You're spending almost *THREE* fuckin' billion dollars a *DAY* on the war, and yet a mere billion a year for NASA is much money?! Yeah, right! Half of your research is getting done there, imagine with the funding for the war you could have established a permanent base on Mars for less than a year!
And they could be spent on education, or roads, or bridges, or public bathrooms, or whatever. But you know what? They wouldn't be. Saying what you COULD do with the money is meaningless unless you actually plan on doing it. That money stood about as much chance as going to NASA as it did my pocket! Now, if NASA's budget had been cut as a result of the war, then you would have a point. But, as I stated, it wasn't. And even if the war had never happened, NASA's budget would not be any different than it is right now. So when you claim that the reason NASA does not have an unlimited budget is the war in Iraq, you are being completely dishonest. You are trying to turn the debate on NASA's budget into a Bush Bashing session, and I just called you on it.
Right this is about politicians (most of them) setting priorities for NASA without funding them so NASA has to pick and choose what to fund with the budget it gets.
If NASA's annual budget had not increased by over a billion dollars since the war in Iraq started, you'd have a point.
With Bush spending it all on the War Of Futility, we're not going to have any money to send anyone to the station anyways. It shouldn't come as a shock that NASA's already trying to find some budget wiggle-room, even before Bush has departed.
Is is possible to have a discussion on slashdot without bashing the President? You hate him, I get it. You tout any bad news that you hear and put a negative spin on any good news so that it is bad (the economy is a good example). I did not see Iraq anywhere in the summary, WTF is point of bringing it up. Maybe you should be posting on DailyKos or HuffingtonPost or something where that type of partisanship is acceptable.
Besides, this has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with NASA making plans beyond the space station. With the budget required to maintain the space station, NASA has little room for other adventures, such as a permanent base on the moon or a manned mission to Mars.
IMHO, we need to turn the space station into a spaceship assembly plant where parts of space ships can be assembled so we can launch a much larger ship than what we can lift into orbit all at once.
I was referring to the preceding sentences, "if the US is a Police State, then what is Great Britain? Hell! What is Cuba, Nicaragua, or China?". Your second statement is a much simpler case of choosing a definition to match the conclusion you wish to reach.
OK, then you might have a point. I'm just tired of people that have never had to drive through an armed checkpoint on their way to work (Kuwait and other places), have cameras follow their every move (Great Britain), or seen armed soldiers in full combat dress at the local mall (Mexico) calling the US a police state when we have none of these things. With what I've seen, it is obvious that this guy has no clue as to what a police state really is. Calling Bush a terrorist, the US a police state or any of the other hyperboles I've seen thrown around here is not only completely ignorant, but damaging as people who actually have to drive through armed checkpoints read it and think the US is so much worse.
Before people start spouting bullshit like that, they really need to travel to a place where the population truly has no rights so they can appreciate what the US has to offer. After having their car disassembled, searched and left in pieces while a soldier has you at gunpoint might make them realize that a wire tap of a foreign phone call is not the violation they once thought it was. I think a little perspective is needed.
Your argument appears to be "A is more foo than B, therefore A is not foo". I cannot think of a single situation in which this makes sense; if foo is absolute (which police-stateness isn't), the left hand side is meaningless. If foo is relative, the conclusion is manifestly bullshit.
Let's make this simple, so you can understand:
If you are arrested (A) for saying "hey, this is a police state" (B), then you live in a police state.
What I said: If A and B, then C.
B is true (he said it), but A is not (he's not in jail), therefor, no C (we are not a police state).
You say the left is for restricting freedom, but I'm afraid the facts are against you. It wasn't until we had a right wing congress sitting pretty next to a right wing president that we became a police state.
How is this informative? Hell, it's not even correct. The US is not a police state, no matter how many times you say it. JHC, if the US is a Police State, then what is Great Britain? Hell! What is Cuba, Nicaragua, or China? Don't give me that 'police state' bullshit until you can truly get locked up for stating "the US is a police state." Unless you are risking you neck by saying it, you are lying. (It's ironic that liars like this are the ones saying "Bush Lied")
(Oh, and this can't be Off Topic until the parent is.)
iapetus did a fine job dismantling your reasoning, I saw no point in repeating the points he made. And no, the GP didn't say it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit on it. He was only stating what is painfully obvious to everyone else--nothing in any of those pictures you linked to looked anything remotely like what the girl wore to the airport.
Although, I already explained all this to iapetus. Rather than just reading his ignorant refutations, you should read further. Don't be the dumbass kid who sits behind someone and says, "Yeah, he told you." Not only was iapetus an idiot for trying to say that he knew more than the people who's job it is to recognize bombs and have been trained as such, but you're twice the idiot for making a "he told you" post.
And as I said in response, no two of those devices looked exactly alike. Every single one was unique. However, they all shared certain characteristics: 1) Worn on torso 2) Had electronics (may or may not be visible) 3) Had explosives (may or may not be visible) 4) Had a power source (may or may not be visible)
This girl's shirt along with the putty in her hand met all four of these criteria. Just like I said that a Ford Excursion looks nothing like a Toyota Prius, they are both cars, they both serve the same basic functions and they both share enough of same characteristics to make them essentially the same thing, even though they are so radically different. So true, it did not look exactly like any of the devices shown, it did share enough characteristics to be considered a bomb (all of 'em). Actually, it looked more like a bomb than several of the well disguised vests in the links. Richard Reid had C4 in his shoe. Did it look anything like any of the images I linked to? No. Was his shoe a bomb? Yes. By using your standards of "it didn't look like any of those, so it couldn't have been a bomb", Richard Reid's shoe could not have been a bomb... and yet, it was. So don't tell me it didn't look like a bomb until you can show me a picture of what all bombs look like.
So while my training on IED's is limited, I have had some training and I know enough to know that there really is no blueprint that all bombs must follow. Since each is home made, they all tend to be unique and come in infinite different designs. To say that this couldn't be bomb because it looks like no other bombs is extraordinarily ignorant, as no to bombs look alike. So please, stop telling the professionals that they don't know what they are talking about. National security is really nothing to armchair quarterback and really, it just makes you look stupid.
Your painful attempt at logic has done more harm than Star's hoodie could ever have done.
And your painful attempt at refutation was... well, just painful to watch. Did you have a point? The GP said it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit. Do breadboard circuits disable bombs or something?
Also, the lady behind the counter was probably neither an electrical engineer nor an explosives expert. To her, it looked like a bomb.
The high for the day was 75 degrees. How often is the high temperature for the day reached before 9am? And even if she was overdressed that's pretty normal at airports since 1, airplanes are cooler than some people like, 2, people wear bulky clothing so they don't need to pack it, and 3, sometimes people fly to cooler climates.
She wasn't traveling. She was there to pick someone up.
And yes, her dress was not a clue since she had no intent to do anything wrong. But it is something I would have picked up on if I were in charge of security. She wasn't dressed for the weather. She was dressed for career day.
Ok so you think it was right what they did in London to Jean Charles de Menezes because he looked strange and ran to the platform to catch the train?
No, not at all. What they did to him was unforgivable. However, if he had a device strapped to his chest with wires and putty in his hands, then it would have been 100% justified.
Sure, I guess it could be. But that was not my point.
Anything that is worn as a vest, shirt or jacket might be a bomb?
Getting closer
Anything that's a 'device' might be a bomb?
OK, you have all the components in place. Now, add them all together and you have something. Is everything with tires a car? Is everything with seats a car? Is everything with an engine a car? No. But if has four tires, seats, and an engine, odds are that it is a car. Yes, it could be something else, but with all of these components, it's more than likely a car.
Are all devices bombs? Of course not. However, devices, in airports, with wires, strapped to a chest, certainly could be a bomb. If you say otherwise, you are either extremely stupid, completely unable to draw a conclusion based on given facts, or are just too damn stubborn to admit that maybe regular every day folks could very possibly mistake this device for a bomb. Well, I hate to say it, but it is a fact that normal, everyday people mistook this for a bomb, even though you can't fit that into your head.
I hope for your sake that you're Amish and like showing off your abs, because otherwise you must look like a suicide bomber everywhere you go. Again, do the math. Add all the components together. Each of them are harmless, but combined and it looks like a bomb. Why is that so hard to understand. You suffer from CO poisoning as kid or something?
For it to look like a bomb. For which I'd need to see some explosives or any signs of some explosives being concealed somewhere (no, a small amount of putty in the hands of a person doesn't count - again, compare to the amount of explosive material in the pictures you so kindly showed us). The T-shirt shown in the article doesn't come close.
Have you ever seen C4 explode? If you had, you wouldn't have said something so stupid. Richard Reid's heel full of C4 could have taken the wing off of a 737. This girl was thought to be carrying at least two handfuls of the stuff. In a crowded area, two handfuls of C4 will kill a lot of people. Detonate it near a support column and you could collapse a terminal. Besides, does the yield really matter? How much of a bomb do you need for this thing to be called a bomb? Do you think security is supposed to say, "Well, we can only see two handfuls of C4. I'm sure she has no more stuffed in her bra/pants/hood. And besides, with that much C4, the best she could do is kill 10 people and bring our nation's travel to a halt. We should let her go. Stand down everyone! She's only going to kill 10 or so." Get real!
I don't know, maybe it's the complete lack of explosives that does it for me. It's going to a very lonely suicide if it does turn out to be a suicide vest. See above.
Except, of course, we've already heard that she didn't ignore the question. And I'd expect them to be worried from that description, and then relieved to see the reality - which is no bomb. She did at first. Here is a quote from wbztv.com.
She did not respond when the employee asked her about the device she was wearing, so the employee repeated the question, police said.
Simpson then said the device was artwork and left the counter and walked around the terminal area, causing some employees to leave the building in fear, police said. It seems like there were several people who thought this was a bomb. I guess that average, every day people really did think this was a bomb. So stop Monday morning quarterbacking and STFU. It looked like a bomb to the ticket counter lady, several other employees and the troopers that arrested her. What more do you need? If you think you are so much smarter than everyone in this situation, then you should move out of your mother's basement and go serve you country. DHS could use someone with your supposed omnipotent intellect.
Don't be so obtuse. You claimed that what she was wearing 'looked like a miniature version' of one of those bombs. It's evident to anyone with a working pair of eyes that this claim is garbage - it looks nothing like any of those devices. None of the suicide bomb devices contains anything recognisable as electronics - and with good reason, because they don't need anything like that.
Um, the ones on the first link had plainly visible wires. From the pictures I saw, the girl's shirt had wires. Most suicide vests are worn as a vest, shirt or jacket. This girl's device was worn on her shirt... or hoodie. Most of the suicide vests that I've seen are "devices". This girl was wearing a device.
I don't know how much more you need. You may be so superior that you can recognize that this was not a bomb within a split second. The rest of us mere mortals are not able to keep a mental categorization of every conceivable suicide vest. For that matter, I still don't see how you can say that there is no possible way for this to be a suicide vest. As for the security at the airport, they received the same description as above. "A girl went up to the counter at the airport wearing a device on her chest with visible wires. When asked about it, ignored the question and left." WTF did you expect these guys to do? Please tell me, what does someone have to do to justify security drawing their weapons. (I've asked that question several times. So far, no one has answered it). If it's not wearing a device on your chest that looks like a bomb to mere mortals, then I don't know what is!
Also: Today, it was 75 degrees Fahrenheit at Logan airport. A little warm for a "hoodie", don't you think? This girl had a device attached to her shirt. There are not a whole lot of devices that attach to shirts. Of the few, a bomb is one of them. Of the few places where people are on the lookout for bombs, specifically suicide bombers, the airport is one of them.
Neither. Again, you're off in your own little fantasy world, responding to things you imagined people might be saying. You claimed that it looked like a bomb. It didn't. End of story.
I claimed it looked like a bomb. The lady at the counter claimed it looked like a bomb. The security at the airport claimed it looked like a bomb. My special services friends from my Army days claimed it looked like a bomb. I'm afraid you are in the extreme minority in saying that this looks nothing like a bomb. I'm sorry, but any device attached to someone's chest that is not recognizable as something else (like a iPod or something), with wires looks like if for no other reason than where it's located. It has all the components need to make a bomb; a battery, wires, a board to connect those wires and explosives (the putty in her hands). Yeah, I think it could have been a bomb.
Ah, so you're going for the argument that her T-shirt looked like these devices because it didn't look like them and that was what they had in common so therefore a thing that doesn't look like a bomb looks like a bomb? Wait, weren't you arguing against that just a second ago? Try to get some consistency in your drivelling, please.
They all have the same components. 1) a power source. 2) wires. 3) explosive 4) usually worn around the torso. So far, she has met 100% of the requirements for this to be a suicide vest. Sure they don't all look the same. A Ford Excursion looks nothing like a Toyota Prius, but they both have 4 tires, a driver's seat, a wind sheild and so on. Yet, they are both vehicles. This girl's shirt did not look exactly like any of the suicide vests in the links I provided, but it had all the same components. Besides, no two vests that I linked to looked exactly alike either, even when made by the same bomb maker.
Bulky. You need a lot of explosives to do serious damage, so the device has to contain a lot of explosives. Who said she wanted to do serious damage. Maybe she just wanted to kill five-fifty peo
Are you even reading what you're posting? None of those pictures looks remotely like the breadboard circuit worn by the arrested girl.
So any device with a breadboard circuit can not be a bomb? What else can a bomb NOT contain. I'm sure our guys at TSA would like to know. I doubt the lady behind the counter knows that a breadboard circuit is. All she saw was a home made device (read: Improvised Device) attached to the chest of this girl with wires. Sorry, but that sounds like a bomb to me.
Except, of course, while none of them contains anything remotely like the girl's T-shirt
So if it looks like a bomb, it's not a bomb because no one would make a bomb that LOOKS like a bomb. If it doesn't look like a bomb, then it can't be a bomb. Which one is it? Besides, none of those devices looked like any of the others. So tell me, what does a bomb vest look like?
one of them does contain a fricking cell phone. Which looks, for your reference, like a cell phone. What with it being a cell phone and all.
No, it HAD a cell phone attached to, much like you do when you talk on it. Does that make you a cell phone when you are on the talking on one?
Overly paranoid people like you are the reason that everything that makes the US a great country is being destroyed. I would be fine with being blown up by TEH TERRORISTS!!! tomorrow if it meant people could display LED artwork publicly in Boston or see the real deal Hoover Dam tour again instead of the castrated "look, in the distance, you can sort of see one of the generators, beneath the giant American flag!" version they have now.
So, you looked at my links. Notice any two vests that looked alike? I'm not just talking about the training ones, but the rest, like where the guy's head was blown off. How about the police vest that was actually a suicide vest? Sure, none looked exactly like the on this chick had on, but then again, none of them looked like any of the others. There were common characteristics to look for. Wires are a pretty good giveaway. Strapped to a chest is another good giveaway. The puddy in the hands... well that was just gravy!
Think you know what a bomb looks like. How about I make nine bombs and one fake one. You pick the fake one and lie down on it while I set off the rest of 'em. You should be safe, Oh, ye that knows so much about bombs. Your obvious expertise will keep you safe.
I agree with most of your statement here, but friggin come on! This girl walks into an airport with a device strapped to her chest and you call it paranoia to stop her? My GOD, if wearing a device that could very easily be mistaken for a bomb with putty in her hands (that looks EXACTLY like C4, btw If you say you can tell the difference between play-dough and colored C4, you are a liar) to the airport where two of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers doesn't warrant a response, then why do you even bother with security at all? If they are not supposed to stop this dumb-ass girl, then WTF are they there for? And before you say they should have just asked her, remember that the lady at the ticket counter DID!!!
Seriously, what in your mind has to happen before airport security is justified in drawing their weapons? If it's not someone with a device and plastique, then I don't know what is!
I think anyone looking at her, hopefully a TRAINED law enforcement pro, would tell that this was nothing
Like box-cutters. Those were nothing also. Even so, google-image "suicide vest" and compare those pictures to what this chick was wearing. Of course, you won't find an exact match, but I think they are close enough for a trained law enforcement pro to not take any chances....but, even if concerned...could have checked thingsout first before surrounding her with machineguns one trigger pull away from ripping her apart.
Your kidding, right:
"Um, excuse me, Miss. Yes you with the bomb looking device on your chest. Would you mind stepping over here with me, please and place you C4 in the bin as I move this wand over you. Please place your arms to the side." A person, as far as I know..is not required by any law to answer another civilian about anything
Ticket agents do have some authority here. Remember, first of all that two of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers passed through Logan airport. Also, keep in mind that a few ticket agents said, "that guy was acting strange" on 9-11 but didn't tell anyone. Imagine how that must have felt, knowing that you gave a boarding pass to a 9-11 hijacker and all you asked was, "did you pack your bags yourself?". Then, compound that feeling with everyone... and I mean EVERYONE asking you, "why didn't you say anything? You could have diverted this whole thing!" Now, back the present, someone comes past this same ticket counter with a friggin bomb looking device strapped to her chest in plain sight and you question the ticket agent for not ignoring it?
This is hilarious. Why in the world should I trust you?
So let me get this straight. You don't trust me, and I'm just some guy typing on slashdot, probably thousands of miles away from you. You would however trust a Asian looking girl with over-died blonde hair in an airport with some sort of device attached to her shirt. I'm sorry, but are you a fucking moron? I don't see any other explanation as to how anyone could be so fucking backwards. BTW, you shouldn't trust me, although I do have some training with explosives, buy you sure as shit shouldn't trust someone with a device strapped to their chest. Trusting that person could cause you end up as nothing more than a cloud of red mist, wet hair and bone fragments.
And why are you talking as if you have some special knowledge of what she was wearing or what bombs look like? There's pictures of the thing all over the news.
Right. So you've seen what she was wearing. Now, look at my comment HERE for some pictures of real live suicide vests that look very similar to what this girl had on her shirt, minus the blinking lights, of course. And as to the lights: Who says you can't put blinky lights on a bomb. If I were a bomb maker and had the time, I would include an LED to test the circuit and battery, although I'd have to make sure that whoever wore the bomb knew which button was the detonator and which was the tester, of course.
Are bombs that look like Hollywood props any less deadly than those that DON'T? I've linked to pictures of suicide vests that also looked like Hollywood props. If you were working at the airport that day, would you take the chance?
Bombs do not have flashing LEDs, regardless of what you see in the movies.
True. But if you ever become security, let me know where so I can sneak anything I want in, as long as I include some blue LED's. 'Cause we all know that if it has blue LED's, it can't be a bomb, right?
Actually, if I were a bomb maker, I might include a LED just to test the battery. I'd hate to think that whoever was wearing the vest might not realize that they have a dead or disconnected battery!
Umm.. did you look at the picture of it? That doesn't look like a bomb. It's a bread board with some wires in it. You know what looks more like a bomb? A cell phone. Fortnately they didn't arrest everyone who had one of those!
Take a look at these pictures. What she was wearing looks like a mini version of one of THESE. None of which, looks anything like a cell phone, btw, but look strikingly similar to what she had on.
Other pictures. HERE and HERE (this actually looks more like what was on her shirt, minus the wires)
Of course, she could have easily ended up like THIS guy who was only wearing a vest with a bunch of pockets! (warning, graphic)
Ah, screw it... use google images and search for "suicide bomb vest". You won't find any cell phones there, but you might find a few that look very similar to her shirt!
I think your problem is that you think you're safe in an airport lobby. You're not. Anyone can be dropped off at the curb and wheel a suit case of explosives up to the huge line at the ticket counter and blow up dozens of people. Please recognize and accept this fact. After the security checkpoint, you have some security, but if you think you need to panic and use deadly force in the lobby, you're wrong. It wouldn't help if you did anyway. So lighten up.
Well, I'm not save on the roads either, but I still expect the police to pull on a car that is swerving at 2:00am. Just because something is not 100% secure doesn't mean that you don't at least TRY to secure it. Sure, there are more effective methods of blowing up people than walking into an airport lobby with a bomb strapped to your chest. Then again, there are more effective ways than setting yourself on fire and driving your jeep packed with a propane tank into the lobby either. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. You can neither over nor underestimate these people.
OK, the airline employee panicked, so I guess the police have to follow up, but it's a false alarm. There's no bomb, nor anything that looks like a bomb on closer inspection. This is where the police want to justify their actions. Looks like they've been trained that the only successful conclusion to a police action is to take someone into custody.
Well, she is out on just over $700 bond. As to whether she is charged or not, I guess that depends on how well she cooperates. If she truly didn't realize that her shirt looked like a bomb, and she apologizes, then OK. Maybe she could do some sort of "Don't be a dumb-ass" or "That was my brain on drugs" public service message as community service. I really hope she wouldn't intentionally try to pull a stunt like that while there to pick up her boyfriend. Then again, she did wear a shirt that looked like a bomb to the airport that 2 of the 19 9-11 hijackers passed through.
Reacting is one thing, overreacting is another. Even if you believe the "device" looked like a bomb (which it most certainly didn't if the posted pictures are accurate), it should have been easy enough for them to have her walk through one of the explosives sniffers, or be sniffed by a bomb dog. If she was clean, they could have let her go, apologized for wasting her time, and let her go. But arresting her and charging her with some bullshit? That's fucking stupid.
People like you are why Libertarians will never win. It's a real shame too because if it weren't for this type of stupidity, I'd be a Libertarian.
It's sad that 90% of the people will bitch to high heaven if this were a bomb and allowed to detonate. "My GOD! Security saw the bomb right there on her chest and they did NOTHING!" Actually, I remember something similar. It was something like, "My GOD! George Bush saw a Presidential Daily Brief that said 'Bin Laden determined to attack America' and he did NOTHING!!" Of course, then they get known as Truthers and fall under the category of Bush Allowed 9-11 to happen.
The other sad part is that if I could go back to 9-11 and warn security to arrest those 19 men with friggin box-cutters, you'd be screaming the loudest. "My GOD! All these men did was have box cutters! WTF could these guys do with just friggin BOX CUTTERS!!??! They were seriously overreacting!"
Next, security is not going to go to the girl with the bomb-looking-device strapped to her chest in a manner reminiscent of a Palestinian visiting a Jewish pizza parlor and ask her to kindly step over the bomb detecting equipment. "Pardon me, Miss? Would you mind if we borrowed that device strapped to your chest so we can test it for explosives? Oh, and if we could borrow that plastique looking stuff too, that would be great."
Finally, overreacting would have been closing down the airport... all airports for that matter immediately after putting a 7.62mm round through this stupid girl's skull from a distance. I have to hand it to the security team at this airport. It took some balls to be well within the blast radius of this girl when they told her to show her hands and hit the ground. They could of very easily been the first casualties of a major, multi-pronged attack. They didn't overreact. They underreacted! They saved this girls life and risked their own. They did not have to do that.
NO people should not have to be afraid of scaring other people. So her head is stuck so far in the clouds solving tricky engineering problems she forgets what other people thing... that's what AMERICA is all about!!!! She made a mistake taking a toy to the airport that scared the little sheeple but it's clearly not wrongdoing by any sense. By all accounts she wore the device for several weeks all over the place. She sounds like a true geek, into everything from welding to advanced vision programming. People shouldn't have to be attacked with guns for being "eclectic" and not worrying about what other people think. She made no threats and followed all the directions... which probably did NOT involve asking her to simply turn the shirt over to security at the first counter she stopped at. You know that ASKING somebody what they're doing without pointing an ACTUAL deadly weapon at them. Now these narrow minded cops are going to deprive the troops of somebody brilliant that can HELP them in their missions!! So who's the terrorist here?
You've got to be fucking kidding me. I saw what she was wearing and trust me, it looked like a bomb. Now you may feel safe traveling with people strapping bomb looking stuff to themselves, but fortunately, you are in the extreme minority on that one!
This dumb-ass girl took a shirt with a bomb-looking device attached to it to a place where you are not allowed to say the word "Bomb" and was surprised when security reacted!???! What is even more shocking is that dumb-ass anarchists on slashdot don't understand why security reacted. Um... maybe it's because the dumb-ass girl had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to their chest? JH Christ! If security doesn't react to that, WTF are they supposed to react to? WTF do you think these guys should do all day, only arrest the bombers AFTER the bombs go off?
Seriously, what does someone have to do for security to react that some slashdotters would find appropriate?
Stop right there, homie. If it were one of your family members wearing this thing, I suspect you'd feel differently.
Sorry, but that "equalizer shirt" looks nothing like a home made bomb. It looks like an equalizer.
By all means, tackle her to the floor, contain her, even freaking *tase* her if she resists.
Oh, GOD!!!! Don't taze her! Then she'd be all over youtube with protesters at the jail and her own army of slashdot supporters! Besides, I don't think tazing someone with a bomb that is set off by electric charge is really the best of ideas. Why not just pull the pin out of a grenade, count to three (out of five) and throw it to her!
As for tackling her... Yeah, that's brilliant also. Not only are you blown to pieces, but what you thought would make you a hero has suddenly made you the "Worst Person on Earth" on tonight's Keith Obermann show for not trying to "defuse" the situation in a way that ends up with her NOT blowing up the airport.
Tackle the person with the bomb. You go ahead! If she doesn't blow both of you to pieces along with everyone else and she happens to get away from you, I'll be back here behind this concrete with my gun drawn ready to shoot her!
Even if you think that, if it's not a bomb, why can't she be released?
She was released, on $715 bail, which, as far as bail goes, is a pittance!
Why does somebody have to be held for carrying something that we thought was a bomb but turned out not to be? The situation is normal so everybody can go home, or am I missing something?
OK, so if I go to the airport, or post office, or bank or wherever with flares strapped to my chest ala Tommy Boy and start screaming Allahu Akbar, causing all kinds of injuries from panicked civilians and bringing whatever business is going on there to a halt, once I'm captured, assuming I'm not shot, should the police just let me go when I say, "I was just joking! See? Road flares. No harm. No foul."?
I am really curious who is sneaking out of Canada into US to work for $4 an hour. Sounds deviously clever. Especially if, for example in Vancouver, a dishwasher job pays $8-10 an hour.
I was talking about the "other" US borders. There are few "snowbacks" in the US. Mexico does not have the generous minimum wage laws that we enjoy in the US and Canada.
Note and disclaimer: I feel comfortable calling them snowbacks as that is a term I picked up from an illegal Canadian who married my downstairs neighbor to gain legality. If you feel it's just a modified racial slur against our neighbors to the south, it's not. My wife and child are dependents from those that crossed from the south.
My guess is that it turns around about half way during the trip to start slowing down. Wouldn't necessarily be half way, we're not talking linear vectors are we? If we're playing catch-up with a planetary target the crossover point might be a bit later than km/2. It's more expensive to escape the closer you are to the sun's gravity well, but I'd think a lot of the energy would be soaked relative to the velocity of the target, i.e. there may not be as much energy to dump near the target. Space ain't flat, found that out from my office mate who was doing the orbital geometry for Pioneer Venus 12/13 some years back (which had the inverse effect, being inward from EO).
I don't know why he kept a separate set of comps in furlongs per fortnight, but us programmerz was wierd back then. Right, that's why I threw the "about" in there. I have no idea as to the escape velocity of Earth and what the velocity needs to be in order to be captured by a planet's gravity to enter orbit. When Picard says, "Standard orbit, Mr. Crusher!" I'm like Picard and let the boy genius figure out how to enter orbit.
Sure, I could look up the velocity needed to escape Earth's gravity and then look up the velocity needed to enter orbit at a particular angle of approach and then find the point needed to fire breaking thrusters minus the amount of time it takes to turn around (assuming that the "braking thrusters" are the same engine(s) as the pusher engine(s)) multiplied by the current (maximum) velocity and figure in gravitational forces and....and.... and.... but I am way too lazy and probably not be that smart anyway. That's why I'm glad we have people like you that take the time in school and work to figure these things out so us "not-so-bright/motivated" people can go about our lives and watch all the cool stuff guys like you do on TV or slashdot. On occasion we'll throw out a quip like I did to make ourselves look smart, but some of us know where the real talent lies and we watch in awe at the amazing stuff you guys do!
After reading this again, I realize that it may look sarcastic. Trust me, it's not.
Slashdot Mirror
You're spending almost *THREE* fuckin' billion dollars a *DAY* on the war, and yet a mere billion a year for NASA is much money?! Yeah, right! Half of your research is getting done there, imagine with the funding for the war you could have established a permanent base on Mars for less than a year!
And they could be spent on education, or roads, or bridges, or public bathrooms, or whatever. But you know what? They wouldn't be. Saying what you COULD do with the money is meaningless unless you actually plan on doing it. That money stood about as much chance as going to NASA as it did my pocket! Now, if NASA's budget had been cut as a result of the war, then you would have a point. But, as I stated, it wasn't. And even if the war had never happened, NASA's budget would not be any different than it is right now. So when you claim that the reason NASA does not have an unlimited budget is the war in Iraq, you are being completely dishonest. You are trying to turn the debate on NASA's budget into a Bush Bashing session, and I just called you on it.
Right this is about politicians (most of them) setting priorities for NASA without funding them so NASA has to pick and choose what to fund with the budget it gets.
If NASA's annual budget had not increased by over a billion dollars since the war in Iraq started, you'd have a point.
With Bush spending it all on the War Of Futility, we're not going to have any money to send anyone to the station anyways. It shouldn't come as a shock that NASA's already trying to find some budget wiggle-room, even before Bush has departed.
Is is possible to have a discussion on slashdot without bashing the President? You hate him, I get it. You tout any bad news that you hear and put a negative spin on any good news so that it is bad (the economy is a good example). I did not see Iraq anywhere in the summary, WTF is point of bringing it up. Maybe you should be posting on DailyKos or HuffingtonPost or something where that type of partisanship is acceptable.
Besides, this has nothing to do with Iraq and everything to do with NASA making plans beyond the space station. With the budget required to maintain the space station, NASA has little room for other adventures, such as a permanent base on the moon or a manned mission to Mars.
IMHO, we need to turn the space station into a spaceship assembly plant where parts of space ships can be assembled so we can launch a much larger ship than what we can lift into orbit all at once.
I was referring to the preceding sentences, "if the US is a Police State, then what is Great Britain? Hell! What is Cuba, Nicaragua, or China?". Your second statement is a much simpler case of choosing a definition to match the conclusion you wish to reach.
OK, then you might have a point. I'm just tired of people that have never had to drive through an armed checkpoint on their way to work (Kuwait and other places), have cameras follow their every move (Great Britain), or seen armed soldiers in full combat dress at the local mall (Mexico) calling the US a police state when we have none of these things. With what I've seen, it is obvious that this guy has no clue as to what a police state really is. Calling Bush a terrorist, the US a police state or any of the other hyperboles I've seen thrown around here is not only completely ignorant, but damaging as people who actually have to drive through armed checkpoints read it and think the US is so much worse.
Before people start spouting bullshit like that, they really need to travel to a place where the population truly has no rights so they can appreciate what the US has to offer. After having their car disassembled, searched and left in pieces while a soldier has you at gunpoint might make them realize that a wire tap of a foreign phone call is not the violation they once thought it was. I think a little perspective is needed.
Your argument appears to be "A is more foo than B, therefore A is not foo". I cannot think of a single situation in which this makes sense; if foo is absolute (which police-stateness isn't), the left hand side is meaningless. If foo is relative, the conclusion is manifestly bullshit.
Let's make this simple, so you can understand:
If you are arrested (A) for saying "hey, this is a police state" (B), then you live in a police state.
What I said:
If A and B, then C.
B is true (he said it), but A is not (he's not in jail), therefor, no C (we are not a police state).
So, if not C, then when B lie.
You say the left is for restricting freedom, but I'm afraid the facts are against you. It wasn't until we had a right wing congress sitting pretty next to a right wing president that we became a police state.
How is this informative? Hell, it's not even correct. The US is not a police state, no matter how many times you say it. JHC, if the US is a Police State, then what is Great Britain? Hell! What is Cuba, Nicaragua, or China? Don't give me that 'police state' bullshit until you can truly get locked up for stating "the US is a police state." Unless you are risking you neck by saying it, you are lying. (It's ironic that liars like this are the ones saying "Bush Lied")
(Oh, and this can't be Off Topic until the parent is.)
iapetus did a fine job dismantling your reasoning, I saw no point in repeating the points he made. And no, the GP didn't say it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit on it. He was only stating what is painfully obvious to everyone else--nothing in any of those pictures you linked to looked anything remotely like what the girl wore to the airport.
Although, I already explained all this to iapetus. Rather than just reading his ignorant refutations, you should read further. Don't be the dumbass kid who sits behind someone and says, "Yeah, he told you." Not only was iapetus an idiot for trying to say that he knew more than the people who's job it is to recognize bombs and have been trained as such, but you're twice the idiot for making a "he told you" post.
And as I said in response, no two of those devices looked exactly alike. Every single one was unique. However, they all shared certain characteristics:
1) Worn on torso
2) Had electronics (may or may not be visible)
3) Had explosives (may or may not be visible)
4) Had a power source (may or may not be visible)
This girl's shirt along with the putty in her hand met all four of these criteria. Just like I said that a Ford Excursion looks nothing like a Toyota Prius, they are both cars, they both serve the same basic functions and they both share enough of same characteristics to make them essentially the same thing, even though they are so radically different. So true, it did not look exactly like any of the devices shown, it did share enough characteristics to be considered a bomb (all of 'em). Actually, it looked more like a bomb than several of the well disguised vests in the links. Richard Reid had C4 in his shoe. Did it look anything like any of the images I linked to? No. Was his shoe a bomb? Yes. By using your standards of "it didn't look like any of those, so it couldn't have been a bomb", Richard Reid's shoe could not have been a bomb... and yet, it was. So don't tell me it didn't look like a bomb until you can show me a picture of what all bombs look like.
So while my training on IED's is limited, I have had some training and I know enough to know that there really is no blueprint that all bombs must follow. Since each is home made, they all tend to be unique and come in infinite different designs. To say that this couldn't be bomb because it looks like no other bombs is extraordinarily ignorant, as no to bombs look alike. So please, stop telling the professionals that they don't know what they are talking about. National security is really nothing to armchair quarterback and really, it just makes you look stupid.
Your painful attempt at logic has done more harm than Star's hoodie could ever have done.
And your painful attempt at refutation was... well, just painful to watch. Did you have a point? The GP said it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit. Do breadboard circuits disable bombs or something?
Also, the lady behind the counter was probably neither an electrical engineer nor an explosives expert. To her, it looked like a bomb.
The high for the day was 75 degrees. How often is the high temperature for the day reached before 9am? And even if she was overdressed that's pretty normal at airports since 1, airplanes are cooler than some people like, 2, people wear bulky clothing so they don't need to pack it, and 3, sometimes people fly to cooler climates.
She wasn't traveling. She was there to pick someone up.
And yes, her dress was not a clue since she had no intent to do anything wrong. But it is something I would have picked up on if I were in charge of security. She wasn't dressed for the weather. She was dressed for career day.
Ok so you think it was right what they did in London to Jean Charles de Menezes because he looked strange and ran to the platform to catch the train?
No, not at all. What they did to him was unforgivable. However, if he had a device strapped to his chest with wires and putty in his hands, then it would have been 100% justified.
No.
Anything that has wires might be a bomb?
Sure, I guess it could be. But that was not my point.
Anything that is worn as a vest, shirt or jacket might be a bomb?
Getting closer
Anything that's a 'device' might be a bomb?
OK, you have all the components in place. Now, add them all together and you have something. Is everything with tires a car? Is everything with seats a car? Is everything with an engine a car? No. But if has four tires, seats, and an engine, odds are that it is a car. Yes, it could be something else, but with all of these components, it's more than likely a car.
Are all devices bombs? Of course not. However, devices, in airports, with wires, strapped to a chest, certainly could be a bomb. If you say otherwise, you are either extremely stupid, completely unable to draw a conclusion based on given facts, or are just too damn stubborn to admit that maybe regular every day folks could very possibly mistake this device for a bomb. Well, I hate to say it, but it is a fact that normal, everyday people mistook this for a bomb, even though you can't fit that into your head.
I hope for your sake that you're Amish and like showing off your abs, because otherwise you must look like a suicide bomber everywhere you go.
Again, do the math. Add all the components together. Each of them are harmless, but combined and it looks like a bomb. Why is that so hard to understand. You suffer from CO poisoning as kid or something?
For it to look like a bomb. For which I'd need to see some explosives or any signs of some explosives being concealed somewhere (no, a small amount of putty in the hands of a person doesn't count - again, compare to the amount of explosive material in the pictures you so kindly showed us). The T-shirt shown in the article doesn't come close.
Have you ever seen C4 explode? If you had, you wouldn't have said something so stupid. Richard Reid's heel full of C4 could have taken the wing off of a 737. This girl was thought to be carrying at least two handfuls of the stuff. In a crowded area, two handfuls of C4 will kill a lot of people. Detonate it near a support column and you could collapse a terminal. Besides, does the yield really matter? How much of a bomb do you need for this thing to be called a bomb? Do you think security is supposed to say, "Well, we can only see two handfuls of C4. I'm sure she has no more stuffed in her bra/pants/hood. And besides, with that much C4, the best she could do is kill 10 people and bring our nation's travel to a halt. We should let her go. Stand down everyone! She's only going to kill 10 or so." Get real!
I don't know, maybe it's the complete lack of explosives that does it for me. It's going to a very lonely suicide if it does turn out to be a suicide vest.
See above.
Except, of course, we've already heard that she didn't ignore the question. And I'd expect them to be worried from that description, and then relieved to see the reality - which is no bomb.
She did at first. Here is a quote from wbztv.com. She did not respond when the employee asked her about the device she was wearing, so the employee repeated the question, police said.
Simpson then said the device was artwork and left the counter and walked around the terminal area, causing some employees to leave the building in fear, police said. It seems like there were several people who thought this was a bomb. I guess that average, every day people really did think this was a bomb. So stop Monday morning quarterbacking and STFU. It looked like a bomb to the ticket counter lady, several other employees and the troopers that arrested her. What more do you need? If you think you are so much smarter than everyone in this situation, then you should move out of your mother's basement and go serve you country. DHS could use someone with your supposed omnipotent intellect.
Don't be so obtuse. You claimed that what she was wearing 'looked like a miniature version' of one of those bombs. It's evident to anyone with a working pair of eyes that this claim is garbage - it looks nothing like any of those devices. None of the suicide bomb devices contains anything recognisable as electronics - and with good reason, because they don't need anything like that.
Um, the ones on the first link had plainly visible wires. From the pictures I saw, the girl's shirt had wires.
Most suicide vests are worn as a vest, shirt or jacket. This girl's device was worn on her shirt... or hoodie.
Most of the suicide vests that I've seen are "devices". This girl was wearing a device.
I don't know how much more you need. You may be so superior that you can recognize that this was not a bomb within a split second. The rest of us mere mortals are not able to keep a mental categorization of every conceivable suicide vest. For that matter, I still don't see how you can say that there is no possible way for this to be a suicide vest. As for the security at the airport, they received the same description as above. "A girl went up to the counter at the airport wearing a device on her chest with visible wires. When asked about it, ignored the question and left." WTF did you expect these guys to do? Please tell me, what does someone have to do to justify security drawing their weapons. (I've asked that question several times. So far, no one has answered it). If it's not wearing a device on your chest that looks like a bomb to mere mortals, then I don't know what is!
Also:
Today, it was 75 degrees Fahrenheit at Logan airport. A little warm for a "hoodie", don't you think?
This girl had a device attached to her shirt. There are not a whole lot of devices that attach to shirts. Of the few, a bomb is one of them. Of the few places where people are on the lookout for bombs, specifically suicide bombers, the airport is one of them.
Neither. Again, you're off in your own little fantasy world, responding to things you imagined people might be saying. You claimed that it looked like a bomb. It didn't. End of story.
I claimed it looked like a bomb. The lady at the counter claimed it looked like a bomb. The security at the airport claimed it looked like a bomb. My special services friends from my Army days claimed it looked like a bomb. I'm afraid you are in the extreme minority in saying that this looks nothing like a bomb. I'm sorry, but any device attached to someone's chest that is not recognizable as something else (like a iPod or something), with wires looks like if for no other reason than where it's located. It has all the components need to make a bomb; a battery, wires, a board to connect those wires and explosives (the putty in her hands). Yeah, I think it could have been a bomb.
Ah, so you're going for the argument that her T-shirt looked like these devices because it didn't look like them and that was what they had in common so therefore a thing that doesn't look like a bomb looks like a bomb? Wait, weren't you arguing against that just a second ago? Try to get some consistency in your drivelling, please.
They all have the same components. 1) a power source. 2) wires. 3) explosive 4) usually worn around the torso. So far, she has met 100% of the requirements for this to be a suicide vest. Sure they don't all look the same. A Ford Excursion looks nothing like a Toyota Prius, but they both have 4 tires, a driver's seat, a wind sheild and so on. Yet, they are both vehicles. This girl's shirt did not look exactly like any of the suicide vests in the links I provided, but it had all the same components. Besides, no two vests that I linked to looked exactly alike either, even when made by the same bomb maker.
Bulky. You need a lot of explosives to do serious damage, so the device has to contain a lot of explosives.
Who said she wanted to do serious damage. Maybe she just wanted to kill five-fifty peo
Are you even reading what you're posting? None of those pictures looks remotely like the breadboard circuit worn by the arrested girl.
So any device with a breadboard circuit can not be a bomb? What else can a bomb NOT contain. I'm sure our guys at TSA would like to know. I doubt the lady behind the counter knows that a breadboard circuit is. All she saw was a home made device (read: Improvised Device) attached to the chest of this girl with wires. Sorry, but that sounds like a bomb to me.
Except, of course, while none of them contains anything remotely like the girl's T-shirt
So if it looks like a bomb, it's not a bomb because no one would make a bomb that LOOKS like a bomb. If it doesn't look like a bomb, then it can't be a bomb. Which one is it? Besides, none of those devices looked like any of the others. So tell me, what does a bomb vest look like?
one of them does contain a fricking cell phone. Which looks, for your reference, like a cell phone. What with it being a cell phone and all.
No, it HAD a cell phone attached to, much like you do when you talk on it. Does that make you a cell phone when you are on the talking on one?
Overly paranoid people like you are the reason that everything that makes the US a great country is being destroyed. I would be fine with being blown up by TEH TERRORISTS!!! tomorrow if it meant people could display LED artwork publicly in Boston or see the real deal Hoover Dam tour again instead of the castrated "look, in the distance, you can sort of see one of the generators, beneath the giant American flag!" version they have now.
So, you looked at my links. Notice any two vests that looked alike? I'm not just talking about the training ones, but the rest, like where the guy's head was blown off. How about the police vest that was actually a suicide vest? Sure, none looked exactly like the on this chick had on, but then again, none of them looked like any of the others. There were common characteristics to look for. Wires are a pretty good giveaway. Strapped to a chest is another good giveaway. The puddy in the hands... well that was just gravy!
Think you know what a bomb looks like. How about I make nine bombs and one fake one. You pick the fake one and lie down on it while I set off the rest of 'em. You should be safe, Oh, ye that knows so much about bombs. Your obvious expertise will keep you safe.
I agree with most of your statement here, but friggin come on! This girl walks into an airport with a device strapped to her chest and you call it paranoia to stop her? My GOD, if wearing a device that could very easily be mistaken for a bomb with putty in her hands (that looks EXACTLY like C4, btw If you say you can tell the difference between play-dough and colored C4, you are a liar) to the airport where two of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers doesn't warrant a response, then why do you even bother with security at all? If they are not supposed to stop this dumb-ass girl, then WTF are they there for? And before you say they should have just asked her, remember that the lady at the ticket counter DID!!!
Seriously, what in your mind has to happen before airport security is justified in drawing their weapons? If it's not someone with a device and plastique, then I don't know what is!
Like box-cutters. Those were nothing also. Even so, google-image "suicide vest" and compare those pictures to what this chick was wearing. Of course, you won't find an exact match, but I think they are close enough for a trained law enforcement pro to not take any chances.
Your kidding, right: "Um, excuse me, Miss. Yes you with the bomb looking device on your chest. Would you mind stepping over here with me, please and place you C4 in the bin as I move this wand over you. Please place your arms to the side." A person, as far as I know..is not required by any law to answer another civilian about anything
Ticket agents do have some authority here. Remember, first of all that two of the nineteen 9-11 hijackers passed through Logan airport. Also, keep in mind that a few ticket agents said, "that guy was acting strange" on 9-11 but didn't tell anyone. Imagine how that must have felt, knowing that you gave a boarding pass to a 9-11 hijacker and all you asked was, "did you pack your bags yourself?". Then, compound that feeling with everyone... and I mean EVERYONE asking you, "why didn't you say anything? You could have diverted this whole thing!" Now, back the present, someone comes past this same ticket counter with a friggin bomb looking device strapped to her chest in plain sight and you question the ticket agent for not ignoring it?
This is hilarious. Why in the world should I trust you?
So let me get this straight. You don't trust me, and I'm just some guy typing on slashdot, probably thousands of miles away from you. You would however trust a Asian looking girl with over-died blonde hair in an airport with some sort of device attached to her shirt. I'm sorry, but are you a fucking moron? I don't see any other explanation as to how anyone could be so fucking backwards. BTW, you shouldn't trust me, although I do have some training with explosives, buy you sure as shit shouldn't trust someone with a device strapped to their chest. Trusting that person could cause you end up as nothing more than a cloud of red mist, wet hair and bone fragments.
And why are you talking as if you have some special knowledge of what she was wearing or what bombs look like? There's pictures of the thing all over the news.
Right. So you've seen what she was wearing. Now, look at my comment HERE for some pictures of real live suicide vests that look very similar to what this girl had on her shirt, minus the blinking lights, of course. And as to the lights: Who says you can't put blinky lights on a bomb. If I were a bomb maker and had the time, I would include an LED to test the circuit and battery, although I'd have to make sure that whoever wore the bomb knew which button was the detonator and which was the tester, of course.
Are bombs that look like Hollywood props any less deadly than those that DON'T? I've linked to pictures of suicide vests that also looked like Hollywood props. If you were working at the airport that day, would you take the chance?
Bombs do not have flashing LEDs, regardless of what you see in the movies.
True. But if you ever become security, let me know where so I can sneak anything I want in, as long as I include some blue LED's. 'Cause we all know that if it has blue LED's, it can't be a bomb, right?
Actually, if I were a bomb maker, I might include a LED just to test the battery. I'd hate to think that whoever was wearing the vest might not realize that they have a dead or disconnected battery!
Umm.. did you look at the picture of it? That doesn't look like a bomb. It's a bread board with some wires in it. You know what looks more like a bomb? A cell phone. Fortnately they didn't arrest everyone who had one of those!
Take a look at these pictures. What she was wearing looks like a mini version of one of THESE. None of which, looks anything like a cell phone, btw, but look strikingly similar to what she had on.
Other pictures.
HERE
and HERE (this actually looks more like what was on her shirt, minus the wires)
Of course, she could have easily ended up like THIS guy who was only wearing a vest with a bunch of pockets! (warning, graphic)
Ah, screw it... use google images and search for "suicide bomb vest". You won't find any cell phones there, but you might find a few that look very similar to her shirt!
I think your problem is that you think you're safe in an airport lobby. You're not. Anyone can be dropped off at the curb and wheel a suit case of explosives up to the huge line at the ticket counter and blow up dozens of people. Please recognize and accept this fact. After the security checkpoint, you have some security, but if you think you need to panic and use deadly force in the lobby, you're wrong. It wouldn't help if you did anyway. So lighten up.
Well, I'm not save on the roads either, but I still expect the police to pull on a car that is swerving at 2:00am. Just because something is not 100% secure doesn't mean that you don't at least TRY to secure it. Sure, there are more effective methods of blowing up people than walking into an airport lobby with a bomb strapped to your chest. Then again, there are more effective ways than setting yourself on fire and driving your jeep packed with a propane tank into the lobby either. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. You can neither over nor underestimate these people.
OK, the airline employee panicked, so I guess the police have to follow up, but it's a false alarm. There's no bomb, nor anything that looks like a bomb on closer inspection. This is where the police want to justify their actions. Looks like they've been trained that the only successful conclusion to a police action is to take someone into custody.
Well, she is out on just over $700 bond. As to whether she is charged or not, I guess that depends on how well she cooperates. If she truly didn't realize that her shirt looked like a bomb, and she apologizes, then OK. Maybe she could do some sort of "Don't be a dumb-ass" or "That was my brain on drugs" public service message as community service. I really hope she wouldn't intentionally try to pull a stunt like that while there to pick up her boyfriend. Then again, she did wear a shirt that looked like a bomb to the airport that 2 of the 19 9-11 hijackers passed through.
Reacting is one thing, overreacting is another. Even if you believe the "device" looked like a bomb (which it most certainly didn't if the posted pictures are accurate), it should have been easy enough for them to have her walk through one of the explosives sniffers, or be sniffed by a bomb dog. If she was clean, they could have let her go, apologized for wasting her time, and let her go. But arresting her and charging her with some
bullshit? That's fucking stupid.
People like you are why Libertarians will never win. It's a real shame too because if it weren't for this type of stupidity, I'd be a Libertarian.
It's sad that 90% of the people will bitch to high heaven if this were a bomb and allowed to detonate. "My GOD! Security saw the bomb right there on her chest and they did NOTHING!" Actually, I remember something similar. It was something like, "My GOD! George Bush saw a Presidential Daily Brief that said 'Bin Laden determined to attack America' and he did NOTHING!!" Of course, then they get known as Truthers and fall under the category of Bush Allowed 9-11 to happen.
The other sad part is that if I could go back to 9-11 and warn security to arrest those 19 men with friggin box-cutters, you'd be screaming the loudest. "My GOD! All these men did was have box cutters! WTF could these guys do with just friggin BOX CUTTERS!!??! They were seriously overreacting!"
Next, security is not going to go to the girl with the bomb-looking-device strapped to her chest in a manner reminiscent of a Palestinian visiting a Jewish pizza parlor and ask her to kindly step over the bomb detecting equipment. "Pardon me, Miss? Would you mind if we borrowed that device strapped to your chest so we can test it for explosives? Oh, and if we could borrow that plastique looking stuff too, that would be great."
Finally, overreacting would have been closing down the airport... all airports for that matter immediately after putting a 7.62mm round through this stupid girl's skull from a distance. I have to hand it to the security team at this airport. It took some balls to be well within the blast radius of this girl when they told her to show her hands and hit the ground. They could of very easily been the first casualties of a major, multi-pronged attack. They didn't overreact. They underreacted! They saved this girls life and risked their own. They did not have to do that.
NO people should not have to be afraid of scaring other people. So her head is stuck so far in the clouds solving tricky engineering problems she forgets what other people thing... that's what AMERICA is all about!!!! She made a mistake taking a toy to the airport that scared the little sheeple but it's clearly not wrongdoing by any sense. By all accounts she wore the device for several weeks all over the place. She sounds like a true geek, into everything from welding to advanced vision programming.
People shouldn't have to be attacked with guns for being "eclectic" and not worrying about what other people think. She made no threats and followed all the directions... which probably did NOT involve asking her to simply turn the shirt over to security at the first counter she stopped at. You know that ASKING somebody what they're doing without pointing an ACTUAL deadly weapon at them. Now these narrow minded cops are going to deprive the troops of somebody brilliant that can HELP them in their missions!! So who's the terrorist here?
You've got to be fucking kidding me. I saw what she was wearing and trust me, it looked like a bomb. Now you may feel safe traveling with people strapping bomb looking stuff to themselves, but fortunately, you are in the extreme minority on that one!
This dumb-ass girl took a shirt with a bomb-looking device attached to it to a place where you are not allowed to say the word "Bomb" and was surprised when security reacted!???! What is even more shocking is that dumb-ass anarchists on slashdot don't understand why security reacted. Um... maybe it's because the dumb-ass girl had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to their chest? JH Christ! If security doesn't react to that, WTF are they supposed to react to? WTF do you think these guys should do all day, only arrest the bombers AFTER the bombs go off?
Seriously, what does someone have to do for security to react that some slashdotters would find appropriate?
Stop right there, homie. If it were one of your family members wearing this thing, I suspect you'd feel differently.
Sorry, but that "equalizer shirt" looks nothing like a home made bomb. It looks like an equalizer.
By all means, tackle her to the floor, contain her, even freaking *tase* her if she resists.
Oh, GOD!!!! Don't taze her! Then she'd be all over youtube with protesters at the jail and her own army of slashdot supporters! Besides, I don't think tazing someone with a bomb that is set off by electric charge is really the best of ideas. Why not just pull the pin out of a grenade, count to three (out of five) and throw it to her!
As for tackling her... Yeah, that's brilliant also. Not only are you blown to pieces, but what you thought would make you a hero has suddenly made you the "Worst Person on Earth" on tonight's Keith Obermann show for not trying to "defuse" the situation in a way that ends up with her NOT blowing up the airport.
Tackle the person with the bomb. You go ahead! If she doesn't blow both of you to pieces along with everyone else and she happens to get away from you, I'll be back here behind this concrete with my gun drawn ready to shoot her!
Even if you think that, if it's not a bomb, why can't she be released?
She was released, on $715 bail, which, as far as bail goes, is a pittance!
Why does somebody have to be held for carrying something that we thought was a bomb but turned out not to be? The situation is normal so everybody can go home, or am I missing something?
OK, so if I go to the airport, or post office, or bank or wherever with flares strapped to my chest ala Tommy Boy and start screaming Allahu Akbar, causing all kinds of injuries from panicked civilians and bringing whatever business is going on there to a halt, once I'm captured, assuming I'm not shot, should the police just let me go when I say, "I was just joking! See? Road flares. No harm. No foul."?
I am really curious who is sneaking out of Canada into US to work for $4 an hour.
Sounds deviously clever.
Especially if, for example in Vancouver, a dishwasher job pays $8-10 an hour.
I was talking about the "other" US borders. There are few "snowbacks" in the US. Mexico does not have the generous minimum wage laws that we enjoy in the US and Canada.
Note and disclaimer: I feel comfortable calling them snowbacks as that is a term I picked up from an illegal Canadian who married my downstairs neighbor to gain legality. If you feel it's just a modified racial slur against our neighbors to the south, it's not. My wife and child are dependents from those that crossed from the south.
I don't know why he kept a separate set of comps in furlongs per fortnight, but us programmerz was wierd back then. Right, that's why I threw the "about" in there. I have no idea as to the escape velocity of Earth and what the velocity needs to be in order to be captured by a planet's gravity to enter orbit. When Picard says, "Standard orbit, Mr. Crusher!" I'm like Picard and let the boy genius figure out how to enter orbit.
Sure, I could look up the velocity needed to escape Earth's gravity and then look up the velocity needed to enter orbit at a particular angle of approach and then find the point needed to fire breaking thrusters minus the amount of time it takes to turn around (assuming that the "braking thrusters" are the same engine(s) as the pusher engine(s)) multiplied by the current (maximum) velocity and figure in gravitational forces and....and.... and.... but I am way too lazy and probably not be that smart anyway. That's why I'm glad we have people like you that take the time in school and work to figure these things out so us "not-so-bright/motivated" people can go about our lives and watch all the cool stuff guys like you do on TV or slashdot. On occasion we'll throw out a quip like I did to make ourselves look smart, but some of us know where the real talent lies and we watch in awe at the amazing stuff you guys do!
After reading this again, I realize that it may look sarcastic. Trust me, it's not.