NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060813/ap_on_re_us/phones_terror_charges

Police found about 1,000 cell phones in the men's minivan. How is this terrorism? What did they plan to do? Put them all on vibrate and call them all at once to create an earthquake?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060813/ap_on_re_us/phones_terror_charges

Police found about 1,000 cell phones in the men's minivan. How is this terrorism? What did they plan to do? Put them all on vibrate and call them all at once to create an earthquake?

It is curious, you have to admit.

The most common use of cellphones if stripped as they were found in the van (chargers pitched away from the phone itself) is as a remote detonator for explosives.

If the cellphones hadn't been stripped like that, it would sound more innocent to me.

But stripping out the batteries, throwing all of those in one box, and throwing 1000 chargers in another - you're getting the phones ready for something, and it isn't a quick sale.

You expect better out of TEXAS?

They saw the arab decent and instantly it was "terrorism" :rolleyes:

Admittedly, cellphones are supposedly easy to use as remote-triggered fuses. On the other hand, most common household appliances can be used in some way for terrorist attacks, so will it be a crime to store tons of flour soon? Flour is an extremely cheap explosive.

It would be more interesting to know under what circumstances this man was found, and why he was suspicious in the first place.

Edit: Now I read the article, and my conclusion is that it is completely ridiculous and typical of the racist police state that the US is turning into.

I think he'd be safer in Jerusalem than Texas.

He bought from *Walmart* as a matter of interest.

It is curious, you have to admit.

The most common use of cellphones if stripped as they were found in the van (chargers pitched away from the phone itself) is as a remote detonator for explosives.

If the cellphones hadn't been stripped like that, it would sound more innocent to me.

But stripping out the batteries, throwing all of those in one box, and throwing 1000 chargers in another - you're getting the phones ready for something, and it isn't a quick sale.
Around here they are usualy stripped to remove memory cards and rebuilt for distrobution to seniors so that they have 911 access in case of an emergency

The amount of material that requires 1,000 cell phones to detonate is probably hard to come by. They are only 20 years old I doubt they can afford it.

It would be more interesting to know under what circumstances this man was found, and why he was suspicious in the first place.

Well duh, they had brown skin.

Around here they are usualy stripped to remove memory cards and rebuilt for distrobution to seniors so that they have 911 access in case of an emergency
Usually, they aren't stripping brand new phones for that.

Participated in such a project. They were all used phones.

The ones in this case were all the same kind, all brand new, all being stripped from the packaging, all being separated into a box of batteries, a box of chargers, and a box of phones.

Well duh, they had brown skin.
Prove it. Link please.

The ones in this case were all the same kind, all brand new, all being stripped from the packaging, all being separated into a box of batteries, a box of chargers, and a box of phones.

To sell separately maybe?

Well, now they say there was a plot involved.

*********************************************************

Y'know what? Fuck it. I'd have done the same thing. I would have called some governmentals up and said, 'Hey, Muslim men in Aisle 8 trying to buy a buttload of cellphones, something's up, wanna come investigate?'.

If there's anybody here that thinks there wasn't a threat presented by those men, I think you're crazy. The police wouldn't have ever done anything if there wasn't a threat, simply because accusations of racism would overshadow any legitimate arguments they had if the men were innocent.

And anyways, they could be trying to ship the phones to the Middle East for use in terror attacks.

I'm going back to bed.

Prove it. Link please.

Odeh said she thought her husband and her relatives were targeted because of their Arab descent. The men's families come from Jerusalem, she said.

Thats right in the article I linked.

It is curious, you have to admit.

The most common use of cellphones if stripped as they were found in the van (chargers pitched away from the phone itself) is as a remote detonator for explosives.

If the cellphones hadn't been stripped like that, it would sound more innocent to me.

But stripping out the batteries, throwing all of those in one box, and throwing 1000 chargers in another - you're getting the phones ready for something, and it isn't a quick sale.
Second look at the article where does it say stripped cell phones? maybe I am missing it or you have another source just curious

Well, now they say there was a plot involved.

*********************************************************

Y'know what? Fuck it. I'd have done the same thing. I would have called some governmentals up and said, 'Hey, Muslim men in Aisle 8 trying to buy a buttload of cellphones, something's up, wanna come investigate?'.

If there's anybody here that thinks there wasn't a threat presented by those men, I think you're crazy. The police wouldn't have ever done anything if there wasn't a threat, simply because accusations of racism would overshadow any legitimate arguments they had if the men were innocent.

Do you have a cell phone? Youre a threat to national security, I am calling the FBI on you right now.

You still need the battery to use as a detonator. It's the ring that creates the current to detonate the bomb. With no battery there's no ring and no current.

Usually, they aren't stripping brand new phones for that.

Participated in such a project. They were all used phones.

The ones in this case were all the same kind, all brand new, all being stripped from the packaging, all being separated into a box of batteries, a box of chargers, and a box of phones.
You have some other source for that? I honestly did not see that in the article anywhere maybe I am just slow thismorning

As for new vs old phones that depends
The nursing home I used to work at got all thoes cheep prepaid ones because all the local cell phone companys had shipped the old ones elsewhere

Well, now they say there was a plot involved.

*********************************************************

Y'know what? Fuck it. I'd have done the same thing. I would have called some governmentals up and said, 'Hey, Muslim men in Aisle 8 trying to buy a buttload of cellphones, something's up, wanna come investigate?'.

If there's anybody here that thinks there wasn't a threat presented by those men, I think you're crazy. The police wouldn't have ever done anything if there wasn't a threat, simply because accusations of racism would overshadow any legitimate arguments they had if the men were innocent.

And anyways, they could be trying to ship the phones to the Middle East for use in terror attacks.

I'm going back to bed.
Thats never stoped them before ... people do stupid shit and other people back them up because they dont want their department to seem incompetent

Tuscola County Prosecutor Mark E. Reene told The Saginaw News in Michigan that investigators believe the men were targeting the Mackinac Bridge, which connects Michigan's Upper and Lower peninsulas.

I think terrorists would set their sights a little higher than a bridge.

You have some other source for that? I honestly did not see that in the article anywhere maybe I am just slow thismorning

As for new vs old phones that depends
The nursing home I used to work at got all thoes cheep prepaid ones because all the local cell phone companys had shipped the old ones elsewhere

It was in the article when they were first arrested.

Also, they didn't buy minutes for the phones. At all.

I think terrorists would set their sights a little higher than a bridge.
I’ve been to the island by ferry ... rather silly little clichéd place nothing but craft stores and candy stores lol

I think terrorists would set their sights a little higher than a bridge.
Usually, a cell phone is used by terrorists to set off IEDs.

Pretty simple, actually. And you don't need a bridge.

I would think a shopping mall would be better.

It was in the article when they were first arrested.

Also, they didn't buy minutes for the phones. At all.
You don’t have to have minuets for 911 calls

Anyways I still don’t see anything about “stripped” cell phones as you put it.

To sell separately maybe?

no profit in that...unless Wall Mart sell wholesale...which I doubt...

all in all very very odd

You don’t have to have minuets for 911 calls

Anyways I still don’t see anything about “stripped” cell phones as you put it.
http://www.mobiletracker.net/archives/2006/08/13/pre-paid-terrorism

Authorities were alerted of the suspicious behavior and checked the suspects' rental car, inside were more than 1,000 of the phones all stripped from their packaging.

Usually, a cell phone is used by terrorists to set off IEDs.

Pretty simple, actually. And you don't need a bridge.

I would think a shopping mall would be better.

Cue American govt/media's reaction to this post with "OMG PLOT TO BLOW UP MALL OF AMERICA".

http://www.mobiletracker.net/archives/2006/08/13/pre-paid-terrorism
THANK YOU thats all I asked for from the beginning I did not know where geting the stripped part from and I thought it was just sleep depravation on my part lol

Cue American govt/media's reaction to this post with "OMG PLOT TO BLOW UP MALL OF AMERICA".
I guess you'll explain to me the economics of their explanation.

I buy 1000 cell phones at retail from Walmart.

I drive to somewhere else in the US, and resell the phones without batteries or chargers (or sell them separately). Without the minutes of course, since I never bought the minutes.

And, the dummies who buy the phones will pay higher than retail price for the phones, in order for me to make money.

Umm.... yeah.

You tell me how that makes sense. Oh, and a couple of guys in Ohio arrested for the same thing - saying they were going to sell the phones in California.

Didn't know there was a shortage of cell phones in California.
http://www.wboy.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=12983

http://www.mobiletracker.net/archives/2006/08/13/pre-paid-terrorism
Stripped from their packaging only means that they had been taken out of their boxes. If I were trying to fit as many cellphones as I could into my van, that's what I would do. The only thing that proves is that they could have sold them separately.

You expect better out of TEXAS?

They saw the arab decent and instantly it was "terrorism" :rolleyes:
Well what if they do turn out to commit crimes? Will you say "well at least we didn't look racist"?

Don't troll. They saw all the phones and thought "terrorism". Besides, it's not like they've been jailed.

I wish we could just drop the race thing. It's utterly irrelevant.

You don’t have to have minuets for 911 calls

Anyways I still don’t see anything about “stripped” cell phones as you put it.
Why is it any more logical to think that they were supplying old people with 911 phones than to think that they might be using them for illegal purposes?

Stripped from their packaging only means that they had been taken out of their boxes. If I were trying to fit as many cellphones as I could into my van, that's what I would do. The only thing that proves is that they could have sold them separately.

Tell me once again how buying phones at retail from Walmart and other small retail shops is going to make me money.

I'll wait.

Stripped from their packaging only means that they had been taken out of their boxes. If I were trying to fit as many cellphones as I could into my van, that's what I would do. The only thing that proves is that they could have sold them separately.
I saw an article (give me a few minutes to dig it up) that said they had been sorting them into boxes, phones in one, batteries in one, chargers in another....

Michigan State Police said troopers from the Caro post assisted in the stop. Page said officers noticed at least one of the men inside the van had separated many new cell phones from the phones' batteries, placing batteries in one box and phones in another.

http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1155377703212680.xml&coll=4

snip

Don't troll. They saw all the phones and thought "terrorism". Besides, it's not like they've been jailed.

snip
Um from the article it sounds like to me they are being jailed


No pleas were entered at the arraignment Saturday at a District Court in Caro. A magistrate set bond at $750,000 apiece and the men were being held at the Tuscola County Jail, police said

Tell me once again how buying phones at retail from Walmart and other small retail shops is going to make me money.

I'll wait.
Hey, I didn't say these guys were good businessmen, only that their actions are not pointing to anything illegal.

shows how crazy americans (especially texans) are.

I think terrorists would set their sights a little higher than a bridge.

To be honest, it's not just "a bridge". Remember, the bridge is 5 miles long and connects Michigan's two peninsulas. It cost $88 million when it was built in 1956, so it would be quite a repair bill in today's dollars. If it were destroyed it could possibly stop all shipping from Chicago to the ocean, which is a lot. Also, the bridge is very symbolic to people of Michigan. To us it represents the unity of our state and our industrial strength. When I read they were allegedly going to blow it up I got chills. Also, if that's what they were doing it would show Americans that people outside of the large urban centers are vulnerable.

That being said, we still don't know what exactly they were planning on doing. It's possible they wanted to bomb the bridge, but it's also possible the police are saying "OMG arab terrorism!" The thing that sticks out to me is why would you need 1000 phones if you were going to use them as detonators?


Well duh, they had brown skin.
Prove it. Link please.

Go to this article and watch the video titled "Three Men Now Facing Terrorism Charges"

Link (http://www.wnem.com/Global/story.asp?S=5269589)

Urmm... well... you could use them to supposedly blow up petrol stations or something... yeah... to cause fuel prices to rise a fraction of a cent in a local area...

Oh yes...

(note Braniac : Science Abuse proved that this will not happen. They filled a caravan full of petrol and rang several mobile phones, all at the same time and it didn't do anything - they then got someone to dance in a bucket of water in nylon clothing and then touch a wire and it blew to pieces)

I saw an article (give me a few minutes to dig it up) that said they had been sorting them into boxes, phones in one, batteries in one, chargers in another....



http://www.mlive.com/news/bctimes/index.ssf?/base/news-7/1155377703212680.xml&coll=4

Yes, that's what I was referring to originally.

I just read this article that says they suspect them of wanting to attack the bridge simply because they had pictures and video of the bridge. This makes terrorism charges even more suspect if that's all the evidence they have. It's not like they might not have indulged in a bit of tourism on their way around buying phones. Whenever I drive over the bridge I see tons of tourists down by the fort taking pictures of the bridge.

Link (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2006608140340)

Hey, I didn't say these guys were good businessmen, only that their actions are not pointing to anything illegal.

If a person acts in a manner inconsistant with his explination that can give rise to suspicion. I don't care if these guys are arab or not, not a single bit. But let's look at this logically.

Don't pull the "omg you have a cellphone are you a terrorist?" line here. I have a cellphone. one. It has a plan, it can be used.

I do not have a THOUSAND cellphones, brand new, bought from a chain store, taken out of their packaging, which I claim that I'm going to sell, out of my VAN, for HIGHER than retail cost, and profit off of.

Yes, lots of racist action has occured against those of arab descent, but at the same time,. police should be able to respond to any suspicious activity regardless of race involved and not be accussed of being racist.

And the fact is, these guys had a thousand cellphones, brand, new, no plan, no packaging, which they said they would sell, for higher than retail, and make profit....out of their van.


You HAVE to admit something seems really wrong with this picture.

Yes, but what would you use a thousand cellphones for? If you were using them as detonators wouldn't you only need a dozen at most? Unless you plan on setting off a thousand bombs, which is a bit of a stretch.

If a person acts in a manner inconsistant with his explination that can give rise to suspicion. I don't care if these guys are arab or not, not a single bit. But let's look at this logically.

Don't pull the "omg you have a cellphone are you a terrorist?" line here. I have a cellphone. one. It has a plan, it can be used.

I do not have a THOUSAND cellphones, brand new, bought from a chain store, taken out of their packaging, which I claim that I'm going to sell, out of my VAN, for HIGHER than retail cost, and profit off of.

Yes, lots of racist action has occured against those of arab descent, but at the same time,. police should be able to respond to any suspicious activity regardless of race involved and not be accussed of being racist.

And the fact is, these guys had a thousand cellphones, brand, new, no plan, no packaging, which they said they would sell, for higher than retail, and make profit....out of their van.


You HAVE to admit something seems really wrong with this picture.

Especially with it happenning with two different sets of Arab males, in two geographically separate areas, at the same time.

If a person acts in a manner inconsistant with his explination that can give rise to suspicion. I don't care if these guys are arab or not, not a single bit. But let's look at this logically.

Don't pull the "omg you have a cellphone are you a terrorist?" line here. I have a cellphone. one. It has a plan, it can be used.

I do not have a THOUSAND cellphones, brand new, bought from a chain store, taken out of their packaging, which I claim that I'm going to sell, out of my VAN, for HIGHER than retail cost, and profit off of.

Yes, lots of racist action has occured against those of arab descent, but at the same time,. police should be able to respond to any suspicious activity regardless of race involved and not be accussed of being racist.

And the fact is, these guys had a thousand cellphones, brand, new, no plan, no packaging, which they said they would sell, for higher than retail, and make profit....out of their van.


You HAVE to admit something seems really wrong with this picture.
Um what I took they were not trying to sell them out of the van as you seem to imply they were trafficing them across state lines

May seem silly to you but people used to do that with boose and other illegals that used to traffic from low to high demand area's and make a proffit all the time

Um what I took they were not trying to sell them out of the van as you seem to imply they were trafficing them across state lines

May seem silly to you but people used to do that with boose and other illegals that used to traffic from low to high demand area's and make a proffit all the time

The problem is, the phones are available cheaply everywhere. In a wide variety of retail stores.

Um what I took they were not trying to sell them out of the van as you seem to imply they were trafficing them across state lines

May seem silly to you but people used to do that with boose and other illegals that used to traffic from low to high demand area's and make a proffit all the time

Odeh said the men were buying the phones to sell to a man in Dallas for a profit of about $5 per phone. She said they were in Michigan because so many people in the Dallas area are doing the same thing that the phones are often sold out.
That's the impression I get as well. My dad ran a flourishing cider import busines when at Uni - same thing.

You tell me how that makes sense.
Never been to a UK street market, then?

Guess what, there are places in Manchester where you can buy phones, free of packaging, without minutes, with accessories as an optional extra. And they're not even stolen. Either bankrupt stock or bought in bulk from some source selling them at below cost - as superstores often do with "loss leaders".

And the people selling them are just random guys, not particularly well educated, not formally employed, making money off goods resale part of the time, doing casual labour part of the time, etc. Whatever pays the rent. And many are dark-skinned ethnic minorities.

What is their crime? If one is being committed, it is that they are not paying tax.

O.M.F.G. Save me from the middle-eastern and north african guys a few miles from where I used to live, who resell electronic goods cash in hand, without paying tax. :eek:

I'm scared, man.

A thousand phones is too many for use as remote switches. But it is enough to make some easy cash at the expense of a bankruptcy auction, supermarket loss leader, etc, without paying tax on the income. I've seen it. I can go to a few places next weekend and see it again. And the word for it is not terrorism, it is called the black market.

Never been to a UK street market, then?

Guess what, there are places in Manchester where you can buy phones, free of packaging, without minutes, with accessories as an optional extra. And they're not even stolen. Either bankrupt stock or bought in bulk from some source selling them at below cost - as superstores often do with "loss leaders".


These guys bought them a few at a time from 7-11 and Walmart. The price is not exactly below retail.

Why would I buy from them, when I can walk into Walmart and buy a phone for less?

The problem is, the phones are available cheaply everywhere. In a wide variety of retail stores.
oh?

Odeh said the men were buying the phones to sell to a man in Dallas for a profit of about $5 per phone. She said they were in Michigan because so many people in the Dallas area are doing the same thing that the phones are often sold out.

These guys bought them a few at a time from 7-11 and Walmart. The price is not exactly below retail.

Why would I buy from them, when I can walk into Walmart and buy a phone for less?
Because according to the article in Dallas they are often sold out retail

See UpwardThrust's post above. If a black market deal doesn't make business sense, that's only because you lack local knowledge.

Because according to the article in Dallas they are often sold out retail
That's according to the wife of the suspect. Not necessarily fact.

Um what I took they were not trying to sell them out of the van as you seem to imply they were trafficing them across state lines

May seem silly to you but people used to do that with boose and other illegals that used to traffic from low to high demand area's and make a proffit all the time

Perhaps, but the fact that they had SEVERAL, had removed them from the packaging, and had divided the components seems suspicious.

That's all, suspicious. Not proof. If you needed PROOF to arrest someone, and not simply a probable cause, then our justice system wouldn't even need a trial.

Their activities are suspicious, if they can demonstrate the validity of it, they'll be set free. I am a huge supporter of civil liberties but to say that their activities did not create an unusual circumstance is....misguided.

Once the evidence points in a way of creating a strong suspicion, they can refute it.

And if their claims are legitimate, they should have no problems doing so.

That's according to the wife of the suspect. Not necessarily fact.
And of course you apparently know more then her about the local market or motives

Sure she may be biased but unlike you I don’t automatically assume that her thoughts on the subject are worthless and that sense they are worthless the opposite is true.

Perhaps, but the fact that they had SEVERAL, had removed them from the packaging, and had divided the components seems suspicious.

That's all, suspicious. Not proof. If you needed PROOF to arrest someone, and not simply a probable cause, then our justice system wouldn't even need a trial.

Their activities are suspicious, if they can demonstrate the validity of it, they'll be set free. I am a huge supporter of civil liberties but to say that their activities did not create an unusual circumstance is....misguided.

Once the evidence points in a way of creating a strong suspicion, they can refute it.

And if their claims are legitimate, they should have no problems doing so.
That at least I can agree with

See UpwardThrust's post above. If a black market deal doesn't make business sense, that's only because you lack local knowledge.

But a black market deal requires that the material not be present legally at retail prices.

These aren't drugs, or alchohol during prohibition, or human organs. These are cell phones. Would a black market for such a thing even EXIST in the united states, given that I, personally, have never experienced a retail shortage of them?

The fact that they claim to be trafficing in a "grey market" (not necessarily black as there's nothing illegal about reselling cellphones) only works IF you can't get those cellphones somewhere else. The question that this case will rest on is...is that true? Is there realy such a thing as a cellphone shortage in this country that would make such a venture profitable?

Admittedly, cellphones are supposedly easy to use as remote-triggered fuses. On the other hand, most common household appliances can be used in some way for terrorist attacks, so will it be a crime to store tons of flour soon? Flour is an extremely cheap explosive.

It would be more interesting to know under what circumstances this man was found, and why he was suspicious in the first place.

Edit: Now I read the article, and my conclusion is that it is completely ridiculous and typical of the racist police state that the US is turning into.
and I'll bet if you stored 1000 bags of flour in your (non-business) van and it was stopped, you too would be questioned.. no matter what your ethic background.

wasn't it said on another thread that for some of these phones, they gave false information, name, address and such. and if this was their business, by contacting the company that made these phone and buying from them directly in bulk, would be cheaper. unless they didn't want to be put on record as to why they were buying alot of phones, which makes it black market.

and isn't running a black market business still illegal?

Heh, put it this way, I know enough about how this works to understand that black market dealing is by far the most likely explanation. Terrorism is a possibility only in the sense that any economic activity or possession of electronic equipment could in theory fund or facilitate it.

snip

and isn't running a black market business still illegal?
Yes but not a terrorist activity as they are being charged with (not sure this is black market though)

and isn't running a black market business still illegal?

Which is why I refered to it as "grey market", it's not illegal to posess or sell a cellphone. Therefore it's not illegal to posess and cell 1000 cellphones (which are legally obtained).

It's not really black market, it's grey market, but grey market only works if there's not a legitimate "white market" to buy them from cheaper.

Is there really a shortage of cellphones so severe that they can cell hundreds of cellphones in a short time?

It's conceivable that a few stores would sell out for a short term, but an entire area having no stock at all for a long time? That just seems...improbable.

Yes but not a terrorist activity as they are being charged with (not sure this is black market though)well, without knowing all the facts, and we all know the government is well known for holding facts back :rolleyes: ... I will wait for this to hit trial.

It's important to note a few things:

1) we don't know all the facts

2) There's nothing illegal about reselling cellphones which means that if they were supplying fake addresses etc etc, this creates more a suspicion

3) they haven't been convicted of anything, the research will bare out as it will and the evidence will point to one way or the other in the end

4) their explination only works if there is a legitimate shortage of cellphones in an area where their venture would be profitable

But a black market deal requires that the material not be present legally at retail prices.

These aren't drugs, or alchohol during prohibition, or human organs. These are cell phones. Would a black market for such a thing even EXIST in the united states, given that I, personally, have never experienced a retail shortage of them?

The fact that they claim to be trafficing in a "grey market" (not necessarily black as there's nothing illegal about reselling cellphones) only works IF you can't get those cellphones somewhere else. The question that this case will rest on is...is that true? Is there realy such a thing as a cellphone shortage in this country that would make such a venture profitable?
When I use the term black market, I do not mean to imply that the trade is illegal, or that there is a shortage. I use the term in the broadest sense - an unofficial undocumented private economic activity. Call it a grey market if you wish.

If I anonymously bought a large quantity of a product, and resold it in undocumented fashion for cash, without paying tax or running a registered business, then I would be performing a black/grey market transaction. The product does not have to be illegal, nor does there have to be a national shortage for the transaction to be outside the official market. I am not even guaranteed a profit, although that would be my motivation.

2) There's nothing illegal about reselling cellphones which means that if they were supplying fake addresses etc etc, this creates more a suspicion

4) their explination only works if there is a legitimate shortage of cellphones in an area where their venture would be profitable
2) Suspicion not of terrorism, but of tax evasion. If you were buying and reselling electronic goods for personal profit, as an individual, for cash, would you leave a name and address for the tax authorities to find? Probably not, if you don't want to pay tax.

4) There need not be a shortage. There only needs to be a local price differential.

When I use the term black market, I do not mean to imply that the trade is illegal, or that there is a shortage. I use the term in the broadest sense - an unofficial undocumented private economic activity. Call it a grey market if you wish.

If I anonymously bought a large quantity of a product, and resold it in undocumented fashion for cash, without paying tax or running a registered business, then I would be performing a black/grey market transaction. The product does not have to be illegal, nor does there have to be a national shortage for the transaction to be outside the official market. I am not even guaranteed a profit, although that would be my motivation.

Fair enough, I can see how that works. The point being, the only reason a rational reasonable person would ENTER the black market (or grey market) trade of anything is if their venture WOULD be profitable. Otherwise why? And FOR it to be profitable, the material they are selling on the black/grey market must be hard, or impossible to receive otherwise. If not, then nobody would buy from them at a price that would retain their profit.

So the only question that needs to be asked is....is there really a shortage of cellphones in this country, anywhere? How many areas are there where there are no stores selling them, and you can't just get online and order one?

You know how many cellphone deals I can find online right now? Once you factor internet into something, there is almost no such thing as a shortage on a local level for this sort of thing...

2) Suspicion not of terrorism, but of tax evasion. If you were buying and reselling electronic goods for personal profit, as an individual, for cash, would you leave a name and address for the tax authorities to find? Probably not, if you don't want to pay tax.

I could argue that doing so creates a suspicion for a whole LOT of things, not all of which are mutually exclusive.

4) There need not be a shortage. There only needs to be a local price differential.

OK, fair enough. Now the onous is on the police to verify, or debunk, a price differential in...where ever the hell they said they were selling them.

OK, fair enough. Now the onous is on the police to verify, or debunk, a price differential in...where ever the hell they said they were selling them.
The proof is easy. The defence can give a load of phones to an experienced salesman, and send him off to whatever markets these guys attended. If he sells some phones at a profit at one of these markets, allowing time for the fact that unofficial traders are not going to have a good day every day, job done.

With black markets, unlike with price-fixing investigations, there will be no written quotes, orders and invoices to compare. It is purely a case of, can you go to one of these places and sell these phones, bargaining individual deals if need be, at an overall profit? It's a safe bet it can be done.

The proof is easy. The defence can give a load of phones to an experienced salesman, and send him off to whatever markets these guys attended. If he sells some phones at a profit at one of these markets, allowing time for the fact that unofficial traders are not going to have a good day every day, job done.

With black markets, unlike with price-fixing investigations, there will be no written quotes, orders and invoices to compare. It is purely a case of, can you go to one of these places and sell these phones, bargaining individual deals if need be, at an overall profit? It's a safe bet it can be done.

Sure, and if they can do that, defense validated, set em free. Enough reasonable doubt.

I'm not saying they're guilty, I'm saying there's suspicion. Let them rebut that suspicion so as to generate reasonable doubt, and then have them set free.

Incidentally, it occurs to me that a particularly devious police officer could have had the guys arrested on terrorism charges because he could, knowing that they would have to admit to the far lesser crime of screwing the IRS in order to clear their name of the terrorism allegations - a prosecution for tax evasion being the true goal all along. Simplifies matters somewhat, wouldn't you say, if the defence are forced to do your prosecution groundwork for you?

I bet it wouldn't be the first time people pulled a trick like that.

Incidentally, it occurs to me that a particularly devious police officer could have had the guys arrested on terrorism charges because he could, knowing that they would have to admit to the far lesser crime of screwing the IRS in order to clear their name of the terrorism allegations - a prosecution for tax evasion being the true goal all along. Simplifies matters somewhat, wouldn't you say, if the defence are forced to do your prosecution groundwork for you?

I bet it wouldn't be the first time people pulled a trick like that.

Yes, but no, and that hinges in the 5th amendment.

You can not be compelled to testify against yourself, you are not required to say you are guilty.

Now what competant lawyer can do is not put them on trial directly, what the lawyer CAN do is create the POSSIBILITY that this is what they were doing.

Show that they COULD do it this way, and the evidence would bare up that they MIGHT be doing it. Give it enough so that it creates reasonable doubt as to their terrorist activites, but doesn't give the IRS enough proof to prove it that way.

Since all you need to do is create reasonable doubt, all you really need to show is that he MIGHT have been doing a different, but also illegal activity. That's enough to get him off the terrorist charge, but not enough to get him on the IRS dodge.

You don't have to show he was not doing a terrorist activity, but rather he WAS doing another illegal activity, all you need to show is that it was reasonably POSSIBLE that he MIGHT have been.

It's a...tricky argument though, and they'd need a clever lawyer to pull it off without screwing them.

It's a...tricky argument though, and they'd need a clever lawyer to pull it off without screwing them.
Oh yes, I agree. If they want to prove that their goal was personal profit and not assisting a terrorist conspiracy, without handing their asses to the tax men, that's one hell of a Catch-22. Alas, it would be a lot easier to convince a jury if they had a different ethnic background. I certainly wouldn't wish their predicament on anyone.

There is much reason to be suspicious here. All Middle Eastern men, between the ages of 19 and 35 (prime terrorism suspects) trying to sell cellphones in the mid east. Cellphones that could of course, be used to detonate an IED.

I'm not saying that was their intention, for all I know they could be just a bunch of regular guys trying to make some money.

for all I know they could be just a bunch of regular guys trying to make some money.
..in America!! The land of Capitalism and the Almighty Dollar? :eek: :eek: Get out.

Oh yes, I agree. If they want to prove that their goal was personal profit and not assisting a terrorist conspiracy, without handing their asses to the tax men, that's one hell of a Catch-22. Alas, it would be a lot easier to convince a jury if they had a different ethnic background. I certainly wouldn't wish their predicament on anyone.
then again, it could be that perhaps they are trying to "squeeze" information from these men about their reseller... after all, they are supplying him with the phones.

I saw an article (give me a few minutes to dig it up) that said they had been sorting them into boxes, phones in one, batteries in one, chargers in another....

So what? How is this terrorism? Can a cell phone work without a battery? No. How is it going to be used as a detonator?

Secondly, if you wanted to blow up a bridge, you only need one, maybe 2 as a back up, not 1000.

Third, dont you think they would have bought them individually rather than in bulk, therefore decreasing suspicion?

Oh yes, I agree. If they want to prove that their goal was personal profit and not assisting a terrorist conspiracy, without handing their asses to the tax men, that's one hell of a Catch-22. Alas, it would be a lot easier to convince a jury if they had a different ethnic background. I certainly wouldn't wish their predicament on anyone.

Well a good lawyer can give them enough rope to climb out of a fire, but not enough to later be used to hang them.

I don't have TOO much sympathy however, since at the end of the day, either they ARE in fact guilty of terrorist activities, OR they are in fact guilty of tax evasion.

And I have no problems with them being punished for their crime...provided they right punishment is afixed to the right crime.

The point is though, that under american law, they don't need to PROVE that their actions were profit driven and not terrorist driven. All they need to give is some reasonable basis that it MIGHT have been. That's enough for a not guilty verdict.

..in America!! The land of Capitalism and the Almighty Dollar? :eek: :eek: Get out.
Actually they were planning to travel to Jordan. Read the article.

There is much reason to be suspicious here. All Middle Eastern men, between the ages of 19 and 35 (prime terrorism suspects) trying to sell cellphones in the mid east. Cellphones that could of course, be used to detonate an IED.

I'm not saying that was their intention, for all I know they could be just a bunch of regular guys trying to make some money.
They're Americans of Middle Eastern descent, in this case Texans. The police haven't provided any links to terrorist networks, any possible explosives the suspects could have used for bombs, or even identified the suspects as part of a radical Muslim moque in the area. The terrorist charges either have some evidence behind them we haven't heard yet, or are part of a bad plan by the prosecutor.

They must've had one hell of a plot, if they were gonna use 1000 phones... :rolleyes:

The fact that they had 1000 is a fairly strong indicator that they were planning to resell.

So what? How is this terrorism? Can a cell phone work without a battery? No. How is it going to be used as a detonator?

Secondly, if you wanted to blow up a bridge, you only need one, maybe 2 as a back up, not 1000.

Third, dont you think they would have bought them individually rather than in bulk, therefore increasing suspicion as shown?
1. They could easily obtain a battery

2. Perhaps they wanted to have enough cellphones for 1000 bombs?

3. Maybe they were in a hurry, or not too smart.

Just playing the Devil's Advocate.

They're Americans of Middle Eastern descent, in this case Texans. The police haven't provided any links to terrorist networks, any possible explosives the suspects could have used for bombs, or even identified the suspects as part of a radical Muslim moque in the area. The terrorist charges either have some evidence behind them we haven't heard yet, or are part of a bad plan by the prosecutor.

in which case, either they will be found guilty with the evidence we don't know, or they'll be set free.

I still think this was enough for an arrest, but not enough for a conviction.

So what? How is this terrorism? Can a cell phone work without a battery? No. How is it going to be used as a detonator?

Secondly, if you wanted to blow up a bridge, you only need one, maybe 2 as a back up, not 1000.

Third, dont you think they would have bought them individually rather than in bulk, therefore increasing suspicion as shown?
um.... one of the first steps to stripping a phone down is removing the battery.

doesn't most phones nowdays have GPS units built inside for locating them? will those units work with the battery removed?

So what? How is this terrorism? Can a cell phone work without a battery? No. How is it going to be used as a detonator?
I didn't say they were using it as a detonator. Someone asked about where DK got his info, he provided a link to an article, then someone else said "but it just says seperated from packaging" then I found the article that DK was talking about.

Secondly, if you wanted to blow up a bridge, you only need one, maybe 2 as a back up, not 1000.
I don't pretend to know what they were doing, but they were being suspicious.

Third, dont you think they would have bought them individually rather than in bulk, therefore increasing suspicion as shown?
they did not buy them in bulk, they bought them a few at a time, so not to set off any alarms at the Walmart.

They're Americans of Middle Eastern descent, in this case Texans. The police haven't provided any links to terrorist networks, any possible explosives the suspects could have used for bombs, or even identified the suspects as part of a radical Muslim moque in the area. The terrorist charges either have some evidence behind them we haven't heard yet, or are part of a bad plan by the prosecutor.
If what you say is true, then they're fine as far as I'm concerned they're good to go. Although they probably did commit several tax code violations and such, and for that they should be punished. Not by jail time, but I don't make the laws.

um.... one of the first steps to stripping a phone down is removing the battery.

doesn't most phones nowdays have GPS units built inside for locating them? will those units work with the battery removed?
Does your phone work when you take the battery out? I know mine doesn't.

They must've had one hell of a plot, if they were gonna use 1000 phones... :rolleyes:

The fact that they had 1000 is a fairly strong indicator that they were planning to resell.
no. that is no indication.

1000 units means 1000 redudant components... spare parts.

which could equate to 250 bomb triggers. if you assume one to be used as a receiver, one for Sender and one spare each.

then there is testing, mistakes which can lower that number.

sure they might be reselling them, but who's buying them... and if they are handling numbers in the thousands, better if they went to the distributor or manufactur direct... unless they don't wanna be traced...

which makes them buying thousands of phones rather stupid.

Does your phone work when you take the battery out? I know mine doesn't.

it leads to a question, if you want to resell then why take them out of the packaging and strip them down?

Urmm... well... you could use them to supposedly blow up petrol stations or something... yeah... to cause fuel prices to rise a fraction of a cent in a local area...

Oh yes...

(note Braniac : Science Abuse proved that this will not happen. They filled a caravan full of petrol and rang several mobile phones, all at the same time and it didn't do anything - they then got someone to dance in a bucket of water in nylon clothing and then touch a wire and it blew to pieces)

On the other hand, Lithium-Ion batteries have an extremely high explosive capacity, which everyone seems to forget. Think outside the box.

There are numerous cases of laptops bursting into flames, batteries explosively venting flame, etc.

http://www.google.com/search?q=lithium%20ion%20battery%20vent%20flame
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/17/1857232
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=dell+laptop+vent+flame&btnG=Search
http://digg.com/hardware/Another_Dell_laptop_catches_fire

Should be enough links for a start. Do your own research for more.

Does your phone work when you take the battery out? I know mine doesn't.
the phone, no that won't work.... the GPS unit inside the phone? dunno, I can ASSUME they don't...

so removing the battery disables any chance for the phone of being located by any agency with that ability... sound more suspicious now.

they did not buy them in bulk, they bought them a few at a time, so not to set off any alarms at the Walmart.

They were actualy doing both, in a way. They were buying 3, and then buying 3 more, and then 3 more, all at the same time. Apparently the register at the store won't allow you to buy more than 3 at a time.

no. that is no indication.

1000 units means 1000 redudant components... spare parts.

which could equate to 250 bomb triggers. if you assume one to be used as a receiver, one for Sender and one spare each.

then there is testing, mistakes which can lower that number.

sure they might be reselling them, but who's buying them... and if they are handling numbers in the thousands, better if they went to the distributor or manufactur direct... unless they don't wanna be traced...

which makes them buying thousands of phones rather stupid.

k, so we're down to 250 triggers.

If they were plotting to blow up a bridge, more than 25 would be excessive.

Still doesn't speak to terrorism.

so removing the battery disables any chance for the phone of being located by any agency with that ability... sound more suspicious now.

Removing the battery also disables any chance for the phone to, you know, work.

the phone, no that won't work.... the GPS unit inside the phone? dunno, I can ASSUME they don't...


so removing the battery disables any chance for the phone of being located by any agency with that ability... sound more suspicious now.
That is based on your assumption from above.

Removing the battery also disables any chance for the phone to, you know, work.

Until you...ya know...put the battery back in.

Until you...ya know...put the battery back in.

Then why take it out?

That is based on your assumption from above.

It's pretty much a safe assumption, GPS systems need to broadcast their location. No power, no broadcast.

That is based on your assumption from above.
which is why I asked if anyone knew if the GPS locater worked with the battery removed.

those two could've made the same assumption and that could be a reason why they were seperating the battery from the phones.

Then why take it out?

a few reasons I can think of:

1) gps locations draw power from the battery, even when the phone is "off". The only way to stop the phone broadcasting, is to remove the battery, or remove the gps system, which you need to remove the battery to do

2) The batteries are designed for their own use too.

Removing the battery also disables any chance for the phone to, you know, work.which is against the exscuse "We were gonna resell them"

would you buy a cheap phone from a stranger that showed signs of being tampered with? (i.e. out of the package)

which is why I asked if anyone knew if the GPS locater worked with the battery removed.
Oh ok. Thats fair enough.
I would assume no. Without power, phone no worky. (All constituent parts)


those two could've made the same assumption and that could be a reason why they were seperating the battery from the phones.

True.... or they could merely have been running a scam. Selling dud phones to unsuspecting idiots. Just as plausible as the 'terrorist' option.

k, so we're down to 250 triggers.

If they were plotting to blow up a bridge, more than 25 would be excessive.

Still doesn't speak to terrorism.
add to that the fact that each phone has it's own frequency... so you have two at most per bomb any more and you get silly...

and who's to say only ONE target... say 25 flight.... another 10 trains and varous buses?

the London bombings showed that multiple targets can be hit at the same time. trains and busses... add to that airplans, boats/ferries...

why only ONE bridge when you can hit multiple bridges...

True.... or they could merely have been running a scam. Selling dud phones to unsuspecting idiots. Just as plausible as the 'terrorist' option.
even more plausable is that they were taking them back to sell the batteries to meth manufacturers.

At the moment, we do not have enough information to be certain as to what they intended to do with the phones. The circumstances are suspiscious, but it's impossible to be able to divine their motive without further information. With the information I have at the moment the likelihoods seem about equal that they were planning to blow some shit up, or just simply resell the phones. Given the stripped down state of the phones, the likelihood shifts slightly towards the blow shit up possibility, but only slightly. At the current moment we cannot know what they were planning to do without further information.

If I were advising the government as to what to do on this matter, I would advise that they arrest them, and figure out what the hell is going on from there.

If I were advising the government as to what to do on this matter, I would advise that they arrest them, and figure out what the hell is going on from there.

EXACTLY. As I said before, the standard for arrest is lower than the standard for conviction. TO arrest you need probable cause. To convict you need proof beyond reasonable doubt. There is probable cause here, thereis NOT proof beyond reasonable doubt, given what we know.

There are...4 possibilities I see here

1) there's evidence we don't know about here.

2) You can only hold someone without charging them for 24 hours before it becomes a 4th amendment violation. So they, legally arrested them, based on probable cause, charged them, because they had to or set them free, and are continuing their investigation hoping for further evidence.

3) The DA is an idiot and/or hoping the jury is made of idiots

4) The DA is a racist and/or hoping the jury is made of racists

The fact is, right now, there is enough for an arrest, but not enough for a conviction. Ignoring the racist/idiot options (which I concede exist) either there's evidence we don't know, in which case....they're terrorists and fry em, or they're trying to get more evidence, in which case they will either succeed, and prove they are terrorists, or fail, and they will be set free.

which is against the exscuse "We were gonna resell them"

would you buy a cheap phone from a stranger that showed signs of being tampered with? (i.e. out of the package)

2) The batteries are designed for their own use too.

.

Oh ok. Thats fair enough.
I would assume no. Without power, phone no worky. (All constituent parts)

True.... or they could merely have been running a scam. Selling dud phones to unsuspecting idiots. Just as plausible as the 'terrorist' option.
except that they wern't selling them to the public but to someone else who was doing the selling.

except that they wern't selling them to the public but to someone else who was doing the selling.

Which creates the possibility that THESE guys are innocent, but the guy they're selling to is not.

In which case the investigation will lead to him, and the police will make of him what the evidence shall direct them to.

.
which doesn't mean anything. the facts are, untill all the evidence is presented, and not just testmony from one side or even the wife of one of the defendants, we can only speculate.

even the wife of one of the defendants, we can only speculate.

It's worth noting that in some instances, the testimony of the wife may not even be permissable.

Which creates the possibility that THESE guys are innocent, but the guy they're selling to is not.

In which case the investigation will lead to him, and the police will make of him what the evidence shall direct them to.
Which is one reason the men are being detained. while it seems like they are focusing on them, they (the law) could be after the "other man"

To sell separately maybe?
No, Sparky, not "to sell separately." Not even "maybe."

Your thinking reminds me of the story of the guy who suspected his wife of cheating on him. When he confronted her about it, she denied it. So he followed her one day and caught her in bed with another man, at which point she said, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

No, Sparky, not "to sell separately." Not even "maybe."

By all means prove it.

By all means prove it.

You don't have to prove it to arrest someone.

You just need cause.

By all means prove it.
As it currently stands, you don't have the ability to prove your claims, and he does not have the ability to prove his claims. Selling separately, though, is unlikely because the individual parts are not worth a value equal to that of a phone as one piece. We also know that a phone that's been stripped down in the condition that these were can be used as a detonator for an explosive device. Those are the only bits and pieces we really have to work with. From there we've only got circumstantial evidence.

As it currently stands, you don't have the ability to prove your claims, and he does not have the ability to prove his claims. Selling separately, though, is unlikely because the individual parts are not worth a value equal to that of a phone as one piece. We also know that a phone that's been stripped down in the condition that these were can be used as a detonator for an explosive device. Those are the only bits and pieces we really have to work with. From there we've only got circumstantial evidence.
*nods in agreement* which is why we have all these plausable explinations but nothing to say which is the truth.

I'm not saying all of this because I think they're guilty, I'm explaining why someone would want to destroy the Mackinac Bridge.

why only ONE bridge when you can hit multiple bridges...

Because hitting that one bridge would cripple Michigan's tourism industry. At the height of tourist season, incidentally. Not to mention there are at least 50 or so vehicles on the bridge at any given time, and on weekends many many more.

Also, it's a symbolic thing. Hitting a landmark like this says that no one is safe. People outside of the huge urban centers don't really worry about terrorism, and for good reason. However, this says that they can hit anywhere.

Also, it's a big damned bridge. And a lot of shipping goes under it to and from Chicago. You may not know this but oceangoing vessels can and do go into the Great Lakes. If a bridge this size were to be destroyed, would you want your freighter ship going through that area? There would be a lot of debris yo wouldn't want to run into. Remember, this bridge is over the Straits of Mackinac, which is the only way from Chicago to the sea.

http://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/communications/greatlakes/GlacialGift/Graphics/Space_Images/Mackinac_Bridge(GLNPO).jpg

I'm not saying all of this because I think they're guilty, I'm explaining why someone would want to destroy the Mackinac Bridge.



Because hitting that one bridge would cripple Michigan's tourism industry. At the height of tourist season, incidentally. Not to mention there are at least 50 or so vehicles on the bridge at any given time, and on weekends many many more.

Also, it's a symbolic thing. Hitting a landmark like this says that no one is safe. People outside of the huge urban centers don't really worry about terrorism, and for good reason. However, this says that they can hit anywhere.

Also, it's a big damned bridge. And a lot of shipping goes under it to and from Chicago. You may not know this but oceangoing vessels can and do go into the Great Lakes. If a bridge this size were to be destroyed, would you want your freighter ship going through that area? There would be a lot of debris yo wouldn't want to run into. Remember, this bridge is over the Straits of Mackinac, which is the only way from Chicago to the sea.

http://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/communications/greatlakes/GlacialGift/Graphics/Space_Images/Mackinac_Bridge(GLNPO).jpgagain, why hit only one bridge when you can hit several.

California, New York, Florida... etc...

and why only a bridge when you can hit planes, trains, buses, Fuel Tankers, cargo ships, etc...

oh, to clear it up, I never said they were guility either, just giving plausible explinations as to why it can be seen as terrorism.

again, why hit only one bridge when you can hit several.

Hitting several bridges is a lot easier to screw up than hitting one. And if you're going to hit one

California, New York, Florida... etc...

That's where everyone expects attacks to occur. People in the interior states don't believe that terrorism will ever effect them, and this would be quite a shock to them.

and why only a bridge when you can hit planes, trains, buses, Fuel Tankers, cargo ships, etc...

A bridge is a lot easier to hit. Also, those other things are what everyone expects terrorists to attack.

oh, to clear it up, I never said they were guility either, just giving plausible explinations as to why it can be seen as terrorism.

I didn't think you were, but I was preemptively stating that I didn't either. It helps to clarify things ahead of times on this board.

Hitting several bridges is a lot easier to screw up than hitting one. And if you're going to hit one
now you're only talking one group... not many groups... where each group takes one target...
That's where everyone expects attacks to occur. People in the interior states don't believe that terrorism will ever effect them, and this would be quite a shock to them.yes it will, and again why only one bridge. also leaving bomb packages in buildings would also be easier.
A bridge is a lot easier to hit. Also, those other things are what everyone expects terrorists to attack.I believe stealing one truck filled with fuel/chemicals and turning that into a traveling bomb would be easier than setting bombs on one bridge.
I didn't think you were, but I was preemptively stating that I didn't either. It helps to clarify things ahead of times on this board.true... so true... :D

Taking them out of their packages sounds like it would make them easier to repackage and resell overseas.

If this is the racist, idiot bullshit that it stinks of, I hope Michigan ends up paying these kids a fortune.

No, Sparky, not "to sell separately." Not even "maybe."

Your thinking reminds me of the story of the guy who suspected his wife of cheating on him. When he confronted her about it, she denied it. So he followed her one day and caught her in bed with another man, at which point she said, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
So you saw all those phones having an orgy with another man?

I think he'd be safer in Jerusalem than Texas.

He bought from *Walmart* as a matter of interest.
Like I need another reason not to shop there.

Okies.

Would this have been a huge deal if a bunch of white men were involved?

I'm not trying to play the race card -- I just wanna know what you all think.

Would this have been a huge deal if a bunch of white men were involved?

I'm not trying to play the race card -- I just wanna know what you all think.
We are kind of wondering if it were going to happen if white men were involved

But yes I think we would be hearing something about it

“Oh look We found TERRORRRISSTS in our HEARTLAND!!!111!!!”

We are kind of wondering if it were going to happen if white men were involved

But yes I think we would be hearing something about it

“Oh look We found TERRORRRISSTS in our HEARTLAND!!!111!!!”
the difference is tho... that white men cannot play the "OHMYGOD RACIAL PROFILING!" card... and it will show that the Bush Admin is not Racially motivated... so I doubt that any news service will spend any time on it.



well, FOXNEWS might...

Would this have been a huge deal if a bunch of white men were involved?

I'm not trying to play the race card -- I just wanna know what you all think.
I think it would have, only we wouldn't have the amount of "this is so wrong, they are being profiled" crap that is going on now.

the difference is tho... that white men cannot play the "OHMYGOD RACIAL PROFILING!" card... and it will show that the Bush Admin is not Racially motivated... so I doubt that any news service will spend any time on it.



well, FOXNEWS might...
Possibly … one of my major issues with commercialized news, I like hearing all the screw-up not just the ones that somehow can manage to attract attention.

2) Suspicion not of terrorism, but of tax evasion. If you were buying and reselling electronic goods for personal profit, as an individual, for cash, would you leave a name and address for the tax authorities to find? Probably not, if you don't want to pay tax.

4) There need not be a shortage. There only needs to be a local price differential.

Should be easy as pie to find that "guy in Dallas" who pays between 25 and 38 dollars per cell phone minus batteries and charger then.
Also the one in California who is allegedly buying them from the other team of cell phone buyers. How hard can it be to find the distributors of batteryless chargerless cell phones who sell them for profit above what they pay the arabs who buy the phones retail for them?

Would this have been a huge deal if a bunch of white men were involved?

I'm not trying to play the race card -- I just wanna know what you all think.

There wouldnt be Generalites howling that "The Man" is fucking over people because of their race if they were white. That's one thing that would make the deal less big.

Would this have been a huge deal if a bunch of white men were involved?

I'm not trying to play the race card -- I just wanna know what you all think.
I can easily see poor white men, sort of like trailer trash but with an actual work ethic, doing the same sort of thing. Electronic goods resale actually works. I see a lot of it here in the UK. All you need is a few poor but entrepreneurial individuals, and a source of cost-price kit.

Someone asked, who would buy a phone like that?

Try me.

I bought a phone last summer from an expensive high street store because it was the tough rubber armoured model I wanted, but it didn't have the right SIM card, wasn't unlocked, and didn't have all the accessories I needed. And the store didn't have that stuff in stock. But when I asked for those bits, the saleswoman leaned over and said that I could get it unlocked and lots of other accessories at a nearby market in a less fashionable part of the city centre. She even quoted a price - £10. Seriously.

Guess what I found when I got there? :rolleyes:

Hence why I give these guys the benefit of the doubt. Because I have seen this sort of resale with my own eyes, in the urban shopping centres of the UK, and not just on that one occasion. All cash, and I doubt all of it is declared to all the right people. It's not just white guys doing it. And I can stroll past those stalls next weekend, if I wanted to.

The thing is, if it was white guys caught with those phones, they would have been initially held on suspicion of handling stolen goods or tax evasion, within a couple of days the matter would have been handed over to the tax authorities, and if they were not declaring that income, the rest of the same old story writes itself.

But no, the men in question were non-white, so the assumption is not that they were running an illegitimate business, but trying to kill people. Somehow.

Yes, there is going to be fuss made, but with good reason, because anyone who knows anything about it, knows how absurd it is.

BTW, off-topic, but I was doing my grocery shopping this afternoon, and misread a plastic box labelled Fruit Salad as 'Angry Fruit Salad'. I need help. :confused:

If this is the racist, idiot bullshit that it stinks of, I hope Michigan ends up paying these kids a fortune.

Why? At very least they're guilty of tax evasion.

Why? At very least they're guilty of tax evasion.
I think he meant, if the terrorism accusations can be shown to have been applied to these men on the strength of their ethnic origin, in a situation where suspects with a different ethnic origin have in past similar cases been accused of entirely different, less grave offences.

It wouldn't take a whole lot of effort for the defence to trawl through past case history, considering the number of times this sort of thing has come to the attention of authorities. There will be precedent, and lots of it. And then the prosecutors would have to explain the application of different laws to these individuals, without admitting to race entering their calculations.

Unless there is credible evidence other than the phones themselves, depending on how much enthusiasm the defence can muster, the authorities could well have shot themselves in the foot, whatever the outcome of any tax evasion investigation. And with good reason - any law enforcement officials can physically perform an arrest, but it is deeply unprofessional to start citing laws not appropriate to the situation.

I think he meant, if the terrorism accusations can be shown to have been applied to these men on the strength of their ethnic origin, in a situation where suspects with a different ethnic origin have in past similar cases been accused of entirely different, less grave offences.

It wouldn't take a whole lot of effort for the defence to trawl through past case history, considering the number of times this sort of thing has come to the attention of authorities. There will be precedent, and lots of it. And then the prosecutors would have to explain the application of different laws to these individuals, without admitting to race entering their calculations.

Unless there is credible evidence other than the phones themselves, depending on how much enthusiasm the defence can muster, the authorities could well have shot themselves in the foot, whatever the outcome of any tax evasion investigation. And with good reason - any law enforcement officials can physically perform an arrest, but it is deeply unprofessional to start citing laws not appropriate to the situation.

One thing throws a wrench in the whole thing. How often have similar events happened within days of a terrorist plot being uncovered?

That skewes things a tad.

One thing throws a wrench in the whole thing. How often have similar events happened within days of a terrorist plot being uncovered?

That skewes things a tad.
I bet several such outfits are busted in the US every week, and have been ever since high-tech consumer electronics became affordable to the masses. There will be several dozen people supplementing their income in this manner in every major city in every industrialised country in the world, especially the US, right now. Who knows how many people the IRS in the US, Inland Revenue in the UK, etc, are investigating for similar activities at any one moment. This is the sort of thing that gets a whole floor of an office building dedicated to it.

There is no excuse for the police forgetting this underlying reality. Basing responses on news headlines and losing sight of proportionality, is not calm professional behaviour. If they over-reacted, that's a black mark on them from me. I do not accept that standards should be loosened because a few people get nervous.

I do not accept that standards should be loosened because a few people get nervous.

I'm not talking nervous, I'm talking odds. If it is true that a terrorist attack is more likely in the wake of a previous one, or coordinated somewhat together, then the odds of any potentially terrorist activity actually BEING terrorist activity, increases in that wake.

What are the odds that a few guys stopped with a van full of cellphones are terrorists, when there hasn't been any terrorist activity for a while?

What are the odds that a few guys stopped with a van full of cellphones are terrorists, immediatly following a terrorist plot?

Are those numbers the same? I don't know, maybe not. And if we're talking about the "probable" of "probable cause", then maybe what happened on other days isn't as relevant, since it wasn't as probable then.

I'm not talking nervous, I'm talking odds. If it is true that a terrorist attack is more likely in the wake of a previous one, or coordinated somewhat together, then the odds of any potentially terrorist activity actually BEING terrorist activity, increases in that wake.

What are the odds that a few guys stopped with a van full of cellphones are terrorists, when there hasn't been any terrorist activity for a while?

What are the odds that a few guys stopped with a van full of cellphones are terrorists, immediatly following a terrorist plot?

Are those numbers the same? I don't know, maybe not. And if we're talking about the "probable" of "probable cause", then maybe what happened on other days isn't as relevant, since it wasn't as probable then.
From my observations of terrorism in the UK and Europe, I would say there is seldom any clustering of attacks. The main exception is rival terrorist groups staging successive retaliatory strikes - then you get clustering. Sometimes you do get sequences of attacks, but only by the same small cell carrying out a programme. Generally, every day has the same likelihood of a terrorist attack as any other, irrespective of whether one took place the previous day, the previous month, etc.

EDIT: Sadly, it would be a difficult argument to get into, where an American jury is concerned, as their experience of this sort of thing is limited.

i dont know if this has been mentioned or not as i didnt bother reading everthing but the news said they were charged with terrorism after the police found numerous stills and videos of the bridge in their van

i dont know if this has been mentioned or not as i didnt bother reading everthing but the news said they were charged with terrorism after the police found numerous stills and videos of the bridge in their van
So they photographed a landmark? Even for circumstantial evidence, that's weak.

So they photographed a landmark? Even for circumstantial evidence, that's weak.

Well think of it this way, men of arab descent buy an extreme quantity of cellphones right after a big story of how cell phones can be used as detonators for bombs, and these guy have a large amount of videos and photos of a well known landmark, which could concievably be a target for a terrorist action

Well think of it this way, men of arab descent buy an extreme quantity of cellphones right after a big story of how cell phones can be used as detonators for bombs, and these guy have a large amount of videos and photos of a well known landmark, which could concievably be a target for a terrorist action

As I said before, I think this amounts to enough for an arrest.

It's not enough for a conviction.

What you need for an arrest is very little, and just because you can obtain it, doesn't mean you should do it.

Why arrest these guys? Nothing they did is related to terrorism. Pictures of a bridge? Horrible even for circumstantial evidence. As for bombs? You don't need thousands of these to set off bombs, you need a couple. You simply aren't going to need a thousand, you would have to be trying to set off hundreds of bombs...

No explosives have been found, no evidence of them actually doing anything related to terrorism, either. Sending the phones to the ME? They have cell phones over there, and probably much more reliable for the area(I wouldn't want to bet on some nokia phone working in iraq, for example).

This was simply a dumb arrest. Might as well start arresting anyone with more than six guns, and having pictures of any area where a lot of people might be.

Well think of it this way, men of arab descent buy an extreme quantity of cellphones right after a big story of how cell phones can be used as detonators for bombs, and these guy have a large amount of videos and photos of a well known landmark, which could concievably be a target for a terrorist action
Ah, yeah, evil darkies. I get it now.

Ah, yeah, evil darkies. I get it now.
evil... probably not... but stupid?

that's purposly ringing bells and whistles... Like they wanna get caught...

hey maybe that's their plan. get caught... make millions with lawsuites as well as a book and possibly movie deal... :rolleyes:

what if they were realy selling the phones to someone. that should be looked at too. they could be ligit but the person there selling to could not. it seems the police were fine until they only questioned the arabs and didn't even think about the person they were selling to.

what if they were realy selling the phones to someone. that should be looked at too. they could be ligit but the person there selling to could not. it seems the police were fine until they only questioned the arabs and didn't even think about the person they were selling to.
they better be looking for him.

they better be looking for him.

damn right

Well think of it this way, men of arab descent buy an extreme quantity of cellphones right after a big story of how cell phones can be used as detonators for bombs, and these guy have a large amount of videos and photos of a well known landmark, which could concievably be a target for a terrorist action

What if it had been the Statue of Liberty? I mean, nobody takes pictures of that if they aren't planning a terrorist attack.

Well think of it this way, men of arab descent buy an extreme quantity of cellphones right after a big story of how cell phones can be used as detonators for bombs, and these guy have a large amount of videos and photos of a well known landmark, which could concievably be a target for a terrorist action
I guess it's one of those local well-known landmarks.

I guess it's one of those local well-known landmarks.
http://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/communications/greatlakes/GlacialGift/Graphics/Space_Images/Mackinac_Bridge(GLNPO).jpg

*laughs uproariously*

Someone's got their tinfoil hat misaligned somewhere...

I guess it's one of those local well-known landmarks.

Yes, it's a very well known local landmark. Anywhere in Michigan if you refer to "the bridge" everyone knows you're talking about the Mackinac Bridge.

To give you an idea how important this bridge is to us, check out the last two iterations of our license plates.

http://www.michigan.gov/images/graphic_16606_7.jpg

http://mas.scripps.com/WXYZ/2006/08/02/0608021202newplate_e.jpg

Also, three of the 5 choices we had for our state quarter had the bridge on them. Damned Governor picking it for us.....

http://www.michigan.gov/images/MiQuarter3_15597_7.jpg
http://www.michigan.gov/images/MiQuarter4_15599_7.jpg
http://www.michigan.gov/images/MiQuarter2_15596_7.jpg

And I agree with New Granada that if these guys were falsely charged with terrorism related crimes the state should get nailed for it.

They are door-to-door cellphone salesmen. ;)

The FBI today said it has no reason to suspect terrorism ties for three Palestinian-American men arrested in Michigan and charged with "collecting or providing materials for terrorist acts and surveillance of a vulnerable target for terrorist purposes."

...

Nearby, in Ohio, a prosecutor today said he lacked evidence to present felony terrorism charges against two more Arab-American men arrested in a similar incident last week over bulk cellphone buys.

Oh shit, they arent terrorists, just inconveniently brown!

Today's Detroit Free Press includes an interesting article on the cottage industry of buying and re-selling prepaid mobile phones -- apparently quite popular in Arab-American communities.

In Michigan, "you can talk to almost any family in the Arab-American community, and they all have some relative in the cell phone business," said Warren David, a Lebanese American from Northville. If police knew that, perhaps five Arab Americans would not have been arrested last week on terrorism charges after they bought hundreds of cell phones, said David, who recently sold his cell phone business to an Iraqi American.

"If they understood us a little more, they might not jump the gun so quickly," he said.

In Ohio on Tuesday, a store employee called police after two 20-year-old Arab-American men from Dearborn bought a large number of cell phones at a Wal-Mart. The same thing happened Friday in Caro after three Arab-American men bought 80 phones at one store. In the Ohio case, Osama Abulhassan and Ali Houssaiky were just trying to make money by buying cell phones so they could sell them to a distributor for a profit, family members said.

"The two young men were engaged in a perfectly legal practice based on the most fundamental principles of our free market economy," the Abulhassan family said in an e-mail.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060814/NEWS05/608140339/1007/NEWS05

prosecutors in a similar case in Ohio have said that TracFones are often used by terrorists because they are not traceable.


The need for secure communications.

Could be for drug dealing , or some other criminal act .

What made them choose terrorism ?

Why this ?

Ali Houssaiky and Osama Abulhassan, both 20 and from the Detroit suburb of Dearborn, have been charged with two felonies — money laundering in support of terrorism and soliciting or providing support for acts of terrorism — and misdemeanor falsification. A preliminary hearing on the felony counts was set for Tuesday.

Unless they are real dumb and think the government is not following money around ?

If the money came from a terrorist source...and these fellows cant prove otherwise ..then they seem to be screwed .

despite....

Defense lawyers said Houssaiky and Abulhassan planned to resell the phones simply to make money. They say the men were targeted only because they are of Arab descent

This doesn't explain where the cash came from at all . The cash they were found with and the cash used to buy the phones. Poor guys looking to raise cash for a college education....

The government never did stop following money from its source and " secure" cell phone communications are a MAJOR need for any criminal or terrorist conspiracy .

Hey ...maybe thats why there are laws against LYING about who you are when you BUY them !...just a thought .