Slashdot Mirror


"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes, Evacuates All Los Angeles Public Schools

The Washington Post reports that all Los Angeles public schools have been closed for the day after a "'credible threat' of violence to students at numerous schools in the sprawling district, and a schools official confirmed that it was a bomb threat to the school district." According to the Houston Chronicle, a law enforcement official speaking anonymously with the Associated Press said that the threat "was emailed to a school board member and appeared to come from overseas. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the investigation. The official says the threat was sent late Monday. Superintendent Ramon Cortines says the threat was made against students at many of the district's schools." The Los Angeles Unified School District, the second-largest school system in the U.S., is no picnic to close; the New York Times notes that the closure throws into disarray "the lives of millions of Angelenos — students, parents, teachers and other school staff members."

241 comments

  1. So vague is has to be true? by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure how this is being spun where you are, but think for a minute. 650,000 students are being sent home because of a "credible" threat. I might be convinced that a school was threatened, but the complete district of LA is bullsh$*. Someone is attempting to change the definition of the word "credible" here.

    Before you "but the children", give me the percentage of terrorist activities or even bombings where someone gave warning.

    No matter what though, you can bet your ass this will be used as propaganda to argue for more government and more freedom loss to the same.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      There are a lot of gun owners in the LA area, so any threat is credible. CA is infested with more of those Republicans than any state. More than any other state. Living here in La with all of the Republican gun owners is very dangerous. Very dangerous. Those people hate us and hate children even more. That is why they're trying to defund WIC. They're trying to starve babies.

    2. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So many I cried this morning when I heard about these threats from the NRA.

    3. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This isn't the first time it's happened in the last couple of months either. Quebec had 71 schools threatened with bomb threats and shootings in November a few weeks prior to that several schools in Ottawa were threatened as well. It almost seems like someone/group is doing this because they know that people will overreact, and of course if something did happen people would be screaming bloody murder because they didn't overreact.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    4. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They love it when children die.

    5. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      They stand against reasonable bans on encryption so they are responsible.

    6. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Pretty much every bombing by the IRA was preceded by a warning, enough time to evacuate everyone, and then to actually follow through on their bomb threat.

    7. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Before you "but the children", give me the percentage of terrorist activities or even bombings where someone gave warning.

      I can't give you a lot of digits of precision, but here's the number I came up with: more than 0%. The warning is the terrorism. You don't have to murder anyone to be a terrorist (though it sure helps).

      How to be a terrorist: Do something scary, preferably targeting a society of cowards. Did you scare people into overreacting? Yes: mission accomplished, you're a good terrorist. No: You're a bad terrorist, so don't quit your engineering day job.

      They probably didn't scare any students ("yay, day off!") but the parents were hit. As for how successful it was, I'll wait for the media to tell me. Everyone, please remember to FREAK OUT, so that we can guarantee a repeat of this cheap tactic. I know I can count on Republican candidates to join the terrorists on this, but let's all please try to remember to include the progressives too: kids need more days off like this! All that pot isn't going to smoke itself!

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    8. Re:So vague is has to be true? by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      Who needs to bother making a real bomb, a threat is enough to disrupt everything...

    9. Re:So vague is has to be true? by njnnja · · Score: 1

      New York also received a threat but didn't deem it "credible" and therefore didn't act on it. My guess is that on any given day, any or all of New York, LA, and Chicago schools probably deal with some kind of threat.

      So for LA to close the schools there is likely some other intelligence that they are acting on. Considering that authorities in that area are still getting information about recent terrorist activity in the area, I think the first knee jerk reaction to closing the schools should be "Hmm I wonder what they found out," not "Why are they overreacting?" (Of course, we should avoid knee-jerk reactions altogether, but then there would be nothing to talk about)

    10. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which is why it's bullshit when that school claimed that kid made a bomb hoax and punished him for it.

      1) The kid claimed it was a clock all the time.
      2) Nobody seriously thought it was a bomb. If the school and cops really thought it was a bomb they should have evacuated the schools as they did for this incident. Not have people be around it for hours.

      Yes most of us suspect the kid is being a smart ass or trolling the school. But that never used to require getting the US cops involved, you just have the teacher go "nice try smart ass". And we all know that the US cops are more dangerous to innocent people than "bomb hoaxes" that everyone knows is a prank (and thus is willing to sit near it for hours).

    11. Re:So vague is has to be true? by L4m3rthanyou · · Score: 1

      I wonder where the odds are, that they'd need to draw the line. What if a hypothetical threat was targeted at "A school in California", or even the entire USA? Or perhaps, what if there was a threat to bomb a non-specific LAUSD campus, some time in the next 30 days? in the next year? in the next 10 years?

      --
      One of these days, I'm going to cut you into little pieces.
    12. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      ETA (the Basque terrorists) and RAF (Red Army Faction; German terrorists) also customarily phoned in warnings. It's pretty much standard procedure for European terror groups: they don't actually want to kill people, because that looks bad, but they still want to carry out a bombing to show how serious they are, so they give a warning.

      Pretty much just the recent Islamic terrorists don't give warnings. They just talk about it beforehand on Facebook, but none of the agents who are supposed to be monitoring them give a damn.

    13. Re:So vague is has to be true? by modecx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just imagine the alternative: You're the superintendent, and it was discovered that your received a somewhat credible threat, after something actually happened--no matter how trifling in the grand scheme. You know full well that you'd be publicly crucified by the entire nation's media, maybe you'd even be inquisitioned by Congress. You'd almost certianly lose your six figure job, and become unemployable to that standard ever again. You probably lose everything you worked your entire life for, and it would probably break up your family as well.

      If you throw up the red flag, none of this happens, except people raise an eyebrow, and some kids get to take the day off, some tax dollars get wasted and the SWAT guys get to go play Rambo in a bunch of empty schools.

      Which path do you chose?

      If I was in his/her shoes, I'd sure as fuck play the CYA card too.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    14. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Northern Ireland, The IRA used to phone in warnings, mainly late or wrong but they did phone in.

    15. Re:So vague is has to be true? by codeAlDente · · Score: 2

      You obviously didn't spend any time this morning telling your kids why their school's closed. Saying this didn't scare any students is pure ignorance.

      --
      He once inserted random mutations into his code, just so he could have the experience of debugging.
    16. Re:So vague is has to be true? by turp182 · · Score: 0

      Love the sig, I saw Exodus a few times a long time ago (they destroyed a lot of my hearing along with Slayer).

      Changing of the Guard was one of my favorites.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    17. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to assume you're being facetious here because otherwise you're mentally ill. California is a bastion of liberalism from top to bottom. There are going to be gun owners wherever you live in this country, but get a grip dude. And if you don't like guns go somewhere "safer" like France.

    18. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a registered Green Party member and I own firearms, including those that people like you call "assault rifles." Be careful with those assumptions.

    19. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chicago and New York, too? Somebody alert John McClane; Jeremy Irons is after the gold in the Federal Reserve, again.

    20. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that California elected a Republican Arnold as Governor for a spell. Much of Cali's representation is also Republican despite the liberal cities such as San Fran. Silicon Valley though is widely considered much more conservative as a bastion of Libertarian-ism which balances the liberalism of the North.

    21. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure how this is being spun where you are, but think for a minute. 650,000 students are being sent home because of a "credible" threat. I might be convinced that a school was threatened, but the complete district of LA (...).

      Obvious solution for this kind of trouble: home schooling, or some sort of exclusive school. Packing tons of children into crowded spaces, to face bullying, strangers and arrogant teachers is a thing of the past. A new system is much needed and overdue.

    22. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well obviously you did a bad job framing this as most likely a prank.

      See if you want to scare kids you tell them an email came in from a foreign country that says they want to kill you.

      If you want to calm them down you tell them that is probably someone is either trying to get out of a test or they are trolling the school district.

      The chances of it being option two are MUCH MUCH more likely. So you aren't even lying to them.
      Don't blame the kids for you being a bad parent.

    23. Re:So vague is has to be true? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      It almost seems like someone/group is doing this because they know that people will overreact, and of course if something did happen people would be screaming bloody murder because they didn't overreact.

      Duh. Anyone who remembers 9/11 probably knows someone whose business was interrupted by a random bomb threat or something. They were "a dime a dozen" back then. The vast majority of them were likely somebody either playing a prank or (more likely) somebody just trying to get some time off of work (or school, as in this case).

      But the thing is -- they worked in keeping people scared. I had some friends back then who stayed away from any place large numbers of people might congregate for a while -- even things like shopping malls. They had heard so many random bomb threats that they assumed there must be terrorists everywhere. Same thing's going on now.

    24. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Closing down a school district with 100,000 employees is more expensive than most people can even imagine. It will easily come with a price tag in excess of $5 million, and nobody's giving them money to do this. Nobody is going to take on a $5 million expense for frivolous reasons.

    25. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be careful? Or what, you'll shoot us?

    26. Re:So vague is has to be true? by MikeMo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This. ISIS doesn't phone in warnings, they kill people. If they had a bomb in the schools, they wouldn't say a thing. Now, all they have to do is phone it in from time to time in various states and they've succeeded.

    27. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His kind wants us to die. That's why those own those things.

      And, Californifucka has more Republicans than any other state. It is a very dangerous place. They constantly murder people. Constantly murder people.

    28. Re: So vague is has to be true? by mwehle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except that California elected a Republican Arnold as Governor for a spell. Much of Cali's representation is also Republican despite the liberal cities such as San Fran.

      Yes, and before Schwarzenegger in my memory we had Pete Wilson, Deukmejian, and Ronald Reagan as well as Gray Davis and Jerry Brown. In the Senate before Feinstein and Boxer we had Pete Wilson and Hayakawa as well as Cranston. California politics are a mixed bag. The state which launched both Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon on their paths to the White House can hardly be seen as the socialist paradise some provincial thinkers make it out to be.

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    29. Re:So vague is has to be true? by mwehle · · Score: 1

      It almost seems like someone/group is doing this because they know that people will overreact, and of course if something did happen people would be screaming bloody murder because they didn't overreact.

      Duh. Anyone who remembers 9/11 probably knows someone whose business was interrupted by a random bomb threat or something. They were "a dime a dozen" back then. The vast majority of them were likely somebody either playing a prank or (more likely) somebody just trying to get some time off of work (or school, as in this case).

      But the thing is -- they worked in keeping people scared. I had some friends back then who stayed away from any place large numbers of people might congregate for a while -- even things like shopping malls. They had heard so many random bomb threats that they assumed there must be terrorists everywhere. Same thing's going on now.

      Absolutely! That went on for years. I grew up outside Philadelphia and for years after September 2001 a sister-in-law talked of being frightened to travel into the city for fear of terrorist attack. There is no publically available indication the Quebec and LA threats are related.

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    30. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said more than any other state, which is true. I don't understand why you CONservatives have to constantly lie. Constantly lie. There are more Republicans in California than in any other state. What profit does your kind gain from spewing the lie that there isn't?

      This is a very dangerous state with all of those Republicans. They are violent people, which is why their kind is Republican in the first place. CA has more gun owners than any other state. There are so many guns flooding the streets here. Flooding the streets here. It is dangerous to leave home. Heck, it's even dangerous to stay at home with all of those Republicans constantly doing drive bys. That is the way of their kind.

    31. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Really, california (and texas.. and new york) should be broken up into smaller states.

      Their population's representation in the Senate and house are grossly smaller than those from many other states.

      For example, Wyoming gets 1 senator per 280,000 citizens and 1 representative per 580,000 citizens.

      Meanwhile California gets 1 senator per 19,000,000 citizens and 1 representative per 710,000 citizens.

      The Iraqi government the u.s. set up has 1 representative per 100,000 citizens and the original 1st amendment (still up for a vote by the way) proposed 1 representative per 50,000 to 60,000 citizens. (But it wouldn't matter to pass it because it also has a minimum total allowed of 200ish total representatives and we currently are fixed at just below 500 which is really low).

      Given the senate control of appointments... it grossly over represents the influence of the population of tiny states over the population of large states. Similarly it grossly over represents the power of tiny states in electing the president.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    32. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect (since I don't have all the information that the decision makers have) that the threat was generic to LA County schools - a school or some schools in LA County were threatened. Since they had no additional information with which to isolate specific schools, they did the best they could and determined that any action taken would have to apply to ALL LA County schools.

    33. Re:So vague is has to be true? by edtice1559 · · Score: 1

      They probably didn't scare very many parents either. Most of them are now so used to false alarms that they are numb to it. Sure inconvenienced a lot of people though.

    34. Re: So vague is has to be true? by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      No, California has more CRIMINALS than most other states. And if you look at the demographics of those criminals, I'm sure about 95% of them...are Democrats. Or Democrat wannabees.

    35. Re:So vague is has to be true? by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Heck throughout the 70s bomb threats at schools were a dime a dozen.

    36. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      They just talk about it beforehand on Facebook, but none of the agents who are supposed to be monitoring them give a damn.

      No, they give a damn. But if they warn people, then there won't be these huge mass deaths and their budget might get cut. Plus, they need the bombs and killings to go off so they can push to take away more freedoms and grant themselves more power. The real terrorists are in the government.

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
    37. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Talderas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really, california (and texas.. and new york) should be broken up into smaller states.

      Their population's representation in the Senate and house are grossly smaller than those from many other states.

      The Senate is not there to represent the people. Perhaps you should sue your high school for giving you a piss poor civics education.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    38. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does owning a gun make a bomb threat more credible?

      How does not owning a gun make a bomb threat less credible?

    39. Re:So vague is has to be true? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > They just talk about it beforehand on Facebook, but none of the agents who are supposed to be monitoring them give a damn.

      Not true. they always care enough to report it to their superiors!.

      How else can spin be prepared ahead of time?
      Plus they need to track that the terrorists are doing what they promised when they were trained and funded.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    40. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LA Republican? Too much bad product is an obvious conclusion.

    41. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone here is complaining about the overreaction, but nobody will do anything about it. Instead, if every single day, every single person in the USA sent a generalized bomb threat to some random public institution, the problem would be solved. Nobody would ever take bomb threats seriously, thus eliminating the disruptive power of a bomb threat. Honestly, what purpose does a bomb threat serve anyway? If you want to blow stuff up, you don't tell anyone about it. A bomb threat by its very nature is just to cause disruption, not to actually facilitate bombing things.

    42. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Let's push this to it's extreme.

      Say three very rich people bought all of wyoming.

      Should they be allowed to control 2 senators and 1 representative? They are a "state" right?

      I think I understand the point of the civics lesson better than you do.

      The founding fathers, in an age where they wanted 30,000 to 60,000 citizens per representative never foresaw we would create huge states with more combination than 20 other states combined.

      And if we were to break the larger states up into smaller states, senators still represent the new state's interest so I'm not clear on where you see a problem anyway.

      Five californian states, five Texan states, and three New York states (the problem being that most of the population is in one city.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    43. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes a bomb threat "credible"? What if someone sets up a bot in a foreign land to send a bomb threat every day from a different account and IP address? Do we shut down the entire planet, every day?

    44. Re:So vague is has to be true? by jfengel · · Score: 1

      You do get to play the CYA card, but only a finite number of times. Eventually, people get tired of it. The threats won't end before you run out of cards, so eventually you've got to figure out how to take a risk. Having demonstrated an abundance of caution will not save you from criticism should one of those attacks finally materialize. Nor, of course, will it save you from the attack.

      Which is what counts in the end. I'm not sure that the CYA really saves his job, one way or the other. George W. Bush didn't lose his job despite a whole bunch of claims that he was warned. I, personally, don't consider those claims sufficiently specific to blame Bush for failing to prevent it (and I assure you, I am no fan of his). I think that a superintendent who handles things well in the aftermath (provides appropriate levels of counseling, makes sufficiently brave and consoling statements to the press, puts some kind of action plan into place but avoids accusations of security theater) would be lauded as a hero.

      This is all a little vague since I don't know what the "credible" threat is. I am a bit hard pressed to imagine a threat that is specific and detailed enough to be credible but so broad that you have to shut down every school to counter it. I'm willing to extend some benefit of the doubt, at least for the moment, as part of my larger point that sooner or later one of these threats will be genuine and still not cost his job if he mis-reads it.

    45. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Notorious+G · · Score: 1

      The original intent was it represent the state and not the people. However, the 17th amendment changed that. The senate now, in fact, represents the people.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    46. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the right decision, too - school superintendents should not be tasked with deciding what is a "credible threat".

      The hard question is, how should law enforcement react to this kind of thing? See also: SWATing...

    47. Re: So vague is has to be true? by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      Looks like Notorious G beat me to it. Your numbers are still an intriguing reason to look at breaking up those states. (Personally I wish Texas would just secede already.) I think the more compelling arguments, though, come from the differing geopolitical areas in California and New York. Here's a Wikipedia article for California, since this idea continue to be A Thing over there.

      My personal opinion is that states' rights have diminished too far, and I'd agree that some of our states are just way too big. Then again, we shouldn't forget the failure of the Articles of Confederation.

      While I'm at it, the Cascadia independence movement was another interesting historical proposal for British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon to secede from Canada and USA and form a new country.

    48. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we could create another body of legislators that is similar to the Senate that has a number of representatives for each state based on the population.

    49. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A pro poker player once said that you should be bluffing about 25% of the time. If a terrorist group could easily multiply the affect of each attack if they made 3 fake threats for every real attack.

    50. Re:So vague is has to be true? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You're the superintendent, and it was discovered that your received a somewhat credible threat, after something actually happened--no matter how trifling in the grand scheme.

      Indeed, trifling is when it happens to other people, not when it happens to you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    51. Re: So vague is has to be true? by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      Don't forget Regan and Nixon.
      California is very diverse politically.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    52. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Incorrect. You're confusing who selects the Senators with who the Senators represent. The 17th Amendment was introduced to eliminate two perceived flaws with the state legislature sending Senators, namely deadlock in the legislature (the worst offending case coming about when the Senate did not confirm a candidate sent that was selected from a plurality rather than majority of the legislator of the state) with the second flaw being the potential for legislators to "buy" the state's assembly to obtain his seat.

      One of the arguments at the time was that the Amendment would diminish state's rights which was countered with the argument that the Amendment would only change the selection of the Senators and not their responsibilities. Meaning that Senators are still supposed to be represent the states. Whether or not you think that is how it is or how it should be is immaterial as that is the structural basis on which the Senate is based regardless of how the Senators are selected.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    53. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, they all just represent themselves...they pay lip service to voters inasmuch as they must in order to get elected, and also scratch the backs of lobbyists inasmuch as they must in order to get anything at all done...but apart from that they abuse their power to make themselves rich.

      They are a necessary evil. It seems like many people have forgotten that necessary evils are evil, and need to be perpetually held accountable (which none of our politicians are).
       

    54. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's more representation than California should have. They elected Arnold. They house, and are proud of it, San Fransisco. We should sell the place to China and forgo what they place into the coffers. We'll lose some money but gain some sanity. Pelosi needs to go.

    55. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should go back, and watch speed. Then you'll know a little something about movie bad guys and bombs.

    56. Re:So vague is has to be true? by modecx · · Score: 0

      No, trifling is when the risk to life and limb from driving in LA traffic exceeds the risk to life and limb from terror threats; yet people freak out when freak events happen (especially to the children) because they can't into statistics.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    57. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On December 8, 1941, the feds were to hold a vote to split off the northern part of California. They had more pressing matters and the vote was never held. It has not been brought to vote since then. The day before that was the day that shall live in infamy. Or, in more the common parlance at the time, "The fucking slant-eyed Nips bombed Pearl Harbor."

    58. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You liberals - are you sure You want the Syrian refugees here?

    59. Re:So vague is has to be true? by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      No, trifling is when the risk to life and limb from driving in LA traffic exceeds the risk to life and limb from terror threats;

      If you're the principal, and someone at your school is killed by terrorists, it is no longer trifling. It doesn't matter what the odds of it were beforehand, or the odds of them happening again.

      You seem to have trouble seeing things from the viewpoint of the people who are in the situation.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    60. Re:So vague is has to be true? by neminem · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I were an awful terrorist that really wanted to make the whole country go crazy, I'd *absolutely* call in "credible" bomb threats like this. I'd keep doing them randomly until someone told the superintendent that he *cannot* keep closing schools like this, it's making everyones' jobs impossible and losing millions of dollars of taxpayer money.

      *Then* I'd blow up a school.

      Luckily, I'm not a terrorist.

    61. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      We've had lots of Republican governors. California is very solidly purple through and through. Silicon Valley is mostly liberal though with enclaves of extremely wealthy people interested in a government that helps them keep it. It is nowhere as nearly conservative or libertarian as Orange Country for instance. Libertarians may be more common than normal in Silicon Valley than elsewhere, but they're still uncommon.

    62. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Alypius · · Score: 1

      Nah, the agents who should be monitoring them don't because of orders from on high, lest they be accused of racism.

    63. Re:So vague is has to be true? by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Because there was a warning and no bombs were found, I suspect that it was a test to see how L.A. would react and what their resources were. The real attack will come without warning.

      The next time might involve bombs designed to go off when the schools are being searched so as to endanger the people looking for them.

      The enemy is not stupid and they know exactly what they're doing; they've had so much experience at spreading terror.

    64. Re: So vague is has to be true? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      No, California has more PEOPLE than most states.

    65. Re:So vague is has to be true? by bughunter · · Score: 2

      Jesus H Christ on a PET 8032, this was no fucking enemy, it was some 4chan troll who didn't want to take his finals today.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    66. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know about percentages, but the Paris attackers published an article in an English language ISIS magazine about what they were going to do about a month before they did it. It wasn't encrypted, but yet nobody did anything about it.

    67. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Natales · · Score: 1

      What broke down here is the threat assessment model. Was there a competent team of interdisciplinary experts who reviewed the threat and concluded it was reasonably credible? then no need for a CYA, since you are doing your job.
      But if this was based on the consensus of a few local folks you know, that may or may not have a respectable background to advice you, then it's on you.
      First of all, if they would have a semi decent IT Security expert as part of their threat assessment team, they wouldn't even have reported that "the IP address was from Germany" since they'd know it's largely irrelevant, being most likely a Tor exit node or a VPN end point, if it didn't match a well-known origin. Instead, they'd focus on the language, plot details and other things that can reveal if this is indeed credible or not. Then they'd probably correlate with similar chatter in other places (like NY), and on and on.
      I'm not sure if every major city should have one of such teams on stand-by, but at least a "service" should exist for these kinds of things so someone like a School Superintendent or a Mall Manager can tap into.

    68. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they did

    69. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      Did you scare people into overreacting? Yes: mission accomplished, you're a good terrorist. No: You're a bad terrorist, so don't quit your engineering day job.

      You sir are an insensitive clod!

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    70. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      sigh...
      "huge states with more POPULATION than 20 other states combined."

      I really hate that you can't edit on slashdot. Even if only for a few minutes.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    71. Re:So vague is has to be true? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      This is what happens when you create an asymmetric war. We prefer to fight from the safety and comfort of an air conditioned office using our drones, rather than on the ground. It's safer for the troops but means that they are basically impossible to harm, so IS and other groups go after civilians instead.

      If the West wants to get involved, it needs to get involved instead of launching missiles from thousands of kilometres away.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    72. Re:So vague is has to be true? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had the threat been real and someone was killed you would probably be storming the barricades protesting the government because they did not take the threat seriously. And the vast majority of the population is not scared in the least they are getting pissed off.

    73. Re: So vague is has to be true? by Barsteward · · Score: 1

      why worry about the Syrians? the US has got more than enough home grown white nutjobs causing mass shootings to worry about Syrians.

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    74. Re:So vague is has to be true? by dave420 · · Score: 0

      Waah waaah waaah. Just admit you don't know what you are talking about, and were blinded by your own hubris. Asking for impossible statistics just illustrates the nature of your argument. Warnings from terrorist groups are so common that there is an almost standard protocol adopted by authorities and groups in question. This allows the groups to accurately convey a threat to the authorities, and to claim ownership if/when the attack happens, and to minimise loss of life. The authorities like this as it's better than having people blown up/killed. You not knowing this, or how many times it has been used, or by which groups it has been used, does not magically make it disappear. I'm going to hazard a guess and say you are not particularly familiar with brands of terrorist campaigns other than Al Qaeda and ISIS.

      Hint: you are not as clever as you seem to think you are.

    75. Re:So vague is has to be true? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Honestly, what purpose does a bomb threat serve anyway?

      It makes the terrorists look better if they don't kill random civilians, and just set off a big bang which looks impressive on TV and scares people. As someone said above, the PIRA generally (although not exclusively) used this tactic in their bombings on the mainland, at least when directed at civilian targets.

      Groups like Daesh don't seem to care about who they kill though, so this bomb threat is pretty unconvincing.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    76. Re:So vague is has to be true? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      a somewhat credible threat

      A random email is not a credible threat.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    77. Re:So vague is has to be true? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      The next time might involve bombs designed to go off when the schools are being searched so as to endanger the people looking for them.

      This was one of the reasons the PIRA during the Troubles liked to give some sort of bomb warning: it meant that they got to kill some police or Army personnel rather than random civilians, which was in theory better from a public relations point of view.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  2. OMG, Anonymous OVERSEAS Email !!!11!!!!111! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=send+anonymous+email

    For fucks sake already. Is this not the oldest trick on the tubes?

  3. We've seen this before by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Funny

    A threat that led to the closing and search of every public school? They should send some police over to the LA branch of the Federal Reserve, just in case.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:We've seen this before by Shadow+IT+Ninja · · Score: 1

      Absolutely right. One of the problems with mass surveillance, especially combined with some kind of automated processing and threat prediction, is that it sensitizes you to diversionary tactics.

    2. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the movies, sure. I'm betting this is from some kid who didn't want to take a test today or get into a fight with a bully.

    3. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Related: a number of LA officers were googling how to get exactly 4 gallons of water into a 5 gallon jug, using only a 3 gallon jug as a measuring device.

    4. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to remember that it's LA, and these are cops:

      "If you have one bucket that contains 2 gallons and another bucket that contains 7 gallons, how many buckets do you have?"

    5. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like you have a 5 gallon jug and a 3 gallon jug. How do you get the wat.. oh right, there's no water.

    6. Re:We've seen this before by mwehle · · Score: 1

      Related: a number of LA officers were googling how to get exactly 4 gallons of water into a 5 gallon jug, using only a 3 gallon jug as a measuring device.

      It's 2015. Why is the US still using gallons?

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    7. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck your freedom-hating liberal globalist units.

    8. Re:We've seen this before by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Because metric is a Communist plan to weaken America's moral character.

    9. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      McClane and the Samaritan are to use SI units..

    10. Re:We've seen this before by amorsen · · Score: 1

      The Martian infiltrators do it to ensure that Mars invasion plans never succeed.

      Only spacecraft/landers which are guaranteed not to spot anything suspicious are allowed to reach Mars.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    11. Re:We've seen this before by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Because it's irrelevant what units you use, as long as there's a conversion for them, and they're locally used universally. Now, if you have a hard time with gallons: there's about 3.8 liters per gallon. Multiply by 4, subtract 5%. Simple. Or maybe that's too hard for you...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    12. Re:We've seen this before by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Why is the US still using gallons?

      Because, contrary to popular rumour, there is nothing sacred about SI.

      No, the liter (litre, whichever) is not intrinsically superior to the gallon (imperial or otherwise). Likewise the gram, the meter, the joule, etc. They're just another system of measurement, really, with nothing to define them as better or worse other than utility for any specific purpose....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    13. Re: We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's more like, "You have two buckets of water. How can you murder innocent people with them, and then claim self defense?"

    14. Re:We've seen this before by dave420 · · Score: 1

      The SI units really shine when you have to start adding or multiplying various quantities, or converting from one unit to another. Yes, we all know a gallon has a definition, but that definition is entirely removed from anything else, hence it's uselessness. So yeah, a litre is pretty cool, as a litre of water weighs 1Kg (at standard temperature and pressure), sits in a box 10cm x 10cm x 10cm, etc. etc. It's weird you missed that out.

    15. Re:We've seen this before by someoneOtherThanMe · · Score: 1

      So, a number of LA officers were googling how to get exactly 15.14 l of water into an 18.93 l jug, using only an 11.36 l jug as a measuring device.

    16. Re:We've seen this before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No dumbo. Of course the metric system is superior. 1000 grams in a kilogram. 1000 millimeters in a meter. 1000 kilograms in a tonne. 1000 milliseconds in a second.

      No, wait!...it's better to use 17/27ths snarklefarging in a cabletron and 19.352 doobelberries in a jazzwhener and -62 and twenty seven eightyfourths hoodlehoffens to one garbeldargs.

  4. Quick! Check the nursing homes for suspects! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Gotta look at unlikely targets or Obama's gonna be pissed!

    Investigation has revealed that Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik were radicalized long before they embarked on their mass murder spree. Both had engaged in online radicalism for years and it’s evident that a devotion to violent hatred brought the couple together; speculation in counterintelligence circles that Malik was actually the prime mover of the couple’s jihadism – and may even have been a provocateur – are plausible but not yet substantiated.

    What is known, however, is that Malik, a Pakistani national who had lived for years in Saudi Arabia, had written extensively on her public social media accounts about her ardent desire to wage jihad and seek martyrdom in the name of radical Islam. Americans who are accustomed to having their social media accounts examined whenever they apply for a job have questions here, and rightly so.

  5. Nuttatology 2.0 by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unfortunately, extremists are learning they can create lots of chaos withOUT the grandiose 9/11-style plans, which often leave too many clues to hide. Many had speculated on this shift before, but it looks like it's now happening.

    1. Re:Nuttatology 2.0 by mjwx · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, extremists are learning they can create lots of chaos withOUT the grandiose 9/11-style plans, which often leave too many clues to hide. Many had speculated on this shift before, but it looks like it's now happening.

      I'm going to bet this was done by bored kids or idiots rather than real extremists.

      This kind of shit has been done for decades and I highly doubt it's increased in frequency since then.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  6. That's a lot of work to get our of exams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how much these groups charge kids to shut down their schools during finals....

    1. Re:That's a lot of work to get our of exams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a class in college (digital micro processor design) where there was a bomb threat called in every test day. Halfway through the semester we would show up at class for a test, then be sent to a random room elsewhere on campus to take the test.

  7. Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An emailed bomb threat from overseas evacuates the entire school district of one of the biggest cities in the United States. When did Americans become such cowards?

    1. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I mean, what kind of gigantic pussy gets scared by a bomb? What a bunch of sissies, holy shit.

    2. Re:Terrorists win by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Next you know, they'll start writing checks to that Nigerian Prince.

    3. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of these bad things only happen, because authorities refuse to forward chain mails ...

    4. Re:Terrorists win by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "An email from a law enforcement member who prefers to remain anonymous" -- this sounds like laundering of spy information in a way suitable for public consumption, which needs a reason, however executive 35,000 foot level.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    5. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Next you know, they'll start writing checks to that Nigerian Prince.

      Obama?

    6. Re:Terrorists win by sycodon · · Score: 1

      It's not as bad as when a student chews a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun. Then it's, "Call in SWAT!"

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    7. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When did Americans become such cowards?

      11 Sept. 2001, and we're more so every day.

    8. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When did Americans become such cowards?

      In A.D. 2101...
      War was beginning.

    9. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      July 4th 1776

    10. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite, a bomb, or a workbench with partial bomb components and explosives residue owned by someone with a history of violence/hate would be something to be scared of. An electronic message that didn't even originate in your country claiming to have a bomb with no evidence to back it up should be about as scary as a person who doesn't own a car and doesn't know how to drive threatening to run you over with one.

    11. Re:Terrorists win by sjames · · Score: 2

      They aren't scared of a bomb, they are scared of an email that claims there is a bomb. If they saw an actual bomb, their fear would make perfect sense.

    12. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans have always been such cowards. The difference here is that the officials that routinely ignore bomb threats because they are not credible suddenly have something to gain from publicizing them all: an argument for universal encryption back doors.

      The argument is bogus of course, but the solid dose of fear will grant it standing in the minds of many voters.

    13. Re:Terrorists win by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      A clock that looks vaguely like a hollywood depiction of a bomb may also inspire fear.

    14. Re:Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say's the person safe in the shade of Superman's (America's) cape.

    15. Re:Terrorists win by Cramer · · Score: 1

      The term you are looking for is "risk averse". The school district doesn't want to be sued into oblivion for "ignoring a bomb threat" -- no matter how BS it may appear, if a bomb actually did go off (pretty much anywhere in the city) after receiving a "warning", there'd be a thousand people suing within the hour.

    16. Re:Terrorists win by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      An emailed bomb threat from overseas evacuates the entire school district of one of the biggest cities in the United States. When did Americans become such cowards?

      Posted by an AC..ah the irony..

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  8. I wonder by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Interesting

    During the six years of World War 2 were all the schools in Europe closed down? This is the ultimate in generating as much hysteria as possible. Next is a complete lockdown, anyone seen outside their house will be summarily shot, and as the cliche goes, survivors will be shot again.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      During the six years of World War 2 were all the schools in Europe closed down?

      To avoid the risk of being bombed, in many of the UK's cities they evacuated children (and teachers) to rural areas and in some cases to Canada or Australia.

    2. Re:I wonder by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or even Narnia.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:I wonder by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but then they got pulled into some stupid war with an ice queen and a bunch of animals and were expected to take up swords and shields and enter combat themselves. They would have been much better off in Australia or Canada.

      BTW, am I the only one that thought the Narnia stories were dumb, and a lame attempt at a copy of Lord of the Rings but with a bunch of annoying in-your-face Christian metaphors?

    4. Re:I wonder by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Or even Narnia.

      Well clearly, that was not intentional. People shouldn't leave old wardrobes just lying around willy-nilly, you never know where they'll form a portal to.
      OTOH, turkish delight.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    5. Re:I wonder by DarkOx · · Score: 0

      No the reality is LOTR was dumb, C. S. Lewis fixed it. Lets face is Narnia is much more readable and if you don't have some strong sense of anit-Christan or Orientalist bias its an all around much better told fantasy.

      LOTR and Hobbit are probably the only books in history that were improved translated to their Hollywood script form. Don't get me wrong I love a rich well described complete fantasy world but Tolkien takes it to such extremes that it ends up being tedious more so than rich.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No way do you seriously believe these things. Also, how in the f*** did you manage to use "Orientalist" in that context? "Anti-christian?" It's like we were reading two different books. I guess there are a lot of extremist Christians though, and they seem to like C.S. Lewis a lot more than Tolkien for some reason. AFAIK the two men had much in common.

    7. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had much in common and were very good friends.

    8. Re:I wonder by Frobnicator · · Score: 1

      BTW, am I the only one that thought the Narnia stories were dumb, and a lame attempt at a copy of Lord of the Rings but with a bunch of annoying in-your-face Christian metaphors?

      Probably the only person, yes.

      Because that is the opposite order of when they were written.

      CS Lewis wrote and published his books from 1949-1956.

      Tolkien wrote chunks of LotR and related world fiction over a 30 year span, but didn't publish it until 1954-1955.

      Most of the seven Chronicles books were published before LotR, and only two (The Magician's Nephew and The Last Battle) could potentially have been based on any of the LotR books as you suggest. Both of those books were (according to Wikipedia) finished before LotR was released; they were completed but not yet published. Books require some lead time between when they are submitted and when they hit the streets, so it is likely that CS Lewis did not know about the books except possibly hearing some of Tolkien's writings and reputation as a professor.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    9. Re:I wonder by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      After the battle Aslan reveals that he could actually have defeated the ice queen with one paw ties behind his back - but he needed all those animals to fight and die in the battle in order to teach everyone and important moral lesson about the value of sacrifice.

      It's something of a recurring theme - the Leo ex Machina has the ability to step in at any time and fix everything, but never does so because that would be unfair interference. At least until The Last Battle, when he just gets fed up with the story, flicks on his omnipotence mode, lobotomises anyone who refuses to love him and quickly whips up a paradise where he can frolic with some children forever.

    10. Re:I wonder by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      It's probably because the Narnia stories were overtly Christian allegories, plus they had those annoying kids as the protagonists. LotR was written by a devout Catholic and had some Christian influence and allegory as well (like Gandalf being resurrected), but it was much more subtle and not obviously written to push Christianity on people.

    11. Re:I wonder by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Thank you, that seems to summarize them pretty well.

    12. Re:I wonder by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It's a common problem with allegory. The author has the tricky task of telling two stories at once, without letting them conflict. Sometimes this doesn't work quite right.

    13. Re:I wonder by quenda · · Score: 1

      Because that is the opposite order of when they were written.

      CS Lewis wrote and published his books from 1949-1956.

      Perhaps GP meant to say "The Hobbit", which was published first, and is a children's book, like the Chronicles, but unlike LotR.

  9. Catching Up With Fiction by sehlat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Wasp is a 1957 science fiction novel by English author Eric Frank Russell. Terry Pratchett (author of the Discworld series of fantasy books) stated that he "can't imagine a funnier terrorists' handbook." Wasp is generally considered Russell's best novel.

    1. Re:Catching Up With Fiction by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Informative

      Book's available for free now...on the phone it goes!

      https://archive.org/details/Ru...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  10. Someone had test today they didn't want to take by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sending in an email is much easier than pulling the fire alarm.

  11. How do we stop it by Ravaldy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are we overreacting? Has this been happening more since the ISIS scares in Paris?

    Can we stop or control this better?

    I know many call these "isolated incidents" but these incidents still cause major disruptions to the population. This incident alone is probably affecting hundreds of thousands of people if you include students, parents and businesses.

    1. Re:How do we stop it by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      We are overreacting.

      I don't believe it was wrong to evacuate the threatened school. You do have to take a direct threat seriously. I do believe it was wrong to evacuate *every* school.

      Also, this stuff is going to continue to happen while the news media shines a laser-like focus on these incidents. We're always going to have this sort of thing, but media attention is actually encouraging this activity.

      Although I understand the need for a free press, I wish these media outlets would develop some ethics without some form of compulsion. Regulate guns all you want, but in the end, I blame the media more than the availability of guns for these specific types of incidents.

    2. Re:How do we stop it by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Although I understand the need for a free press, I wish these media outlets would develop some ethics without some form of compulsion

      Regulate the press :)

      On a serious note, the only people that can make free press better is the readers. If the content is too "soap like" then move your attention to a different outlet or take the time to criticize the one in question. Unfortunately I see little hope for any change in viewer/reader behavior when I still see people follow the kardasians (not worth spelling properly).

    3. Re:How do we stop it by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      I sometimes wonder if there is value in regulating the press. It's not clear to me if that is worse than letting it do what it is doing now.

      Ultimately, school shootings or other random mass killings (as opposed to organized crime killings) are a relatively rare, albeit extremely emotionally charged scenario. If we are looking at the situation in a very cold-blooded way, these are still very rare occurrences that, based on impact to society, should not be driving a national debate.

      If you have 900 schools in a system, and the threat to one school can close all of them, then all you need is threats to one third of your schools, and you won't have a school year in 2016. Obviously, they're not going to shut the LA schools down every time they get a threat, they simply can't. But now, this overreaction is the norm.

      And what happens when someone does get killed in an LA school this next year? Will the school district now be blamed for not closing because a kid got killed?

      In the end, I think the real problem is what you mentioned: the viewers. Which means that the problem is our society, and not really the news, not the guns, and quite possibly not even the shooters. All of those other things are enabled by our culture. Our murder rate has been decreasing for decades and yet we're apparently more afraid than ever. This fear is more likely to hurt us through overreaction in things like disruption of our lives, creation of a police state and a sense of fear in our lives when we shouldn't have any.

    4. Re:How do we stop it by Ravaldy · · Score: 1

      Our murder rate has been decreasing for decades

      Although true, massacres are on the rise which unfortunately provides ammunition for the media to scare us. If people took the time to calculate their odds of being murdered they would quickly realize their diet has a much better chance at shortening their life than a murderer.

      Will the school district now be blamed for not closing because a kid got killed?

      You nailed it. Everybody wants revenge and that means the blame game followed by law suits. Nobody can accept that things happen that aren't a living person's fault. Unless there was miss handling of the person's life nobody should have to answer for it.

  12. so, great success. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After the San Bernadino shooting that killed 14 people, we have shut down more than 900 public schools in the second largest city in america. terrorism isnt about killing people, or maiming them, or destroying property. terrorism is about undermining the authority of a target nations government. Its about making its populus too frightened to send their children to school, too worried to board a plane without massive security theatre, and too scared to accept immigrants into a nation that was founded and championed by immigrants. Today is a dark day not because of lives lost, but because we have effectively agreed to the premise of terrorism.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its about making its populus too frightened to send their children to school, too worried to board a plane without massive security theatre, and too scared to accept immigrants

      One of these is not like the others. Making the populace too frightened to send their kids to school or to board and airplane really undermines the ability of a society to function at a basic level, because education and transportation are critical to a society's continued operation as well as long-term success. Immigration (particularly from middle eastern nations) is NOT necessary for a society's survival or prosperity. You can argue that it enriches a country to some extent, or that it's a humanitarian thing that's good for humanity at large, but how is it necessary for a particular nation? It's not. And it if were, there's no reason that western nations couldn't cut off immigration of middle easterners altogether and then increase the numbers of immigrants it allows from China, India, southeast Asia, eastern Europe, South America, and sub-Saharan Africa. It's not like we desperately need masses of people from the middle east for our nations to function, the way we need schools and travel.

    2. Re:so, great success. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about making people fear those who are different. The immigration aspect is just a symptom of that. The goal is to get people to turn on each other and become hostile toward foreigners, both of which serve as effective recruiting tools. Sadly, many prominent figures are taking the bait, making the fight against terrorism that much more difficult.

    3. Re:so, great success. by nimbius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would argue to the contrary as youre assuming a short term definition. While not strictly necesary in the short term, an outright ban on middle eastern nations has a significant long term impact on our ability to understand, react to and interact with these cultures. shunning these immigrants would beget demonizing the region and cultures and, much as demonizing communists/reds/russians in the sixties, would lead to strategic and tactical disadvantages as we supplant knowledge for rhetoric. A prime example lies in the Tupolev bomber, which was consistently outclassing our best range and capability assessments as they were founded on a fundamental predicate of soviet 'inadequacy.' We based much of our political interaction with russians on the rhetoric of politicians and social scientists who, without direct access to a communist russian, simply assumed that due to their atheism they were untrustworthy scoundrels.

      considering society as an organism, diversity in organisms enhances their survival capabilities while enhancing a monoculture causes increased succeptibility to its environment. Becoming less adaptive and diverse would naturally be in a nations least interest.

      --
      Good people go to bed earlier.
    4. Re:so, great success. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shunning these immigrants would beget demonizing the region and cultures

      Isn't that what they are doing to us? So is their intolerance of us and Jews/Christians hurting them?

    5. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Recruiting tools? "Waah! I can't emigrate across the ocean to this other country, so I'm going to dedicate my life to becoming a terrorist and blowing myself up to kill as many people as possible!"

      This doesn't sound right...

      There's countless nations which do not accept immigrants from middle eastern nations. How many immigrants does Japan take in yearly? How many incidents of terrorism has Japan suffered from foreigners? (The only one I can think of is the Sarin gas incident, which was done by a native.)

      I'm sorry, this idea that "we need to take people in from screwed-up nations and cultures or else they'll attack us" sounds just plain ridiculous.

    6. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      And how exactly did having little contact with the Russians hurt the American economy? The main problem was that there was a Cold War, and the two powers were roughly equal technologically (note "roughly"), and both interested in geopolitical dominance, so this naturally created a lot of tension and possibility for war. However, the American economy was also doing quite well at this time, and suffering horribly because of its lack of access to Russian immigrants (or technology; the Russians in fact copied a lot of American tech).

      Middle eastern nations are not like Russia/USSR. They're technologically backwards and really have nothing of value to offer except for oil. Their cultures are basically worthless and stuck in the bronze age. Militarily they are no threat whatsoever; they don't even have ships to cross the Atlantic. If we weren't so interested in their oil, we'd have nothing to lose by simply practicing a policy of isolation and containment with them.

    7. Re:so, great success. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      One of these is not like the others. Making the populace too frightened to send their kids to school or to board and airplane really undermines the ability of a society to function at a basic level, because education and transportation are critical to a society's continued operation as well as long-term success. Immigration (particularly from middle eastern nations) is NOT necessary for a society's survival or prosperity. You can argue that it enriches a country to some extent, or that it's a humanitarian thing that's good for humanity at large, but how is it necessary for a particular nation? It's not.

      Necessary for what?

      Nothing is "necessary" except obeying the laws of physics. It's not "necessary" that any Americans continue to have a pulse, even. It's not "necessary" to maintain public education or public roads -- there was a time when these things didn't exist, and the universe didn't collapse into some internally-contradictory nonexistence. Using words like "necessary" without any further details is a great rhetorical device, as it allows one to make ridiculous claims that logically can't be argued against.

      Immigration is necessary to maintain our standard of living without implementing some other form of population control (e.g. compulsory reproduction) or scrapping our current economic system. Of course, it is not necessary that we maintain our standard of living, or that we avoid population control, or that we maintain our current economic system. But, if we are to do all of those things, then it is necessary to continue a policy of allowing immigration.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    8. Re:so, great success. by nimbius · · Score: 1

      And how exactly did having little contact with the Russians hurt the American economy?

      I apologise if im not following completely, but our isolationist standoff with the USSR cost us two buildings during the terrorist attack of 9/11 and it plunged us into deep recession. How? one of our many proxy wars with the former soviet union was in Afghanistan in which we backed the Mujahadeen in their efforts to resist occupation by Soviet forces. we provided arms and advanced training, and in doing so helped create the Taliban. we fought these wars in a continued push to isolate and contain the USSR based on our limited knowledge of russian social and domestic policy.

      They're technologically backwards and really have nothing of value to offer except for oil.

      Or modern algebra, judeochristian philosophy, coffee, cateract surgery, the vertical axis windmill, mercuric chloride, the first known rocket driven torpedo, or a little instrument known as the guitar.

      Militarily they are no threat whatsoever

      offtopic. immigration policy in the context of international diplomacy and multiculturalism have nothing to do with military power. but to be fair, the Persian nation of Iran did manage to with great success hijack and safely land our most advanced stealth drone, the RQ-110, in 2011.

      If we weren't so interested in their oil, we'd have nothing to lose by simply practicing a policy of isolation and containment with them.

      youre right! the Carter doctrine of foreign policy stipulates we have to spend an inordinate amount of time, and resources, in order to secure middle eastern oil not for ourselves, but against other nations. we import it at a fraction of its capacity, but we dominate its export with intent.

      --
      Good people go to bed earlier.
    9. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Japan seems to get along just fine with an advanced, industrialized economy without resorting to large-scale immigration. You can argue that it'll bite them in the ass in 50 years or so, but that hasn't happened yet.

      And honestly, the way you pitch it, it sounds like exploitation. How exactly is immigration helping the places these people come from, and the people still stuck there? If anything, it seems to make them worse off.

    10. Re:so, great success. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Japan seems to get along just fine

      I don't know of many economists that would describe it that way (though, granted, there are other issues at play besides the demographic catastrophe).

      And honestly, the way you pitch it, it sounds like exploitation.

      It probably is, but I try not to make value judgements.

      I wasn't arguing in favor of immigration any more than I was arguing against it. I was just trying to inject some points that you seem to have omitted in the hope that people would have more of a complete picture to draw their own conclusions from.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    11. Re:so, great success. by myowntrueself · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You have to look at the deep cultural background of the countries that are falling over themselves to take in refugees.

      You might notice that it is only countries with a strong Christian background who are doing so.

      This is because Western Christianity (as contrasted with Eastern Christianity) is descended from the religion of the slaves of Rome. Consequently its strongest values are things which were important to the slaves of Rome and this has profoundly affected the psychology of the societies of Europe and many of their colonies.

      In this example victims are good and any victim must be embraced and supported. These Western countries are simply incapable of rationally evaluating the benefit or detriment of taking in refugees; they are compelled to take in refugees no matter the consequences. They will continue to take in refugees until their societies and economies have completely broken down.

      You will notice that Eastern Christian countries (eg Russia, Greece) aren't interested in taking refugees. You'll notice that Muslim countries aren't interested in taking refugees. Not even Buddhist countries are so driven to destruction and Buddhism is one of the most altruistic religions that exists.

      To put it simply; In certain cultures people get a really good feeling out of 'acts of kindness' it makes these people release endorphins which gives them a 'natural high'.

      They aren't taking the refugees for the benefit of the refugees. They are taking the refugees so that they can feel better about themselves.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    12. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't know of many economists that would describe it that way (though, granted, there are other issues at play besides the demographic catastrophe).

      Economists are frequently full of shit. Economics isn't even a real science. Compared to most other countries in the world, Japan is a very nice place to live, and it has a strong economy. Those economists will probably say it's not *as strong as it could be* if they followed their economic models and adopted policies they think it should have, but that's all supposition, nothing more. The simple fact is that Japan's economy is not bad, it's a strong industrial power, it still makes lots of great stuff, and it's a very safe, clean, and nice place to live. They do seem to have some challenges ahead with population, but a lot of that seems to come from this crazy idea that everything needs to constantly grow without end. If companies can downsize, why can't nations? As long as they can manage it properly, it should be doable.

    13. Re:so, great success. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I apologise if im not following completely, but our isolationist standoff with the USSR cost us two buildings during the terrorist attack of 9/11 and it plunged us into deep recession. How? one of our many proxy wars with the former soviet union was in Afghanistan in which we backed the Mujahadeen in their efforts to resist occupation by Soviet forces. we provided arms and advanced training, and in doing so helped create the Taliban.

      That's a bunch of BS.

      It did help create the Taliban, but the Taliban had little to do with 9/11, that was Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. The Taliban sheltered him (or basically ignored him), but that's it.

      Al Qaeda attacked on 9/11 because of the exact reasons that Osama himself laid out in his video. Mainly it was because of the US involvement in Saudi Arabia and that region. That has nothing to do with the USSR, and everything to do with our energy policy and our being buddy-buddy with the Wahabbists in Saudi Arabia.

      So really, if the US had followed a policy of isolationism and non-interventionism with regard to the middle east, 9/11 would never have happened! OBL wasn't mad at us for helping the Mujahideen with the Soviets, he was mad at us for having boots on the ground near Mecca.

      So no, having limited knowledge of Russian policies did NOT result in any serious negative consequences.

      Or modern algebra, judeochristian philosophy, coffee, cateract surgery, the vertical axis windmill, mercuric chloride, the first known rocket driven torpedo, or a little instrument known as the guitar.

      And how many of those came from modern times? Islamic societies used to be peaceful and advanced for a little while, and then they took a left turn and shunned learning when some cleric became popular, and it's been fucked up over there ever since. And I can do without coffee, thanks; civilized people drink tea. Judeochristian philosophy isn't anything to be too proud of either, it's not much better than Islam, and regardless, that isn't a product of any Islamic societies, it's a product of Jewish society from Roman times. That's like the Swiss trying to claim credit for inventing concrete and building the aqueducts and coliseum.

      As for guitars, that's just dumb. Guitars resembling modern instruments were invented in Spain, and the word itself comes from ancient Greek. Wikipedia cites a 3300 year old stone carving from Babylonia of some kind of guitar-like instrument, but again, to say that modern Islamic societies can claim credit for that is ridiculous in the extreme. It's like Mexicans claiming credit for inventing Lacrosse (a Native American game) because they have some ancestry to people that lived almost on the same continent to the people who did.

      but to be fair, the Persian nation of Iran did manage to with great success hijack and safely land our most advanced stealth drone, the RQ-110, in 2011.

      Yes, and that's a threat to the US mainland how? Wake me when Iran has a serious blue-water Navy and is sending their own drones into airspace anywhere near the Americas.

    14. Re:so, great success. by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Japan's national debt was 226% of GDP as of 2013. That's worse than Zimbabwe's 203%.

      Say what you will about economists or economics, but that's some shit right there. And you think this is "not bad"? At what point do you think national debt becomes bad? 300% GDP? 400%?

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    15. Re:so, great success. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Abject, unadulterated bullshit. Just look at Lebanon - a majority Muslim country with just over 5m people, and they've accepted over 1m refugees. Clearly you don't know what you are talking about. You also don't seem to realise that Germany, for example, needs to take in ~800,000 immigrants a year to make up for the massive decline in birthrate. Your ignorance and arrogance are simply astounding.

    16. Re:so, great success. by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

      Germany, for example, needs to take in ~800,000 immigrants a year to make up for the massive decline in birthrate.

      What. Automation is making human labor less and less necessary. Declining population due to lower birth rate is a good thing, not a problem that needs to be fixed.

    17. Re:so, great success. by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Lebanon is taking refugees temporarily, ultimately they will leave and go to Western countries.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  13. American IQ goes up fractionally for a day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So nothing of any value was lost.

  14. mass violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I hear the strange echos of conversations. People saying that if other people hand in their firearms then they will be perfectly safe from mass violence. People defending their use of firearm homicide statistics instead of using homicide statistics. People who said a couple in California with a garage full of pipe bombs wouldn't have killed anyone if they just didn't have black semiautomatic rifles.

    1. Re:mass violence by wyHunter · · Score: 2

      It just points out that liberalism is a mental disorder. I use the term 'liberalism' in the statist, neo-fascist way it is used now, not in the true meaning of the word. Unfortunately today's liberals...aren't.

    2. Re:mass violence by mwehle · · Score: 1

      I hear the strange echos of conversations. People saying that if other people hand in their firearms then they will be perfectly safe from mass violence. People defending their use of firearm homicide statistics instead of using homicide statistics. People who said a couple in California with a garage full of pipe bombs wouldn't have killed anyone if they just didn't have black semiautomatic rifles.

      Indeed. Today the Guardian UK had an article and a table of half-answered questions which claimed this last. I don't think many readers understand the Federal definition of an assault weapon and the absurdity of a bayonet mount or telescoping stock being seen as increasing lethality. I have not read of a shooting yet where someone was in addition bayoneted, or where the shooter would have been inhibited by a weapon with a solid stock.

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    3. Re:mass violence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you need to study up on your political classifications. Statism and fascism is the extreme end of conservatism not liberalism whose extreme is communism.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics

    4. Re:mass violence by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      It would appear you have delusions and aren't too well off yourself. Liberalism, in any sense, is against Fascism. Fascism is a right-wing thing, an alliance between government and big business, emphasizing nationalism.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  15. Don't discount it by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    Before you "but the children", give me the percentage of terrorist activities or even bombings where someone gave warning.

    ISIS, unlike other groups, has the reputation that allows them to alternate between threats and actual acts of violence. Either way, their goals are advanced. So long as they have enough actual acts of violence to keep up their reputation, the mere threat of ISIS mobilizing is enough to scare the shit out of people for good reason, and ISIS knows that.

    1. Re:Don't discount it by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > What has actually happened here is that we as a Nation have modified the definition of terrorism, which now includes mere threats of violence instead of actual violence.

      Nope, nobody has changed the definition of terrorism. It means now, and always has meant "Stuff other people do, that we may or may not also do, but we don't like that they do". That is what it always meant, what it always will mean.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    2. Re: Don't discount it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those aren't even words. Put your helmet on and let your mother feed you. Tell her it is unfair to unleash her mentally deficient children loose on the internet.

  16. Object-free zones by Alypius · · Score: 2

    Silly oversight...they made them gun-free zones, but not bomb-free! Someone needs to put up some signs, then this will all go away.

    1. Re:Object-free zones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The freedom-free zones are very welcome.

    2. Re:Object-free zones by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Silly oversight...they made them gun-free zones, but not bomb-free! Someone needs to put up some signs, then this will all go away.

      Silly, guns have tiny little bombs inside them. So do (internal combustion engine) automobiles.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  17. Headlines by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1, Funny

    The Latest: NYC officials: We got same threat, call it hoax

    Why are these NYC officials talking like a Native American stereotype?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    1. Re:Headlines by KlomDark · · Score: 3, Funny

      How?

  18. The Only Legitimate Reponse by 31415926535897 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I believe the only proper response to this threat is to introduce common sense bomb control legislation.

    1. Re:The Only Legitimate Reponse by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      I'm sure once such a law is signed it will be obeyed all the time.

    2. Re:The Only Legitimate Reponse by The-Ixian · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know that the only way to counter a bad guy with a bomb is to have a good guy with a bomb.

      Obama, quit trying to take away my bombs!

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    3. Re:The Only Legitimate Reponse by twotacocombo · · Score: 1

      I believe the only proper response to this threat is to introduce common sense bomb control legislation.

      We cannot allow emailed bomb threats to become the "new normal", so we need to go one step further and introduce common sense email control legislation. For the children. God bless America.

    4. Re:The Only Legitimate Reponse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that the only way to counter a bad guy with a bomb is to have a good guy with a bomb.

      The odds of entering a classroom with a bomb in it are over a million to one. The odds of entering a classroom with TWO bombs are over a million times a million to one. So reduce the odds, bring your own bomb!

    5. Re:The Only Legitimate Reponse by Snufu · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This wouldn't be a problem if we just had more professionals stationed throughout schools with bombs strapped to their bellies.

  19. many many to come by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As soon as it is realized by students in our anti-education culture that by bouncing a forged email through the right patch of overseas re-mailer geography, they can enforce a district-wide day off, then these will become a daily and national occurrence. I wonder if this is the kill-button for high-school in the US.

    1. Re:many many to come by internerdj · · Score: 2

      While I agree with your analysis of the outcomes, I'm not so sure I agree with pinning it on the "anti-education" culture or at least anything I would see elsewhere discussed as anti-education culture. The anti-education culture of the students stems from being forced to participate in education at the time they are most resistant to authority. It has very little to do with any philosophical stance against the educational material or process.

    2. Re:many many to come by wyHunter · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, talking with today's high school 'students' what most of them gets seems hardly to resemble education.

  20. Kids in cold climates get snow days off. by Snufu · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why shouldn't L.A. kids get jihad days off?

  21. The terrorists are winning. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every time I see a fearful reaction like this I think back to what I heard one newscaster said near the end of live broadcasts of 9/11. I can't remember the exact wording of the quote and I haven't been able to find it posted online anywhere, but the meaning of the message is still clear in my mind. He said that the goal of terrorists is to change the lives of the population. To undermine our freedom and our ways of life using fear. Violence, destruction and killing are not the goal but rather just tools to reach their goal via fear. He said that we should not change how we go about our lives due to fear. If we do the terrorists have won.

    Every time I see a reaction such as this I know that we did not take his message to heart. The patriot act, the TSA, mass surveillance, locking down and closing schools, push for increase gun control, freedom-stripping legislation, threats and discrimination against particular races/religions creeping towards the levels of WWII with Jews (and others) by the Nazis and Japanese/Germans/Italians by the US, and so much more. Knee-jerk reactions to everything, and reduction of freedoms throughout all out of fear. If we don't start to realize what is happening and take back our lives then the terrorists have officially won.

    1. Re:The terrorists are winning. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I should also add the increased attempts to demonize encryption and the militarization of domestic police against protesters to the list as well.

    2. Re:The terrorists are winning. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Every time I see a fearful reaction like this I think back to what I heard one newscaster said near the end of live broadcasts of 9/11. I can't remember the exact wording of the quote and I haven't been able to find it posted online anywhere, but the meaning of the message is still clear in my mind. He said that the goal of terrorists is to change the lives of the population. To undermine our freedom and our ways of life using fear. Violence, destruction and killing are not the goal but rather just tools to reach their goal via fear. He said that we should not change how we go about our lives due to fear. If we do the terrorists have won.

      Every time I see a reaction such as this I know that we did not take his message to heart. The patriot act, the TSA, mass surveillance, locking down and closing schools, push for increase gun control, freedom-stripping legislation, threats and discrimination against particular races/religions creeping towards the levels of WWII with Jews (and others) by the Nazis and Japanese/Germans/Italians by the US, and so much more. Knee-jerk reactions to everything, and reduction of freedoms throughout all out of fear. If we don't start to realize what is happening and take back our lives then the terrorists have officially won.

      It wasn't just the newscasters who predicted we'd overreact. It was in Bin Laden's playbook. "I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in -- and the West in general -- into an unbearable hell and a choking life." http://edition.cnn.com/2002/US/01/31/gen.binladen.interview/

      The terrorists couldn't take down America. Only we could do that. And we did. Just as he predicted.

  22. I'm shocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That schools in LA aren't bomb-free zones.

  23. 'Twern't Mormans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any ideas who is responsible?

  24. Warning is usually specific by aepervius · · Score: 2

    So called "lone wolf" asshole terrorist (klebold/Harris/etc...) usually warn in advance because they want the attention that is true. But usually those warning are specific, not "the whole LA basin" or whatever. Organisation on the other hand like islamist terrorist claim afterward because they want the operation to be sucessful. Thus for the flight downed in Egypt claims came afterward (claiming beforehand would make it more believable but far harder to pull off)- As such I would really really like to see the definition of credible and the threat given.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Warning is usually specific by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A claim made after the event is easily provable if the claim is signed, encrypted and published some time before the event as something innocuous. Then proof is made when the encryption key is released after the event. This is encryption 101.

      So, there really isn't a huge risk of not being believed if the end goal is truly to get credit for an event after it has occurred.

  25. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    The title is grammatically correct.

    Only by the warped grammar of 20th century newspaper headlines. An "and" would have been more appropriate, and if you're jammed up for space, and ampersand replacing the comma would have less confusing. But I sometimes think we now live in a world where confusing headlines are acceptable because everyone finds the reality of the news confusing.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  26. Really, um, credible by bradley13 · · Score: 2

    Authorities in New York City said they received the same threat but quickly concluded that it was a hoax.

    Really? Every time some punk sends a stupid email, you're going to shut down an entire city?

    First, there is no reason to take this stuff seriously. US deaths by terrorism is still in the ballpark of people dying of lightning strikes. If you insist on taking it seriously, give a 10% annual bonus to any teacher with a concealed carry license plus appropriate training. Problem solved.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Really, um, credible by mwehle · · Score: 2

      Really? Every time some punk sends a stupid email, you're going to shut down an entire city?

      First, there is no reason to take this stuff seriously. US deaths by terrorism is still in the ballpark of people dying of lightning strikes. If you insist on taking it seriously, give a 10% annual bonus to any teacher with a concealed carry license plus appropriate training. Problem solved.

      How does a CCW assist in finding and defusing a bomb?

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    2. Re:Really, um, credible by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Silly.
      Guns solve everything!

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    3. Re:Really, um, credible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to point out the obvious, but packing heat probably won't help you much in the event of a bomb.

    4. Re:Really, um, credible by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      So they can shoot the bomb? What??

  27. They say we don't negotiate we terrorists.. yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty confident this was some sort of actual (or it is perceived to be by the 'overseas' part) terrorist threat too unlike many of the solo mass shootings. When a terrorist makes a threat and you react differently than you otherwise would you are playing right into there hands. Until there is credible specific evidence that there is an actual bomb or *something* and it's not just fictitious or a prank it makes no sense to shut down an entire school let alone an entire school district. Particularly when your school districts is closing in on near a 1000 schools and millions of students. Next thing they are going to do is shut down America because of an overblown and broad bomb threat. Disturbingly enough they've already done this to a lesser extent in Europe when they put Brussels on lock down, and in the United States after the Boston Marathon bombing (Watertown).

  28. Next Up... by tekrat · · Score: 2

    Shutting down schools because officials receive Nigerian Prince scam. *And* they give the scammer their bank account details, because after all, 20 Million is on it's way!

    Can't you wait until they get the calls telling them their windows machine has a virus, and ONLY the tech support dude with the indian accent can fix it?

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  29. Agendas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    the closure throws into disarray "the lives of millions of Angelenos — students, parents, teachers and other school staff members."

    Sounds like a typical day in LA.

    Jokes aside, really, our school district, which is closer to downtown than most is open (cause we're a corporated city). And that our old police chief--bratton said the current adminstration overreacted.

  30. the tool timothy has watched CNN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Snicker "tool"

  31. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by alex67500 · · Score: 1

    The title is grammatically correct.

    Only by the warped grammar of 20th century newspaper headlines. An "and" would have been more appropriate, and if you're jammed up for space, and ampersand replacing the comma would have less confusing. But I sometimes think we now live in a world where confusing headlines are acceptable because everyone finds the reality of the news confusing.

    Please don't publicise your limited grammatical capacity to others who can, do understand elaborate headlines.

  32. Not credible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The public schools in LA are gun-free zones. So the threat is completely not credible in any way. We need to look further, perhaps the person who made the decision to cancel school stood to profit in some way. But treating the threat as serious is ludicrous.

  33. Troll much? by s.petry · · Score: 0

    First, California is a Liberal^WDemocratic State. It is, and for decades has, mostly voting Democratic, with huge dollars in the SF Bay area going to Obama in the last 2 cycles (count the cash by party, Republicans didn't receive much) and continuing with Obama and Clinton Fund raisers in the wealthiest areas of SF. (E.G. Palo Alto).

    That is enough to prove you wrong and trolling, but I have to add the obvious. Republican no longer means what you think it does (how much it ever did is an interesting debate). Just because you are stupid enough to believe Arnold Schwarzenegger was a "Republican", as in the historical depiction of "Republican", does not make it true. It is like believing that Trump is the same type of "Republican.". Republican and Democrat are not any different except in self claims. Both receive cash from the same groups, both vote the same way, and behind closed doors where they can laugh at the public they pat each other on the back for their great acting.

    That last sentence should explain at least some of Mr. Trumps success. Most people get that politicians have become two sides of the same coin. One thing we can say for sure is that Mr. Trump is not the typical politician that we have all begun to despise.

    Just to be clear, this is not attempting to promote or knock Donald Trump, the Dem/Rep party, or the great Ahnold. It is knocking the current state of politics and pointing out that _YOU_ don't get what most people do.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Troll much? by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      So basically you are saying both sides are bad so vote Republican?

  34. kid? by amlu · · Score: 1

    maybe not extremist terrorist but some kids freaked up on adderall and some tricky exams happening on the day? Bit of tor or maybe a vpn and you have a credible threat.

  35. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    to others who can, do

    You have a "can, do" attitude. I like that.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  36. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by sexconker · · Score: 1

    No, it fucking isn't.

    ""Credible" Bomb Threat Closes, Evacuates All Los Angeles Public Schools"

    According to the title, the bomb threat is "credible", and the bomb threat closes. Everything from the comma on is a language-raping jumble of shit.

  37. Re:Quick! Check the nursing homes for suspects! by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

    The likely suspects are students. Students have been calling in bomb threats on their schools for many, many years. I remember a bomb threat one day at my elementary school in the late 1980s. 99.9% are false threats of course.

    --
    This space intentionally left blank
  38. Problem solved by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

    See.... the issue here is they don't have their spam filter turned up high enough.

    No e-mail, no problem

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  39. Because... by number6x · · Score: 1

    Because, if we give up imperial measurements, the terrorists will have won!

    The next political movement is to move away from a decimal based dollar, and start having 240 cents to a US Dollar! (or has that been done already?)

    1. Re:Because... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Because, if we give up imperial measurements, the terrorists will have won!

      The next political movement is to move away from a decimal based dollar, and start having 240 cents to a US Dollar! (or has that been done already?)

      The thing is, the US never even adopted imperial measurements. The Imperial system was defined by the Weights and Measures act of 1824, some 50 years after their revolution so the US Customary Units aren't even as current as the Imperial system.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  40. Intelligence and the LAUSD board? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahahahahaha! *ahem* No

    That and this week is "finals week" for high schools.

    Well, there's always the aftermath to look forward to.

  41. ID Required by RoccamOccam · · Score: 1
    "Parents/Guardians please bring proper ID when picking up your child at school. They will be required."
    — LA School Police (@LASchoolPolice) December 15, 2015

    But, but, ... that's racist!

  42. Tangentially related by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

    The Los Angeles Unified School District, the second-largest school system in the U.S., is no picnic to close; the New York Times notes that the closure throws into disarray "the lives of millions of Angelenos — students, parents, teachers and other school staff members."

    So, are there protocols that make an exceptional event like this any easier to manage? Considering the nation's terrorism alert concerns, don't these incidentially function as 'duck and cover' terrorism drills?

  43. Gallons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how to get exactly 4 gallons of water into a 5 gallon jug, using only a 3 gallon jug as a measuring device.

    For those who share my compulsion to solve FizzBuzz, here is the solution to the above:

    1) Fill the 5 gallon jug.
    2) Use the 5 gallon jug to fill the 3 gallon jug.
    3) Empty the 3 gallon jug.
    4) Pour the remaining 2 gallons from the 5 gallon jug into the 3 gallon jug.
    5) Fill the 5 gallon jug again.
    6) Top off the 3 gallon jug with the 5 gallon jug - this will require 1 gallon, leaving 4 in the larger jug.

    (For those who do not share my compulsion, feel free to just laugh at us.)

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

      Why don't you just fill the five gallon container with 3 gallons, then fill the three gallon container up 1/3 of the way?

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

      Very funny, troll.

      (Yes I am an idiot, and actually wrote a real answer to your question before I realized what you were doing. Thankfully I was not crossing the street at the time.)

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

      Or alternatively:

      1) Fill the 3 gallon jug and pour it into the 5 gallon jug
      2) Refill the 3 gallon jug and pour it into the 5 gallon jug until the 5 gallon is full (now the 3 gallon jug contains 1 gallon)
      3) Empty 5 gallon jug
      4) Pour remaining 1 gallon from 3 gallon jug into 5 gallon jug
      5) Refill the 3 gallon jug and pour it into the 5 gallon jug

    4. Re:Gallons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That works too, but takes more steps than my solution.

  44. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The irony is that they're *proud* of their literary skills. *sighs*

    I'm not logging in, damn it. I should be sleeping - we just shambled back to the hotel not long ago. Tomorrow, we are off! Err... Unless we put it off until Wednesday.

  45. Unprepared by safetyinnumbers · · Score: 1

    LAUSD used to be much better prepared for attacks http://www.latimes.com/local/l...

  46. What I always Wondered by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    Do real bombers phone in the time and location of the bombs they plant? Has anyone ever in the history of the universe ever planted a bomb in a school, and then told the authorities that they have done so?

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  47. SWATing by Macdude · · Score: 1

    So someone SWATed the LA School District!

    The claim is this was a credible threat, where is the text of the email? What about this email made the threat credible, what differentiates a credible threat from a non-credible threat?

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
  48. So the LA school kids have found Tor? by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

    "Email that appeared to come from overseas"?

    So we're going to collectively shit our pants in fear every time Timmy wants to skip school, decides to Tor to the Netherlands, makes a fake Gmail account (seldombinlayd@gmail.com) and emails the principal that a jihad has been declared against the tyrannical usurpers of Al Gebra?

    Got it, just checking.

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

  49. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    So commas can't be used to separate lists?

  50. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Not without the use of the word "and". And that's not a list anyway.

  51. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    You can't have a list of two items?

  52. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by tehcyder · · Score: 1
    'Closes' and 'evacuates' are verbs. You don't have lists of verbs, you have lists of nouns.

    Anyway, the title is in Newspaper Headline, not proper English. It has its own rules. For example, in the UK, tabloid headlines will often refer to teachers as "Sir" in headlines ("Sick Sir Shags Student") as it's nice and short, despite being forty years out of date.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  53. Re:"Credible" Bomb Threat Closes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    So "A car drives, carries, and transports people" is improper English because you can't have a list of verbs?

  54. Nope. Again. by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Firstly the letter AFAICT was not encrypted. Secondly at best even in such a case you do it only shortly before the event ,1 a minute or two so that there is no time to react and no way to dispute your claim, no need of encryption, and some outfit used that method extensicely in the 80ies, like separatist basque, corse and IRA when they warned of their own explosives . The fact it was sent in clear so long in advance make it clear it was with almost certainty an hoax (come on a cell warning of an attack with 27 persons in a region ?). At least they did not put allah with a lowercase "a" like the hoax letter in new york did.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org