Talk:Student arrested over "art" shirt with exposed wiring at Boston Airport

OR

I just watched the press conference on TV and got the quotes from the officials:

"This is a serious event and was handled quickly and safely. She claims this was an act and just wanted to display the act. She didn't understand the seriousness of the situation and she is lucky we did not use deadly force because we had machine guns on scene," said authorities during a press conference at 11:00 a.m. today.

DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 15:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I also got what the shirt said from the press conference too. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 15:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Misleading/incorrect headline

Read http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/09/woman_arrested.html in particular the comment by "Kadin2048":

'I think the most disgusting part of all this is how the AP is reporting the story. From the opening sentence of the AP story above:

"An MIT student wearing what turned out to be a fake bomb was arrested at gunpoint Friday at Logan International Airport and later claimed it was artwork, officials said."

What the hell? It "turned out" to be a fake bomb? No, it didn't. It turned out to be a bunch of blinky LEDs in a breadboard. It was categorically *not* a 'fake bomb.'

With journalists like these, who needs propaganda?'

Please don't spread stupid ignorant paranoia, report the facts. —64.7.159.210 18:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

This is true, I was going to say, it's not a circuit board... well it's a breadboard... but still unless you're an electronics major you wouldn't know what the hell that is. --TUFKAAP 19:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Why did the title still say "fake bomb" ? It wasn't a fake bomb. Boston is just paranoid wishing they were as important as NYC. fyi, I'm in Boston at this moment. Nyarlathotep 22:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It was made with the intentions of looking like a bomb and that is not disputable. Therefore its a fake bomb. Her intentions were for it to resemble a bomb or she never would have been arrested. It is nonsense to say it wasn't. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

What's your source for what her intentions were? The only source we have currently are her own statements to the police about it, that it was intended as art. The police have suggested that because to them it looked like some sort of bomb that it was intended to look like one-- but that's an allegation that they will have to prove in court. Fnordling 23:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

That is ridiculous. Read her shirt, read her blog on MIT oh and again, she was arrested for it. If it was not made to look like a bomb, which is clearly what it was meant to look like, art or not. She walked into the airport with it, walked down the path of the terminal to the desk, and stood in the exact same spot where 9/11 hijackers stood. Try and convince anyone that her intentions were art. Follow the sources, not your opinions. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you follow your own advice. If the woman's blog says she's going to make something that looks like a bomb, then you should link it as a source. To say that thing was "clearly meant to look like a bomb" is your opinion. 207.63.100.164 23:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It's green LED lights arranged in a star-pattern, worn by someone whose blog does describe her as quirky and an "inventor". I'd say we keep the "bomb" talk to a minimum. Sherurcij ^{refusing to add Original Reporting until PD Articles are allowed} 23:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't created to look like a bomb; it was created so she could wear it as a nametag for MIT's career fair. 18.238.6.77 01:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Remember those fake bombs planted around Boston before? Sherurcij ^{refusing to add Original Reporting until PD Articles are allowed} 23:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Yup I do...good point. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 23:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It's very simple, we only have support for the assertion that the device had expose wires, exactly like the last time boston freakeed out. exposed wired don't make it a fake bomb no matter how much some idiot cops think it does. Nyarlathotep 15:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Where's our Boston reporters? ;-)

We have plenty of folks we can ask for help in Boston, some of them even on or near the MIT campus I'm sure. Could we find someone to interview Simpson, and like, maybe get a circuit diagram of the breadboard? :-) --Kim Bruning 17:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Interviewing Simpson is unlikely to happen anytime soon. From what I can tell, she's avoiding reporters, a pretty wise move considering how the initial media response distorted the case against her. As for an electrical diagram, that can probably be created based on a close-up of the breadboard. 18.238.6.77 18:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It's different if it's someone from MIT asking, I figure. Maybe we can secure a Wikinews exclusive, if she hasn't talked with anyone else yet? ;-) Would you know someone who can make the circuit diagram? (though I'm guessing this is a pretty typical kind of circuit) --Kim Bruning 19:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It's unlikely that she'll speak to anyone from MIT. She seems to be keeping a low profile; I noticed she's gone from my Facebook friends list. I'll see if I can create a PNG of the circuit diagram and upload it or send it to someone. 18.238.6.77 20:01, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This is the best picture I can find of the circuit, but it's still too small to see exactly where the diodes are connected, so any diagram I make would be inaccurate. Oh well. 18.238.6.77 20:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks man, that's cool already :-) --Kim Bruning 02:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It appears that there are the same number of resistors as LEDs. The circuit would simply be a parallel set of 1 resister and 1 LED connected between the battery terminals on the top and bottom of the proto-board. A more efficient circuit would have used 2 or 3 LEDs in a chain with 1 resistor. Dan Oetting 14:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Other Sources

Suffolk county DA statement

CNN transcript of initial press briefing

Defense attorney statements

Dan Oetting 14:26, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit protected request

{{editprotected}} new info: Star placed on probation: http://starbulletin.com/breaking/breaking.php?id=7208

Edit protected request disabled. We don't add new information to old stories, please consider starting a new story if appropriate. Adambro (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)