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

641–650 of 986 posts

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#641

Post by ams6110 »

zem wrote: post #522
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…

why do people insist on using the phrase "repeatedly set off the explosive detector"? if there is a substance on his person or bags that made the detector register a false positive, it is naturally going to register that same false positive every time it is run over said substance. the repetition means nothing.

Because if he hadn't, you'd conclude that the detector registered falsely. The fact that repeated tests had the same result confirms that the detector is working (or, at least, that it's consistent).

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#642

Post by dragonwriter »

jrockway wrote: post #616
amirmc wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when the TSA is at all bus stations and gates access to roads? Do you walk? Logic like this means you essentially hide from the problem until there's nowhere left. What happens then?

Doesn't this mean we shouldn't have any laws, because one day the laws could be used to imprison everyone and use their internal organs to produce email spam? The point is, I think we still have travel alternatives and legal protections from abuse. The federal government only has the authority to affect travel between states, not within a single state. If the TSA starts interfering with movement in a single state (li…

> If the TSA starts interfering with movement in a single state

You mean, if the TSA starts screening (and, thus, assuming the power to reject) passengers for intrastate air travel, like they have been since day one of TSA operations?

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#643

Post by Amadou »

jeremycole wrote: post #459
icambron wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The craziness of "he set of the detection machine but it's clearly a false-positive, but now that he's on our radar let's grill him in case he just happens to be a terrorist" should be obvious to anyone.

Yes, IMHO it comes from this: What would be on the news if he was a terrorist and they find out that he actually set off the explosives detector before doing his deed? So basically their response is more about fear of embarrassment (to an extreme) than actual effectiveness.

It is also about a lack of accountability. There is no penalty for going to town on the guy - for them its just a more exciting day on the job - for him it's a humiliating loss of personal autonomy.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#644

Post by mohamabid »

83457 wrote: post #413
eternalsunshine wrote: post #243

...and what does this have to do with Ramadan?

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.

so? Question was how in his case it was related to Ramadan? he was beeping for explosives, he wanted a pat down, he wanted answers.

Was he questioned initially because he didn't eat any thing or was going on religious trip or was brown or anything related to muslims or Ramadan? NO

He should have said don't fly when you touch bug spray/ insecticides and want a pat down. The title should be around the context and its not the case here.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#645

Post by jlgreco »

zaroth wrote: post #621
jlgreco wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "set off explosive detectors. Repeatedly." If I walk back and forth through a metal detector with a belt buckle multiple times, do I become increasingly suspicious each time it beeps?

It's nothing at all like going through a metal detector with your belt on. Metal detectors check your present state, trace analysis checks your PAST state. False positives are possible, I've had it happen to me. When "the machine beeped", I got a thorough pat-down and re-swabbed, and the next time "the machine did not beep" and I was on my way. It's my understanding that TSA agents will not allow someone to pass who…

Passing a belt buckle through a metal detector repeatedly and passing a sample through an explosives detector repeatedly demonstrates nothing except that the alarm was not transient.

Just because it isn't transient doesn't mean it isn't a false positive as this story demonstrates.

With such an overwhelmingly massive chance that the alert was a false positive, the response the author received is indefensible.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#646

Post by Amadou »

warfangle wrote: post #215
marvin wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

On the other hand, the true positive rate of the TSA is zero. Not one single person detained by the TSA has been charged, much less convicted, on terrorism charges.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#647

Post by pc86 »

pc86 wrote: post #378
ck2 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Please point me to the source showing that we used them to manufacture munitions, or to the one showing me that we gassed and burned them.

Is there a reason I'm being downvoted? There are almost no parallels (beyond the most literal) between a concentration camp and an internment camp.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#648

Post by hyperventilator »

jrockway wrote: post #578
jessaustin wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

news.ycombinator.com/leaders may prove enlightening. [EDIT: he really did make this argument, but it seems to have disappeared.] What happened? Did you have a stroke? Are you actually jrockway's brother-in-law, "borrowing" his handle?

I don't understand why everyone is so outraged that I don't think the US is a police state. "Airport security is horrible", so I say to take the train. Have you ever taken the train? The security is not that bad. But instead, I get downvoted to -4 and people accuse me of having a stroke. All I can say is that the hysteria is at an amazingly-high level. I am not sure why I even read TSA-related articles anymore.

There has been a noted increase of posts containing "lol" and other indicators of decline.

Edit: If you think posts with lol are a good thing please say why.

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#649

Post by hyperbovine »

nrivadeneira wrote: post #629
hyperbovine wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather live in a country where the process occasionally fails and we don't have to put up with / subject others to this shit. And yes, I am American and I experienced all the pain and horror of 9/11.

Did you really experience it (as in, you were in NYC at the time) or were you just a casual observer?

I don't think it was necessary to be in NYC at the time to have been deeply affected by 9/11, but no matter: I, the guy who wrote this article, and 310m other non-NYC Americans still have to live under the draconian post-9/11 regime, regardless of where we were on that day.

Also, "casual observer"? Really?

Re: Don't Fly During Ramadan

#650

Post by jlgreco »

nrivadeneira wrote: post #619
jlgreco wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "set off explosive detectors. Repeatedly." If I walk back and forth through a metal detector with a belt buckle multiple times, do I become increasingly suspicious each time it beeps?

At the very least it confirms suspicions that you do in fact have metal on you. By removing doubt, you do increase suspicion.

It doesn't confirm that the machine results were not a false positive, it only provides you with some assurance that the results were not transient: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6260688
Post reply on HN