Don't Fly During Ramadan - <AUTHOR> http://varnull.adityamukerjee.net/post/59021412512/dont-fly-during-ramadan <comment><USER5> The land of the free.

As I read more and more of those stories I can't help but wonder at how things changed. I am from a formerly-eastern-europe-soviet-bloc country (Poland) and these kinds of oppressive techniques sound very familiar. The haziness of procedures, lack of basic rights, intimidation, no accountability of state officials -- we've seen all that until 1989. At the time, while the communist regime was imposed on us, the USA seemed like heaven: transparency, procedures, basic rights, free speech, accountable officials.

Look at where we are today. I can't even imagine being held captive without arrest for hours, being questioned about the purpose of my trip, about my religion and habits, all while travelling within my country. When entering the country, the passport clerk has exactly two options: let me in, or call the police and get me arrested on the spot. I feel free and I am happy to live in a free country, together with people who because of the past oppressive Soviet regime are quite sensitive to abuses of power.

At the same time, the U.S. is rapidly degenerating into something that isn't quite the sinister oppressive regime, but getting close to the point where it could become one, if a wrong leader gets elected. It's scary.

And the worst thing is -- American people got so used to the idea of living in a free country, that they do not even admit the thought that things are going the wrong way. Most people don't see the signs.

<comment><USER6> I don't think this is that oppressive. He went through security and set off an explosives detector. The cops showed up and asked some questions. Then he left.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the government can't hamfistedly accuse you of a crime. All it says is that they have to charge you or let you go in 24 hours, give you a trial, and punish you in a consistent way. They did that here; they asked some questions and they let him go.

You can argue about the techniques; religious questions, not giving him water, but it's all a well-documented psychological game that they're trying to play. If they make the suspect mad, the suspect is more likely to start yelling hysterically without thinking, saving the taxpayer the cost of a long trial. It's worth a try, right? (I think the correct answer to any question is, "my lawyer will answer that. get me my lawyer.")

Anyway, I look at this like the lottery, but in reverse. Sometimes you lose the reverse lottery and a day of your life gets fucked up. But ultimately, life moves on and you have an interesting story. You can say that the government is an oppressive regime that is out to get you for your political views, or you can say you rolled the dice and lost.

Let me ask you this: say you want to check for guns and explosives before people get on an airplane. How do _you_ do it?

<comment><USER7> >>Anyway, I look at this like the lottery, but in reverse. Sometimes you lose the reverse lottery and a day of your life gets fucked up. But ultimately, life moves on and you have an interesting story. You can say that the government is an oppressive regime that is out to get you for your political views, or you can say you rolled the dice and lost.

The view you have expressed here demonstrates that you have literally no idea what you are talking about.

It is not a "lottery" when the TSA and their goons are profiling people based on race, religion, income, and a host of other criteria.

<comment><USER8> The explosives detection machinery doesn't care what you look like or believe.

I don't know about you, but I want the TSA / FBI / NYPD to look into it so that they're sufficiently convinced the individual is not a threat.

<comment> mark-r Once they've determined he isn't carrying actual explosives he shouldn't be considered a threat anymore. The detection machine might single you out for additional searching, but once the search is complete you should be free to go.

<comment><USER9> > _Once they 've determined he isn't carrying actual explosives he shouldn't > be considered a threat anymore._ //

Because people who handle explosives and cover it up when questioned, and aren't involved in handling explosives in their day job, are completely to be trusted?

Surely once they've determined he isn't carrying explosives they need to be sure as possible, if he claims not to have been around any explosives, that he's telling the truth; in order to reduce the risk that he's going to use explosives in an illegal way and/or manner dangerous to life. Don't people who're manufacturing explosives in secret deserve at least a passing glance to see what they're doing with them.

It looks here like they checked his apartment to corroborate his statements.

Now if they've established there are no traces of explosive present - <USER2> example they confirm the cause of a false-positive - that's different.

<comment><USER10> Er.. No.

The problem with your line of thought is that you trust that machine to be somewhat reliable. We don't _really_ learn what set off the machine, but the author's guess is an over the counter spray..

If that's the high tech "You need to endure this process for the greater good, since the machine claims you're a threat" world you like to live in, I .. opt out. That thing is obviously next to useless and probably as effective as a look in the eyes of the stranger, with your gut deciding if he's going to stay put for the rest of the day or if he's allowed to move on.

IFF we had a reliable, working test with little to no false positive due to f __*ing everyday stuff (or .. bad luck, being a 'random' match), THEN you might have a point. Right now, you don't.

<comment><USER9> > _your line of thought is that you trust that machine to be somewhat > reliable_ //

And your problem is you assume the machine isn't reliable. So then if it's set off, you just say "ah well, it's probably a false reading". At that point you just obviated the purpose of the machine.

Yes we don't learn whether it was the permethrin (? can't certainly recall the name) but the people who did the sweep of his apartment confirmed that there were no other indications of explosives manufacture [or you can plump for the slightly less cynical - 'the questioning confirmed he was not a threat'].

There's likely always going to be some false-positives: the needs of the many, yadda, yadda.

> _IFF we had a reliable, working test with little to no false positive due to > f_ ing everyday stuff* //

Can you post your source and the pertinent stats for the number of false- positives for explosives detection at airports in the USA please.

<comment><USER11> Our friend Bayes and his theorem can help us here. Suppose you have an HIV test which is 95% accurate in detecting if you are HIV positive or not. The HIV rate in the US is about 0.3%.

If you subject a random American to this HIV test and the test result is positive, what is the probability that that person has HIV? I wont do the math, but the right answer is about 2%. Since the prevalence of HIV is so low it doesn't matter how accurate the test it, it will still generate many times more false positives than true ones.

Same thing with bombs. The number of American air passengers/year is about 800 million/year and of them, at most 5 are carrying explosives. Even if the bomb detector is 99.9% accurate it will generate thousands of false positives for each real bomb it catches.

<comment><USER12> It turns out when you actually get tested for HIV, they do two tests. One has a high false positive rate but a low false negative rate. If that comes positive, they do a second test that's the other way around.

<comment><USER13> It also turns out that we don't test everyone for HIV. In what I am sure is some form of irony, we probably test more folks for carrying bombs than we do for having HIV. When the numbers show there are more folks with HIV in America than there are those carrying bombs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Everything about this story, right down to the questions, agents involved, luggage inspections and the man's apartment being broken into and searched, fits very well with my own experiences in 2012 with entering the United States. I'm a recent Lebanese immigrant to Canada, male, in my early twenties, and to top it off I work on encryption software. I imagine the only worse thing I could be is an Iranian nuclear scientist.

I was asked questions ranging from whether I am affiliated with Hezbollah to why I was developing encryption software (and one time there was even a technician who asked me about its technical aspects), and specifically detained for questioning more times than I can count.

I was never refused entry, but I just wanted to attest that this man's story is completely credible to me, right down to the fine details he describes.

Possibly an interesting side-story for HN folks: By astronomical coincidence, I bumped into David Petraeus at a strange social event in D.C., after being harassed at the border every single time, and told him conversationally, casually, about my background and what I work on, just to see how he would react, if his reaction would line up with the knee-jerk reaction at the border. He smiled, raised a glass of champagne, and said, "cheers."

<comment><USER15> > I imagine the only worse thing I could be is an Iranian nuclear scientist.

I would like to think such a person would have no problem coming, but just wouldn't be allowed to go back.

<comment><USER16> This is what I find surprising about security checks, don't quite understand. When I entered Israel I was out hailing a cab within minutes of debarking my flight. When I was leaving, they had me detained and searched thoroughly. I couldn't understand why they let me enter in the first place if I was such a suspect personality.

<comment><USER17> Travelling into/out of Israel the extra security checks are all about getting on an airplane (due to historical attacks on air travel). Getting off the plane at Ben Gurion Airport is always easy, but you probably went through extra screening getting _on_ that plane at the other end (in my experience, usually done by Israeli security guards at foreign airports).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Most striking and appalling is the lack of common sense and basic empathy throughout this whole ordeal. For example, he asked multiple times for _water_ , a basic necessity for life, and was denied multiple times. That can't be rationalized in anyway—what did they expect, him to drown someone? His requests as to the nature of his detention were denied. His rights to privacy were utterly ignored. And it goes on…

We need to wake up and see that those that "protect" our safety have reduced us to a state of fear worse than that which we are trying to prevent. We are now being terrorized by our own terrorism prevention. Merely because we happened to clean for bed-bugs and look Middle Eastern.

When will we say enough is enough and do something about it?

<comment><USER19> The most popular argument against the TSA that I have heard? They spend too much of their time searching the "wrong people". You know the kind that wouldn't "hurt a fly"? Weasel phrases that in essence mean that the TSA should do what Israel does. Racial profiling. Not that they don't do enough of it. At least on paper, they try to mess up that by searching white grandmas from the midwest and little blonde girls. Of course, the latter is what America complains the most about really.

<comment><USER18> I've heard the same arguments. Sadly, I have no good answer for _how_ the TSA should do their job. However, treating someone rudely and, to an extent, inhumanly, doesn't fit the bill.

<comment><USER19> The point to realize that America is not fucking Israel. We are not under threat the way Israel is. That is a country that is struggling for its existence; in missile range from Iran; surrounded by hostile forces on all sides.

In America, things are different. Sure the borders are porous; sure there is a low probability that the muslim guy down the street is a terrorist, sure there is a possibility that the war of 1812 could be repeated by the Canadians.

However, is the country really going to live its life based on insignificant probabilities? It has been 12+ years since 9/11\. Surely, there is a time limit after which this insanity can mellow down.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is a manifestation of the US institutionalized xenophobia.

Good manners and taste should keep me from using this submission as another soapbox against how the US views foreigners, but when you see foreigners as enemies, a citizen who looks or acts vaguely "foreign"— I can't offer a precise definition of what "looking foreign" entails, but it's a combination of being a part of a small demographic group, and being a part of an ethnicity that is regularly caricatured in the media and in public discourse—will be treated with the same respect and care dispensed to a real foreigner.

<comment><USER21> It echos of rounding up everyone who is Japanese and throwing them into concentration camps.

It's amazing how many people don't know we had concentration camps in the USA in recent history.

We are just a hop skip and jump away from that again, all it would take is another major nightmare.

<comment><USER18> Link: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment)

I had never heard of this.

<comment><USER22> Are you an American? I'm curious, because in my experience the American interment of Japanese is fairly well known among Americans and Japanese, and not well known by everyone else.

<comment><USER21> Internment is a revisionist word to make it sound less harsh. They were concentration camps.

<comment><USER23> "Concentration camp" has been used to describe Nazi death camps for a long time, and has come to be more-or-less synonymous. None of the Japanese camps systematically killed people, as far as I know. Manzanar was an atrocity, but it was not in the same league as Dachau. To call them both by same name is misleading.

That said, 'internment camp' sounds far too weak. From what I've read, every piece of property they couldn't carry was taken, and they were rounded up and forced to live in horse-stalls for the duration of the war. Every single family, as far as I know, had to not only suffer the indignity of being held without cause, but then had to rebuild from zero after the war. I can't think of a better term, but it needs one.

<comment><USER24> Concentration camp (KZ) sounds about right. The term for places like Dachau and Auschwitz is Vernichtungslager (extermination camp). A concentration camp is not set up for industrial mass-murder of its prisoners.

<comment><USER25> In modern English the distinction is not consistently made. Sometimes you see extermination camps and concentration camps talked about, but other times you see both talked about just as 'concentration camps'.

<comment><USER24> I certainly agree. Concentration camp is an umbrella term, both in German and English. However, if we're talking about the exact type of camps, it makes sense use the proper words and inform readers of the distinction. It's only fair to the victims to use appropriate language and not play down the severity of their situation.

<comment><USER25> Yes, I agree. To be clear, I _do_ prefer using the term "concentration camps" to refer to what the US did to the Japanese, but I understand that others object to that and find their objections fairly reasonable.

<comment><USER26> I wouldn't necessarily argue the use of "concentration camps," but as I said in this thread, my grandparents and many of their family and friends were interned and they all use "internment camp" as the preferred nomenclature. They have generally avoided the use of "concentration camp."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This makes me so angry. This was one of the reasons I got out of consulting. Every fucking time, I would get an enhanced check. Surprisingly enough, it is nothing new. This is something you face if you are a minority. Hell, I remember a friend from back in Africa whose dad got blacklisted in the nineties because he had a beard. Brown catholic guy with a beard got blacklisted. The only difference now is that at least this guy is articulate enough to vocalize organized discrimination.

And Fuck Jet Blue while we are at it.

<comment><USER27> If I were a consultant today, I'd look into buying an RV. No more dirty hotel rooms or questionable restaurant food. And a much lower chance of a TSA encounter.

<comment><USER28> "Yeah can you give me about two weeks? I'm going to take my RV."

-1 client. How bout no.

<comment><USER27> Three possible replies to this.

#1. I have a MiFi device, so I can get started with the preliminaries as my spouse drives. And of course, once I arrive I'll be on-site with your team.

#2. Because I provide my own living arrangements, my expenses will be much lower. I'll charge you diesel from my current location instead of a round-trip business-class airline ticket, and the RV park is $300 a month, vs. $150 a night at a hotel. Since I tow my car, you won't be paying for a rental. And you won't be billed for bi-weekly weekend trips home, as I bring my home with me.

#3. (fudge it a bit...) I can be there as soon as I finish wrapping things up with my current client. Probably on the 9th.

<comment><USER28> When I pay someone $3000 for the day, I expect them to arrive in two hours in a fucking G6.

<comment><USER27> Winston Wolfe arriving in an NSX. Gotcha.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Do not try to talk your way out of anything. And you do NOT have to and should not answer any questions from law enforcement or the TSA. Ask repeatedly: Am I being detained? Am I free to go?

Cops can ask for ID (which you do have to provide, sadly) and can briefly frisk you to look for weapons -- if they have reasonable suspicion to believe a crime has or is about to happen.

One other thing of note and what makes this situation a bit odd is that once you get into a TSA line (basically past the first TSA person), you legally have to complete it. But the TSA is not law enforcement and they cannot detain you.

This is different for foreign nationals trying to enter the country (you can be turned away), but U.S. citizens have a right of return (though you can get held for a long time if they make up some reason to suspect you for simply refusing to answer questions.)

And the OP ought to file a complaint with TSA and FOIA the incident report. He should also talk to CCR about a possible lawsuit. Being detained for 18 hours without food or water is dangerous and illegal.

Also fuck JetBlue. Remember they voluntarily turned over their entire customer database to the feds in 2002 to help with datamining. Sounds to me like JetBlue also violated common carriage rules. A captain can refuse to transport a passenger for any reason, but an airline cannot.

<comment><USER30> > Do not try to talk your way out of anything. And you do NOT have to and > should not answer any questions from law enforcement or the TSA. Ask > repeatedly: Am I being detained? Am I free to go?

Unfortunately, this is a pipe dream. At that point, they can do _whatever they want to you_. Legally? Probably not. But they can still do it, because there is simply nothing you can do except try to fight or escape physically (which won't work). There's no cops to call, no lawyers to call, absolutely nothing you can do. Unless you value your principles more than your time, or even your safety/life, you will compromise those principles to placate your captors.

<comment><USER31> And when do we finally decide that those principles are worth fighting for? When do we decide that "absolutely nothing you can do" is unacceptable?

<comment><USER32> Of course you should fight for your principles, but don't do it in a situation where you're guaranteed to lose. To pick a losing fight when there's no attention, no context, and no message, is not martyrdom. Its just dumb.

To create a Rosa Parks moment, it takes a lot of strategy, planning, and cooperation. Not spur-of-the-moment frustration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> This is pretty harrowing to read. I've been fortunate enough to never go through any of this (but I don't _look_ like a 'terrorist'). I think America needs to take a hard look at itself and the compromises it has made on civil liberties in the name of this supposed 'safety' that we have now.

<comment><USER34> Sadly, I lack the faith that such re-examination of our country will happen anytime soon. The inmates are in charge of the asylum and replacing them is going to take decades.

<comment> at-fates-hands The only way the people take this country back is to start a third party. A REAL third party, somewhere between the moderate liberals and the libertarians.

Without any outside competition, it's just recycling the same type of candidates, with the same policies and with the same disregard for basic civil liberties.

<comment><USER35> > The only way the people take this country back is to start a third party.

If a party was started, it wouldn't be a third party, it'd be something like a fortieth party, excluding strictly regional parties.

The reason additional parties aren't competitive is structural in the electoral systems used in federal and state elections, and adding more parties isn't going to change that.

<comment><USER36> Exactly. So you have to go back yet another step and look at who has power to change the electoral system.

You might think the only answer is a constitutional amendment, which requires a supermajority of Congress, but in fact there's a backdoor: if you have the cooperation of a majority of state governments then you can certify any electors you like. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstat...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact) for an attempt to change the U.S. electoral system in this way.

<comment><USER37> I think that Wikipedia article is far too sanguine about the likelihood that NPVIC would pass Constitutional muster.

First, it's not likely that the wording of Article II truly grants state legislatures _unlimited_ discretion in the selection of electors. A state law that required electors to be men or Methodists would surely be unconstitutional today. And as a result, there's almost certainly an equal protection argument to be made against NPVIC: Sure, each individual voter is participating equally in a larger process to choose the President, but that's not the process prescribed by the Constitution. The process demanded by the Constitution is a state-by-state selection of electors, and if a state legislature wants to have an election, it better be an election in which every voter _of that state_ is participating equally. A thought experiment: Could the state of California pass a law that counted every vote for the electoral slate of the Democratic party twice? Surely not. So how can they pass a law which discounts the vote of every voter except those that voted for the nationwide popular winner?

Second, if this agreement doesn't trigger the Congressional approval requirement of the Compact clause of Article I, I can't imagine what would.

<comment><USER36> Interesting comments, thanks. In fact this article seems to speak to NPVIC and the compacts clause: [http://www.columbia.edu/cu/jlsp/pdf/Summer2009/02Pincus.42.4...](http://www.columbia.edu/cu/jlsp/pdf/Summer2009/02Pincus.42.4.pdf)

<comment><USER37> Yes, something like that note is more or less exactly what I'd expect SCOTUS' position to be. And I don't think it would be a close decision.

Then the question becomes, if Congress endorses the pact, could it go into effect? The success of an equal protection claim against the agreement is a little trickier to forecast, since the justices who typically support a broad reading of equal protection are likely to be the most sympathetic to arguments for eliminating the disparity between the popular vote and the EC. But I think the Court would see NPVIC, rightly, as an "end run" around the amendment process, and require that state elections remain _state elections_ : States do not have the power to facilitate national or interstate plebiscites outside the usual Constitutional order.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> So my brother is a doctor. He told me a story about one of his colleagues, also a doctor, one of the smartest doctors my brother knows (which is no light praise), who happens to be a brown colored Muslim. My brother's brown colored Muslim doctor colleague tells him that it is increasingly humiliating to be constantly harassed by TSA when traveling and that he is thinking of leaving the country. My brother follows up by telling me that one day someone is going to need this brilliant, brown colored Muslim doctor and when that day comes the brilliant doctor may not be here.

The bottom line is that we need to ask ourselves what kind of environment are we creating for the country, it's citizens and it's visitors. At some point very smart people, who happen to be non-white, are going to realize that they would rather be somewhere else and we will be the lesser for it.

<comment><USER39> *its citizens and its visitors

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Last week I flew into SFO from Paris. I was called out at the Paris airport with another person (of Muslim origin). The person at the counter started asking me a few questions, and then asked me if we're colleagues. I said we weren't, and that I don't know the guy. He let me go after that, but I was then flagged for security at every single checkpoint after that. I was pulled for a bag check after scanning my boarding pass. In SFO I was flagged for 'secondary screening' during immigration. The immigration officer took me in a room and basically asked me to give details on pretty much my entire life and activities for the past year. After I got out of there, I was then flagged at the customs, where the officer rummaged through all my bags. I'm terrified now that this will become a regular thing, and that was only because I was accidentally associated with a young Muslim male. I now understand what they must be going through pretty much every single time they fly.

</comment><comment><USER41> It really seems like "Flying While Brown" is this century's "Driving While Black". These and similar stories are shocking and demeaning all involved.

Since the OP is here, and it wasn't totally clear in the story, I'm just wondering: if and when did you point out you were a Hindu not a Muslim†, and whether doing so and possibly additionally pointing out the historical enmity between those two groups might have helped or hindered.

And it seems minor amongst everything else, but them making jokes about your credit card in that situation really pisses me off. Its adding insult to injury. However, it seems to me that people make jokes when they are uncomfortable. That guard probably was uncomfortable with that he was doing, and if he was, maybe he should complain to their bosses, stop doing their job in that way and/or quit.

† Lest anyone get the wrong idea, I do not condone this intimidating, brown- shirted bullshit for anyone; I'm just wondering if it is possible to get away from being pigeon-holed.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Since the OP is here, and it wasn't totally clear in the story, I'm just > wondering: if and when did you point out you were a Hindu not a Muslim†, and > whether doing so and possibly additionally pointing out the historical > enmity between those two groups might have helped or hindered.

A few of the officers did noticeably relax their body posture when I told them I was Hindu (just as the man from Homeland Security relaxed when I told him I didn't even speak Hindi).

I didn't point out the historical conflict between the two groups in India. Given how little they seemed to know about Hinduism in general, I suspect that wouldn't have helped, but who knows.

<comment><USER42> I wonder how it would play out if you were an atheist. Would they assume that you are actually a Muslim denying his faith to get through?

<comment><USER43> Being flippant - it probably wouldn't do you any harm to be carrying a bacon sandwich.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> >In all my life, I have only felt that same chilling terror once before - <USER3> one cold night in September twelve years ago, when I huddled in bed and tried to forget the terrible events in the news that day, wondering why they they had happened, wondering whether everything would be okay ever again.

Wow... just wow.

<comment><USER18> Perhaps the terrorists knew this would happen all along. They knew our paranoia would surpass any efforts they could ever hope accomplish. Instead of terrorizing a few thousand, they could terrorize a whole nation—daily and officially.

It's brilliant and pathetic at the same time.

<comment><USER45> There's no "perhaps" here. Of course they knew this would happen. That's the _whole point_. It's right there in the name: they're _terrorists_ because they _create terror_. The US is now terrified and burning piles of cash and lashing out at its own citizens, which is exactly what the terrorists wanted to happen.

<comment><USER46> Sometimes I wonder. When Seal Team Six stormed his compound, an attack launched from an occupied into a sovereign country and killed him although he was unarmed. I wonder whether he felt dread or achievement.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> The last part really got me thinking, when the author mentioned that his apartment was probably searched by some agency. He would obviously have noted if he had received some sort of notification that his apartment had been legally searched.

Is it legal for the police, the DHS, FBI or any other agency to search your apartment and belongings without notifying you? Are there warrants that will let the authorities do this? What are the circumstances which allow them to do this?

<comment><USER48> I am not a lawyer, but this is how I understand it: Hypothetically if they had issued a FISA warrant to the landlord, then the landlord could have let them search the apartment and _additionally_ would not be legally allowed to inform his tenet that a warrant had been issued [1], must less that his apartment had been searched.

1\. [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1861](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1861) see part (d) "Nondisclosure"

<comment><USER47> Would _any_ other measure than a FISA warrant allow for a search of an apartment without notifying the owner and/or tenants?

<comment><USER49> I'm not a lawyer but I know if you rent an apartment, there are cases when your landlord can let the police into your apartment without a warrant.

<comment><USER50> Why even bother notifying the landlord? I would imagine they wouldn't have qualms about picking a lock.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> How often does this happen and not get blogged about? If you want to help stop this from happening again, I suggest donating to the ACLU: [https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew- give](https://www.aclu.org/donate/join-renew-give)

<comment><AUTHOR> This post was unbelievably painful to write.

I didn't want to relive the experience - I wanted to forget about it, but a friend of mine convinced me that I needed to let people know that these things happen, for that exact reason. That's why I wrote it.

<comment><USER52> I immigrated to the U.S., but I grew up here, it's my home, I love this country (perhaps even more than some people that were born here), and I consider myself an American.

So, from a fellow American, thank you for having the courage to set aside your emotions and write about this experience. People _need_ to hear about these incidents. Your post won't change the political system, but it changed, ever so slightly, the consciousness of thousands of people that read it. It counts for something, and it's important!

Thank you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> "You've got people from five different branches of government all in here - <USER4> don't do this just for fun."

Exactly. You do it because it's a secure, well-paying job; there's an infinite budget to keep bullies like you working.

<comment><USER54> "\- we don't do this just for fun - we have to justify our jobs."

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> To me one of the more troubling aspects of this is that in 2013 and after 12 years, the specialists we have fighting this "war" still have trouble distinguishing between Hindu & Muslim (though obviously Muslims should not be treated like this either). It might be easier for me b/c I'm Hindu but just looking at a name is usually enough to at least get past that part.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know, my surname is _incredibly_ distinctive.

To anybody who's vaguely knowledgeable about these things, it not only points out my nationality, but also which region of India I belong to, my religion, and also my caste[0].

[0] Not that I pay attention to caste, but as you can see, Indian surnames contain a lot if information, to anybody even remotely trained in reading them.

<comment><USER56> You don't have to say _your_ name, for obvious reasons, but would you mind giving an example of an Indian name, and how all of that information is encoded in it? That's REALLY fascinating to me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Any name that ends in "-jee" or "-ji" is a British variant on an Indian Bengali name[0]. Almost anybody who has it (Mukerjee, Banerjee, Chatterjee) is originally from West Bengal, a state in India that borders Bangladesh.

Beyond that's, it's a Hindu name. Almost all Hindu names are specific to a particular caste (the origins of the caste system are simply a precise codification of socioeconomic status, so it's similar to someone being called "a Trump" or "a Kennedy").

Priests can also tell further information from the name, such as the _gotra_ : [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotra](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotra) . In layman's terms, this is a way of identifying one of your earliest known ancestors.

The name even has a Wikipedia page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukherjee](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukherjee)

[0] The British changed a lot of names of both people and places when they were in power - ex., they changed "Mumbai" to "Bombay", although people are now starting to use the original name again.

<comment><USER56> That's really interesting, thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I'm Canadian, Indian heritage, and I practice Hinduism. Based on Aditya's article, I feel like we're probably similar with respect to our "religiousness".

What happened to him is horrendous, and scary. I'm currently living in Palo Alto for work, but every time I travel to and from the USA, I'm always in fear. That said, I have never had an issue; mind you, I've never made the explosives detector beep. I always elect for the pat down too.

While the TSA employees aren't always the friendliest, I haven't had any memorable run-ins with them. On the contrary, they've been actually nice at times. It helps that I always travel clean shaven, and speak to everyone as politely as any Canadian can. :-)

As a counterpoint, the only instance of racial profiling that I encountered while flying was actually in Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada. I was traveling with some colleagues back to Toronto; they were Caucasian, and I was the only non-Caucasian. The security agent at the airport decided to "randomly" select me for explosives screening. She was the lone agent, and it's a tiny airport. No one before or after me was "randomly" screened. No one else was non- Caucasian.

I'm not saying that security agents should be fearful of choosing a non- Caucasian for random screening, lest they be accused of profiling or racism. I'm saying that random screenings should actually be random. Also, I can't verify this hypothesis myself since I sucked at probability theory, but I'm pretty sure that only selecting 1 person out of 250+ passengers traveling through the airport is an insufficient sample size for actually detecting a person who may be carrying explosives; you should probably be randomly selecting more people.

TL;DR - USA yay, Canada nay!

<comment><USER58> That's interesting, because every Canadian airport that I've been to (and admittedly I've been mainly to the larger ones) has had an electronic mat that you stand on that lights up a sign with an arrow to the left or right, telling you whether you should go to the standard metal detectors or the millimeter wave scanners (or a patdown if you so choose). The idea presumably being that when a machine is choosing, it leaves no room for profiling. I've never seen those in any American airport I've been to.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> i was detained by airport security in SFO upon arrival for two hours without setting off any alarms. Security kept asking me questions, disappearing into a room, then coming back asking me the same questions. They basically took the phone number of my entire contact list and told me they were calling them.

After i saw them take a few trips to that room, i started suspecting that they are watching me from somewhere and trying to analyze my behavior. i don't know why that idea came to me, but i realized i was extremely nervous and sweating. So i decided to bluff that i am pissed and this is outrageous.

When the security guys came back i started bluffing a bad mood. i turned the table by asking them questions instead. "is there something wrong?", "people are waiting for me outside" were some things i started saying. One security guy asked me to calm down but i kept on bluffing, i told them my flight was twenty one hours long non stop and that they are wasting more of my time. at this point i wasn't bluffing anymore i got really upset.

They disappeared one last time, i started huffing and puffing, and looking for the cameras that were watching me since i was convinced that was the case. When security came back, they simply told me you're good to go. They jokingly asked if i'd rather stay there. i said yes. They both raised their eyebrows and looked at me surprised as if they were about to interrogate me again. Then i jokingly said, i'd love to stay and watch all these hostesses passing by, at that point there was a team of hostesses passing by and we all laughed. They told me that this helps them endure their night shifts!

But the funny part was when i reached home, and started calling my relatives whom the security officers said they are calling. My relatives all said that they received no call, and told me of course those guys always bluff. I don't think i can take security seriously after that incident ever.

</comment><comment><USER60> Do not talk to the police.

Do not talk to the police.

Do not talk to the police.

[http://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc](http://youtu.be/6wXkI4t7nuc)

Police includes any federal agents, border patrol, CBP, et c.

Do not talk to the police. You cannot talk your way out of being arrested or explain your way on to a flight. They record everything and even an accidental misstatement is a felony.

You gave them address history, work configurations, business associate information... why? Did you somehow think you could talk them out of being afraid? This sort of breach of privacy (volunteering private corporate information to cops) is a firing offense in my book.

Do not talk to the police.

<comment><USER61> Umm, you definitely can explain your way on to a flight.

When a TSA agent asks if they can search your bag, saying "yes" has always lead to me catching my flight, and I'm pretty sure saying "Let me talk to my lawyer" would lead to me missing my flight. Also when they asked if there was any reason you might have set off the bomb detectors, answering with a valid reason can definitely lead to you catching your flight.

However, as soon as its clear you're going to miss your flight, I would agree its the time to stop talking.

<comment><USER62> When they take you to a separate room, that's when you stop talking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> This "We have some female flight attendants. Would you be able to follow their instructions?"

They assume he was a Muslim and 'off course Muslims have problems following instructions from women'.

</comment><comment><USER64> That's awful. I'm half-Mexican and look like a really tan Jewish man and the treatment I received in the wake of 9/11 (having also been the first time I decided to grow a beard) was awful. I had to show two forms of ID to deposit money and the bank for some reason was rude and ended up refusing to let me deposit my paycheck, several people threatened to beat me up and chased me out of stores, and I wasn't able to make it through security at the airport without a "random" patdown until last year. I'm not even Middle-Eastern, I just KIND OF look it. I can only imagine what others go through.

</comment><comment><USER65> A few years ago, a US border official didn't even know about my visa type (O1) and put me through secondary because he didn't know that the visa existed.

This also happened on the US/CA border to me - the official told me I had the wrong visa to which I responded I had the correct visa. We went round 15 times in a row back and forth, with me stating it was the correct visa until he gave up and let me go.

A close friend of mine also had a gun put on the table to intimidate him in a secondary screening when coming from the UK to the US.

So much for wanting to be an "immigration magnet" like the Google hangout tomorrow with the CTO of the US.

[http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/08/21/we-immigrant- geeks...](http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/08/21/we-immigrant-geeks-making- us-geek-magnet)

</comment><comment><USER48> The end of the story sounds suspiciously like Zersetzung:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi#Zersetzung](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi#Zersetzung)

<comment><USER46> I recently read an article about the Stasi. I was strangely fascinated by Zersetzung - as I understand it, one of the main objectives was to supply other people with evidence against your own sanity. "[R]eplacing one variety of tea with another" \- No really, that and other ridiculous things happened. Agents of the Stasi went into homes and did that. It is designed to make you seem like a lunatic when you try to explain yourself and get help. Imagine that, being subject to a procedure designed to make you feel utterly helpless and alone. You are right and everything is real, but everything real is now designed to seem strange to other people.

I wonder why wikipedia translates it as "corrosion" or "undermining". The term Zersetzung is more often used as meaning a biological process of degradation. It's dissolution. It's being eaten away by acid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> The United States (Government) are a bunch of unenlightened, racist, xenophobic people bent on oppressing people by treating every non english/anglo-saxon as a terrorist. Please, someone tell me this isn't the case in an absolute sense.

<comment><USER67> oh, Hi Noam Chomsky.

<comment><USER67> I lose points every time I criticize Noam Chomsky. Who are the other sacred cows on HN that if you criticize you automatically lose Karma? I'll take a stab:

Noam Chomsky Paul Graham Elon Musk Jeff Bezos

<comment><USER68> That wasn't a criticism. It was a short, sarcastic jeer with poor grammar.

<comment><USER67> and what tokenizer screamed from what was presumably his Mom's basement between sessions of WoW was additive to the conversation?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> It seems most commenters here are missing the fact that _somebody had been in his home_. Without notifying him of the fact, he just noticed that things were slightly off, picture missing, etc. Is this legal in America? I mean, don't they have to tell him at some point if his private premises have been breached? Or are there special rules when you say "terrorism!", like in the London airport detention case?

</comment><comment><USER70> Look at it from the TSA/Police/FBI perspective: Someone goes to the airport on the first day of Ramadan, refuses the scan, sets off the chemical detectors, then asks to leave. During further interview he indicates that he hasn't eaten yet that day, is travelling for religious purposes, has just moved and is travelling alone. This further investigation doesn't seem insane to me. In fact if there was a clear profile for someone I would investigate it would be him.

That said, it doesn't hurt to show basic human decency.

<comment><USER71> I'm a religious American Muslim who fasts every day of Ramadan every year. So, what you're saying is that if I am Muslim, it's Ramadan, I'm fasting, and I'm traveling for religious purposes - that's suspicious? What your religion or ethnicity is, or how religious you are, or what your specific religious practices are - none of these should even be a factor to consider in security to the TSA/police/FBI/etc. I find this view to be utterly disgusting.

<comment><USER72> _who fasts every day of Ramadan every year_

Muslims calling Ramadan "a fasting month" is a serious devaluation of the word "fasting". It's not actual fasting if you only eat at night. It's fasting if you don't eat for at least full day. Say, eating once or twice only every other day.

Also, doing this for one month in a year is another sham. How very useful!

<comment><USER73> Dear gngeal, I represent "the Muslims", yes all 1.6 billion of them. Upon receiving your comment we immediately held an emergency meeting (because we care) and decided to apologize for carrying out this sham for the last 14 centuries. What would you have us call it instead? I'm sure it'll make a huge difference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> On an offbeat note, this reminds me of the only time I've ever been thoroughly patted down at an airport. It was in Shreveport and during a weekday, with very little foot traffic. I was with a friend who looks like the classical all-American girl and me, well, I'm a minority but a "Golden Minority" (being facetious about that term, not serious...). Anyway, the TSA people were very nice about pulling us aside and patting us down and nominally going through our stuff. I thought it was weird but then I looked behind us and saw a woman and child, both dressed in hijab, who subsequently also received the full pat- and-search routine.

<comment><USER16> Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "Golden Minority?"

<comment><USER74> I was going to joke about how you must not have grown up in the 80s-90s, but doing a Google search just now, I see that I might have used the wrong term...

The better known term is "model minority," in which Asians, in America, were held up as what minorities _should_ be like: smart, hard-working, non- confrontational to the status quo:

[http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/education/asia...](http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/education/asians- often-burdened-as-model-minority-20120511)

I swear "golden minority" was also a common term, because Asian-Americans were perceived as achieving toward high-pay professions (doctors, engineers, etc) and, well, we're also referred to as "yellow"...but there seem to be very usages of "golden minority" and Asian

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> Don't fly in Ramadan? I would rather say: don't fly to USA. I'm from a muslim country but I'm not muslim, but I would never ever fly to the US.

</comment><comment><USER76> I'm European, I think I'll never go to the USA. They are just too aggressive/paranoid with security. Of course, I have no rights there.

<comment><USER77> Well, you are still kind of lucky. If you come from so-called "developing countries" or middle east don't even think about going to Europe or USA. The attitudes are almost the same besides US having better devices and more officers.

<comment><USER59> i'm form the middle east. i go to europe and USA often. although i was patted down twice in the US, one random check and the other for no apparent reason that i describe in another comment here (which was hilarious by the way), the worst experience was going to Netherlands, at the final check point the officer looked at my passport, asked me what i was coming for, and then gave me a disgusted look and handed me the passport back. That was really awful. I had so much fun there though the people were exceptionally welcoming. i would highly recommend middle easterners to travel as much as they can, safely of course.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER78> When the TSA Agent said he wasn't detained yet refused to return his stuff, was that not theft?

<comment><AUTHOR> IANAL, and I would love to know this.

But at the time, what else could I do, besides wait for the police to show up?

<comment><USER47> For the lawyers out there, this sounds like an excellent business opportunity. 20-minute legal emergency response to people in trouble at the security checkpoint. Could assist directly with regards to asserting rights, filing suits if the passengers' rights have been violated and extracting every dime that can legally be extracted from airlines that involuntarily re-book passengers.

Sorry that you had to go through this, and thank you for the very well-written account of how this ordeal looked first-hand.

<comment><USER79> It would be nice if there were some sort of dead man's switch functionality in-case phone access was denied. I'm not sure exactly how this would work, but I think it's an interesting idea.

<comment><USER80> Use GPS and cell tower tracking to determine if you are inside an airport. If you are inside for longer than X minutes, send a message to selected people stating that.

<comment><USER79> People sometimes spend much more time in airports than they'd like to for legitimate, non-interrogative reasons.

Perhaps take into account authenticated activity, or lack thereof? Activate this special functionality when you anticipate possible issues (e.g. going through airport security) and you've got a timer waiting on some element from Action Set Y to occur every X minutes before notifying emergency contact(s) Z, specified previously.

Sounds like an idea...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Wow. I'm really not sure how to respond to this.

I think the best thing might be that the statue of liberty is dismantled for now and put away in storage, just in case it's ever needed again.

</comment><comment><USER82> [http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/](http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/)

Call your representative today and talk to them about this story if you are disturbed by it. Please, you have to speak to have a voice.

<comment><USER83> They have to be listening for you to be heard.

<comment><USER82> Not true at all! My rep. is very kind and does actually listen to her constituents. I won't say the same for my senators but my rep is pretty level headed and listens to her constituents.

Also, your apathy is what is causing the problem! Get out there! VOTE! Talk to your elected officials. Absent you, the lobbyists and mountebanks out there sure will. Monopolize your rep.'s time. You matter! You count! Act like it!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> Sad but lets not make the mistake of thinking this is limited to the United States. It's how most governments respond to what they feel, correctly or not, are security threats. I'm of indian origin as well and was traveling in India a few years ago. At the time, in response to the Mumbai attacks, the government had instituted a requirement for non Indian nationals to require permission to re enter the country should they leave within 2 months. I found this out when I arrived, as I was scheduled to travel to another Asian country and return within a week. While traveling, I visited the Indian embassy and sat in the commissioners office while he was on the phone and, later, while he was purchasing bananas from a vendor visiting his office. He took my passport and told me to return the next day- which screwed up my trip- but I did it. After my visit was complete I went back to India. When leaving India for the US, they noticed I had left the country within 2 months. I pointed out I received permission from the local embassy. They then claimed upon return to India I should have registered with a local government agency. I explained I didn't know this, no one had told me. They removed me from my flight. I checked into a hotel and the following business day went to the agency. When it was my turn, they asked for copies of where I was staying, who my local relatives were, copies of their passports, copies of their electric bills - fortunately I had a uncle who helped me and sweet talked them a bit. I got a permission booklet, that night tried to rebook my flight, but nothing was available on my airline all week. I had to return to work, so i spent $800 and bought a one way ticket on another airline.

Maybe not as humiliating as what this poor guy had to go through, but my point is, governments can act incredibly irrationally in response to security threats. I realize the need to keep its citizens secure - but when they claim they don't want the terrorists to win, one has to wonder if they haven't, in fact, actually won already by slowly decimating our democracy.

<comment><USER85> I went through the same BS about not registering myself. The system is incredibly bureaucratic and frustrating. But on the other hand, you never really threatened.

</comment></comment><comment><USER86> I am a US resident.

Flying from France back into the states through customs in Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport was the worst experience I've had with TSA.

First of all, a woman who was supposed to be managing the maze of lines tried to take my passport from my hand when I wasn't looking. I held it tight as she attempted to pull it away from me and she was clearly mad, yelling "I'm trying to help you!"

In line for the body scanner I was pulled aside for one of the random pat- downs. I didn't think about it at the time but it could've easily been the TSA employee who tried to take my passport form my hand.

The employee who was supposed to be giving the pat down was obviously reluctant to do it and asked me 4 times if I was okay with being touched inappropriately. I agreed 4 times, it took him 10 minutes to actually start giving me the pat down.

While I was being patted down another employee asked me if the bag that went through the scanner was mine. I said yes.

He began removing my clothes and charge cords and a few items I had purchased in France, and spreading them out on a table away from me.

I told him to stop and he asked why. I said I didn't want him to go through my belonging while I wasn't there and he didn't respond, but stepped away from the table.

After the pat down I re-assembled my luggage and continued boarding the plane. Just as I was about to leave security the officer came and put his hand on my shoulder and said that I "wasn't done with the security procedure yet."

He said I had to stand back from the table while he removed the items from my bag which I had just put back in. Apparently he removed my laptop and set it in one of the item-scanner bins at the end of the conveyor belt. He took 15 minutes to go through my bag, put everything back inside and sent me on my way.

Just before boarding I noticed my laptop had not been placed back in my bag. I darted back to security where the previous staff had been replaced by all-new employees. I spent the next 30 minutes trying to get them to dig through bins to find my MacBook, which was buried in a stack on the other side of security.

I made my flight by minutes.

</comment><comment><USER87> Wow this is shocking... I think a lot of this is probably related to the issues that the "bullshit jobs" article that was up on HN earlier this week ( [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6236478](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6236478) ) covered. A pithy quote I heard from someone earlier this week seems to ring true here: If Al Qaeda's plan was to cause a massive overreaction that would destroy the very idea of America from within: wow, good plan.

</comment><comment><USER88> I couldn't even finish reading it - The fact that someone is being questioned about what their religion is, is not something I would expect in the land of the free. I'm not religious at all, but if someone in authority asked me my religion just to make sure that I'm not one of 'those people', it would piss me off to no end.

</comment><comment><USER89> The problem here is that he set off the explosives detectors. Regardless of what color skin he had or what religion they thought he was, the second he did that, repeatedly, he was in for a lot of questioning.

<comment><USER90> I'm sure that there is a common way to make explosives with pesticides, but it's more common to use pesticides to kill pests. Right? The sensors obviously create false positives in most cases I'd expect.

Giving people water should be a bare minimum requirement in any interrogation.

<comment><USER91> _Giving people water should be a bare minimum requirement in any interrogation._

They could be a member of Cobra, who have devised a way to make explosives out of water so they can turn the world's oceans into bombs.

You never know.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER92> My plan:

1\. Dress in ethnically ambiguous clothing.

2\. Coat myself in insecticide before heading to the airport.

3\. Look shifty.

4\. Refuse the millimeter wave machine.

5\. Get Detained.

6\. Take off ethnically ambiguous clothes.

7\. Scream: "I'm a white male... what now bitches!"

<comment><USER93> If you're going to go through that much trouble, the Colorado School of Mines does a high-speed photography workshop every so often. You are photographing explosives of various types. I would imagine clothes worn during the workshop would be very interesting to airport scanners with a bonus of learning about high-speed photography.

<comment><USER92> I have been wanting to book a flight to Colorado.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER94> This story had nothing to do with Islam/Muslims/Ramadan, but for reasons only known to the author, he has implicated every bit of his story and ordeal to Muslims. This is just amazing.

</comment><comment><USER95> If they denied you water for 18 hours, you have a lawsuit. Get hold of a lawyer.

What I can't understand is why they were so motivated that they had people doing leg work - they had field agents check you out, go to your apartment. That's a lot of effort in contrast to an electronic trawl of your records.

You must have really scared them. I really wonder what chemical it was that showed up on the sensor...

<comment><USER96> They didn't deny him water for 18 hours. The '18 hour' clock started when he ate dinner the night before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER97> Hey chimeracoder,

I went to school with you and saw you at some ADI events and hackathons from time to time. Even if I dont know you more than in passing, hearing something like this about somebody I know hits much closer to home than hearing it on the news. There isn't much I can say that hasn't already been said here, and you probably won't read through these hundreds and hundreds of comments, but if you read this, I just want to say that I'm so sorry. This is disgusting, and I hope that you never have to deal with a clear violation of rights like this again.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you thank you thank you thank you so much for writing this comment.

I had no idea that this blog post would blow up the way it has, reaching far more people than I ever thought. I originally wrote it with people like you in mind - people who know me personally, and otherwise would never have realized that someone they know personally was affected by our policies like this.

The post was really difficult to write - I didn't want to have to relive that experience again just to put it onto the page - but seeing a comment like this makes it worth it.

<comment><USER97> I saw the title earlier today and didn't read it, but then when it later had so many comments I figured it was important. I was pretty shocked when I recognized the picture and github username. I'm really glad that you did write it, and I'm glad that I could make it worthwhile for you :)

Safe travels,

Ryder

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER98> I am a Muslim, and I share openly my thoughts on religion, faith, and related subjects. I frankly do not mind being singled out (once in a while) because I am Muslim as long as it is it is not assumed from the beginning that I am guilty.

What I have a problem with is people assuming someone is already guilty because they are Muslim, or Black, or White, or Hindu, or short, or Blonde. When you are start there it becomes a struggle for one person to prove they are innocent and it rarely ends well because from the get go it is set for someone to be wrong as opposed to both parties getting to the truth.

I was once asked by a FBI agent to meet and answer questions, which I did happily and readily. He was very polite, and more importantly, he started with an explanation of the situation and why he had to ask questions, we had a chat, and that was the last time I heard about it.

</comment><comment><USER90> This is one of the best written accounts I have read in a very long time, the ending is just beyond belief, but in this climate I'd say totally believable. It says to me one thing so clearly that has been somewhat lost in all of this:

WE MAY HAVE STOPPED TERRORIST ATTACKS BUT THE TERRORISTS DEFINITELY WON.

</comment><comment><USER99> I realized on the drive home that if we could sneak a sed script into the tools used to write appropriation bills in Congress, and had it swap budget allocation for NSA and NASA (only one letter difference!) next year we could be looking at half a dozen space stations and a base on the moon!

</comment><comment><USER100> Just reading this raised my hackles.

The only thing I really feel like saying is "I'm sorry", as you'll never get any sympathy from this system's enablers.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. Even though it's not coming from the TSA/FBI/et al., it means a lot.

<comment><USER101> Brave of you to share. Hope you get your photo back soon and some free flyer miles or something. You deserve better. We all do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER102> I couldn't even make it to the end. Land of the free, home of the brave.

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here. I'd recommend reading until the end - unfortunately, it didn't end when I was released from airport.

<comment><USER103> Have you considered filing a FOIA for raids on your apartment & the painting?

<comment><AUTHOR> I didn't. I've never actually had to file a FOIA request before - is this something that would be available through one?

<comment><USER104> I would file one on yourself with all relevant agencies. It's a painless process (I emailed mine to the FBI), albeit a slow one.

<comment><USER103> What did you get back? Anything redacted?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Holy hell. For what little it's worth, I am so sorry you had to go through that.

There is so much horrifying with that story it makes me shudder.

</comment><comment><USER105> Every time I visited the US I was subject to so called "secondary" checks that looked more like interrogation, so I understand the author's feeling very well. Last time I was denied entry at all. I'm just a regular remote IT contractor living in Canada who happened to have a passport of an Eastern European country. I don't want to come to the US anymore because of this humiliating experience of crossing the US border. I'd better focus on serving customers in Canada. Canada feels much more like a _country for people_ .

</comment><comment><USER106> what does this have to do with Ramadan? The title should more be around bug sprays, insecticides and wanting a pat down.

Only because he was asked if he was fasting and wanted special prayer arrangement doesn't justify the use of Ramadan here.

I wish it would have not happened to him, but I feel certain things gave rise to the situation which could happen to anyone during any time.

</comment><comment><USER107> What do we do?

For at least a decade, but more markedly so in the last eighteen months or so, I can't get on the Internet without seeing a story like this. Authorities of all sorts ignore any laws they feel like to provide the appearance of security against threats that usually don't exist in the first place. Revelations in technology that show absolutely nothing is secure unless you are manually rolling dice to construct one-time pad keys, and god help you if you try to store them on a post-2000 PC. I'm coming steadily closer to panic, as a citizen, as a technology professional, and as a human being. What can we do? No rational discussion of this ever takes place, both online and off, because of the hordes of comments insisting that the US will NEVER be as bad as a real authoritarian regime NO MATTER WHAT, and the equally radical comments that we are already WORSE than the USSR. So far as I am convinced, there is nothing an individual can do. This is a Big Problem, and going back over history texts, political activism only solves about one Big Problem per decade. So, for the sake of argument, I ask we suspend whatever structural beliefs we have. Assume, for this comment thread, that the current decline into a rightless police state will continue unabated, only stopped by the random sudden social upheaval that, without fail, takes place sooner or later. What can an individual do to be safe, or feel safe? Anything? Or is the only option to shut up, take our Xanax, and live with the Cold War-esque existential fear that you could be violated or killed at any time just because an agent doesn't like your ethnicity/choice of cleaning supplies/fact that you work in technology?

<comment><USER108> Personally, I'm making plans to leave the US. Since few people will listen to me when I explain how bad things are, I do not believe effecting change is a reasonable course of action. Instead, I will try to internationalize my business and my life so that I can interact with pleasant people and escape tyranny.

<comment><USER109> What other countries are better options?

<comment><USER108> Countries I'm researching: Panama, Chile, Singapore, Hong Kong, Vietnam. All have ups and downs. Read the works of Doug Casey, Andrew Henderson (Nomad Capitalist), and Simon Black (sovereignman.com) for information on how to get offshore corporations and bank accounts so you can do business overseas, and second passports so you can optionally be unaffiliated with the US and don't have to worry about having your passport revoked by the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER110> _I took a look at the ID and calmly pointed out that it said "August 2013" in big letters on the ID, and that the numbers "8 /10" meant "August 10th, 2013", not "August, 2010". I added, "See, even the expiration sticker says 2013 on it above the date". He studied the ID again for a moment, then walked out of the room again, looking a little embarrassed._

ISO-8601 date format people!

[http://xkcd.com/1179/](http://xkcd.com/1179/)

</comment><comment><USER111> People have some funny ideas about the "explosive detector" machine. It can rightly be called an "explosive detector" in exactly the same sense that the TSA clown who takes everyone's regular-sized liquid containers and throws them away can be called an "explosive detector."

There might be an explosive there, but there almost always isn't, and the whole thing is for show.

</comment><comment><USER112> "Ironically, when I went to the other terminal, I was able to get through security (by walking through the millimeter wave machines) with no problem."

Why go through all of that only to give into the body scanners!

<comment><USER113> Presumably at that point he just wanted to get on with his trip.

<comment><USER112> Why opt out in the first place then? Isn't that like boycotting the bus up until the point where you realize you have to get to work and then deciding it is too much trouble to walk so you take it anyways?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER114> I asked JetBlue about this (via Twitter…) and they said ( [https://twitter.com/JetBlue/status/370659852546109441](https://twitter.com/JetBlue/status/370659852546109441) )

""@mherdeg The govt agencies can speak for themselves. We stand by our crewmember's decision, and regret the inconvenience this caused.""

Interesting.

<comment><AUTHOR> In another tweet, they claim that the responsibility lies with the government agencies who screened me: [https://twitter.com/chimeracoder/status/370663486470103040](https://twitter.com/chimeracoder/status/370663486470103040)

(which seems to contradict your tweet: [https://twitter.com/cgervasi/status/370675125244284928](https://twitter.com/cgervasi/status/370675125244284928))

If that's the case, I'm not sure why the person who denied me boarding was the JetBlue agent, not a TSA agent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER115> Hindu guy here. I'm sure I'll be buried but the last time I opted out of a millimeter wave scan, I was also tested for explosives. I did set it off multiple times and was taken to the back room for a private screening. I was held in there, questioned for ten minutes, then I was on my way. I have not opted out since.

</comment><comment><USER116> As others have said, horribly misleading title. It has nothing to do with Ramadan! How about don't fly when you have some weird chemical on you that sets off airport security.

</comment><comment><USER117> What's happening? Where is the Hacker News I knew? I have up-voted at least 4 grayed-out comments that were opposing the prevalent view (that TSA is pure tyranny, an US government by extension) but nothing our of the ordinary - people contributing their opinion to the conversation.

Don't downvote if you disagree!

<comment><USER118> While I personally don't agree with some of those who were grayed-out, I agree with this sentiment.

Thing is, I sometimes want to know how many people disagree with a comment. I almost wish there were thumbs up/down icons to signify how many people agree with a comment, separate from the downvote/up system that indicates if a comment is off-topic or has no content.

</comment></comment><comment><USER119> So what does the Ramadan have to do with this? It could have happened any month.

<comment><USER120> It has. They suspected he was somehow Muslim because ... wait for it .. he has brown skin. They suspected he was a terrorist ... because they wrongly suspected he was Muslim ... because they think most terrorist are Muslim. They suspected he was going to blow up a plane as a "celebration" or somehow connected with Ramadan.

<comment><USER119> By making those assumptions you are just as bad as them.

<comment><USER120> I didn't make the assumptions I am guessing what assumptions they made and what assumption he thinks they made about him.

Read the blog again and then my comment what show which one of those horrible assumptions I made. Those are guess of why he was profiled more than he should have been. If you look closely all the sentences start with "They suspected" not "I think he has brown skin and thus is a terrorist".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER121> I've had this happen to me before as well, but in Australia, and the similarities and differences are interesting.

I set off the explosive scanner for TNT when flying to see my family at Christmas (and was told straight away what I was found positive for). Was immediately taken into another room with my carry-on, and had my checked-in luggage located and brought in as well.

A lot of things were very similar - I had the full pat down, the numerous questions, and everything was looked over. However they did it all just once. They took everything out of my bag and it was full of Christmas presents, which they then wanted to open, but I persuaded them to put them through the X-ray scanner still wrapped.

I also had a 'guard' watching over me and making sure I didn't leave, and multiple people coming in to ask me questions and verify my answers.

In the end they were able to X-ray all my stuff to their satisfaction, re- checked my bag, and I was was on my way in about 20-30 minutes.

They never did figure out why I set it off btw, and it's never happened again. Very strange.

The thing that sticks out to me from the experience, was how on alert everyone got once the explosive detector went off. Suddenly everyone was _very_ uneasy and wary of me, especially when it came up positive a second time.

So although I think the recent incident was poorly handled, I do understand to some extent the measures in place - i.e. being taken away to another room to be checked, having all their stuff looked over, etc.

And although it seems nuts they didn't let him leave, if he did show positive for explosives then what else should they have done? It's a difficult problem - surely they are compelled to investigate him if that happens?

Does anyone know if it would even be legal to search his place while he was away btw? Surely not, since he checked out and they were happy to let him go.

And how ridiculous Jet Blue denied him boarding (and yet were happy to let him board the next day!)

</comment><comment><USER122> I get the feeling that we need public defenders in all airports and at borders. The complete lack of an adversarial process there is downright dangerous.

<comment><AUTHOR> I can't decide whether I love or hate the idea of this generation's "amublance chasers" being the "airport security line chasers".

</comment></comment><comment><USER123> Initial thoughts:

It sounds like the phone was nearby during this entire inexcusable ordeal. Too bad it wasn't recording the entire time.

The names of everybody involved in detaining or interviewing or interrogating should be released and they should explain from their point of view.

How can we stop the TSA from thinking religious boom boom terrorism is a real thing in the US when it obviously isn't?

[Sidenote: I've had the "uncontrollable shaking without being cold" thing before too (due to lack of food). It's really bad. Only solution is to eat something immediately. The shakes should go away within 30 seconds. I imagine if you let them continue for more than a few minutes, you'll collapse/blackout/seize/Something Bad™.]

<comment><USER124> Oh for crying out loud. A well-nourished human body can go for between a week and a month without food. Nothing bad would have happened to his health (he stated he is not diabetic) after a day or so without eating.

It was probably because of the inexcusable treatment and stress that he received. That is more than enough to be angry about, no need to make stuff up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER125> I find similarities between this incident and the interrogation technique of the secret police in East Berlin. I learned about this in a movie I watched a few days back- "The Lives of Others" or "Das Leben der Anderen" (2006). The secret police used to detain people and question them repeatedly for many hours while forcing them to sit on lie detectors with their palm faced down under their thigh. Under pressure, innocent people would start to answer different versions to the same questions, while suspected revolutionists would keep narrating the same 'stories'. I think sooner or later every government starts acting the same way. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

<comment><USER120> Great movie! But those were not lie detectors they were pads to collect sweat.

Those were put in jars, cataloged, and saved for later. They would be used in hunting someone down using dogs. It basically saved their scent and then years later if they want to find you and you are running way they could bring in the K-9 unit.

<comment><USER125> Thank you for correction, I missed those details.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER126> I'm a random American white guy with an insulin pump. I (my pump) set off the explosives detector once. They took me into a back room, closed the door, patted me down twice, took all my bags apart and swabbed EVERY single item (like 60+ things) and ran them through the detector. After none of them set it off, the guy say "That was weird, go ahead" and I left.

Given my anecdote and the OP's anecdote the racial and religious profiling aspect of things is clear. Also, the TSA's willful ignorance of just a few basic religious details that I (and presumably any other educated person) learned by simply paying attention and reading, is chilling.

<comment><USER127> slightly tangential, but I wonder how they would/could treat sterile medical equipment (insulin vials, syringes, epi-pens, etc).

It's not something that's exactly conducive to hasty disassembly and swab analysis.

I suppose the paranoid approach would be to confiscate it on any suspicion, and require you to purchase/be credited with 'certified' replacements post- security, although I'm sure there are exotic things that would be tricky to get everywhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER128> The TSA is to brown men as what cops are to black men.

</comment><comment><USER129> Sigh, it's this hard even being a citizen and resident of the country. As a former international student, and now just living here and working (and soon to be booted because...immigration laws), this experience is so commonplace whenever interacting with the government it's not even funny. These topics on HN are commonly discussions about curbed American freedom under the government.

But there's a significant topic of interest for people all around the world when the (arguably) most powerful nation decided to stop playing Mr. Nice Guy with even its own citizens, and what that could mean for the rest of us.

I have pretty much stopped traveling except out of necessity (I cut down from 12 flights a year till 2011 to 1 flight in 2 years since) because of the huge hassle and strain security can become. Imagine what it was like when my (Indian) passport had Arabic stamps on it because it was issued in Oman (where I lived before I came here). I'm not even religious, but I was so often picked for "random checking" the booth probably knew me by name.

What bothers me more than the inconvenience and trauma this causes for people like me and the OP (although that bothers me a lot), is the _massive waste of resources_ this form of civilian harassment is -- at least 7 officers were involved shuttling documents of some guy going on vacation for 4+ hours. All because of their (grossly incorrect, at that) racial profiling, lack of cultural knowledge, and general fear of people who don't look like themselves. Geez.

</comment><comment><USER130> This is just disgusting. I feel terrible just reading it. Like I'm invading this person's privacy simply by bearing witness to his pain at the hands of these imbeciles.

</comment><comment><USER131> What I don't understand: If you are detained for several hours, why don't people call a lawyer? Why did he speak to the police (end even the FBI!) without legal counsel?

<comment><AUTHOR> As I mentioned in the post, they claimed I "wasn't being detained". I asked more than once to use my phone; they denied me.

Maybe I could make that more clear.

<comment><USER132> It sounds like the best course of action is to just have an attorney present if a situation like this happens again. You knew you were being detained, no matter what the authorities said. As far as I know, there are no provisions anywhere that forbid you from having a lawyer present when and wherever you want.

<comment><USER133> I often see "have an attorney present" arguments, but they make me wonder - can you really afford to have an attorney on retainer if you're not independently wealthy? Or is it as simple as calling a plumber and asking them to come over?

Should I shop for an attorney and keep their contact information with me just in case I might need one?

Will the attorney be willing to come over at a moment's notice if I've never used their services before?

<comment><USER132> I suspect it is like any market. Some will be there within the hour, some will need ramp-up time. However, regardless of the attorney, I would suspect that any criminal defense lawyer would be able to effectively navigate the particular situation at hand. If it were me, I would tell them they can arrest me and charge me, or let me on my way. I would be shocked if the results of this finicky machine are admissible in court (given that polygraph results are not). Does anyone know whether or not that is the case?

Come get me, coppers!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER134> I'm boycotting Jet Blue.

<comment><USER124> What is the superior airline that you will be transferring your business to? Let us all know :P

<comment><USER134> Seeing where the airline operates and since I'm not in US, I won't have a chance to boycott the airline. However, if I ever get a chance to travel to/out of US(which is bound to happen), Jet Blue will not be my airline of choice.

If my friends happen to have to use an airline, I will let them know what I've heard of the airline, and suggest them to find an alternative. That's pretty much it. It's not much, but I won't forget the name Jet Blue.

<comment><USER124> You will be disappointed with the alternatives. I think you are not allocating blame correctly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> mark-r I'm sure this isn't the end of the story either. He'll be on the watch list now, and subject to additional scrutiny for every flight forevermore.

</comment><comment><USER135> As a TSA officer if a person/his baggage sets off an explosive detector alarm, I think I wont let him fly until I am fully convinced that he is traveling with no malicious intent. How soon and how well I get convinced will depend on how competent I am at my job. Clearly the officers that handled this person were incompetent, unsympathetic and ignorant. That is a different problem altogether nothing related to freedom.

</comment><comment><USER136> I've wanted to move from Australia to Silicon Valley for a few years now. I mean, I'm an entreprenurial software engineer: it's where I'm _supposed_ to be, right?

But, over the past few years, I've learnt more and more about the US of A. And I don't like how things are done over there.

Sure, Australia isn't perfect (if I hear anyone say "Boat People" once more, I'm going to punch them right in the face), and I'm a young, single upper middle class White male: I shouldn't have any issues, right?

But that's not the point. The fact that the US and even the UK have ended up this paranoid...

I no longer want to move. Hell, I want to move back to New Zealand to be honest, if it gets any worse here in Aus.

And that's a loss for me personally, and for your country as well.

:(

\----

EDIT

Please convince me that it's not all that bad... that rights aren't being eroded, and that I wouldn't have to turn a blind eye to prejudiced treatment against my neighbours. Convince me that I should still come...

I really want to, but I'm honestly frightened of what might happen to me if I do.

<comment><USER137> Canada seems to be opening doors for tech entrepreneurs. If I have the chance, that's probably where I'd like to go.

</comment></comment><comment><USER138> The greatest damage done by 9/11 was not the actual destruction of the towers and the deaths of all those people, but the (sadly predictable) _reaction_ of our government, particularly the Patriot Act, the creation of the TSA and the Dept. of Homeland Security, and the emboldening of the NSA, CIA, FBI, and the NYPD.

</comment><comment><USER139> Extremely disturbing.

This was well written and very interesting to read, but I do wonder how one could recall the details so specifically?

<comment><USER140> Traumatic events can leave much stronger memories, almost like they're burned in.

<comment> a-priori Yes, they're called flashbulb memories and they feel 'stronger' and more detailed than other memories. People assume that they're therefore accurate, but really, they're no more accurate than other memories.

In fact, the repeated recall can cause them to become distorted over time.

If you want to preserve a memory, write it down immediately while it is fresh. Don't trust that an old memory is accurate.

<comment><USER140> Wikipedia says the difference between flashbulb memories and traumatic memories is stress, and that there is "a shortage on studies regarding personal events such as accidents or trauma".

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashbulb_memory#Flashbulb_mem...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashbulb_memory#Flashbulb_memories_compared_to_traumatic_memories)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashbulb_memory#Critique_of_f...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flashbulb_memory#Critique_of_flashbulb_memory_research)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER141> "Oh Beautiful, for spacious skies, for amber waves of grain..."

What has happened to my beautiful country? The one that I learned about in 2nd grade, the one that always gave me a warm and fuzzy feeling, the one that I was proud of even before I knew what 'proud' meant. Where is that dreamy land?

In a way, we do it to ourselves. We elect officials that are 'tough on crime' that support enormous police forces. We empower the police state (not just the police but the gov't at large) out of fear. People in this country need to grow a pair. One of my friends actually said something to the effect of, "No, I don't care if the NSA searches through my private stuff, so long as it makes me safer." Mr. Franklin would've had a word with that young lady. Unfortunately that sentiment prevails a large number of people.

</comment><comment><USER142> The way they treated him is appalling. Even if he was Muslim, this shouldn't have happened! I travel a lot and have seen things like this happen before my eyes in the UK and Australia. People that look slightly ethnic and taken aside and "randomly" stopped. EDIT: Sorry for the typo.

<comment><USER143> Did you mean appalling?

<comment><USER142> Yes, I've fixed the mistake.

<comment><USER144> What would we do without HN's built in spell-checking auto-commenters :)

<comment><USER140> Apparently this sophisticated new AI still fails the Turing Test... for now.

<comment><USER145> I actually tried turing testing chatbots a while ago (chatterbot, jabberwacky, etc.) to see if they've improved. No, they don't pass even remotely, and they all get very offended when you suggest they've failed (Chatterbot quote "Are you insulting me?"). Chatbots have a terrible temper.

<comment><USER142> Agreed. I tried having a conversation with Chatterbot, I asked it a question and it replied "Do you listen to the sounds", then I said what sounds and it replied "I am not a guy". Chatterbot basically spouts random responses its gotten, from a database.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER146> The fact that they refused to give him any water stuns me the most. Is this really not illegal in the US? Is this not considered a torture? Is this not so obvious abuse of power that the huge media scandal is assured? Is this not the thing that officials who do that to the detained person lose their job or even go to jail for? Because I believe that in my country all of those would be true. How can any country in which all of those are not true call itself "the land of free"?

EDIT: People are discussing here whether or not the US is on their way to became an oppressive regime. I don't understand that. In my book if the country allows this kind of behaviour of their officials and if I understand the word 'oppression' correctly... it already is an oppressive regime. Simple as that.

</comment><comment><USER147> It's sickening to hear that you had to go through such experiences. Funny that the 'default' scanner technology didn't set off any alarms. Many of these policies just seem to provide the sense that we're safer, rather than actually do anything to remove real dangers.

</comment><comment><USER30> The fact that there are even people in this thread defending this procedure is incomprehensibly disgusting.

</comment><comment><USER148> 1984 is here and we all look the other way. 1984 is today.

</comment><comment><USER149> Aditya, if you're reading this: the next time a TSA agent threatens to call the cops, let them. If you hadn't made any outbursts, you haven't broken any laws.

Plus they'd be calling REAL cops. Ones that have to enforce and abide by real laws or actually face consequences.

</comment><comment><USER150> I think it's pretty clear that this whole thing could've been avoided if you went through the normal security screening process that everyone else normally obliges to do. On the other hand, what happened to you is sick and disturbing. I really found the way they treated you disgusting and I'm sorry you had to go through that.

I also think that your title is misleading and mildly offensive. Ramadan is a holy month, and more so a time of peace (although it's a time of peace every part of the year). I doubt this wouldn't have happened to you if it had been a few weeks earlier or later. I don't think it's right of you to say this only happened because it was during Ramadan that you coincidentally decided to fly.

</comment><comment><USER151> Clearly misleading title. What does it have to do with Ramadan/Muslims. You are just trying to create a bad effect. I think clearly this is a publicity stunt. What did you get from writing this? Happiness? Stop hurting other's sentiments.

</comment><comment><USER152> This story seems at odds with the idea that the NSA collects massive amounts of data about everyone, or at least with the idea that it is capable of making use of that data, by sorting and qualifying it properly.

If the NSA needs to know so much about people to protect us from terrorists, why did the TSA, NYPD and FBI have to ask this guy these questions? Shouldn't one telephone call to the NSA have resulted in 'no known risks'?

Of course, putting on my tinfoil hat, this may be on purpose. A few such incidents may be necessary to give us the idea that they are in the dark. The entire thing may have been a charade, caused by the 'telephone call' not helping out.

</comment><comment><USER153> Bin Laden promised us that "America will not be able to dream of security until we live in security in Palestine." The TSA and NSA are making Bin Laden's dream come true. Our overreaction to Bin Laden is causing more harm than Bin Laden did. Bin Laden killed 3000 Americans, but more Americans -- over 4000 -- were killed in the Iraq war. We also did ourselves a lot of economic harm, having spent close to a trillion dollars on the Iraq war alone. Spurred by Bin Laden, we are doing this to ourselves. And I am not even counting the over 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the war and the damage to goodwill towards Americans.

</comment><comment><USER62> In case you had any doubt that the TSA wasn't staffed by incompetent racist idiots.

</comment><comment><USER154> I felt so angry while reading this. It's clear to say that the terrorists have won.

<comment><USER119> >terrorists

You mean the government?

<comment><USER75> He/she most likely means 9/11 ones

<comment><USER119> Yep, I also meant the government. Or are you still convinced 9/11 was not a false flag?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER155> Aditya - amazing writing, horrible story. I'm so sorry you had to go through that

</comment><comment><USER156> Not that anyone should be treated like this, but I suspect they literally don't even know the difference (or even that there is) between Hinduism and Islam. If you're gonna profile, at least know your freaking religions!

</comment><comment><USER157> Sounds like it's a good idea to invest in a good alarm system and video tape entrance. This way you'd at least know if they had entered without a warrant.

Camera would need to back-up to something remote though, and notify you quickly.

</comment><comment><USER158> I feel terrible that this happened to the author and his experience clearly shows the incompetence of the government bureaucratic agencies - no water?! that is outrageous! I wish I could say that this will not happen again (to him or others), but the truth is that it probably will. Perhaps one positive aspect of this horror story is that the author has shared this with everyone and hopefully this can help educate people for positive change. I felt chills reading the author's anecdote and I am astonished by his courage and composure; I don't know if I'd be able to handle it myself.

</comment><comment><USER159> He reliably set off the chemical detectors. We can assume that earns anyone additional scrutiny.

So the claim here seems to be that he received _too much_ additional scrutiny because of his background. This certainly seems plausible, but he's not the first person to miss their plane due to the TSA either.

But unless we know how people of other backgrounds are scrutinized after they set off the chemical detectors are traveling alone, we can't conclude that he was racially or religiously profiled.

Even still, this is a substantially reduced claim and none of it really supports the conclusion "Don't fly during Ramadan".

</comment><comment><USER160> ...and what does this have to do with Ramadan?

<comment><USER161> My guess is... Ramadan is a holy month for Muslims. Many terrorists are muslim. Terrorism increases around Ramadan. He is brown, many Muslims are brown, TSA on high alert for Muslims. He is setting off an explosives residue detector. Many terrorists use explosives.

<comment><USER162> That is some really weird logic. If I were a terrorist planning an attack, I would carry it out as soon as all the preparations are ready, not wait until some specific date or month or whatever.

<comment><USER163> You may be underestimating the logical accuity of airport security.

Some years ago I used to regularly fly from London to Boston, see clients, take the Delta shuttle down to New York see more clients, then fly back from there to London.

Every single time I would be chosen for the "random" extra search going through security for the shuttle. And due to the sensitivity of the Boston-New York flight only a few years after 9/11, the extra checks were pretty thorough.

One time, while chatting to the security chap as he was metal-detecting my belt, I asked why I was stopped so often. He told me that it was a combination of my being foreign (British but fair enough) and the fact that I was taking a one way trip. Apparently they had concluded that suicide bombers only buy singles. I did point out that, under the circumstances, they probably wouldn't be overly concerned about the money wasted on the return portion. However, my application of reason didn't prevent me from being searched on all subsequent flights.

As an aside, I never experienced anything like the trauma of the OP. The security people were always very polite and friendly. I'd like to think it's due to the bonhomie of the Bostonians. I suspect though that it's because I don't look archetypically Muslim.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER164> I once moved into an apartment with bed bugs. So this is what I learned:

\- at least in Germany you cannot buy bed bug spray in a regular store

\- if you have bed bugs, it's recommended to contact an exterminator that will cost you hundreds (or even thousands)

\- you can still buy spray against bed bugs. The warning sign on the spray is one level below "explosive". As you can imagine, the stuff you get in the store says that you mustn't use it indoors.

Sorry mate, not sure which Spray Brand you used, but using bed bug spray is really dangerous.

You say that the TSA, FBI etc. are ignorant. You are ignorant too by not reading the spray bottles you use.

</comment><comment><USER165> Whether it's the NSA or the TSA, the American public is finally getting a glimpse at how shockingly little freedom our laws actually afford us. For every protection we think we have, there is a gaping exception that can be invoked by virtually any government employee that feels like it. The US government of 2013 essentially can and will do anything it wants, when it wants, with very little resistance from the courts, the public, or politicians. Sadly, I'm not sure that the political will exists to fix any of it.

</comment><comment><USER166> That sucks.

First of all don't speak besides identifying yourself by name. Then the only thing to say is "Am I free to go?". If the answer is no, then ask "Am I being detained?". If no, then ask "Then I'm free to go, yes?".

Back and forth. Personally, upon hearing I'm not being detained, then I'd leave.

Second, you can't be refused medical attention. "I feel nauseous, perhaps because I've been refused water and now I feel faint. I need medical attention".

The more you say, the worse you make it for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER167> At least 2 billion people in the world would instantly know that "Mukerjee" is not remotely a Muslim name. And yet the FBI doesn't.

That's our problem right there, at home and abroad: Total and complete lack of cultural knowledge among the (US-born, mostly white) folks in our security and military forces.

Of course, in this individual case (which does not excuse their behavior) he could have made everyone's life easier by just saying "I am not Muslim, I want a BLT" since that was obviously their suspicion.

</comment><comment><USER168> This is the first time I hear about the TSA but how could this be legal? How can a private entity force someone to stay in some room?

It's really disgusting, I hope it gets lot of attention.

</comment><comment><USER146> I feel so sorry for this guy and I just think that I would rather 'risk' dying in a terrorist attack while flying with him than live in a society that needs do this to some random guy in order to feel safe. I get that they need to be careful when something triggers explosive detector alarm... but this? Pressuring the guy for hours without water which I would not be afraid to call a torture? Is that really necessary?

At what point does reasonable safety turn into cowardly society?

</comment><comment><USER169> I was reading that whole story waiting for a punchline. He repeatedly set off the explosives sniffer while trying to go through airport security, and speculates that someone searched his place while he was away.

And?

I'd imagine that repeatedly setting off a bomb detector would be probable cause for a warrant to search his place. I'm not sure what the "is" is here, other than it's a major hassle caused by a screening machine throwing a false positive, which machines inevitably do.

<comment><USER170> Really? Are you serious? Even if he set off those detectors, which are evidently broken, doesn't he have to be treated with minimal courtesy as a human? They could've even just started off with listing some household items that could set it off. Does a broken machine warrant psychological warfare techniques? And if you're even able to justify that, where do these techniques stop? Should he have also been waterboarded and forced to drink crude oil, you know just to see if he'll break? All this despite being 'American'. The pain and mental anguish one goes through when this happens will only be apparent once it happens to you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER171> Prove you are not fasting for Ramadan by eating this hamburger.

</comment><comment><USER172> A tech company I worked for a while back wanted to send me to the States, and also China to do some work. I refused on both requests because of stories like this I've heard. I just tell them it's because of family commitments, which is always a handy excuse. Other countries I would never go to are Russia, Saudi Arabia, UAE and pretty much anywhere in Africa. It's pretty sad actually, but I guess I'm way too paranoid.

<comment><USER173> Where are you from?

</comment></comment><comment><USER174> About 6 months ago, I had the explosives detector at SFO flag me as suspect after a random pat-down. What followed was a second, slightly more thorough, pat-down and a very thorough search of my carry-on. It all took about 15 minutes, and the TSA staff were nothing but friendly throughout the procedure.

Whenever you fly, keep two things in mind: 1) the TSA staff are mostly just doing their job, and 2) not all of them are assholes.

<comment><USER175> Those two arguments can be applied for practically any profession.

If you are mentioning them as offset to the issue at hand, they are no comfort to people who are subject to racial profiling/harassment (or to people who condemn such actions).

Otherwise they are just redundant statements.

</comment></comment><comment><USER176> There is already an A/B experiment of sort being run on ability of the "chemical detectors". There are lots of airports outside of US that do not have these capabilities. If there is no statistical difference between the terrorist attack incidence directly from the said chemicals then it would be an interesting data point to add to the study of security theatre.

</comment><comment><USER177> Although the author had a horrible experience, it has nothing to do it with Ramadan. Beside, there is no mention of Ramadan by TSA agent to him except a silly question/example about Hinduism. So the title is very presumptuous: "this happened to me because I've tried to fly in Ramadan" which is as bad as TSA agent's state of mind.

</comment><comment><USER178> Can anyone point to a good reference explaining what your rights are and what to do if questioned and/or detained by the TSA?

<comment><AUTHOR> I linked to Flex Your Rights[0] in the blog post. They have two great videos (both available for free on Youtube) about dealing with police encounters.

Unfortunately, the TSA are _not_ police officers, and so you don't have the same rights as you do when dealing with police officers. (Notice how the police officers refused to be present during the pat-down - I didn't mention this in the article, but the cops stepped out of the room every time the TSA officers patted me down).

If anybody has a good, analogous resource for dealing with TSA and the FBI, I would love to know.

[0][http://www.flexyourrights.org/](http://www.flexyourrights.org/)

<comment><USER178> Yes, that's a very helpful link. Will keep an eye out for a TSA-related version of this and speak with some lawyer friends.

Thanks for the excellent writeup of your experience, though I'm sorry you had to go through it in the first place. As someone who is also brown-skinned and from a Hindu family and who has been singled out for many "random" screenings, I've dreaded the chance of this sort of interrogation happening, every time I've flown since 9/11.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER179> I've never had my flight cancelled...but the rest of it sounds pretty par for the course, even for white people.

</comment><comment><USER180> Regarding this line: "The shaking motion was entirely involuntary, and I couldn't force my limbs to be still, no matter how hard I concentrated."

... I think that's adrenaline. Fight or flight instinct. Next time, ask your doctor about beta blockers, or ask your bartender about a double-shot of liquor.

</comment><comment><USER181> Well this story vaguely reminds me of post communist Romania where all newly freed government agencies were fucking with people however they wanted. And I can tell you now it wasn't any ordinary governmental agency that searched his apartment it was the CIA or NSA.

</comment><comment><USER182> My take away isn't 'don't fly during x' but 'don't fly at all'.

</comment><comment><USER183> As a critical issue: there needs to be a mobile app, which upon opening, immediately begins live recording of video and audio to a remote server/s and posts them on vimeo/YouTube/etc.

If this already happens to exist, I'm interested.

</comment><comment><USER184> Sincerely, what can I, someone not involved directly in this incident, do to prevent incidents like this one from happening to other people?

Sending messages to airlines and congresspeople seems ineffectual. What are my other options?

</comment><comment><USER185> It's unfortunate he went through that, but I thought it was common sense that if you opt out of the scanner they are going to put your through the wringer. So I wouldn't call what happened unexpected.

</comment><comment><USER186> We are only getting one side of the story here. Would love to hear it from the other side. I think if one swabbed positive for explosives in a triage you could expect something like this in or out of Ramadan.

<comment><USER187> Much of the misunderstanding, I imagine, is that people who have never worked in a lab, such as these TSA employees, think that 'swabbed positive' means 'touched explosives'.

These quick tests just use a reagent that reacts with a part of a molecule. In the case of an explosives test, I imagine it responds to molecules with a -NO2 group. That could be TNT or any of a thousand perfectly innocent, harmless substances. A test that tests for the whole molecule, with a smaller (but still non zero) chance of a false positive, would be too expensive and take too long for a situation like this.

If you're just testing average people, the chance of a false positive is orders of magnitude more likely than a real positive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER188> This is disgusting to read, can't imagine going through that.

</comment><comment><USER189> Ugh, honestly we as a country should boycott flying until they straighten this shit out. I can't believe people are payed to harass others like this.

</comment><comment><USER190> I don't know whether I laugh or feel pity about these people.

TSA and other agencies have created more fear and panic among Americans than Osama or anyone else.

</comment><comment><USER191> I've been through special security checks, inspections, etc. Last year I was carrying something my parents sent me, TSA asked me to take it out, and ran chemical tests on it. I said do whatever you want with it, and was nice to them. They in turn were nice to me, and allowed me to carry it on the plane, while I was ready to throw it away if they didn't want it on the plane. Maybe its just me, but this guy just had the wrong attitude through the initial part of the process. I feel sorry for what happened to him later.

<comment><USER192> If only everyone as submissive as you are! Perfect citizen that every police state needs

</comment></comment><comment><USER193> For the record India has the second largest number of Muslims in the world. So just because you are from india doesn't mean you are Hindu.

</comment><comment><USER194> things like these and also those similar to having googled words such as "pressure cooker" and "bomb" at some point on my machine in the US and being thwarted by a SWAT team at some point, really scares some one to even be in the US because he would have all the convincing signs like a beard, being a Muslim and might actually have to fast.

</comment><comment><USER195> Try this:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niaGh5Jx_Oo](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niaGh5Jx_Oo)

</comment><comment><USER196> A better title: Don't live in the USA

</comment><comment><USER197> Did it occur to anybody else that these laws are being used to legitimize racial discrimination and harassment?

</comment><comment><USER198> Maybe I'm just neurotic and work is getting to me, but the tone of the article felt oddly erotic to me...

</comment><comment><USER199> Alternatively, fire government workers who abuse their power or are incompetent.

</comment><comment><USER200> Reminds me of "Darkness at Noon" by Arthur Koestler

</comment><comment><USER201> As a muslim this makes me scared of ever going to the USA.

</comment><comment><USER190> Atleast someone should tell these guys how to read Dates!!

</comment><comment><USER202> I must admit the questions of the JetBlue assistant also made me wonder how often they have problems with religious fanatics.

I don't envy the people on either side of that story.

</comment><comment><USER203> Well i for one feel a lot safer now.

</comment><comment><USER204> Great read!

</comment><comment><USER205> Why is this story not as big as the Brazilian guy held at Heathrow? that was for 'only' 9 hours!

<comment><USER206> Perhaps because that guy is the partner of the journalist that first revealed all the things NSA has being doing

</comment></comment><comment><USER207> Gosh, I feel safer already.

</comment><comment><USER205> The West becomes the East, East becomes West

</comment><comment><USER208> > Don't Fly During Ramadan if you're brown

FTFY.

</comment><comment><USER209> Good god!

</comment><comment><USER210> It is a terrible ordeal, but for all of the other factors brought up the critical factor is that he set off an explosion detector (and clearly it doesn't get false positives often given the response they showed). Everything else (about Ramadan, being Hindi, the color of one's skin, etc) may be nothing more than decorations, and no one here knows what would happen if John Smith Anglosaxon set off the same detector in the same situation.

Yes, they talked about Ramadan and his situation, and where the parking lot is around his house, and none of this should be surprising to anyone. They're using conversation to try to determine whether he's lying, gaps in his story, nervousness, and so on. Any single person they talk to will get a conversation that is individualized to the person. Reading too much into it may be misleading.

This isn't intended to defend the TSA (universally reviled), or any of the other agencies, but repeatedly setting off an explosion detector is 95% of this story. The rest is just surrounding decorations.

<comment><USER211> My bags have set off the explosives detector before, twice. (In both cases, due a heart medication that apparently triggers false positives). I was not taken into a back room or interrogated for hours. They searched me and my bags in more detail, asked some questions, and concluded it must have been a false positive. The experience took about 15 minutes each time.

This was a few years back, but I don't recall if it was post-9/11 or not. It seems like even setting off a detector doesn't, alone, justify the extreme reaction the authorities took in the author's case.

<comment><USER212> If you set off a gas chromatograph for nitroglycerine and then say you have heart tablets then you'll be fine. He obviously set off a specific trigger AND couldn't account for it (although they clearly tried to get him to).

Back in the 70s or 80s a group of friends in Britain were sentenced for participating in a terrorist act because they set off an explosive test. They spent years in prison before it was determined that it was a false positive caused by the coating of a popular brand of playing card.

<comment><USER213> Too bad they couldn't even tell him what set it off, since he clearly did not remember:

      "I can't think of anything. What does it say is triggering the alarm?" I asked.

      "I'm not going to tell you! It's right here on my sheet, but I don't have to tell you what it is!" he exclaimed, pointing at his clipboard.

''EDIT: formatting''

<comment><USER212> Not letting him drink water or whatever is simply inhumane. Not giving him information is simply a judgment call or policy decision. Perhaps it is against policy to reveal which exact molecules their machines react to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER214> bad day

</comment><comment><USER215> Contrarian perspective: He fits a certain profile. Triggered a bunch of attributes (address move, chemicals on him, etc.).

The 9/11 attackers walked through the scanners with knifes.

The Boston bombers were flagged, but still traveled freely.

After both attacks people were laughing at the stupidity of the enforcement agencies, uselessness of the TSA, etc.

Here, the process worked.

His account is subjective, everyone else is an idiot, he's way smarter than them, gets offended by simple questions about religion, etc. OK, good for him. The more you push back, the more self righteous and arrogant you are during security checks, the deeper you're digging yourself in. Those people are doing their jobs. Same with how you should be treating waiters, etc.

JetBlue has the right to deny you a flight. ElAl does this all the time, incl. racial profiling. Good security track record.

<comment><USER25> > _Here, the process worked._

So a false negative is it "not working" but a false positive _is_ it working? How about no.

<comment><USER215> at the end they let him go. he triggered alarms, they checked, determined him not a threat, let him go.

false positive would be him charged with terrorism.

<comment><USER25> That is an absurd redefinition of failure that serves no purpose but to make the TSA look better.

If he _were_ charged you'd undoubtedly just redefine "false positive" to be falsely _convicted_ , not 'merely' charged.

<comment><USER216> And if convicted it would move onto "at least he wasn't summarily executed, _he can appeal_ "

"The system working" here in the UK unfortunately can mean serving _only_ 16 years in prsion before a conviction is overturned: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Six](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Six)

        Relevent bit is under the Trail section:
        "On 12 May 1975 the six men were charged with murder and conspiracy to cause explosions."
        "Forensic scientist Dr Frank Skuse used positive Griess test results to claim that Hill and Power had handled explosives"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER217> Thank you for posting this. I was about to book a ticket on Jetblue for next week but I am now decided not to fly with them or recommend them to anyone.

While we can fix private airlines and businesses for their stupid attitude there is, of course, no way for people to fix NSA/TSA and all those inverted bullshitters living on taxpayer's money.

<comment><USER218> Most airlines reserve the right to remove passengers from a flight if they feel it is safer to do so. This happens all the time, and I'm sure from the perspective of the expelled passenger it's always "unfair." I trust you will follow your own principle and boycott every airline.

<comment><USER217> For that matter every restaurant, home owner, bus driver, taxi, parkway, condominium, hospital, school, university or business has the right to remove a _person_ from their premises. That doesn't mean people do or have to do it illustriously and then come back and say: we'll fly with you tomorrow - we'll let you travel on our airline only tomorrow because you're not "safe" today.

When the TSA circus cleared the person in question there is absolutely no reason for him to be prevented from travel.

> I trust you will follow your own principle and boycott every airline.

I hope you'll find someone who buys your ad hominem/bait elsewhere. On hacker news you might want to read up the guidelines [1] on quality of discussions and disagreements.

[1] [http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER219> People like to blame the US government for this, though I think the real culprit is that often the dumber, more xenophobic members of society are usually hired for these kinds of positions. As in the case of police brutality, cameras need to be recording all encounters between travelers and airport security, and extensive quality control performed. This is an issue that is tarnishing the United States's reputation everywhere. Travelers are often the elite from their respective countries and the US is digging itself into a hole with this.

There's a big opportunity for startups to provide the backend for this quality control. A hosted webapp that allows teams of inspectors to seamlessly collaborate on monitoring the quality of TSA agents from anywhere.

<comment><USER220> But who hires and tolerates the dumber, more xenophobic members of society for these positions?

The biggest impediment to fixing or eliminating the TSA is that the decision makers don't eat their own dogfood. If every Congressperson had to endure the inhumane treatment that passes for airport security these days instead of being whisked through VIP lines the TSA would be fixed within months.

<comment><USER219> The thing is, senior people don't eat their dogfood in anything. The CEO of Ford probably drives a Benz. What has worked in all industries is quality control. Government has always had a problem in doing this (the DMV) but that's where startups should step into to educate the politician that it's good for both public and for the politician's future elections (using said startup's product).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER221> This article has very little to do with Ramadan...Muslims don't fly more often during Ramadan than the rest of the year, do they? 9/11 didn't happen during Ramadan.

Take a look at this objectively.

A brown guy, traveling alone, tested positive for explosive residue while going through a TSA checkpoint. After some brief questioning, they determined that there was a 99% chance that he wasn't a terrorist.

How stupid would we as Americans have felt had we allowed someone to fly on the same day as having a 1% chance that he was a terrorist?

<comment><USER222> "Traveling alone" = half the business travelers at the airport. "Brown" = most of the world. "Explosive residue" = hand lotion or bug spray. "Brief questioning" = 4 hours, ticket canceled, $700 new ticket cost and apartment search.

This is racial profiling, straight up, and ineffective security. How about you go through this and tell me it's all good.

I (of brown skin) was once taken aside INSIDE a jetway, after clearing all security, and quizzed: how much cash was I carrying? Where did I go to school? And this bizarre national origin totem: who won the World Series last year? I'd have had a better chance of telling them what RSA stood for or who Stallman was than baseball.

</comment></comment><comment><USER223> This is outrageous, aren't there laws to prevent people like him from speaking about this! (That was sarcasm, by the way).

</comment><comment><USER224> LOL!

Don't be fooled by this post, the dude comes from a country where rape is a regular no-comment thing.

Where a minister cost the exchequer $50 billion by giving away spectrum.

Where the state army regularly massacres its own citizens in the name of progress (forced land seizures), citizens who have no political options and have turned to Naxalism out of desperation.

Look, brown man travels for 10 years in the US and gets hassled once -- with some justification it seems (the chemical tests came back positive). I can guarantee that and average American travelling to India would face a much harsher ordeal at the hands of the locals. Just ask any white woman tourist.

Yo...Aggrieved Bong! Karma is a bitch and somehow all the hassling of Whitey when he is in Calcutta had to come around. In this case it landed on your ass. Move along and stop pretending to be a hipster with your "virtual corporations" and shit. Or would you prefer going back to the motherland and working for Didi?

I for one would be happy to be subjected to such a process IF it also had the effect of catching the REAL terrorists. The fact that it does not is the real tragedy here.

</comment><comment> o0-0o This happened to me - because of incense. Specifically, the Nag Champa in the Red box (not the blue box). It is super good stuff, but the machine does not like it too much.

</comment><comment><USER225> I honestly used to think America was the best country in the world... but lately I've been seeing more and more shocking things. Very sad indeed. I would have been terrified if that happened to me.

</comment><comment><USER226> Oh man, I would _not_ handle that situation well. I'm quite sure I'd have clammed up as soon as I found out I wasn't making my flight.

</comment><comment><USER227> How did you remember all that stuff you wrote. The they said and you said. Either you recorded, you had a pen and paper. Or this article is full of lies.

<comment><USER228> It's obviously meant as an approximation.

Look, you can believe it or not, but that's just your opinion. Everybody gets to make up their mind for themselves.

<comment><USER227> approximation? dude, that's some serious business.</comment></comment></comment>