Ahmed and the clock thing

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:33 am

That story was giving me so many warm fuzzy feelings what with all the nerd unity and important tech people and NASA reaching out to him, but quite a lot of people are claiming that it was a carefully planned hoax done for attention and that liberals are so gullible, like so (including comments):

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015 ... e-backlash

also: http://blogs.artvoice.com/techvoice/201 ... ourselves/

are they just being clueless racists, or might there be any truth to that?

Because there are a lot of them; at least, they currently monopolise the top of the google news results when I search for 'ahmed'..

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:37 am

I had suspicions about this kid's motives from the start but now Richard Dawkins has actually put my suspicions into words so let him take the heat.

Post by **aels** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:49 am

I mean, the two criticisms I have seen have been from Richard Dawkins (who is the worst) and Sarah Palin (who is the worst) so I'm disinclined to be suspicious of anything other than Islamophobia until I see anything more conclusive. Literally the worst conclusion I can draw so far is 'boy may have tried to take credit for clock he did not in fact invent wholecloth', like oh no, the terrible scandal. And:

Everyone jumped to play the race and religion cards and try and paint the teachers and police as idiots and bigots, but in my mind, they were probably acting responsibly and erring on the side of caution to protect the rest of their students, just in case.

Unironic use of 'the [X] card' is always the cause of side-eye in me. And I do still wonder why, if the school and police seriously thought they had a bomb on their hands, they didn't evacuate the school and y'know, treat the whole this-could-be-a-bomb thing with a touch more actual seriousness.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:54 am

Some people have said that if he did indeed mastermind the entire thing to get such vast public support and awesome free stuff, it would make him even more of a genius.

I saw some posts from conservative blogs that mention his family has ties to terrorist groups, and that his father was apparently campaigning for sharia law where they live, or something.

But as another commenter also said - if he did all this to prove a political point about people being reactionary Islamophobes, then, well, he proved it.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:55 am

Okay, now I have to change my mind.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:59 am

My whole feeling on this is... really mixed. On the one hand, I was extremely suspicious of this story from the start, partly because one should always be suspicious of viral outrage stuff and partly because it seemed to play into so many of my preconceptions so neatly. And as it went on it did turn out that there was quite a lot here that is really suspicious. No one really knows the whole story so far.

No matter what, though, Richard Dawkins is, of course, a piece of shit, and he deserves every single bit of backlash he's getting.

Post by **aels** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:00 am

Also I'm all about Occam's Razor. What is more likely: radicalised teen masterminds plot to make Islam sympathetic in the eyes of a country so Islamophobic that more than half of Republicans surveyed still think Obama is a SECRET MUSLIM *or* teen boy tries to impress teacher, is subject to racial profiling by jumpy school and police force known for being a touch, shall we say, racially insensitive? I'm not saying it couldn't be a hoax, I'm just saying that I remain skeptical until the evidence improves.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:05 am

He's a teenager. They're always up to something nefarious.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:10 am

In terms of evidence, so far the most convincing to me was how he mentioned he was aware that it could look 'suspicious', so I don't think he was completely oblivious to how people would react. But that wouldn't make him a terrorist; at most he was just being a teenager, most of whom are attention-seekers who want to make some kind of point. Which of course is still not a crime.

Even in the worst case scenario where all this was carefully masterminded... he succeeds in getting people's sympathy, starts a national dialogue about Islamophobia, gets a bunch of cool stuff that lots of privileged rich kids take for granted anyway, maybe gets his ego inflated a little... it's nothing particularly evil.

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 5:28 am

The fact he may have thought it could look suspicious is not important. I see it as similar to a rape victim saying they considered their short skirt to be a bit too revealing. Still not their fault shit happened

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 5:45 am

Yeah; I'm not saying it makes it his fault in any way, just that he's not some clueless kid who made this cool thing and was confused and baffled that people could even think it was a bomb. A part of him might have been daring the system to expose its racism, and they did.

Though what do you make of this part of the article:

Why did he choose a pencil box, one that looks like a miniature briefcase no less, as an enclosure for a clock? It's awful hard to see the clock with the case closed. On the other hand, with the case open, it's awful dangerous to have an exposed power transformer sitting near the snooze button

I'm still hoping he didn't do this intending to provoke anything, because I like science and nerdy kids who build stuff and I've been rooting for him. I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:16 pm

I'd add to this, but I feel there's nothing more to add.

Post by **Gendo** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 3:03 pm

Two things that respond to various things in this thread.

1. From what I've read, at no point did the police or the school think it was a bomb. They thought it was a fake bomb, a hoax/threat. Thus the lack of any school evacuation or anything.

2. From what I've read, the kid went right up to his teacher to show it off to him, explaining what it was and such. This is not the act of someone who is trying to build a fake bomb to make a scene. If he wanted to do that he would have hidden it, or kept it a secret to have it "accidentally" discovered.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 3:16 pm

I'm taking it a face value for the moment since all anyone has to offer as "evidence" that this was a planned situation is basically personal opinion and conjecture.

I mean, we know America is horrible with out Islamphobia issues so unless someone has actual evidence to support their opinion there's no reason to believe anything other than a case of racial profiling.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 8:59 pm

I'm not surprised that Richard Dawkins is receiving backlash and accusations of racism or islamophobia, coming from SJWs, the PC police, or other members of the Army of the Professionally Offended (which I'll call APO from now on).

Whenever someone criticizes a member of a group that the APO perceives as being underpriviledged, the APO starts spouting accusations of <underpriviledgedgroup>ism towards the person who dared criticize another person; no matter how justified the criticism might be.
Also on this thread.

And since we mentioned Occam's Razor: The theory with less unproven assumptions is usually correct.

"radicalised teen masterminds plot to make Islam sympathetic in the eyes of a country so Islamophobic that more than half of Republicans surveyed still think Obama is a SECRET MUSLIM": One unproven assumption.
"teen boy tries to impress teacher, is subject to racial profiling by jumpy school and police force known for being a touch, shall we say, racially insensitive": Two unproven assumptions.

Post by **aels** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 9:09 pm

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 9:10 pm

shut the fuck up

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 9:11 pm

lol silly German

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 11:25 pm

What do Scandalous Jewish Women have to do with anything?

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:12 am

^I thought it was Sexy Jewish Women.

But I checked in on Tumblr, and the actual SJWs there have been curiously silent on this, so safe to say that most of the outrage is coming from other people who find this an affront to justice and an obvious case of Islamophobia. Heck, I first heard about this from people being furious on Reddit, which is pretty much the antithesis to SJWism.

The theory with less unproven assumptions is usually correct.

The plausibility of those assumptions is also important. That's like saying that if I put a sandwich on my desk and it's gone, either it was teleported away (one assumption) or a colleague was hungry and stole it (two assumptions), therefore it was more likely teleported away.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:07 am

Anakin McFly wrote:The plausibility of those assumptions is also important. That's like saying that if I put a sandwich on my desk and it's gone, either it was teleported away (one assumption) or a colleague was hungry and stole it (two assumptions), therefore it was more likely teleported away.

Fair enough.
In the comment sections to the articles, some mentioned that Ahmed may have been influenced by his father. This is plausible, but also an unproven assumption. So I guess this evens it out.

My post was expressing annoyance about the fact that when a person is criticized, and this person happens to be a member of a minority or underprivileged group, then some APOs always spout accusations of racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism towards the critics.

Especially in Germany. Whenever someone criticizes the politics of the state of Israel, you can bet that someone will cry Antisemitism.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 7:32 am

I never realized that Mutha moved to Germany.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:10 am

CashRules wrote:I never realized that Mutha moved to Germany.

It's not just him. Just check the reactions to Günter Grass's poem "What Must Be Said".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Must_Be_Said

The problem is that the accusation of racism or antisemitism or anti-islamism are used to silence voices. So it's a rather convenient way to deal with arguments you can't refute rationally. That's anti-intellectualism in my opinion.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:14 am

It's almost like you don't realize I was comparing YOU to Mutha because of that ridiculous SJW/APO nonsense. You just need to throw in a few "progressive, feminist, leftist, fedora-wearing, college trust-fund hipster" comments and you'd have the act nailed.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:47 am

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

And unless you can refute my arguments, they stand.

Post by **aels** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:51 am

Please clarify where you have made any arguments. All I have seen is conjecture that other people are too easily offended, something I have not seen supported since your only evidence for it is 'People are upset about a thing I am not personally upset about, therefore they are easily offended'.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:19 am

I'm upset by other people's nonupsettedness.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:26 am

"progressive, feminist, leftist, fedora-wearing, college trust-fund hipster"

Wait, since when did 'fedora-wearing' fit into that list?

@phe_de, Refutations:

1) The cop(?) who, when Ahmed was brought in, allegedly commented "Yep, that's who I thought it was." How would his comment be explained in the absence of any racial/religious profiling?

2) Various anecdotes from comments regarding similar situations that ended completely differently, including one whose (white) classmate once made a rocket and pretended it was a bomb for the lulz. Nothing happened to him; vs Ahmed repeatedly claiming his clock was not a bomb, and getting arrested nonetheless.

3) Given that Texas is known for being racist and anti-Muslim, Occam's Razor makes it more likely that their reactions were caused at least in part by those prejudices. I'd say that it's highly unrealistic to expect that it never affected how they reacted.

4) People have pointed out that if they were indeed profiling students in the name of school safety, their primary supsicions should have been levelled at white boys, who are responsible for the vast majority of school shootings in America; whereas, to date, not one Muslim terrorist has targeted an obscure American school, which is a politically pointless target.

If a Muslim kid ever did decide to do a school shooting or bomb his school, it would also require further proof that this was an act ofo terrorism stemming from his religious beliefs, rather than - as is more likely - for the same bunch of reasons that other American kids occasionally go on murdering rampages in schools.

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:16 am

http://dysfunctionalparrot.com/rants/fedoras-hipsters/

Women and Justin Timberlake, pissing on the world one article of clothing at a time.

Monk · Post by **Monk** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 1:57 pm

phe_de wrote:
Anakin McFly wrote:The plausibility of those assumptions is also important. That's like saying that if I put a sandwich on my desk and it's gone, either it was teleported away (one assumption) or a colleague was hungry and stole it (two assumptions), therefore it was more likely teleported away.
Fair enough.
In the comment sections to the articles, some mentioned that Ahmed may have been influenced by his father. This is plausible, but also an unproven assumption. So I guess this evens it out.

My post was expressing annoyance about the fact that when a person is criticized, and this person happens to be a member of a minority or underprivileged group, then some APOs always spout accusations of racism, Islamophobia, antisemitism towards the critics.

Especially in Germany. Whenever someone criticizes the politics of the state of Israel, you can bet that someone will cry Antisemitism.

I'm pretty sure it's because Dawkins has a history of some saying racist shit in the past (along with some other misogynistic crap). But seriously, stop saying things like "SJWs" - it just makes you look like an ignorant dumbass.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 3:22 pm

Women and Justin Timberlake, pissing on the world one article of clothing at a time.

Huh. Well, that's new. I always thought that fedoras were associated with neckbeards or something.

But am I still allowed to hate college trust-fund hipsters? :(

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:14 pm

What are SJWs? Single Japanese Women?

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:49 pm

Blade Azaezel wrote:What are SJWs? Single Japanese Women?

Smart Jordanian Woodworkers

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:02 pm

Small Jewish Wallets?

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 5:08 pm

Social Justice Warriors.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:24 pm

Suspiciously Juxtaposed Wallabies

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:31 pm

Strangely Jovial Weasels

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:32 pm

Anakin McFly wrote:
"progressive, feminist, leftist, fedora-wearing, college trust-fund hipster"
Wait, since when did 'fedora-wearing' fit into that list?

@phe_de, Refutations:

1) The cop(?) who, when Ahmed was brought in, allegedly commented "Yep, that's who I thought it was." How would his comment be explained in the absence of any racial/religious profiling?

2) Various anecdotes from comments regarding similar situations that ended completely differently, including one whose (white) classmate once made a rocket and pretended it was a bomb for the lulz. Nothing happened to him; vs Ahmed repeatedly claiming his clock was not a bomb, and getting arrested nonetheless.

3) Given that Texas is known for being racist and anti-Muslim, Occam's Razor makes it more likely that their reactions were caused at least in part by those prejudices. I'd say that it's highly unrealistic to expect that it never affected how they reacted.

4) People have pointed out that if they were indeed profiling students in the name of school safety, their primary supsicions should have been levelled at white boys, who are responsible for the vast majority of school shootings in America; whereas, to date, not one Muslim terrorist has targeted an obscure American school, which is a politically pointless target.

If a Muslim kid ever did decide to do a school shooting or bomb his school, it would also require further proof that this was an act ofo terrorism stemming from his religious beliefs, rather than - as is more likely - for the same bunch of reasons that other American kids occasionally go on murdering rampages in schools.

Thanks for your post.
About 1: We don't know if it really happened, or if the cop knew stuff we don't. But if it happened the way you said it, then the cop was racist, not Dawkins.
About 2: I doubt the white classmate got an audience with influential politicians. But I agree that double standards are bad.

The others are valid points.

However, the thread was about Dawkins criticizing Ahmed for disassembling a clock and claiming he invented it; which generated accusations of racism and Islamophobia towards Dawkins; although Dawkins never mentioned Ahmed's race or religion.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:37 pm

aels wrote:Please clarify where you have made any arguments.

With pleasure.

My argument is: If a person A criticizes a person B for whatever reason, and person B is a member of some minority or underpriviledged group (like black, Jewish, Muslim...), then the odds that someone will accuse person A of racism/antisemitism/islamophobia... are above 95%, even if person A never mentioned the skin color or religion of person B.

If you can prove to me that this is wrong, meaning: If you can show me cases where someone criticized the actions of a person who happened to be black/Jewish/Muslim/... without mentioning the skin color or religion; and later the critic was not accused of being racist/antisemitic/islamophobic/..., then I will stand corrected.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:39 pm

Monk wrote:I'm pretty sure it's because Dawkins has a history of some saying racist shit in the past (along with some other misogynistic crap). But seriously, stop saying things like "SJWs" - it just makes you look like an ignorant dumbass.

I knew that using this term would push the buttons of a few posters. Since this board was a bit slow lately, I thought that a bit of action wouldn't hurt.
I was not disappointed.

Cassius Clay · Post by **Cassius Clay** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:42 pm

I like Social Justice Warlock.

It's like, you're a warrior but with magic....motherfucker.

Post by **Gendo** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:48 pm

phe_de wrote:
aels wrote:Please clarify where you have made any arguments.
With pleasure.

My argument is: If a person A criticizes a person B for whatever reason, and person B is a member of some minority or underpriviledged group (like black, Jewish, Muslim...), then the odds that someone will accuse person A of racism/antisemitism/islamophobia... are above 95%, even if person A never mentioned the skin color or religion of person B.

Do you think this could possibly be because it's actually likely that the criticism of person B steps from the fact that he's a member of a minority or underprivileged group? You do realize that just because person A didn't mention skin color doesn't mean that skin color can't play a role, right? I'm sure that when black people are passed over for jobs simply because of having a black-sounding name on the resume, the hiring manager doesn't mention skin color in his reasons.

If you can prove to me that this is wrong, meaning: If you can show me cases where someone criticized the actions of a person who happened to be black/Jewish/Muslim/... without mentioning the skin color or religion; and later the critic was not accused of being racist/antisemitic/islamophobic/..., then I will stand corrected.

I don't think anyone disagrees that the majority of the time, someone will accuse person A of having racists/etc motivations. The point is that racist motivations DO play a role quite often, so hey, instead of worrying about the poor feelings of those privileged white people who are being accused of racism, let's actually deal with the fact that racism is the problem.

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 6:56 pm

Gendo wrote:Do you think this could possibly be because it's actually likely that the criticism of person B steps from the fact that he's a member of a minority or underprivileged group? You do realize that just because person A didn't mention skin color doesn't mean that skin color can't play a role, right? I'm sure that when black people are passed over for jobs simply because of having a black-sounding name on the resume, the hiring manager doesn't mention skin color in his reasons.

In this case, Dawkins criticized Ahmed because Ahmed had claimed to have "invented" a clock, when all he apparently did was to disassemble it.
Of course, it's not far-fetched to assume that if Ahmed had been a white person with a "white"-sounding name, this would not have made the news, and Dawkins would never have heard of it.
But if a white person had made the news about a fake bomb and claiming to have invented a clock which they didn't, I believe Dawkins would have criticized them as well.

Gendo wrote:I don't think anyone disagrees that the majority of the time, someone will accuse person A of having racists/etc motivations. The point is that racist motivations DO play a role quite often, so hey, instead of worrying about the poor feelings of those privileged white people who are being accused of racism, let's actually deal with the fact that racism is the problem.

Racism is a problem. But labeling actions or sayings "racist" when they are not is not helpful.
In this case, it's the school or the cops that were probably racist, by making a mountain out of a molehill. But not Dawkins.

Monk · Post by **Monk** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 9:46 pm

phe_de wrote:
Monk wrote:I'm pretty sure it's because Dawkins has a history of some saying racist shit in the past (along with some other misogynistic crap). But seriously, stop saying things like "SJWs" - it just makes you look like an ignorant dumbass.
I knew that using this term would push the buttons of a few posters. Since this board was a bit slow lately, I thought that a bit of action wouldn't hurt.
I was not disappointed.

Ok, douchebag.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Wed Sep 23, 2015 10:11 pm

So, the more I learn about this case, the more I think it's an example of the left-wing being mostly wrong for the right reasons and the right-wing being mostly right for the wrong reasons. What's interesting to me is how people are reacting to it rather than the case itself, at least so far. It's amazing how quickly and easily people draw the lines and divide into ideological teams based on almost nothing.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:43 am

It's Dawkins, though. He's made it extremely clear that he hates all religions, particularly Chrisianity and Islam, so it's a far stretch to me to say that his criticism of any Muslim person would not be influenced in some way by his raging hatred of religion.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:13 am

Re: SJW - I hate how the term has been hijacked by MRAs and racists etc. It used to be an insult for people who used social justice as an excuse to be hypocritical assholes or to make themselves seem enlightened and progressive, and in the process harm marginalised people and the cause of social justice. Now the world lacks a term for the kind of people who tell someone who made a rape joke that they hope his daughters get raped, or who yell at people for not putting trigger warnings on photos of pomegranates because they might be mistaken for gore, or who respond to a trans kid's story about coming out to bigoted family and finally finding acceptance with "lol, white men have it *SO* hard", or who spam someone's inbox with vicious death threats because she said she didn't understand why gay people couldn't just have civil unions because they were the same as marriage, or who verbally abuse a store cashier because she couldn't tell that her friend - who was dressing and looking like a typical girl and whom the cashier had never met before - was genderqueer, and had called them 'miss', etc. Which is a world of difference from calling out stuff like what Dawkins says, or being angry at social injustices.

Also, this person as a quintessential example; the vast majority of her targets were themselves members of often two or more marginalised groups, primarily women of colour: http://laurajmixon.com/2014/11/a-report ... ral-names/

...the harm BS/RH has done over the years—death, rape, and maiming threats; deception; gaslighting and deletions of incriminating posts; false accusations; terrorizing of fans, rape victims, and people in emotionally or mentally fragile states ... BS/RH's forum-trolling and destructiveness extends back well before her adoption of social-justice rhetoric (for instance, in one SFF media fan forum early in her career, she savaged other commenters in arguments over SF shows; in gaming forums, she has insulted gamers who disagree with her about videogames).

However, at some point she discovered social-justice-driven rage-speak and found it to be a particularly effective weapon. In this way BS/RH has been doing great harm to the progressive wing of SFF. By hiding behind the language of progressive causes, she taints—she cheapens—one of the primary means at social-equality activists' disposal to help the community-at-large understand a very important series of systemic biases that is harming people every day.

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 4:41 pm

This is coming straight from my facebook.

So let me get this straight.
A kid brings a clock, which he puts inside a metal pencil case, making it look like a bomb, takes it to school the very next day after 9/11 by his own volition, and not as part of say a school activity.
He shows it to his engineering teacher who tells him to not show it around.
He disregards, plugs the clock during his english class (the clock had no batteries of it's own), sets the alarm clock to go off during said class for no reason. (The alarm had to be set)
He gets questioned, and doesn't offer any explanation, or for instance call his engineering teacher to vouch for him.
On other notes, the clock was inside the metalic case, you needed to open it (it had a lock) to actually look at the time (talk about not practical), there was a wire sticking out that had to be used to plug it in, and more importantly HE DID NOT MAKE IT, BUT JUST TOOK THE CASING OFF AN OLD ONE.
And he is the victim?

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 2:36 am

What DA said, then.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri Sep 25, 2015 11:22 am

I just want to add I don't think my school invoked police involvement with hoax weapons unless they were used in conjunction with a serious threat, which Ahmed did not do. The code of conduct simply suspended the kid that possessed it.

At first glance, to an untrained eye, it does arguably look like a bomb. So I do think Ahmed should have been subject to the school's code of conduct. That said, while I also understand they wanted to take precautions, I agree those precautions were lacking at best and negligent at worst regarding both Ahmed and the safety of other students.

At the end of the day, Ahmed shouldn't have ended up in cuffs and to think any further detail than "It's a clock" is needed is one of dumbest things I've ever heard.