>>11320
>All complete speculation on your part, based on the unsupported conclusion that he was intentionally trying to get in trouble.
Just like your assumption that he's perfectly innocent, absolutely baseless. He was just as likely trying to scare the teachers and kids of bomb threat. I'm sorry but there's no reason to do this as far as I'm concerned except to cause shit. All he did was pull an alarm clock out of the casing and put it into a suitcase. Yeah some EE project that is. LOL.
>And there would be no long term consequences because the kid's innocence was easily proved.
Look who keeps on asserting baseless assumptions as fact again. You know if you're gonna try and bust me for soemthing don't go right ahead and do it. Besides if you read my post here: >>11310 I said:
>none of us know what actually happened but I'm not going to buy into the "poor oppressed Muslims" narrative and Dawkins is right to challenge it.
But hey just buy into the media narrative before the facts are out.
>So in the mean time why not treat idiots with the contempt they deserve?
More baseless assertion.
>Come on, not even American police are bad enough to kill a fourteen year old for being passive aggressive during questioning. Or are they? Seriously though, if you think I can't talk to cops without expressing my uncontrollable "juvenile rage" I think you're confusing rage with exasperation and lack of self-control with lack of giving a shit, were I in this specific situation.
Look, it's easier to comply with cops than give them a hard time because they can give you a hard time too. It's that simple. One time I was speeding over 50 and was in a shitty mood when I was pulled over. You know what I did? Was extra nice to the cop so the let me off with going only over 10.
>Arguing with a cop and refusing to follow their commands isn't the same as giving a little sass. When you know it's only a matter of time before you're proved right there's no reason to make a criminal out of yourself by resisting arrest, but expressing displeasure is completely understandable.
You keep on asserting he's perfectly innocent. But there's no proof either way.
>If this level of response seems insufficient, recall that THE ONLY EVIDENCE OF IT BEING A BOMB IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS "Durr, it has wires and a clock face." Seriously, people say this shit "looks like a bomb", but it doesn't if you actually examine it for more than a second.
The main board could've had a wifi module connected outputting to a remote device.
Also why put it in a suitcase like that if he wasn't gonna pretend it's a bomb? That's the thing, he did a good job making it look like those crappy timed bombs we see in movies. You know I'd love to put a fake gun with no orange plastic around the barrel to your head and see how'd you react. Yeah sure on closer inspection it's a fake gun but given that situation you wouldn't know. It's better to be safe than sorry.