Large Hadron Collider Scientist Arrested For al-Qaeda Ties 245
mindbrane writes "A scientist working as a subcontractor on a peripheral LHC project has been arrested as a terrorist. The CBC is running a story outlining the arrest of a man on Thursday in south-east France for suspected al-Qaeda links: 'CERN officials said the man, whose name has not been revealed, was working under contract with an outside institute and said he had no contact with anything that could have been used for terrorism. He had been at CERN since 2003, officials said. ... The news that someone with terrorist connections might have worked at the facility is likely to cause concern because of both the high profile of the giant physics experiment and also the technology in use, which has made some members of the public nervous.'"
Six degrees of separation (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously (Score:2, Insightful)
so you don't have to DO anything anymore? (Score:5, Insightful)
so you don't have to DO anything anymore to get arrested? He was arrested for "al-Qaeda ties"? what does that mean exactly? Did he kill anyone? Did he plot to kill anyone? Did he know about a plot to kill anyone? It sounds like his sister's friend's neighbor had a cousin who was friends with someone in Al Qaeda back in 1990.
Also, from TFA: "The news that someone with terrorist connections might have worked at the facility is likely to cause concern because of both the high profile of the giant physics experiment and also the technology in use, which has made some members of the public nervous"
So people are concerned about someone (with terrorist connections) MIGHT have worked at the facility?!?? OMG that's a reason to start rounding up everybody with brown skin!
Geesh
Re:But i thought... (Score:1, Insightful)
The democratic cabal obviously had a member that was eligible to nominate him, so that part was easy, but actually controlling the minds of the selection committee probably required pointing their mind control satellite (how else could he have won the election?) at Norway.
More seriously, Obama winning the prize reflects poorly on the Nobel committee, not on him.
Re:Better news article - More to this (Score:1, Insightful)
There's more going on here than we're hearing about.
So you have the two guys - one a brilliant physicist and the other with a PhD from the Curie University.
First off, it's hard to believe guys like this decide to blow things up. They are well educated; not the pawns of some brainwashing cleric.
But its even harder to imagine that they get caught in this manner.
These guys are so smart, but its easy to 'bug' their internet connection? Maybe they were sending e-mails without any encryption? Discussing things without using a code? Not able to stop people listing to their communications, or realising if they were being physically bugged? But holding down a day job at CERN? Doesn't add up.
Why did they even decide to get in touch with that group in North Africa? What could a bunch of guys living in a desert possibly offer to these guys in terms of help? These guys could probably plan their own misdeeds - so why would they potentially compromise themselves by trying to get in contact with some people they don't know and aren't sure they can trust?
I guess what I'm basically saying here is that if these guys are so smart - and I believe two people that achieve this sort of academic record, coming from nothing, are going to be shit hot - then I don't believe that they'd get caught in that manner.
I find it hard to believe that people that smart and that educated, having lived in different countries, would want to use terrorism to achieve their ends, but I find it really really hard to believe they'd be caught so easily.
Re:Disbelieve (Score:1, Insightful)
Slashdot moderators, as a group, have too many degenerate members.
Re:And I thought the al quaeda BS would finally st (Score:1, Insightful)
Why did you think changing the president of the USA would in any way affect the behavior of the police in FRANCE?
Re:Six degrees of separation (Score:4, Insightful)
We funded and armed the predecessors of the Taliban in their fight against the Soviets. And we continued to support them in their suppression of criminal warlords and the opium trade through the mid 1990s. Since the Taliban and al Qaida cooperate and share personnel, its quite probable that 'we' (through the CIA or overtly through the State Department) have supported al Qaida in the past.
We have a dismal history of keeping tabs on our friinds while we carefully monitor those we consider to be our enemies. But then that's just human nature.
Re:And I thought the al quaeda BS would finally st (Score:3, Insightful)
"And I thought after we got rid of george w bush, all the "al quaeda this" and "axis of evil that" and "osama this" and "emmanuel goldstein that", "give me all your money and all your rights or they'll kill you" would finally stop..."
Being paranoid over Al Qaeda doesn't meant they aren't a viable threat, though paranoia doesn't make for well thought-out policy decisions.
Re:Better news article - More to this (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't hard to believe at all.
Intellectuals of a certain type have always been attracted to games of espionage, treason and conspiracy - and "game" is, I think, the right word here:
Cambridge Five, [wikipedia.org] Whittaker Chambers [wikipedia.org]
Most probably don't expect to be around when things blow up - but now and again you may find an exception: 2001 Anthrax Attacks [wikipedia.org]
These guys are so smart.
The geek really ought to have learned by now that the smart and the arrogant make stupid mistakes. Hans Reiser [wikipedia.org]