So, wait a minute. This kid makes a private joke among friends, and his message is intercepted by security services and obviously taken out of context (in that they failed to realize he was privately joking among friends).
Seems to me that the security forces should eat the cost of this. This is the price you pay for spying on everyone and overreacting.
The kid didn't say this publicly
Even if this was a real terrorist, this is the worst move security services could've done.
They could bar a suspected terrorist from entering the plane via a temporary arrest. If they're wrong, just reimburse the travel costs. If correct, you didn't let a terrorist possibly hijack a plane.
They could use the "randomly selected for a search" card as an excuse for detailed screening. A terrorist can't blow up a plane without some sort of smuggled troublesome equipment anyway. If they're wrong, you spent like 10 minutes searching a random dude. At least you didn't gave a terrorist chance to hijack a plane.
They instead let a suspected terrorist enter the plane as usual; then tailed him with fighter jets. What the actual fuck was the plan if the suspected person was a terrorist? Blow up the fucking plane so all the civilians inside die?
Imagine the call done to the authorities
"This is airport, we've detected a suspicious individual that could be affiliated with a terrorist organization"
"Since you detected him, I assume you've detained him? We'll be sending units"
"Umm... no? Just let him board the plane"
"YOU WHAT?"
Yeah why the fuck were they spying on some 18 year old kid's snapchat?
He wrote:
"On my way to blow up the plane (I'm a member of the Taliban)."
There's no way that text doesn't get automatically flagged for review by Snapchat.
Who's reading these private messages?
I imagine Snapchat read it.
Then checked his location (since Snapchat likely asks users to turn on that permission, or it could've been found through photo/video metadata).
Then they informed the airport nearest to his GPS location.
And that's probably why it got blown out of proportion.
Snapchat says "Hey airport, we found someone at your location who said they're going to blow up a plane. Here's a cropped picture of the guy's face."
Then the airport staff are looking through everyone who's checked in, trying to match the Snapchat picture to the passport photos. By the time they found a match, the plan had already departed. (Let's be real, they probably have some facial recognition, but it was likely double-checked by humans, plus all the communication back and forth, etc.)
So now the airport knows that the guy who said he's going to blow up the plane is already on the plane, and the plane is in flight. What are your options at that point?
Probably doesn't need facial recognition even. Snapchat has people's phone numbers. Which are also used when booking tickets for most airlines. The airport could cross check phone record from Snapchat with their airlines' passenger info.
Snapchat is not private.
That's exactly how the Taliban talks. The highly cryptic methods used by this terror organization have been cracked.
What makes you think the Taliban is trying to hide? They're public. They have a Twitter account. They post memes. They're not trying to be cryptic, they're pretty out and open with their messaging these days.
Because if a terrorist sent that then blew up a plane and they didn't act the public backlash would be insane.
While it's super invasive there are terrorists stupid enough to use services like this to communicate.
Also what's the goal of scrambling jets when the threat is a passenger inside said jet? Are they gonna ask the pilot to pipe the radio to the PA and say "you better not blow up that plane because we're in charge and we said so?" Do they have a sniper on the wing ready to take out just one guy meanwhile depressurizing the whole fuselage, potentially explosively? Maybe Top Gun Tom Cruise can hit the guy with a burst of the 20mm? Seems like there's no point whatsoever. Best case they can say "yep it blew up" or "nope it didn't blow up."
I mean, were there actually a terrorist onboard the plane, I imagine the logic would be "If they hijack it and decide to try to crash it into something 9/11 style, a fighter can at least blow it up in time to prevent more casualties on the ground"
This would make sense. Fighters were scrambled to take out Flight 93. The assumed target was the White House, so they were scrambled so fast they didn’t have time to arm them. Their plan was to literally crash into the hijacked plane. One into the tail, one into the cockpit.
By the time they arrived the plane had already been brought down by the passengers.
Wow. Eject or kamikaze?
I’m not totally sure, I don’t recall whether that was answered in the interview I saw with one of the pilots.
That's surprising that they don't keep at least a few jets armed in case they need to be scrambled for real. Guessing that's since changed and they do now.
The jets are to shoot down the airliner if it aims towards a dense area, sensitive location, etc.
They'd shoot the plane down if they can't get the pilot to land safely. They'd rather one plane full of innocent passengers gets killed than a plane full of innocent passengers and a building full of even more innocents.
Or ... maybe don't let them on the plane at all?
he was at the airport check in when he sent it. assuming 2 hours between check in and boarding..... that's actually a really fast time to figure out who sent a random snap, unless somebody overheard him and then followed him while reporting it.
Or if Snapchat flagged it and reported it to the airport (which they absolutely will do.)
What's the fighter pilot got to do with that?
Because if a guy with a bomb manages to persuad the pilot to change course.....
Is anyone stupid enough to think that Snapchat is private? Honest question. It's still a social media platform.
Private enough to use as the primary communication method for my multi-million dollar drug empire? No. Private enough to make a dumb joke to a friend and not expect to become a terrorist? It should be but clearly not
Yeah I would personally tell them to eat shit.
This tends to be ineffective in court.
The kid didn’t say this publicly
I'm not sure what this changes. Do actual terrorists make their plans public? IANAT, but I'm pretty sure they discuss and plan their actions privately most of the time.
Besides, look at what he wrote:
"On my way to blow up the plane (I'm a member of the Taliban)."
If he somehow didn't expect that line of text to get his Snapchat auto-watchlisted, then he's even dumber than originally thought.
Do actual terrorists go around saying “lol I’m a terrorist”? Maybe a little business card with some finely embossed “Taliban Suicide Bomber” printed under their name to hand out to everyone.
That's really not far off from actual Taliban recruitment and propaganda tactics these days. They have a public Twitter account, if anybody's forgotten.
I mean yeah most people kinda assume that their private conversations are private, hopefully this will help more people aware that corporations and governments are spying on us all
My first thought is what is the point of sending fighter jets to deal with a bomb threat?
"Don't you blow up this plane, or else........ we'll blow up this plane."
Bomb threats can be used to get control of the plane and then fly it into stuff. The fighter jet is there to bring down the plane if it seems like they’re trying to 9/11 it.
I think it's more the plane could have gone into a built up area.
Yea. They can do finish blowing it up
Seriously think a little bigger. Why are people commenting this?
Because lemmy is full of 15 year old kids with no experience in the real world
Reminiscent of the Twitter joke trial. Except this obvious joke was made in private, so there's even less excuse for the over-reaction. Useless timewasters.
So if a terrorist makes a private chat, they're immune?
Wut?
It would have been nice if they could have stopped him before he got on the plane. If he was serious, things likely wouldn't have ended well.
“Before departing”- I think he was on the plane when he made the Snapchat comment, but the article is not clear.
It’s possible he was overheard and some stranger who didn’t- and couldn’t- know it was a joke reported him.
He admitted to sending a picture with his 'bomb joke' and Taliban comment from a check-in desk at Gatwick Airport, which experts who analysed his phone told the court was shared in a Snapchat group with six other users at 9.47am the day of his arrest and showed him wearing a hat and sunglasses.
so he was at the airport. making terrorist threats. brilliant.
Edit2: Looking into snapchat's content policy, it seems very probably snapchat was the one that reported him to the authorities. From their Community Guidelines:
These Guidelines apply to all content (which includes all forms of communication, like text, images, generative AI, links or attachments, emojis, Lenses and other creative tools) or behavior on Snapchat — and to all Snapchatters. We are particularly sensitive to content or behavior that poses a risk of severe harm to Snapchatters, and reserve the right to take immediate, permanent action against users engaging in such behavior. Additional guidance about what we consider to be severe harm and how we take action against it is available here.
Taking the link hop to the 'additional guidance':
The safety of Snapchatters is our top priority. We take behavior that threatens the safety of our community very seriously, particularly when the threat of harm is severe. We consider severe harm to include both (1) harms that risk significant damage to the physical or emotional well-being of Snapchatters, and (2) the imminent, credible risk of severe harm, including threats to human life, safety, and well-being. We collaborate with experts, safety groups, and law enforcement on these topics in order to better educate ourselves and our community, and to take appropriate action where these threats may arise on our platform. We consider these types of harms to merit a heightened level of scrutiny, as well as swift, strict, and permanent consequences for violators.
When we identify Snapchatters engaging in any of the following activities, we immediately disable their accounts and, in some instances, refer the conduct to law enforcement:
Activity that involves sexual exploitation or abuse, including sharing child sexual exploitation or abuse imagery, grooming, child or adult sex trafficking, or sexual extortion (sextortion)
Attempted selling, exchanging, or facilitating sales of dangerous and illicit drugs
Credible, imminent threats to human life, safety, or well-being, which may include violent extremism or terrorism-related activities, human trafficking, specific threats of violence (such as a bomb threat), or other serious criminal activities
In addition to enforcing stricter consequences for these violations, our internal teams are continually working with experts to better understand how we can detect and limit threats, prevent harm, and stay informed of potentially harmful trends. Our work on this topic is never finished and it will continue to evolve with the needs of our community. We invite you to report a safety concern, visit our Safety Center, or learn more about our efforts to address harmful content and promote wellness.
Emphasis is mine.
When you're in a group chat in Snapchat, Snap always has an ear on the group.
Suggesting anything illegal at an airport or border crossing is off-limits for me, no jokes, even with family/friends. I thought people knew better.
Now if only we fined companies proportionally for saftey violations...
"The intention was never to cause public distress or cause public harm," Verma told the court.
That moment, the kid realised some joke is off-limit and could have serious consequences.
a private joke?
Unfortunately, an app and justice will not differentiate between a joke and real, once it tripped either of this system then you pay the consequences. If you wanna joke about this, joke irl.
What was private about it?
private jokes made in public aren't private. (this was sent from the check in counter of the airport.)
It was a private chat group message, what's public about it?
If your in a public place, other people can see your screen. Also, snaps are frequently video, so he may have been over heard.
If your in public (like that), you have no expectation of privacy.
edit: also do you really think Snapchat won't be screening messages? They probably have his geolocation data, know he's an airport and just sent something about "planes" and "bombs" and "taliban". nobody in the world is going to review that and think, "oh, it's just a joke. move along."
As per the article, security saw the message, it was not reported by another traveller. So he presumably was, or thought he was, in private when he made the joke.
Security services saw the message and flagged it to Spanish authorities, who sent two F-18 jets to follow the airliner until it landed, per the BBC.
The Security Service is MI5. I doubt very much the agent was ever out at Gatwick that day. Either they scooped up the message via some form of mass surveillance or Snapchat reported it.
My assumption is he thought that the Snapchat group itself was private and didn’t realize that Snapchat absolutely will nark on you if you threaten to get them wrapped up in something Iike terrorism. Another article says he was at the check in counter.
If airport security saw the message/overheard it, they would never have let him through the security check point to board in the first place.
No I absolutely agree that he was probably auto reported by Snapchat. Nevertheless, my point holds that that would be very much considered a private conversation.
One 18-year-old is about to find out the very harsh consequences of being an adult.
The harsh consequences of being in a police state
What should happen if there is an explicit threat by a passenger to blow up a plane? Just hope it's a joke because it seems like one?
EDIT: As usual, lots of downvotes, but no actual answer to the question.
the article seems to suggest it wasnt even shared publicly, so I suspect that they hadn't even considered the possibility that anyone who might think of it as a threat might see it. Posting that on a public forum, I can see the reaction, and I can definitely see an argument that the joke was in bad taste, but to be perfectly honest, unless one of their friends thought the message was sincere and reported it (which the article doesnt mention and sounds dubious) a private message like that really shouldnt have been visible to the authorities in the first place.
The lawyer claims the joke was made with friends in private, but we don't know what 'in private' means. Does Spain have the authority to automatically flag private Snapchat conversations for terrorist threats? Because I'm dubious. I think it's much more likely that someone didn't have their account set private.
Snapchat collects the contents of every message you send, including the pictures, including the text. from their Community Guidelines:
These Guidelines apply to all content (which includes all forms of communication, like text, images, generative AI, links or attachments, emojis, Lenses and other creative tools) or behavior on Snapchat — and to all Snapchatters. We are particularly sensitive to content or behavior that poses a risk of severe harm to Snapchatters, and reserve the right to take immediate, permanent action against users engaging in such behavior. Additional guidance about what we consider to be severe harm and how we take action against it is available here.
Taking the link hop to the 'additional guidance':
The safety of Snapchatters is our top priority. We take behavior that threatens the safety of our community very seriously, particularly when the threat of harm is severe. We consider severe harm to include both (1) harms that risk significant damage to the physical or emotional well-being of Snapchatters, and (2) the imminent, credible risk of severe harm, including threats to human life, safety, and well-being. We collaborate with experts, safety groups, and law enforcement on these topics in order to better educate ourselves and our community, and to take appropriate action where these threats may arise on our platform. We consider these types of harms to merit a heightened level of scrutiny, as well as swift, strict, and permanent consequences for violators.
When we identify Snapchatters engaging in any of the following activities, we immediately disable their accounts and, in some instances, refer the conduct to law enforcement:
Activity that involves sexual exploitation or abuse, including sharing child sexual exploitation or abuse imagery, grooming, child or adult sex trafficking, or sexual extortion (sextortion)
Attempted selling, exchanging, or facilitating sales of dangerous and illicit drugs
Credible, imminent threats to human life, safety, or well-being, which may include violent extremism or terrorism-related activities, human trafficking, specific threats of violence (such as a bomb threat), or other serious criminal activities
In addition to enforcing stricter consequences for these violations, our internal teams are continually working with experts to better understand how we can detect and limit threats, prevent harm, and stay informed of potentially harmful trends. Our work on this topic is never finished and it will continue to evolve with the needs of our community. We invite you to report a safety concern, visit our Safety Center, or learn more about our efforts to address harmful content and promote wellness.
Emphasis is mine.
so snapchat's content filters picked up on the threat, there may have been an actual human involved, and they sent it to the relevant authorities, complete with all of his details. It's likely that the relevant authorities puttered around with things for a bit, sending it through the "proper channels" by which time he was on the plane and in the air.
Even if snapchat didn't automatically snoop the message, he could have been reported by one of his friends.
How is it a threat if said privately?
The same way it's a threat if you tell someone privately that you're going to blow up a building. But it's not clear that this was truly private.
Holy shit dude it's only been a few minutes calm the fuck down
If 4 people are going to downvote me within that time and not respond, I'm going to say something about it. I notice you took the time to respond to me without answering the question. Do you have an answer?
I was gonna write out a response (which is why I was back here anyways) but your demeanor is just "I wanna be angry" and there really is no amount of logic you apply to people like you.
Ok... but I'm not angry.
It's just edgy teenagers who think they know everything about how the world works, don't sweat it.
I guess. It just annoys me when people downvote me a whole bunch when I ask a question but don't explain their downvotes. I don't care if I say something and everyone on Lemmy thinks it's worth downvoting and I get 2500 downvotes or whatever, but I just think people should have the basic courtesy to explain why.
I know they won't, but it still annoys me.
EDIT: See, in this response (I'm editing just because I saw it already had a few downvotes) I don't care if I get dozens of downvotes to this comment and no one responds. It's when I ask a question. I don't downvote people for asking questions unless I also respond. If I don't like their question, I'll explain why. I think that's just courteous. But maybe I'm in a minority. Courtesy is mostly dead on the internet anyway.
I feel like people downvote like that when they don't like how the comment makes them feel, but can't be bothered to think about why that's the case.
And I have no interest in what those people think feel.
Alternatively, it can make me do a double take, and reconsider my own reasoning, just to make sure I haven't made an error, in fact or in judgment. I don't think you need to do that here; what the adult said was most definitely a potential threat.
Typing is hard, voting is easy. Reddit was the same way. Just accept it and move on, frequently things shift the other way and you get comments if you're just patient.
I agree. Sometimes I just can't help myself.
In this case it's also one guy with 4 accounts being a dick and troll, not 4 different people. Keep in mind, quantity of votes doesn't mean unique people.
He shouldn't have been allowed boarding in the first place. The security services saw that message, but let him board the plane. They're fully responsible for the bill of two jet fighters used to trail the plane, and would be in way more deep trouble if this was an actual terrorist.
Did they see it before he boarded the plane though? The article didn't make that clear.
Granted it isn't the US, so our customs and laws don't apply. That being said, it really depends on how they got the evidence I think.
If it was a public post(intentionally or accidentally public), or someone reported it, or snapchat's TOS authorizes scanning and reporting "private" messages, then yeah, seems like this teenager's actions should have consequences.
If it's a result of an illegal police state that has access to people's private communications, the evidence should be fully inadmissible. And the response is a result of information that should not have been in their hands to begin with, making this 100% on them.
I think the former is a lot more likely. But the article is too short on details.
I truly hope that's the case, though I think we're all a little more accustomed to seeing police state overstepping in this day in age. And the article is meant to be ragebait for that anyway I think.
I'd say wait for the details to surface, and if it truly ends up being police state overstep, I hope their citizens hold them accountable in whatever way will bring about change. I like the French methods personally.
So, wait a minute. This kid makes a private joke among friends, and his message is intercepted by security services and obviously taken out of context (in that they failed to realize he was privately joking among friends).
Seems to me that the security forces should eat the cost of this. This is the price you pay for spying on everyone and overreacting.
The kid didn't say this publicly
Even if this was a real terrorist, this is the worst move security services could've done.
They could bar a suspected terrorist from entering the plane via a temporary arrest. If they're wrong, just reimburse the travel costs. If correct, you didn't let a terrorist possibly hijack a plane.
They could use the "randomly selected for a search" card as an excuse for detailed screening. A terrorist can't blow up a plane without some sort of smuggled troublesome equipment anyway. If they're wrong, you spent like 10 minutes searching a random dude. At least you didn't gave a terrorist chance to hijack a plane.
They instead let a suspected terrorist enter the plane as usual; then tailed him with fighter jets. What the actual fuck was the plan if the suspected person was a terrorist? Blow up the fucking plane so all the civilians inside die?
Imagine the call done to the authorities
"This is airport, we've detected a suspicious individual that could be affiliated with a terrorist organization"
"Since you detected him, I assume you've detained him? We'll be sending units"
"Umm... no? Just let him board the plane"
"YOU WHAT?"
Yeah why the fuck were they spying on some 18 year old kid's snapchat?
He wrote:
There's no way that text doesn't get automatically flagged for review by Snapchat.
Who's reading these private messages?
I imagine Snapchat read it.
Then checked his location (since Snapchat likely asks users to turn on that permission, or it could've been found through photo/video metadata).
Then they informed the airport nearest to his GPS location.
And that's probably why it got blown out of proportion.
Snapchat says "Hey airport, we found someone at your location who said they're going to blow up a plane. Here's a cropped picture of the guy's face."
Then the airport staff are looking through everyone who's checked in, trying to match the Snapchat picture to the passport photos. By the time they found a match, the plan had already departed. (Let's be real, they probably have some facial recognition, but it was likely double-checked by humans, plus all the communication back and forth, etc.)
So now the airport knows that the guy who said he's going to blow up the plane is already on the plane, and the plane is in flight. What are your options at that point?
Probably doesn't need facial recognition even. Snapchat has people's phone numbers. Which are also used when booking tickets for most airlines. The airport could cross check phone record from Snapchat with their airlines' passenger info.
Snapchat is not private.
That's exactly how the Taliban talks. The highly cryptic methods used by this terror organization have been cracked.
What makes you think the Taliban is trying to hide? They're public. They have a Twitter account. They post memes. They're not trying to be cryptic, they're pretty out and open with their messaging these days.
Because if a terrorist sent that then blew up a plane and they didn't act the public backlash would be insane.
While it's super invasive there are terrorists stupid enough to use services like this to communicate.
Also what's the goal of scrambling jets when the threat is a passenger inside said jet? Are they gonna ask the pilot to pipe the radio to the PA and say "you better not blow up that plane because we're in charge and we said so?" Do they have a sniper on the wing ready to take out just one guy meanwhile depressurizing the whole fuselage, potentially explosively? Maybe Top Gun Tom Cruise can hit the guy with a burst of the 20mm? Seems like there's no point whatsoever. Best case they can say "yep it blew up" or "nope it didn't blow up."
I mean, were there actually a terrorist onboard the plane, I imagine the logic would be "If they hijack it and decide to try to crash it into something 9/11 style, a fighter can at least blow it up in time to prevent more casualties on the ground"
This would make sense. Fighters were scrambled to take out Flight 93. The assumed target was the White House, so they were scrambled so fast they didn’t have time to arm them. Their plan was to literally crash into the hijacked plane. One into the tail, one into the cockpit.
By the time they arrived the plane had already been brought down by the passengers.
Wow. Eject or kamikaze?
I’m not totally sure, I don’t recall whether that was answered in the interview I saw with one of the pilots.
That's surprising that they don't keep at least a few jets armed in case they need to be scrambled for real. Guessing that's since changed and they do now.
The jets are to shoot down the airliner if it aims towards a dense area, sensitive location, etc.
They'd shoot the plane down if they can't get the pilot to land safely. They'd rather one plane full of innocent passengers gets killed than a plane full of innocent passengers and a building full of even more innocents.
Or ... maybe don't let them on the plane at all?
he was at the airport check in when he sent it. assuming 2 hours between check in and boarding..... that's actually a really fast time to figure out who sent a random snap, unless somebody overheard him and then followed him while reporting it.
Or if Snapchat flagged it and reported it to the airport (which they absolutely will do.)
What's the fighter pilot got to do with that?
Because if a guy with a bomb manages to persuad the pilot to change course.....
Is anyone stupid enough to think that Snapchat is private? Honest question. It's still a social media platform.
Private enough to use as the primary communication method for my multi-million dollar drug empire? No. Private enough to make a dumb joke to a friend and not expect to become a terrorist? It should be but clearly not
Yeah I would personally tell them to eat shit.
This tends to be ineffective in court.
I'm not sure what this changes. Do actual terrorists make their plans public? IANAT, but I'm pretty sure they discuss and plan their actions privately most of the time.
Besides, look at what he wrote:
If he somehow didn't expect that line of text to get his Snapchat auto-watchlisted, then he's even dumber than originally thought.
Do actual terrorists go around saying “lol I’m a terrorist”? Maybe a little business card with some finely embossed “Taliban Suicide Bomber” printed under their name to hand out to everyone.
That's really not far off from actual Taliban recruitment and propaganda tactics these days. They have a public Twitter account, if anybody's forgotten.
I mean yeah most people kinda assume that their private conversations are private, hopefully this will help more people aware that corporations and governments are spying on us all
My first thought is what is the point of sending fighter jets to deal with a bomb threat?
"Don't you blow up this plane, or else........ we'll blow up this plane."
Bomb threats can be used to get control of the plane and then fly it into stuff. The fighter jet is there to bring down the plane if it seems like they’re trying to 9/11 it.
I think it's more the plane could have gone into a built up area.
Yea. They can do finish blowing it up
Seriously think a little bigger. Why are people commenting this?
Because lemmy is full of 15 year old kids with no experience in the real world
Reminiscent of the Twitter joke trial. Except this obvious joke was made in private, so there's even less excuse for the over-reaction. Useless timewasters.
So if a terrorist makes a private chat, they're immune?
Wut?
It would have been nice if they could have stopped him before he got on the plane. If he was serious, things likely wouldn't have ended well.
“Before departing”- I think he was on the plane when he made the Snapchat comment, but the article is not clear.
It’s possible he was overheard and some stranger who didn’t- and couldn’t- know it was a joke reported him.
edit, from another article:
so he was at the airport. making terrorist threats. brilliant.
Edit2: Looking into snapchat's content policy, it seems very probably snapchat was the one that reported him to the authorities. From their Community Guidelines:
Taking the link hop to the 'additional guidance':
Emphasis is mine.
When you're in a group chat in Snapchat, Snap always has an ear on the group.
Suggesting anything illegal at an airport or border crossing is off-limits for me, no jokes, even with family/friends. I thought people knew better.
Now if only we fined companies proportionally for saftey violations...
That moment, the kid realised some joke is off-limit and could have serious consequences.
a private joke?
Unfortunately, an app and justice will not differentiate between a joke and real, once it tripped either of this system then you pay the consequences. If you wanna joke about this, joke irl.
What was private about it?
private jokes made in public aren't private. (this was sent from the check in counter of the airport.)
It was a private chat group message, what's public about it?
If your in a public place, other people can see your screen. Also, snaps are frequently video, so he may have been over heard.
If your in public (like that), you have no expectation of privacy.
edit: also do you really think Snapchat won't be screening messages? They probably have his geolocation data, know he's an airport and just sent something about "planes" and "bombs" and "taliban". nobody in the world is going to review that and think, "oh, it's just a joke. move along."
As per the article, security saw the message, it was not reported by another traveller. So he presumably was, or thought he was, in private when he made the joke.
The Security Service is MI5. I doubt very much the agent was ever out at Gatwick that day. Either they scooped up the message via some form of mass surveillance or Snapchat reported it.
My assumption is he thought that the Snapchat group itself was private and didn’t realize that Snapchat absolutely will nark on you if you threaten to get them wrapped up in something Iike terrorism. Another article says he was at the check in counter.
If airport security saw the message/overheard it, they would never have let him through the security check point to board in the first place.
No I absolutely agree that he was probably auto reported by Snapchat. Nevertheless, my point holds that that would be very much considered a private conversation.
One 18-year-old is about to find out the very harsh consequences of being an adult.
The harsh consequences of being in a police state
What should happen if there is an explicit threat by a passenger to blow up a plane? Just hope it's a joke because it seems like one?
EDIT: As usual, lots of downvotes, but no actual answer to the question.
the article seems to suggest it wasnt even shared publicly, so I suspect that they hadn't even considered the possibility that anyone who might think of it as a threat might see it. Posting that on a public forum, I can see the reaction, and I can definitely see an argument that the joke was in bad taste, but to be perfectly honest, unless one of their friends thought the message was sincere and reported it (which the article doesnt mention and sounds dubious) a private message like that really shouldnt have been visible to the authorities in the first place.
The lawyer claims the joke was made with friends in private, but we don't know what 'in private' means. Does Spain have the authority to automatically flag private Snapchat conversations for terrorist threats? Because I'm dubious. I think it's much more likely that someone didn't have their account set private.
Snapchat collects the contents of every message you send, including the pictures, including the text. from their Community Guidelines:
Taking the link hop to the 'additional guidance':
Emphasis is mine.
so snapchat's content filters picked up on the threat, there may have been an actual human involved, and they sent it to the relevant authorities, complete with all of his details. It's likely that the relevant authorities puttered around with things for a bit, sending it through the "proper channels" by which time he was on the plane and in the air.
Even if snapchat didn't automatically snoop the message, he could have been reported by one of his friends.
How is it a threat if said privately?
The same way it's a threat if you tell someone privately that you're going to blow up a building. But it's not clear that this was truly private.
Holy shit dude it's only been a few minutes calm the fuck down
If 4 people are going to downvote me within that time and not respond, I'm going to say something about it. I notice you took the time to respond to me without answering the question. Do you have an answer?
I was gonna write out a response (which is why I was back here anyways) but your demeanor is just "I wanna be angry" and there really is no amount of logic you apply to people like you.
Ok... but I'm not angry.
It's just edgy teenagers who think they know everything about how the world works, don't sweat it.
I guess. It just annoys me when people downvote me a whole bunch when I ask a question but don't explain their downvotes. I don't care if I say something and everyone on Lemmy thinks it's worth downvoting and I get 2500 downvotes or whatever, but I just think people should have the basic courtesy to explain why.
I know they won't, but it still annoys me.
EDIT: See, in this response (I'm editing just because I saw it already had a few downvotes) I don't care if I get dozens of downvotes to this comment and no one responds. It's when I ask a question. I don't downvote people for asking questions unless I also respond. If I don't like their question, I'll explain why. I think that's just courteous. But maybe I'm in a minority. Courtesy is mostly dead on the internet anyway.
I feel like people downvote like that when they don't like how the comment makes them feel, but can't be bothered to think about why that's the case.
And I have no interest in what those people
thinkfeel.Alternatively, it can make me do a double take, and reconsider my own reasoning, just to make sure I haven't made an error, in fact or in judgment. I don't think you need to do that here; what the adult said was most definitely a potential threat.
Typing is hard, voting is easy. Reddit was the same way. Just accept it and move on, frequently things shift the other way and you get comments if you're just patient.
I agree. Sometimes I just can't help myself.
In this case it's also one guy with 4 accounts being a dick and troll, not 4 different people. Keep in mind, quantity of votes doesn't mean unique people.
It's just one guy?
He shouldn't have been allowed boarding in the first place. The security services saw that message, but let him board the plane. They're fully responsible for the bill of two jet fighters used to trail the plane, and would be in way more deep trouble if this was an actual terrorist.
Did they see it before he boarded the plane though? The article didn't make that clear.
Granted it isn't the US, so our customs and laws don't apply. That being said, it really depends on how they got the evidence I think.
If it was a public post(intentionally or accidentally public), or someone reported it, or snapchat's TOS authorizes scanning and reporting "private" messages, then yeah, seems like this teenager's actions should have consequences.
If it's a result of an illegal police state that has access to people's private communications, the evidence should be fully inadmissible. And the response is a result of information that should not have been in their hands to begin with, making this 100% on them.
I think the former is a lot more likely. But the article is too short on details.
I truly hope that's the case, though I think we're all a little more accustomed to seeing police state overstepping in this day in age. And the article is meant to be ragebait for that anyway I think.
I'd say wait for the details to surface, and if it truly ends up being police state overstep, I hope their citizens hold them accountable in whatever way will bring about change. I like the French methods personally.