#IStandWithAhmed

[LucyStoner]

My 13 year old likes to watch how-to-draw videos on youtube. The next time she shows me one of her drawings, I'll be sure to "smack her upside the head" and tell her that she didn't actually draw that, she just copied it, and she clearly has no original talent and should stop showing me these "hoax drawings."

 

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

The same thing with many of my son's programming projects. Most are assignments to copy/replicate.

 

Copying: It's how people learn.

[BrookValley.]

My 13 year old likes to watch how-to-draw videos on youtube. The next time she shows me one of her drawings, I'll be sure to "smack her upside the head" and tell her that she didn't actually draw that, she just copied it, and she clearly has no original talent and should stop showing me these "hoax drawings."

 

:banghead:  :banghead:  :banghead:

 

 

The same thing with many of my son's programming projects. Most are assignments to copy/replicate.

 

Copying: It's how people learn.

 

 

Sounds oddly like that there fancy kind of learnin'. Progymnasmata, yeah, that's it. Something to do with...classical types of education? 

[EmseB]

You can keep adding more buts if you like, but realize that it's likely going to come across as arguing for the sake of arguing.

Sorry, I thought this was a discussion board and wasn't aware thread drift or discussing other aspects of any given current event was not allowed.

 

So the thread was supposed to be just a bunch of posts with one sentence about how Ahmed should not have been jailed?

[LucyStoner]

Sounds oddly like that there fancy kind of learnin'. Progymnasmata , yeah, that's it. Something to do with...classical types of education?

Good word.

 

Thank you for the challenge word for my next spelling club meeting. :P

[fraidycat]

Sorry, I thought this was a discussion board and wasn't aware thread drift or discussing other aspects of any given current event was not allowed.

 

 

You've tried scolding us several times for this. Enough already.

 

Your arguments appear to be without merit and are personal attacks on a fourteen year old child. It's as simple as that.

 

And yes, THIS. thread is entitled I stand WITH Ahmed, so that's what it's about.

 

Anybody is free to create a spin off thread to discuss zero tolerance policies, whether Muslim kids should be invited to the White House, the actual meaning of "hoax", or any other topic they wish. This thread is about supporting a 14 year old who ended up in the national spotlight, through no fault of his own.

[EmseB]

I think there's a difference between copying a drawing and tracing a drawing. I think this is actually a great comparison in terms here and what I'm talking about. I think there is a difference between putting together a clock based on a kit or a plan and individual circuits and taking the case off of a clock and saying you made one yourself. I think I knew the difference at 14. Like if someone said, "did you draw that?" I would know it would have been deceptive to say yes if I had traced it.

 

Likewise, I think the pic tweeted above with the lemons is neat and a cool thing to make or construct or try with different fruits and such. If you had taken the case off of your nightstand clock and called that science, engineering, creativity, or an invention I'd raise an eyebrow. Showing your kids the inside of a clock is cool, for sure! Showing them how to make one is related, but not the same thing. I traced this drawing of bugs bunny, note I'm going to free hand my own. One is much more difficult, even with an example to go by.

 

I think that claiming I'm somehow a kind of ogre for pointing this out is silly. It's not a knock on him to say he didn't construct anything, it's just that he didn't. Just like tracing is cool, but not the same as drawing something really well on your own. I get it doesn't matter to some people, I don't expect everyone to care. It doesn't matter if you trace something and say you drew it. Imitation is learning, tracing is learning to draw, but it's certainly not the same as drawing free hand from an example. But it's not horrible to say I hope he can build his own clock one day.

[EmseB]

You've tried scolding us several times for this. Enough already.

 

Your arguments appear to be without merit and are personal attacks on a fourteen year old child. It's as simple as that.

 

And yes, THIS. thread is entilted I stand WITH Ahmed, so that's what it's about.

 

Anybody is free to create a spin off thread to discuss zero tolerance policies, whether Muslim kids should be invited to the White House, the actual meaning of "hoax", or any other topic they wish. This thread is about supporting a 14 year old who ended up in the national spotlight, through no fault of his own.

Can you please, then, stop responding to any of the aspects of the thread that bother you or put me on ignore instead of net nannying me and trying to control what I and others post? Unless you're a mod and are asking me to leave the thread?

 

Also, I have not personally attacked him. I have commented on content he posted to the web and statements he made.

 

I know there is an ever present debate about thread drift vs. S/o. I'm sorry I fall into the former category, but I've never found a message board where it's outlawed, and I hate trying to continue conversations in s/o's. I get your personal preference is different than mine.

[LucyStoner]

Taking apart something electronic and reassembling it to work again is how many if not most engineering minded students spend a few years.

 

My son took apart two broken Wii systems (ours and the one my brother had upgraded from to the the Wii U) and fixed one of them to work by figuring out what was wrong. That's not inventing a Wii or a sign of genius. But it's still pretty dang cool. ETA- and it extended the life of our Wii. It's 8 years old at this point and still kicking it.

[amsunshine]

Taking apart something electronic and reassembling it to work again is how most engineering minded students spend a few years.

 

My son took apart two broken Wii systems (ours and the one my brother had upgraded from to the the Wii U) and fixed one of them to work by figuring out what was wrong. That's not inventing a Wii or a sign of genius. But it's still pretty dang cool.

 

 

Exactly. The people who are trying to belittle this kid's work either don't understand this, or have some sort of underlying agenda to promote.

[BrookValley.]

I think there's a difference between copying a drawing and tracing a drawing. I think this is actually a great comparison in terms here and what I'm talking about. I think there is a difference between putting together a clock based on a kit or a plan and individual circuits and taking the case off of a clock and saying you made one yourself. I think I knew the difference at 14. Like if someone said, "did you draw that?" I would know it would have been deceptive to say yes if I had traced it.

 

Likewise, I think the pic tweeted above with the lemons is neat and a cool thing to make or construct or try with different fruits and such. If you had taken the case off of your nightstand clock and called that science, engineering, creativity, or an invention I'd raise an eyebrow. Showing your kids the inside of a clock is cool, for sure! Showing them how to make one is related, but not the same thing. I traced this drawing of bugs bunny, note I'm going to free hand my own. One is much more difficult, even with an example to go by.

 

I think that claiming I'm somehow a kind of ogre for pointing this out is silly. It's not a knock on him to say he didn't construct anything, it's just that he didn't. Just like tracing is cool, but not the same as drawing something really well on your own. I get it doesn't matter to some people, I don't expect everyone to care. It doesn't matter if you trace something and say you drew it. Imitation is learning, tracing is learning to draw, but it's certainly not the same as drawing free hand from an example. But it's not horrible to say I hope he can build his own clock one day.

 

The thing is it's really not very relevant to the discussion, and so you're left wondering just what the point is? At least, I am. What exactly is your point? The only point I can think of with the "he didn't even make anything on his own" argument is just to attack the kid's character so you can go see! He's just not an honest person to begin with, so he *did* make a hoax bomb! 

 

Except there would seem to be no evidence to suggest he made a hoax bomb to begin with, so I really don't see the point. 

 

And, even if I did really understand why some people think it matters how complicated his clock was or wasn't, how is taking the parts out of a clock and reassembling them in another case more like tracing than copying? That makes no sense. He did not open up the case, take a look, and then close it back up. He disassembled the parts, then figured out how to wire it all back up in another case and make it work as it was originally intended to work. Sounds a lot more like drawing free hand from an example to me. Still copying, absolutely, but again--that's a great tinkering lesson for a kid his age, and exactly how a kid learns this kind of thing. 

[Joker]

I think there's a difference between copying a drawing and tracing a drawing. I think this is actually a great comparison in terms here and what I'm talking about. I think there is a difference between putting together a clock based on a kit or a plan and individual circuits and taking the case off of a clock and saying you made one yourself. I think I knew the difference at 14. Like if someone said, "did you draw that?" I would know it would have been deceptive to say yes if I had traced it.

 

Likewise, I think the pic tweeted above with the lemons is neat and a cool thing to make or construct or try with different fruits and such. If you had taken the case off of your nightstand clock and called that science, engineering, creativity, or an invention I'd raise an eyebrow. Showing your kids the inside of a clock is cool, for sure! Showing them how to make one is related, but not the same thing. I traced this drawing of bugs bunny, note I'm going to free hand my own. One is much more difficult, even with an example to go by.

 

I think that claiming I'm somehow a kind of ogre for pointing this out is silly. It's not a knock on him to say he didn't construct anything, it's just that he didn't. Just like tracing is cool, but not the same as drawing something really well on your own. I get it doesn't matter to some people, I don't expect everyone to care. It doesn't matter if you trace something and say you drew it. Imitation is learning, tracing is learning to draw, but it's certainly not the same as drawing free hand from an example. But it's not horrible to say I hope he can build his own clock one day.

 

Why do keep saying he just took a case off a clock? The way I understand it, he disassembled a clock and then was able to put it back together and make it work. I don't think he just took the case off a clock and threw it in another container. I think that type of curiosity should be encouraged no matter the age. Some children are late bloomers and you have no idea what this person might be capable of one day. I think it's a good thing that what he's doing in his spare time is figuring out how things work.

 

I have an artist dd. She often tries new figures/designs/etc. freehand while looking at the original. I think it's awesome what she is able to accomplish in that freehand drawing and don't think it's not as good just because she had a guide (looking at the original). I don't view what Ahmed did as tracing. I view it more as freehand while using the original as a guide.

 

 

[RubberChickenGirl2]

Maher’s response?

“No, the message is you can see why they would err on the side of caution because only 25 miles away somebody DID try to kill people…What if it had been a bomb? So the teacher is supposed to see something that looks like a bomb and go, ‘Oh wait, this might just be my white privilege talking…I sure don’t want to be politically incorrect, so I’ll just let it go.â€

Check it out on youtube.

[zoobie]

Taking apart something electronic and reassembling it to work again is how many if not most engineering minded students spend a few years.

 

My son took apart two broken Wii systems (ours and the one my brother had upgraded from to the the Wii U) and fixed one of them to work by figuring out what was wrong. That's not inventing a Wii or a sign of genius. But it's still pretty dang cool. ETA- and it extended the life of our Wii. It's 8 years old at this point and still kicking it.

My dad has spent his whole life taking electronics apart and putting them back together. He started with his mom's vacuum cleaner and toaster, but now he gets paid for it. I guess his 43 year career is a hoax too. :D

[zoobie]

Maher’s response?

“No, the message is you can see why they would err on the side of caution because only 25 miles away somebody DID try to kill people…What if it had been a bomb? So the teacher is supposed to see something that looks like a bomb and go, ‘Oh wait, this might just be my white privilege talking…I sure don’t want to be politically incorrect, so I’ll just let it go.â€

Check it out on youtube.

Again. She never thought it was a bomb. She put it in her desk. She didn't evacuate the school. The police never thought it was a bomb.

 

Maher is outspokenly anti-Islam. His opinion doesn't surprise me.

[BrookValley.]

 

Maher’s response?

“No, the message is you can see why they would err on the side of caution because only 25 miles away somebody DID try to kill people…What if it had been a bomb? So the teacher is supposed to see something that looks like a bomb and go, ‘Oh wait, this might just be my white privilege talking…I sure don’t want to be politically incorrect, so I’ll just let it go.â€

Check it out on youtube.

 

 

And...what's your point? They didn't "err on the side of caution" because they knew it wasn't a bomb.  No one says, "hey cool, now keep that thing in your backpack," if you think, even one little bit, that that thing is a bomb. No one holds a suspected bomb, with even the teensy-tiniest bit of suspicion! in your desk for a few class periods if you think it's a flippin' bomb. 

 

They didn't err on the side of caution over a suspected bomb because it was  never a suspected bomb. FFS. Isn't that much obvious? 

[RubberChickenGirl2]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

 

If that happened to my kid I would skip the whole way to see the lawyer. Then I would sue the ish out of the school and the police for being a pack of dumb asses.

[Spryte]

I am confused here. Some people seem to be implying that what he did wasn't very bright (that he just took the case off a clock - which I've only read here, from one poster, that that is all he did) yet he apparently is a budding, deceitful, criminal mastermind who planned to get all of this attention. (To what end? People think he knew he'd get media attention?) So which is it? He's not very bright - he just traced a clock - or he brilliantly knew he'd get arrested and manipulated this situation to create a media storm, and [gasp!] an invitation to the White House?

 

Seriously, people, this is a child. It's the beginning of the school year. He wanted to get to know his engineering teacher. So he used components and assembled a clock. Cool! He should not have been interrogated, taken away in handcuffs.

 

It doesn't matter if you're not impressed by his clock. Does it? That isn't the point.

 

No child should be taken from school in handcuffs for looking for approval from his teacher, and trying to find an outlet for his curiosity. He didn't create a bomb, or a hoax bomb. And he didn't just have his creation confiscated, broken, thrown away. He wasn't just suspended. He was questioned by the police, he was arrested. He was handcuffed. This was a massive over reaction from the school.

[BrookValley.]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

 

Hi Rubber Chicken Girl. Do you actually have a point to make, preferably well-substantiated? We like our arguments meaty around here.  Red herrings and ad hominem attacks don't really endear anyone to your point of view. 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

 

If these things are true, absolutely nothing is changed. Just so you know.

[Spryte]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer.

Did his dad take a clock to school, too?

[amsunshine]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

 

 

So, let me try to follow this logic:   Dad is an attention seeker.  Ahmed is Dad's kid.  Therefore, Ahmed is an attention seeker? 

 

The dad has no relevance here.  

 

So what if they are happy to go see a lawyer?  What's your point?  They have a right to seek legal assistance, just like anyone else, don't they?

[QueenCat]

If you read up on this kid's dad, he is an attention seeker and you can also find happy instagrams of the fam on the way to the lawyer. 

 

 

NM

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Not really responding to your note.......... but I notice that you are new here. I hope you'll start a new topic and introduce yourself to the group. Share with us a bit about your homeschooling adventures and how you came to our little village on the web. Welcome.

 

Based on the nick, I believe this poster is someone who used to be very active at the Sonlight forums.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Not really responding to your note.......... but I notice that you are new here. I hope you'll start a new topic and introduce yourself to the group. Share with us a bit about your homeschooling adventures and how you came to our little village on the web. Welcome.

 

We don't usually do this to new people, because it's not very hospitable. :(

 

RubberChickenGirl (#1) was a longterm member here. I don't know if this is the same poster.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Based on the nick, I believe this poster is someone who used to be very active at the Sonlight forums.

 

OH.

 

I've been trying since yesterday to remember where else that name was from, after finding her in the archives here. You're right. SL forums.

 

[QueenCat]

We don't usually do this to new people, because it's not very hospitable. :(

 

RubberChickenGirl (#1) was a longterm member here. I don't know if this is the same poster.

 

Well, it wasn't intended to be unhospitable, and people do often ask this when they notice new people, but I'll delete the original comment, as it isn't my desire to be thought of as unhospitable.

[EmseB]

The thing is it's really not very relevant to the discussion, and so you're left wondering just what the point is? At least, I am. What exactly is your point? The only point I can think of with the "he didn't even make anything on his own" argument is just to attack the kid's character so you can go see! He's just not an honest person to begin with, so he *did* make a hoax bomb!

My original point was that I finally understood why people kept insisting it was "just" a clock. I had been under the impression, based on Ahmed's YouTube video and the invite to the White House, that he had invented something or made some new variation on an alarm clock that made it super cool (albeit distracting in English class) and perplexing to even his engineering teacher, so much so that he told him not to show anyone. Then when I saw an article that showed the clock he had opened up and put in his pencil box, a lot coalesced about why the English teacher confiscated it but did not evacuate the school. Why the engineering teacher told him to keep it from being a distraction but also didn't confiscate it. It was just an opened up clock in a different case. Neat looking, but a distraction, right?

 

I was left confused, however, with Ahmed using the word invention and headlines that said he constructed or built a clock.

 

Then I was confused as to why a 14yo would take the case off of a clock, take it to school, call it an invention and set the alarm to go off during English class. The idea of him actually wanting to hoax a bomb didn't occur to me, I didn't think he had some nefarious motive, but I couldn't figure it out. It seems outside my realm of experience with high schoolers.

 

 

All that and the main theme being...why he would be handcuffed for it???

 

 

 

 

He did not open up the case, take a look, and then close it back up. He disassembled the parts, then figured out how to wire it all back up in another case and make it work as it was originally intended to work.

Ah, I didn't see this stated anywhere as what actually happened. That would make much more sense as a science project. I actually didn't see him explain what he did, but I don't have cable news so it's quite likely I missed a story on that somewhere.

[BrookValley.]

My original point was that I finally understood why people kept insisting it was "just" a clock. I had been under the impression, based on Ahmed's YouTube video and the invite to the White House, that he had invented something or made some new variation on an alarm clock that made it super cool (albeit distracting in English class) and perplexing to even his engineering teacher, so much so that he told him not to show anyone. Then when I saw an article that showed the clock he had opened up and put in his pencil box, a lot coalesced about why the English teacher confiscated it but did not evacuate the school. Why the engineering teacher told him to keep it from being a distraction but also didn't confiscate it. It was just an opened up clock in a different case. Neat looking, but a distraction, right?

 

I was left confused, however, with Ahmed using the word invention and headlines that said he constructed or built a clock.

 

Then I was confused as to why a 14yo would take the case off of a clock, take it to school, call it an invention and set the alarm to go off during English class. The idea of him actually wanting to hoax a bomb didn't occur to me, I didn't think he had some nefarious motive, but I couldn't figure it out. It seems outside my realm of experience with high schoolers.

 

 

All that and the main theme being...why he would be handcuffed for it???

 

 

 

 

Ah, I didn't see this stated anywhere as what actually happened. That would make much more sense as a science project. I actually didn't see him explain what he did, but I don't have cable news so it's quite likely I missed a story on that somewhere.

 

My understanding from reading articles and looking at the pictures is that he took the parts from one clock and put them back together in the case. Mostly I'm getting that information from the pictures I've seen of the thing. Looks like circuitry and wires put back together in another case. 

 

Yeah, a distraction for sure. I don't fault the engineering teacher for telling him to keep it in his bag, or the English teacher for taking it from him when the alarm went off, if all it were was that they thought it a distraction (which we know at least the English teacher said she thought it looked "like a bomb, so I'm going to guess the snowball started there). It's the somewhere along the way when he was led away in handcuffs for something that was obviously neither a bomb nor a hoax bomb. I don't think we disagree on any of that. 

 

I have not seen any video of Ahmed explaining what he did to build the clock, either. Like I said, I'm looking at the photo and going, "oh, yeah. There's some clock guts. Look, there's some clock guts wired together in a case." Other than that, from what I have seen and read otherwise, I think Ahmed was just tinkering. He took some parts and made them work like the original again. He was proud of what he had done (I couldn't take a clock together and put it back together again, even in its original case/form. Hell, my toddler put my 8-year old's radio back together when he dropped it this morning--it's one of those very simple kit things, like 6 wires you plug here and there for the speakers and whatnot--and I couldn't. Until eldest pointed out to me that the wires are labeled.  :o ). He wanted to show it to his engineering teacher, maybe to start the year off on the right foot? Because he thought he'd think it was cool, too? I don't know exactly why, but I can certainly think of several reasons why a 14-year old into tinkering with electronics would want to bring it to school to show his science teacher. 

 

ETA: on the word invention: I think invention is probably overstating what it actually is, but I think that's also really irrelevant. So he used the word invention a couple times. He wouldn't be the first 14-year old to have visions of grandeur.  :laugh:  I don't see where saying "invention" vice "creation" or "doohickey I reconstructed" or anything else is any indication as to the kid's trustworthiness or general character, especially when it's obvious he wasn't trying to hide anything about it. 

[SKL]

The thing is, we don't know if there was any reason for them to think the boy brought a hoax bomb to school.  Suppose another kid said "hey is that a bomb?" and Ahmed said, "ha, yeah, ha ha."  Or a thousand other possibilities where any one person in the school might have reported that they thought Ahmed had either a real or fake bomb.  Perhaps even another 14yo boy who made a mistake.  The fact is we aren't allowed to know if anyone reported anything that would have justified an investigation into whether this was a hoax bomb.  And we can't know that Ahmed's claim that he never implied it was anything but a clock is true.

 

I also don't know how far the cops went in their actions.  Did they take him to the station house in cuffs and book him?  Or did they just have the cuffs on him temporarily while they were still at school?  Does anyone know from a source outside Ahmed's family and its representatives?  Because the way people are talking, there must be all kinds of info out there that I haven't seen.

 

We also don't know whether Ahmed was indeed calm the whole time or acted a little ... less calm when he realized he was being accused of a violation or crime.  Which I could understand.  (There have been cases of excited non-muslim kids being put in cuffs at school "for their own protection etc.," and it is usually considered overkill, but cops still do it sometimes.)  Or maybe that particular police department puts everyone in cuffs if they are accused of something like that.  The thing is that we don't know. 

 

We want to believe this good-looking, academically promising kid is completely innocent.  That is understandable, but creating a "factual" description of what happened without having anything but the boy's word is not objective.  Trashing various other people based on this unsubstantiated scenario isn't right IMO.  Wait until we have the objective facts before trashing the heck out of schoolteachers.

 

(And no, they don't always evacuate schools even when someone calls in a clear bomb threat.  They used to make us all go sit in the gym while they had sniff dogs go around looking for bombs.  It was always a hoax, and everyone knew that, so it would have been silly to make everyone go outside every time.  That would also encourage the hoaxers to do it again, since disruption was what they were after.)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

The thing is, we don't know if there was any reason for them to think the boy brought a hoax bomb to school.  Suppose another kid said "hey is that a bomb?" and Ahmed said, "ha, yeah, ha ha."  Or a thousand other possibilities where any one person in the school might have reported that they thought Ahmed had either a real or fake bomb.  Perhaps even another 14yo boy who made a mistake.  The fact is we aren't allowed to know if anyone reported anything that would have justified an investigation into whether this was a hoax bomb.  And we can't know that Ahmed's claim that he never implied it was anything but a clock is true.

 

I also don't know how far the cops went in their actions.  Did they take him to the station house in cuffs and book him?  Or did they just have the cuffs on him temporarily while they were still at school?  Does anyone know from a source outside Ahmed's family and its representatives?  Because the way people are talking, there must be all kinds of info out there that I haven't seen.

 

We also don't know whether Ahmed was indeed calm the whole time or acted a little ... less calm when he realized he was being accused of a violation or crime.  Which I could understand.  (There have been cases of excited non-muslim kids being put in cuffs at school "for their own protection etc.," and it is usually considered overkill, but cops still do it sometimes.)  Or maybe that particular police department puts everyone in cuffs if they are accused of something like that.  The thing is that we don't know. 

 

We want to believe this good-looking, academically promising kid is completely innocent.  That is understandable, but creating a "factual" description of what happened without having anything but the boy's word is not objective.  Trashing various other people based on this unsubstantiated scenario isn't right IMO.  Wait until we have the objective facts before trashing the heck out of schoolteachers.

 

(And no, they don't always evacuate schools even when someone calls in a clear bomb threat.  They used to make us all go sit in the gym while they had sniff dogs go around looking for bombs.  It was always a hoax, and everyone knew that, so it would have been silly to make everyone go outside every time.  That would also encourage the hoaxers to do it again, since disruption was what they were after.)

 

Actually we do know the answer to the bolded, as there is no legal restrictions on the police or school stating they acted on a report of a bomb hoax/a student reported something about a bomb.

 

Had that happened, the actions taken by the school and police would have been more justified, and they would have defended their actions.

 

Whether he was calm or not isn't particularly relevant, but we do have a pic of him in handcuffs in the school and he doesn't look particularly agitated.

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

SKL - you keep implying that we haven't heard the other side of the story. The Irving police chief, Larry Boyd, held a press conference and addressed the situation. 

[idnib]

When people are using a bomb as a hoax, they want people to think there's a bomb. That's the whole point. They don't go around saying it's a clock. 

 

And if someone is disguising an actual bomb as a clock, they don't tell anyone about it or point it out. They're hoping it's not found out but if it is, it will look like a clock. When that happens, "hoax" is the farthest thing from the truth.

 

Are people saying he made something that would look like a bomb, but rather than hoaxing people into thinking it's real, he tried to pass it off the fake bomb as a clock? 

 

 

 

Occam's Razor.

[Spryte]

When people are using a bomb as a hoax, they want people to think there's a bomb. That's the whole point. They don't go around saying it's a clock.

 

And if someone is disguising an actual bomb as a clock, they don't tell anyone about it or point it out. They're hoping it's not found out but if it is, it will look like a clock. When that happens, "hoax" is the farthest thing from the truth.

 

Are people saying he made something that would look like a bomb, but rather than hoaxing people into thinking it's real, he tried to pass it off the fake bomb as a clock?

 

Why?

 

 

Occam's Razor.

Ah yes, a decoy clock disguised as a hoax bomb that's actually a clock! This will be the perfect way to garner attention. Genius mastermind at work, eh?

 

Sometimes it's *not* a zebra. Sometimes it's the most obvious answer. A kid. Tinkering. With a clock. Showing his teacher. Which is what we should be encouraging.

[EmseB]

So, yes, what you are taking about, I can totally understand bringing that to school and bring proud to show it off. I can very much understand that and if he did do that then what I've been talking about is a moot point. It makes sense to me why a kid would take that to school. But, I've not read that is what happened.

 

 

This is a summary of a few of the things I've read, makes some of the points I've talked about here, and has some things that I haven't looked at yet (I had no idea he was offered space camp, MIT $$$, etc...wow!):

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/21/martin-shkreli-is-big-pharma-s-biggest-asshole.html

 

Apparently Richard Dawkins also weighed in and was excoriated on Twitter for saying Ahmed didn't build a clock but rather unscrewed one from a case and put out in his pencil box and felon line he was fooled. He backed of that claim after taking a Twitter beating.

 

 

 

My understanding from reading articles and looking at the pictures is that he took the parts from one clock and put them back together in the case. Mostly I'm getting that information from the pictures I've seen of the thing. Looks like circuitry and wires put back together in another case.

 

Yeah, a distraction for sure. I don't fault the engineering teacher for telling him to keep it in his bag, or the English teacher for taking it from him when the alarm went off, if all it were was that they thought it a distraction (which we know at least the English teacher said she thought it looked "like a bomb, so I'm going to guess the snowball started there). It's the somewhere along the way when he was led away in handcuffs for something that was obviously neither a bomb nor a hoax bomb. I don't think we disagree on any of that.

 

I have not seen any video of Ahmed explaining what he did to build the clock, either. Like I said, I'm looking at the photo and going, "oh, yeah. There's some clock guts. Look, there's some clock guts wired together in a case." Other than that, from what I have seen and read otherwise, I think Ahmed was just tinkering. He took some parts and made them work like the original again. He was proud of what he had done (I couldn't take a clock together and put it back together again, even in its original case/form. Hell, my toddler put my 8-year old's radio back together when he dropped it this morning--it's one of those very simple kit things, like 6 wires you plug here and there for the speakers and whatnot--and I couldn't. Until eldest pointed out to me that the wires are labeled. :o ). He wanted to show it to his engineering teacher, maybe to start the year off on the right foot? Because he thought he'd think it was cool, too? I don't know exactly why, but I can certainly think of several reasons why a 14-year old into tinkering with electronics would want to bring it to school to show his science teacher.

 

ETA: on the word invention: I think invention is probably overstating what it actually is, but I think that's also really irrelevant. So he used the word invention a couple times. He wouldn't be the first 14-year old to have visions of grandeur. :laugh: I don't see where saying "invention" vice "creation" or "doohickey I reconstructed" or anything else is any indication as to the kid's trustworthiness or general character, especially when it's obvious he wasn't trying to hide anything about it.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So, yes, what you are taking about, I can totally understand bringing that to school and bring proud to show it off. I can very much understand that and if he did do that then what I've been talking about is a moot point. It makes sense to me why a kid would take that to school. But, I've not read that is what happened.

 

 

 

 

Then what are you reading?  A quick Google brings up numerous articles that report exactly what has been said here.

[EmseB]

When people are using a bomb as a hoax, they want people to think there's a bomb. That's the whole point. They don't go around saying it's a clock.

 

And if someone is disguising an actual bomb as a clock, they don't tell anyone about it or point it out. They're hoping it's not found out but if it is, it will look like a clock. When that happens, "hoax" is the farthest thing from the truth.

 

Are people saying he made something that would look like a bomb, but rather than hoaxing people into thinking it's real, he tried to pass it off the fake bomb as a clock?

 

Why?

 

 

Occam's Razor.

FTR, I didn't think he was making a hoax bomb in my speculations. I was perplexed by why he would show off something he didn't make, but hoax bomb didn't cross my mind until it was brought up somewhere else. I still don't see it, but I'm aware it is a conspiracy theory floating around.

[LucyStoner]

So. To the idea that this was a carefully orchestrated stunt designed to go viral. Well, if it is Ahmed or his family are certainly ridiculously brilliant. And incredibly talented PR whizzes who should open a firm. And more power to 'em.

 

Truthfully though, it stretches the imagination to assume that any 14 year old kid is that brilliant.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

So. To the idea that this was a carefully orchestrated stunt designed to go viral. Well, if it is Ahmed or his family are certainly ridiculously brilliant. And incredibly talented PR whizzes who should open a firm. And more power to 'em.

 

Truthfully though, it stretches the imagination to assume that any 14 year old kid is that brilliant.

 

They would also have to predict that the police would over react while also not giving them reason to do so.

[SKL]

SKL - you keep implying that we haven't heard the other side of the story. The Irving police chief, Larry Boyd, held a press conference and addressed the situation. 

 

Can you link the interview you are referencing?  Because all the articles I see involving police explanations are very brief and don't answer the questions I have.

 

In addition to the other questions I raised, I don't see anyplace where it says hours went by between the time the English teacher confiscated the contraption and the time the investigation began.  People here are using that allegation as "evidence" that the school personnel had false motives.  But is it a fact?

[LucyStoner]

They would also have to predict that the police would over react while also not giving them reason to do so.

True dat. So PR wunderkind AND psychic! Sure, why not?

 

Sometimes it's really just horses and not zebras.

[Word Nerd]

So. To the idea that this was a carefully orchestrated stunt designed to go viral. Well, if it is Ahmed or his family are certainly ridiculously brilliant. And incredibly talented PR whizzes who should open a firm. And more power to 'em.

 

Truthfully though, it stretches the imagination to assume that any 14 year old kid is that brilliant.

 

Especially when you are at the same time assuming he isn't that smart or talented.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Can you link the interview you are referencing?  Because all the articles I see involving police explanations are very brief and don't answer the questions I have.

 

In addition to the other questions I raised, I don't see anyplace where it says hours went by between the time the English teacher confiscated the contraption and the time the investigation began.  People here are using that allegation as "evidence" that the school personnel had false motives.  But is it a fact?

 

The lack of answers should tell you something.  If they had been told students were saying Ahmed said he had a bomb, then one would expect they would mention that little tidbit as to why they acted as they did.

 

Instead, the chief gave short answers and effectively said "Oops, our bad."  Sometimes what isn't said says a lot.

 

Regarding the timeline...he showed the the clock to a teacher in first period.  In a later period (I read 3rd elsewhere but I am not certain of that), it beeped and was confiscated by the English teacher.  He was later pulled from 6th period by the principal and the police.  If the teacher didn't immediately report the clock as a potential threat, and it appears he/she did not, then it is reasonable to question exactly why she reported it later.

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/09/16/ahmed_mohamed_arrested_for_making_clock_in_irving_texas_teenager_s_teachers.html

[idnib]

FTR, I didn't think he was making a hoax bomb in my speculations. I was perplexed by why he would show off something he didn't make, but hoax bomb didn't cross my mind until it was brought up somewhere else. I still don't see it, but I'm aware it is a conspiracy theory floating around.

 

Yes, sorry. My post wasn't directed to you.

 

So. To the idea that this was a carefully orchestrated stunt designed to go viral. Well, if it is Ahmed or his family are certainly ridiculously brilliant. And incredibly talented PR whizzes who should open a firm. And more power to 'em.

 

I blame Balloon Boy's parents.

[SKL]

The lack of answers should tell you something.  If they had been told students were saying Ahmed said he had a bomb, then one would expect they would mention that little tidbit as to why they acted as they did.

 

Instead, the chief gave short answers and effectively said "Oops, our bad."  Sometimes what isn't said says a lot.

 

Regarding the timeline...he showed the the clock to a teacher in first period.  In a later period (I read 3rd elsewhere but I am not certain of that), it beeped and was confiscated by the English teacher.  He was later pulled from 6th period by the principal and the police.  If the teacher didn't immediately report the clock as a potential threat, and it appears he/she did not, then it is reasonable to question exactly why she reported it later.

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/09/16/ahmed_mohamed_arrested_for_making_clock_in_irving_texas_teenager_s_teachers.html

 

No, I don't agree that the lack of answers proves anything.  I don't believe these adults just randomly attacked this boy for no reason whatsoever other than his religion.  There was something that caused concern to whoever decided the police needed to be called.  The police investigated whether he had intended his non-bomb to scare people.  They decided he didn't.

 

And I don't find his own words credible.  Especially after watching him on video "explaining" what happened.  He acts shifty and mumbles and leaves out important info and changes the subject when he isn't sure how something is going to be viewed.  He's changed his story a couple of times.  So I don't necessarily believe what he says as far as how he was spoken to by the cops etc.

 

By the way, your  link wasn't to a police interview.

 

And before anyone accuses my comments of being motivated by Islamophobia or whatever, I have Muslim friends who had kids in the US schools during 9/11.  I have Muslim friends who are in extremely trusted high-security positions in the USA.  I have trusted Muslim friends with many things I don't just trust anyone with.  I am just saying this kid does not appear so credible that we can take his every word as gold.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

No, I don't agree that the lack of answers proves anything.  I don't believe these adults just randomly attacked this boy for no reason whatsoever other than his religion.  There was something that caused concern to whoever decided the police needed to be called.  The police investigated whether he had intended his non-bomb to scare people.  They decided he didn't.

 

And I don't find his own words credible.  Especially after watching him on video "explaining" what happened.  He acts shifty and mumbles and leaves out important info and changes the subject when he isn't sure how something is going to be viewed.  He's changed his story a couple of times.  So I don't necessarily believe what he says as far as how he was spoken to by the cops etc.

 

By the way, your  link wasn't to a police interview.

 

They interrogated him for two hours, refused to let him speak to his parents, and then hauled him away in handcuffs to a juvenile detention center where he was fingerprinted.

 

When the media **** storm flares up, the police chief gives an interview but doesn't present a reason for those actions like the ones you suggested, but does admit that the boy wasn't charged because he didn't build the bomb as a hoax.

 

Nothing is preventing the police chief saying "we had X information which is why we chose this course of action."  The fact he had the opportunity to provide a justification for why five police officers hauled this kid away and didn't does tell us a lot.

 

I didn't say my link was to the police interview.  You asked about the timeline regarding the English teacher and I provided additional information for you.

 

I do not have a link to the full interview but you can quite easily find the statements from the police chief using the Google machine.  If his statements don't answer your questions you may want to take it up with him, as he is the one who chose what information to release.

[SKL]

  If his statements don't answer your questions you may want to take it up with him, as he is the one who chose what information to release.

 

Well my point is that a lot of people here are talking like they know all these facts that I don't see anywhere.  That's a lot of outrage (and personal attacks) over unsubstantiated "facts."

[SKL]

Oh, actually the cops decided they didn't have evidence to prove he intended a bomb hoax.  Which is different from saying they are sure he didn't.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Well my point is that a lot of people here are talking like they know all these facts that I don't see anywhere.  That's a lot of outrage over unsubstantiated "facts."

 

Again, people are acting on the information available.  The police chief has spoken and did not provide any information like the scenarios you concocted to justify his actions.  After a week of this, that information not being put forth is a strong indication it does not exist.  Expecting people to not comment until "facts" that may not even exist are presented seems a bit absurd.

 

We do know:

--Ahmed took a clock to school.

--He showed it to a teacher in 1st period and called it a clock.

--The alarm on the clock went off during his English class.  He told the teacher it was a clock.  The teacher confiscated the clock.

--During 6th period, he was removed from class by his principal and five police officers.

--He was interrogated for up to 2 hours without a parent present. 

--He was removed from the school in handcuffs and was booked at a juvenile detention center.

--The police chief stated there is no evidence that Ahmed intended the bomb as a hoax.

--Ahmed was suspended from school for 3 days.

 

None of the above is in question, and there is enough there to generate outrage, disgust, and a lawsuit.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Oh, actually the cops decided they didn't have evidence to prove he intended a bomb hoax.  Which is different from saying they are sure he didn't.

 

The actual statement was "no evidence to support that there was an intention to create an alarm.â€

 

No evidence is pretty damn definitive and is very different than if they said "not enough evidence."

 

And if there was "no evidence" (which means zero, zilch, nada, nil) it seems odd they needed to handcuff him and book him.  And note, your theory that maybe he told someone he had a bomb (which is pure speculation on your part) doesn't fit the "no evidence" statement as a statement from a student or faculty member saying Ahmed made such a claim would be evidence.