• I've created a thread for feedback on the reaction/likes feature Feedback thread

Kid re-wires clock, gets suspended from school for "bomb hoax"

sunmaster14 said:
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Do you not have an answer? I can understand the school's reaction to a certain extent, but not the police reaction once they had the knowledge it was a clock. In my view the police are there to investigate, in this case that would have taken one question to the kid and a look at what he had brought to school. At the worse I would have expected the police to tell the lad that carrying such things into school without prior permission is not a good idea.
 
[SNIP]
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Ahmed+%20clock+%20police+statement

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/16/us/texas-student-ahmed-muslim-clock-bomb/

Please note that this is an article that is highly critical of the police and the school. Not some one biased against Ahmed.

From DAY ONE the information has been there. If you had actually read any of the articles associated with this issue, you would KNOW why I said he shut down. It's been said OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. So obviously you didn't do ANY research on your own.

Irving Police spokesman Officer James McLellan told the station, "We attempted to question the juvenile about what it was and he would simply only tell us that it was a clock."

The teenager did that because, well, it was a clock, he said.

On Wednesday, police announced the teen will not be charged.

Chief Larry Boyd said Ahmed should have been "forthcoming" by going beyond the description that what he made was a clock. But Boyd said authorities determined that the teenager did not intend to alarm anyone and the device, which the chief called "a homemade experiment," was innocuous.
Click to expand...
Ahmed has never disputed these claims.


This, via the Associated Press, is the statement:

The student showed the device to a teacher who was concerned it was possibly the infrastructure for a bomb. School resource officers questioned the student about his intentions, and the reason he brought the device to the school. The student would only say that it was a clock and was not forthcoming at that time about any other details. Having no other information to go on, and taking into consideration the devices suspicious appearance and the safety of the students and the staff at MacArthur High School, the student was taken into custody for possession of a hoax bomb
Click to expand...
http://www.vox.com/2015/9/16/9339427/ahmed-arrest-irving-police


[SNIP]

And as has also been posted, oh I don't know, probably about 100 times, the fact that the original teacher that he showed it to was never brought to the office or involved in the situation, gives us a clue that he probably didn't tell them that he brought it in to show that teacher.


[SNIP]

Edited by kmortis: 
Do not personalize the topic

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Darat said:
Do you not have an answer? I can understand the school's reaction to a certain extent, but not the police reaction once they had the knowledge it was a clock. In my view the police are there to investigate, in this case that would have taken one question to the kid and a look at what he had brought to school. At the worse I would have expected the police to tell the lad that carrying such things into school without prior permission is not a good idea.
Click to expand...

My answer is that you were begging the question. That mess of circuitry in a metal box with an electrical cord sticking out may have performed some of the functions of a clock, but it was neither useful nor practical as a timekeeping device for school. A wristwatch is practical, and there is no reason to be suspicious of a student's motives in bringing it to school. An alarm clock is somewhat less practical, and a teacher might reasonably ask why a student brought it to school. The contraption that you blithely refer to as a clock requires more explanation. It was not obviously a clock, nor was it obviously only a clock. Additionally, a clock would be brought to school in order to keep track of time. I don't think anybody, except perhaps you through implication, has claimed that Ahmed brought that thing to school in order to keep track of time.
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
This has been addressed many times. Nobody thought it was a bomb. It wasn’t just a clock in a box. It was a clock in a box that also appeared to be (at least to some people) a possible infrastructure to a bomb or something that could be used as a hoax bomb.
Click to expand...

ANYTHING can be a hoax bomb, including nothing.

"Hoax bombs" range from "suspicious packages" left alone in the middle of the street that turn out to be suitcases, or boxes, or rabbit traps (a real recent case), to the phone call that there is a bomb in the building but is actually nothing.

The key to a "hoax bomb" is not what it looks like (a bomb can be hidden in anything) it's the circumstances. When the kid says, "It's a clock" and carries it with him everywhere he goes, that's not a hoax bomb. It's a clock.

A bomb hoax would be if he put it in some conspicuous place to freak everyone out, or did it inadvertently.
 
pgwenthold said:
ANYTHING can be a hoax bomb, including nothing.

"Hoax bombs" range from "suspicious packages" left alone in the middle of the street that turn out to be suitcases, or boxes, or rabbit traps (a real recent case), to the phone call that there is a bomb in the building but is actually nothing.

The key to a "hoax bomb" is not what it looks like (a bomb can be hidden in anything) it's the circumstances. When the kid says, "It's a clock" and carries it with him everywhere he goes, that's not a hoax bomb. It's a clock.

A bomb hoax would be if he put it in some conspicuous place to freak everyone out, or did it inadvertently.
Click to expand...
We do not know what Ahmed said to the police. What we do know is he had a device that went off in a class. to the layman it does look suspicious. Just because he then said it was a clock doesn't mean it was or was not meant to be a bomb hoax. We don't know if he told the police about showing it to the other teacher before this happened. We also do not know about any previous problems at school and what they were about. The police and the school do. It is possible his previous problems were a factor in their decision. This has been suggested by the letter the letter requesting the school be allowed to make it public.

There are so many unknowns here I am surprised ( not really) that people exercising skepticism would be so sure this was a case caused by bigotry. These unknowns also don't rule out that it was involved.

I am also surprised that people repeat the mantra that he was arrested for bringing a clock to school. When clearly there is more to his arrest than something that typically people would look at and call a clock.
 
eeyore1954 said:
We do not know what Ahmed said to the police. What we do know is he had a device that went off in a class. to the layman it does look suspicious.
Click to expand...

What makes it "suspicious"? And I thought it was taken up by the police, not laymen?


Just because he then said it was a clock doesn't mean it was
Click to expand...

No, that fact that it showed the time of day is primae facie evidence that it is a clock. Actually, it goes beyond that - the fact that it showed the time of day means it was, by definition, a clock.

or was not meant to be a bomb hoax.
Click to expand...

I have a pen. If you ask me, I will tell you it is a pen. That doesn't mean it can't be a bomb hoax. Should I be arrested for having a pen and saying it is a pen and not a bomb hoax? You don't know what I mean?

When clearly there is more to his arrest than something that typically people would look at and call a clock.
Click to expand...

Oh, so he has done some major modification to take a simple clock and make it look like something very different? But I thought that he didn't do anything all that fancy, and just rewired a clock? But now he didn't just rewire a clock, he made something that looks unusual? Good on him, right? That's cool, worthy of being sold in the late SkyMall, right? Or was it no big deal? Had to keep the apologists stories right.
 
sunmaster14 said:
It's kind of weird that you want to laugh at the teacher. Not only did Ahmed interrupt her class intentionally,
Click to expand...

This is an unsupported (though, I will grant you, probably also unrefuted) inference.

sunmaster14 said:
but he had something that did not look remotely like anything that is normal to have in school.
Click to expand...

I don't know what that means. Beyond don't bring guns, I did not know that we were supposed to be hung up on things that are "normal to have in school".

sunmaster14 said:
The people who are claiming it looked like a clock, and only a clock, are suffering from hindsight bias. Even if the display did clock-like things, there was no reason to believe that it was only a clock and didn't do anything else that could be disruptive to the school environment.
Click to expand...

There's no reason to believe that of my underwear either. Just like the "clock" resembled non-remarkable electronics in a box, my underwear looks like regular underwear. But maybe I have modified it to fulfill various non-undewear related functions. You just don't know.

sunmaster14 said:
On top of that, it was actually dangerous, as many in this thread have noted. It was both an electrical shock hazard and a fire hazard, since it could be (and was) connected to A/C power without proper shielding of hot wires and without proper mounting of the transformer.
Click to expand...

That may be so, but he was not arrested for carelessness in tinkering. He was arrested for bringing a "hoax bomb" to school.

sunmaster14 said:
In any event, this incident went viral not because it was an alleged case of school official stupidity, which are legion, but because it was an alleged case of Islamophobia. You may think it's appropriate to point and laugh at the English teacher, but Ahmed did not get invited to the White House because he had a stupid teacher.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but what most struck me, personally, about this case is the incompetence involved in that such an incident would lead to an arrest. In fact, I have compared it to the 2007 Boston Mooninite panic (though possibly not on this forum) which no one ever alleged involved any racial or religious bigotry.
 
cosmicaug said:
This is an unsupported (though, I will grant you, probably also unrefuted) inference.
Click to expand...

I've linked to his interview on Al Jazeera before (he describes what happened at 0:48).



So, not only did he take the clock out of his backpack (which his first period teacher told him not to do), but he showed it to a friend, plugged it in, and then set the alarm so that it went off. During English class. I think my inference is pretty solid, although one might quibble with whether his intent was to disrupt English class or just to treat it as the equivalent of recess.


I don't know what that means. Beyond don't bring guns, I did not know that we were supposed to be hung up on things that are "normal to have in school".
Click to expand...

Actually, the school code of conduct does in fact give the principal discretion to ban items that he thinks don't belong in school. I think this is a good way to distinguish between, for example, a laptop computer and an Xbox. Or a bracelet and a pair of handcuffs. Or a watch and an alarm clock. The principal is given this discretion presumably because it would be too difficult to list all of the things which are allowed in school or not allowed in school, and in any case, with such a list, the students could game it.

The point is that things in school should have a purpose. Dual purpose items can be tricky, but something with no school purpose at all does not belong in school.


There's no reason to believe that of my underwear either. Just like the "clock" resembled non-remarkable electronics in a box, my underwear looks like regular underwear. But maybe I have modified it to fulfill various non-undewear related functions. You just don't know.
Click to expand...

Your underwear has a purpose that is important for getting an education in school. It holds your dangly bits in place (assuming you have them) and/or prevents accidental flashing. As such it helps make the learning environment physically and emotionally more comfortable. Underwear may in fact have a dual purpose as the primary containment vehicle for an underwear bomb, but that's just one of those risks that teachers, parents, and students have to live with.
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
I've linked to his interview on Al Jazeera before (he describes what happened at 0:48).



So, not only did he take the clock out of his backpack (which his first period teacher told him not to do), but he showed it to a friend, plugged it in, and then set the alarm so that it went off. During English class. I think my inference is pretty solid, although one might quibble with whether his intent was to disrupt English class or just to treat it as the equivalent of recess.
Click to expand...

There's more ambiguity to that language than you are allowing for: "It was plugged in and I set a time on there and I showed it to a student sitting next to me. And it went off so the teacher looked around and said...."

Did he set a time or did he set the alarm with the intent of it going off? Bringing up intentionality is hardly a quibble when my claim is that you were drawing unsupported inference regarding intent (not that intending to disrupt a class with an alarm sound would merit that an alarm clock be treated as a "hoax bomb" --though in some circumstances it could merit a visit to the principal's office).

sunmaster14 said:
Actually, the school code of conduct does in fact give the principal discretion to ban items that he thinks don't belong in school. I think this is a good way to distinguish between, for example, a laptop computer and an Xbox. Or a bracelet and a pair of handcuffs. Or a watch and an alarm clock. The principal is given this discretion presumably because it would be too difficult to list all of the things which are allowed in school or not allowed in school, and in any case, with such a list, the students could game it.

The point is that things in school should have a purpose. Dual purpose items can be tricky, but something with no school purpose at all does not belong in school.
Click to expand...

This is absurd.
 
sunmaster14 said:
My answer is that you were begging the question. That mess of circuitry in a metal box with an electrical cord sticking out may have performed some of the functions of a clock, but it was neither useful nor practical as a timekeeping device for school. A wristwatch is practical, and there is no reason to be suspicious of a student's motives in bringing it to school. An alarm clock is somewhat less practical, and a teacher might reasonably ask why a student brought it to school. The contraption that you blithely refer to as a clock requires more explanation. It was not obviously a clock, nor was it obviously only a clock. Additionally, a clock would be brought to school in order to keep track of time. I don't think anybody, except perhaps you through implication, has claimed that Ahmed brought that thing to school in order to keep track of time.
Click to expand...
Nobody but you is claiming that Ahmed brought the clock to tell time with, and the end purpose of the project was not a functional clock but a bench rugged electronics research object. It could have been a radio.

The only "explanation" required or possible was not ever going to be received by cops convinced something else is at play.
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
Nobody but you is claiming that Ahmed brought the clock to tell time with, and the end purpose of the project was not a functional clock but a bench rugged electronics research object. It could have been a radio.

The only "explanation" required or possible was not ever going to be received by cops convinced something else is at play.
Click to expand...

Stop drama queening. If Ahmed had told the cops, "I made this cool gadget and I brought it to school to show Mr. Johnson, I showed it to him this morning"

Then Mr. Johnson comes down and says "Oh yeah, Ahmed is a little engineer of sorts and is always playing around with electronics, he did indeed show it to me this morning."

You really think they would have arrested him for bringing it to school?

I can tell you ONE thing I absolutely know about cops and that is they hate having to do paperwork over non issues. That's why domestic violence issues have taken so long to deal with. The cop comes to the house and then the victim changes their mind and refuses to press charges. Domestic violence is a REAL ISSUE (before everyone starts spittle shouting at me) but doing all the paperwork for people to just change their mind the next day is very annoying.

Cops do not like to have to do unnecessary paperwork. So I really don't think they were "itchin' for a reason to arrest a kid."


:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I've been interviewed by cops with a preconceived false narrative. When they ask the wrong question it doesn't matter what the answer is. We don't know what he said. We have been told he asked to talk to his dad and was denied, we know the cops commented he was uncooperative in some manner they labeled "passive aggressive." Unless and until they release a transcript or report we know nothing else, so perhaps you might consider re reading a chapter or two of The Phantom Tollbooth. There's a memorable bit about an island you seem to be on in this thread.
 
truethat said:
Stop drama queening. If Ahmed had told the cops, "I made this cool gadget and I brought it to school to show Mr. Johnson, I showed it to him this morning"

Then Mr. Johnson comes down and says "Oh yeah, Ahmed is a little engineer of sorts and is always playing around with electronics, he did indeed show it to me this morning."
You really think they would have arrested him for bringing it to school?
I can tell you ONE thing I absolutely know about cops and that is they hate having to do paperwork over non issues. That's why domestic violence issues have taken so long to deal with. The cop comes to the house and then the victim changes their mind and refuses to press charges. Domestic violence is a REAL ISSUE (before everyone starts spittle shouting at me) but doing all the paperwork for people to just change their mind the next day is very annoying.

Cops do not like to have to do unnecessary paperwork. So I really don't think they were "itchin' for a reason to arrest a kid."


:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They did arrest him.

They didn't think it was a risk. We know this because they didn't do anything that one should do if presented with the risk of a bomb.

Their account gives no reason to doubt Ahmed's claim that he said it was a clock.
 
jimbob said:
They did arrest him.

They didn't think it was a risk. We know this because they didn't do anything that one should do if presented with the risk of a bomb.

Their account gives no reason to doubt Ahmed's claim that he said it was a clock.
Click to expand...

Um no. Again for the umpteenth time. THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED> Even Ahmed doesn't dispute that that is not what happened.

You don't get to just make up your own version of events to back up your moral outrage.

Awaits the inevitable "Do you have any evidence to back up that claim? Because I'm not going to go read anything about what actually happened."
 
cosmicaug said:
Maybe so, but what most struck me, personally, about this case is the incompetence involved in that such an incident would lead to an arrest. In fact, I have compared it to the 2007 Boston Mooninite panic (though possibly not on this forum) which no one ever alleged involved any racial or religious bigotry.
Click to expand...

There does seem to be a general ignorance about what non-consumer grade electronics look like...
 
Jrrarglblarg said:
I've been interviewed by cops with a preconceived false narrative. When they ask the wrong question it doesn't matter what the answer is. We don't know what he said. We have been told he asked to talk to his dad and was denied, we know the cops commented he was uncooperative in some manner they labeled "passive aggressive." Unless and until they release a transcript or report we know nothing else, so perhaps you might consider re reading a chapter or two of The Phantom Tollbooth. There's a memorable bit about an island you seem to be on in this thread.
Click to expand...

So what is happening here is clear. You have a personal bias against the topic and are insisting on interpreting the evidence in the way that matches your own personal narrative, extrapolating what happened to you as somehow relevant to this story when it's completely irrelevant.

Have fun with that.
 
Oh hey, they showed the actual clock on the morning news today, the cops still have it. they plugged it in and everything. the large flashing 12:00 that came on gave it away immediately.
 
truethat said:
Jrrarglblarg said:
I've been interviewed by cops with a preconceived false narrative. When they ask the wrong question it doesn't matter what the answer is. We don't know what he said. We have been told he asked to talk to his dad and was denied, we know the cops commented he was uncooperative in some manner they labeled "passive aggressive." Unless and until they release a transcript or report we know nothing else, so perhaps you might consider re reading a chapter or two of The Phantom Tollbooth. There's a memorable bit about an island you seem to be on in this thread.
Click to expand...
So what is happening here is clear. You have a personal bias against the topic and are insisting on interpreting the evidence in the way that matches your own personal narrative, extrapolating what happened to you as somehow relevant to this story when it's completely irrelevant.

Have fun with that.
Click to expand...

Unlike anyone else on this thread. :rolleyes:

I do wonder what the purpose of throwing the kid in with 5 (6?) officers for the interrogation. Are police officers too stupid to come up with a reasonable line of questioning as individuals? I kind of doubt it. Maybe it is a deliberate tactic to make what is already an intimidating situation even more intimidating. Would intimidation tactics ever possibly involve the pushing of a preconceived false narrative and the dismissal of responses not fitting that narrative?

You speculated that if only Ahmed had said "the right thing" the cops would never had arrested him. Jrrarglblarg related a personal experience which shows that at least in some occasions this does not happen. How is this any less relevant than your own speculation?


If you get to speculate, here's my own speculation:
Interviewer: What is it.

Ahmed: It's a clock. I had a smashed clock, fixed it and put it in a different case.

Interviewer: But why did you do this?

Ahmed: [confused, says nothing]

Note taker: [writes that suspect is uncooperative]

Interviewer: Why did you put it in a metal case. What is it supposed to do.

Ahmed: It's a clock. It tells time.

Note taker: [writes that suspect is passive aggressive]

[Etc....]
Click to expand...
 
6TZOxuV.jpg
 
cosmicaug said:
Unlike anyone else on this thread. :rolleyes:



If you get to speculate, here's my own speculation:
Click to expand...



Ok let me ask you a question that I posed before that everyone just ignored.


Ahmed's sister was previously suspended for supposedly threatening to blow up the school.

Isn't it possible that the police wondered why two kids coming out of the same home have a pattern of "bomb" issues at the school? Isn't it possible that that they were concerned that something else was going on?


Let's say the cops thought this

I wonder if there is something going on at HOME that the kids are innocently reflecting?

The kid seems nervous and scared and doesn't want to tell us anything.

His dad shows up freaking out demanding to see his kid (which is of course normal) but could be interpreted as wanting to get Ahmed back under his control.


Let's talk to this kid by himself to see if there is any danger at home.
 
Last edited:
truethat said:
<snip>

Isn't it possible that the police wondered why two kids coming out of the same home have a pattern of being falsely accused of "bomb" issues at the school?

<snip>
Click to expand...


FTFY.

Makes stuff a a little different viewed like that. Don't you think?


Also, two instances is a little bit sparse to call a "pattern".
 
Last edited:
Look we all know Ahmed got uppity and wouldn't start talkin', and no self-respectin' cop in Texas is gonna pass up an opportunity to teach a disrespectin' middle eastern teenager a lesson.
 
quadraginta said:
FTFY.

Makes stuff a a little different viewed like that. Don't you think?


Also, two instances is a little bit sparse to call a "pattern".
Click to expand...


Oh come on. TWO Kids from the same home having the same issue. How many times has ANY kid you know had an issue related to a "bomb" incident?:rolleyes:

And once again you are still not understanding the point. Straight up we have no evidence beyond the sister's word that she was "falsely accused." Is that how you think suspensions work? Someone just waltzes into the office and says you said something and then end of story?

Consider this, (and please don't bother responding, this is for the page in general, not to you specifically) What about a kid that comes to school and is falsely accused of saying she's a drug dealer and her friend has lots of drugs at home.

Then a year later her brother comes to school with little packets of rock candy ala Breaking Bad. The kid keeps saying "It's just candy, it's not Meth!"

Don't you think that's a bit strange and maybe the cops would want to know if anything was going on at home?
 
Last edited:
truethat said:
<snip>

And once again you are still not understanding the point. Straight up we have no evidence beyond the sister's word that she was "falsely accused." Is that how you think suspensions work? Someone just waltzes into the office and says you said something and then end of story?

<snip>
Click to expand...


You're right. Of course not.

No one in an environment full of teenagers is ever falsely accused, and even if something that wildly unlikely did happen it would never get by the administration. They are wise to every childish attempt at manipulation.

Don't know what I was thinking.
 
quadraginta said:
FTFY.

Makes stuff a a little different viewed like that. Don't you think?


Also, two instances is a little bit sparse to call a "pattern".
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. Maybe truethat has a point. Two people from the same family, somehow reported to have bomb threats, even though there weren't any bombs. You must admit it is a bit odd.

I wonder what Ahmed Mohamed, Aysha Mohamed, or their father, Mohamed al-Hassan Mohamed, could be up to that causes that sort of suspicion.
 
Meadmaker said:
I'm not so sure. Maybe truethat has a point. Two people from the same family, somehow reported to have bomb threats, even though there weren't any bombs. You must admit it is a bit odd.

I wonder what Ahmed Mohamed, Aysha Mohamed, or their father, Mohamed al-Hassan Mohamed, could be up to that causes that sort of suspicion.
Click to expand...

Can you give any evidence that Aysha's story was true? Or do you just usually believe one side of the story without any information, details or investigating what actually happened.......oh wait.....

There's that racialist ideology again. Amazing how my kids with names just like those have never been involved in any sort of issue with a fake bomb threat at school, nor have any of their Arab Muslim friends, or millions of Arab Muslim kids with Arab Muslim names living in the US.

I'm sure they were the ONLY Arab Muslim kids attending their school and that's why they were singled out.

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Clock Boy is back, with attorneys...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/11/2...ng-texas-city-school-district-for-15-million/

Demand letters issued by Mohamed’s attorneys on Monday sought $5 million from the Irving Independent School District and $10 million from the City of Irving in addition to written apologies from the Irving ISD and the city’s mayor and police chief.


The letter to Irving ISD alleges several violations of school policy, including that employees “disregarded the district’s written policies and procedures by detaining, interrogating and attempting to coerce a confession from Ahmed.” The letter also claims Mohamed suffered “severe psychological trauma” and was harassed by officials.


...


In a sentence that is bolded, italicized and underlined, Mohamed’s attorneys write that their client’s “reputation in the global community is permanently scarred.”
Click to expand...

The kid's practically a movie star - presidential visits, CEO's and corporations praising him and showering him with gifts - poor kid. Give me a break!
 
Isn't that some sort of extortion?

Pay me or I'll sue you?

http://irvingblog.dallasnews.com/20...apology-for-ahmeds-treatment-over-clock.html/

http://www.scribd.com/doc/290859889/2015-11-23-City-of-Irving-Demand-Letter

Demand
As a result of the above-described violations of Ahmed’s constitutional, statutory, and common law rights, and the damages flowing from those violations, we demand the following: 1. Ten million dollars as compensation for the damages Ahmed suffered at the hands of the City of Irving and its employees. 2. A written apology from Mayor Van Duyne acknowledging that she has never
been presented with any evidence that Ahmed was a “pawn” in any “civilization jihad” or that the events here were planned by Ahmed’s family or friends as part of an “influence operation.”
3. A written apology from Police Chief Larry Boyd acknowledging that Ahmed Mohamed never intended to threaten anyone, and that his detention, interrogation, and arrest were wrongful and were made at a point in time when there was no reasonable suspicion to believe that Ahmed had committed a crime or was about to commit any crime. If you fail to comply with the above demands within sixty days from the date of this letter, you should expect that we will file a civil action addressing the causes of action and events described in this letter.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
In a sentence that is bolded, italicized and underlined, Mohamed’s attorneys write that their client’s “reputation in the global community is permanently scarred.”
Click to expand...

Uh huh.
 
Strikes me as a particularly frivolous legal claim. The only reason that Ahmed has any notoriety at all is because his family rushed to the media like moths to a flame.

By the way, I think a found a picture of Ahmed's new invention. It looks like a thermometer that lights up when your beverage has reached the optimal temperature. Or maybe it's just a clock.


 
sunmaster14 said:
Strikes me as a particularly frivolous legal claim. The only reason that Ahmed has any notoriety at all is because his family rushed to the media like moths to a flame.

By the way, I think a found a picture of Ahmed's new invention. It looks like a thermometer that lights up when your beverage has reached the optimal temperature. Or maybe it's just a clock.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_6744356539343853a3.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...
Given that photo was released by ISIS and is claimed to be the type of terrorist bomb that brought down the Russian airplane, can I assume that you are calling Ahmed a terrorist bomber or want-a-be?
 
15 million bucks? Cripes, a guy could buy a whole raft of slave laborers immigrant workers in Qatar for that kind of dough.
 
I gather that some have used the suit to indicate that this was all a plot by Ahmed and his family to obtain big money through litigation. My, they are very clever to have planned it out so well and to have predicted the school's and/or police's over-the-top response! This contrasts with the posters who were unimpressed by the clock itself as a science project. Too bad the school and police fell for it as planned and placed themselves in so much legal liability. Whatever the result I suspect that it will cost the police and school if only to mount a defense.

I was previously arguing (and still do) that the USA needs more scientifically interested people like Ahmed, but perhaps it is in legal talent in which he really excels. Frankly I think he has a good case and will probably be able to settle out of court for a significant sum.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Strikes me as a particularly frivolous legal claim. The only reason that Ahmed has any notoriety at all is because his family rushed to the media like moths to a flame.

By the way, I think a found a picture of Ahmed's new invention. It looks like a thermometer that lights up when your beverage has reached the optimal temperature. Or maybe it's just a clock....
Click to expand...
We've been over this, sunmas. If anyone ever thought it was a real bomb, why didn't they evacuate the building and call a bomb squad?

Ergo no matter what it might have looked like, obviously a real bomb was not at issue.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
We've been over this, sunmas. If anyone ever thought it was a real bomb, why didn't they evacuate the building and call a bomb squad?
Click to expand...
You answered your own question, they never thought it was a bomb. It was investigated as a hoax bomb. It certainly wasn't an invention, it wasn't even homemade.
 
Giordano said:
<respectful snip>
I was previously arguing (and still do) that the USA needs more scientifically interested people like Ahmed, but perhaps it is in legal talent in which he really excels. Frankly I think he has a good case and will probably be able to settle out of court for a significant sum.
Click to expand...
I wonder how much Ahmed has to do with the lawsuit vs how much his father and the lawyer he hooked up with to file.
 
Giordano said:
Given that photo was released by ISIS and is claimed to be the type of terrorist bomb that brought down the Russian airplane, can I assume that you are calling Ahmed a terrorist bomber or want-a-be?
Click to expand...

No, I was actually making fun of the people who insisted that Ahmed's "invention" was obviously a clock. Presumably the same people would say that the picture I uploaded is obviously a can of Schweppes Gold pineapple soda with an improvised thermometer and swizzle stick. Well, they would if they were being consistent. But they won't be.
 
Giordano said:
I gather that some have used the suit to indicate that this was all a plot by Ahmed and his family to obtain big money through litigation. My, they are very clever to have planned it out so well and to have predicted the school's and/or police's over-the-top response! This contrasts with the posters who were unimpressed by the clock itself as a science project. Too bad the school and police fell for it as planned and placed themselves in so much legal liability. Whatever the result I suspect that it will cost the police and school if only to mount a defense.

I was previously arguing (and still do) that the USA needs more scientifically interested people like Ahmed, but perhaps it is in legal talent in which he really excels. Frankly I think he has a good case and will probably be able to settle out of court for a significant sum.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's a wholly frivolous case, and I predict it won't survive a motion to dismiss (with prejudice), if Ahmed's lawyers even bother to file a complaint. It will cost the school district and the city $10,000 in legal fees or so, and that's a bit of a shame, but the case will not go far. Apart from the fact that neither the school nor the police did anything wrong with respect to the law, any putative damages (which are speculative, to say the least) resulted only from Ahmed's family's actions (specifically, publicizing the event as much as possible).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom