The CIA recently used a school bus for training exercises, then left live explosives in that bus after returning it, which were discovered two days later after the school bus was returned to its normal use. (IE: THE CHILDREN!!!!!!)
They never used live explosives. They used material that COULD be explosive, but no children were ever in any danger.
Even the story called it explosive material, and it was material bomb-sniffing dogs are trained to detect.
That's technically true, but extremely sensationalized.
They borrowed bus, they left things that can go boom on bus
It *can* technically go boom, but not without a detonator. There wasn't any threat to anyone from its mere presence.
So you'd be fine sitting on it? What if it had been involved in an accident?
Yes I would be. If it was in an accident, then the person(s) at fault should pay for the damage they did, same as any other accident.
I'm assuming you didn't just make it up.
Isn't it telling enough that you read this and can't immediately say "no way, not a chance"
People make mistakes. Even when people blame computers, it was either a user error or a programming one. By people. Computers just help them to fuck up bigger!
I'd still prefer a government agency trying to ensure our safety than rent-a-cops.
There's no real difference
Unfortunately the lines do get blurred. But largely because we won't fund the police properly.
Don't think that applies to the FBI though.
False. They were discovered two weeks after use and I don't know that they were live explosives. At least that's what I thi k the article said.
It was a couple days until they were discovered and it was various explosives including C4 which while stable is indeed live.
I'm assuming real explosives would be required to test detection techniques.
False. It wasn't "live explosives" - at least not according to multiple news reports, which of course could be wrong. But so could any news report saying they *were* live. I think I'll go with "inert" here.
It wasn't rigged to blow but it is certainly capable of exploding in the right conditions
I'd assume the explosive was real. Hard to test your sniffer dogs and sensors against a fake. It's pretty damn hard to blow that stuff up though without proper detonators. You can drop it from a plane, shoot it, I think even burn it (you can with some, not sure about this specific type) and it won't go BOOM.
Still a pretty huge fuck-up though. It deserves the attention.
I know folks, it may come as a shock to you that these buffons are just regular old humans like you and me. They aren't some super species just because they work for da gubmint.
Of course not. But a lot of people don't accept that mistakes sometimes happen because "gubmint" is bad.
I don't believe that for a second. Explosives are highly regulated and must be returned to supply by the person that signed them out.
Hahahahahaha Google it.
Make sure you're sitting down.
I don't want too, I'll just take your word for it.
See my linked article, biker. Some of the material came out of the container, so it wasn't that the container didn't get returned. But I've just scanned a bunch of articles and they all specify that it was "incredibly stable" and requires a special detonator to set it off. In other words, it wasn't really "live explosives."
Would you sit on that bus Susan? And aren't they going to say whatever they can to spin it and make it look better than it was? Classic damage control PR.
From the descriptions I read, yes, I would.
I don't buy the logic that just because you think someone is going to "spin" something, that that's what happened. That's like the "logic" that says just because Scalia's death would have been beneficial to someone, or just because it happened in a remote place etc., that means it *was* a murder.
You're right, up to a point Susan.
But if you were to try to walk down a street with a package that you'd declared had C4 in it, you wouldn't be vertical for long.
I don't think anyone would sit on that bus knowing this
Sorry axl, wrong again