A lot of time and effort has been put in the previous post, which regretfully I do not have, but for the sake of other FTers I will keep it as short and sweet as possible.

The writings hide a important issue. The law as stated out above contains the term material particular , whcih is the key here. These mean "a specific item" and then "consequential, significant" respectively. Without any physical MATERIAL to back up a threat or the specific nature of the threat , it will not stand up in Court and the cops are also unlikely to arrest without a better chance of conviction. The intent is the issue here.

I will try to address how this hidden detail makes a huge difference. The first link that is about an Edinburgh Salesman, there he had physical material to back up his 'threat'. Some pipes and wires sticking out form a briefcase/case. There is specific material to back it up.

In the second link, the British woman who joked about a bomb, said "three bombs" making it a specific threat. She repeated it, increasing the specificity of the threat.

There is an important difference between a young dude/dudette saying "Hey how about a bomb" and "I have three bombs hidden in my handbag". I do not have the time to waste for other quoted links.

FAA admits about the storage of images. They store all airport scanner images, maybe including those of 10 year olds. Happily, a lawsuit is already in the system.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html

Some idiots at security in Heathrow say that a T shirt with a Transformer cartoon is a 'threat" and threaten arrest just for the T shirt!
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/a...ers-t-shirt.do

If the holier-than-us attitude, without any accountability or limit towards security remains in place, soon enough we are going to be living in the People's Democratic Republic of UK or USA!