Slashdot Mirror


10-Year-Old Muslim Boy Probed For 'Terrorist House' Spelling Error (bbc.com)

AmiMoJo writes: A 10-year-old Muslim boy who mistakenly wrote that he lived in a "terrorist house" during an English lesson at school has been investigated by police. The pupil, who attends a primary school in Lancashire, meant to say he lived in a "terraced house." The boy was interviewed by Lancashire Police at his home the next day, and the family laptop was examined. The 2015 Counter Terrorism and Security Act means that teachers have been legally obliged to report any suspected extremist behavior to police since July. Miqdaad Versi, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, the UK's largest umbrella group for Islamic associations, said he was aware of dozens of cases similar to that of the schoolboy.

315 comments

  1. Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    A muslim.
    He is,
    suspicious.

    1. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Bullshit

    2. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have no fear of Muslims, and I'm not one. I do have a fear of pretentious pseudo-artists who feel that whatever they slop on the wall should be immediately revered by all who see it, and feel that they should be immune from all criticism no matter how well deserved.

    3. Re:Polaroid Obama by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      And by "criticism" you mean "gunned down by maniacs"?

    4. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If by "gunned down by maniacs" you mean some geek clicks a drop down and down mods bad art, then yes, that's criticism.

    5. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If not for the subject line, I might have bought that.

    6. Re:Polaroid Obama by RoLi · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Those poor Muslims - they rape women, blow up civilians and plunder, and the whole world doesn't want to live with them!

      What's wrong with the whole world?

    7. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      found the bigot

    8. Re: Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Read the news asswipe. Facts != bigotry. It's getting old.

    9. Re:Polaroid Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's full of assholes like you who conflate the actions of a microscopic minority with the majority.

    10. Re: Polaroid Obama by Xman73x · · Score: 0

      Who cares let them all suffer for what they do behind our backs in those mosques there rapists and child molesters! And God knows as to what there teaching children today! He could've had a bomb or planned one anyway, heck if I was living in the UK I'd be suspicious as well.ðY"

    11. Re: Polaroid Obama by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      The error in your comment is that you assume all Muslims behave as you describe. The reality is that the crimes you mention would be committed in far greater numbers by Christians. But the religion isn't deemed to be relevant in that case. Nor is it relevant when a Muslim behaves badly. A person who commits those crimes is a bad person no matter what their religion. That's simple enough that even a bigot should be able to understand it. Maybe.

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    12. Re:Polaroid Obama by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      A muslim. He is, suspicious.S/muslim/non-white/ No further edits necessary.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    13. Re:Polaroid Obama by TheReal_sabret00the · · Score: 2

      Those poor Christians - they rape children, drone civilians and plunder, and the whole world doesn't want to live with them! What's wrong with the whole world?

  2. News for Nerds? by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They should change the slogan to "Half-Story Clickbait to Bring the Foaming-at-the-Mouth People to the Site". Not catchy enough?

    1. Re:News for Nerds? by jdavidb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They should change the slogan to "Half-Story Clickbait to Bring the Foaming-at-the-Mouth People to the Site". Not catchy enough?

      Nerds are frequently concerned with stories about rights and injustice.

    2. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BBC cares not for your clicks.

    3. Re:News for Nerds? by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really? Since when? 5 years ago this story wouldn't even have been submitted to Firehose, much less been posted to the front page. However AmiMoJo has a special relationship, so he can post whatever he wants.

    4. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this story isn't for us.

    5. Re:News for Nerds? by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      Well it's not a million miles away from the schoolboy's clock mistaken for bomb story. Although I'm pretty sure someone would have said that didn't belong on this site either.

    6. Re:News for Nerds? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

      However AmiMoJo has a special relationship, so he can post whatever he wants.

      It's true. Years ago I bought a $5 subscription to get rid of the ads on mobile (before adblock was available). There was actually a problem processing it and I felt most embarrassed having to get support involved to process it. Strung that baby out for years.

      Ever since then I've enjoyed a special relationship with the /. editors. They grudgingly tolerate my impertinence, and occasional wrath directed at them (especially around the who beta era, when my signature was less than cordial). They know I'm cheap, the kind of bastard who subscribes for $5 once a decade, but they also know I spend more time posting here than working and these days that's becoming a rare thing.

      Thing is, I just love the down-votes I get whenever I post some SJW bullshit, so I'm kinda addicted now. Sometimes I travel and get withdrawal because I'm stuck on an aircraft with no internet for 12 hours. Well, I mean they have internet, but I'm too cheap to pay for it.

      I used to come here for the insightful commentary and interesting debate, now it's mostly just to annoy MRAs and anti-feminists. I can see you have a rather high ID so are probably a millennial who joined yesterday, but the trick is to learn to let go and not read every single story. Just skip over it if you don't like it, or go to firehose and vote for something else. You could even submit some bullshit of your own, and I'll happily down-vote it and then re-submit a more click-baity, left leaning version myself. Your welcome.

      Obligatory xkcd.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:News for Nerds? by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      5 years ago this story wouldn't even have been submitted to Firehose

      Right. But in 2001, that fucktard Bin Laden went and crashed 4 planes into the US. And then that fucktard George W Bush went and overreacted to it.

      And here we are, still dealing with terrorist bullshit and western democracy pants-wetting. I don't like it any better than you do, but it is the world we live in.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    8. Re:News for Nerds? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      it is relevant to tech if it's an autocorrect error. maybe the boy meant tourist house, like a boarding house.

    9. Re:News for Nerds? by JazzLad · · Score: 3, Informative
      Can you not even read TFS?

      The pupil, who attends a primary school in Lancashire, meant to say he lived in a "terraced house."

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    10. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The BBC cares not for your clicks.

      Clicks from the US, just like everything else outside their license area, are monetized by the BBC.

    11. Re:News for Nerds? by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      Five years ago was 2011 I think.

    12. Re:News for Nerds? by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Funny

      Everything changed that day! Including the flow of time.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    13. Re:News for Nerds? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Terrorism is a very marketable commodity. Bush didn't overreact. He sold everybody a bill of goods. He opened up a domestic market. The infrastructure and industry built around it now has a life of its own. Why not make every buck you can from it for as long as possible? Fear = Dollars. You know the game. It still seems that the UK is the real pioneer in the business though. I suppose being so much closer to the action would make it that way.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    14. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My welcome what-is-that-again?
      captcha: outvotes

    15. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a real loser lol. If posting shit online to make people mad gets your dick hard, I suggest you go see a therapist. Or a massage therapist to give you a happy ending because you are a sick and twisted person.

    16. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a real loser lol. If posting shit online to make people mad gets your dick hard, I suggest you go see a therapist. Or a massage therapist to give you a happy ending because you are a sick and twisted person.

      While AmiMoJo might be a bit o a troll at times, the post you responded to is so clearly done as a joke that I honestly thing you're the one who needs some professional help. Or both of you. Or all three of us.

      Wait, why didn't I just say "Woosh!"

    17. Re:News for Nerds? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Can you not even read TFS?

      The pupil, who attends a primary school in Lancashire, meant to say he lived in a "terraced house."

      I guess people presume that terrorists can't have nice things... :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    18. Re:News for Nerds? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      maybe that was another autocorrect, or maybe the kid was talking to reporters and the reporters didn't understand properly. What's more likely - a 10 year old boy is conversant enough in home design terms to describe his home as a terraced house, or that he said tourist house, which is the kind of oversimplification that a 10 year old would make, and then the reporter mis heard him? hmm?

    19. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny because it's true.

    20. Re:News for Nerds? by JazzLad · · Score: 2

      "terraced house" is British English for "townhouse" (a common design term)

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    21. Re:News for Nerds? by jdavidb · · Score: 0

      Go to Soylent News, then.

    22. Re:News for Nerds? by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      +6, you just made my day!

    23. Re:News for Nerds? by sumdumass · · Score: 2

      His parents likely have spoken about it in front of him. I knew by the time i was in first grade that i lived in a aframe colonial house and my cousin lived in a modern ranch style house just from my parents talking in front of me.

      But it doesn't really matter. This is a non-story anyways. The kid admitted something, a quick investigation happened and it was determined to be a mistake. If your 10 year old went to school and said you beat him or you leave your crack pipe out when you pass out and your his sister was playing with it, the cops would show up to your house too.

    24. Re:News for Nerds? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Clockboy at least had a tech angle -although a flimsy on when you realize why he did it.

    25. Re:News for Nerds? by Tyrannosaur · · Score: 1

      [claps]

    26. Re:News for Nerds? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to be browbeaten by somebody named Jizz Lad.

    27. Re:News for Nerds? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Yep. I really did have a $5 subscription. I keep forgetting to do another so I can see stories before they hit the front page.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    28. Re:News for Nerds? by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      What an original ad hominem. Your mom must be proud.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    29. Re:News for Nerds? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      But it doesn't really matter. This is a non-story anyways. The kid admitted something, a quick investigation happened and it was determined to be a mistake.

      Except the part about the family laptop being examined, I would agree.

    30. Re:News for Nerds? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      I'm not going to be browbeaten by somebody named Jizz Lad.

      But will you be meatbeaten by him?

    31. Re:News for Nerds? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      this is turning into a really sticky situation...

    32. Re:News for Nerds? by Demize · · Score: 1

      These kinds of stories have been around forever. Slashdot was around for the aftermath of both 9/11 and Columbine. There's always been an interest in personal liberties and personal privacy, especially as it intersects with geek culture.

    33. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Social justice warriors have always wanted to steal nerd culture. However, nerds are too problematic to mix with.

    34. Re:News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You usually have moronic posts and stories, but this was quite entertaining. I love to see you get butthurt as well.

    35. Re: News for Nerds? by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      Social justice warriors have always wanted to steal nerd culture.

      Nerds were posting about rights on slashdot before the term SJW was even born.

    36. Re:News for Nerds? by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Can you not even read TFS?

      Ya, but I just assume that it was wrong from the get go.

    37. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feminist here, SJW bullshit annoys me much like Extremist militant bullshit annoys muslims.

    38. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talking about rights != SJW

    39. Re:News for Nerds? by mattventura · · Score: 1

      The funny part is that every story that seems to not fit manages to get an above-average number of comments. I don't think I've seen an actual tech story in ages with 1000+ comments, yet there's at least been a few shooting and terror related cases with 4-digit comment counts.

    40. Re:News for Nerds? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Except that the BBC story today say that the police and town council claim that it is "untrue to suggest that this situation was brought about by a simple spelling mistake". In other words, they don't think it was a mistake and that the police acted "responsibly and proportionately".

    41. Re:News for Nerds? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well, given a little background with clockboy and his family, i can believe it. Or in other words, i think this might be intentional in order to present a narrative for some other agenda. Cameron just came out threatening deportation of Muslim women who don't learn English and said that the traditional patriarchal society where women are not allowed out of the house without a male family member or suffer violence against them is unacceptable.

      So perhaps this was orchestrated in order to present a narrative that Muslims in the UK are being discriminated against to head off legislation in the works.

      Actually, I find his comments rather insightful if you can find the audio. Of course if you said anything like that in the US, your political career would be over and you would be branded a racists.

    42. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or if his phone autocorrected it because he's a terrorist, I mean a Muslim. Mine auto corrects terrorist as terrace cause I'm a Jew.

    43. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amurica

    44. Re:News for Nerds? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Really? Since when?

      Since stories like that get more comments than the ones about IT.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    45. Re:News for Nerds? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Thing is, that doesn't rule out the possibility that it was a spelling error, since authorities are notoriously prone to lying when they do something stupid and the claim can't be checked.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BBC radio reports here, in the UK said the child also reported being beaten by his uncle and the case was investigated by Child Protection. Seems there was less interest in that, although attempting to controle children by the constant threat of violence is a form of terrorism.

    47. Re: News for Nerds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrace house and townhouse are not synonymous. Terrace is working class often originally without indoor plumbing, townhouses were for middle class or better.

    48. Re:News for Nerds? by TempestRose · · Score: 1

      *clap* *clap*

  3. I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The kid's background doesn't come into it - if any kid had written that they live in a terrorist house, it would be checked out. This is not a case of profiling, no matter how much the Muslim Council of Britain tries, without actually saying so, that it was targeted at a Muslim.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure if the kid was a white transsexual suburban boy he wouldn't be investigated. He only was investigated because he was Muslim and Muslims have a terrorism problem.

    2. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Worse, the counter paranoid argument is that the boy did this on purpose, or was told to do it by his elders, in order to "fix" the school system. I call bullshit that he misspelled terraced as terrorist.

    3. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm not paranoid, but that is likely the case. The same with the "Clock Boy" and his sisters antics. They were all staged.

    4. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1, Troll

      I'm pretty sure he would be.

      Tim McVeigh, The Unabomber, and most recently the yahoos up in the American Northwest who want property "returned to its original owners" - not, incidentally, the tribes who lived there before the white people arrived.

    5. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be. None of your examples have anything to do with the UK either.

    6. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pseudoskepticism isnt much better than paranoia.

    7. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which tribe are you referring to? The one present at the time the white European migrant came? Or the tribe before that where displaced by that tribe? Or the other tribe way back? Or the first human that got there first but was just passing by because it wanted to go south some more?

      Which one of the previous savages occupant are the original owner? Make up you mind, are we all equally 'of the same human race' migrant? Or are some race better than other? Asuming you are not a racist person, you will pick the first option. In which case the 'original owner' are the original owner from this time period. e.g.: our time where the laws of nation know as the United State of America rule this land.

    8. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by T.E.D. · · Score: 2

      I don't doubt that it OUGHT to be checked out no matter whose kid it was that wrote it. If my blonde-haired blue-eyed kid had written it, I still think the responsible thing would be to check it out.

      OTOH, I'm also pretty sure the "check it out" is likely to be carried out a lot more respectfully on a rich white kid's family than on a relatively powerless poor immigrant's family. Particularly if they are from a background that has a rep for producing terrorists. Not that this isn't to be expected too, but it makes this particular error a lot more unfortunate in the muslim kid's house.

      Another angle is how this particular error got made on the kid's part. Most likely they had only encountered both words verbally and didn't realize that they were actually different words with different spellings. So now ask yourself how this little muslim kid came to hear "terrorist" applied to themselves often enough that they thought it was a word for their kind of house?

    9. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if any kid had written that they live in a terrorist house, it would be checked out.

      Even if that were the case, it's still outrageous that teachers apparently feel they are required to report obvious spelling errors and that the police feel they are worth investigating. At any point someone could have said "this is stupid, it's clearly a mistake, let's not waste time and money or cause unnecessary grief for this family", but no one had the guts. This is what happens when you create a climate of fear, where if some kid decides to go to Syria because J1hadi2011 told him to his teachers get blamed for not spotting it.

      Even worse, where is the judicial oversight? Shouldn't searching the family laptop require some kind of check, especially when it is based on such incredibly flimsy evidence? It seems like if someone outside the school/police had looked at it, there might have been a chance for a sane outcome.

      In any case, I really doubt the probability of unfortunate spelling errors being reported to the police is the same for a nice 99% white school in rural Hampshire as for a 99% Muslim school in Birmingham. We need to do a test like those identical CVs with Christian/Muslim names on the top, but with two kids called Dave and Mohammed.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by FireFury03 · · Score: 2

      Even worse, where is the judicial oversight? Shouldn't searching the family laptop require some kind of check, especially when it is based on such incredibly flimsy evidence?

      For police to examine a laptop by force, they would require a search warrant. But in this case they probably asked the family to hand it over voluntarily, which the family agreed to do to make the police go away and stop hassling them.

    11. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The thing is legally the teachers had to report it to the police. Failure to do so could lead to prison.

      The other thing is that children are horrible at keeping secrets and will grass even themselves up all the time. Therefore it was appropriate to investigate and the fact that he was from a Muslim household in my view makes it extra worthwhile following up. Now that the Irish terrorist threat has all but gone in the UK, statistically that fact makes it more likely that it was not just a mistake and hence worth investigating.

      Imagine his family had disappeared to Syria in a couple of months to join Daesh?

    12. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Whenever I play cops and robbers with my kids, I make sure they know they have the right to ask to see a search warrant. It's funny to watch a four year old asking to see a warrant.

    13. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      This is not a case of profiling, no matter how much the Muslim Council of Britain tries, without actually saying so, that it was targeted at a Muslim.

      I don't see anything in TFA to suggest that anybody is claiming it was anything to do with "profiling". Just that it was an over-reaction. Just in case this needs a UK-to-US translation: "terraced house" is British English for "townhouse" (but usually smaller). I'm not sure "terrorist house" makes sense - but it seems like a highly plausible Autocorrupt* or speech recognition goof for something like "terrised hosue".

      Of course, we are relying on the clickbait media, so maybe it will emerge in a few days (after the kid has met the Queen and been given a scholarship to Eton) that he didn't really write an essay but just re-used bits from an old Radio Shack one but, on the face of it, this seems to be a clear cut case of teachers interpreting the law ad absurdium. Which, of course, will lead to a backlash and a "cry wolf" effect. Plus, essays don't explode, catch fire or electrocute people.

      (*I recently sent my colleagues an email saying that I was "having problems sorting out the wife" - mark my words, one of these days, Autocorrect is going to bring about the Acropolis!)

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    14. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by ComputerGeek01 · · Score: 1

      Exactly, the only profiling here is being done by the press, otherwise this stuff happens all of the time. Even back in my day, I grew up as a middle child a little less than 18 months from my older brother. I kid you not, every other week one of us would come into school with a black-eye or a busted up lip. Was it because our parents were beating us? No, it was because one was getting back at the other for the previous week. Eventually, by law, the school had to investigate and the only thing they found is what they already knew; that my brother and I were a couple of assholes. It's the same principle here. The school has to investigate even the slightest possibility based on the evidence in front of them. They knew ahead of time what they would find in both cases but they had to do it anyway. The only reason this is in the news is because the boy is Muslim and he made a typo.

    15. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely correct. That's because generally trans men can just be men without assholes like you needing to act like trans folks get special privileges.

      Do you have any fucking clue what you just wrote?

      Transsexual boy: A person assigned the female gender at birth living as a boy. Brangelina's son would be an example last I heard.

      Transsexual girl: A person assigned the male gender at birth living as a girl. This is what you thought you were talking about, but you're just a stupid willfully ignorant cunt.

      Your point about this story being stupid stands.

      Disclaimer: The term transsexual has been deprecated and is only used by feminists and other willfully ignorant bigots like 110010001000 who have victimhood complexes.

    16. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by silentcoder · · Score: 0

      Nope. Even if your idiotic reasoning was not idiotic it would not lead to the conclusion you cite.
      It would lead to the conclusion that the very concept of an "original" owner is ridiculous and invalidate the claims of the people you are defending just as much as you claim it invalidates the claims of native Americans.
      Very simply put - it would mean that the only ownership that exists at all is whoever the deed says it belongs to at this moment.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    17. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol. Cops never look into these groups anymore. It's way easier to target brown people since nobody gives a crap about them

    18. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Really, you don't see any problems with this pre-crime stuff. If things go in the direction they seem to be going lately in 10 years you won't be able to say anything in public that is even slightly unusual. Otherwise you will be "checked out". Bright future indeed.

    19. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Flavianoep · · Score: 1

      How can one misspell terraced as terrorist? Did he use autocorrect? I would demand more details if I really cared.

      --
      Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
    20. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And they the American Northwest "YallQaeda" folks are being allowed to come and go from the Federal land as they please even after it was found out that they are wrecking havoc on the lands. So you have armed folks taking over Federal lands, ruining them, and they are allowed to come and go without being arrested? Do you really think they would be treated the same way if they were 150 armed black men or 150 armed Muslims?

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    21. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Saddam's Iraq, teachers were compelled to report any "suspicious" behaviour to the "authorities". Children were "encouraged" to report any "suspicious" behaviour to teachers. An account of this is written here (http://www.amazon.co.uk/was-Saddams-Prisoner-Abu-Jameel/dp/1494864789). Microsoft didnt invent FUD - politicians have used it throughout the ages.

    22. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by KGIII · · Score: 1

      This. Had a non-Muslim done this then it would have been the same result.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    23. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I don't think I've ever called you an idiot before. Well, there's a first time for most anything. Idiot.

      Seriously, we take terrorism pretty damned serious these days - regardless of the source. Also, what's 1288 mean?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    24. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Informative
      They would investigate anyone. The UK has a LONG history of dealing with non-muslim, non-arab terrorists.

      2000 1 June: Real IRA bomb on Hammersmith Bridge, London.
      2000 20 September: Real IRA fired an RPG-22 at the MI6 HQ in London.
      2001 4 March: Real IRA detonated a car bomb outside the BBC's main news centre in London. One London Underground worker suffered deep cuts to his eye from flying glass and some damage was caused to the front of the building.[21] (See 2001 BBC bombing)
      2001 16 April: Hendon post office bombed by the Real IRA.
      2001 6 May: Real IRA detonated a bomb in a London postal sorting office. One person was injured.
      2001 3 August: Real IRA bomb explodes in Ealing, West London, injuring seven people. (See 2001 Ealing bombing)
      2001 4 November: Real IRA car bomb in Birmingham.

      If you want, you can go back to the beginning of the '70s - just a bunch of white terrorists until July 2005.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    25. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I don't know. When I was a wee little idiot, I misspelled one of my middle names over and over again - the teachers actually thought it was "Luck" instead of "Luke." Of course, I was in very early elementary school.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    26. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure if the kid was a white transsexual suburban boy he wouldn't be investigated. He only was investigated because he was Muslim and Muslims have a terrorism problem.

      I'm pretty sure you are wrong. Children and their families have long been under scrutiny if the child says or does something in school. Some times it gets goofy, such as when a child draws a picture that causes concern, and it might have only been a character in a video game, but I can tell you, if they suspect malfeasance or abuse, they take a good long look at it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    27. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Could you have at least read the summary? "The 2015 Counter Terrorism and Security Act means that teachers have been legally obliged to report any suspected extremist behavior to police since July."

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    28. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I was about his age, I couldn't tell the difference between "Skull" and "School". They just sounded identical to me, so I would use the spellings interchangeably. Note that I don't have any learning deficits or other disabilities, and I wasn't the only one I knew who had similar word mixups. Young children just sometimes hear words as being the same. Especially with an accent, Terraced and Terrorist can certainly sound similar enough that he could mix up the spellings. This definitely sounds like an honest mistake to me.

    29. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be. None of your examples have anything to do with the UK either.

      Do you have children? Although I suspect your transexual dig was directed at Barbara Hudson, When my son was in school, there were cases of white children who would write or draw something, and it would be checked out.

      Did someone make this a UK only comment section?

      I have no problem with them looking into the boy's comments either. It isn't infringement. Could even have been a cry for help, and imagine if we ignored a cry for help.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    30. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by simplypeachy · · Score: 1

      Sure he'd be checked out. It would go like this:

      Teacher: Hey Johnny, what makes your house a terrorist house?
      Johnny: It has houses on both sides that go allllll the way down the whole street, Miss!
      Teacher: Terraced houses look really cosy all snugged up to one another!

    31. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      "pre-crime"? Are you serious? 50 years ago, if you had written that you had a bomb in your house it would have been investigated. If you had written that you had forcibly had sex with a minor, or a press to print counterfeit bills, or that you had a cache of stolen goods, same thing. This is not pre-crime.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    32. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by prunus.avium · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...Note that I don't have any learning deficits or other disabilities...

      Umm. I hate to be the one to break this to you...

    33. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > if any kid had written that they live in a terrorist house, it would be checked out

      This is dumb.

      Do you know what I would have done? As the teacherI'd have talked about the kids in class, and asked around. First I'd have asked little Jenny about the nice story about her dog-house she wrote. Then I'd asked little Jimmy about the awesome treehouse he described. Then little billy-muhammed and asked "Oh, can you describe a bit more about the house you live in" and after two sentences I'd have known if I either need to correct him on "terrace" or if I have to call the police.

      The teachers involved, if the story did happen this way, are true dumbasses. As teacher you constantly are exposed to "worrysome" stories from children about all kinds of things and checking them out without panicing is the first thing you do, it dissolves like 95% into nothing and the rest you then can take care of. Without panic.

    34. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Jiro · · Score: 1

      I don't see anything in TFA to suggest that anybody is claiming it was anything to do with "profiling"

      Why did they mention the boy is Muslim, if not to imply that he was reported because he was Muslim?

    35. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Well I have a lot of imagination. Since you're mindlessly supporting a ridiculous situation you must be trying to divert attention away from yourself. Therefore you must have something to hide. Let's investigate that laptop of yours. I mean, just imagine the things you might be hiding!

      The moral is, police should have A LOT of reasons in order to investigate you. If any silly hint is enough you get an obscenity.

    36. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      And then again, a teacher worth his salt would have asked the boy after class what he meant when he wrote it. Just to verify what was actually going on, you know. Instead of sending the police to raid their house...

      This is almost a case of "swatting", by accident.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    37. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by St.Creed · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Dude... take those meds. You need 'em.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    38. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should have read the article, or at least the summary. Teachers are obliged to report such incidents, same as they are obliged to report anything that might be a case of child abuse.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    39. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Does this really need to be checked out? I mean, more than just the teacher asking if that's what he really meant. Are we so paranoid about terrorism that we need to follow up a 10 year old's spelling mistake? Do we really think that terrorists call themselves terrorists at home and in front of their kids?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    40. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      They would investigate anyone. The UK has a LONG history of dealing with non-muslim, non-arab terrorists.

      2000 1 June: Real IRA bomb on Hammersmith Bridge, London. 2000 20 September: Real IRA fired an RPG-22 at the MI6 HQ in London. 2001 4 March: Real IRA detonated a car bomb outside the BBC's main news centre in London. One London Underground worker suffered deep cuts to his eye from flying glass and some damage was caused to the front of the building.[21] (See 2001 BBC bombing) 2001 16 April: Hendon post office bombed by the Real IRA. 2001 6 May: Real IRA detonated a bomb in a London postal sorting office. One person was injured. 2001 3 August: Real IRA bomb explodes in Ealing, West London, injuring seven people. (See 2001 Ealing bombing) 2001 4 November: Real IRA car bomb in Birmingham.

      If you want, you can go back to the beginning of the '70s - just a bunch of white terrorists until July 2005.

      OK, so apart from the the Paddies, the Taffs, the Muzzies, animal rights protesters, working class, anarchists, communists, and people from a criminal background; would they have investigated? No. Clear discrimination.

    41. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      cisgendered; Probably the most stupid word I've seen in a long time.

    42. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      What the fuck? Really? Did we not learn the lessons of Columbine, 20 years ago?

      Whenever a kid says something, adults need to take action. NOT to take action is depraved indifference. We had too much of that already, that's how Columbine happened. No matter what the kid says or how crazy it seems - because it CAN happen here. Seriously, did you miss the whole "learning lessons" thing? It sounds like you did.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    43. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      transsexual; Probably the most stupid word I've seen in a long time.

    44. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And they're likely working to rule to protest, and reporting every possible suspicion to undermine the system, which works great in this case.

    45. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if that were the case, it's still outrageous that teachers apparently feel they are required to report obvious spelling errors and that the police feel they are worth investigating. At any point someone could have said "this is stupid, it's clearly a mistake, let's not waste time and money or cause unnecessary grief for this family", but no one had the guts.

      Didn't the summary YOU WROTE say they are legally obliged to do so. Are you suggesting they should have comitted a crime because it's the "right thing(tm)"?

      This is what happens when you create a climate of fear, where if some kid decides to go to Syria because J1hadi2011 told him to his teachers get blamed for not spotting it.

      And there I thought it might have been the potential imprisonment and/or fines.

      Even worse, where is the judicial oversight? Shouldn't searching the family laptop require some kind of check, especially when it is based on such incredibly flimsy evidence?

      Curious you should ask that. Which law(s) have been violated and what is the police's rebuttal to the allegations?

      In any case, I really doubt the probability of unfortunate spelling errors being reported to the police is the same for a nice 99% white school in rural Hampshire as for a 99% Muslim school in Birmingham.

      Muslim is not a skin color.

      We need to do a test like those identical CVs with Christian/Muslim names on the top, but with two kids called Dave and Mohammed.

      In before "1 in 5 Muslims have been investigated for terrorism".

    46. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Type44Q · · Score: 0

      You're a complete fucking twit if you believe those were all IRA attacks and not false flags.

    47. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      I recommend not calling someone an idiot and then immediately following up with two grammatical errors... ;)

    48. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      In-fucking-deed.

    49. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell would impersonate the IRA?

      Go to all that trouble of making & placing a bomb - and not have to glory that goes with it?

    50. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe like the difference between retired and retard.

    51. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      I concur. Too often, a whole shed load of busybodies go stomping in for trivial reasons. And probably 90% of the time or more, if a kid says he lives in a "terrorist house", it's kids being ingenuous.

      On the other hand, he may have been literally repeating a "joke" heard by his elders - "We're a terrorist household". That may or may not be literally true, since it doesn't take a whole lot to get you added to the witchhunt these days. But in the off chance it is true, and the kid's living in a house full of bombs, weapons, and ill-intentioned plotters, it's better to heed the warning.

      So I'm in favor of a few discrete inquiries. Just in case.

      I am not in any way in favor of a full-on SWAT raid as the first step. Leave that until it's determined that there's actually fire under the smoke.

    52. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      The thing is legally the teachers had to report it to the police. Failure to do so could lead to prison.

      I'm sorry, what law results in prison for unreported spelling errors?

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    53. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's natural to assume that on a story about the UK in a comment thread about the same story, that the next reply would still be about the UK.

    54. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some kids have writing problems. Some kids thinks its all OK if they don't get the red wavy line anywhere. Some kids have siblings/friends who thinks it is fun to mess with their schoolwork. Some kids don't make an effort, schoolwork is something meaningless to be filed & forgotten.

    55. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      None of that matters in the business of terrorism. This is advertising to boost sales, therefore, yes to all your questions.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    56. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      No I'm not in favor of casting a wide net and discretely investigating things on the off chance that it's true. I'm in favor of not investigating people unless you have very good reason to.

    57. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by jopsen · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure if the kid was a white....

      I printed a copy of the terrorist handbook back in bording school... and they search my room very week! (or maybe they were just checking up on my cleaning)..

    58. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0

      Well I have a lot of imagination. Since you're mindlessly supporting a ridiculous situation you must be trying to divert attention away from yourself. Therefore you must have something to hide. Let's investigate that laptop of yours. I mean, just imagine the things you might be hiding!

      The moral is, police should have A LOT of reasons in order to investigate you. If any silly hint is enough you get an obscenity.

      Way to pin that needle to the edge, way to go apeshit nuts. Now get back to your compound in Idaho, those rabbit holes don't dig themselves you know.

      See what I did there, ya paranoid shit?

      Schools have always checked into odd statements by children. Whether it's because a kindergarten kid is drawing anatomically correct images of mommy and the dog having sexy time, or some teenager talking about reorganizing the high school with a rifle, you'll have this sort of thing. Nothing new in this at all.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    59. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0

      It's natural to assume that on a story about the UK in a comment thread about the same story, that the next reply would still be about the UK.

      Is this the first time you have been on the intertoobz? It;s called topic drift, and it's inescapable. And complaints about it are right up there with "its" versus "it's".

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    60. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by KGIII · · Score: 0

      Hmm... Careful rereading of my posts doesn't reveal them. Care to educate me?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    61. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is my point exactly. If they got a deed they are the original owner. Perhaps you would have not bother posting a agreeing comment about a 'idiotic reasoning' if you actually took the time to understand what was told.

    62. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit, did I miss the war declaration?

      I knew I shouldn't have skipped the last cisgendered meeting. Does anybody have the minutes?

    63. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Copid · · Score: 1

      Seriously. There are enough cases about really unfair and arbitrary profiling of innocent Muslims that they don't need to use this nonsense example. If a kid writes that he lives in a terrorist house or a meth lab house or that daddy is a bank robber, somebody is going to poke around and see what's up.

      A side lesson: If you actually do plan on running a terrorist house, don't have little kids living in it. They're really bad at keeping secrets.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    64. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      Your comment is oblig but I'll respond anyway. The point is that the SJWs have caused transphobia to snowball so far out of control I am now being denied medical care locally. I try to find a new doctor since the old one retired, and I get the runaround.

      Is it because I'm a man and am being held accountable for what a gaslighting asshole manager did to a female programmer at my employer? Am I being held accountable for what a loudmouth doctor kept going on about that was seriously pissing off the committee? Am I being held accountable for the way the cisfemales in the accounting department distorted information to me that impacted my estimate? Is it a feminist objection or just a run of the mill religious objection? Combination of both?

      I only have my meds until the end of March.

      I did go too far with GP. What will happen without my meds is extremely distressing to me. Hint: they're not just cosmetic when they also have the side effect of preventing me from experiencing physical circumcision pain. If I cannot continue my meds, I am prepared to take drastic measures to ensure I will not begin experiencing excruciating pain again.

      Thanks, Obama!

      Feel free to mod offtopic.

    65. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, at the risk of being whooshed I'll bite....

      No, adults do NOT need to take action whenever a kid says something. Or rather, *appropriate* action should be taken like:

      Teacher: "Achmed, can you explain what kind of house you live in?"
      Achmed: "Well, we've got these neat glass doors that we use to sit outside....."
      Teacher: "You mean a 'terrace?'"
      Achmed: "Yeah."
      Teacher: "Ok, you spell that word t e r r a c e. OK? Bye-bye."

      Action done.

    66. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      You failed to highlight "suspected extremist behavior". It doesn't say they are legally obliged to report every damn meaningless thing.

    67. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell would impersonate the IRA?

      I'm trying to work out whether this is an incomplete pun about the difference between the "Provisional" and the "Real" IRA. But now I'm mentally replaying that scene where Alan where he books a hotel room with the latter name, and I have a hankering to watch the episode...

    68. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      And how many of them were real? Most? Some? None? My point stands - the UK has a LONG history of investigating white terrorist threats.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    69. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by nytes · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with them looking into the boy's comments either. It isn't infringement. Could even have been a cry for help, and imagine if we ignored a cry for help.

      We just had a little incident out here, last month, where some neighbor noticed odd activity around a house but didn't report it because she didn't want to be accused of racial profiling. It made a little stir in the local news. Fourteen people died.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    70. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      I'm very sorry if you're in pain and denied access to medication you need. That really, truly sucks. My reply was rather acerbic because your comments were so far off-topic I could not see any relationship between the topic and your post. Sorry for that.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    71. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with them looking into the boy's comments either. It isn't infringement. Could even have been a cry for help, and imagine if we ignored a cry for help.

      We just had a little incident out here, last month, where some neighbor noticed odd activity around a house but didn't report it because she didn't want to be accused of racial profiling. It made a little stir in the local news. Fourteen people died.

      I think that on Slashdot, the crypto-libertarians think that report cards and receipts are an unsufferable invasion of privacy.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    72. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Writing that you live in a terrorist house is not even a little bit suspect?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    73. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you have armed folks taking over Federal lands, ruining them, and they are allowed to come and go without being arrested?

      This happens every year. It's called hunting season.

    74. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, the only profiling here is being done by the press

      Funny how the comment just above yours in my view says this:

      the fact that he was from a Muslim household in my view makes it extra worthwhile following up

      Many of my conservative friends believe profiling isn't just acceptable, not doing it is stupid.

    75. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      You can't even imagine an accent where they sound identical?

    76. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Now you must be really stupid. Nobody takes a gun to take back property they already own. By your own reasoning its impossible to return land to "original owners" so your critique of the GP actually ends up being against the same people he was criticising.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    77. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not focus on education instead of on nannying? Nobody really cares if a few of the children are living bad home lives, that's for them and their families to sort out if they are so inclined.

    78. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, 99% of the time I think I'd be with you, but a 10 year old literally reported that he lived in a terrorist house. That doesn't deserve firebombing or SWAT teams but it does deserve investigation. There was a police interview and according to the summary (not backed up by the article) a laptop examined. It's not made clear if the parents/owners consented to the laptop search (a warrant lets you search it without consent; the police can look at just about anything if you freely consent to it).

      This isn't like the clock kid, where he was arrested in clear violation of his rights for a thing that's not actually suspicious (as evidenced by the teacher putting the "bomb" or "bomb trigger" in his desk). A 10 year old reported he lived in a terrorist house, police checked it out, found out it was a spelling mistake, story ends. I don't even see evidence that there was anything better for police to be doing at that moment. Police are the sort of thing where you hire for your peak needs, not your average needs....

    79. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wonder why any Muslim would ever consider some violent attack on society when they are obviously held in such high regard and treated as first rate citizens in the eyes of the law and also by those who enforce the law. It completely escapes me how they could ever become disenchanted with the establishment and then resort to violence due to their anger and frustration.

    80. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Teachers there do not "feel" that they are required to report, the law states that they must report this sort of thing. We're no longer living in an age where anyone is allowed to say "this is a mistake, let's skip it" when it comes to schools. Flexibility is being removed from educators.

    81. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Did we learn the right lessons though? Learn the lesson to immediately jump on the suspected case and call in law enforcement as step one, or learn the lesson to clamp down on bullying early rather than let it fester over time?

    82. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      Eh, don't sweat it. I'm very anxious for my appointment next week. I'm also very apprehensive that I will be denied a prescription. I've been lashing out, and I deserve to be chided for that.

      I'm certain that the amputation I will need to perform (by myself, but I won't do it outside of walking distance to an urgent care registration desk, probably in my car in the parking lot) if I still do not have access to a refill at the end of March is relatively safe. After all, they've had eunuchs since ancient times. It will be effective, and then perhaps I can quit my bitching.

      Bonus if what they charge me is less than a proper orchiectomy. I'll be able to wear even sexier jeans!

    83. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by mjwx · · Score: 2

      They would investigate anyone. The UK has a LONG history of dealing with non-muslim, non-arab terrorists. [snip, sorry :)]

      If you want, you can go back to the beginning of the '70s - just a bunch of white terrorists until July 2005.

      Whilst yes, this is true there have been a disturbing number of over-reactions like this one directed against Muslims specifically that stand out from the increasing number of general over-reactions by the UK's various constabularies. I think that is the problem here.

      During the troubles, when Ireland was sending bombers to England, were ordinary Irish harassed? When anti-GMO protests went on, did they stake out vegans?

      It was a 10 year old boy who malpropped a word. The correct thing to do (and what would have been done in my day before the media made out like every Muslim is a terrorist) would have been for the teacher to ask little Achmed what he meant and corrected him. Even if the teacher over-reacted, the police should not have taken it as seriously as to raid someone's house.

      Personally I blame the mass media, organisations like the Daily Mail that write at best, cliche laden, hyperbolic nonsense (or in most cases, cliche ridden, utter fabrications) to convince people that every brown person is a terrorist waiting behind a bush to do nasty things to them. Domestic violence is a bigger problem in the UK but the headline "Chavs, Stop Beating Your Wives" would eliminate their target audience and nothing sells papers like fear from unsubstantiated, unquantifiable and nebulous threats.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    84. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In an idiotic country made up of chickens scared of their own shadow, yes. In a civilized and mature society no. You are trying to normalized a behavior that is simply unacceptable.

    85. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by bestweasel · · Score: 1

      "During the troubles, when Ireland was sending bombers to England, were ordinary Irish harassed?"

      Not only harassed but framed and sent to prison for years (Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 - think I got the score right). In those days too, racism was much more mainstream and it was commonplace for TV comics (and everyone else) to tell jokes about how stupid the Irish apparently were.

      Now that racism is frowned upon in decent society, Muslims can be picked on instead. This has some advantages: it's not racism but they're often easy to spot and they're mostly not white.

      Back to something like the topic, when will we see the first death by auto-correct?

    86. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The IRA phoned up and claimed them. How would that work if it was a false flag?
      "Today the IRA bombed Oxford Street."
      "Oh no we didn't."

      Feckin' eejit.

    87. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by worf_mo · · Score: 1

      The details ore obviously classified, but unconfirmed sources claim that a former POTUS has been asked for spelling advice lately. Coincidence, you say?

    88. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The kid's background doesn't come into it - if any kid had written that they live in a terrorist house, it would be checked out. "

      Excellent lying on social media. Really well done. You will be rewarded.

    89. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by naich · · Score: 1

      Or the teacher could have asked him what he meant by "terrorist house" and cleared it all up in seconds, with no police time and money wasted.

    90. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Imagine his family had disappeared to Syria in a couple of months to join Daesh?

      Maybe they just went there to get good seasoning for their cooking. You know, Mrs Daesh?

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    91. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Careful rereading of my posts doesn't reveal them. Care to educate me?

      I don't think I've ever called you an idiot before. Well, there's a first time for most anything. Idiot. Seriously, we take terrorism pretty damned serious these days - regardless of the source. Also, what's 1288 mean?

      In the UK the "most" would be "almost" , but maybe it's just a normal colloquialism in the US? However, "serious" should definitely be "seriously". And I'm not sure you can abbreviate "what does" to "what's".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    92. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Most is fine (at least here in the US) and here's a citation for the latter: http://english.stackexchange.c...

      Thank you for taking the time to offer correction because I actually continually work on my grammar.

      So, I stand by my calling them an idiot. ;-) I don't normally do that but I'll make an exception.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    93. Re: I'm not seeing the problem here by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      In an idiotic country made up of chickens scared of their own shadow, yes. In a civilized and mature society no. You are trying to normalized a behavior that is simply unacceptable.

      We're not talking the US, where everyone is so afraid of gun violence that everyone feels they need a gun to protect themselves from everyone else who feels the need to have a gun to protect themselves from everyone else who has a gun ... :-)

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    94. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.google.ca/search?q=new+black+panther&tbm=isch

      Regressive scum. Don't be so hypocrite.

    95. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      This took place in the United Kingdom the applicable piece of legislation is the The Terrorism Act 2000 as amended by Counter-Terrorism Act 2008. This places a legal duty to report to the police as soon as practically possible any suspicions of any terrorist activity. Failure to report activity can be punished by a fine or imprisonment.

      As I said children are hopeless at keeping secrets and will grass themselves and others up all the time without realizing they are doing it. So while in hindsight it would appear to have been a spelling mistake to the teacher in the class that "spelling mistake" and frankly as an appalling Dyslexic speller the idea that terraced can be misspelt as terrorist is a asking a lot, created a reasonable suspicion that had to be reported under the law.

    96. Re:I'm not seeing the problem here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine his family had disappeared to Syria in a couple of months to join Daesh?

      I am imagining "Freedom" to think and believe whatever you want in life. If you had an idea in your head to move to foreign country and then live your life the way you want... why should you be stopped?

  4. THAT will teach him to spell!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also, he might want to go see the world as a tourist.

    1. Re:THAT will teach him to spell!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, then he can submit to being stripped, probed and otherwise humiliated just like the rest of us.

    2. Re:THAT will teach him to spell!!! by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      I noticed some link a friend had posted with a news parody site with the headline "Schoolboy anxiously spellchecks homework after writing about the iris in his garden".

  5. They need to investigate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Authorities should be asking questions. It would not matter what religion the students family practiced

    1. Re:They need to investigate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If some kid was accused for anti-semitic speech, would it matter if their parents where know to be neo-nazi?

      Sure the vast majority of Nazi are peaceful, but they still believe in a hateful ideology that is prone to breed extremist.

      I don't believe it is unfair to consider possible terrorist threat more serious from a Islamist than from any other stupid teenager that would make stupid jokes to get attention.

      If you believe that race, religion or other background should be irrelevant then you MUST be equally intolerant of all the black peoples saying nigger all the time. RACIST! HATE SPEECH! Persecute single everyone one of them because their racial and cultural background is irrelevant! In other words, don't use common sense. Disregard context. And punish them to the full extent of the institution rules or applicable laws.

  6. You know it's true. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have become a society of terrified people. God damn we are fucking pussies.

    1. Re:You know it's true. by koan · · Score: 1

      But we aren't really, not any more than we were before mass media.
      It's the constant news "telling" you what it is and how you should feel about it.

      Stop consuming mass media, watch your fear level drop.

      Try it.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  7. Plot twist by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 1

    Even though the boy made a simple mistake, it won't take the great British press long to find some super tenuous connection to an act of terrorism and link him to it.

    1. Re:Plot twist by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, yeah. It's like Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.

      If you try hard enough, you can likely find a super tenuous connection to an act of terrorism to almost anybody.

      Somewhere there's a bizarre chain of crap which says "Rik Sweeney went to school with a guy who went to the same mosque as a guy who washed the floors where a guy was in the same English class with the guys who delivered pizza to guys who did the Boston Marathon shootings". Ta da, you're linked to terrorism.

      If you go chasing shadows you can make up any old crap. It doesn't make it evidence of a damned thing.

      The problem is both the press and the idiots who claim they're trying to protect our freedoms treat these tenuous links as if they are meaningful.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Plot twist by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      It's likely that some terrorist at one point lived in or near a terraced house. That should be connection enough for the super sleuths at BBC news.

    3. Re:Plot twist by NotDrWho · · Score: 0

      ...or it will come out that this was all a publicity stunt orchestrated by the kid's dad.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:Plot twist by tinkerton · · Score: 2

      Don't forget the public pressure. Perceived cost of doing nothing about something that turns out to be dangerous: huge. Perceived cost of getting up all in arms about nothing: tiny. We hardly have a concept of risks we should accept . Deliberately doing nothing is hard to sell.

    5. Re:Plot twist by qwijibo · · Score: 1

      But once you know that chain of events, the NSA can justify why they need surveillance data on everyone who ever ate a pizza, took an english class, walked on a floor, or cast a shadow.

      The data is there, all known terrorists show up in one or more of those groups.

    6. Re:Plot twist by matfud · · Score: 1

      Apart from a mexican with no legs, a gluten intollerence, and who is scared of the monsters lurking in the shadows.

    7. Re:Plot twist by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      For some odd reason, that almost exactly describes a chihuahua. ;-)

      A quivering little ball of acid reflux, hostility, and fear. Are they supposed to shake like that?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    8. Re:Plot twist by qwijibo · · Score: 1

      Yes, El Chapo was able to hide in the natural blind spot this surveillance created. However, the NSA spokesperson said "Not an issue, he's the DEA's problem. Let me make this perfectly clear: his shenanigans are clearly not our department."

  8. Damn autocorrect by paiute · · Score: 5, Funny

    A man received the following text from his neighbor:
    I am so sorry Bob. I've been riddled with guilt and I have to confess. I have been helping myself to your wife, day and night whenever you're not around. In fact, probably more than you. I do not get it at home, but that's no excuse. I can no longer live with the guilt and I hope you will accept my sincerest apology and with my promise that it won't ever happen again.
    The man, anguished and betrayed, went into his bedroom, grabbed his gun, and without a word, shot his wife and killed her.
    A few moments later, a second text came in:
    Damn autocorrect! I meant "wifi, not "wife" . . . . .

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Damn autocorrect by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      Such things happen. I tried telling my girlfriend I was an ecoturist via text, and now I'm stuck in a hut in the Amazon basin!

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  9. Terrace by DougReed · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I live on a street called a 'Terrace' ... when I first moved here, and changed all of my magazine subscription addresses... one of them came next month addressed to "S.E. Terrorist"....

    1. Re:Terrace by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      Was this a few years ago? Because if it was recent then I'd worry whenever there was a knock at the door.

    2. Re:Terrace by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The story doesn't say but I'm wondering if this is a spell checker mishap. Carelessness or lack of reading skills and clicked on the wrong thing. I'm moderately literate and I've done it as an adult.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. Poor kid by koan · · Score: 1

    Now he has to meet the president and get an all expenses paid trip through school.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Poor kid by JustNiz · · Score: 2

      This is in England. They don't have a president.

    2. Re:Poor kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is in england. all they have is cameron. spare the child.

    3. Re:Poor kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The President of the USA is both head of state and head of government.

      Cameron is head of government, but the Queen is head of state.

  11. Double standard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he was transgendered, a black female, athiest or a lesbian feminist, he would have received an award for this paper.

    He got arrested because Muslim.

  12. Officials by internerdj · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not much of one to sympathize with politicians but I'm pretty certain this is what we sound like to someone in office:
    Terrorist attack...
    Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."
    Does something...
    Constituents: "Why are you attacking the freedoms of all these innocent people? You are being racist and evil."
    Terrorist attack...
    Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."

    1. Re:Officials by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can either be free or you can have the illusion of safety. Most people willingly choose the latter.

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

      That's an excuse. We all know that people are masses of lemmings that just follow and think what they are told anyway. If they were told that there is no problem with terrorists, then there would be no terrorist problem. We are told what we are told because there is some sort of an agenda, most likely to make money and grab power.

      Most of politicians are ponds in this game too. It's just an illusion that they make policy. Whose idea was to introduce the x-ray scanners on people in airports? Not an elected official, but the person that actually had an economic interest in adding them (owned lost of stock). Whose idea was there to have extrajudicial killings? Definitely not elected officials, they just sign the orders. Hint: there were satellite controlled unmanned "drones" since 1990s, but the new owner made billions, not the old owner. And whose idea was it to give banks free cash since 2008? I guess you can ask any of the Goldman's appointees in most central banks.

      So why are we having a terrorist problem without a terrorist problem? Because fear sells better than sex and some people would sell out the future to make money for themselves today.

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

      False dichotomy. Paying for legit police work counts as "doing something" without attacking freedoms.

    4. Re:Officials by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Implying that politicians listen to constituents?

      Occams razor says this is just a conspiracy against the people. That's a far more likely scenario than a politician listening to constituents.

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

      I read what you wrote as:

      Terrorist attack...
      Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."
      Does something that reduces constituent's freedom...
      Terrorist attack...
      Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."
      Does something that reduces constituent's freedom...
      Terrorist attack...
      Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."
      Does something that reduces constituent's freedom...
      Terrorist attack...
      Constituents: "Why didn't you stop all these people from dying? Do something to keep it from happening again."

      Ad infinitum... The fact is, no matter what you do, you can not stop crazy people from doing crazy things. Absolute security is absolutely impossible.

    6. Re:Officials by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      Your analysis completely leaves out the imperialist interventions that create the environment where people would want to employ terrorism.

    7. Re:Officials by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Illusions are easy to create. Sure, we had one terrorist attack slip through but think of the thousands we prevented but weren't allowed to tell you about!

    8. Re:Officials by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      That's a part of creating the illusion of safety. We intervene militarily and thus we have "done something". That's what the public wants. If the governments sit back and debate to invade or not to invade the public complains that they do nothing and that they want those terrorists squashed like bugs. Never mind that the number dead from terrorist attacks is miniscule. So we go in and stomp around and create even more terrorists, then the public says good job but too bad this is a bigger problem than we first thought, maybe we should keep stomping around and see what happens?

    9. Re:Officials by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Some of the deadliest attacks are just random crazies. I don't think I care if the person that kills me is a terrorist or just some bat-shit crazy asshole. It's not gonna matter in the end.

  13. Okay, let's all get outraged by NotDrWho · · Score: 0

    Only to find out later that this was all a "Pay attention to me and my oppression!" stunt, set up by the kid's dad.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People like you are just brownshirts in waiting. Your willingness to believe in false narratives like "clock boy's father told him to do it" is insidious.

    2. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      No, sadly, the brownshirts of today are the SJW's who would happily abolish basic freedoms like free speech, freedom of association, and freedom of religion in favor of enforcing their own ideology by force of law. And they're not in waiting. They're already here.

      And I say that as a former liberal who is no longer welcome in the movement due to my belief in the freedom of expression above all.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    3. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      And I say that as a former liberal who is no longer welcome in the movement due to my belief in the freedom of expression above all.

      Do you believe that I should free to legally say "I will pay $1,000,000 to whoever murders $PERSON"? Note: I've got no intention of paying up, so it's speech only.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by NotDrWho · · Score: 1

      I suppose that depends on whether you're doing an stand-up routine or talking to a hitman at the time.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    5. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inciting violence. Not free speech. Decided centuries ago.

    6. Re:Okay, let's all get outraged by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I suppose that depends on whether you're doing an stand-up routine or talking to a hitman at the time.

      The latter, or possibly just announcing it publicly and stating it is no joke. But I emphasise that I would never pay, so it is literally just speech, i.e. me talking.

      If you accept that the latter is and should be illegal, then you are agreeing with the criminalisation some forms of speech. Again talking to a hitman is literally speech. If so, you agree that some sorts of speech are sufficiently dangerous that they should be illegal. IOW you do not support unrestricted speech above all.

      If you agree, means that you think there is a line for speech which should not be crossed under penalty of law. That means you do not fundamentally disagree with people who want more restrictions, it merely means you have different opinions on where the line should be drawn.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  14. A Freudian slip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'nough said.

    1. Re:A Freudian slip by mark-t · · Score: 1

      While it might initially look that way, I think that this exposes two problems, the first is the kid's fault and the second is the schools. The first problem is with people who use automated spellchecking and do not proof read what they wrote before committing it as a final work. The second is that it shows it is probably a mistake to assume that anything that is output from a computer which might looks peculiar is necessarily anything that resembles what the person that allegedly wrote it actually meant to say. Society is already adapting in this respect to text messaging, because of how outlandishly bad autocorrect goofups can be, but we haven't really similarly adapted to such spellchecking corrections on home computers or laptops.

    2. Re:A Freudian slip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he were an Anglican I might agree, but he's not, and I don't.

    3. Re:A Freudian slip by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I might suggest that it would be a very a poor reflection of your character that such an observation might genuinely influence your judgement.

  15. Out of the mouth of babes.. by daq+man · · Score: 3, Funny

    When I was a little kid I wrote "When I grow up I want to be a scientist and work in a lavatory". I did grow up to be a scientist but, fortunately, I work in a laboratory.

    1. Re:Out of the mouth of babes.. by jbeaupre · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are you surrounded by chrome and tile? Running water nearby? Odd smells? People stopping by, crapping all over you, then leaving? Do people drop off pieces of paper to you?

      You might be in that lavatory you wrote about.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    2. Re:Out of the mouth of babes.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you surrounded by chrome and tile? Running water nearby? Odd smells? People stopping by, crapping all over you, then leaving? Do people drop off pieces of paper to you?

      You might be in that lavatory you wrote about.

      Some days it's difficult to tell the lavatory users apart from the middle managers.

      Okay, okay. MOST days.

    3. Re:Out of the mouth of babes.. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Are you surrounded by chrome and tile? Running water nearby? Odd smells? People stopping by, crapping all over you, then leaving? Do people drop off pieces of paper to you?

      You might be in that lavatory you wrote about.

      Some days it's difficult to tell the lavatory users apart from the middle managers.

      Okay, okay. MOST days.

      You are way ahead of me. I can't tell the lavatory porcelain from the middle managers.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  16. terrorist vs drug fears ; clock boy 2.0 by vpness · · Score: 1

    first, this wouldn't have been news if the 10 year old had ratted out his father for cooking meth. It was news because of the terrorist plus muslim terms being applied. all that said, whilst I agree that we are all becoming wimps, the risk adverse public folks (school, police) would rather be 'safe than sorry,' given that they'd be unemployable if they had info and didn't follow up. last, this does seem like a reprise of clock boy 2.0. Sniffs as far too convenient.

  17. Sad Commentary by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    It's a sad commentary on society when:

    A) We assume it's natural for police to stop by after a kid's spelling mistake. (My 9 year old makes similar mistakes all the time.)

    and

    B) My first instinct was to praise the department for the "measured" response of not hauling the kid into the station in handcuffs, interrogating him for hours without his parents, and then (when they realize the deep trouble they're in) leaking a story that the kid/family is secretly evil in some way.

    This boiling water is feeling much more comfortable. Ribbit!

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Sad Commentary by jopsen · · Score: 1

      B) My first instinct was to praise the department for the "measured" response of not hauling the kid into the station in handcuffs, interrogating him for hours without his parents, and then (when they realize the deep trouble they're in) leaking a story that the kid/family is secretly evil in some way.

      Yeah, it's sad.. that we have to happy there was no attempt of cover up... Granted that mostly an American thing.

    2. Re:Sad Commentary by TwentyCharsIsNotEnou · · Score: 1

      My first instinct was to praise the department for the "measured" response of not hauling the kid into the station in handcuffs, interrogating him for hours without his parents, and then (when they realize the deep trouble they're in) leaking a story that the kid/family is secretly evil in some way.

      Indeed, many seem to be taking the over-the-top route these days - or at least they're being reported more often as doing so.

      Maybe/hopefully, there are still a large majority of unreported well-handled cases.

  18. It's not an obvious misspelling by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    Even if that were the case, it's still outrageous that teachers apparently feel they are required to report obvious spelling errors and that the police feel they are worth investigating. At any point someone could have said "this is stupid, it's clearly a mistake, let's not waste time and money or cause unnecessary grief for this family", but no one had the guts. This is what happens when you create a climate of fear, where if some kid decides to go to Syria because J1hadi2011 told him to his teachers get blamed for not spotting it.

    Terraced and terrorist don't sound that much alike, unless you pronounce them kinda like George W. Bush, perhaps. Now here's the thing you're missing. What if the kid's father really is a terrorist and the kid is scared out of his mind about what his dad and friends are up to? At 10, any school kid should know what the word "terrorist" looks on paper and sounds like when spoken if they live in the English-speaking world. It's right up there with the word "pedophile" with only deaf people who've been living in caves their whole lives having an excuse to say "what does that word mean?"

    1. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's right up there with the word "pedophile" with only deaf people who've been living in caves their whole lives having an excuse to say "what does that word mean?"

      It means "foot fetishist", doesn't it?

    2. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      any school kid should know what the word "terrorist" looks on paper and sounds like when spoken if they live in the English-speaking world. It's right up there with the word "pedophile" with only deaf people who've been living in caves their whole lives having an excuse to say "what does that word mean?"

      I would disagree strongly on this. Frankly it strikes me that you are not around ten year olds that much.

    3. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Most people don't know what pedophile means and think it means child molester, which is on the same level as thinking heterosexual means rapist.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    4. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Terraced and terrorist don't sound that much alike"

      You've obviously never been to Accrington. Where I grew up there were plenty who'd pronounce both as approximately "terst". Go look up Fred Dibnah https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    5. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Spell checkers do what they can to screw up anything you write.

    6. Re:It's not an obvious misspelling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Now here's the thing you're missing. What if"

      A fine example of how imbeciles think.

  19. Should have been a teachable moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This could have been a good teachable moment had the teacher simply done her job and asked the student to explain his statement. Being someone who is rather poor at spelling, I think even I might have learned to spell a little better had the teacher done so.

  20. Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 0

    The Quran establishes the fundamental tenets of Islam. No muslim will disagree with the statement that literally believing and following everything in the Quran is absolutely fundamental to being a "good" muslim.
    http://www.quran-islam.org/art...

    The quran includes many passages on torture and death to all non-believers, and treating women like chattels.
    http://www.thereligionofpeace....

    Many hundreds of thousands of "good" Muslims around the world are acting on the quran and are committing murder and torture of innocent people, and abuse of even their own women on a daily basis. Of the many millions of Muslims around the world, a high percentage are clearly in at least quiet agreement with terrorist organizations like IS's motives and methods.

    It boggles my mind how any supposedly intelligent people can still seriously think anyone that voluntarily chooses to follow such a religion deserves to get given the benefit of all doubt, and even be treated like civilized people when they clearly aren't civilized BY THEIR OWN CHOICE.

  21. Relevant Terriorist Video by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    Terriorist attack imminent.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  22. Fucking hell, the comments here are awful. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Here's how you "investigate" the problem. Here's how teachers would have "investigated" things before laws saying that anyone saying something slightly wrong had to be reported to the police.

    Teacher: What do you mean by "terrorist" in this sentence?
    Boy: Well, the houses are joined together in both sides.
    Teacher: Are you sure you're using the right word?
    Boy: Um well I'm not sure how to spell it but I thought that was it, I heard it yesterday.
    Teacher: Yesterday we used [these words], was it any of these?
    Boy: Ohhh! it was "terraced".

    Here's how teachers are expected to behave now:

    Teacher: A likely spelling error! I MUST CALL THE POLICE OR I CAN GO TO JAIL!

    I would not have children in the UK today. I'm terrified by this environment. My father was brought up in a dictatorship, and taught in a school under that same dictatorship, and not even he was supposed to monitor kids like this.

  23. Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about those Oregon boys who have invaded a government building, armed, and professed that they will shoot down dead any government official who comes to evict them.

    And what has the government done? Fuck all, while these *actual terrorists* get outside to talk to the cameras of the mainstream media rather than invaded and blown up a la Iranian Embassy raid.

    But despite that, you're still "pretty sure he would be", HOW?

    1. Re:Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Farmers that sit-in a irrelevant federal building are terrorists, but a bunch of niggers that destroy property and assault the police are just good boys that dindu nuffing.

      Be honest, which group would you prefer as neighbour? I would rather have a farmer. The nigger that will trash my home because he watch a Jewish movie from Hollywood that blamed his failure on the evil white people the day before.

      LOL the regressive left is strong in this one. Please die of PC overdose already, why don't you just fuck off.

      If you love niggers so much, go live in that 'hood': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw5pZpGh5Hg

  24. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Christian bible is just as bad ...

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  25. John Brown's body by eric31415927 · · Score: 1

    ... liies a smolderiin' [moulderin'] in the ground.

    When I was young, I thought the lyric was "smolderin'," and I wondered what John Brown did to make so many people happy that he was smoldering in hell.
    Of course the song laments the death of John Brown and the the lyric is "moulderin'."
    Kids use the words they hear most often.
    Unfortunately, "terrorist" is a much more common word than "terraced."

    1. Re:John Brown's body by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Really? I thought it went:

      eeee jumped thirty thousand feet without a parachute
      eeee jumped thirty thousand feet without a parachute
      eeee jumped thirty thousand feet without a parachute
      an' eee ain't gonna jump no mooooo-ooo-ooore

      What's all this about John Brown?

      Anyway as for errors of spelling and hearing:

      http://www.inspire21.com/stori...

      I didn't believe it, but a teacher assured me it was 100% plausible and likely true because there'd really be no need to make up answers rather than use real ones. I didn't actually understand the "menagerie lion" one until the teacher in question carefully mispronounced "imaginary line".

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  26. Could be worse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the kid was in Afghanistan, he'd be "probed" in other ways by the locals.

    They don't call it "Bumfuckistan" for no reason.

  27. Of course they should check it out by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    It could just as easily have been a slip in saying something he shouldn't as a misspelling.

  28. Just like the christian bible,then. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No different.

    Hell, they believe in the exact same god.

  29. "Terraced House" is UK lingo for "Town House" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  30. Kid might have seen something "odd" ... by drnb · · Score: 1

    Do we really think that terrorists call themselves terrorists at home and in front of their kids?

    Its not merely whether the parents utter the word "terrorist". Its also whether the kid sees items *he* associates with terrorism in his mind. What might a child who saw the AK-47 in the house of a Paris attacker think? What might a child who say the pipe bombs in the house of the San Bernardino attackers think?

    One does not know what put the word "terrorist" into the kid's mind. One has to investigate. And who in our society are trained investigators for possible criminal acts? He was **interviewed** at home the next day and a laptop examined?

    If it were an Irish family the same thing would have occurred.

    1. Re:Kid might have seen something "odd" ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dmb ... is that your best attempt at spelling "dumb"?

    2. Re:Kid might have seen something "odd" ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dmb ... is that your best attempt at spelling "dumb"?

      What a fool you are, can you read? It reads "d r n b" to the rest of us not "d m b". Man you must be so relieved you posted AC.

  31. If it were an Irish kid -- same thing by drnb · · Score: 1

    ... that teachers apparently feel they are required to report obvious spelling errors and that the police feel they are worth investigating ...

    How is it an obvious spelling error rather than motivated by a kid seeing things around the house he associates with terrorism? How might a 10 year old describe a house of one of the Paris attackers where an AK-47 may have been seen, or the San Bernardino attackers were a pipe bomb may have been seen? In our society the police are the trained investigators of possible criminal acts, not teachers.

    Shouldn't searching the family laptop require some kind of check

    You assume the owner did not grant permission. The police can ask, the owner can say yes.

    I really doubt the probability of unfortunate spelling errors being reported to the police is the same for a nice 99% white school in rural Hampshire as for a 99% Muslim school in Birmingham.

    If he were an Irish kid the family would have been investigated, especially in years where the IRA was actively attacking people.

  32. Pussies are those afraid to ask a question ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have become a society of terrified people. God damn we are fucking pussies.

    Yeah, terrified of offending someone by asking them embarrassing or offensive questions. Young kids often say revealing things about their homes and parents that horrify their parents. When those statements cross a line into criminal activity its reasonable for someone to knock on the door and have a god damn conversation to make sure it was just a kid's misunderstanding. The cowardly pussies are those who are afraid to knock on the door and ask an embarrassing question because the other person might be offended.

  33. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by dywolf · · Score: 0

    found the bigot.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  34. Propaganda effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder why the kid made such error, there is a huge difference between "Terraced" and "terrorist". It may be related with the ammount of shows, news reports or even people they know dailly that equal "muslim" with "terrorist"? Maybe, in some place of his mind, he also made this relation. He said "muslims are terrorists, im muslim so im a terrorist".
    I fear that with such propaganda we may be creating a new generation of muslims that will identify themselves with terrorists at an unconscious level. Im sure that sending the police to check his house for something he wrote on his homework assignment will not help him neither.

    Terrorists are murderers, not muslims, and racist generalizations are always wrong. It doesnt matter if the murderers say they are fighting for the Islam or whatever, they are not, they are just crazy Sociopaths.
    Sometimes i feel like muslims are the new jews.

    1. Re:Propaganda effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When your "murderer" flies an ISIS flag, waves korans and cry Allah Akbar as they fly planes into the WTC, bomb the Boston Marathon, shoot innocents in San Bernardino, behead captives, shoot, bomb, stab people. - then they are NOT Mormons, they're Muslims.

  35. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by MorePower · · Score: 2

    They believe the Koran is good, but most Muslims disagree with the idea of torturing or killing people. They might "understand" a non-literal interpretation, they might rationalize that it only applies in a narrow historical context, they might just be ignorant of the actual passages in in. JUST LIKE CHRISTIANS, they believe what they want to believe anyway; which for most ends up being a cherry-picked, metaphorical, has-to-be-understood-in-context "understanding" that their holy text is all about peace and brotherhood.

    If the self-identified Muslims want to believe that God expects them to be peaceful and loving, why the hell would you want to tell them they're wrong?

  36. Yeah but did he have a ... by flappinbooger · · Score: 1

    Home Made Clock?

    THAT would have been a whole different story.

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  37. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Instead of just mindlessly name calling, why dont you actually address my points with an intelligent counterargument?

  38. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    Compare the number of Christians who fast during lent with the number of Muslims who fast during Ramadan, and you'll understand why the Quran is a much bigger problem than the Bible.

  39. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 0

    Firstly let me just say that I think all religion is bad, Christianity included.
    To address your point though, as far as I am aware even the old testament doesnt tell Christians to torture unbelievers or to treat women like cattle. or do things like this shit:
    http://www.themalaymailonline....

    Yes the old testament has violent stuff in it, but not even close to the scale of the quran. And as far as I understand, most christians consider the old testament is an outdated anachronism and only focus on the much more gentle new testament, and interpret it al sorts of ways other than literally.
    Unlike Christianity, Islam fundamentally requires the quran to be taken completely literally.
    The quran states in at least 109 different verses (see here: http://www.thereligionofpeace....) that order to be a good muslim, you must(not should, MUST) do what we in the West would consider seriously screwed up stuff, including commit Jihad and kill any/all non believers. As a Muslim If you do anything else or interpret the writings any differently you are literally not following islam, and are commiting apsotacy so have now made yourself a target, since the penalty for apostasy is death (and the penalty relies at the core of it on an authentically verified Hadith from Prophet Muhammad so is considered especially fundamentally unquestionable by all other good muslims). You can now see how Islam itself is fundamentally constructed to be viral, it contains many such cleverly constructed mechanisms like this entirely designed to hold on to and extend the number of believers simply through fear of persecution and even quran-sanctioned death from their own communities.
    Show me anything of that even remotely scale anywhere in the new testament and then I'll believe what you claim.

  40. Thanks Obama! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    For protecting us from these dangerous spelling errors and ensuring fat paychecks for the private swat teams, security services, and cheesy gadget manufacturers who rely on your steadfast gaurd to line their pockets.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  41. Where is the tech angle? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I want general news stories I'll go to bbc.co.uk

  42. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by thoromyr · · Score: 1

    Because the short reply pretty well covered it? As did some others, but lets try again:

    The Bible establishes the fundamental tenets of Christianity. No christian will disagree with the statement that literally believing and following everything in the Bible is absolutely fundamental to being a "good" christian.
    http://www.1stap.com/en/html/t...

    The Bible includes many passages on torture and death to all non-believers, and treating women like chattels.
    http://www.whatchristianswantt...
    http://othersidereflections.bl...

    Many hundreds of thousands of "good" Christians around the world are acting on the Bible and are committing murder and torture of innocent people, and abuse of even their own women on a daily basis. Of the many millions of Christians around the world, a high percentage are clearly in at least quiet agreement with terrorist organizations like IRA's motives and methods.

    It boggles my mind how any supposedly intelligent people can still seriously think anyone that voluntarily chooses to follow such a religion deserves to get given the benefit of all doubt, and even be treated like civilized people when they clearly aren't civilized BY THEIR OWN CHOICE.

  43. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Like I said in another answer in this thread:
    I think ALL religions are bad.
    Yes the old testament has violent stuff in it, but (since I'm not a Christian) as far as I understand , unlike Islam and the quran, most Christians consider the old testament is an outdated anachronism, so don;t follow it, and only focus on the much more gentle new testament, which does not have anything like the qurans barbaric crap in it, and also unlike "good" muslims, "good" christians remain free to interpret their book in al sorts of ways other than literally.
    I get and agree with your point that there can very easily be an inherent bias depending on perspective, but it also seems clear that modern Christianity in real-life implementation is not even half as fundamentally barbaric and therefore uncivilized as modern Islam in real-life implementation, not that I like or agree with either.

  44. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    You seem to forget that Christians had a centuries-long head start in barbarism, torture, etc.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  45. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
    "as far as I am aware even the old testament doesnt tell Christians to torture unbelievers or to treat women like cattle." Wow, just wow. There were no christians during old testament times.

    From your first link:

    Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text

    Really? The numerous Christians who are supporting candidates who want to repeal gay sex, force transsexuals into the wrong bathroom (a risky proposition), and even put a bounty on the heads of gays don't exist?

    If you had bothered to red the old testament, you would have already found the sections where god commanded his people to kill the non-believers, and take their wives and children into slavery. And the part where the tribe of Benjamin was told it's okay to raid the other tribes to capture their own wife. Sounds every bit as bad as ISIL.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  46. Jewish propaganda, more like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this shit? Are you sick of 'Climatedot' constantly going on about Social Justice Warrior, politically correct bullshit every single day? Pushing the Jewish agenda with every other article. Sickening.

    1. Re:Jewish propaganda, more like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SHITlerhead, Still upset that your side lost WW2? Obeyed the demand from the US, UK and SU that your heroes surrender, unconditionally?

      Good.

  47. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    No, I don't forget that Christianity WAS as much of a problem as Islam is now. But the key point here is : "WAS".

  48. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

    Christianity still is promoting murder in Africa, with government support. Christianity is still fighting against gay, lesbian, and transsexual rights, and also promoting violence against lgbt. Christians are still promoting hate, intolerance, and fear based on the bible, even to the level of the presidential race.

    The bibie:

    One Book to rule them all,
    One Book to find them,
    One Book to bring them all,
    And in the darkness bind them.

    Saying that someone else is worse nowadays is not an excuse.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  49. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Sigh yet another irrational anti-christian rant based entirely on the old testament. I'm not even slightly religious and certainly not a Christian but even I can see you're waaay off track there by choosing to simply ignore the last 2000 years.

    You yourself pointed out that there were no Christians during old testament times then you say Christians are bad because what the old testament says.You can't have it both ways. Even your argument is internally self-contradictory.

    As to bringing up support for repealing gay sex or whatever, thats an obvious emotional strawman that is completely irrelevant to the actual argument.

  50. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    According to the quran itself, that is a fundamentally contradictory and inconsistent position to being a "good" muslim.

    >> If the self-identified Muslims want to believe that God expects them to be peaceful and loving, why the hell would you want to tell them they're wrong?

    I have no trouble with people believing whatever they want, as long as it doesn't also affect me, but when they claim its Islam and in accordance with the quran they are perpetrating a snow job on all of us.

  51. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> Christianity is still fighting against gay, lesbian, and transsexual rights, and also promoting violence against lgbt.

    The beleif that being gay is sick and wrong isn't shared by all christians, nor is it only limited to christians, so your point is completely irrelevant.

    I don't see too many Christians openly rounding up all gays at gunpoint and throwing them off the tops of tall buildings, like ISIS are doing in the name of Islam all over Syria and Iraq.

  52. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    Everyone is promoting hate, intolerance and fear. For example, that's what you are doing right now when you talk about Christians. Promoting hate, intolerance and fear is simply part of human nature.

    Having said that, you are right, saying that someone else is worse is not an excuse. But what you are doing right now is defending Islam, which is a lot worse than Christianity, because Christianity is not all good. That's not a simple fallacy, that's plain crazy.

    Let me put it this way : It's now a minority, but still a lot of Christians will condemn you and actively try to ostracize you because of what you are. As for Muslims, the majority of them on this planet will support your murder. You choose.

  53. Interviewed at Home with parents present by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    Not arrested, not handcuffed, not interviewed without without a responsible adult present, not excluded or expelled.

    Seems like a text book example on how this should be handled, unlike some places I could mention.

    1. Re:Interviewed at Home with parents present by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      On the grounds that a Muslim kid who can't spell needs to be investigated at all.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  54. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by iamacat · · Score: 1

    You missed the big communist scare a few decades ago. Or Japanese-American hysteria during WWII. Whenever there is a conflict, there is a tendency to demonize everyone that shares any attributes with an enemy. Once the conflict is over, it always turns out that these are just regular folks who just happen to look/talk/pray like the evildoers.

  55. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by PRMan · · Score: 1

    How so?

    What we fail to understand today is that in the Old Testament, God has different rules for different societies. Societies that had degenerated into little more than roving bands of serial murderers were wiped out. Societies that were kind to others and lived harmoniously they were told to spare. This is no different than the Allies going to war against Germany and Japan in WWII.

    At no point does God tell Christians to kill their enemies. We are to love our enemies and treat them kindly in hopes that they will see a better way.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  56. Are you fucking kidding? by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 1

    A) These stories always happen with Muslim boys
    B) Why investigate any kid for saying "terrorist house" when he meant "terranced house"?

    1. Re:Are you fucking kidding? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
      So all those suspected white IRA terrorists in the UK never existed?

      Also, try to get your facts straight - he didn't say anything.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  57. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Interesting parallel but we;re not talking about a conventional war.
    I'm not demonizing people for their race/country.
    I'm questioning a multinational group's own free choice in continuing to believe in something that is by its own words openly barbaric, viral and allows no individual interpretation, so therefore directly affects how all muslims interact in the world. So no its not really a good analogy.
    The only example I can think of might be Naziism in WW2, since it became kind of a cult especially in the upper ranks of the SS, but even then not really a good comparison since even Hitler knew better than to enforce performing acts of genocide, torture and treating your own women worse than animals as a basic requirement of every Nazi.

  58. Quick Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, this was responded to far more quickly than the Rotherham case was. I wonder why?

  59. Well by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    There's a grammar nazi joke in there somewhere I'm sure, but I'm not going looking for it.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  60. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    There are sects that say that the Bible must be interpreted literally. Even the parts that are allegories! Yes, some of those people have issues. Christianity has been used to justify killing witches, killing gays, killing jews, keeping slaves, etc.

    As for Islam, Jews and Christians were allowed to live in the early Caliphates (yes they had to pay taxes). Where those caliphs apostates for not killing them, or perhaps there is plenty of room for interpretations within Islam? As for Jihad, it means struggle. Struggling to stop smoking with help from God is a Jihad also.

  61. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
    Just taking what you said and showing how silly it was. I'll repeat your comment:

    "as far as I am aware even the old testament doesnt tell Christians to torture unbelievers or to treat women like cattle.

    As I pointed out, this was a totally ignorant comment to make, since there were no christians at that time.

    then you say Christians are bad because what the old testament says.

    Paul (new testament writer, see 1 Cor.21-24) continued to condone slavery. His words were used to justify slavery for centuries. You can't ignore the last 2,000 years either.

    And I notice you have no response to my remark about Christian leaders persecution of gays and lesbians, which called for the death penalty in places as diverse as Uganda and the United States. Ted Cruz doesn't mind it, and neither do Huckabee or Jindal.

    Also, when you write "As to bringing up support for repealing gay sex or whatever, thats an obvious emotional strawman that is completely irrelevant to the actual argument.", you seem to have missed that Paul also attacked gays (Romans 1:26-27). Certainly it's relevant when showing that Christians aren't all sweetness and light, and never have been since the earliest days of Christianity. Also, you have no reply

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  62. Well played sir, well played. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Sadly, no mod points today.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  63. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
    No, it's not irrrelevant. There is a specific agenda against LGBT in much of the Christian community, as promoted by American Pentacostal missionaries in Uganda (who supported the death penalty for gays) and various pastors in the US.

    Not all muslims are throwing gays off buildings, does that mean we should overlook those in ISIS that do? Of course not.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  64. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    First, I am standing up against ignorance and hate, which Christians have a 2000 year history of indulging in. Pointing out the emperor has no clothes (or that Christianity has a long history of intolerance) is stating the facts, unlike the fairy tales christians have used to justify their mistreatment of others for two millennia.

    And I certainly have not defended islam by pointing out that christians used to do what ISIS does today.

    When you write:

    a lot of Christians will condemn you and actively try to ostracize you because of what you are. As for Muslims, the majority of them on this planet will support your murder. You choose.

    You need to buy a clue. They know what I am, and none of my Muslim friends would support my murder. You're pushing a very limited stereotype. And Christians actively ostracizing me? The majority wouldn't - but that doesn't mean that the bigoted minority shouldn't be called out on it. So I'm pretty good with either choice (maybe because I live in the real world instead of Faux News?)

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  65. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Lets see - Jesus never condemned slavery (how hard is it to say "You can't own people!"). Paul encouraged slaves to stay slaves if they couldn't convince their owner to free them, rather than rebel. And of course, Paul also roundly condemned gays, same as many christians do today "in the name of jesus."

    As for "At no point does God tell Christians to kill their enemies.", Jesus said (Matthew 10) "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Skip forward to Revelation and find out just how cruel the "lamb of god" can be. Bloodthirsty bastard (in both senses).

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  66. Terries trying to get froggy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Draxx them sklounst.

  67. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by MorePower · · Score: 1

    According to the quran itself, that is a fundamentally contradictory and inconsistent position to being a "good" muslim.

    But that's the same Koran that they are ignorant of, reinterpreting, or ignoring anyway. They can just as easily be ignorant of, reinterpret, or ignore those parts of the Koran too.

    I don't see why the strict "Koranic Literalists" should get to define Islam when clearly most Muslims are not literalists (even if they think they are). Biblical Literalists are a small, very disliked minority of Christianity, so why would Islam be different?

  68. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by William+Baric · · Score: 1

    And I'm pointing that you are also an emperor with no clothes. We all are. Like everyone, you are also promoting hate, intolerance and fear. The way you use the pretense of history to justify your own hate is a clear indication of that. Do I blame you for creating your own enemies? Not really. As I said, it's human nature and we all have a need to fight our own windmills.

    As for buying a clue, I already did. I saw the hate behind the hypocrisy. I'll certainly acknowledge only a minority of Muslims living in the West would truly (or at least openly) hate you for no other reason than who you are, but Muslims in the West are certainly not representative of the rest of the world. You said you live in the real world? Are you sure? Because I'm pretty sure your circle is not typical. Are you sure you can extrapolate the attitude of your friends to the rest of the world?

    As a whole, Christians and Muslims on this planet are really not in the same category when it comes to submission to their own religion. On a more direct note, I never really had problems with Christians for being who I am, but I certainly had with Muslims. Of course not with all of them, like you I have Muslim friends, but my friends are certainly not representative of the Muslim world.

    BTW, I don't watch Fox News. I'm not American. I'm an atheist, moderately anti-theists and even anti-capitalist. On the other hand, I'm certainly not a social justice warrior, nor a feminist, so I fight different windmills.

  69. When will this child... by KenHansen · · Score: 1

    Get calls from Mark Cuban, visit Facebook and Google, get scholarships to ivy-league universities and visit the whitehouse?

  70. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

    If you bother to read just one sentence further, you'll realise it's not a literal sword. It's about converting people and the resistance the new converts may face coming from the household / family.

  71. "Muslim boy" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not a muslim boy. It's just a kid, who happens to have muslim parents.

  72. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by dywolf · · Score: 1

    there is no point in addressing outright bigotry other than to call it what it is.
    you deserve no more or less than that.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  73. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by dywolf · · Score: 1

    I think all religions are equally bad as well.
    I also think they are equally good.
    they're a mixed bag.

    And I don't got around repeating links to bigoted BS, and accuse a fifth of the worlds population of being terrorists.
    The worst part is you don't even see the things you say for what they are.

    --
    The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
  74. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Well clearly, you're one of those many people that aren't going let something like actual facts inconveniently get in the way when political correctness is at stake.
    Just keep right on with your passive-aggressive insults. You're just playing right into the terrorists agenda.

  75. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> There is a specific agenda against LGBT in much of the Christian community

    Of course there is! The Bible is the defining book of their religion. and both the old and new testaments say homosexuality is an abomination and just plain wrong. Knowing that, why would you reasonably expect any good Christians to say/think anything else?
    Similarly, the quran denounces homosexuality, so good muslims are bound to just the same.

    The big important difference that you strangely seem to want to keep denying/ignoring/avoiding/missing is that the new testament doesn't call for believers to kill all homosexuals where as the quran does.

  76. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> Biblical Literalists are a small, very disliked minority of Christianity

    I'm not so sure the bible is so irrelevant to Christianity as you seem to think.

    >> so why would Islam be different?
    Because there are far higher levels of fundamentalism in general in Islam than there are in Christianity. For example how many Christians do you know that take a special prayer break 4 times a day? Its a basic way of life for most muslims.

    I'n mot sure why there is so much radicalism in Islam but I think its a combination of the viral nature of Islam, the way it fundamentally uses brainwashing and peer pressure, and the relatively poor levels of education in many islamic countries (since Shariah actively suppresses education, especially for the 50% of the population that are female). You can see that Islam really is very viral especially when compared to Christianity.

  77. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    The Episcopal Church in the US has supported LGBT rights to the point that the larger Anglican Communion is taking some sort of action I don't entirely understand but probably makes sense to an Episcopalian or Anglican against that Church. No Episcopalians that I know (and that includes one priest) promote violence on an individual level.

    Given any group X, not all members of group X are alike. There are denominations I despise, but I pretty much agree with the Episcopal Church except for some differences about theology.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  78. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Why do you think that the Bible is either taken literally or irrelevant to Christianity? There are plenty of Christians who consider it inspired by God but not literally true.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  79. Slashdot no longer offers subscriptions by tepples · · Score: 1

    You're not forgetting. Subscriptions are no longer available on Slashdot. From the subscription page:

    Please Note: Buying or gifting of a new subscription is not available at the moment. We apologize for the inconvenience. This downtime though does not effect your current active subscription in any way. We will keep you posted on the latest

    Most of the subscriber benefits are available without charge to Excellent karma users anyway.

    On SoylentNews, on the other hand, the subscription page still works.

  80. Benghazi by tepples · · Score: 1

    The 2001 overreaction set up the 2012 Benghazi overreaction. It's like an allergic reaction only on the second exposure to an allergen.

  81. The real culprit here... by whytewulf · · Score: 1

    People are missing the real culprit here.. The Evil, evil Spellcheck. This kid probably wrote terraced,.. and the Evil MS Empire changed it to "terrorist". the UK should be looking at them!.. Why do you hate freedom, Microsoft?... WHY!?!?!

  82. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1
    So, pointing out that Christians historically have been just as violent as ISIS, and that certain christian groups still actively promote the idea of "kill the gays", same as ISIS, is now promoting hate, intolerance and fear? That's pretty warped thinking.

    I'll certainly acknowledge only a minority of Muslims living in the West would truly (or at least openly) hate you for no other reason than who you are, but Muslims in the West are certainly not representative of the rest of the world. You said you live in the real world? Are you sure?

    Iran is the world's #1 capital for sex change surgery. Transsexuals have the approval of the Ayatollah, who issued a fatwa saying so. Last I looked, Iran was a Muslim country. So yes, I'm pretty sure.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  83. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's just make camps for Muslims and gas, burn, shoot, stab, and torture each and every one. We can tattoo numbers on them to keep track of them. We'll start with kicking the terrorist children out of school and then enforce a country wide curfew. Then we will go to war. Yeah and we will call it the Holocaust 2.0. It'll be what 'Merica needs. Genicide. In no way possible will we seem like assholes. And we will just keep invading and bombing countries in the Middle East even though that will provoke them to attack us more.... And while we are at it, we will make sure to leave out the part about freedom of religion when Merica was colonized mumbo jumbo in history books. Hell we already left out all the bad crap we did to the natives of the land. Muslims are the problem and must be eradicated. There is no other way to make a perfect world.

    I'm just kidding. The whole mass hysteria on what's a terrorist is disgusting. Why aren't the kids that bullied me in school in the 90s considered terrorists? Why do we overuse the word terrorist? Why are our troops still over there?

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

      > Let's just make camps for X and gas, burn, shoot, stab, and torture each and every on

      They already exist and are run by ISIS/Al Qada/Taliban/Boko Haram/Muslim Brotherhood. Haven't you seen the videos?

  84. W accent by tepples · · Score: 1

    teachers have been legally obliged to report any suspected extremist behavior

    You failed to highlight "suspected extremist behavior". It doesn't say they are legally obliged to report every damn meaningless thing.

    School faculty who have a George W. Bush accent (as mentioned in dryeo's comment) are more likely to become suspicious of extremist behavior when hearing "terraced".

  85. probes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how was this young boy probed? It sounds bad.

  86. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    And those who don't convert? Read the next few chapters for all the pain and suffering they're in for as they go to their eternal punishment, all sanctified by Jesus, the lamb of God.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  87. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    The big similarity that you don't seem to get is that most people who say they follow a religion, if you scratch a little bit deeper, don't really follow whatever their holy book say to do. Actions speak louder than words.

    And, as I've already pointed out, recent Christian missionaries have backed killing gays. Same as ISIS. Again, actions speak louder than words.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  88. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Oh come on, just check the world news every day. You really can;t be seriously claiming that Christians are kiling even slightly as many people as Islam just because of their faith.

    >> recent Christian missionaries have backed killing gays.
    Then they aren't actually practicing Christianity.

    >> . Same as ISIS
    Then they are simply being good muslims.

    See the difference yet?

  89. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    >> Why do you think that the Bible is either taken literally or irrelevant to Christianity?

    Perhaps not being a Christian I just don't get it, but whats the point of a religion having a book or even a name if everyone is just going to make whatever shit up they want and just follow that instead?

  90. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    AH, the "no true scotsman" fallacy. Try again.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  91. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > As for Jihad, it means struggle.

    Mein Kampf means "my struggle" too.

    Take your jihad and stick it up your nakba.

  92. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Christians tend to agree on some things, including most of the Nicene Creed and the holiness of the Bible. After that, there's historical research and individual revelations, some of which get popular. Some of the details can be interesting if you're into that sort of thing. (My wife's cousin was installed as a Lutheran pastor. Another pastor asked if he believed in the Nicene Creed, and then listed four other writings, one by Luther, and asked if said cousin believed those were compatible with the Nicene Creed.)

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  93. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    The Nicene Creed is just a short (9 sentences or so), basic statement of belief in God and Jesus. I'd be amazed if the majority of Christians couldn't aagree on that much. but If as you say, some Christians still can't even fully agree on just that much, and can still legitimately call themselves Christians, then it just validates my argument that Christianity, without taking at least the New Testament literally, is so woolly as to be essentially meaningless/pointless.

  94. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    It is not a One-true-scottsman argument. There's absolutely nothing ad-hoc about my statement,
    You can simply check the facts for yourself. Just the September Paris attacks accounted for 129 innocent deaths, and there are radical islaimic suicide bombings and opther attacks happening around the world daily.
    Can you remember any redical christian attacks that caused equivalent numbers of deaths? You've basically got to go back and total up at least 20 years worth to get a number of deaths even close to just one day's worth of Islaimc attacks: http://www.alternet.org/tea-pa...

    All your comebacks so far have all been based on emotional outbursts, attempts to sidetrack the issue, pruposeful misunderstandings, and lame attempts to incorrectly label. Its the only approach you acn make because you have no valid position that you can back up with actual facts or citations, since your emphasis is clearly entirely on enforcing political corerctness rather than having to deal with whats really going on.

    If you want further responses from me, stay on track, stop with the emotional/personal attacks, and use facts and references to back up your argument.

  95. Re:Of course its gonna get checked by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    First, I wrote "No true scostman fallacy" Not "One true scotsman fallacy", whatever the hell that is? You need to see what the "no true scotsman" fallacy means.

    Me: recent Christian missionaries have backed killing gays.

    You: Then they aren't actually practicing Christianity.

    Classical "no true scotsman fallacy". "No real christian would do that."

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.