Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't Fly During Ramadan

varnull.adityamukerjee.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 986 posts

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#211

Post by [deleted] »

eshvk wrote: post #61
lukeqsee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 18…

[deleted]

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#212

Post by sneak »

Do not talk to the police.

Do not talk to the police.

Do not talk to the police.

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.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#213

Post by solistice »

corresation wrote: post #127
ck2 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know they don't have a button to push to make it give a false positive so they can hold people? Cops have dogs trained to give false positives on signal and we are constantly spied on and lied to by our own intelligence agencies. So please don't tell me this idea is far fetched, I think it's very plausible.

Sure it's plausible. It's just incredibly unlikely (not least because this notion that the TSA is some white power apparatus seems to be at odds with the reality that the TSA is a very diverse workforce. Add that the passenger list in most urban centers is incredibly diverse, and this idea that it's just xenophobia seems quite nonsensical. Another post talks about how this demonstrates how the US views "foreigners" -…

Also, if you have a "secret button" used by hundrets of TSA officials, with at least some borderline irresponsible, how long do you think it takes for those news to leak out? Two weeks?

The only way to keep a secret for long periods is that few know about it.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#215

Post by warfangle »

marvin wrote: post #144
Robin_Message wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cynically? That sounds like a standard interrogation technique. Keep them off balance, upset them, try and force them to stop lying so as to get the drink they need (not that the OP was lying).

Now for the next question: Is this a suitable way to interrogate someone who is not under arrest and is presumed innocent? Is the false negative rate of TSA checks low enough to start assuming that someone is guilty?

The false negative rate of the TSA is nonzero, ergo it is not low enough to start assuming someone is guilty.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#216

Post by fennecfoxen »

codegeek wrote: post #109
corresation wrote: post #72

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…

You are missing the point. yes he set off the explosion detector for which he should have been questioned and he was. The issue is how they did it. No water for hours ? You seriously think that it is ok ? The rest 5% decorations that you were talking about is lot more than just decorations.

The bit that got me as incontrovertibly hilariously-stupid was... they got all upset that he hadn't identified to them that he'd checked some baggage.

If the guy is an adversary, you can't rely on him to bring that fact to your attention. If the guy isn't an adversary, his failure to identify it is (by definition) innocent in nature. In neither sense does harassing the guy about it make sense.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#217

Post by swalkergibson »

Robin_Message wrote: post #95
evan_ wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the purpose of denying him water? Of taking the picture?

Cynically? That sounds like a standard interrogation technique. Keep them off balance, upset them, try and force them to stop lying so as to get the drink they need (not that the OP was lying).

When do standard techniques start to move into the territory of enhanced interrogation techniques? 8 hours without water? 12? 18? 48?

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#218

Post by pinaceae »

jlgreco wrote: post #89
pinaceae wrote: post #56

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…

> Here, the process worked. So a false negative is it "not working" but a false positive is it working? How about no.

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.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#219

Post by javajosh »

ck2 wrote: post #133
JackFr wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

"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.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#220

Post by amirmc »

jrockway wrote: post #190
jwr wrote: post #73

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 imp…

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 ques…

> "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?"

Politely. With the view that I'm dealing with people who are innocent unless found to be otherwise.

Edit: Please also note that permethrin is not an explosive. Should everyone who uses insect repellant be treated this way while going through security? I'm surprised the guy even knew the name of the chemical (I wouldn't have).

Post reply on HN