"Fake Bomb" at Logan

[1969912 0]

For the purposes of argument, I'm going to give the airport police (Mass State Police, Not TSA) the benefit of the doubt and assume that they had reason to investigate the girl (I really believe that they might have had reason to question her, but NOT at gunpoint). That's where it ends though.

Time to watch the movie "Idiocracy" (no pun intended, of course), which magically showed up on my hard drive after finding the name of the film on Bonfire.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[billvon 2,991]

>If I have to take off my friggin' shoes, she doesn't get special rights.

The right to not be arrested for carrying a toy is not a "special right."

When did we as a people become such puling cowards, that a flashing light could make us pee our pants out of fear? Freedom can be scary sometimes, but it beats the alternative. (And given how many people died to defend those freedoms, it seems like we shouldn't throw them away so lightly.)

[normiss 800]

and it still pisses me off that I have to think twice about carrying a pocket knife on my person for the sole intent of it's purpose...a tool...simply because of this hysteria that the general public now sees them as a weapon...I never would have the intent to use it as such and therein lies the distinction...intent.

she was a stupid college kid...I don't personally see anything beyond that.

[happythoughts 0]

clicky

Quote

Simpson then “roamed briefly around the terminal,” Wark said. Margolis said this caused several Logan employees to flee the building.

Flee the building. Apparently, they felt threatened.

MIT news office release

Quote

MIT is cooperating with the state police in the investigation, according to a statement released by the MIT News Office this afternoon. “As reported to us by authorities, Ms. Simpson’s actions were reckless and understandably created alarm at the airport,” the statement continues.

"reckless"

MIT Chancellor

Quote

“The statement was drafted in a consultation among colleagues who gathered to review the information we had on the incident,” MIT Chancellor Phillip L. Clay PhD ’75 said in an e-mail to The Tech. “We prepared a statement after we discussed what our responsibilities are to the public regarding the incident.”

Clay said that MIT had not spoken with Simpson before issuing the statement.

Clay said that MIT considers Simpson’s actions to be “reckless,” because taking the reported items to an airport could reasonably be foreseen to cause alarm. “We all have a responsibility not to cause alarm and to be mindful of security requirements.”

"reckless"
"reasonably be foreseen to cause alarm"

Quote

MIT Police Chief John DiFava likewise said that “reckless” was “not a word that’s inappropriate.” DiFava was the interim public safety director of Logan International Airport for two months immediately following Sept. 11, 2001.

The possibility of a suicide bomber “requires a significant and serious response,” DiFava said. Machine guns are “standard equipment down at Logan,” said DiFava, adding that machine guns are commonly seen at airports overseas. “There was a female party with a device wired on her body and a glob … a substance that looks like C-4, C-5, or Semtex [plastic explosives]. … To have guns drawn, I don’t have a problem with that.”

"possibility of a suicide bomber"

A lot of people at MIT felt that her actions were reckless.

[normiss 800]

merely wandering around an airport makes others feel threatened?? I wonder how many have felt that way when I've had a long layover....
Of course the college is going to distance itself from any stupid kid that just got in trouble...no surprise there either. A lot of people at the university are going to legally clarify the distance, this is normal positioning these days thanks to the risk of being responsible for anything people around us do.

if she was a big a risk as they seem to make her out to be...and several employees felt threatened before she made it the security check point...why wasn't she detained BEFORE she got there??? I hate to see the way EVERYTHING gets blown out of proportion these days.

All of downtown Orlando was closed for an entire day about two months ago...all because some dumbass left his lunchbox on a wall he was sitting on. Christ people.... Are we really that afraid of EVERYTHING????

[billvon 2,991]

>Flee the building. Apparently, they felt threatened.

Well, nowadays it doesn't take much more than a swarthy guy to make people flee.

>A lot of people at MIT felt that her actions were reckless.

Shortly before my time a few MIT students were caught rigging a hack at Harvard. One of them had a coat full of batteries. The Harvard police were suspicious; the students claimed that all MIT students did such things.

The MIT president of the time showed up to smooth things over.

"We found them with batteries, but they claim it's normal at MIT," said one of the cops.

"Well, it is," said the president, and opened his coat to reveal rows of batteries. The students were released, and all was well.

Today, of course, they'd have been arrested if not shot. I'm still not sure when we became such cowards.

[n23x 0]

Oh noes, MIT publicly expressed disapproval after Logan airport throws a shitfit?

Just like the recent reaction to the Moveon.org Patreaus ad, if you don't condone certain activities, you're against the US and unpatriotic.

Don't mistake cleanup publicity for truth.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[1969912 0]

Food for thought, and now back to my movie:

http://www.schneier.com/essay-124.html

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

The MIT president of the time showed up to smooth things over.

He didn't this time. He called it reckless. It is.

Quote

Today, of course, they'd have been arrested if not shot. I'm still not sure when we became such cowards.

Perhaps since 50 people are killed by suicide bombers each day in Iraq. People with common sense are afraid of people who appear to be suicide bombers.

The Logan employees thought she was a probable risk.
A reasonable person does not take the chance of being blown apart.

People in England are ramming flaming vehicles into airports. There are suicide attacks at airports.

Some people who were willing to commit suicide boarded planes at Logan. They have a history.

It is nice to armchair quarterback the situation since the board was not wired to an explosive vest under the sweatshirt. Now it is supposed to be harmless college prank fun ?

If your appearance closely resembles a suicide bomber in an airport in the US, this response is the reasonable expectation.

[n23x 0]

Quote

Perhaps since 50 people are killed by suicide bombers each day in Iraq.

Interesting fact, how many Americans are killed in the US by suicide bombers each day?

Quote

The Logan employees thought she was a probable risk.
A reasonable person does not take the chance of being blown apart.

This logic has about as much sway as, "if you're not hiding anything, you won't have a problem with us sifting through your private shit".

What specific part of this art project puts it over the edge? Was it the wires, the breadboard, the lights or battery? And don't say the sum of those objects, because then I'll ask you to clarify exactly what you think constitutes a "possible risk".

Quote

It is nice to armchair quarterback the situation since the board was not wired to an explosive vest under the sweatshirt.

If these were stories of success, maybe people wouldn't be complaining and expressing their dissatisfaction.

Quote

Now it is supposed to be harmless college prank fun ?

No, it's just harmless, and fun. The words prank and college really have nothing to do with it.

Appeal to emotion all you want, the only people you'll find are ones who are just as afraid as you are.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[billvon 2,991]

>Perhaps since 50 people are killed by suicide bombers each day in Iraq.
>People with common sense are afraid of people who appear to be suicide
>bombers.

Far, far more people are killed by cars every day here in the US. (Which, by the way, is where Logan is.) Are you afraid of cars? Or do you have no common sense?

>It is nice to armchair quarterback the situation . . .

Even nicer to cower in fear from 19 year old women with flashing lights on their shirts. At least she didn't have brown skin - they might have had to shut down US airspace again.

[champu 1]

Quote

And just what does a bomb look like?

Well, a trigger might look something like the attached, if it were being planted somewhere and set off remotely. A personnel-borne IED trigger, which I understand is what people thought this woman had on her, would more than likely contain little or no electronics. As for the bomb itself, I'm sure you know it could take on any number of sizes, shapes, and appearances.

I fall into the crowd that says, "stop her... check out the device... verify it's not a bomb that she was off to plant somewhere... maybe confiscate it if you're worried about other people seeing it and freaking out... send her on her way." Any further action is just silly.

As a side note, suppose this really was a PBIED and she was a suicide bomber... what do you think she would have done the moment she was confronted by security?

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

...carrying a toy ...

...a flashing light..

... 19 year old women with flashing lights on their shirts....

If that's all it had been, we wouldn't be having this discussion. See above.

[Andy9o8 2]

All things considered, in this particular case, were this to go to trial (although it won't; see below), I'd handicap her chances of conviction at about 80%.

But - she's a young, first offender, and while I (obviously) do think she meant to make people at the airport suspect her device might be an explosive and to freak out over it (which is enough to satisfy the hoax and disorderly conduct statutes), I don't think her intent was malicious (which is not a required element of the offenses), and I don't think she realized just how seriously the authorities would take this, or just how potentially dangerous (especially to her) her stunt was.

That being the case, I think justice would be best served by what will almost certainly happen: she will be put in a pretrial diversion program for misdemeanor first-offenders, she'll have to perform about 40 - 80 hours of community service to pay the taxpayers back for all the money she's cost them, she'll have to apologize in court, and then the DA will drop the charges, and eventually her record will be expunged. And then this (probably) brilliant kid will go out into the world and help me perfect that matter-energy-matter transporter I've been working on in my basement. That works for me.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

And just what does a bomb look like?

Well, a trigger might look something like the attached, if it were being planted somewhere and set off remotely. A personnel-borne IED trigger, which I understand is what people thought this woman had on her, would more than likely contain little or no electronics. As for the bomb itself, I'm sure you know it could take on any number of sizes, shapes, and appearances.

I fall into the crowd that says, "stop her... check out the device... verify it's not a bomb that she was off to plant somewhere... maybe confiscate it if you're worried about other people seeing it and freaking out... send her on her way." Any further action is just silly.

As a side note, suppose this really was a PBIED and she was a suicide bomber... what do you think she would have done the moment she was confronted by security?

There are posters here that would dismiss what you posted a picture of, as a mere prank, and not a trigger.

[BounceEasy 0]

If she was trying to make a statement, I sure as hell haven't heard it yet. Except that maybe the terrorists have managed to put us on edge to the level that we are our own worst enemy.

If you walk, just walk. If you sit, just sit. But whatever you do, don't wobble.
- Master Ummon

[champu 1]

Quote

There are posters here that would dismiss what you posted a picture of, as a mere prank, and not a trigger.

I know. And those people sit at the far opposite, and equally unfortunate, end of the spectrum from those who believe that any action by authorities is justifiable so long as a claim is made that they are, "doing the best they can."

You have to empower your security personnel to perceive and address threats. There can be very general protocols established for them to follow in doing so such that people don't have their rights violated, but you can't construct a leash out of checklists and procedures and tie it like a choker chain around their necks. That's why I feel it was right for this woman to be detained, questioned, etc.

This profession employs people, not machines, and people make mistakes. If you give people the job of making decisions on the fly, you can only train them to get it right most of the time. Since the cost of not stopping someone when you should have is much greater than the cost of stopping someone when, in hindsight, you shouldn't have, I have no problem with security personnel making errors on the side of caution. However, it must be recognized by everyone involved (prosecutors... listen carefully to this part) that a system is being employed that errors on the side of caution. The errors are part of the system, not the direct fault of the person you stopped.

To further hassle someone after you've discerned that they were not actually a threat despite raising your suspicions is not in any way productive. To me it is a simply a brutish display of frustration by those who work in the system over the fact that they are part of a system that isn't perfect. It is their inability to admit that the system can make mistakes (i.e. letting this woman go on her way) that leads to protests from those keen on protecting civil rights.

[n23x 0]

Quote

There are posters here that would dismiss what you posted a picture of, as a mere prank, and not a trigger.

Care to name a few? I'll hope you note that not a single commenting engineer referred to what she built as a "prank". It is about as much a prank as a soap box car, a model airplane, or any other project a hobbyist might produce, be proud of, and be interested in showing off.

Further, I think ALL of us (all posters, not just engineers) would identify the device in that photo to have nothing but malicious intent. See, that was easy!

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

>Perhaps since 50 people are killed by suicide bombers each day in Iraq.
>People with common sense are afraid of people who appear to be suicide
>bombers.

Far, far more people are killed by cars every day here in the US. (Which, by the way, is where Logan is.) Are you afraid of cars? Or do you have no common sense?

That exactly is my point, thank you for making it.
There is not a large number of people killed by suicide bombers in the US. However, people with a tv set have seen what they resemble and learn from it.

No one has to have blown up fuel tanks for security people to understand the danger of that possibility.
There doesn't have to be a successful suicide bomber for security to have a response planned.

I don't believe that a suspected bomber should be approached. It would be irresponsible and unsafe to approach one to a close distance. I have nothing but praise for their excellent handling of the situation.

As the Chancellor of MIT said, the act was reckless and had an easily foreseeable outcome. (My neighbors 10yo daughter thinks SS needs evaluation.)
Of course, no one believes that this poor judgment is typical of the general MIT student body.