Purely out of curiosity...

[Mark Kohut]

Not Even Twice A Day... (No one spared)

Or The Clock Struck Thirteen...(1984 allusion) 

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 12, 2015, at 2:22 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd like to see a Flannery O'Conner version:
> "Out Boxed"
> 
> On Saturday, December 12, 2015, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'd like to see a Flannery O'Conner version.
>> 
>> On Saturday, December 12, 2015, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Or The Secret Disintegration!....TRP, stop out for a short story!
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > YES! The Clockwork Bomb.
>>> >
>>> > All kinds of resonances.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 1:38 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> In fact, a good writer could spin this into a VERY good story.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Saturday, December 12, 2015, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It seems likely that the son played out a set up, a test, and the school
>>> >>> and the cops failed the test.  No one thought it was a bomb. The boy said it
>>> >>> was a clock. Yet the authorities tried their best to get a hoax bomb charge
>>> >>> to stick. They failed the test. They lost this Sting, and I'm glad it played
>>> >>> out as it did.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> David Morris
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Saturday, December 12, 2015, Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I sincerely hope that you are not implying that I came to my conclusions
>>> >>>> based on anything THOSE idiots wrote, or that my skepticism about the
>>> >>>> oversimplified, wrongheaded narrative that much of the mainstream media has
>>> >>>> chosen to run with in this case puts me on par with the brothers and ancient
>>> >>>> alien true believers on this pathetically benighted website.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> J
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Dec 12, 2015 8:19 AM, "Elisabeth Romberg" <eromberg at mac.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Clock-boy was also the subject on FreemanTV with Jamie Hanshaw last
>>> >>>>> Saturday.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> http://freemantv.com/muslim-attacks-believe-it-or-else-jamie-hanshaw/
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 12. des. 2015 kl. 07.13 skrev Steven Koteff <steviekoteff at gmail.com>:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> It is scary just in how much it reveals about how reactionary we've
>>> >>>>> become.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> You know, in a really peaceable society, people remember that there's a
>>> >>>>> difference between being arrested and undergoing something that requires
>>> >>>>> damages--that's only supposed to happen once you get convicted. A person who
>>> >>>>> committed no crime occasionally being brought in for questioning and then
>>> >>>>> released is an unavoidable part of even the most utopian investigatory
>>> >>>>> system (you might call it, ahem, an inherent vice).
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Was there any suggestion or indication that, aside from the arrest being
>>> >>>>> wrongful in the first place, he was improperly handled/treated? There is
>>> >>>>> this from the ArtVoice thing:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> "I asked if I could talk to or speak to my son and they told me, 'No,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> not right now' because they were taking his fingerprints and asking
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> him questions," Mohamed said.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> If that's true (there's no time frame given I don't think) is that
>>> >>>>> outside normal/proper operating procedures?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Don't know if it constitutes the 'torture' the dad is quoted as
>>> >>>>> suggesting.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Steven Koteff <steviekoteff at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> All your clarifications are noted, and important--I should've been
>>> >>>>>> carefuller about them in the first place.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Mark Thibodeau
>>> >>>>>> <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> But that's kind of my point. Me and you paying attention to this is
>>> >>>>>>> meaningless. The MEDIA (95% of which is pushing a false narrative) are
>>> >>>>>>> the ones who should never have run with this. If they hadn't, then we
>>> >>>>>>> wouldn't be having to discuss it.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> And anyway, in the Big Picture, NOTHING really matters, does it? So
>>> >>>>>>> why even bring it up in this particular context?
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> J.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> PS - Further clarification... I never claimed that the Mohammed family
>>> >>>>>>> planned any of this in advance, and I don't know anyone who does. The
>>> >>>>>>> opportunity simply presented itself, and they ran with it. No need for
>>> >>>>>>> any complicated conspiracy or plan. It's just that, as soon as the
>>> >>>>>>> media jumped on Ahmed's alleged "mistreatment", THAT's when the
>>> >>>>>>> conniving for money began. But that doesn't let Ahmed off the hook for
>>> >>>>>>> his shitty behavior.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Steven Koteff
>>> >>>>>>> <steviekoteff at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> > I guess I'm curious also why this particular case is so exigent, if
>>> >>>>>>> > it is as
>>> >>>>>>> > simple as the kid and his father are con artists, or malicious
>>> >>>>>>> > provocateurs.
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> > If that's the case, then the wrongdoing is a relatively simple one,
>>> >>>>>>> > and
>>> >>>>>>> > committed on a relatively small scale (that is, by one or two
>>> >>>>>>> > people, as
>>> >>>>>>> > opposed to the broader/less addressable alternative that it's a
>>> >>>>>>> > systemic
>>> >>>>>>> > problem). People filing a ridiculous lawsuit--happens all the time.
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> > If that's the case, why does this particular one deserve more of my
>>> >>>>>>> > attention (which I'm giving it) than, say, climate talks, what Trump
>>> >>>>>>> > means
>>> >>>>>>> > for America, this Shkreli asshole, etc., all of which seem to be of
>>> >>>>>>> > more
>>> >>>>>>> > pressing concern to the country than just a single father and son
>>> >>>>>>> > acting
>>> >>>>>>> > wrongly and in a way that did not really physically endanger anyone.
>>> >>>>>>> > I mean
>>> >>>>>>> > I guess the fact that the case is so zeitgeisty sort of gives it its
>>> >>>>>>> > own
>>> >>>>>>> > exigence, right or wrong, and of course we should always be on the
>>> >>>>>>> > side of
>>> >>>>>>> > truth prevailing, but...
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> > I dunno. I'm not saying it's wrong to have the stance that the
>>> >>>>>>> > family should
>>> >>>>>>> > get nothing and should maybe be punished in some way. I do not even
>>> >>>>>>> > think
>>> >>>>>>> > the ends-justify-the-means thing (meaning that maybe the attention
>>> >>>>>>> > this gets
>>> >>>>>>> > helps lead us in the direction of more tolerance, of more peace, of
>>> >>>>>>> > less
>>> >>>>>>> > systemic prejudice and injustice, etc...) is a good counterargument
>>> >>>>>>> > if it
>>> >>>>>>> > depends on us accepting or ignoring something untrue--I do think the
>>> >>>>>>> > distinction should be made. But I guess I'm saying it feels like the
>>> >>>>>>> > swing
>>> >>>>>>> > in the other direction has been more than a return to rest or even
>>> >>>>>>> > an equal
>>> >>>>>>> > sort of pendulum-swing, but has been additional enmity and
>>> >>>>>>> > attention, also
>>> >>>>>>> > coming before all the facts are known, maybe.
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >
>>> >>>>>>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Steven Koteff
>>> >>>>>>> > <steviekoteff at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> > wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> Do you think there is room for both parties to have somehow acted
>>> >>>>>>> >> wrongly?
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> I.e. Ahmed and his father were being deliberately provocative (to
>>> >>>>>>> >> the end
>>> >>>>>>> >> of money and attention or whatever else) in Ahmed's bringing the
>>> >>>>>>> >> clock to
>>> >>>>>>> >> school and repeatedly calling attention to it,
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> but also that the teachers and/or police (who as should be noted
>>> >>>>>>> >> knew
>>> >>>>>>> >> Ahmed much better than we do) were, at some turn, possibly less
>>> >>>>>>> >> generous
>>> >>>>>>> >> than they could've been? Let's say Ahmed is routinely a pain in the
>>> >>>>>>> >> ass and
>>> >>>>>>> >> the source of small-scale mischief (that is, suspendable and
>>> >>>>>>> >> outrageous
>>> >>>>>>> >> offenses but something short of taking lives) and possibly a bad
>>> >>>>>>> >> kid, like a
>>> >>>>>>> >> true-blue asshole. This seems true if he is guilty of deliberately
>>> >>>>>>> >> inciting
>>> >>>>>>> >> panic or whatever. (And if we can use the egregiousness of the
>>> >>>>>>> >> lawsuit to
>>> >>>>>>> >> retroactively inform our judgment of his character at time of
>>> >>>>>>> >> clock-display,
>>> >>>>>>> >> then we can also use keep going, by a sort of syllogism, to
>>> >>>>>>> >> retroactively
>>> >>>>>>> >> use it to assume that maybe he was just an obvious asshole from the
>>> >>>>>>> >> start.)
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> If that's all true, then the teachers are possibly collectively
>>> >>>>>>> >> sick of
>>> >>>>>>> >> his shit. Maybe one or several of them are having particularly
>>> >>>>>>> >> rough days
>>> >>>>>>> >> and so their patience is thin (this seems to be a fair possibility
>>> >>>>>>> >> in the
>>> >>>>>>> >> case of high school teachers who have to deal with dozens of
>>> >>>>>>> >> students like
>>> >>>>>>> >> Ahmed a day). And so maybe, despite having never actually thinking
>>> >>>>>>> >> it is
>>> >>>>>>> >> anything more dangerous than a clock that looks like an explosive
>>> >>>>>>> >> device,
>>> >>>>>>> >> they flex just a bit more bureaucratic muscle than they needed to.
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> (We think that race/religion are the only things that can guide
>>> >>>>>>> >> decisions
>>> >>>>>>> >> like this, but in the case of a student and his school's faculty,
>>> >>>>>>> >> likely
>>> >>>>>>> >> their personal biases toward him are just as influential [though of
>>> >>>>>>> >> course
>>> >>>>>>> >> those are guided by any biases they might have toward his
>>> >>>>>>> >> race/religion,
>>> >>>>>>> >> etc.]).
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> Maybe there are one or several points at which someone could've
>>> >>>>>>> >> just said,
>>> >>>>>>> >> "Ahmed, you're being an asshole, give me the clock, I'm putting it
>>> >>>>>>> >> in my
>>> >>>>>>> >> desk until the end of the day." But then, given the zero tolerance
>>> >>>>>>> >> thing,
>>> >>>>>>> >> there is a point at which this thing has too much momentum to just
>>> >>>>>>> >> let go...
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> I don't know. I mean that sincerely--I really don't. I think the
>>> >>>>>>> >> account
>>> >>>>>>> >> of things you posted indicates that Ahmed and his father acted
>>> >>>>>>> >> wrongly. I
>>> >>>>>>> >> also think there is room in there for the teachers and police not
>>> >>>>>>> >> just to
>>> >>>>>>> >> have been victims but to have been sort of...punitively
>>> >>>>>>> >> trigger-happy. I say
>>> >>>>>>> >> this as someone who also went to junior high, and to high school,
>>> >>>>>>> >> in the
>>> >>>>>>> >> 21st century, in a Union state, and who witnessed open enmity from
>>> >>>>>>> >> teachers
>>> >>>>>>> >> toward particular students for reasons like: A) the kid is black,
>>> >>>>>>> >> B) the kid
>>> >>>>>>> >> is not smart, C) the kid is hyperactive, D) the teacher seems to
>>> >>>>>>> >> have an
>>> >>>>>>> >> unhappy disposition as is, E)tc.
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> I think, as a society, we are not well equipped to deal with
>>> >>>>>>> >> situations
>>> >>>>>>> >> this nuanced--in which multiple parties might have acted wrongly.
>>> >>>>>>> >> Of course
>>> >>>>>>> >> many such situations are probably like this to an extent. There
>>> >>>>>>> >> are, I'm
>>> >>>>>>> >> guessing, several minorities who were acting like assholes,
>>> >>>>>>> >> possibly very
>>> >>>>>>> >> high, being violent and unpredictable, making threats, handling (if
>>> >>>>>>> >> not
>>> >>>>>>> >> using) weapons, who were killed by police officers, who might not
>>> >>>>>>> >> have been
>>> >>>>>>> >> killed had they been white.
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Mark Thibodeau
>>> >>>>>>> >> <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >You've emphasized twice that the sources are 'mainstream.'
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >Why is that? To indicate that it is an unbiased take (as opposed
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >to a really political, say, blog) or to imply that it is more
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >stringently fact checked or...
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> I mention it because, as someone who was "internet famous" between
>>> >>>>>>> >>> 1999 and 2006 (peak years 2000-2003) as sole author and content
>>> >>>>>>> >>> provider of a quite successful proto-blog email newsletter (The
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Daily
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Dirt), I am intimately aware of and particularly sensitive to the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> (ahem) "liberties" taken by the reactionary right-wing side of the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> blog-and-comment-o-sphere. I spent much of my seven years as Jerky
>>> >>>>>>> >>> LeBoeuf (coinciding as they did with the Dubya preznitcy)
>>> >>>>>>> >>> debunking
>>> >>>>>>> >>> and fact-checking the likes of Drudge Report, Fox News, Rush
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Limbaugh,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Free Republic, Little Green Footballs, and all the rest of the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> then-nascent ultra-conservative first-gen blog-rolls. So I would
>>> >>>>>>> >>> hate
>>> >>>>>>> >>> to be mistaken as one of those. On the other hand, I am currently
>>> >>>>>>> >>> on
>>> >>>>>>> >>> the edge of despair due to so many of my former friends, readers
>>> >>>>>>> >>> and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> other allies behaving as left-leaning versions of the assholes I
>>> >>>>>>> >>> mention above, ever ready to assume the worst of any institution
>>> >>>>>>> >>> (or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> cis-gendered white male), accept any and all claims to victimhood
>>> >>>>>>> >>> as
>>> >>>>>>> >>> valid, and basically display the same kind of ravening,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> drool-flecked
>>> >>>>>>> >>> howling, pack mentality, as if they've torn a page from the main
>>> >>>>>>> >>> stylebook of the turn-of-the-millennium Conservative
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Movementarians.
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >It's hard, in something this complicated, to rely on second-
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >(and third-, and...)hand reportage. When everyone involved
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >has so much at stake now (even if the teachers acted 100%
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >rightly, they're now in a situation where they are probably
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >compelled to act and testify in their own self-interest, just for
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > protection).
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Yes. And that's why I always try to reason these things out for
>>> >>>>>>> >>> myself, with as cool a head as humanly possible. In this case, for
>>> >>>>>>> >>> instance, I asked myself, would it be REASONABLE for a teacher to
>>> >>>>>>> >>> believe that someone who brought such a thing into class was up to
>>> >>>>>>> >>> some kind of mischief? As soon as I saw the "clock" in question...
>>> >>>>>>> >>> it
>>> >>>>>>> >>> was clear to me that, OF COURSE the teachers were right to be
>>> >>>>>>> >>> suspicious. The thing could not possibly look less like a clock.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> The
>>> >>>>>>> >>> only way it could look more like a cliche'd action movie bomb was
>>> >>>>>>> >>> if
>>> >>>>>>> >>> it was a bowling ball with a firecracker sticking out of the top.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> So,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> next step for me, if the teachers were correct in SUSPECTING
>>> >>>>>>> >>> POSSIBLE
>>> >>>>>>> >>> BAD INTENT, then were they right to call in the police? It turns
>>> >>>>>>> >>> out,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> considering the school district's zero tolerance policy, they
>>> >>>>>>> >>> probably
>>> >>>>>>> >>> didn't even have a choice. Same as if they'd caught him with
>>> >>>>>>> >>> booze, or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> a joint, or if he'd pinched a female student's bottom and she'd
>>> >>>>>>> >>> complained... the authorities HAD TO BE called in. And they were.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Now,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> that leads us to the question of whether the authorities did
>>> >>>>>>> >>> anything
>>> >>>>>>> >>> wrong by taking Ahmed into custody, or putting him in handcuffs,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> keeping him from his parents for an hour and a half. And you know
>>> >>>>>>> >>> what? There is NO legislation that prevents police from detaining
>>> >>>>>>> >>> or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> handcuffing a 14 year old. This should be patently obvious to
>>> >>>>>>> >>> anyone
>>> >>>>>>> >>> who went through junior high school (as it was to me, as I myself
>>> >>>>>>> >>> have
>>> >>>>>>> >>> personally witnessed teacher and police behavior towards 13/14/15
>>> >>>>>>> >>> year
>>> >>>>>>> >>> olds that was FAR more egregious and unjust than what poor Ahmed
>>> >>>>>>> >>> went
>>> >>>>>>> >>> through). But apparently most of the members of the media who have
>>> >>>>>>> >>> been reporting on this story were hot-house flowers who grew up in
>>> >>>>>>> >>> social justice enclaves where they were taught (hahaha) that life
>>> >>>>>>> >>> should be "fair" or something, or that if you have a problem with
>>> >>>>>>> >>> authority, you can always sue the bastards. Well, maybe that's
>>> >>>>>>> >>> true. I
>>> >>>>>>> >>> certainly hope it isn't, because for the Muhammed family to get
>>> >>>>>>> >>> one
>>> >>>>>>> >>> thin dime out of this would be a travesty of justice and a blow
>>> >>>>>>> >>> against common sense, in my opinion as an anti-racist,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> anti-fascist,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> authority-skeptic liberal of long standing.
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> Sincerely;
>>> >>>>>>> >>> J
>>> >>>>>>> >>>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Steven Koteff
>>> >>>>>>> >>> <steviekoteff at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > I don't mean to imply anything. Just thanking you for doing the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > research--I
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > am in that gray area of being curious enough to want to know the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > timeline
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > without being curious enough (or having enough time) to do much
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > digging
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > myself.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > And also, because you seem much more up on this than I am, I am
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > curious
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > to
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > hear your takeaway.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > I think if everything in that article is right then it kind of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > seems
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > like it
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > was at best incredibly ignorant and irresponsible on the part of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > dad and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > the son. At worst (and the direction it seems to lean, if the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > article
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > is
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > right) possibly a deliberately provocative act on the part of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > father. To
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > what end? Is it just about money and attention? I actually
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > think, if
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > provocation is deliberate, it betrays not just run-of-the-mill
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > selfish
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > motives but also personal disturbance on the part of the father,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > the kid
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > too.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > But all that comes with the caveat that the account is true.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > You've
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > emphasized twice that the sources are 'mainstream.' Why is that?
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > To
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > indicate
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > that it is an unbiased take (as opposed to a really political,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > say,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > blog) or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > to imply that it is more stringently fact checked or...
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > It's hard, in something this complicated, to rely on second-(and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > third-,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > and...)hand reportage. When everyone involved has so much at
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > stake now
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > (even
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > if the teachers acted 100% rightly, they're now in a situation
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > where
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > they
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > are probably compelled to act and testify in their own
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > self-interest,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > just
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > for protection).
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > I read that article saying that the police said something, but
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > at least
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > half
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > of me is thinking I should be asking, "But who says the police
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > said
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > that?"
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Mark Thibodeau
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> > wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Here's a handy timeline from the ArtVoice blog. The facts all
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> check
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> out (meaning the author hasn't misrepresented the mostly
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> mainstream
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> articles to which he refers):
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> On the morning of Sept 14, Mohamed El Hassan Mohamed drove his
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> son
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Ahmed to school and at that time, according to NBC
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Dallas/Ft.Worth,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Mohamed "encouraged him to demonstrate his gift of technology"
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> at the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> school. He was referring to a small plain metal case, inside of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> which
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> contained the hastily arranged and unshielded electronic
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> components of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> a 1980's Micronta digital alarm clock. A device Ahmed would
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> repeatedly
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> insist he threw together the night before in just 15 minutes
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> from of
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> "scraps" laying around his house, a device that he himself
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> considered
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> to appear suspicious and threatening.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Defying common sense, it appears that Mohamed, the man who runs
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> National Reform Party of Sudan, who is considered an
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> enlightened
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> scholar in Sudan, who ran for its presidency twice in the last
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> 5
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> years, whose daughter was suspended from school for a bomb
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> threat,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> whose son was detained and suspended for multiple disciplinary
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> problems and electronic pranks, in a town recently rocked by a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> double
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> murder honor killing and lies 25 minutes from the Garland TX
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Jihadi
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> attack, on the first day back to school after the anniversary
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> of 9-11,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> encourages his son to bring in a nondescript metal case with a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> timer
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> and loose wiring inside without being asked to by any teacher,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> device even his son admits looked threatening and suspicious.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Next we are told by Ahmed that he shows the device to his 1st
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> period
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Science teacher who sensitively and politely tells him the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> device is
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> "nice" but it looks like a bomb and so he should put it away
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> and not
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> take it out and show it to anyone else at school.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> According to Mark Cuban who spoke with an Irving resident who's
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> friend
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> is a teacher in Mac Arthur H.S., Ahmed proceeded to show off
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> device to each teacher all the way to 6th period where in
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> English
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> class, Ahmed claims to have plugged the device into the wall
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> outlet
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> and set the alarm to go off in the middle of class "to show a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> friend".
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> When the teacher reacted to the disruption he "unplugged it
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> right
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> away". After showing the English teacher what caused the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> disruption,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> the teacher told him it looks like a bomb, that it is making
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> her
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> nervous and would make others nervous, and to put it away in
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> his
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> backpack, to which Ahmed said "I don't think it looks like a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> bomb". At
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> the end of class the device was confiscated and the Principal
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> alerted.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> The Irving school system adheres to a zero tolerance policy
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> regarding
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> threatening devices, and being that the possession of such a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> device
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> with intent to alarm others is a criminal offense in Texas, the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> police
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> were called to question Ahmed and determine what his intentions
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> were.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Later 3 teachers would sign a complaint to the police about a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> hoax
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> bomb, as the Principal decided to contact the police on the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> issue.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> The police arrived at school and entered the conference room
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> where
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Ahmed was detained and one officer claimed "that is who I
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> thought it
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> was". Likely referring to Ahmed's past troubles and his
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> family's
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> notoriety. The police questioned Ahmed, and claimed he was not
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> forthcoming, passive aggressive, and would not directly answer
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> their
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> questions. They decided to arrest him for possession of a hoax
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> bomb
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> and bring him to the police station where they would continue
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> their
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> investigation to determine whether he intended to raise alarm
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> with his
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> device, a Class A misdemeanor.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Somehow or other it appears Ahmed's 18 year old sister Eyman
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> found out
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> that Ahmed was being taken to the police station. There is an
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> iconic
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> photo of Ahmed in handcuffs taken by Eyman, and some captions
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> under
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> that photo indicate it was taken at the police station. This
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> implies
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> his sister arrived shortly after Ahmed arrived, because he
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> would not
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> have been in handcuffs after he was released without charge an
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> hour
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> later. There is also speculation Eyman took the photo as Ahmed
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> was
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> leaving the school in handcuffs.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Ahmed's father claims the first he heard of his son's problem
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> was from
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> a phone call from the police. We do not know if he arrived with
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> or
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> separate from Eyman. It is hard to believe Eyman heard about
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> incident and arrived at the police station to take that photo
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> never alerted her father. If Eyman only knew through her
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> father, this
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> would mean they both arrived at the station in time to see
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Ahmed
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> before he went in a private room for questioning. Improbable
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> but
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> possible. The father's account follows.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> **The first he heard of it was when he received a call from
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> police,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> who said his son was being charged with having a hoax bomb,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Mohamed
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> said.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> He rushed to the police station, where he saw his son
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> "surrounded by
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> five police and he was handcuffed," the father said. Ahmed told
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> his
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> father he'd asked to phone him but the police told him he could
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> not
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> because he was under arrest, Mohamed said.
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> "I asked if I could talk to or speak to my son and they told
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> me, 'No,
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> not right now' because they were taking his fingerprints and
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> asking
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> him questions," Mohamed said. "I asked if I could see the thing
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> they
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> were calling a bomb. The police never let me even see it but I
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> knew
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> what my son brought to school. It was an alarm clock that he
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> made. He
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> wakes up with it most mornings. **
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> Here we have Mohamed contradicting his son's claim the device
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> was
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> hastily thrown together the night before. His credibility as a
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> responsible parent and supervisor of his child already strained
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> to the
>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> limit, he goes on to claim, "my son was hurt and tortured and
>>> >>>>>>> >>&
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20151212/9fd8a003/attachment.html>