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

Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

boardingarea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 228 posts

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#171

Post by wpietri »

jlgaddis wrote: post #80
wpietri wrote: post #14

How I hate these stenographer-to-the-powerful articles. The guy makes his money as a consultant to airlines; he here gives the official side of things under cover of perfect anonymity and official deniability. He does it while pretending to be a neutral arbiter of fact, showing no skepticism at all about official claims. And, naturally, he doesn't bother to follow up with the author of the blog post he responded to.…

> And, naturally, he doesn't bother to follow up with the author of the blog post he responded to. FTA (the first paragraph, actually): I was initially approached by his supporters, and put in touch with him, to help spread his story … however … once I began researching the story, his detailed blog post began to unravel. Unless you mean that he should have shared with Aditya Mukerjee his article/accusations/assumptio…

That's exactly what I mean. He has quotes from sources contradicting the blog posts. He allegedly spend quite a bit of time talking with people. Any real reporter, and hopefully anybody with an interest in publishing a fair article would have called Mukerjee and said, "Hey, let me check some things." But this article treats airline and government claims as fact.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#172

Post by wpietri »

ballard wrote: post #134
wpietri wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy crap! There is even a blog where somebody disgruntled chronicles all his alleged misdeeds: http://fishfraud.blogspot.com/ Some articles that caught my eye: http://fishfraud.blogspot.com/p/about-fishfraud.html http://fishfraud.blogspot.com/2010/11/projectweddingcom-revi... http://fishfraud.blogspot.com/2010/11/warning-to-national-me... http://fishfraud.blogspot.com/2010/11/steven-frischling-in-c... http://fishfra…

Good work. Great claims require great evidence. It could be a jilted lover or frmr business partner.... Who knows. Are there any public records which support this counter-blogger's claims? The other thought is: does the original blogger have any hard evidence beyond nitpicking and counter-claims provided by JetBlue to trash our traveler?

There are public records about how many times the guy has been sued that are linked. And the news articles about the fraud case seem real enough.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#173

Post by moocowduckquack »

etchalon wrote: post #154
einhverfr wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does not mean he wasn't detained. If you aren't free to go, you are detained. If you are pulled over for speeding, until the officer lets you go, you are detained. So not only was he detained but his bag was seized. Now arguably everyone is briefly detained by the TSA on condition of travel, and arguably all bags are seized briefly. However, that is why there needs to be scrutiny on these practices.

As was stated, he wasn't detained. He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain. So he chose to stay.

He was told he could leave the airport, escorted by personnel, but that his bag had to remain.

Being told you can walk away if you like but we are keeping your stuff, is usually a form of theft.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#174

Post by goggles99 »

They should require putting cameras/microphones on all TSA employees and in all TSA inspection/interrogation rooms. I for one would pay an extra $5 per flight to pay for this. Put the review of all of this footage in the hands of an accountability/oversight agency to review whenever there is a complaint, also make the footage available on request to the public.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#175

Post by wpietri »

tlrobinson wrote: post #22

Well, I can understand why he'd become "agitated" after being told his options were to leave without his bag or be subjected to an "obscene" screening. Also, regarding: "There are no independent sources within the TSA or Department of Homeland Security (DHS) who can find any record of NYPD involvement – let alone a search of his apartment by federal authorities – and there is no incident report referencing any furthe…

Yeah, what does that even mean? What are independent sources with TSA or DHS? And whatever they are, how did a random blogger contact them all?

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#176

Post by wpietri »

rdtsc wrote: post #69

> I know many people want to believe in TSA and national security conspiracies. The idea of a government collective creating a single story to keep one person down is intriguing. People will believe what they want, The fact that they need to build a straw man argument basically dismissing all those who might disagree as conspiracy nuts (a well known PR tactic) should make one scared and worried. This is a pretty good…

I'm pretty sure I know what "airline emerging media consultant" means: http://socialmediadouchebag.net/

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#177

Post by dnautics »

"Mr. Mukerjee refused additional screening"

No. Mr. Mukherjee refused screening in private. It's unacceptable to be unconsensually screened in private without a third party (I.E. not TSA officer) witness. I've refused to be screened in private, the TSA makes it VERY hard for you to do that, and I definitely got verbally agitated. How would you feel if there you were exposed to a significant risk of being sexually assaulted with no witnesses present?

"This is absolutely correct, at this time he was in limbo, he was not being detained, but he could not leave."

That is completely unacceptable.

Once you are threatened with sexual assault, it is unreasonable to expect to be anything besides "aggressive evasive".

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#178

Post by wpietri »

mdasen wrote: post #144

I don't mean to be too meta, but did anyone else notice this article dropping from #1 to #19 in a matter of minutes? It feels like one of the powers that be is trying to censor the article. I know that the ranking algorithm isn't directly tied to points and time, but there's an article an hour older with only 31 points (vs over 130) that's in position 5: http://i.imgur.com/RBLM2K7.png .

There is also flagging, which allows people to artificially force articles down.

It happens all the time on sexism-in-tech articles.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#179

Post by einhverfr »

arjie wrote: post #169
einhverfr wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can be respectful and still refuse, "Officer, I know you are just doing your job, but I don't consent to searches." Or even to the TSA, "I believe my person is seized and detained. You may search me and let me fly, but just be aware I am not consenting to it."

The latter is not asserting any rights since you cannot permit them with 'you may search me' while simultaneously claim you are not consenting. 'You may search me' is consent. The former exchange may be followed by: 1. The officer reaching for your vehicle, you instinctively reacting to block him, and we have our aggression. 2. The officer asking why not, telling you he is now going to have to throw the book at you a…

It is letting folks know you may be asserting it after the fact and you aren't waiving your right. What you are doing is establishing that the search isn't voluntary and that your cooperation is not consent.

I don't know how different circuits would look at it. My understanding is that this would not be effective in the 5th and 11th circuits since they hold that you consent to searches when you get in line and you can't revoke that consent. But other circuits haven't gone that far. That means that if they want to hold the search as lawful, they have to establish that it is a valid administrative search, and that consent is not required.

It would be clearer if "you may" was replaced by "I am aware you may" clarifying that this is not permission but a statement of possibilities.

Re: Did The TSA and JetBlue Deny Travel For Looking Muslim During Ramadan? No

#180

Post by einhverfr »

tacticus wrote: post #166
etchalon wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article makes it very clear what "detained" vs. "not detained" means, in this context. Mukerjee wasn't being detained, or kept, beyond the basic protocol of "unscreened passengers have to be escorted out of the terminal." Mukerjee was free to leave, he simple had to leave the building entirely. He could not just leave and then step back into line, as was his intention, for numerous utterly sane reasons.

He also had to surrender his bags.

IOW his bags were seized.
Post reply on HN