- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: FBI Director Wray: “These are not hoax devices”
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:37 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:37 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
What I said in my first post and have maintained throughout this thread is that IF situation #2 is the truth (that has yet to be determined), then the bombs are indeed hoaxes.
I don't get how this is so hard for them.
I don't know, either. It's weird. I'm not up in here saying "THE FBI IS DEFINITELY LYING!" Honestly I'm just debating the semantics of their word choice. If the guy sent fake bombs, then they were hoaxes, by definition. Doesn't change that it was a fricked up crime by a crazy person that deserves to sit in jail (this frickwit was making bomb threats back in 2002, for frick's sake).
Now, if they WERE all real bombs that malfunctioned, then they weren't hoaxes, also by definition. But we haven't gotten word on intent yet, so that's not really something anyone can say with certainty.
2
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:38 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:The FBI knows what the word hoax means, unlike someone from earlier.....
If point #2 in my earlier post is correct, then the FBI used the wrong word, by definition. They aren't infallible, I think both sides of the aisle can agree on that point
So for the FBI to say it isnt a hoax, that is the FBI saying the guy tried to make a working bomb
Please someone argue this simple statement of fact
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:40 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:Actually, it is the semantics of your poor word choices.
Honestly I'm just debating the semantics of their word choice.
quote:Right, but if he sent devices intended to be bombs, but weren't real bombs due to his incompetence, then they are not ”real bombs" but also not hoax devices.
If the guy sent fake bombs, then they were hoaxes, by definition
This post was edited on 10/26/18 at 3:41 pm
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:40 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:Its not weird man
I don't know, either. It's weird.
You were spouting off incorrect shite earlier, then changed your argument mid way
Here is your original argument
quote:
If they were real bombs, then they weren't hoaxes. If they weren't, then they were hoaxes. Period.
Then, after arguing that and realizing you were wrong, you change it to this, agreeing what I have been saying the ENTIRE TIME
quote:My point the entire time was a hoax requires deliberate attempt to fool, and you argued against that for pages
Crazy guy intended to fool people into thinking he meant to kill people and sent fake bombs through the mail.
This post was edited on 10/26/18 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:42 pm to lsupride87
quote:
That is not what you have been saying
It's precisely what I've been saying.
quote:
If they were real bombs, then they weren't hoaxes. If they weren't, then they were hoaxes. Period.
You were saying if the bombs are fake, then they are a hoax. Period.
Which supports what I said in my post with the two options. If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes. If he sent real bombs that malfunctioned, then they weren't hoaxes.
So my question is to the FBI regarding whether these bombs have been determined to be either defective or deceitful. That distinction will reveal whether or not they were hoaxes.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:43 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:THIS
Which supports what I said in my post with the two options. If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes.
IS
NOT
CORRECT
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:44 pm to Nastradamus
Then FBI Director Wray is only describing intent.
There has not been one material listed that could ever explode, so how could these be considered bombs?
The perps intent was to terrorize the addressees, and that's certainly not a hoax
There has not been one material listed that could ever explode, so how could these be considered bombs?
The perps intent was to terrorize the addressees, and that's certainly not a hoax
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:44 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:The quote in the op is clearly expressing the belief or, at least, narrative, from the FBI's perspective, the intent was to create real explosive devices and not fake devices.
determined to be either defective or deceitful.
ETA: I expect his attorney to argue otherwise.
This post was edited on 10/26/18 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:44 pm to lsupride87
I bet if you post one more people will automatically start agreeing with every thing you say.
people will automatically start agreeing with every thing you say. 
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:46 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
I enjoy wordsmithing and am quite good at it.
I don't think you are using the word wordsmithing correctly.
Wordsmithing implies someone functioning as an editor on a writing that has already been done.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:47 pm to piggilicious
This isnt an agree or disagree moment with tbird, this is a right or wrong
Tbird says this
To make his statement correct, one would say
Tbird says this
quote:That is simply not true
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes.
To make his statement correct, one would say
quote:
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs he knew were fake with the intent others would think they are real, then the bombs were hoaxes.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:48 pm to texridder
quote:
Wordsmithing implies someone functioning as an editor on a writing that has already been done.
no it doesn't
It implies a talent for writing
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:48 pm to lsupride87
quote:
quote:
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes.
That is simply not true
To make his statement correct, one would say
quote:
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs he knew were fake with the intent others would think they are real, then the bombs were hoaxes.
Maybe he was too crazy to know either way.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:48 pm to lsupride87
quote:This is closer to true than his original statement. If Mr. Crazy Guy knew them to be non operational or had no real belief that they would operate, i.e. that they were fake, then the statement is true.
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes.
This post was edited on 10/26/18 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:49 pm to Vecchio Cane
quote:you are thinking of "wordsmith"
no it doesn't
Wordsmithing
quote:
The making of changes to a text to improve clarity and style, as opposed to content.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:49 pm to PearlJam
quote:Correct
This is closer to true then his original statement. If Mr. Crazy Guy knew them to be non operational or had no real belief that they would operate, i.e. that they were fake, then the statement is true.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:50 pm to TbirdSpur2010
delete dp
This post was edited on 10/26/18 at 3:52 pm
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:50 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:THen it still wouldnt be a hoax
Maybe he was too crazy to know either way.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 3:57 pm to Nastradamus
The bombs were a hoax. Here's google's definition:
Since it wasn't humorous it was definitely a malicious deception. And that's what it was, a deception. He never intended actual harm, that is evident. Nobody fails 14 out of 14 times if he is serious.
quote:
a humorous or malicious deception.
Since it wasn't humorous it was definitely a malicious deception. And that's what it was, a deception. He never intended actual harm, that is evident. Nobody fails 14 out of 14 times if he is serious.
Posted on 10/26/18 at 4:00 pm to lsupride87
quote:Of course it's true.
If Mr. Crazy Guy sent fake bombs, then the bombs were hoaxes.
That is simply not true
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News