Slashdot Mirror


Man Arrested At Oakland Airport For Ornate Watch

First time accepted submitter mbeckman writes "A man was arrested at Oakland airport for having bomb-making materials. The materials? An ornate watch and extra insoles in his boots. Despite the bomb squad determining that there was no bomb, The Alameda county sheriffs department claimed that he was carrying 'potentially dangerous materials and appeared to have made alterations to his boots, which were Unusually large and stuffed with layers of insoles.' The man told Transportation Security Administration officers that he's an artist and the watch is art."

519 comments

  1. Take that! by jhoegl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Take that Freedom and creativity!

    1. Re:Take that! by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The home the brave, where we fear unusal timepieces and footwear.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:Take that! by rullywowr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Take that, 4th amendment! Shit, I just went through TSA today with a coiled air compressor hose (the yellow type)...that was lots of fun..

    3. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's what happens when you live in a fascist country.

    4. Re:Take that! by SomePgmr · · Score: 1

      Yeah well, nothing really new there. In their defense, I've heard footwear can be dangerous now. ;)

      I'd like to see a photo of the watch though. "wires, switches, and fuses" sounds pretty cool... though I think I'd know better than to test TSA by wearing it through security.

    5. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're Bushists, not Fascists, thank you very much.

    6. Re:Take that! by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It didn't start with Bush.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Take that! by LifesABeach · · Score: 2

      Come on, you know the law, "Create Art, go to jail."

      Of course, raise your hand if you need multiple Insoles, and compartments in your shoes.

    8. Re:Take that! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It did reach its "out of the closet" phase with the Bush II regime - and has been normalized into permanence under the Obama intelligence-state.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    9. Re:Take that! by travbrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and it certainly hasn't ended with Obama. He has extended most of the policies of Bush, but seems to get a free pass from most of the people who were up in arms about Bush.

    10. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It didn't start with Bush.

      The terrorist/TSA paranoia very much did. He managed to push through the most significant change (per person dead).
      No catastrophe, even of larger proportions, has ever advanced us so far towards police state.

    11. Re:Take that! by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's ridiculous to arrest the man because he had a watch in his boots. But why in the hell did he have a watch in his boots? That doesn't make any sense to me. Was he coming from out of the country? Was he coming into the country? Did he forget what pockets were for? Things don't seem to add up to me.

      It is possible that he was testing security at the airport so that he could sneak a bomb in later. Nobody would take the time to change their boots unless they had more than one use for them.

      I didn't read TFA so excuse me if that was posted in there.

    12. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.

      Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    13. Re:Take that! by EdIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No shit.

      Some people still have their heads so far up his ass, reveling in the smell of "hope".

      As far as I am concerned Obama is a traitor in every way possible by not coming through on his promises, and basically doing everything he can to destroy freedoms and turn us into a police state.

      No, ObamaCare does not make up for it, nor has anything else he has done make up for it either.

      The only thing more disgusting is the fact Romney would have been far worse.

    14. Re:Take that! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      The home the brave, where we fear unusual timepieces and footwear.

      Tragic. And it's not like his watch was a Urwerk or something weird from Think Geek...
      (Man those Urwerk watches are cool - if only I had $150k to blow on a watch...)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    15. Re:Take that! by frosty_tsm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.

      Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.

      Considering the number of people who died in the Civil War, I would say that his actions were justified by the threat. The Civil War makes Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11 look like a day in the park.

    16. Re:Take that! by GravityStar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, a pair of boots stuffed with a few insoles sounds like a *perfect* place to keep a (fragile piece of art/ornate watch). Depending on the material of the boots, they could protect the watch from any mishandling of the luggage. Yes, he could have put the watch in a separate box, but that box would have taken up space on its own. This just sounds to me like efficient use of space.

    17. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Obviously I agree. I was just responding to "No catastrophe, even of larger proportions, has ever advanced us so far towards police state."

      That is just as obviously false.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    18. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why hasn't the president made an effort to rid the country of these drones?

    19. Re:Take that! by lhunath · · Score: 4, Informative

      He didn't have a watch in his thick boots. He had a watch. And thick boots.

      man was arrested at Oakland International Airport after security officers found him wearing an unusual watch

      --
      ``OK, so ten out of ten for style, but minus several million for good thinking, yeah?''
    20. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.

      Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.

      Four words: Alien and Sedition Acts.

      Lincoln was the point of no return, but our government has been going downhill since the start.

    21. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't have a watch in his boots... the summary is just poorly worded as usual. RTFA, etc.

    22. Re:Take that! by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 2

      As lhunath has already pointed out, the watch wasn't in the boots. But even it was in his boots, then it is not such an outrageous thing for him to do as you suggest. Shoes are a fashion item, and there have been plenty of novelty shoes made in the past. There have been shoes with LED lights and wheels that pop out turning them into skates. There was even a fad of having a tiny aquarium containing live goldfish in the heels of disco boots.

      You just need to expand your imagination a little to understand why people might want to dress up in fancy things. Gray suits might be fine for you, but not everyone can live in such a drab way. If you really can't understand this, and think that such attitudes are actually suspicious behavior, then perhaps a career in law enforcement would be perfect for you.

    23. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      well, at the same time, imagine being in the middle of a war where your enemy were your own country men The civil war was a really fucked up time in america, families were killing each other.

      it should be noted that lincoln's plans post-war were to lift things like that, including the draft, which was only meant to stay in place just for the civil war, as america's future was in jeopardy. He got shot in the head before he could take care of that. Ironically, John Wilkes Booth fucked the south over hard by killing Lincoln. Lincoln's plan was not to punish the south like his successors did, but to give them a hand, show no hard feelings and that we can be a nation together again. The divisive force between the south and the north were about 5 extremely wealthy people, there were no glory days for the south as far as 99.5% of the southerners were concerned. Lincoln sought to end the disparity in the region after the war and establish industry alongside agriculture to make the nation's economy even stronger.

      Instead he got shot, his successors sought punishment, and people who helped reconstruct the south left it in worse shape (stole money and belongings and ran away, carpetbaggers are what they were called)

      In short, Lincoln was not a bad guy, just a president who got dealt a really shitty hand.

    24. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, it was concealed in your rectum.

    25. Re:Take that! by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 1

      Three words. Reading Comprehension Fail. I'm an idiot, please forgive me.

    26. Re:Take that! by GofG · · Score: 1

      uh... i think civil liberties lost per dead American was still higher with 9/11, since the civil war saw more dead Americans than any other conflict ever. Also the whole "full-scale war on American soil" was a pretty big deal and actually threatened the country,

      --
      GFA/M/S d-- s: a--- C++++ UBL++$ P+ L+++ !E- W++ N+ !o K- w--- !O !M !V PS++ PE Y+ PGP+ t+++ 5- X+ R tv@ b++ DI++++ D+ G
    27. Re:Take that! by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Corrections "McGann reportedly took off his watch while going through a security checkpoint at Terminal 2 about 7:45 p.m. and put it in the security bin along with his carry-on luggage". Now security added in this piece of utter bullshit, "covered it with his coat". The Whole idea of putting stuff in the security bin is to have it inspected, the order you put it in is arbitrary. The next bit "his boots were two sizes too big and they were stuffed with layers of home made insoles", "which allowed for large cavities where someone would be able to hide items". OK shit head security but was there actually anything hidden there.

      Basically security fucked up and are now creating more and more bullshit to hide their fuck up. How far are those morons going to push it, right up to the dismissal in court and the smack down of an expensive law suit. Bunch of idiots trying to hide their incompetence in bureaucracy and bullshit.

      PS avoid Huffington Post unless you are after full of hype and missing substantial detail like "being held Friday in Santa Rita Jail in Dublin in lieu of $150,000 bail". So a judge also joined in the parade of fuck ups.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    28. Re:Take that! by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 2

      This is the part I failed to read. They made a big fucking deal out of nothing,and are now trying to cover it up. Next time I should try rewarding comprehension, and reading TFA to get the actual details.

    29. Re:Take that! by davester666 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, everyone thinks footwear is just for comfort, fashion and warmth, until they get kicked in the nuts. Then it becomes a weapon of ass destruction.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    30. Re:Take that! by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      Because, he, CAN! WTF man? Since when one has to have legal explanation of every, or any deed or thought he has done or intend to do?
      Really, WTF?

    31. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's probably because there was a civil war going on!

    32. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and it certainly hasn't ended with Obama. He has extended most of the policies of Bush, but seems to get a free pass from most of the people who were up in arms about Bush.

      Nobody wants to be called a racist.

    33. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I wasn't really addressing the bizarre "civil liberties lost per dead American" metric, but rather the "No catastrophe... has ever advanced us so far towards a police state" bit.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    34. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Civil war doesn't count as a catastrophe?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    35. Re:Take that! by Chewbacon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've long admitted that the terrorists won: we are fucking terrified.

      --
      Chewbacon
      The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
    36. Re:Take that! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Mittens is in bed with neoconservatives. That should tell you plenty about him. Add in the facts that he's Mormon, and that he didn't castigate the other Christian whackos spouting nonsense about "legitimate rape", that should turn anyone's stomach.

      Meanwhile, at least one of his "business ventures" involved actively exporting American business overseas, mostly to China.

      As regards globalization and the redistribution of American wealth, Obama is mostly a sucker, and a chump. Mittens, on the other hand, is an active player, pushing hard to enrich all the rest of the world at America's and Europe's expense.

      Alternate timelines? There's no need for that. Just look at the facts, and don't believe the hype fed to us 24/7 on the Mass Propaganda Channels.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    37. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the number of people who died in the Civil War, I would say that his actions were justified by the threat. The Civil War makes Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11 look like a day in the park.

      Considering that Lincoln is the one who got them all killed, I would say his actions weren't justified in the slightest.

    38. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He had a good chunk of Maryland's legislature jailed without charges.

      He forcibly evicted civilians from a big chunk of kansas, put them into internment camps and burned out the entire area they left behind.

      Yet he is still reasonable considered to have been a great if not the greatest American President.

    39. Re:Take that! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The TSA did begin with Bush, even if real law enforcement was heading that way previously.
      I'm starting to think the current events are due to the TSA starting at the time of a President that pronounced "Terrorists" and "Tourists" the same way. The TSA are just fulfilling their perceived role of cutting back on the incidence of Tourism :)

    40. Re:Take that! by dbIII · · Score: 2

      No problem. Got to go, my shoe is ringing.

    41. Re:Take that! by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      To be fair though. The watch had wires and switches connected.
      Not exactly art. Also I am pretty sure if I had that watch I would have talked to people about it ahead of time.
      If you do not know by now that the GED holding "Security Professionals" of the TSA would freak the fuck out over this then you are too stupid to be free.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    42. Re:Take that! by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

      You don't need anything fancy...a cheap CASIO will do.

      --
      No sig today...
    43. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm still wondering why some of the people in my Facebook timeline actively want Bush II back.

    44. Re:Take that! by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Take that Freedom and creativity!

      That's curious... if I was your enemy that's exactly what i'd want to take from you.

    45. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take that Freedom and creativity!

      Look, I'm a pretty big hater of the TSA and security theater, but in this case pulling him aside seems to be justified. It's one thing to wear an "artsy" watch through the airport, it's another thing to make your watch out of components which can be easily and quickly dis-assembled and reassembled to make some other electronic device.
      Now, I don't know that he should be charged with anything, once they determine he's not actually a threat it seems to me they ought to let him go and if they're really THAT worried let the FBI and CIA take it from there. But Lady Gaga doesn't get to wear her razor-blade sunglasses on the plane either, even though they're "Just artsy sunglasses". You don't get to just slap a bunch of shit together, call it "art", and get a free pass on the rules.

      Look, this isn't that tough to figure out. Put your timepiece in your checked luggage, and if you're going to bring a device which is really out of the ordinary, it's probably best to make sure it doesn't violate any rules regarding what you're allowed to carry. If you really MUST bring it on the airplane, then it can be declared and properly checked just like you can do with a firearm and explosives. Yes, really- it's just a LOT of paperwork to do it.

    46. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as I am concerned Obama is a traitor in every way possible by not coming through on his promises, and basically doing everything he can to destroy freedoms and turn us into a police state.

      Oh look, you get a +3 Insightful for not knowing what the fucking definition of Treason is.

    47. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.

      Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.

      Are you saying he declared martial law permanently, even after the war was over? Because that's the only way you could possibly interpret those actions as "advancing our society towards a police state". Once martial law was ended, and yes it WAS ended, what specifically did he do to move us towards a police state?
      +5 Insightful my ass.

    48. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the line before that: (per person dead)?

      Spock: Illogical! ;-)

    49. Re:Take that! by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Have you gone through the airport with a cell phone... Guess what, that can easily be used as a timer and remote detonator for a bomb. Do you seriously think that bomb timers need to have blue and green wires all over the place like some Hollywood movie? There is no justification for charging him.

      Its pure 100% "of course we are right" even in the face of facts to the contrariety. Otherwise *everyone* with a watch or phone should be charge. Because they can be used in a bomb.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    50. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      WW2 was started by a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor which killed less US citizens than 9/11, and resulted in Roosevelt rounding up anyone with Japanese ancestry on the West Coast to put them into camps...

      Ignorant of history, we are doomed to repeat it.

    51. Re:Take that! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      They are Saturday Night Live cast members?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    52. Re:Take that! by Phrogman · · Score: 1

      No, WWII was started by the German Third Reich invading countries in Europe. The Japanese followed by invading areas in the far east. The US essentially ignored that first few years of the war in Europe (while many Americans did not, joining other national militaries to participate in fighting the Fascists, and the US government did provide supplies to Britain while ostensibly remaining neutral, so its not quite clearcut).
      The US entered the war in the Pacific when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour, that is true. They also got involved in Europe, but the war (like WWI) started years before the US got involved. Please read some history books written outside of the US :P

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    53. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How far are those morons going to push it, right up to the dismissal in court and the smack down of an expensive law suit.

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but TSA agents are FEDERALLY PROTECTED by sovereign immunity from all lawsuits that might arise as a result of their overzealous activities. That's why none of the women groped have been allowed to prosecute them for sexual assault.

    54. Re:Take that! by EdIII · · Score: 3, Informative

      I did not say treason, I said traitor.

      Treason is usually specifically against the state, or the sovereign. Obama has acted within the legal frameworks of the US, although in some cases, that may be in dispute. Sometimes treason can mean a betrayal of trust, but most times in context when talking about a politician, it does not.

      Traitor, OTOH, primarily means the betrayal of trust and/or a cause.

      Obama was supposed to represent hope and change. That asshole betrayed us with FISA, the Patriot Act, the TSA bullshit, etc. Every single time there is a decision to be made that profoundly affects the civil rights of US citizens Obama betrays us.

      Everything he said to get elected the first time was a lie.

      I'm not a Romney supporter either. That man truly frightens me with this religious zealotry. Obama is helping to turn us into a police state, but at least when the secret police come for us, it won't be because of our beliefs in mythical beings in the sky. It will be because of our beliefs in freedom.

    55. Re:Take that! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      The home the brave, where we fear unusual people.

      FTFY

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    56. Re:Take that! by yoshi_mon · · Score: 1

      The only thing more disgusting is the fact Romney would have been far worse.

      Romney? What about McCain and [shudder] Palin?!

      We have gotten so far right in the US that what passes for the left here is a joke. My main hope is that the pendulum will swing back the other way in my lifetime.

      --

      Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
    57. Re:Take that! by lonecrow · · Score: 1

      basically doing everything he can to destroy freedoms and turn us into a police state. I am not an American, nor do I live in America. Can someone please explain to me exactly what Obama has done to deserve this type of accusation?

    58. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It didn't "start" with Bush... it was just institutionalized under Bush.

    59. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I did read the line above it, but it doesn't seem related to the final sentence. And frankly, it's a very strange measure anyway - I'm not even sure how to respond to it.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    60. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      He didn't end martial law - he was killed.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    61. Re:Take that! by antdude · · Score: 1

      Hmm, one mentioned the calculator watch which I still wear and use. :/

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    62. Re:Take that! by tragedy · · Score: 1

      Imagine that. A watch with switches. It's a bit harder to find watches with plastic-insulated wires, although there are plenty with uncoated wire or maybe even magnet wire.

      If you do not know by now that the GED holding "Security Professionals" of the TSA would freak the fuck out over this then you are too stupid to be free.

      But if your freedom subject to the whims of dumb goons, then you're not truly free in the first place.

    63. Re:Take that! by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      That is just as obviously false.

      Except your counter-example is obviously false, on three levels: Lincoln was dealing with a freaking civil war, not a one-time attack that only happened due to his gross negligence and incompetence. An civil war explicitly planned for in the Constitution, which allows the suspension of habeas corpus in the event of invasion or rebellion. And while such a suspension should have been approved by Congress as that power is listed in Article I, not Article II, you can't say that a mass secession of states doesn't amount to a qualifying "rebellion".

      Secondly, your counter-example ignores justification. No one would shouting "police state" over porno scanners or freaking out over a watch at the airport if reality was closer to 24, and a terrorist attack was aimed at America (with WMD's!) every other Tuesday. Joseph McCarthy wouldn't have become a pariah if there actually were a small army of communist spies actually implanted in the federal government.

      Finally, you also ignore permanence. Habeas corpus was restored at the end of the Civil War. But more than 10 years after the last terrorist attack, more than a year after Bin Laddin's assassination, the worst of Bush's policies are still in effect, plus a bunch of new ones: porno scanners, kill lists, and assassinations of American citizens.

    64. Re:Take that! by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Hardly your fault, you should have just skipped reading Huffington Post précis and done a news search to find a more complete article, to find out what really happened. They are dumbing down Huffington Post to shift it and it's gullible audience right.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    65. Re:Take that! by cusco · · Score: 1

      I have the feeling that the country will only be allowed to move left when the vampires on the right have sucked the corpse dry and discarded it, moving on to fresh meat in Australia or Taiwan.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    66. Re:Take that! by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      No shit.

      Some people still have their heads so far up his ass, reveling in the smell of "hope".

      As far as I am concerned Obama is a traitor in every way possible by not coming through on his promises, and basically doing everything he can to destroy freedoms and turn us into a police state.

      No, ObamaCare does not make up for it, nor has anything else he has done make up for it either.

      The only thing more disgusting is the fact Romney would have been far worse.

      ==
      Please answer this question. You want jobs to be created. Do you believe the wealthy are going to do it? Who are the customers going to be? Step out of the cacoon and look around the world. There is a major recession out there, and there is no money to buy USA goods, or even China's goods. China is crying because there is a recession, and the USA is suffering and crying because there are no customers. If you have no customers, what jobs can you create? Can you survive if your only customers are your fellow Americans who are as broke as you?

      Small business creation is the way the economy is going to recover. Small business starts small, employs one or two, and takes a few years to grow. A restart of the economy takes a few years (at least 10) to recover.
      So, who started the global recession? Please research this and come back to Slashdot with your answer. It started in 2000, after the minor boom to convert computer systems from 2 digit years to 4 digit years and to implement major ERP systems.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    67. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's quite it. Killing is only another way to terrorise. If you can spread terror without moving a finger, all the better.

    68. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      You are preaching to the choir, man. I already said I agree. I guess you don't count the Civil War as a "catastrophe". Another example I could have used was the Alien and Sedition Acts.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    69. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself.
      Im not terrified of any terrorist.

      The TSA on the other hand....

    70. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong, Your government is the terrorist in the first place. Osama & his friends would still be killing each other and leaving the rest of the world alone if it werent for you "Democracy defenders" kicking their way into the fray.

      It's quite unusual that your concern for "democracy" or "well being" is usually paired with these coubtries having large quantities of resources you need or some property you find interesting.

    71. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am in no way defending the existence. of the TSA
      As far as I can tell there is no need for them other than to get us used to being searched.
      On the other hand this guy is a fucking tool that knew what he was doing.
      You can at least admit that can you not?

    72. Re:Take that! by alexo · · Score: 1

      Direct US involvement in WW2 was started by a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor...

      FTFY.

    73. Re:Take that! by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      No offense, but read up on what Lincoln did during the Civil War.

      Suspended Habeus Corpus. Declared martial law in several US cities.

      Considering the number of people who died in the Civil War, I would say that his actions were justified by the threat. The Civil War makes Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11 look like a day in the park.

      Then again, Iraq and Afghanistan make the Civil War look like quickies.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    74. Re:Take that! by tragedy · · Score: 1

      On the other hand this guy is a fucking tool that knew what he was doing.
      You can at least admit that can you not?

      No, I can't admit that based on the evidence of the article. If I had more information on this artist and the situation I might admit it, or I might not, depending on what the actual facts are. It's possible he really was trying to get the TSA guys to think that the watch was a bomb, but, taking the article at face value, that's not the case. All we know is that he had an unusual watch with some visible (non-functional) electronics. The TSA guys either panicked or just went into authoritarian CYA mode and called out the bomb squad. The bomb squad guys said that he didn't have a bomb, then he was arrested anyway for possession of bomb-making materials. Anyone with a brain knows that the answer to the question: "could someone make a bomb out of that, combined with some explosives" is "yes" for pretty much any "that" you can imagine. So, laws outlawing bomb making materials clearly outlaw everything. In other words, this should have ended when the bomb squad guys said he didn't have a bomb. The TSA guys and the Sheriff's dept. could have said "oops, honest mistake, sorry for the inconvenience" and let him get on with his harmless life. Maybe there were extenuating circumstances that made it seem like he was more of a threat. None of those have been presented to us that I can find, so to assume the existence of such circumstances seems premature.

    75. Re:Take that! by EdIII · · Score: 1

      He betrayed us on FISA. There should have been an investigation, and multiple people should have gone to prison (or at least removed from their positions) for warrant less eavesdropping on American's conversations. The Telcos and the Intelligence Community conspired against American citizens to profoundly violate their civil rights and privacy.

      He extended the Patriot Act, the single most abhorrent piece of legislation in United States history. It allows the Intelligence Community to strong arm companies into compliance, and if executives in the company dare complain, or make it public knowledge, they can end up in deep dark hole deprived of their freedom. Makes the Intelligence Community no better than the Stasi.

      He has let the TSA run wild where if object to an invasive, humiliating search (how many women are on video in tears?), often doing things to children that would get you sent to prison, you can be arrested for trying to leave. Your a terrorist first and need to prove your innocence, just to leave.

      There are numerous other opportunities that he had to support civil rights and swing the pendulum the other way, but instead, he has allowed the Constitution Free Zones to increase. If you are not aware of what those are, google them. It's basically a huge area around the borders of the US where they justify suspension of certain Constitutional rights in the name of national security. Guess what? A very significant percentage of Americans just happen to live within the zone. It's not like it is 10 miles around the border. It is much larger than necessary, if it could be argued to be so at all.

      I could go on, but Obama has failed us in every conceivable way that is truly important. That whole Obamacare deal is nice and all, but that is basically a half-assed reach around after the deep dicking he pulled on us.

    76. Re:Take that! by lonecrow · · Score: 1
      OK So if I have read your reply correctly what you are saying is:
      1. why hasn't Obama pushed congress harder to repeal laws past by congress under the Bush administration
      2. why is he not acting to push congress to curb the over reach of the Border protection services
      3. and you want him to exercise more control over the TSA and tell them exactly how to balance traveler security vs personal invasion.

      About the TSA he has said "I understand people’s frustrations, and what I’ve said to the TSA is that you have to constantly refine and measure whether what we’re doing is the only way to assure the American people’s safety. And you also have to think through are there other ways of doing it that are less intrusive," Obama said."

      Now if he explicitly told the TSA to stop pat downs or scans or whatever and there was an incident, you would probably be calling for his impeachment for interfering with the good work of the agency. I can hear the pundits now: "If it hadn't been for Obama interfering with the TSA for political gain, those people would be alive today."

      So instead of saying Obama has done more to limit freedom then anyone else, you should have said "Why hasn't he done more to repeal the freedom limit actions of others."

      Just saying most of the stuff your complaining about was started by other people and the only way for him to do anything about them is through a republican led congress.

      Your aim is true but you have the target wrong.

    77. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War, but this is explicitly allowed for in the US constitution. Article 1, Section 9: "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." I don't understand why Lincoln gets so much grief for doing something the founding fathers clearly allowed (even expected) the president to do.

    78. Re:Take that! by EdIII · · Score: 1

      I am neither Republican, nor Democrat. He failed in his promises, and was supposed to be different than Bush.

      Forgive my language, but I don't give two shits about Democrats, Republicans, and their arguments about socialism versus capitalism, etc.

      My primary concern is about civil rights, and the checks and balances that are supposed to constrain government from turning into a police state.

      Obama has failed to serve the interests of the American people, which is always our Freedom first. Without our Freedom, what the heck are we doing all of this for?

    79. Re:Take that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Large businesses are recording record profits (record for the 5-7 years, anyway) and aren't hiring. If people don't have jobs, people can't buy shit. If the so-called 'job creators' were actually creating jobs, instead of continuing to lay people off while raking in bonuses for improving the company's bottom line, the recession would be over.

    80. Re:Take that! by lonecrow · · Score: 1
      Understood. and I didn't mean to be nit picky but there is a world of difference between:

      basically doing everything he can to destroy freedoms and turn us into a police state. and
      "I wish he could/would do more to restore our the freedoms that others took away or eroded."

      It appears that there are many in your society that really do believe the former simply because it has been repeated over and over by people with an agenda. I think as a thinking person you have an obligation to question yourself before repeating other people's propaganda. I am sure it was not your intention to be a tool for the plutocrats.

    81. Re:Take that! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Is there any detail about the boots? I'm wondering if they're "Pacs" or some similar insulated boot, which would routinely be both "too large" and have extra liners/insoles.

      [I know someone who wears oversized shoes with extra insoles because she has really bad flat feet and this prevents painful feet.]

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    82. Re:Take that! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Probably has something to do with Article 1 defining the powers granted to the Legislature, but Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus with an Executive Order.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    83. Re:Take that! by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Large businesses are recording record profits (record for the 5-7 years, anyway) and aren't hiring. If people don't have jobs, people can't buy shit. If the so-called 'job creators' were actually creating jobs, instead of continuing to lay people off while raking in bonuses for improving the company's bottom line, the recession would be over.

      The future manufacturing for large organizations will be done with robots. Much of electronic and vehicle manufacturing in Asia is already done with robots. The same is already in place for the food industry. A robot can do the work of many workers, and can do it flawlessly. So... big business will install robots, and bring the manufacturing back to the USA, and yes, a few jobs will be created. The world will do manufacturing where there are mineral resources, and the rest of the world will be a creating jobs in services. There will always be a need for talent. But realize, automation of the worker also reduces demands for workers.

      That is why I believe the future is with small business. Just go give you an idea of small businesses, an electrician in my municipality was hired to repair street lights (bulb changes, photocell relays, and more). He invested in a Cherry Picker, and became a contractor for our municipality and for two others around the metropolis. Now, he has three trucks, a good revenue stream and the municipalities are saving money and giving good service to their residents.

      Small business is the future.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    84. Re:Take that! by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Here's a typical detail. Poor man buys boots really cheap but two sizes two big, makes home made insoles to make them wear able, end of story.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    85. Re:Take that! by heefeneet · · Score: 1

      "which allowed for large cavities where someone would be able to hide items"

      That's a worrying precedent. The human body also has these...

    86. Re:Take that! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That too (hell, *I* wear oversized boots with homemade fleece liners as winter work boots), tho probably not the po'man's "custom-fitted" boot, in this case.

      Still, it sure points up how this security theatre is manufacturing "threats" to justify its existence.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  2. "first time plagiarist" by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well done Timothy. I submitted this story earlier and the submission by mbeckman appears to be copied from my submission.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:"first time plagiarist" by jhoegl · · Score: 2

      Yeah, its why I stop submitting.

    2. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, its why I stop submitting.

    3. Re:"first time plagiarist" by war4peace · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    4. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 1

      I definitely sympathize, but I from my experience, it is likely an honest error. I have spent my time on several occasions writing summaries only to see one come through right before I'm finished. I've also innocently submitted summaries (which I thought superior) atop another similar submission and watched mine rightfully be discarded. I have seen many occasions where an anonymous post of lesser eloquence trumps an account-based submission of greater quality, only because it was first. But, as you've illustrated, it doesn't always work. If it's any consolation, I voted for yours earlier, but not the newer one.

      --
      Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
    5. Re:"first time plagiarist" by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know this is headed for a -1, but when given the choice slashdot authors have always chosen the summaries that come from their buddies over everyone else. This is a tradition going right back Rob Malda himself. A summary of one of their buddies has to be pretty bad for them not to chose it over someone they don't know. It's a bit of the assholery that Slashdot was founded on.

      Yes, I know. When I met Rom Malda personally he was an asshole to my face. He is smart but he is an asshole. That's the way it is.

    6. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      his had a link in the submission instead of after. That is typical /. style.

    7. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is smart but he is an asshole.

      Is that why goatse was the mascot for so long?

    8. Re:"first time plagiarist" by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

      Did you see the part where it says, "First time accepted submitter mbeckman writes..."?

      I suppose that mbeckman could be a buddy of Timothy, who greenlit the article for him to make him feel good on his first try. But I find a much simpler explanation much more plausible: Timothy was probably browsing the submissions and saw mbeckman's first and greenlit it because at the time he was browsing, he didn't see whoever57's. I know it's not as conspiracy theorish, but there you are.

      Really though, is this a thing now? Grousing because you don't get your article greenlit on Slashdot? I've had several that I thought should have been and weren't, even things that got greenlit later with what I thought was an inferior write-up. I've also had some that were greenlit. I had probably three or four that I thought were really good turned down before I got my first one greenlit. After that, I didn't care so much. If I submit something and it gets greenlit, great; if not, oh well. I like Slashdot, but I don't particularly need it to validate my self-worth.

    9. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I definitely sympathize, but I from my experience, it is likely an honest error

      It it were the same story with the same text lifted from the original article, I would agree. But, please compare the first couple of sentences from the 2 submissions: they are identical. What's more, the sentences don't appear in the article -- they are my writing, based on the article.

    10. Re:"first time plagiarist" by mbeckman · · Score: 5, Informative
      Whoever57, If that is your real name.

      I did copy your previous post, after I replied to it and Slashdot for some reason deleted the whole article. I had saved a copy and reposted to help propagate this inportant example of TSA idiocy. I didn't give you credit because you're the kind of person that calls someone a plagiarist for simply reposting the existence and summary of a widely available news item. You plagiarist, you ;)

    11. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really though, is this a thing now? Grousing because you don't get your article greenlit on Slashdot? I've had several that I thought should have been and weren't, even things that got greenlit later with what I thought was an inferior write-up

      I am grousing because mbeckman copied my submission. Not just the URL, but the text that I wrote summarizing TFA. Check out the first few sentences of the submissions and then see if you can find that text in TFA.

    12. Re:"first time plagiarist" by mbeckman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It says "first time accepted submitter" because I've submitted before and been rejected, in my opinion because of liberal bias. A previous (unaccepted) post of mine noted that several major news networks had ignored a significant story reporting a study showing climactic temperature decline. Of course, with /. there is no discussion, no appeal. Only speedy, unexplained censorship. P.S. I don't know Timothy.

    13. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that why goatse was the mascot for so long?

      Malda took the image with him when he left.

    14. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 0

      "several major news networks"

      Probably because US news networks don't worry about things like facts. Or truth.

      In any case there are thousands of studies on the climate conducted. I would be very surprised if a few didn't show temperature decline, especially given the economic importance of this issue to potential funders of such studies. That is the way science works. But that doesn't make them statistically relevant.

    15. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Well done Timothy. I submitted this story earlier and the submission by mbeckman appears to be copied from
      my submission.

      I figured timothy hates me because I've talked shit about his "abilities" and all my submissions end up disappearing. So I stopped trying.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    16. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Yeah

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    17. Re:"first time plagiarist" by kwerle · · Score: 1

      My question to you: what on earth does this have to do with news for nerds?

      Why does /. continue to cover the TSA?

      Not only is it not news for nerds, it is not news.

    18. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I did copy your previous post

      At least you admit to stealing other people's work and presenting it as your own.
      Unfortunately, that does not stop you from being a petty thief.

      Next time, at least take the time to rewrite instead of plain plagiarism. It's not cool.

    19. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've submitted one time (as AC), and my submission was used instead of 5 other competing submissions.

      Anecdotal evidence FTW. Perhaps their "buddies" were better at writing submissions in the style that slashdot preferred, since they had already submitted hundreds of articles in the past? There's some style tips in the FAQ. Read, follow, and get published.

    20. Re:"first time plagiarist" by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Not accepting an article is not censorship by any honest use of the language.
      So a plagiarist, anti-science global cooling fool and a guy that screams "censorship" when his articles are not accepted? Anything else you want to tell us to make us think even less of you?

    21. Re:"first time plagiarist" by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The scanners I see as news for nerds so that explains those ones. Maybe it's a SF costume angle with this one.

    22. Re:"first time plagiarist" by mbeckman · · Score: 1

      Your reaction illustrates my point precisely. You automatically assume that somebody offering data contradicting your (presumed) belief in anthropogenic global warming is an "anti-science fool". Now, when a person such as yourself is also in position to squelch public discussion against their position, in a public forum such as Slashdot, and does do precisely that, that is censorship. The irony here is that my post was not about global warming per se, but about censorship itself. So we have Slashdot censoring a discussion of censorship. The irony twists tightly indeed.

    23. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1
    24. Re:"first time plagiarist" by bernz · · Score: 1

      Is it remotely possible you were kind of an asshole to him? Or are you without any flaws in personal confrontation?

    25. Re:"first time plagiarist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, not news for nerds. News for everyone. I'm afraid the nerd meme is suffering abuse. Sometimes, news for humans is necessary to maintain a bond with reality, which is not all about Apple. If slashdot ever adhered to a strict nerd policy, there would be violent uprisings of meta nerds and submeta nerds that would complain about deviations from their specific interests. Just accept it dude; nerds are not civilized. They are designed for airconditioned warfare and ruthless pen fencing. They are vicious and inherently exclusive. It's National Techno Sophism, with nuclear modpoints.

  3. hum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a non-story. I'm not being a contrarian or trolling, it really just is.

  4. Re:Moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yes, well, obviously he was trying to make some sort of statement of some kind, maybe having to do with "art", and maybe not.

    But seriously, I think he planned this for exactly what happened.

    Moron.

    Dear Moron, no need to sign your posts.

  5. Never forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    01-31-2007 Never Forget

    Remember kids, just don't say, look, or do anything weird and nothing will happen to you.

    1. Re:Never forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the wiki ... During the preliminary investigation at the site, the police found that the device shared "some characteristics with improvised explosive devices." These characteristics included an identifiable power source, circuit board with exposed wiring, and electrical tape. After the initial assessment, the Boston police shut down the northbound side of I-93 and parts of the public transportation system. Just after 10 a.m. the bomb squad used a small explosive filled with water to destroy it as a precautio

    2. Re:Never forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... nothing will happen to you.

      Did the TSA tell you that?

      I remember "Dr Phil" (who loves women being victims or teen rebels) reporting on a normal woman going through the check-point and a guard just walked over and knocked her senseless in front of the security camera. His buddies then claimed 'reasonable force'.

    3. Re:Never forget... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could Americans please choose little or big endian for dates, instead of switching halfway through?

    4. Re:Never forget... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      ... These characteristics included an identifiable power source, circuit board with exposed wiring, and electrical tape...

      I'm now calling on all Shashdotters; Open your computer or cellphone, verify the above checklist and immediately report yourself you your nearest bomb disposal squad. I have no doubt the have nothing better to do than deal with bullshit threats based on lists like the above.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
  6. materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    McGann was taken to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin where he was charged with possessing materials to make an explosive device, sheriff's officials said.

    I'll bet they can say this about anybody who has a spool of wire, some cutters, and a soldering iron. Rather convenient for police.

    1. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a stick of gum, a paper clip and a baseball card in the case of MacGyver.

    2. Re:materials... by rhook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I bet everyone has bomb making materials in their garage and under their sink.

    3. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't need a spool of wire.

      Any wire will do, including your phone charger, or the spare cat 5 wire you always carry in your computer bag,
      earbuds for your phone, the phone itself, etc.

      ANY wire constitutes bomb making equipment.

      The fact that he was a short dude and wanted to be taller and used multiple insoles to achieve that is also
      somehow a crime.

      We still have to entertain the possibility that he got exactly what he was looking for, notoriety and fame.

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?

      Fools and idiot attention seekers. Any terrorist would be much more clever. The charges leveled are
      probably simply to hold him on till they dig through his life. When released, he will probably try to sell
      his watches to other fools based on his new found fame.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    4. Re:materials... by Andrewkov · · Score: 2

      Ssshhh! Don't tell anyone!

    5. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If not, a trip to the local Hobby Lobby will get you most of what you would need.

    6. Re:materials... by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      A few household chemicals in the proper proportions.

    7. Re:materials... by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Your car has a tank full of explosives.

    8. Re:materials... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only fools are the people who support the TSA and their actions. When the free thinkers are all on lockdown, there will be nobody to stand up for your right to express your opinion on issues like this.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:materials... by neonKow · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Probably more "fool" then attention seeker, but it should be a wake-up call that anyone who wants to travel should know better than to wear a piece of art around lest you tick off security check points. Certainly says something about the state of our nation's paranoia and the lack of oversight, transparency, and accountability in some of these organizations.

    10. Re:materials... by TrekkieGod · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security? Really, who does that? Fools and idiot attention seekers.

      How far have we fallen that slashdot readers are asking that?

      Who does that? Nerds. Nerds do that. Incredible nerds like Steve Wozniak for example.

      People wear things I find to be ridiculous all the time that everyone has no problem labeling as fashion statements. But if it's wires and fuses, it can't be a statement of the types of things you enjoy, it has to be an idiot attention seeker?

      Personally, I find it much more easy to label people idiots when they think every exposed wire and fuse is a bomb.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    11. Re:materials... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      I bet everyone has bomb making materials in their garage and under their sink.

      So? Having it in your garage is not the same as carrying it into an airport.

    12. Re:materials... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      Babies' diapers can be used to build bombs. Babies should be banned from planes.

      Especially if they are crying.

      Why can't the TSA do something about that? Litte bald-headed Machiavellis, all of them, I tell you . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    13. Re:materials... by davydagger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?"

      steampunk?

      mabey he is, but the TSA and local PD does itself no favors giving every dolt looking for free publicity, all the free publicity they want.

      The "filfthy speech movement", made a career out of taunting the government into enforcing useless legislation to get the populace behind them, as did howard stern, and the legacy of the shock jock. The irony is, that, authorities, like a monkey with its hand on a grape nut in a trap, could let go and free itself anytime they want, but they never learn.

      The FBI campaign against so called "radicals" on california university campuses made heros and legends out of the mundane, and wasted FBI resources, destroyed the credbility of the federal governement, and ultimately let the real communists get the bomb, and let the mafia grow uncontrolled, by diverting resources towards harmless protestors who didn't not result in putting away serious threats to the nation.

      Mabey a few more idiots need to make fortunes before they catch on. All they are doing is degrading the reputation of the TSA, not catching any real terrorists(who take the efforts), and just repeating historical failures.

    14. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was an artist. A hipster. Call it what you want, but some people like the look of hardware. Punishing them for not conforming to your image is asinine.

    15. Re:materials... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      True, but this man didn't do that: he merely wore a watch of his own design, and was arrested anyway. Even after the bomb squad said, "No danger."

    16. Re:materials... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      What's gonna happen when someone wears something based on this: http://www.adafruit.com/products/659

    17. Re:materials... by dcollins · · Score: 1

      I suppose the real fools are those paying for the security, incarceration, investigation, and overtime being accrued here.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    18. Re:materials... by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?

      You're right, but only in this very refined case. About 10 years ago I built a noise cancelling system out of a microphone, some electronics and I was young so it all looked very home made. It worked well, almost as well as the Bose QuietComfort series headphones. Flying was a real treat with my custom contraption on. Yet now I suddenly can't take it through airport security for fear of me not actually getting to my destination.

      There are documented cases of artists, students, professionals, teachers, vendors with tech equipment, and likely more all having major problems with airport security for the same reason, they dared to build something.

      This guy may be a fool and an attention seeker, but many others aren't.

    19. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong!
      If he wanted notoriety and fame, then instead of big boots, he would have wore a large cuecumber in his pants.

    20. Re:materials... by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

      The charges leveled are probably simply to hold him on till they dig through his life.

      Personally, I think that the charges leveled have little to do with this guy; they are to teach everyone else a lesson: Don't do this, or we'll make your life mighty inconvenient. They don't want people with wires and fuses hanging off of them constantly trying to get through airports because they think it's clever or funny, causing massive logjams in security so that the people who just want to get from point A to point B can go their merry way.

      It's the same reason why if you joke about, "It's not like I have a BOMB in my briefcase!", they'll haul your ass off to jail. Not because they actually believe that you have a bomb in your briefcase, but because if someone actually does think that someone has a bomb, they want that person treated with the utmost of seriousness.

      I don't like the situation the way it is, and I'm sure that there could be more sanity around the whole issue, but I also think that what they do is not completely without merit and I do kinda understand where they're coming from. People shouldn't engage in assholery with people who are responsible for protecting the security and lives of others. Most sane people wouldn't pull out a realistic-looking toy gun, point it at a police officer, and laugh and say, "Ha ha! I'm just kidding! No need to get all upset about a simple joke..." But then we have people who think it's perfectly fine to engage in such tomfoolery with TSA agents.

    21. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > mabey he is

      I bet nobody's ever said that about you being stupid.

    22. Re:materials... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      If he was standing in line would it be a queuecumber?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    23. Re:materials... by supervillainsf · · Score: 1

      Dude, he's probably one of the maker set and built a watch from an arduino. The only crime is against efficient system design.

    24. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      People shouldn't engage in assholery with people who are responsible for protecting the security and lives of others. Most sane people wouldn't pull out a realistic-looking toy gun, point it at a police officer, and laugh and say, "Ha ha! I'm just kidding! No need to get all upset about a simple joke..." But then we have people who think it's perfectly fine to engage in such tomfoolery with TSA agents.

      Agreed/
      Its called suicide by cop. And it happens more than you think.

      Knowing that TSA doesn't have guns makes this a semi-safe bit of attention getting, with charges that seldom stick, but a notoriety that does. The guy HAD TO HAVE KNOWN that would be the result.

      Allegedly (and I do mean that in the legal sense, as there is not a single photo of evidence) he had hollowed out compartments in the multiple insoles in his boots. Supposedly the watch contained fuses. What kind? Electrical, or det-cord?
      It screams Dry Run if you are a TSA agent even in the absence of any explosive. That is what they are trained to look for.

      Intelligent people who just want to get to their destination would pack it in luggage, or explain to TSA BEFORE they get to the gate what it is and why he is carrying it so that he could avoid arrest.

      Was it Steampunk, as some have alleged? Perhaps. But something that elaborate and expensive would make more sense in packed luggage. I still think he was seeking attention. He got it.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    25. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's that?

      Cannon fuse.

      What do you use it for?

      My cannon.

    26. Re:materials... by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Babies' diapers can be used to build bombs. Babies should be banned from planes.

      Especially if they are crying.

      Why can't the TSA do something about that? Litte bald-headed Machiavellis, all of them, I tell you . . .

      Stewie Griffin is going to blow up your house for that one, Kid.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    27. Re:materials... by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      I don't like the situation the way it is, and I'm sure that there could be more sanity around the whole issue, but I also think that what they do is not completely without merit and I do kinda understand where they're coming from. The TSA shouldn't engage in assholery with people who they are responsible for protecting. Most sane people wouldn't arrest someone because they're wearing the jewelry of their choice. But then TSA agents on a power jag think it's perfectly fine to engage in such stupidity in support of security theater.

      There. FTFY.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    28. Re:materials... by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      I got the tenth degree just for carrying a Fluke 77 multimeter with me. I was an electronic technician at the time on my way to a job. Sure it happens to have a battery, some switches, and and LCD display, but I have no idea what kind of hijinks they thought I could do with one.

    29. Re:materials... by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?

      Who builds a bomb with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?

      If the TSAsshats go chasing Hollywood bombs instead of what actually could be dangerous, they deserve to be fired. Same with the Sheriff - I don't expect them to be familiar with bombs (although it wouldn't hurt if they called in an "expert", i.e. someone not completely unfamiliar, before making decisions), but I do expect them to have common sense. I guess I aim too high.

    30. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You accurately describe the status quo.

      But the question remains, what does the logic behind that have anything to do with actual bombs/threats?

      A real threat wouldn't behave like a prankster. However erstwhile, the effort saved from suppressing prankster noise is cancelled by the effort and focus on... pranksters.

      Car analogy! Pulling over every red porsche doesn't stop dangerous/speeding driving.

    31. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Please follow along.
      He wasn't charged with carrying a bomb.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    32. Re:materials... by Jiro · · Score: 1

      A real threat wouldn't behave like a prankster.

      A well-trained real threat who keeps his cool and follows every precaution to not get noticed won't behave like a prankster.

      An actual real threat may very well behave like a prankster. Not everyone is perfect; besides, people certainly act in dumb ways when under stress, and bombing a plane is a high stress occupation.

      Remember the first World Trade Center truck bomber? "A real threat wouldn't return to get back the deposit on the truck he used for bombing." Of course, he did.

    33. Re:materials... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The irony is, that, authorities, like a monkey with its hand on a grape nut in a trap, could let go and free itself anytime they want, but they never learn.

      What do they have to 'learn'? Authority is stronger than ever, and it appears that it will grow even stronger for the foreseeable future. I will believe that "degrading the reputation of the TSA" actually means something when the TSA no longer exists. If anybody is caught in the monkey trap, it is us who continue to support their authority. The historical failure is ours.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    34. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security?
      Really, who does that?

      A person who is under the impression that he lives in a free country where you don't have to explain yourself to every single person you meet?

      Freedom to do only things that you can relate to, is not freedom.

    35. Re:materials... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's the same reason why if you joke about, "It's not like I have a BOMB in my briefcase!", they'll haul your ass off to jail. Not because they actually believe that you have a bomb in your briefcase, but because if someone actually does think that someone has a bomb, they want that person treated with the utmost of seriousness.

      Which is really quite juvenile behaviour of the people that make the arrest. Accepting no challenge at all to authority, not even jokes, is really a sign that the person is not fit to be in a position of authority.

    36. Re:materials... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The sign of the true utter stupidity of the situation is that he sent it through the scanner and did everything a well behaved ideal citizen is supposed to do.

      I could have ended up the same way myself a few years ago over a netbook when the security guy had never seen one before (he must have been new). Fortunately the two policemen he called over recognised it.

    37. Re:materials... by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Probably more "fool" then attention seeker, but it should be a wake-up call that anyone who wants to travel should know better than to wear a piece of art around lest you tick off security check points.

      You suggest 300+ million Americans should self-censor in order to placate the TSA.
      I suggest that XY,000 TSA agents learn how to do their jobs better.

      One of these suggestions chills free speech, the other does not.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    38. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Well that only makes sense if you assume he was simply a duffas, unaware of any thing that has been going on for the last ten years.

      I still think he was baiting the TSA.
      No luggage.
      One way ticket.
      Single Male.
      Bought ticket at last minute.
      Carrying weird device thru security
      Hidden compartment in shoes

      It just screams Arrest Me! He had a plan to be arrested and got his wish.

      Guy walks into a bank.
      Wearing a ski mask
      Hand in bulging coat pocket.
      Hands a note to teller asking for a donation...
      Tell me if you seriously believe he's just as innocent as a new born babe.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    39. Re:materials... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Hidden compartment in shoes

      Extra inner soles are not a "compartment" so please refrain from such bullshitting.
      The rest (apart from a device that scared a TSA guy) only indicates a fairly normal and not suspicious situation before 2001, and not abnormal now for somebody travelling at short notice for work, family matters etc etc.

    40. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Go read the full articles.
      They specifically stated there were hollow compartments in the insoles.

      It may come as a surprise to you, but it's not 2001 any more.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    41. Re:materials... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      So what was hidden in them?
      Sorry, it's just not enough and the entire point is that it should not matter that it's not 2001 anymore.

    42. Re:materials... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Ahh, some perspective.

      My kingdom for a mod point.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    43. Re:materials... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      The FBI campaign against so called "radicals" on california university campuses made heros and legends out of the mundane, and wasted FBI resources, destroyed the credbility of the federal governement, and ultimately let the real communists get the bomb...

      ...the fuck? The USSR tested its first nuke in 1949.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    44. Re:materials... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      It screams Dry Run if you are a TSA agent even in the absence of any explosive.

      Possible; and the aim of a "Dry Run" is to identify the strong and weak points of the security network. If this was the case a) the TSA agent believed he had a terrorist in front of him b) the TSA agent believed the Terrorist wanted to know if he would be detected or not c) the TSA agent did what the terrorist wanted and told him that he had been detected. What he should have done is silently verified there were no explosives; arranged for the man to be watched and escorted through the airport and then, later, investigated his contacts.

      The TSA agent should, at the very least be up on a disciplinary charge for incompetence. In fact, however he should be investigated for giving away state secrets and high treason. This entire arrest and news story becomes an even more serious cover up.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    45. Re:materials... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      They specifically stated there were hollow compartments in the insoles.

      Sure, because nobody has hollow compartments in their shoes.
      http://www.nisbets.co.uk/Air-Cushioned-Sole-Shoe/A821-42/ProductDetail.raction is just the first of around 27 million results on Google.

    46. Re:materials... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      ...the fuck? The USSR tested its first nuke in 1949.

      I'm not sure what the fuck he's talking about either, but I'm not sure what the USSR has to do with real communists. I know I'm dangerously close to a "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but was the USSR really ever communist?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    47. Re:materials... by neonKow · · Score: 1

      No. I don't suggest that at all. You're making the same point I am.

    48. Re:materials... by lgw · · Score: 1

      "The Communists" means the USSR and perhaps China, through a couple decades of American history. Few of the generation opposed to "the Commies" cared about economic systems, but the brutal totalitarianism of those states was somehting to guard against (especially soon after WWII, when we had seen how badly that could go).

      In hindsight, it sure doesn't seem like we won the fight against totalitarianism, merely forced it to find better excuses for constant government intrusion into our daily lives.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    49. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets just make it 0 TSA agents and call it a day.

    50. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Upon inspection, nothing was hidden in them.
      Dry run?
      Just an attention seeking idiot?

      And apparently your point is not germane, because clearly it DOES matter that its not 2001 anymore.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    51. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      That's all find and dandy, but YOU don't get to define the TSA agent's job requirements. Its significantly above your pay grade.

      They would get more info by grilling him and digging through every aspect of his life than by "watching him and escorting him through the airport".

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    52. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      air bubbles cast into an insole is not the same as a compartment.
      But thanks for trolling.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    53. Re:materials... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Oh, I'm sorry. Hadn't realised you had first-hand knowledge of the exact "compartments" in his soles.

      Do please share, in what way were they abnormal, suspicious and otherwise worthy of being detained and charged in a country renowned for the injustice of its court system?

    54. Re:materials... by icebike · · Score: 1

      Do your own research son.
      I did mine already, and quoted police reports up thread.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    55. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Study your enemy carefully and come to know him well... For you shall come to be just like him."

      --old Russian proverb.

    56. Re:materials... by cusco · · Score: 1

      I've been delayed because of having:
      1) two laptops in the same bag
      2) a 2-oz bottle of Cholula hot sauce (confiscated three times)
      3) cowboy boots that have been re-heeled multiple times so they were full of broken off nails
      4) drywall dust on my bag

      5) a USB hub

      That last I had all my loose USB cables plugged into it. The TSA grunt fished it out of my bag, looked suspiciously at it and asked, "Does this thing have a timer?" I wish I were kidding.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    57. Re:materials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree with your sentiment completely, just to add some food for thought:

      There's a difference between "XY000 TSA agents should do a better job" and "People shouldn't do retarded fucking shit that is begging for problems.

      To take it to an extreme, while it may not be illegal to walk into a crowded mall, looking nervous and strung out, wearing several rows of red cardboard tubes taped to your torso, while simultaneously holding a cellphone with a wire running to the red tubes (bonus points if you're wearing a balaclava)... to do so is just begging to be arrested.

      So while I agree with your thought that the TSA was retarded and overreated horribly, people as well shouldn't do retardedly stupid things that scream "arrest me". Now while the person in the article wasn't nearly so extreme, and the boots were a complete non-issue... wearing something with, from what I've read in the comments (article blocked at work), various wires sticking out for no particular reason is very much so going to draw attention.

      The x-ray should have solved the question of 'what's in the watch' just about instantly, so I'm not sure why it didn't end there... but still, you wear attention-getting things, don't complain when you get attention. And though this sounds pretty much identical to the whole thing of women wearing provocative clothing, there's a massive difference between dressing up to feel and look good, and walking into a skeezy bar with a sign that says "Get me drunk and I put out"

      At one point, a person has to just use some common fucking sense.

    58. Re:materials... by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      We still have to entertain the possibility that he got exactly what he was looking for, notoriety and fame.

      Who builds a watch with wires and "fuses" hanging out of it and then walks thru airport security? Really, who does that?

      Given the list of stuff attached to the watch, and despite the lack of pics, I think that the "fuses" in question are electrical fuses, not Wile E. Coyote-style TNT-detonator fuses. I also can't help but think that the "authorities" involved don't know the difference.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    59. Re:materials... by lecoupdejarnac · · Score: 1

      I happened to see this on local news, and it as usual with local media, they praised the TSA and only showed interviews of TSA agents and pro-TSA people who were "happy they caught the guy". No questions were raised about violations of rights, or whether or not the watch was actually an explosives trigger device or just looked strange to the TSA. Glad the mainstream media encourages everyone to bend over for the TSA...

  7. Fake cocaine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh brother. They managed to find a journalist who characterized it as something other than a fake bomb. It was *not* an ornate watch AFAIK. This is the only journalist I've seen characterizing it as such. Pictures or we cant' judge either way. If it was just a busted clock with wires hanging out, no biggy. I think it's more likely the TSA was doing its job this time. At best, this guy is in the same category as people who sell fake crack, which is illegal too. What did the guy think would happen from acting like a bomber? This isn't prottected speech. It's like... well... bringing a fake bomb into an airport. It'll come down to a jury: would a reasonable person think this is a bomb? I bet they would.

    1. Re:Fake cocaine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Oakland. So the TSA employees undoubtedly are made up of more felons than usual with a lower IQ than usual.

    2. Re:Fake cocaine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That has nothing to do with Oakland and everything to do with TSA.

    3. Re:Fake cocaine by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Sort of like Congressmen.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  8. Aloha Snackbar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll reserve judgement until I see the boots and the watch.

    1. Re:Aloha Snackbar by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll reserve judgement until I see the boots and the watch.

      NO! The judgement is complete once they found no trace of explosive materials
      Having wires on you or wearing thick shoes is absolutely no reason for being detained. Even if he had an actual bomb timer, that's nothing without a bomb

      I hope he sues them

    2. Re:Aloha Snackbar by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While I agree with you completely, I think it's a sham that there was no attempt in the article to even try to show the watch in question.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    3. Re:Aloha Snackbar by ultranova · · Score: 1

      NO! The judgement is complete once they found no trace of explosive materials

      Unless it's a chemical weapon.

      Just imagine: a plane flies at 30,000 ft, when all of the sudden this guy takes his boots off. The smell fills the cabin. People run for the windows and try to smash them, willing to suck the near-vacuum just to be rid of it. The pilots turn the plane to a desperate nosedive towards sweet, thick, clean air. And the sweat-footed terrrorist passes out with a contented smile on his face, certain that all on the plane will join him in heaven for hell has already been visited upon them.

      And now you know why you must remove your shoes before boarding the plane.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:Aloha Snackbar by Eyeball97 · · Score: 1

      Bingo

      My gut feeling is this man decided to do a bit of publicity whoring, and the watch & boots were made deliberately to get himself picked up

    5. Re:Aloha Snackbar by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be a biological weapon? The smell is caused by bacteria.

    6. Re:Aloha Snackbar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd guess the watch might be something like this.

      As for the boots? Who knows?

    7. Re:Aloha Snackbar by mianne · · Score: 1

      True, and I agree one is free to express their creativity so long as the process isn't likely to cause harm to anyone.

      But at the same time, you have to take into account the amount of real world experience a TSA agent and a crowd of people actually has, and if you really want to provoke the likely ignorance you'll encounter.

      Take the innards out of a magic eight-ball, tie a couple knots at the end of a short length of cotton rope and push the outer knot through the aperture leaving the tail hanging out. You'll have a classic cartoon "bomb" which a person of reasonable intellect would not see as a very credible threat. But try to nonchalantly hold this in your hand as you walk toward an airport security checkpoint. I'd bet you'd find people panicking, followed by you getting tackled by goons, then restrained and blindfolded in a windowless room while the airport is evacuated.

      The bomb squad will shortly thereafter confirm that your mock-up poses no real threat and in fact contains no suitable bomb-making materials at all. However, it's a safe bet that you're the lead story on the news tonight, and you will be charged with "disturbing the peace" at a bare minimum but more likely other "terrorism" charges will be thrown at you anyway. And it may be a very long while before you ever see the light of day again.

      --
      Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
    8. Re:Aloha Snackbar by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Reserve judgement for what?
      I came home from a race, and I brought our organizations timing system back in my carry on... It fits in a small black suitcase. You open it up, it has a timing system, toggle switches, and plenty of wire... Based on what they are claiming it could have been "potentially dangerous materials.' So I'm guilty? guilty of having "potentially dangerous materials" If I added a few more things (like the explosives) then I could have built a bomb. So throw me in jail?
      Not only is this utterly ridiculous, many of the comments on here are ridiculous as well.

  9. Dissonant outrage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given that TFA says he was also carrying other "potentially dangerous" stuff and was not really arrested simply for wearing a watch, this could be outrageous or not.

    I just don't know what to feel.

  10. The suspect? by EGSonikku · · Score: 1
    --
    - "Scientia non habet inimicum nisp ignorantem"
  11. Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the article, it seems as if the TSA did the safe thing and called the bomb squad, which I guess is the right thing to do. I don't expect the guy at the checkpoint to be able to decide if the "modified" watch is dangerous or not, and so they called in the experts (who decided that there were no explosives).

    What bothers me is that he was then arrested: "McGann was taken to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin where he was charged with possessing materials to make an explosive device" (emphasis mine). Isn't that too broad a charge? I'm sure every household has material that could conceivably be used to make an explosive device. Is everyone a threat now (in an actual enforceable sense, not in a we-assume-everyone-is-guilty sense)?

    1. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      Don't bombs usually require some kind of....uh.....explosive?

    2. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Isn't that too broad a charge?

      That the question even needs to be asked is a pitiable commentary on the state of affairs in the US today.

    3. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What bothers me is that he was then arrested: "McGann was taken to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin where he was charged with possessing materials to make an explosive device" (emphasis mine). Isn't that too broad a charge? I'm sure every household has material that could conceivably be used to make an explosive device. Is everyone a threat now (in an actual enforceable sense, not in a we-assume-everyone-is-guilty sense)?

      It's actually fairly common in the US for police to round up known activists before any major political event and charge them with "possessing materials to make an explosive device" when they find the mower gas in their garage or some toilet cleaner under the sink. They can usually tack on some kind of "conspiracy to riot" as well, with a "terrorism" enhancement courtesy of the PATRIOT act.

      See: every DNC, RNC, G8, IMF, etc in the last 10 years

    4. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by houghi · · Score: 1

      From the article, it seems as if the TSA did the safe thing and called the bomb squad, which I guess is the right thing to do.

      They have you nicely conditioned into thinking that a watch is something that it is OK to call in the bomb squad for.

      Your defense might be that they used box cutters to destroy 3 planes, The fourth plane showed us that will not happen again.

      And even if it were possible, that leaves the fact that they are unable to determine what is dangerous. So if this is a false positive, how many false negatives are there? Never heard of somebody who forgot something in his hand luggage and they said nothing? Happened to me. I forgot that my keys had a very small leatherman knife. So I put it in the bag with all the cables and chargers for my portables and phones. Lots of random metal in cables and such to trow off stoopid people.
      They told me to open the bag and took out the water I also had forgotten. Drank that and walked on with my knife still in the bag onto the plane.
      I have heard from others similar stories. Most of the times concerning lighters they have forgotten.
      False negatives do exist and as we see here. False positives also do exist.
      Proof they are unable to do their job.

      And yes, in the eyes of the police (not of the law) everybody is guilty. Everybody is a treat.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    5. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 1

      From the article, it seems as if the TSA did the safe thing and called the bomb squad, which I guess is the right thing to do.

      They have you nicely conditioned into thinking that a watch is something that it is OK to call in the bomb squad for.

      What I liked about this situation is that the TSA agent did not know whether it was risky or not, and called someone with the proper qualifications. Also, if you show up with something that has wires hanging out, there would have been some suspicion/security concerns even prior to the TSA era (not necessarily bomb-squad levels, but there would still be some extra procedures).

      I don't disagree with the rest of your post. But the idea that the bomb squad was called in for a generic watch is incorrect. They were called in because it was a device that looked like a trigger to the TSA agent. In an ideal situation, they should have checked other issues (are there any explosive chemicals, for example) and just let him board the plane. But I don't expect such behavior from people doing jobs that high-school dropouts apply to.

    6. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by tftp · · Score: 1

      Don't bombs usually require some kind of....uh.....explosive?

      No. Just observe closely a failure of a truck tire or a diving air cylinder. The only requirement for a bomb is to be able to expand fast enough to be harmful. Air "explosions" will not be supersonic, but they will be plenty for anyone in vicinity.

    7. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just that he was arrested, but that he was ACTUALLY CHARGED with a CRIME of possessing materials to make an explosive device, even though the guys from the bomb squad confirmed that he did not possess materials to make an explosive device. Our country has let itself become terrified by a bogeyman that doesn't exist, into being a bunch of skittish little cry-babies with no sense, sitting in a dark corner and pissing ourselves at every noise.

    8. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the deal. If a watch has been modified to be a bomb timer, do you think it's going to *look* like it's been modified?

      The fact that it looked modified is the first 100% direct method of knowing it's not part of a bomb.

      Ignorant TSA fucks, fucking up American's rights left and right since 9/11 - the rapists and pedofiles of the TSA should all be lined up and shot for their crimes against humanity.

    9. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Don't bombs usually require some kind of....uh.....explosive?

      That's what the extra insoles were for.

    10. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      From the article, it seems as if the TSA did the safe thing and called the bomb squad, which I guess is the right thing to do. I don't expect the guy at the checkpoint to be able to decide if the "modified" watch is dangerous or not,

      You know what is scary, you and people like you. NO they didn't do the safe thing. They did the WRONG thing.
      Personally I think that the TSA needs to be abolished. And here is one reason why, you said you don't expect the guy to know. Except that is basically his job. LEAST he could have done was stick that watch in the sniffer. Doesn't sniff any bomby stuff, then send him on his way.
      But really the watch had "toggle switches, a circuit board, fuses, and wires" That can describe almost ANY electronic device. But you think its ok to call the bomb squad.
      I know many criminals are stupid. But do you think someone would build something that looks like a tv bomb?

    11. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that too broad a charge?

      Yes, its an extremely broad charge. Pretty much every person who reads this post is literally guilty of such a "crime". Its the definition of stupidity. But that's the TSA and current anti-"terrorism" laws.

    12. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bombs usually require some kind of....uh.....explosive?

      Don't try to confuse the TSA with facts.

    13. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Everybody is a treat.

      So in Soviet Russia, the cake isn't a lie -it's YOU!!!?

    14. Re:Can't decide if this is good or bad... by FrankieBaby1986 · · Score: 1

      I don't expect the guy at the checkpoint to be able to decide if the "modified" watch is dangerous or not, and so they called in the experts (who decided that there were no explosives).

      Why Not? If the guy at the checkpoint is supposed to be responsible for security, then he aught to at least be somewhat technically adept and have some idea of whether or not a circuit could be dangerous.

      I think your expectations are too low for someone with this level of responsibility.

      --
      ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
  12. "Materials to make an explosive device." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not particularly shocking that the guy got stopped. What's particularly interesting is that they then proceeded to actually charge the guy, because the watch could be used as a timing device for a bomb. While I don't know about his insoles, and how they factored in, I'm pretty sure that almost every single person on every flight I've been on in the last two years has carried with them the materials necessary to make a timing device for a bomb, right?

    It feels like there's something missing from the story, and I'd really like a better description of the watch and why it was so interesting to security, and then the police.

  13. Sigh by Osgeld · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With all the bullshit pictures on the linked site, one would think there would be an image of the fucking watch... so I watched the video where bubbly mc blonde flaps along for a min and nothing.

    can someone show the god damned watch already? how ornate is a watch before the bullshit squad get your face on the news?

    1. Re:Sigh by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Funny

      With all the bullshit pictures on the linked site, one would think there would be an image of the fucking watch...

      That would be like... gasp... distributing pictures of materials that can be potentially used to make a bomb. A lesser offense, but probably enough to get a fine

      Not to mention the risks that the terrorists will learn what kind of ornate watches around suspicion and de-assemble their bombs into less suspicious ornate watches

      On a serious note -- the guy is still detained, not like they could contact him for comment or pictures

    2. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, maybe they're doing it so that dumb asses don't start mass producing the things and start clogging up the TSA queues. Or possibly create worse press [than this story already does] by pointing out what the drooling high school dropouts flagged as life-threatening.

    3. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, this watch was not ornate in the sense that it had diamonds on it, it had wires and fuses.
      Long story short: the guy is a moron.

  14. Was the watch one of these? by macemoneta · · Score: 1

    http://goo.gl/LDMgp

    Look! Wires and things!

    Has anyone ever found a watch, clock, or cellphone that couldn't be used as a trigger device?

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:Was the watch one of these? by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Oh man, i want one of those. Any would do. Works best with a 2000 USD italian suit and low tops.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    2. Re:Was the watch one of these? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 1

      We're 11 years away from September 11, 2001 and I think we're right at the beginning of this shit.

      Be prepared for more dopey law enforcement officials to throw people in jail because they encounter something they don't understand. And, of course, these same law enforcement officials will continue on the ages-old tradition of pressing forward with a dumbass charge because they are afraid of the embarassment of admitting that they don't know something and, therefore, did something incredibily stupid.

    3. Re:Was the watch one of these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://goo.gl/LDMgp

      Look! Wires and things!

      Has anyone ever found a watch, clock, or cellphone that couldn't be used as a trigger device?

      Maybe this guy was carrying the dreaded screwdriver? No average person should be able to open a device without at least getting a rectal exam when entering the USA.

  15. Picture by brit74 · · Score: 1

    Initially, it's seemed bizarre to get stopped for a "large watch", but can we at least have a picture? I mean, was his watch as big as the clock "flava flav" wore around his neck? The video also says the watched looked suspicious with wires coming out of it, so it was obviously improvised.

    1. Re:Picture by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Right. Because descriptions given by law enforcement are always accurate. There is no picture of it because it probably looks completely benign and it would be too embarrassing for the government.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  16. Re:Moron. by saihung · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find your willingness to speculate about the motivations of a complete stranger based on no information adorable.

  17. He must be very smart by aglider · · Score: 0

    To go to an airport filled with even smarter security officers while wearing all that metal stuff.
    Really, really smart! Both sides.

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
    1. Re:He must be very smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I was Superman, because then I would kill everyone. I'd fly to the White House, and the President would be like "Hey Superman, I'm so glad you defend the American Way." And I'd be like "Fuck you, you MPAA whore" and I'd feed his desk to him.

      Then I'd go to GOP headquarters and the big fat rich white guys would be like "thanks for keeping our bouregoise butts safe" and I'd say "Fuck you corporate whores" and I would feed Wall Street down their throats.

      The I'd go to Ron Paul and he would be like "Hey Supermn, go back in time and kill Lincoln before he became president because he was bad." And I would be like "Fuck you you ignorant racist dick" and I'd force the entire US Federal government.

    2. Re:He must be very smart by evil_aaronm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But to arrest him after the bomb squad said, "No danger"? What's the point? If the bomb squad had been worried about it, Ok, there's justification. This is just the cops being assholes because they can. Cops are not there to teach us lessons, or punish bad fashion sense. Either the guy was dangerous, had illegal materials, or indicated that he had intent to cause harm, or the cops were wrong to arrest him. I can find quite a few things wrong with just about every person I meet: if I were a cop, should I be able to arrest them for that?

    3. Re:He must be very smart by Nyder · · Score: 1

      But to arrest him after the bomb squad said, "No danger"? What's the point? If the bomb squad had been worried about it, Ok, there's justification. This is just the cops being assholes because they can. Cops are not there to teach us lessons, or punish bad fashion sense. Either the guy was dangerous, had illegal materials, or indicated that he had intent to cause harm, or the cops were wrong to arrest him. I can find quite a few things wrong with just about every person I meet: if I were a cop, should I be able to arrest them for that?

      Well, actually that is all cops can do. Then it's up to the DA to decide if they want to prosecute. Now if their DA is really stupid, they'll press charges, but hopefully he/she'll bitch slap the police for being stupid. Guess we will find out monday.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    4. Re:He must be very smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But to arrest him after the bomb squad said, "No danger"? What's the point? If the bomb squad had been worried about it, Ok, there's justification. This is just the cops being assholes because they can. Cops are not there to teach us lessons, or punish bad fashion sense.

      Actually, they are, and they're here for your uncool niece.

    5. Re:He must be very smart by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Maybe the cops felt that he was "testing" security by attempting to sneak a fake disassembled bomb in (trigger on wrist, explosive in the shoes), either as a rehearsal for the real thing, or for a disparaging article "security don't spot a thing"...

    6. Re:He must be very smart by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      That artist got himself very good and free publicity from the TSA. I'd say he's actually pretty smart indeed.

    7. Re:He must be very smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may be a budgetary case. If the bomb squad is called in someone has to pay for it. If there was no reason for the call TSA may be required to foot the bill. If charges are pressed maybe the local government or the airport needs to pay.

  18. My favorite TSA experience... by Thagg · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was traveling from LAX to New Orleans to shoot Bit Momma's House 2 (you remember that, don't you?) After some bad experiences checking baggage, I carried on my supplies, including my tracking kit.

    Now, my tracking kit was a small Pelican case filled with watch batteries, short wires, and LEDs. After it went through the X-Ray machine, the TSA agent looked at the screen, looked at me, looked at the screen, then picked up the box. He carefully unlatched it, and held it out *as far as he could* as he opened it, turning his head away and looking through the corners of his eyes.

    Needless to say, I was insulted.

    --
    I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    1. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He carefully unlatched it, and held it out *as far as he could* as he opened it, turning his head away and looking through the corners of his eyes.

      Needless to say, I was insulted.

      Is this a new TSA bomb avoidance technique? We should probably have been teaching our bombs squads all along that if you don't look at the bombs directly, they cannot go off!

    2. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      I would have laughed my ass of, after yelling BOOM by surprise.
      Priceless, therefore worth a short arrest session, tee hee.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by hawkinspeter · · Score: 3, Funny

      Must be some kind of quantum trigger

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    4. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Guru2Newbie · · Score: 2

      If you like that BOOM, then I think you'd enjoy this picture: What is a Bastard?, too.

    5. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You would have gone straight to jail for a stunt like that.

    6. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Well, you know, if you have sex standing up, you can't get pregnant. I've heard. However, I don't think my brother, ex-Navy EOD, would put much faith in the "don't look" method, though.

    7. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You contributed to Big Momma's House 2 and you're insulted?

    8. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it was a bomb, and assuming it wasn't quite powerful enough to kill someone who is literally just an arms length away, then looking away could protect his eyes from being damaged if it went off. So it doesn't seem completely stupid to me. However, actually opening something you think could possibly be a bomb when you haven't been trained to do so is extremely stupid.

    9. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Luckily, as an US citizen, I wouldn't have to resist the urge, nor would I be subjected to such a situation. From this perspective, the US of A is like that bully who terrorized the neighborhood for ages, and now hides in an absurdly secured house because every community member fucking hates his guts and plots for revenge. Well played!

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    10. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Sorry mate, I'm only a bastard if I start the whole thing. The other dude started it, I'm just playing along :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    11. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're pretty thin skinned to get insulted by such a thing. In fact, I'd call you fairly uptight to get offended by this.

    12. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

      A dear friend was working at a university in the days of the Unabomber and got an unexpected package with no return address.

      The responding officer picked it up, shook it, and said "it doesn't seem like a bomb".

    13. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Funny

      He carefully unlatched it, and held it out *as far as he could* as he opened it, turning his head away and looking through the corners of his eyes.

      Well, if there was a risk of seeing any images from "Big Momma's House 2" that was only sensible.

    14. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You should be in jail for BMH2. Shame you didn't get the full body inspection.

    15. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you like that BOOM, then I think you'd enjoy this picture: What is a Bastard?, too.

      Paper bags are routinely used during training of bomb disposal techs and various other explosives handlers. Trainee hears the bag pop and they know they just made a mistake that would have killed them in a real situation.

    16. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by Thagg · · Score: 1

      I was insulted that he thought I would make a bomb that weak...

      --
      I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
    17. Re:My favorite TSA experience... by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Simply dropping something heavy or even coughing would do, and could circumvent the arrest if you did it the right way.

      If I was the TSA agent, i'd be asking you a couple of questions about the device if I really thought it might be a bomb, before I opened it. I'd also make you open it too :). I'm guessing you are a cleanshaven white male too, or the story might have been a bit different (unless the TSA agent was completely different to the actors in any of the other stories i've heard about airport security)

  19. Re:Moron. by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Genius is more like it. The next step is to auction the watch off while the publicity is still hot.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  20. What about Woz's watch? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's interesting to draw a comparison between this guy making his own watch as an "art project" and Woz's Nixie tube watch which he says he has worn on flights. Did the TSA just let Woz through because he was Woz?

    1. Re:What about Woz's watch? by stox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They let Woz through because he is a member of the 1%, normal laws do not apply to them.

      --
      "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    2. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 1

      I can't comment on this article's watch since there are no pictures. But Woz's watch seems to look like a thick watch - nothing fancy or suspicious. A friend once wore a small dive computer (which is more conspicuous) on his wrist when he was going through security (like usual, he had to remove it and pass it through the X-ray machine). On the other hand, if Woz had started unscrewing it and pushing dials (in front of security - not while in air, like he mentions on the video) I guess he might have had a problem.

    3. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Jiro · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If he wanted to be a troublemaker, intentionally made a fake bomb, and got caught, "art project" is pretty much the only thing he could say that would explain why he has a fake bomb without confessing to a crime. So I'm very skeptical that it's actually an art project. Rather, he tried to troll the TSA, and he got caught; I'm surprised that he didn't add that he was just doing a social experiment.

      And in the unlikely event that he was actually doing it as an art project, it's really not unreasonable to expect the TSA to treat art projects that look like bombs as bombs. Really, switches, wires, and fuses? How many fuses are on your watch?

    4. Re:What about Woz's watch? by tbird81 · · Score: 1

      Are losers still on about this 1% crap? Woz has got to be 0.0001%

      You don't see 1 in 100 people being able to walk through without scrutiny.

    5. Re:What about Woz's watch? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

      A National Medal of Technology? That'a more like the 0.000001%.

    6. Re:What about Woz's watch? by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are losers still on about this 1% crap?

      Yes. As long as "loser" stays a perjorative with implied stigma and/or a license to be treated as anything less than an average human being, they will be, for the simple reason that for one winner there will always be several losers, thus making the average person a loser. That current society requires 99 losers for 1 winner simply makes that more so.

      It was the 1% that declared war on the 99%, not the other way around.

      You don't see 1 in 100 people being able to walk through without scrutiny.

      Of course you don't, they don't take the regular flights but have private jets. Which would be fine by itself, it's not that much of a burden on other people, but it's not enough for them. They're never happy as long as anyone else has anything at all.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    7. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is the ownership class feels entitled to a 5-10% return on their passive investments. Trouble is the economy is only growing by 1-2% per year and they already consume 30% of GDP. They can't get that kind of return on investment anymore without reducing everyone else's share.

      So yes, to them we are the enemy. Because we consume what they believe is rightfully theirs.

    8. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You didn't get his point. The 1% are rich, but not super rich. The 1% are not rich enough to be able to own their own private jets, for instance. The 0.00001% (or so, you can look up statistics to correct the number of zeroes) are the ones who never have to bother with little people's laws. Of course, saying the zero dot zero zero zero... would be a bit more difficult, 1% is much more marketable.

    9. Re:What about Woz's watch? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      So I'm very skeptical that it's actually an art project. Rather, he tried to troll the TSA

      I doubt that's what he was doing, but why can't trolling the TSA be a valid form of art? Art can have a political point. Making a political point can be done in an artistic way.

    10. Re:What about Woz's watch? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      If he wanted to make trouble would he put on the scanner like a good citizen, or would he instead do something to make trouble? The trouble here is an over-reaction by TSA people out of their depth looking for some way to make it look like they had a reason other than inexperience to call in the bomb squad.
      I think it's yet another example as to why they should be replaced by professional law enforcement.

    11. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, only a very small part of the 1% are using private jets and the like: 1% of the USA is 3M people, after all. The difference isn't that they aren't subject to scrutiny but that they are more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt, and that's something you see at all levels. Even when I was a student, if I wore a suit I wouldn't get asked for my student ID when my ticket was inspected (and in my best clothes I wouldn't even get my ticket inspected), but if I was wearing jeans and a pub crawl shirt, I'd have to present my card every time. Similarly, if you're wearing good clothes and drinking nice beer in a dry zone, you're likely to get a smile and a nod from the police, but if you're dressed scruffily or drinking cheap beer, you're going to get it confiscated. That sort of thing goes on all the time, and I suspect it happens there: someone travelling first class with frequent flyer tags on his luggage is likely to be passed through even if he looks like a bit of a hippy.

    12. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "1%" is a fucking myth. There is so much turnover in the top 1% of income earners that very few people in the 1% this year will still be in the 1% within five years. Most the people who spend any time in the top 1% of income earners will only stay there for a few years. Sure, you can tax the hell out of them, but all you are doing is stealing a disproportionate amount of their lifetime earnings.

      The whole idea of this story is to trace lower tax rates to income inequality since 1980. And the whole thing is bullshit. You know what else happened since 1980? The rise of technology and globalization, leading to the commoditization of unskilled labor. But sure, it was low tax rates that did it. Guess you've never heard of Occam's Razor?

      Fucking morons.

    13. Re:What about Woz's watch? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      They're never happy as long as anyone else has anything at all.

      Bingo! This. In spades. This is the real problem. It is not enough that they have more, it is that YOU must have none. This is the real crime.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    14. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TL;DR loser whining.

      If you're on /. you're the 1% as far as Africa and Asia are concerned (but then, you liberal shitbags don't actually care about brown people).

      And you're definitely the 99% as far as penis size and intellect.

    15. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Jiro · · Score: 1

      A passive-aggressive form of troublemaking is still troublemaking. Just because he didn't utter the words "I have a bomb" doesn't mean that he didn't deliberately wear a device that he knows resembles a bomb with the intention of causing trouble.

      And there's a difference between the TSA people confiscating a cupcake, and the TSA people calling in the bomb squad for something that looks like a bomb. Stopping bombs is what they're supposed to do.

    16. Re:What about Woz's watch? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I disagree and IMHO you are just making excuses that I do not consider valid and I very much doubt that the minor actions engaged in were a deliberate attempt to convince people that he had a bomb. This bullshit lies within the realms of the person stopped because he had a picture of a gun on his t-shirt.
      It shouldn't matter even if it looks like a movie cannonball with a hissing fuse, once the professionals have cleared it the cut rate clowns in the TSA should have gone with what the professionals said instead of playing petty little authoritarian power games to pretend they were correct all along.

    17. Re:What about Woz's watch? by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If you're on /. you're the 1% as far as Africa and Asia are concerned (but then, you liberal shitbags don't actually care about brown people).

      Over a third of the world has Internet access. But conservatives rarely let facts affect their opinions.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    18. Re:What about Woz's watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever flown first class?
      I have. Believe me, the security is a lot more... "dignified".
      A *LOT* more.

  21. could be used to make a timing device for a bomb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A Southern California man was arrested at Oakland International Airport after security officers found him wearing an unusual watch they said could be used to make a timing device for a bomb, authorities said Friday.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this be true of *any* watch?

    he was charged with possessing materials to make an explosive device

    So not only did he get hassled for wearing a watch that was unusual enough that the TSA noticed it, but he was arrested and charged...

    Next time I travel I'll have to make sure my watch is boring enough it doesn't get noticed so I'm not charged with "possessing materials to make an explosive device."

    obXKCD: https://xkcd.com/651/

  22. or in other news by nimbius · · Score: 5, Funny

    faced with a budget surplus and a terrorism deficit, the Oakland Airport TSA spring into action and arrest the most suspicious thing they can come up with after 3 red bulls and a half dozen cruellers: a 50 year old white man with a nice watch and a pair of comfy shoes.

    freedom has been preserved once more thanks to the watchful eye of a handful of overweight highschool drop-outs in cheap polyester slacks and clip-on ties....but for how long?

    tune in for an exciting conclusion to next weeks "Security theatre." Will the man in the comfy shoes buy a new, even more dastardly ornate watch with his lawsuit payout? What devious new orthopaedics will our nemesis equip himself with next? All this and more will be revealed in, "episode 25: I elected obama twice, this shits not funny anymore"

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:or in other news by ericloewe · · Score: 3, Funny

      The comfy shoe is merely an evolution of the comfy chair used by the spanish Inquisition. Deadlier, but more portable.

    2. Re:or in other news by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      From what it sounds like, it wasn't a "nice" watch. It was a piece of "art" he had made that had fuses and wires deliberately hanging out of it. Clearly, he was trying to make a statement as an artist.

      As others have suggested, I too have no problems with professionals getting called into to ensure that everything is kosher, rather than letting a minimum wage TSA grunt take a glance at something that looks really odd and suspicious then waving the guy through. What I do have a problem with is his getting arrested after that, since it was clear that he was not an actual threat at that point, nor was he building a bomb. It looks as if they just wanted to charge him with something since he had clearly been purposeful in making something that looked suspicious.

    3. Re:or in other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Who cares if TFS clearly states that it was the sheriff's, blame the TSA for everything.

  23. Another Moron by NetNinja · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Gee let me wear this contraption that will garner all sorts of attention.

    I can understand someones desire to express his art but to do it in an airport with TSA screeners who are basically highschool push outs is just fucking stupid.
    I guess he can express his creativity in a public holding cell, see if they give a fuck about your expressionism.

    1. Re:Another Moron by sjames · · Score: 1

      If our society has degraded to the point where pandering to the tastes of an average knuckle dragging goon is the only remaining option, please just go ahead and flush. Whatever happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave?

    2. Re:Another Moron by slippyblade · · Score: 1

      We have always been at war with West Eurasia...

      We have never been at war with West Eurasia...

    3. Re:Another Moron by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      Gee let me wear this contraption that will garner all sorts of attention. I can understand someones desire to express his art but to do it in an airport with TSA screeners who are basically highschool push outs is just fucking stupid.

      I disagree with you. It is true that he could expect to be searched and tested for explosives for wearing a strange watch. But I still would not expect him to be detained after a further inspection had found no explosives on him.
      Also, is he an idiot for wearing thick-soled shoes to the airport as well?

      He's doing a valuable service to us -- pointing out how ridiculous things got. A charge of "having wires that may be used to make a bomb" (in a McGyver episode) is now enough to be detained and taken out of the airport into police custody?

    4. Re:Another Moron by BeanThere · · Score: 2

      He's doing a valuable service to us -- pointing out how ridiculous things got.

      Kind of like Rosa Parks did, but I suppose she was also just looking for attention.

    5. Re:Another Moron by russotto · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to the land of the free and the home of the brave?

      The free were imprisoned and the brave got shot.

    6. Re:Another Moron by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      He wasn't just detained. He was charged with a crime and now he will have to hire a lawyer and prove his innocence in court. If he was under the impression that he did not live in a police state I would guess that his views have now changed.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  24. The new normal by spire3661 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I imagine this https://www.adafruit.com/products/950 would give TSA agents pause, especially if its modified even further (blinky lights, toggles etc).

    --
    Good-bye
    1. Re:The new normal by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I had this device discovered in my backpack during a TSA extra-gropey our-explosives-detector-machine-has-beeped secondary inspection. It was powered down, but it actually is a hacked-together, home-made gadget for triggering an external unit.

      The TSA agents responsible were grumbling about having to work next to the ineffectual backscatter X-ray scanners (I'd opted out), and were interested in what camera equipment I had and what I'd recommend for a beginner. Many of the agents are human, and sick to death of the security theatre they have to work with.

      (As a photographer who likes taking pictures of weird bits of crumbling infrastructure, I've had plenty of run-ins with security guards and the like. Oddly, I've never been arrested.)

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    2. Re:The new normal by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Personally, I liked the one from Speed. You know, the one that looked something like this. I hope the TSA are keeping their eyes out for that one, too.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    3. Re:The new normal by bidule · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oddly, I've never been arrested.

      That's because you're a car.

      --
      ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
    4. Re:The new normal by devent · · Score: 1

      > (As a photographer who likes taking pictures [flickr.com] of weird bits of crumbling infrastructure, I've had plenty of run-ins with security guards and the like. Oddly, I've never been arrested.)

      Why are you expecting being arrested for taking pictures of public places?
      I thought you are from the USA and not Iran, Irak, or any other oppressive regime country?
      Is your populace already that brainwashed by the DHS?

      Greetings from Europe, where I hope we finally stop listening to crazy people over the big pond.

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    5. Re:The new normal by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

      Greetings from Europe, where I hope we finally stop listening to crazy people over the big pond.

      Greetings from a European who has been shouted at by Polish military police for taking photos of their vital security apparatus!

      (Also, some of the locations I've been caught in may not have been public places...)

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    6. Re:The new normal by Formalin · · Score: 1

      Ah, just because Poland entered the EU, doesn't make it Western [European].

      Police were giving me a hard time in Balkans, taking photos of pretty benign stuff there. I'd imagine Russia is worse yet, for things like that. Old mentality, something.

  25. So electronics are illegal now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So electronics components are illegal now? What would happen if you tried to pack a kids toy that teaches electronic circuits in your carry on luggage? Gitmo?

  26. Not "bomb"-making materials by gman003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Those aren't bomb materials. Those are, at best, timer-making materials and a place to conceal something.

    Yeah, sure, if the guy's got ammonium nitrate and kerosene in his carry-on, those would be bomb-making materials. Go ahead and arrest him for that.

    But if you're going to start arresting people for stuff that can be part of a bomb without actually being dangerous, you should start by taking away everyone's cell phone. Not only do they all have timer functions now, but they can, and have, been used as remote triggers.

    1. Re:Not "bomb"-making materials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they were gel insoles, they might have been concerned about the constituent of the gel. If I was a TSA agent, and somebody had a stack of 4 or 5 gel insoles in their boots, I'd want to know what the gel was.

  27. This is hurting US tourism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Every time I read something like this, it reduces my interest in travelling to the US. Generally, I only visit the US by car, which is very limiting.

  28. They'd have kittens..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As the product description says:

    "This new version is even more hackable than ever. The on board microcontroller in this model is the very popular ATmega328P used in many of the current versions of Arduino. In fact, you can reprogram your watch using the same Arduino IDE software that you use for a regular Arduino."

    Just don't reprogram it to go into "countdown" mode at the touch of a button !

    Blue WIre?
    Red Wire?

    (You KNOW you'd have to include correctly coloured wires!)

    Capatcha "lynched" - says it all, really.....

  29. So they find nothing and feel stupid by future+assassin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and in retaliation they charge the guy with a real crime. He should set up a donation site so we can donate to his legal fund so he can stir up moire shit. Now for those will will spout the If you got nothing to hide... Well he had nothing to hide yet the authorities still railroaded him.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:So they find nothing and feel stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was stupid enough to be different enough to be charged with a bogus crime. Now what wasn't clear about that?

  30. Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by hey! · · Score: 3, Informative

    Anybody who's read or watched 1960s spy stories knows how to make a detonation timer with an ordinary watch or analog clock. You scrape the paint of one of the hands and position a bare wire on the face so it completes the circuit at the desired time. So the argument the cops are making that the watch was capable of triggering a bomb means exactly nothing. Anything capable of marking the passage of time can be adapted to trigger a bomb. You could rig a trigger with an hour glass if you wanted to.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does make you wonder if the TSA numpties are using episodes of MacGyver as training videos...

    2. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by green1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not only analog watches, digital watches are even easier, set the alarm for a specific time, and connect to the buzzer...

      Of course he wasn't arrested because he had a big ridiculouse watch, he was arrested because he made someone look stupid when the bomb squad showed up and couldn't find a bomb... the law for "making an authority figure look bad" isn't written down anywhere, but it is one of the crimes that is guaranteed to get you arrested almost every single time.

    3. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      with an ordinary watch or analog clock

      or a carrot, half a cup of pepsi and exactly two other ingredients.

      and no, I'm not tellin'.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    4. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      And what do you need a timer for if you're planning on blowing yourself up, anyway? Set it for 120 seconds so you can announce your nefarious soliloquy giving 007 time to defuse or jettison the bomb?

    5. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Anybody who's read or watched 1960s spy stories knows how to make a detonation timer with an ordinary watch or analog clock. You scrape the paint of one of the hands and position a bare wire on the face so it completes the circuit at the desired time. So the argument the cops are making that the watch was capable of triggering a bomb means exactly nothing. Anything capable of marking the passage of time can be adapted to trigger a bomb. You could rig a trigger with an hour glass if you wanted to.

      Well, if we didn't know how to, we do now that, thanks!. Hopefully they don't arrest you for training terrorist by telling us how to do that.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    6. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't figure out if I have just been trolled (carrot-caked?) or put on a watch list. Google just returns lots of recipes for carrot cake and pot roast.

    7. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something like this, I reckon...

    8. Re:Analog watches make dandy detonation timers. by dbIII · · Score: 1

      or a carrot, half a cup of pepsi and exactly two other ingredients

      Shoot, a fella' could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff

  31. I'll just leave this here by zill · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since no one mentioned it yet, Casio F91W.

    Remember, choosing the wrong brand of watch could land you in Gitmo.

    Casio, not even once.

    1. Re:I'll just leave this here by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      That's awesome, I'm ordering one immediately.

    2. Re:I'll just leave this here by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remember, choosing the wrong brand of watch could land you in Gitmo.

      "I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that." - Barack Obama, On CBS 60 Minutes, November 16, 2008

      --
      "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    3. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed that watch is about to get very popular with traveling geeks. Though I doubt the average TSA'er would even notice.

    4. Re:I'll just leave this here by evil_aaronm · · Score: 2

      And I thought it was insane to make it illegal just to own lock-picking tools.

    5. Re:I'll just leave this here by PPH · · Score: 1

      Terrorists aren't stupid. When the profile about wearing a Casio F91W became public knowledge, they switched to Patek Philippe.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:I'll just leave this here by Genda · · Score: 1

      Closing Guantanamo and opening Montana is not a move in the proper direction.

    7. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, brown people in the United States or a nation it's at war with do not constitute the majority of Slashdot readers. Doesn't mean you can just dismiss this, though.

    8. Re:I'll just leave this here by Nyder · · Score: 1

      And I thought it was insane to make it illegal just to own lock-picking tools.

      it is? I can't own a bobby pin or screwdriver? Damn, after all the practicing in Fallout 3, my skills are no good!!!!

      --
      Be seeing you...
    9. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait. Why isn't Casio being shutdown for producing equipment so certain to be used for the creation of explosive weapons that people are detained for wearing them?

    10. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We made sure it didn't happen." - Congress

    11. Re:I'll just leave this here by Maow · · Score: 1

      Remember, choosing the wrong brand of watch could land you in Gitmo.

      "I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that." - Barack Obama, On CBS 60 Minutes, November 16, 2008

      I'm hugely disappointed that he didn't close it. But wasn't the reason he didn't close it the setting-hair-on-fire and similar cowardly nonsense from various opponents that were scared shitless of having "terrrrrrists" transferred to mainland USA prisons, to be held in SuperMax prisons until trials would have been held?

      I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

      Still, damned disappointed. But do find it ironic that some of those blaming him for that *supported* Bush when he created the gulag in the first place.

      *shug* Damned glad I'm not American.

    12. Re:I'll just leave this here by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

      That's highly unlikely. It would be trivial to transfer the prisoners into a specially built high security prison on some abandoned US military base in the middle of Nowhere, USA. Once the civilian trials had taken place, the facility could be handed over to some state government to become a regular prison.

      Sadly, when it comes to addressing the human rights abuses committed by America in its witch hunt on turban wearing brown people, Obama is just full od hot air like most Americans.

    13. Re:I'll just leave this here by Maow · · Score: 1

      I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no
          one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

      That's highly unlikely. It would be trivial to transfer the prisoners into a specially built high security prison on some abandoned US military base in the middle of Nowhere, USA. Once the civilian trials had taken place, the facility could be handed over to some state government to become a regular prison.

      Sadly, when it comes to addressing the human rights abuses committed by America in its witch hunt on turban wearing brown people,
        Obama is just full od hot air like most Americans.

      Here's a reference to the opposition I spoke of:

      Some conservatives, however, don't like the idea of bringing suspected terrorists the government calls dangerous to the U.S. mainland.

      "There's really no place in the United States that can replicate the sort of operational security features that Guantanamo has," said David Rivkin, a former Justice Department official.

    14. Re:I'll just leave this here by Maow · · Score: 1

      I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no

          one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

      That's highly unlikely. It would be trivial to transfer the prisoners into a specially built high security prison on some abandoned US military base in the middle of Nowhere, USA. Once the civilian trials had taken place, the facility could be handed over to some state government to become a regular prison.

      Sadly, when it comes to addressing the human rights abuses committed by America in its witch hunt on turban wearing brown people,

        Obama is just full od hot air like most Americans.

      Here's a reference to the opposition I spoke of:

      Some conservatives, however, don't like the idea of bringing suspected terrorists the government calls dangerous to the U.S. mainland.

      "There's really no place in the United States that can replicate the sort of operational security features that Guantanamo has," said David Rivkin, a former Justice Department official.

      Here's something else:

      On May 20, 2009, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346) by a 90-6 vote to block funds needed for the transfer or release of prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[12] President Obama issued a Presidential memorandum dated December 15, 2009, ordering the preparation of the Thomson Correctional Center, Thomson, Illinois so as to enable the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners there.[13]

    15. Re:I'll just leave this here by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      And then there is this bill, signed a few years later by Obama:

      The 2011 Defense Authorization Bill additionally prohibits âoethe use of funds to modify or construct facilities in the United States to house detainees transferred from United States Naval Station, GuantÃnamo Bay, Cuba.â

      It's like he's trying to have his torture, and yet claim powerlessness too. Highly unimpressive.

    16. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He tried, but congress wouldn't approve any funds to relocate the prisoners.

      The president isn't a dictator.

    17. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No, you can't transfer prisoners from Guantanamo to the US mainland or spend any money to prepare facilities to do that" -- Congress, Jan. 7, 2011 (paraphrased from the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill, and the language was renewed in 2012)

      He tried. He's said he opposes the congressional obstruction to him following through with his promise. Unless you want him to break the law and unilaterally order Guantanamo's closing, there's not much more he can do. I guess if you're going to blame him, blame him for promising something he couldn't fulfill without the approval of congress.

    18. Re:I'll just leave this here by khallow · · Score: 1

      How? All Obama had to do was move people out of Guantanamo and it wouldn't matter what laws the Republican minority managed to pass (which would have been zilch). I just see it as another campaign promise that Obama reneged on when he no longer had to promise anything in order to get elected.

    19. Re:I'll just leave this here by Maow · · Score: 1

      And then there is this bill, signed a few years later by Obama:

      The 2011 Defense Authorization Bill
      additionally prohibits âoethe use of funds to modify or construct facilities in
      the United States to house detainees transferred from United States Naval
      Station, GuantÃnamo Bay, Cuba.â

      It's like he's trying to have his torture, and yet claim powerlessness too.
      Highly unimpressive.

      Like I said, I'm unimpressed too, but I think you missed the part that the Senate passed the bill blocking funds (I don't think the president has a choice at that point but to sign it into law), where Obama signed a memorandum to get a place ready for prisoner transfer. He doesn't have the ability to force it to happen though.

      But, it does seem like the USA likes its gulags and is loathe to give them up. Hell, Canada even refused to accept a Canadian citizen (born in Canada, 15 years old when captured) from being transferred back to Canada from Guantanamo. The Conservatives blocked the transfer at every possible opportunity until very recently; and had the support of a disturbing number of Canadians on that. So, I guess Canada likes gulags-by-proxie. Shameful. (See Omar Kadr case.)

    20. Re:I'll just leave this here by antdude · · Score: 1

      I still wear and use a calculator watch since my teen(age) days. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    21. Re:I'll just leave this here by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      He tried, but congress wouldn't approve any funds to relocate the prisoners.

      Wait - the President can start a war without Congress (Libya) but cannot transfer a few hundred prisoners without their approval?

      Laughable.

      Gitmo is still open because Obama never intended to end what made Gitmo, Gitmo: endless detention without trials, or if you're lucky, a military kangaroo court. He was going to move it to a SuperMax in Illinois. As if a Democratic Congress would have overridden the veto of their new president just after he was sworn in.

    22. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      B-b-b-but the Republicans said no!

    23. Re:I'll just leave this here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but he soon discovered that doing so would need more than a 5-minute bandaid, so he said 'fuck it' and went to sleep.

  32. A sad state of affairs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was playing this fun, odd video game called "Real Lives 2010" (Google it, think Oregon Trailish)

    Depending on your country of residence you get random factoids. One for the US was "The US claims that human rights violations are 'An aberration', But in truth occur frequently"

    Too true game, too true : (

  33. Re:Moron. by sjames · · Score: 1

    Sorry, trolling is far too common to be considered performance art. Perhaps you should try watchmaking.

  34. Re:Fucking Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hi Moron.

  35. The watch was art! by erroneus · · Score: 1

    And this is security "theatre!" It's all very very creative these days isn't it? Good thing nudity as a form of protest is allowable in airports. Unfortunately, nothing on my body looks dangerous... *sigh*

    1. Re:The watch was art! by Genda · · Score: 1

      I dunno... you may have a threatening birthmark, you can't see!!! I would suggest a close screening with possible surgical removal of the offending body part.

  36. This is why ... by hduff · · Score: 3

    ... we can't have safe things. Morons.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  37. Re:Moron. by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Apparently not. He was modded +5 Funny as an anonymous coward. I usually don't hand out Mod points to AC's but I would have in this case as that was pretty good. You did ask for it.

  38. Re:Moron. by amiga3D · · Score: 2

    I'd head straight to Ebay with it.

  39. Yeah boyeeeeee! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What was Flavor Flav doing in Oakland?

  40. Re:Moron - Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This just proves to me that people with badges and guns are stupid, moronic and easily manipulated.

    Terrorists are smart, cunning and great at manipulating.

    So, do you feel safe, you asshole sheeple?

  41. Obama outbushes Bush!!! by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 0

    Take that Mitt!

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  42. The Watch by presspass · · Score: 1

    It was probably this watch:

    https://www.sparkfun.com/products/11488

    1. Re:The Watch by Genda · · Score: 1

      Actually I think it was this watch.

  43. OMG terrawrists!!!11!!!1! by jmcvetta · · Score: 1, Insightful

    From TFA: "While no actual explosives were found, McGann was carrying potentially dangerous materials and appeared to have made alterations to his boots, which were unusually large and stuffed with layers of insoles, Nelson said."

    So in other words, this guy isn't actually causing any problems at all, he's just wearing some funky shoes. And the SA consider this good reason to harass and arrest him. This is why I wear Birkenstocks + socks when I fly - afaik, no one is yet living in irrational terror of hippie sandals.

    1. Re:OMG terrawrists!!!11!!!1! by evil_aaronm · · Score: 0

      My knuckles are potentially dangerous; should I be forced to amputate my hands? I'd still have elbows, so amputate my arms? Then what about my feet, which many MMA guys use to knock people out all the time. Maybe we should be like the black knight in Monty Python - "It's just a flesh wound!"

  44. I love it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How free is your free country now amerifags?
    Remember electronics are dangerous mmkay.

    1. Re:I love it! by evil_aaronm · · Score: 0

      I think the ignorant morons that comprise the TSA and the local police squad are more dangerous.

    2. Re:I love it! by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Well we are still more free than North Korea. I think. At least we can still be proud of that.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    3. Re:I love it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well we are still more free than North Korea.

      That's what they keep telling us, at any rate.

  45. I'm "watch"ing you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'nuf said

  46. Corrupt cops will do what they want... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The crime is that he cant sue the Cops that arrested them directly. If cops had to pay for their crimes they would be less like assholes and more like civilized people.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Corrupt cops will do what they want... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      The crime is that he cant sue the Cops that arrested them directly. If cops had to pay for their crimes they would be less like assholes and more like civilized people.

      How about in civil court?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    2. Re:Corrupt cops will do what they want... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've long thought that cops should be paid a stipend to buy their own bond. In return the bonding agency gets to look at their record and charge them what they think is appropriate.

    3. Re:Corrupt cops will do what they want... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but when he levels the multimillion dollar lawsuit against the sheriffs office for wrongful arrest, unlawful detainment, and violation of his civil liberties...the officers involved will probably be terminated. To arrest and detain for bomb making materials typically requires a critical component like the explosive or a blasting cap. If their statute is so broad as to include anything that could be a bomb component than I doubt its constitutionality, and I further doubt that the statute is indeed so broad. I'm betting pissed off TSA guard and/or sheriff''s deputy = jackpot lawsuit for this guy

    4. Re:Corrupt cops will do what they want... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      You cant. If you are a cop you are IMMUNE from any and all civil and legal lawsuits in regards to anything you do on duty. If it was "in the line of duty" and he mows down 5 children.... the cop get's a bonus and a paid vacation while they "investigate"

      I should be able to after a judge throws something out to be able to sue the cop directly. Make that fucker pay for my lawyer fees, my lost time, and pain and suffering out of his paycheck.

      That will make a cop think twice before being a "I AM A COP THEREFORE I AM A GOD" asshole and doing anything wrong.

      But then I also believe an off duty cop that speeds or breaks a law should lose his job permanently.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  47. I'm an ARTIST!... by Genda · · Score: 1

    I'll have you know that I hand painted this "'F' the TSA!" t-shirt. Please handle it with all due respect.

  48. The vast explosive materials conspiracy by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hear that there's a vast conspiracy to load up every airplane that flies with a highly flammable and explosive material, that sometimes this material even makes up the bulk of the weight of the aircraft in flight. It's everywhere on the plane and people doesn't even realize it, even stored in vast quantities inside the wings of most commercial airliners. The rumor I heard, and I know this sounds a bit outlandish, is that it's even pumped into the engines, where it's actually very common for it to cause small explosions that most people don't even realize or think about.

    The thought of it scared me so much that I decided that I would only drive places in my car instead.

    1. Re:The vast explosive materials conspiracy by Kazymyr · · Score: 3, Funny

      But do YOU realize there's an even bigger conspiracy to load all cars, including yours, with an even more explosive fluid? And that it's also pumped through the engine where it causes explosions?Think about it, man, and ditch your booby-trapped car. I have a bike I could sell you.

      --
      I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
    2. Re:The vast explosive materials conspiracy by lee1026 · · Score: 1

      I know you are joking, but airplanes don't really run on explosions the ways cars do. Jets simply use an continues burn. Pistons work the way you think they do but they are no longer common in large aircraft

    3. Re:The vast explosive materials conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minor nitpick: jet engines that you'd use on a plane all are continuously combusting and don't have a cycle of detonations like a piston engine. While there are a few types of jet engines that do use multiple detonations, they're not practical for use on planes.

    4. Re:The vast explosive materials conspiracy by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      He drives a Chevy Volt

  49. Troubling... by John+Pfeiffer · · Score: 1

    Well, as someone who designs timepieces and clocks that would charitably be described as "Holy shit, is that a bomb?" I find this more than a little troubling... Oh well, at least the shoes I usually wear are an ancient and well-worn pair of Nike low-tops...no problems there...unless they decide my shoes look too old and I must be hiding a bomb in them.

    What the fuck is going on with this country? Also, it makes me wonder if Woz has any trouble like this with his Nixie watch...

    --

    Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
    1. Re:Troubling... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      Well, as someone who designs timepieces and clocks that would charitably be described as "Holy shit, is that a bomb?" I find this more than a little troubling... Oh well, at least the shoes I usually wear are an ancient and well-worn pair of Nike low-tops...no problems there...unless they decide my shoes look too old and I must be hiding a bomb in them.

      What the fuck is going on with this country? Also, it makes me wonder if Woz has any trouble like this with his Nixie watch...

      This is the same country that freaked out over adverts to Aqua Force Hunger Team https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Boston_bomb_scare

      Stupid people are stupid. They react stupid, and they bring stupid all around.

      --
      Be seeing you...
  50. Re:Moron. by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 1

    1. Hide watch in unlikely place.
    2. Get caught sneaking through TSA.
    3. Head to Ebay.
    4. Profit!!!

  51. I dunno about his watch... by kenorland · · Score: 1

    But if this is his website, he deserves to get arrested.

    1. Re:I dunno about his watch... by Nyder · · Score: 1

      But if this is his website, he deserves to get arrested.

      Nothing wrong with that web page, seems like you are a bit jealous.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    2. Re:I dunno about his watch... by kenorland · · Score: 1

      The entire page is a single Flash file. If you think there's "nothing wrong" with that, you're living in the last century of web design.

    3. Re:I dunno about his watch... by MadMaverick9 · · Score: 1

      What website? All I get is ... 1680x1050 black pixels.

      And in the upper left corner it says something about "myspace counter" barely readable.

      Interesting website ... yes.

    4. Re:I dunno about his watch... by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      There's plenty wrong with it.

      For starters, it's flash only with no fallback. Now, that doesn't make one deserve to be arrested, but it does mean he (or whoever made it, if contracted) shouldn't be making web pages.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  52. Obama? by kenorland · · Score: 1

    This is the responsibility of the executive branch. Obama had four years to fix this, and it would have been easy for him to do this. Yet it's gotten worse rather than better.

    1. Re:Obama? by Nyder · · Score: 1

      This is the responsibility of the executive branch. Obama had four years to fix this, and it would have been easy for him to do this. Yet it's gotten worse rather than better.

      I always find this funny.

      Bush 1 fucked shit up badly.
      Bill Clinton came in and fixed shit better, but everyone bitches about him lying.
      Bush 2 fucks up with Clinton did, then fucked shit up even worse.
      Now we have Obama, who hasn't been very honest with us so far, and doesn't seem to care about getting America back on track.

      You see the problem? We had 1 good president and all of you get your panties in a bunch because he lied. All presidents lie. That is how they make it to office. Guess what? Clinton lied and did his job great, unlike the other shit bags you have all elected into office.

      You don't know when you have it good, and are way too stupid to keep the good things. We have gotten what we deserve by believing that politicians won't say or do anything to get in office. Time to stop. Make our politicians keep their promises, or we drop them for new ones. Make them serve the people, not the corporations. If we don't, then expect shit to just get worse.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    2. Re:Obama? by kenorland · · Score: 1

      We had 1 good president and all of you get your panties in a bunch because he lied.

      I don't know who you mean by "all of you". I had no problem with Clinton; I thought he was one of the better presidents in a long time. He was also very popular and would probably easily have won a third term, so people knew it.

      Bush and Obama got reelected because their challengers were awful. But far fewer people were worshiping Bush as blindly as people are worshiping Obama.

  53. Re:Moron. by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

    *golf clap*

    --
    I drank what? -- Socrates
  54. Time for performance artists to test the airports by davidwr · · Score: 1

    It's time for a coordinated attack on the nation's airport's security's lack of common sense.

    Get 100 performance artists and their lawyers and PR teams and possibly even undercover news media to go to 100 different airports dressed wearing completely legal, non-dangerous clothes that are designed to separate those security people who can tell a threat from those who can't.

    As the artists go through, the lawyer is in line behind them.

    In airports with well-trained security nothing happens and the artist and his entourage board their plains.

    In airports with poorly-trained security, the incident makes front page of the local news. If this happens in more than a few locations, it makes national news.

    Unfortunately, such an exercise is restricted to well-to-do artists with no previous legal trouble who are willing to be arrested and, for the several months it will take to fight it in court, be stuck with "pending charges" and possible yellow- or red-flagging on the "no fly list."

    Still, if any artists are daring enough AND their lawyers clear them first, it would be fun to read about.

    DO NOT TRY THIS KIND OF THING without clearing it with a lawyer first AND being willing and able to have your live made very uncomfortable for months or even years.

    Bonus points if you tell your US Congress-person or US Senator first and they are willing to back you up.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  55. Re:Moron. by Abreu · · Score: 2

    He was probably wearing some "steampunk" watch and boots, the poor idiot.

    I'd bet there was no statement planned.

    --
    No sig for the moment.
  56. Who Has the TSA Caught? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How many actual criminals has the TSA actually caught? People who would actually have done any harm if the TSA hadn't caught them?

    How many of them would have been caught with methods that don't violate everyone going through an airport?

    The answer is probably that the benefit is very small. Other than the benefit of $BILLIONS to security corps and a authority/fear culture that makes it easier to waste more $BILLIONS on abusing us.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  57. Civil War comparisons by davidwr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In a time of actual invasion or insurrection, the President can do a lot of things he can't otherwise do. Our founding founders knew this.

    The closest we've come in the last 30 years on a national scale were the events involving the 9/11 hijackers before 9/11 and the unknown but thought to be very real and very high threat in the days after.

    On a local scale, there have been some domestic "attacks on the United States" that would warrant Lincoln-esque restrictions on civil liberties in a very small geographic area - city blocks perhaps - for maybe a few hours at most. Had I been in downtown Oklahoma City in the hours before the Federal Building was bombed AND had the feds had specific, credible intelligence, I would forgive them if they denied me my right to be in that part of downtown during that time frame. But I'd demand they explain themselves later or I'd sue them for violating their oath of office, namely, to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  58. Trolling the police by davidwr · · Score: 2

    In a free country, you are allowed to troll the police and waste their time if you don't otherwise break the law.

    You ARE allowed to walk down the street in a suspicious manner.

    You are NOT allowed to actually do anything that a reasonable person would reasonably consider a threat.

    You ARE allowed to have a watch full of gears on a plane.

    You are NOT allowed to have a bomb on a plane.

    Besides, we all carry the most important thing needed to build or use a bomb known to man around with us every time we fly.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  59. TSA -- Keeping America safe from Communism. by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    America used to be the greatest nation of tinkerers and inventors in the world. Now we're a nation of consumers. The ability and inclination to create things is now considered prima facia evidence of anti-social tendencies.

    There's recently been an Internet-driven renaissance of inventing things -- the maker movement. But there's something sinister about the movement. It's *international*. Consider the Arduino. It was developed in the *commune* of Ivrea Italy, and the design is the property of *nobody*. The Trilateral Commission is probably behind it, assisted by the socialist Obama administration.

    People who know more than you are scary. People who know more than you *cooperating* with each other is scarier still.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:TSA -- Keeping America safe from Communism. by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      America used to be the greatest nation of tinkerers and inventors in the world.

      When was this?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  60. Riff on Dos Equis commericial by davidwr · · Score: 2

    Deep announcer voice:

    When he writes letters to his mother, the post office encrypts the messages for him.

    When he plans a bombing, the building blows itself up out of respect.

    When he is finally arrested, his guards treat him to the hospitality you can find only in the tropics.

    He is, the most interesting terrorist in the world.

    Different voice:

    "I don't always wear a watch, but when I do, I prefer Casio."

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  61. For those that don't RTFA... by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

    He was WEARING the watch, it was NOT in his boots. The boots were oversized and had added insoles in them. Doesn't sound too bad right? The watch was modified and had fuses, wires, and switches added to it....

    Sounds like they erred on the side of caution and while the summary sounds pretty outrageous I think a watch with all of that added to it sounds a bit odd too. Need more details, the dude definitely sounds a bit off...

    --
    Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
  62. "Wires, switches, and fuses"? by ckhorne · · Score: 1

    I have as much disdain for the TSA as anyone else on here, but after watching the video, I tend to agree with TSA's action. They stated that the watch had "wires, switches, and fuses" on it, and somewhere mentioned that they were toggle switches.

    Now, I have no idea what it actually looked like, but there's only so many ways to attach toggle switches and fuses to a watch. It's going to look highly suspicious. Couple that with some odd shoewear, and I actually think the TSA is justified in taking precautions on this one.

    However, continuing to detain him after the bomb squad cleared him is blatantly wrong..

    1. Re:"Wires, switches, and fuses"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He effectively harassed the TSA by causing them to have to call the bomb squad. Any additional detention and charges filed are justified.

    2. Re:"Wires, switches, and fuses"? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      It's going to look highly suspicious.

      It looks highly suspicious like what? What you THINK a bomb looks like? Do you know what a bomb looks like? If you were a terrorist how would you build a bomb that you wanted to sneak past security?
      Look it had "toggle swtiches" EVERY electronic device has a toggle switch. It had wires... Fewer new electronic devices have wires, but lots of older ones do. Besides your power cords that is. Ohhh and heaven forbid it had circuit board!

    3. Re:"Wires, switches, and fuses"? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      He didn't cause anyone to do anything. If you are walking down the street and the cops decide to detain you... is it because you were harassing them?

  63. Re:Moron. by Grimbleton · · Score: 2

    Walking through with a watch on your wrist is neither sneaking nor "hiding in an unusual place"

  64. Re:Moron. by Sulphur · · Score: 1

    Genius is more like it. The next step is to auction the watch off while the publicity is still hot.

    That is his TSA period, and of course it will go up in value when he has his next period.

  65. Obama gave TSA a big boost ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It did reach its "out of the closet" phase with the Bush II regime - and has been normalized into permanence under the Obama intelligence-state.

    FYI, there is a HUGE GAP between "out of the closet" phase and the "normalized phase".

    What Bush II did was bad enough, but if Obama didn't give TSA a big boost things wouldn't be as bad as it is, right now.

    I am neither pro Bush nor pro Obama. For me, TSA is anti-people thing and no matter which president is for TSA, that president is anti-America.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  66. Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by Local+ID10T · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's ridiculous to arrest the man because he had a watch in his boots. But why in the hell did he have a watch in his boots? That doesn't make any sense to me. Was he coming from out of the country? Was he coming into the country? Did he forget what pockets were for? Things don't seem to add up to me.

    It is possible that he was testing security at the airport so that he could sneak a bomb in later. Nobody would take the time to change their boots unless they had more than one use for them.

    I didn't read TFA so excuse me if that was posted in there.

    He had an ornate (fancy word for ...fancy) watch AND boots with extra insoles (the poor man's version of lifts?)

    --
    "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    1. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 2

      Three words. Reading Comprehension Fail. I'm an idiot

    2. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      The fancy watch was a art project that resembled the Boston bomb scare more than a timepiece. I've not seen any pictures, but it was described as having "switches and resistors" and other electronic components. He had a watch that looked like a bomb timing device and did not look like a watch, and had extra space in his modified footwear sufficient to hold a bomb. I'm not clear on the complaints of whether the problem asserted is the execution of the rules (as was the Boston Bomb scare), or the rules themselves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Boston_bomb_scare if you don't know what Boston bomb scare I'm referring to.

    3. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 2

      The one thing everyone who clicked on the article wanted: Pictures of the watch in question. the thing not in the article: Pictures of the watch.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    4. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Why isn't there a picture of it? The guy is an artist, he should have had 1000 of them ready to sell before trying to get through security with it.

    5. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by dbIII · · Score: 1

      That bomb scare didn't look much like a bomb either. Depressing.

    6. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by anubi · · Score: 1

      AND boots with extra insoles (the poor man's version of lifts?)

      Now, that could just as well have been ME. I deliberately put layers of paper held in place with duct tape under a plastic insole in my shoes to hold my feet at about 10 degrees angle because of some problem in my ankle. I am very flatfooted, and without that cheap orthotic, I do not go very far. The orthopedist will sell me an orthotic that does exactly the same thing for about $200. I notice traveling even a few feet over an angled surface if its slanted the wrong way.

      I do not blame the authorities for questioning shoes full of filler. In the past, real bombs have been placed in shoes. It would be foolhardy to ignore historical facts.

      Now, the watch thing.... if the watch looks like it might be a bomb, can you blame them? If I tried to carry a piece of luggage aboard a plane that I made from a 12 inch pipe nipple and two end caps, do I think for one minute they would let me board? I do not think I could even walk in public for one minute with that thing assembled like that. Neither would I blame them.

      This is no time to be teasing the authorities trying to protect the public. Making threatening devices is no joke.

      If I tried to board a plane with a suitcase full of batteries, wires, and switches, I better have a damn good reason for doing so. A damn good reason.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    7. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by Skynyrd · · Score: 0

      He had an ornate (fancy word for ...fancy) watch AND boots with extra insoles (the poor man's version of lifts?)

      He had a watch with fuses and wires.
      He had boots with extra thick soles, that he created.

      Nothing exactly illegal, but he's dumber than a bag of rocks if he thinks it's going to be OK to go through airport security with electronics with fuses and wires. He's a fucking idiot, and deserves whatever he gets. I travel for business, and I fucking HATE the idiots at the TSA. In this case, I agree with what they did.

      He's from Palos Verdes Estates, California. I doubt there's a house worth less than a million there. The most expensive housing development (per house) in the US is there. There's nothing poor about this guy. Even if he lives in mom's basement, mom is well off.

    8. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by jmcvetta · · Score: 2

      If I tried to board a plane with a suitcase full of batteries, wires, and switches, I better have a damn good reason for doing so. A damn good reason.

      Really? What's wrong with that? All those things are legal, and none of them particularly dangerous.

    9. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by fatphil · · Score: 1

      I think yours was the only post that needed to accompany this story. Says everyting necessary, and nothing unnecessary.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    10. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by cellocgw · · Score: 2

      Oh, really? And you know what a "bomb timing device looks like?" Methinks not.
      Get a few clues, eh? Resistors and switches, oddly enough, are part of rather a lot of electrical gadgets, like, say, cell phones and radios and computers. You're about as close to reality as the Boston cops who thought a Lite-Brite display was a bomb timer, because, well, all the bombs on TV have giant LED countdown timers.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    11. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      "If I tried to carry a piece of luggage aboard a plane that I made from a 12 inch pipe nipple and two end caps, do I think for one minute they would let me board?"

      Yes, if after they inspected it, determined that there was nothing harmful about it, as happened here.

    12. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by tragedy · · Score: 2

      Yes, if after they inspected it, determined that there was nothing harmful about it, as happened here.

      We must have read different articles. In the article I read, they inspected it, determined that there was nothing wrong with it, then charged the guy with possessing materials to make an explosive device and locked him up anyway. Basically it's saving face. Just like in the Boston lite brite scare. The authorities don't want to look like over-reacting idiots, so it becomes even more important to them to charge the person with something. The people behind the Boston lite brite ads were brought up on bomb hoax charges and copped a plea jut to make it go away and the authorities get to pretend that they're not idiots, just the victims of tricksters. The same sort of thing will happen in this case. They have nothing on the guy, but they'll tell him if he pleads guilty to some ominous-sounding charge, he can walk with time served. He'll have to choose between taking the plea or spending the next decade in and out of jail and court dealing with this. If he takes the plea, then it's over quickly, if he doesn't, then he's going to have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars he probably doesn't have, and travel repeatedly to somewhere he doesn't live and he'll risk prison time if the prosecution can charm the jury, although he may also have a chance at a big payoff suing the city, sheriff, TSA, etc. eventually.

    13. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Content of laptop : Batteries, wires, switches

      Fuck! I'm a terrorist!

    14. Re:Rea Ding Com Pre Hen Shun by niftymitch · · Score: 1

      A picture did make the local news. It looked like a loony toon (tm) version of a bomb. Fuses from an old fuse panel, a coiled bit of wire scavenged from a ESD strap and a Timex watch hot glued to a goth wrist band.

      Very much the cartoon and in that regard clearly art.

      Sadly a real device could be tiny and fit under and behind the X-ray shadow
      of a modern oversize watch that is so popular at K-mart (or any of a hundred+
      things). I have seen such things on Bond movies and seen parts at RS. I suspect
      small is hard to get right the first time but easy the next 100 times which scares me.

      --
      Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  67. Re:Moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By they time they release it from evidence (assuming they ever do) no one will remember it or him.

  68. Honest error, my foot ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0

    I definitely sympathize, but I from my experience, it is likely an honest error.

    Maybe in your case they were "". I've seen many of your submissions and you never did publicly criticizing any of the Slashdot editor.
     
    In my case it's very different.
     
    I've done submissions only to be rejected, but almost always right after my submissions were rejected - and someone somehow picked up a similar story and did the submit - walla ! theirs got in.
     
    But I'm not sour grapes over it.
     
    The way I look at it is that no matter who did the submission, as long as a good story is accepted, Slashdot's readers get to reap the benefits.
     
    As for the editors, I've been on Slashdot for too long to give any damn on how they feel. If they fcuked up, I'll say they fcuked up, that's all, no point of pussy footing around them just because they are the editors.
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Honest error, my foot ! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      walla ! theirs got in.

      The word you were desperately searching for when you found "walla" was "voila'....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:Honest error, my foot ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not viola?

    3. Re:Honest error, my foot ! by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 1

      I definitely know it happens, though I'm not yet certain why. Take for example, my most recent submission which was rejected over an anonymous submission that came in 24 hours later. Mine contained a typo and a link at the bottom of the post. The anonymous version was a little cleaner, but much later, and it was accepted pretty quickly. When it becomes routine, I will stop submitting and go elsewhere. Until then, I guess I'll keep at it. It's really just a little hobby, and possibly an unhealthy one anyway -- I aint no Pickens.

      --
      Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
  69. Idiots. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

    I am not sure about Oakland, but in San Francisco you can often see hundreds of people dressed in footwear of unusual size and various impractically looking decorations on their clothes and accessories. My Casio watch is a much more practical "bomb component" -- I wear it on all flights and never was harassed about that.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    1. Re:Idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Casio watch is a much more practical "bomb component" -- I wear it on all flights and never was harassed about that.

      Can't be be a F91W or you'd be a guest at Gitmo... or then, maybe that's just if you are/look muslim/arabic...

    2. Re:Idiots. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      It's Casio A168, from the same series, however I look very much non-muslim.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  70. so ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    unfortunately most americans are undereducated idiots.
    what else is new ?

  71. Re:Moron. by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 2

    Three words. Reading Comprehension Fail. I'm an idiot.

  72. Re:I know a bigger outrage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My taxes already pay for tons of shit I not only don't want, but which I think is fucking evil.

    But hey, that's what living in a democracy is all about. One person, one vote, and the group does what the majority decides.

    As it happens, health insurance is one of the things I DO want my taxes to cover. After putting up with all that other bullshit, it's about fucking time they did something which benefits me.

    And hey, don't you worry your knickers into a bunch. If you want extra health-care, I'm sure you can find somebody to sell you some.

  73. Re:Moron. by issicus · · Score: 1

    people still wear watches? where can I find one of these stylish devises ?

  74. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

    The 'shoe bomber' didn't have a BOMB in his shoe, the whole story was made up by our Jewish 'masters' to give them even more excuses to take naked photographs of us using their TSA scanners.

    Strange. I just checked my copies of IJC Monthly (part of what I get for my dues in the International Jewish Conspiracy) for the time around when that guys was arrested and there's no mention of us making that up. I'll bring it up at the next meeting as we're plotting our next "Drinking Christian baby blood" party.

    Bigoted Scumbag!

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  75. He should have WATCHED what he was doing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because now TSA won't LEGO of him.

    1. Re:He should have WATCHED what he was doing by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Because now TSA won't LEGO of him.

      He should have just let the TSA have his Eggo

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  76. Who cares? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it's ridiculous to arrest the man because he had a watch in his boots. But why in the hell did he have a watch in his boots? .

    Who cares? That's his business, and nobody else's.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  77. WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by mha · · Score: 0, Troll

    Moderators should be REQUIRED to read up on the article. Having read several articles about the circumstances of this case I can only conclude that THIS TIME they where most definitely justified to take in that guy. Yes, even if it turns out he was innocent. READ ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE before posting, please. My first knee-jerk reaction to the headline, when I first saw it (somewhere else), was the same as here, but the full facts changed MY mind.

    1. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      Did you ever see a place with a picture of the watch in question? I saw a quote that it looked like a detonator, and he's still in custody for possessing "bomb making materials" but I haven't seen the device itself.

    2. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Nor will you, until the FBI "crime lab" creates something especially suspicious looking.

    3. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by Turminder+Xuss · · Score: 1

      In the article it mentioned that the watch included a "fuse". That's a whole new level of ornateness right there.

      --
      You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle.
    4. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Do you have a link to the story you read, because the one I read was nothing like what you describe.The guy obviously just had an unusual watch and was wearing boots with insoles in them. Big deal.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    5. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "full facts"? Please do go ahead and provide a link to a picture of the watch.

    6. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you wouldn't mind giving us the full facts, would you? Eh. Gimme some links!

    7. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      THIS TIME they where most definitely justified to take in that guy. Yes, even if it turns out he was innocent. READ ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CASE before posting, please. My first knee-jerk reaction to the headline, when I first saw it (somewhere else), was the same as here, but the full facts changed MY mind.

      You mean stuff like this?

      "He had every component to make a trigger mechanism," Nelson said. "Was it? No. But was everything there? Yes."

      This is both lies and a total misdirection.

      Misdirection? Yes. Everybody who carries a laptop or a mobile phone with them has "every component to make a trigger mechanism" (a timer, wires and a battery).

      Lies? The crucial part of a "trigger mechanism", unless we are playing silly word games, is the detonator. This is the difficult bit to obtain or make, actually much more difficult than normal explosives. This is the bit that takes an electrical signal and converts it to an explosion. As such it contains (admittedly a small amount of) pretty unstable and dangerous explosives, would be illegal and we would have heard of it if he had it.

      His watch would have justified an extra search. They might even have been justified in asking him to leave it behind because they were too stupid to understand it. His arrest is false imprisonment and was in no way justified.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    8. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by mha · · Score: 1

      I'm interested, why did you choose to ignore my "CORRECTION: WHY MODDED INSIGHTFUL???" post? Because you like a controversy?

    9. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by rtfa-troll · · Score: 2

      Look at the timing of my post. It's two minutes after yours. I certainly took more than two minutes to start replying; realise I had to check all the articles again to be sure I hadn't missed something; find the best quote I could that might explain your viewpoint and then reply. In other words, your post wasn't already up when I wrote mine.

      Anyway; thanks very much for admitting to being wrong. Realising we are wrong is one of the greatest things and is exactly how knowledge advances. Sorry if my post upset you but I really feel that the TSA had managed to mislead you with their usual insinuation against innocent people and that that was bad. Remember innocent until proven guilty. The TSA has the right to put out facts but not the right to put out accusations. They did the opposite.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    10. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by just_a_monkey · · Score: 1

      And commentators should be required to back up their opinions with links, instead of vague notions that others should "read up". So what are these full facts that changed your mind?

      --
      How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
    11. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      What did you read that changed your mind?
      Did you read how the watch had a circuit board (most digital watches do, just like my iPad, just like.. well you get the idea)
      Did you read how the watch had... get this, a TOGGLE switch? Oh NO! Toggle switches are no cause for being arrested?
      Perhaps you read how his shoes had cavities that could hide something. My pants have pocket that can hide things. Isn't that the whole reason we have to take our shoes off?
      Maybe you read how he was wearing a military style shirt? That can be purchased at a outlet stores (but aren't common... Lo and behold if you wear an uncommon shirt!)
      Or perhaps you caught the part on how we was on a day trip and had no luggage or extra clothes. Like anyone can afford to bring luggage on planes anymore
      If you read more damning evidence please provide the links. Otherwise I don't see anything about the guy, other than he has the same things almost everyone else has.

    12. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      His watch would have justified an extra search. They might even have been justified in asking him to leave it behind because they were too stupid to understand it. His arrest is false imprisonment and was in no way justified.

      I completely disagree. His watch should have justified ANYTHING. Not an extra search, NOR asking him to leave it. Or do you think anyone with a digital watch, smart phone, or computer should require extra searches?

    13. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by rtfa-troll · · Score: 1

      I think you are talking "moral" justification. I was talking legal. Unfortunately the TSA does have wide powers to stop and search and "I'm stupid and don't understand electronics" is a sufficient legal justification for an extra search (know as "suspicious"). What matters is that, once the guy is shown to be innocent then he should be left alone.

      Morally, of course, the guy should be allowed to travel freely in the way that he wants without harassment. That's a different argument and I'm with you on that one. It needs to be tempered with measures that make it difficult to use a plane as a weapon, however locked cockpit doors are the correct measure here, where x-ray machines and TSA guards have almost nothing to say.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    14. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be the one who enjoys controversy, since you started off by trolling us with a particularly crazy and uninformed post.

    15. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Did you ever see a place with a picture of the watch in question? I saw a quote that it looked like a detonator, and he's still in custody for possessing "bomb making materials" but I haven't seen the device itself.

      On the information given, I'd say there is a good chance it looks like this one.

    16. Re:WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      What kind of detonator? How much Wile E. Coyote did these people watch in bomb squad training?

  78. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

    The 'shoe bomber' didn't have a BOMB in his shoe, the whole story was made up by our Jewish 'masters' to give them even more excuses to take naked photographs of us using their TSA scanners. The public are so fucking stupid it's unbelievable. I can't even have a conversation with ANYBODY I know about stuff that matters. Take the JEWS' disgusting mass murder in Gaza over the past few days - the idiots I work with don't even know what they 'should' think about it, seeing as they subconsciously know that Jews are their 'masters' and mustn't be criticised, no matter what atrocities they commit. Hell, they already get away with torturing their own baby boys, 'because God told us to do it', what can't they get away with?

    Just to clarify, I don't support the Israelis' heavy-handedness in Gaza, nor do I support the subjugation of the Palestinians over the past sixty-odd years. I also don't support the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, including women and children by Palestinian thugs.

    Sadly, you're part of the problem. Just as the vast majority of muslims are not terrroristic stone killers, the vast majority of Jews are horrified by the evil perpetrated on the Palestinians by the Israeli government.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  79. If the guy was trolling for attention then... by bdwoolman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    He could be in hot water if the US attorney decides to prosecute him for hoaxing under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. You know the security theater that makes travel so miserable is not benign. Poke the Homeland Security rattlesnake wrong and feel the fangs. Make a bad joke, or deliberately carry crap to stimulate negative attention, and you may get a lot more than you bargained for.. We see stories all the time about people going through hell even when they made some innocent mistake.

    The people doing this work are under trained and under qualified. They have a lot of power in a limited space. There is stress. And a statistically small, but measurable, threat. Personally I think airport security should be handled much differently. But until they put me in charge of the world the airport gauntlet is pathetic a fact of life. Frankly, with Mr Insole I sense a little mental illness. Hopefully somebody will make the right call. Hopefully the bureaucracy will cut this guy a break. But if the authorities detect that he is a wise ass they might throw the book at him.

    My formula for passing through the looking glass? I keep my wise mouth shut. I wear good quality sweats. No belt. In a quiet corner before I get in the security line I empty all my pockets. Including top pockets. Everything goes in my backpack.( Even receipts trigger backscatter.) I feel for coins. Everything. Usually the scan goes smoothly and I avoid being frisked or wanded so I can quickly snag my backpack off the belt. Then I take another quiet moment to reassemble my belongings. As I do so I often ponder the irony that 30,000 people a year die in cars in the US alone. So that if this was really about saving lives we would have declared 'war' on Toyota and Ford long ago. It is a Franz Kafka world and that's a fact. Maybe one day I'll be offered a political choice in this matter. But to date no major party offers to ratchet this crap back. Not even a little. Sigh.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
    1. Re:If the guy was trolling for attention then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My formula for passing through the looking glass? I keep my wise mouth shut. I wear good quality sweats. No belt. In a quiet corner before I get in the security line I empty all my pockets. Including top pockets. Everything goes in my backpack.( Even receipts trigger backscatter.) I feel for coins. Everything.

      Greetings, sheep, and thank you for your compliance in the destruction of American society. As Edmund Burke says, “All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.” Don't complain. Don't discuss the evil. Certainly don't give any indication that there are better options. Just keep you head down and hope the bad guys pick a different victim this time.

    2. Re:If the guy was trolling for attention then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fly 2-3 times a month for work. Have never gone through a scanner. I always opt out. You are a lemming.

    3. Re:If the guy was trolling for attention then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To get through the looking glass you submit quietly and carefully, aware that the slightest misstep, no matter if it is benign and legal, could land you in the wrong world on the other end of that portal.

    4. Re:If the guy was trolling for attention then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a statistically small, but measurable, threat.

      I don't think it is actually measurable, there are too many random variables involved. Car accidents are statistically measurable but terrorist incidents lack common cause.

  80. Re:Moron. by flimflammer · · Score: 2

    The watch was covered in wires, fuses, switches, etc, and his boots were quite large as if to convey there is something inside them. Come on now. Do you really believe he was just innocently passing through security, completely oblivious to the suspicion that was going to be levied against him when anyone in the airport looked at him? Really?

    It's a publicity stunt. Whether or not I think that should be enough to arrest a man (I don't), it should have been obvious to him from the start that it was going to be extremely suspect the moment he was seen by security. He might as well have just walked into the airport with fake sticks of TNT strapped to his chest given the fear that currently rules over airports.

    Now he can profit from his new-found fame once he gets out of custody.

  81. Check your stats by baffled · · Score: 2

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War 625,000 total casualties
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War 110,000 or 150,000 or 600,000+ depending on the source
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_war ~13,500

    The lowest estimates still place Iraq + Afghanistan casualties at 125,000. Not a "day in the park."
    Upper estimates exceed Civil War casualties. ..Or are we only counting Americans?

    1. Re:Check your stats by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

      Or are we only counting Americans?

      In one sense, all of them were Americans, although a good number of them didn't want to be.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Check your stats by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1

      We are counting threats to us used as justification.
      We don't consider our threats to others (which now outweigh any threats to us by orders of magnitude) as justification.

      That's just us "protecting our freedoms."

      Which is why we need to ban boots and watches.

      --
      This space available.
    3. Re:Check your stats by funwithBSD · · Score: 2

      Your civil war numbers are very low, new estimates based on better ground penetrating radar finding mass gravesites push the number of military ONLY deaths up to 1 million

      Civilian deaths are still unknown, but scaling to the Napoleonic Wars that would be one to two civilian deaths per combatant death due to direct action, population displacement, disease, food and water disruption.

      It aligns well with the census data which shows the US should have grown in population much faster, 11-12m vrs the 9m recorded.

      Furthermore, the population of the US was around 31m, so up 10% of the population was killed. Iraq population was around 50m, even 750k is 1.5 percent.

      Germany and Russia during WW2 are the only other countries that could compare to the true decimation of the population during the US Civil War.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    4. Re:Check your stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking kidding me? Do you really think that the loss of the nation can be described based on percentage loss of human life? I have never seen human life devalued to that of a percentage point: and I'm very sorry you just popped that cherry.

    5. Re:Check your stats by funwithBSD · · Score: 2

      Yes, it is an appropriate way of looking at it. Let me explain why, the deaths themselves are tragic to the dead, but the higher the percentage of loss of society as a whole escalates as it goes up.

      Do you know any American military service member killed in the first, second Iraq or Afgan wars? How about family members?

      I don't, and I come from a military family, I was in the military, and I have lived in military heavy cities all my life. My cohort was smack dab in the middle of the first Iraq War, I was just exiting the service as it started to build up. I know three that served during all 3 actions and one has been at the tip of the spear in two of them. He has spent half his adult life at age 22 somewhere in the Middle East wearing a uniform.

      The US is a nation of 300+ million people, the deaths of US military and civilians is around a hundredth of a percent in all 3 wars combined.

      The odds of being personally effected by those three wars is statistically low, even though a single person or family might be heavily impacted by those killed in the war.

      Compare that to Iraq, where 120,000 to 750,000 depending on the estimate, were killed directly or indirectly during the war. That is a half to one in a half percent deaths of a population of 51 million.

      Those percentages mean every person has multiple deaths in their circle of family and friends.

      Now imagine 10%.
        I am not a super socialite guy, I am an introvert really, but I have more 100 people in my life that are friends, neighbors or coworkers. Probably more like 200 or 300 if I stretch the definitions a little to people I interact with 2 or 3 times per month, business or personal.

      Now, 20 or 30 of them are dead. For someone like my sister, that number might be as high as 100 or 150. For a highly connected person, like a teacher, doctor, or a reporter, a thousand. For a socially central person like a minister or community leader/organizer, several thousand.

      Russia after ww2 with a death rate of 23%? 70 to 100 dead for someone like me. In the span of 7 years.

      I cannot even imagine it at 10 percent, it would certainly leave my life in drastic turmoil, if not devastation. At least on or more of my closest friends would have died, depending my age at the time.

      25%? How do you even continue as a cohesive society? I think if you look at Russia, Germany, and Cambodia they cease to function as the former society and reform under a new but related social structure. In the case of Russia and Cambodia that was part of the plan for Stalin and Pol Pot.

      America underwent two 10% losses, the Civil War and WW1 combined with the Flu afterwards.
      In both cases you can see radical and sudden shifts in our society directly related to the deaths.

      That does not mitigate the losses of any war compared to any other, but it does measure the additional relative impact to the social fabric and cohesion.

      In short, while US military losses are tragic on the personal scale, they barely register on the national scale, probably because they are mostly military. Dying is part and parcel of being a soldier, however remote the possibility.
      9/11 deaths had far more impact, as do the civilian deaths in Iraq. They will likely be dealing with that for as long as they will be dealing with the deaths caused by Saddam's regime.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    6. Re:Check your stats by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Typo above, 22 years of service, making him 41, not 22 years old as I wrote it.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    7. Re:Check your stats by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Germany and Russia during WW2 are the only other countries that could compare to the true decimation of the population during the US Civil War.

      Genghis Khan and Timurlane would like to have a word with you.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re:Check your stats by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Of course we are only counting Americans. Why would dead non-Americans in non-America be expected to have an effect on declarations of Martial Law in America?

      Also the numbers need to be scaled to be per capita.

    9. Re:Check your stats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the "only counting Americans" reference was in regards to Iraq & Afghanistan, in which case the casualty numbers would be much lower than those from the wikipedia quote.

      Unless I'm misundestanding you, and you mean the people in Iraq and Afghanistan are all "in one sense" Americans?

    10. Re:Check your stats by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      The way the comment was written, it looked like it was saying that only Union casualties should be counted.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    11. Re:Check your stats by cusco · · Score: 1

      The US population in 1860 was only 31 million, so if you adjust it to today's population it would be the equivalent of over six million.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    12. Re:Check your stats by cusco · · Score: 1

      The Black Plague killed about a third of everyone who lived between Iceland and India in a decade.

      The Great Dying after the European invasion of the Americas killed off 70 to 90 percent of the population from Tierra del Fuego to Point Barrow over the course of a century. Is it any wonder the Incas thought the Spaniards were representatives of a vengeful deity, when they were immune to the smallpox and influenza that was killing millions?

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  82. How The TSA Stole Christmas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    === How the TSA stole Christmas ===

    Every person in America Liked Christmas a lot...
    But the TSA, Who lived and worked in DC, Did NOT!
    The TSA hated freedom and the whole Christmas season! Now, please don't ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
    It could be that their heads weren't screwed on quite right. It could be, perhaps, their neckties were too tight.
    But I think that the most likely reason of all May have been that their brains were two sizes too small.

    But, whatever the reason, their brains or their ties, They set about inventing rules worth despise.
    Staring down their noses on us with big frowns. All freedom-lovers from big cities to small towns.
    For folks nation-wide from that end to the other, Planned to spend holidays with one another.

    "And they're buying their tickets!" TSA snarled with a sneer. "Heavy travelling for Christmas! It's practically here!"
    Then they strained, with their tiny brains trying. "We MUST find a way to keep people from flying!"

    "For very soon, we know all the people near and far," "Would wake up bright and early and rush to their car!"
    "With Christmas cheer! And the joy! Oh, the Joy! Joy! Joy! Joy!" "Holiday excitement! And JOY!
    JOY! JOY! JOY!"

    "And on Christmas day, they'll sit down to a feast." "And they'll feast! And they'll feast!"
    "And they'll FEAST! FEAST! FEAST! FEAST!"
    "With hot apple cider, they'll eat rare Who-roast-beast." "And mint christmas pies, 'til their waists have increased!"

    "And THEN" "They'd do something we hate most of all!" "Each of those people, the tall and the small,"
    "Will go caroling after eating their fill." "They'll go house to house, spreading goodwill."
    "And they'll sing! And they'll sing!" "And they'll SING! SING! SING! SING!"
    "Peace on Earth and other nonsense sublime." "Pursuit of happiness, hmmph! It's all thought-crime!"
    "Over 200 years we've put up with it now!" "We MUST stop freedom-to-travel!" "...But HOW?"

    Then they got an idea! An awful idea!
    THE TSA GOT A TYPICAL AWFUL IDEA!

    "How about this for a start!" they laughed in their throats. "We'll make them take off their shoes and their coats!"
    And they chuckled, and clucked, "How 'bout more Grinchy tricks! "Let's add pat-downs just to be complete dicks!"

    "All we need is a scanner..." The brass looked around. But since they aren't safe, there were none to be found.
    Did that stop the old bastards...? "Ha!" TSA simply said, "If we can't find cancer-machines, we'll make them instead!"

    So they called up Chertoff, and offered piles of cash. And blitzed the media with fear-mongering trash.
    THEN to screw people further, and add more commotion They decreed 3 ounces max for toothpaste and lotion.
    "And bag each toiletry!", one bureaucrat wailed. "Hassle-free travel will be completely curtailed!"

    It was dark at the airport. Quiet snow filled the air. Travellers came early to allow time to spare.
    For the process was slow now beyond compare. "This will be fun," the dictators hissed. And they took to their stations, clenching their fists.

    All the lines in the airport advancing by inches, But no one spoke up to challenge these Grinches.
    For the illusion of safety free from attack, Security theater begins in the back.
    "Let's first cut off these baggage locks." "We promise no stealing," said those dishonest cocks.

    Then they slunk through the luggage, with a smiles most unpleasant, Getting grubby fingerprints upon every present!
    Pop guns! Pan-pollers! Pan-tukas! And drums! Checkerboards! Thistle-winks! Popcorn! And plums!
    Then on down the line they sent the whole bunch, Haphazardly smashing the bags with a crunch!

    Bag inspectors aside, there's a type even meaner: The *CAUSE* of long lines, the TSA screener!
    Performing nude scans and pat-downs and more, These domestic enemies of amendment four.

    One bitter agent bent on screwing with lives, Gave extra "security" to daughters and wives.
    For the approaching mom, he raised scanning power. Her naked

  83. you gotta be a real idiot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To test the TSA with any non-standard personal item. They're not too bright to begin with.

  84. Welcome to NudeAirways(TM)... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In ObamaWorld, you can be charged with "possessing materials to make an explosive device" if you are carrying anything that can be used as a component of a bomb...

    So... do not carry/wear anything that can burn rapidly, can contain anything that burns rapidly, can be used to start something burning, can be used to keep time, can sense altitude or position, etc...

    Solution: Welcome to NudeAirways, please check EVERYTHING, and line-up for your cavity searches... oh and CAT scans to look for surgically-implanted devices and blood tests and tox screens to check for weaponized contagious diseases...

    - OR -

    We can stop embracing the stupidest ideology on Earth, Political correctness, and behave like intelligent adults... we need to just focus on the only ideology that is a risk to anybody: Islam. No non-muslim has ever hijacked an airliner full of people to use as a guided missile. In the 1970's and 80's people could board any airliner quickly and easily without naked-body scanners or grope-fests, the taxpayers were not funding a new billions-of-dollars-per-year fascist-dream called the TSA, government was not reading everybody's mail, tracking their movements, etc. and no airliners were at any significant risk. Islam is NOT a race, NOT an ethnicity, it is a set of beliefs people CHOOSE to believe. IF there truly are any "moderate" muslims (the politically-correct people keep telling us these moderates are the vast majority) then they should have wrapped-up and solved the whole "extremist" thing long ago... but they don't seem to be working the problem with any real fervor... they seem to be just "laying low" waiting to see which "side" wins so they can then say "we were always with you" to the victor in the struggle. As long as it refuses to clean-up its own, this ideology needs to be treated like leprosy, and anybody who chooses to "belong" to it or "follow it" needs to be eyed with extreme suspicion as we eye with suspicion anybody who chooses to belong to the KKK or the NAZI party

    1. Re:Welcome to NudeAirways(TM)... by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      IF there truly are any "moderate" muslims (the politically-correct people keep telling us these moderates are the vast majority) then they should have wrapped-up and solved the whole "extremist" thing long ago...

      Are you really that brainwashed or are you just a bigoted asshole?

      Muslims are not a monolithic group. There are many sects and subgroups. Just like Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Sikhs, etc. there are Muslims of all stripes. Including those that are just as bigoted as you. Why don't you go and make all the various sects of whatever bullshit religion (and they all are) you subscribe to play nice? Here in the US we probably have them all beat, as some have observed:

      The USA is so enormous, and so numerous are its schools, colleges and religious seminaries, many devoted to special religious beliefs ranging from the unorthodox to the dotty, that we can hardly wonder at its yielding a more bounteous harvest of gobbledygook than the rest of the world put together. -- Sir Peter Medawar

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  85. Everything Would Fall Under That Category by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know what a number of professional pyrotechnitians use to detonate explosives?, nails. Yes, as it turns out, a board with nails in it, a few wires, and an electrical source actually makes for an quick but effective setup to manually detonate individual groups of explosives. Also, pretty much any watch could be rigged to set off explosives. Bulky boxers could easily be used to hide a reasonable amount of explosives.

    Hell, the only thing that wouldn't matter in an explosion are padded boots, which seems more like something an electrician would do.

    Long story short, WTF?

  86. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    If the jews have so much power, why do they keep getting blamed and killed? Wouldn't they have hired a fall guy, or is it that we never find out when Boothe and Oswald are hired by the jewish masters?

  87. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Oooh, how do I join? Do drink dead Christian, I have to go to communion. The blood is great, but the raw Jesus flesh is usually dry, and a bit salty.

  88. Am I the only one who is glad he was stopped. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone needs to put an end to these hipsters, with their fake glasses, homemade shoes and ornate watches. More power to the TSA or any organization that wants to take them on!

  89. What about an iPhone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couldn't you make a bomb out of an iPhone using the lithium-ion battery as an explosive? I suppose you would actually need a second battery to use to power the electronics and ignite the first bomb. It would be interesting for someone to convert an iPhone into a bomb as a demonstration project because that would help establish case law to limit the use of this particular law to real cases where there is a real risk, not trumped up charges.

  90. You shouldn't be surprised by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know why you guys expect a constitutional lawyer to do anything other than maintain the status quo apart from a few minor changes or large changes over a very long time (a lot more than four years). He's not really a socialist you know. People just call him that as a meaningless insult when they really want to yell "nigger" instead.

    1. Re:You shouldn't be surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're right, he's more of a communist than a socialist. nigger? nah, that man is just as white as he is black. a fool, would be a more appropriate term.

    2. Re:You shouldn't be surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .. nah, that man is just as white as he is black. a fool, would be a more appropriate term.

      fool?, no, that's more applicable to the i-voted-for-him-cuz-hes-black-like-me mob (like he has anything in common with them).
      I expect he knows exactly what he's doing, and is doing so to a plan. I rather think the term you're looking for is coconut..brown on the outside, white inside.

    3. Re:You shouldn't be surprised by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know why you guys expect a constitutional lawyer to do anything other than maintain the status quo

      I might expect him to be aware of the Fourth Amendment, along with the standard interpretation prior to the TSA that it's illegal for government agents to just blanket search everyone unless there's a specific identified threat of immediate concern. Before the TSA, when we were searched essentially by private screeners operated by the airlines, we consented to (limited) searches as part of a private commercial transaction -- if we refused to submit, we were just told we couldn't fly. Police or the FBI could only get involved if there were a reasonable suspicion to search further.

      Now we have government agents doing invasive searches, and if you don't comply, you can be detained and arrested. That's exactly the kind of thing the Fourth Amendment was passed to avoid.

      The interpretation of the Fourth Amendment changed suddenly and radically in the past decade, and I would expect a Constitutional lawayer to know something about it.

    4. Re:You shouldn't be surprised by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Of course he's aware of the 4th Amendment. How can you properly circumvent a law you don't understand?

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  91. Re:Moron. by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    None of that was in the description. Were you there? If so is there more you could tell us?

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  92. Re:Moron. by dbIII · · Score: 2

    The police near me would have recently filled all available cells with people travelling by train to a Science Fiction convention if it was standard procedure to arrest anyone that was wearing weird stuff. I'm sure he wanted to attract some attention by his costume but I doubt he wanted it from the TSA.

  93. Mod above up by dbIII · · Score: 1

    It was worth reading this article just to get that link to the FLORA - Wearable electronic platform.

  94. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

    Oooh, how do I join? Do drink dead Christian, I have to go to communion. The blood is great, but the raw Jesus flesh is usually dry, and a bit salty.

    Sorry. The IJC (and world domination) is just for the chosen people. However, aside from the monthly magazine, I don't get much for the dues I pay. You'd think I'd get a fat check every month or at least wholesale pricing since we're running the world, eh?

    Not just dead Christian. It's Christian babies. We have our own dry stuff (see the link), but it's not salty.

    It is pretty amazing that people actually believe that stuff. I mean, what with the Lubavitchers mostly on welfare and the other Hasidim in the US and the Haredi in Israel also not working for a living, you'd think the complaint would be about those lazy Jews sitting around reading the Torah all day.

    But I guess it's easier to hate the Jews if you delude yourself into thinking they're running the world. Damn, bigots are dumb!

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  95. Adding to that by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Looking at photos of the aftermath of an oxy-acetylene explosions from flashbacks shows a couple of interesting things. The acetylene bottles alone fail by burning out a plug or or splitting the seams, so you end up with an enormous jet of flame for some time but no explosion. The oxygen however is in cast bottles with no seams so if a flashback makes the oxygen in the bottle burn it builds up pressure until the bottle bursts, scattering shrapnel everywhere and in one photo there was a ten metre diameter hole in a concrete floor where the oxygen bottle had been. That was from a normal gas welding kit.

    1. Re:Adding to that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except oxygen doesn't burn...

    2. Re:Adding to that by tftp · · Score: 1

      Except oxygen doesn't burn...

      No. But nearly everything else burns in oxygen - including steel.

  96. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    It is pretty amazing that people actually believe that stuff. I mean, what with the Lubavitchers [wikipedia.org] mostly on welfare and the other Hasidim [wikipedia.org] in the US [tabletmag.com] and the Haredi in Israel [haaretz.com] also not working for a living, you'd think the complaint would be about those lazy Jews sitting around reading the Torah all day.

    Bah, they are the jewelry mob of NY, and own De Beers and sit and do nothing, collecting welfare wile being billionaires making millions from blood diamonds (they suck the blood off first before selling).

  97. Re:Moron. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    It was in TFA.

  98. Re:Moron. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    To be honest, I'm not really sure what to tell you if you can't see the difference between the two scenarios.

  99. That word doesn't mean what you think it means by dbIII · · Score: 1

    There's been dictionaries on that internet you are connected to since before there was a world wide web.

    1. Re:That word doesn't mean what you think it means by mbeckman · · Score: 1

      Which word? Plagiarist? Anthropogenic? Science? Censorship? Irony? Discussion? You seem to have your own definition for each of these. I side with Noah Webster myself.

  100. I can tell the difference but you've missed the po by dbIII · · Score: 2

    The point is people wearing weird shit shouldn't be enough of an excuse to lock them up after the bomb squad has been and gone. One person's normal can be another person's weird shit, and an odd watch plus big boots is probably a lot less weird than some of the stuff I've seen teenage girls wearing in airports.

  101. Al Gore talked WMDs and Iraq invasion in the 2000s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Al Gore talked WMDs and Iraq invasion in the 2000s. He was looking for war with Iraq through much of the 1990s.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Chn1qAn1f3w

    Had things worked differently in Florida in late 2000, Al Gore would have would have done pretty much the same things.

  102. CORRECTION: WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by mha · · Score: 1

    My... rage? (all caps) was because the one sentence of the post was NOT "insightful". I don't mind moderators voting it up if they like it - but please stick to correct labeling!

    As for what I wrote, after re-reading the story and sleeping over it, I now think it's questionable. On the one hand it may indeed be a gross overreaction, on the other hand it very much looks like the guy may have done this deliberately as a publicity stunt for himself, knowing that in the end they would have to set him free after grabbing national headlines. I hate that too, so my FEELINGS tell me "jail him", the reasoning part of the brain has a different opinion.

    1. Re:CORRECTION: WHY MODDED "INSIGHTFUL"??? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      so my FEELINGS tell me "jail him",

      Your feelings say to jail him, because he pulled a perfectly legal stunt? My feelings say he should be sueing right about now.

  103. History repeating itself? by Caedite+Eos · · Score: 1

    As I was reading, I couln't help but think of other countries ... at another time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm8K1q0N-F4

  104. Sad thing is that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    a real terrorist would walk through with their phone without anyone giving it a second glance...

    Internally reroute/tie buzzer wires to usb port, sync cable ties phone to detonator, set alarm/timer - boom... If you're on a suicide mission you don't need a timer at all.

  105. either a moron or a trouble maker by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Not that I condone the TSA's overly heavy-handed approach in any way, but you have to ask yourself what was the guy actually thinking?

    It seems to me he must have been one of either:
    1) A total moron for not being able to guess the obvious trouble that would happen when attempting to go through airport security wearing a watch that looks like a bomb

    2) actually trying to incite trouble (starving artist seeking publicity etc)

    So in short he's either a moron or a trouble maker.

  106. Re:Fucking Idiot by Larryish · · Score: 1

    Now THAT was funny.

  107. Re:Moron. by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    Hmmm.... and what relevance does that hold to anything?

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  108. 1853 != 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    True, but hardly comparable, since that arose from an actual war on American soil. Your comment's not quite Godwin standard, but getting close.

    1. Re:1853 != 2012 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I'm not the one who went to the extreme. I was responding to:

      No catastrophe, even of larger proportions, has ever advanced us so far towards police state.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  109. McGyvering timers by Thomas+Shaddack · · Score: 1

    A timer can be made from a leaky bag of water. As we talk about airplanes, a barometric trigger can be made from a bag of chips, or that little single-dose cup of coffee cream (notice how they inflate when at altitude).

  110. TSA learns from ATF by presspass · · Score: 1

    ATF Declares "Chore Boy" pot scrubber as supressor.

    http://www.wnd.com/2011/11/368769/

  111. Give an inch, take a mile by Gallomimia · · Score: 1

    The more ridiculous crap everyone puts up with, the further and further they will be pushed.

    --
    Sadly, a Libertarian cannot force his views on another, and freedom cannot spread as does the cancer known as religion.
  112. Art ? by Svartormr · · Score: 1

    That's no excuse, Citizen, for double-plus ungood badthoughts!

  113. Mitt's goal is to enrich *himself* by zooblethorpe · · Score: 2

    As regards globalization and the redistribution of American wealth, Obama is mostly a sucker, and a chump. Mittens, on the other hand, is an active player, pushing hard to enrich all the rest of the world at America's and Europe's expense.

    You've got it wrong here -- Mitt is working hard to enrich himself. Any other beneficiaries of his actions, such as China's economy, are purely accidental. If Romney thought he could get as rich as quickly by creating jobs in the US, you can rest assured that he'd do just that. But for now, the US is still relatively close to (if not at) the top of the global economic pile, so any arbitrage to be made from outsourcing will negatively affect the US.

    Cheers,

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  114. Why don't you do the job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You who sneer at such silly mistakes would never consider doing the job yourself.
    In other words, leave such work to those who might not be best qualified to do it, then yuck it up when they make a mistake.
    Think about it.

  115. Re:No such thing as a 'shoe bomb' either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, Christian baby blood? You're way behind the times.

    CODED MESSAGE FOLLOWS: NNV(@#!JH!B!BJFQ__D(DHJ!L!::GL:KDGSXVA*AQU#JF

    That's the new fashion, brother.

  116. Yup. You got it, AC. by bdwoolman · · Score: 1

    The security line is not the place to vent your antipathy to the airport system. My personal strategy is to get through it ASAP. Also I drive when I can these days. And I have supportted the AARP

    Check out what happened to this guy. And reconsider your next transit through. Dubai. Strictly speaking not the same as a security line problem. But it sure is an arbitrary world out there.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
    1. Re:Yup. You got it, AC. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you have missed that what I was writing is satire. Is it not proof that we have lost our freedom if such thoughts can be accepted as right?

  117. What kind if cigarettes do you smoke? by bdwoolman · · Score: 1

    I'll bring you some in jail. Boy, it sure is hell to be right. But the truth is I bet you are just as well behaved as I am in a TSA security line. (Or you are posting from behind bars. Or are too poor to fly.) I am simply being honest about getting through it as quickly and as painlessly as possible. And in a good mental state. Of course if you want to amuse and or irritate the agents by being disorganized and uncooperative you can do so. Your pointless bravado will get them a commendation and, perhaps, a promotion for wrapping you up if the situation escalates. What will it get you?...Well, since you have decided to put them in complete control by giving them cause to make you a target. It is up to them what you get. Me? I make my flight. This gives me a chance to support realistic efforts to curtail this wrongheaded nonsense. Oh, and I am not the one who posted as a coward.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
    1. Re:What kind if cigarettes do you smoke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying that what you're claiming isn't in your best interest, personally. I'm saying that it's a sad state of affairs that it's the case that that's in your best interest, personally and that it's a failure of justice and our society that that is the case.

  118. found an image by MooseTick · · Score: 1

    Not really, but if it looked like this he would definately have an issue...

    http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4043/4702368517_812af64a5a.jpg

  119. Amen to that. by bdwoolman · · Score: 1

    On this we are agreed. Personally I am infuriated by the TSA protocol. One reason I am so careful to make the experience smooth from the start is that I don't want to give rise to an awkward situation where I might get provoked and lose my temper. (I have nothing to hide, but I come to this situation on edge.) I recognize that a tantrum would not alter the state of affairs. And could result in harm to me, and would serve no good end.

    This surveillance mission creep is extremely bad for the country. But it has been going on for some time. I was frisked by a US Marshall in 1973 because I had long hair and had forgotten my draft card. I was allowed to board after getting a lecture from Wyatt Earp. Now get off my lawn.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
    1. Re:Amen to that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fair enough. :) We obviously have more in common than that which separates us and I hope that when a real campaign to end this crap starts up you join in on the fun.

  120. Update to the story - picture of the watch by joeflies · · Score: 1