What could go wrong? Well, if the device functions as designed, you could kill a bunch of innocent people and yourself, and then go straight to hell. If it doesn’t function at all, you’ll go to prison for a long time. If it partially functions, you’ll set fire to your crotch, the other passengers will beat you down, and then you’ll go to prison for a long timeI'm going to call him the "briefs bomber". The other options are "the underwear bomber" which doesn't alliterate and "that 'tard who tried to blow up a plane with his underwear" which is too long.
I'm sure it was uncomfortable having his genitals on fire, but where I really sympathize with him is in having to wear the ashen underwear until they got him to the hospital. Maybe that's just because I've never had my genitals on fire so I don't know how uncomfortable it is --at least I can't recall that ever happening-- but I have had to wear ashen underwear and believe me, that is no fun at all.
We may all think we can joke about this because no one was killed and no one was even injured except for the murderous 'tard who burned his own pecker off, but I'm concerned about a very serious side effect. Because of the Shoe Bomber, the 'tards in airline security force all airline passengers to take off their shoes and pass them through the scanner separately. Are we now going to have to do that with our underwear?
You might thinks this is silly, but taking off shoes is just as silly. It would be easy to form explosives so that they did not show up in a scan. In fact, I doubt that it would require much special effort at all. The reason we have to take off our shoes is because the people making decisions about these sorts of things are not trying to solve the problem of keeping people from being killed. They are trying to solve another problem which they consider much more important: protect their jobs.
These bureaucrats fear that if another shoe bomber tried and succeeded in bringing down a plane and they did not have this policy, then their jobs might be in danger. They are afraid that the media, which would obviously be looking for a villain other than the bomber himself, would latch onto the fact that the shoes were not scanned and blame whoever made that policy. A media blitz like that can overwhelm all reason in politicians, sending them screaming in a panic to punish someone else before their voters punish them. And if the scanning would have made no difference at all, well, no amount of protests like that are going to get through a full-scale media Storm of Righteousness.
But really, how serious a threat is that? No one gets fired for security lapses in the US government. Good grief, no one was even fired for 9/11 --a grotesque security failure which resulted in the deaths of 3,000 people. In fact, I recall that one of the screwups in the FBI was actually promoted shortly afterward. These media storms never happen to US civil servants any more, only to Republicans and pro-life Democrats. I speculate that this is because reporters have come to see the US bureaucracy as an ally in the war against Republicans.
Oops. I guess I got a little off-topic there. So back to the briefs bomber. Let's see, I need some more comments about a dumbass who sets flames to his underwear...
I'm hopping the dumbass is now qualified for the Darwin award, which only requires you to take yourself out of the gene pool, not die. Making yourself sterile would qualify.
I hear when the dumbass is at a barbeque he likes to grill his own weaner.
Maybe instead of the briefs bomber we should call him the Oscar Meyer bomber.
I hear that he had a syringe of igniter in one pocket and a squirt bottle of mustard in the other. (sorry, but you should have quit reading after the barbeque line).