5 ms·

I remember taking my first airplane ride 18 years ago. I remember excitedly talking about bombs, etc., and my dad telling me, "never say 'bomb' in an airport."

I remember taking my first airplane ride 18 years ago. I remember excitedly talking about bombs, etc., and my dad telling me, "never say 'bomb' in an airport." My dad wasn't a security nut, just someone who knew "when in Rome..." pretty well. It just was common knowledge that "bomb" in that setting was in the same class as shouting "fire" in a theater. So, here is a student with cards that teach him how to say "bomb," in an airport, in a language that is spoken by most people who have bombed our planes. I am pretty strongly against TSA abuses and they obviously shouldn't have done this to him (and I mean it should be illegal to do this to him), but is it okay to say this kid could have been a little more prudent?

troystribling 17y ago
A recall an indecent a few years ago (sorry no link) where several engineers were detained in an airport for discussing a 'Bill of Materials', usually referred to as a BOM a homophone of bomb. Knowing where to draw the line can be difficult.
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Right, because everybody knows that those that want to bomb airplanes go around with flash cards in multiple languages and discuss their desire loudly with fellow passengers before the flight. Anything passengers say should be 100% ignored because it doesn't add any factual information unless you're being approached by someone alerting you to a possible situation. People in line for a security check will naturally tend to discuss topics related to security.
gcheong 17y ago
This reminds me of the time I was flying back from a conference where I had forgotten the I had a sample of a soda drink called "Bomba" in my carry on. To make matters worse, the drink was in a bottle shaped like a grenade. Though I could tell that the security guard didn't actually think I had a real bomb, he still would not let me through security with it. Matter of principle I guess.
- lutorm 17y ago
  You don't get to take any liquids through, bomb-shaped or not...
  - gcheong 17y ago
    This was before the liquid restrictions.
gojomo 17y ago
I think it depends on details not provided in the linked account. Did he have just 2 cards, with the words 'bomb' and 'terrorism', held where security and other passengers couldn't help but see them? (That is, was he trying to provoke a reaction, a sort of performance-art-in-the-security-line?) Or, did he have a deck of dozens, packed away out of sight? The threshold where I'll excuse security for giving him extra scrutiny -- possibly even temporary detention -- is somewhere between those two possibilities.
- lutorm 17y ago
  It's not clear to me why having cards that say bomb is at all relevant. What's the thinking here, that any terrorist needs to be able to say "bomb" in Arabic to make it go off? For a country that allows people to say that they support the Holocaust in the name of free speech, this seems COMPLETELY misguided. Not just a little, but completely. I'd bet that there is zero correlation between being able to say bomb in Arabic, or between wanting to learn to say bomb in Arabic, and wanting to set one off.
  - gojomo 17y ago
    My point is: presentation matters. One side of a flashcard is a label. Holding the 'bomb' label against one's laptop, and the 'terrorist' label against one's chest like a nametag is a different presentation -- one designed to provoke thought or even alarm -- as opposed to just having the cards among others inside a carry-on. Similarly, what if he ostentatiously dropped just the terror-related cards while in the security line? If the truth is close to those scenarios, then Nicholas George wanted attention, and he got it. It's harder for me to get worked up about TSA if that's the case.
    - sailormoon 17y ago
      Did you even read the article? He had a stack of common flash cards in his pocket. He needed to know words like "bomb" and "terrorism" to understand arabic newspapers. Nothing about holding the card for "terrorist" against his chest or ostentatiously dropping the cards in front of the guards.

troystribling 17y ago

A recall an indecent a few years ago (sorry no link) where several engineers were detained in an airport for discussing a 'Bill of Materials', usually referred to as a BOM a homophone of bomb. Knowing where to draw the line can be difficult.

jacquesm 17y ago
Right, because everybody knows that those that want to bomb airplanes go around with flash cards in multiple languages and discuss their desire loudly with fellow passengers before the flight. Anything passengers say should be 100% ignored because it doesn't add any factual information unless you're being approached by someone alerting you to a possible situation. People in line for a security check will naturally tend to discuss topics related to security.

gcheong 17y ago

This reminds me of the time I was flying back from a conference where I had forgotten the I had a sample of a soda drink called "Bomba" in my carry on. To make matters worse, the drink was in a bottle shaped like a grenade. Though I could tell that the security guard didn't actually think I had a real bomb, he still would not let me through security with it. Matter of principle I guess.

lutorm 17y ago
You don't get to take any liquids through, bomb-shaped or not...
- gcheong 17y ago
  This was before the liquid restrictions.

gojomo 17y ago

I think it depends on details not provided in the linked account. Did he have just 2 cards, with the words 'bomb' and 'terrorism', held where security and other passengers couldn't help but see them? (That is, was he trying to provoke a reaction, a sort of performance-art-in-the-security-line?) Or, did he have a deck of dozens, packed away out of sight? The threshold where I'll excuse security for giving him extra scrutiny -- possibly even temporary detention -- is somewhere between those two possibilities.

lutorm 17y ago
It's not clear to me why having cards that say bomb is at all relevant. What's the thinking here, that any terrorist needs to be able to say "bomb" in Arabic to make it go off? For a country that allows people to say that they support the Holocaust in the name of free speech, this seems COMPLETELY misguided. Not just a little, but completely. I'd bet that there is zero correlation between being able to say bomb in Arabic, or between wanting to learn to say bomb in Arabic, and wanting to set one off.
- gojomo 17y ago
  My point is: presentation matters. One side of a flashcard is a label. Holding the 'bomb' label against one's laptop, and the 'terrorist' label against one's chest like a nametag is a different presentation -- one designed to provoke thought or even alarm -- as opposed to just having the cards among others inside a carry-on. Similarly, what if he ostentatiously dropped just the terror-related cards while in the security line? If the truth is close to those scenarios, then Nicholas George wanted attention, and he got it. It's harder for me to get worked up about TSA if that's the case.
  - sailormoon 17y ago
    Did you even read the article? He had a stack of common flash cards in his pocket. He needed to know words like "bomb" and "terrorism" to understand arabic newspapers. Nothing about holding the card for "terrorist" against his chest or ostentatiously dropping the cards in front of the guards.