Ok, If this is true, what does that tell you. Who's the biggest fool here?
A number of UK newspapers and other sources have started to recently produce news articles, explaining how some people have noticed, that it is a completely FAKE story. (Or something on those lines).
I.e. The boy and his family have set this incident up on purpose as a stunt.
After hearing all the various accusations and explanations as to why they are being fraudulent and trying to con the general public, of America.
Have the American news sources, realized yet that it is a FAKE story, and created on purpose by the boy and his family ?
Anyone who still believes that it is a genuine story, and the boy and his family are telling the absolute 100% truth.
Needs to go on the holiday of a life time. Send me $49,999. I will than let my King/Prince of Nigeria friend, give you a tremendous holiday in East Korea.
Apparently 78.2% of Americans have never heard of East Korea.
tl;dr
Balloon boy.
Ok, If this is true, what does that tell you. Who's the biggest fool here?
NOPE,
It didn't look like a bomb. But a bunch of ignorant teachers/police decided to treat it as it. As a matter of fact, this questions what is suspicious.
I take the rear off my cell phone and pull a couple of the boards out??? Is that now a bomb???
Ok, If this is true, what does that tell you. Who's the biggest fool here?
If I chew a poptart into the shape of a gun, does that make it a gun?
I don't know, as you could mean a number of different things. Who is the biggest fool, then ?
The people who got fooled into thinking it was a god damn bomb, took him in and arrested him.
The Pop-tart gun kid and this are two very different circumstances....
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/shu...e-as-handcuffing-and-arresting-ahmed-mohamed/
No one thought it was a bomb.
The police said from they beginning they knew it wasn't a bomb.
But you can't bring fake bombs to school just like you can't bring fake guns to school
The people who got fooled into thinking it was a god damn bomb, took him in and arrested him. Gave him a platform and eventually got him a meeting with the pres/white house, Zuckerberg etc...
Essentially getting him notoriety for success.
Richard Dawkins questions Ahmed Mohamed's 'motives' and sparks backlash
Evolutionary biologist says boy’s arrest was wrong, but questions whether he really invented an alarm clock
Dawkins tweeted: ‘If this is true, what was his motive? Whether or not he wanted the police to arrest him, they shouldn’t have done so[.]’
Dawkins tweeted: ‘If this is true, what was his motive? Whether or not he wanted the police to arrest him, they shouldn’t have done so[.]’ Photograph: Geraint Lewis/REX
Martin Pengelly in New York
@MartinPengelly
Monday 21 September 2015 18.36 BST
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via Email Share on Pinterest Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Shares
14k
Comments
4,096
Save for later
The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins found himself at the centre of controversy on Sunday when he questioned the motives of Ahmed Mohamed, the 14-year-old boy who was arrested and detained in Texas when a teacher thought a clock he had made was a bomb.
Dawkins did not dispute that Mohamed should not have been arrested, but questioned whether the boy had truly “invented” the clock, as has been reported. He tweeted:
Mohamed, whose parents are from Sudan, was arrested, handcuffed and questioned by five police officers at MacArthur high school in Irving on Monday. He was then suspended for three days.
He told MSNBC he was not allowed to call his parents and was accused of carrying a hoax bomb. He said: “I felt like I was a criminal, I felt like I was a terrorist. I felt like all the names I was called.”
He added: “In middle school I was called a terrorist, called a bomb maker, just because of my race.”
In a controversy that largely played itself out on Twitter, Mohamed then received overtures from Silicon Valley tech companies, support from Hillary Clinton and an invitation to the White House from President Obama.
Ahmed Mohamed is tired, excited to meet Obama – and wants his clock back
Read more
On Friday, Mohamed spoke to the Guardian. Such national attention was “worth it, once you realize what you’re fighting for”, he said, adding that that fight was “not just for Muslims … but for anybody who has been through this”.
Dawkins, the author of books including the groundbreaking The Selfish Gene, the bestselling The God Delusion and the memoir A Sense of Wonder, is a leading critic of religious belief and an advocate for rational thought.
On Sunday, the emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford said he was simply looking for the truth of the Texas schoolboy’s story.
In a tweet, the scientist linked to a YouTube video entitled Ahmed Mohammed [sic] Clock is a FRAUD, in which user Thomas Talbot alleges Mohamed’s clock “is in fact not an invention. The ‘clock’ is a commercial bedside alarm clock removed from its casing”.
In his tweet, Dawkins said: “If this is true, what was his motive? Whether or not he wanted the police to arrest him, they shouldn’t have done so.” His next tweet said of the video: “This man seems to know what he’s talking about.”
0:00
/
0:00
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Ahmed Mohamed thanked his supporters on Wednesday, but added he is keen to move schools
Subsequent tweets, issued against a growing storm of online protest, said: “Assembling clock from bought components is fine. Taking clock out of its case to make it look as if he built it is not fine. Which is true?
“Yes, there are other reasons why a boy might take a clock out of its casing & pretend he’d made it. Trying to impress teachers, for instance[.]”
Linking to an artvoice.com blogpost entitled Reverse Engineering Ahmed Mohamed’s clock … and Ourselves, Dawkins tweeted: “If the reassembled components did something more than the original clock, that’s creative. If not, it looks like hoax.”
Dawkins eventually retreated. He devoted tweets to questioning police motives and tweeted a reference to the new leader of Britain’s opposition Labour party: “Sorry if I go a bit over the top in my passion for truth. Not just over a boy’s alleged ‘invention’ but also media lies about J[eremy] Corbyn.”
In an answer to a Twitter user who wrote: “I think you too frequently confuse ‘truth’ with ‘obsessive and unnecessary dedication to accuracy’”, Dawkins wrote: “That could well be true, in which case I apologise. I guess I’m a bit sensitive about being among the many fooled.”
He subsequently retweeted President Obama’s White House invitation to the boy.
This article was amended on 21 September, to correctly identify Ahmed Mohamed’s home town. It is Irving, Texas, not Irvine as we initially said.
The cops didn't make this statement until all the shit blew over. Which makes me think would they have made the same statement, if it was actually a BOMB!
My thinking is they made this statement because they were looking pretty fucking stupid. This at least made then look stupid instead of "pretty fucking stupid".
Hayes pointed out that, despite the allegations against the teen, no bomb squad was called to the MacArthur campus, nor was the campus evacuated.
That is kind of true.
I think my past post, was too "making out they are DEFINITELY fraudulent".
It is still NOT 100% bolted down (definite yet).
Example link:
UK Newspaper story. Where prominent/famous scientist details his feelings that things are apparently FAKE.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/20/richard-dawkins-questions-ahmed-mohamed-motive-backlash
So when the facts don't agree with your narrative, then the facts are wrong.
Got it.
Not sure what you're saying.
The facts are the cops made a statement "We knew it was never a bomb", well after this blew over. By that time he was getting contacts from the Pres, Facebook, twitter etc...
It was damage control (if you understand this). The cops made this statement to look "at least a little better".
I'm saying that you're wrong and they never thought it was a bomb.
The facts are the bomb squad was never called and the school was never evacuated. If they had even the slightest HINT that it was real, those steps would have been taken at minimum.
Then they should have never went as far as arresting him, etc...
But they did, did they!!!
So that's were the ball dropped. It would have been a much diff story if they had never did shit, and left him alone!
They can arrest you for bring a hoax bomb to school. And they did.
To repeat, you can't bring fake guns to school and you can't bring fake bombs to school. You can and will be arrested for such offenses. They did NOT drop the ball in arresting, they acted appropriately.
They can arrest you for bring a hoax bomb to school. And they did.
To repeat, you can't bring fake guns to school and you can't bring fake bombs to school. You can and will be arrested for such offenses. They did NOT drop the ball in arresting, they acted appropriately.
You have to ask the right questions and the police didnt. Only ignorant people would jump to conclusions without asking the right questions to get the right answers.
Yes and going back to the defintion?
What is a hoax. I take the rear cover off my cell phone and take some boards out!!!
The gun pop-tart kid was never arrested, he was suspended.
Big difference.
Also big difference in race of both kids
I would like to see if Ahmed was White and was named Joe...
How would we see this play out then, we would never know!!!
Intentionally creating something with the appearance of a bomb for the purpose of causing distress.
Mission accomplished.
Poptart kid wasn't trying to cause distress. Also he was seven. Big difference.
You know this how?
Oh right, you don't know.
Stop making shit up.
Seriously.
What's a bomb to you may not be a bomb to another person. By their definition there have been a lot of shit that could be a bomb. I bought a whole MB into work a few years ago. That could be a bomb. Hell, it was in my bag and went through the metal detector within a federal building.
Again, if they are stupid enough to take that as a bomb, mission accomplished.
What's distress to one person may not be distress to another. The poptart kid could be considered causing distress because of he made a poptart the shape of a gun. You typically don't see guns being portrayed anywhere in a public school.
The poptart kid was white!
I guess many don't like getting into this issue or don't want to discuss it, but there is a component of race here!
If you don't want to believe that, that's fine...
It's very simple: intent
no one thought it was a bomb
just like no one thought the poptart gun was a gun
intent
intent and he was seven
Ahmed was 14 and knew exactly what he was doing
The only component of race was on the part of Ahmed trying to be a 'martyr'
You keep making assertions with zero evidence to back them up. There is plenty of evidence of authorities taking threats of violence or hoaxes very seriously regardless of race.
Are you saying that it's ok to bring hoax bombs to school if you're muslim?