Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Transportation

Booted From Airplane For Wearing Anti-TSA T-shirt 826

Posted by timothy
from the more-than-3-ounces-of-sarcasm dept.
Cigarra writes "PhD student Arijit learned the hard way that in Brave New America you can't mock TSA's Security Theater and go on about your business. According to a recollection in RT.com: 'After being vigorously screened and questioned multiple times, Arijit says he was finally given permission, once more, to board his plane. The pilot of the aircraft, however, had had enough of the whole ordeal and asked the Delta supervisor to relay the message that, due to the discomfort the shirt had caused, neither Arijit nor his wife would be allowed to board the aircraft.' Just how much humiliation is the general American public willing to tolerate in the name of 'security'?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Booted From Airplane For Wearing Anti-TSA T-shirt

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:02AM (#41093641)

    I mean come on "Arijit" clearly a terrorist threat.

    • KKK to TSA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Cryacin (657549) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:08AM (#41093715)
      Looks like the KKK renamed their acronym to something more paletable.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:11AM (#41093747)

      He may be an ijit, but he's Arijit!

    • Re:duh - his name (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @09:36AM (#41095307)

      So are Eric and Dylan [wikipedia.org], Timothy [wikipedia.org], Ted [wikipedia.org], Jeff [wikipedia.org], and John [wikipedia.org]. Should we bar everyone with those first names from flying?

    • Re:duh - his name (Score:4, Insightful)

      by schlachter (862210) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @10:11AM (#41095915)

      sounds like the pilot was being vindictive and trying to push his political views...no fair and bad service.

  • It's even worse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jodido (1052890) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:03AM (#41093647)
    Add in the racial bias in profiling and the racist prejudices of some passengers (this can get you booted too if a passenger decides s/he is "uncomfortable" on the plane with you on it) and you have quite an ugly situation.
  • seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jsepeta (412566) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:04AM (#41093657) Homepage

    what kind of dipshit is afraid of a t-shirt? obviously this guy is being pushed around because of his name and genetic background. i smell LAWSUIT.

    • by cusco (717999) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <ybxib.nairb>> on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:14AM (#41093803)
      I would totally do this, but my wife would kill me. I'm far more afraid of her displeasure than that of some TSA idiot.
    • by pr0nbot (313417) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:31AM (#41094081)

      I once unthinkingly put on a t-shirt that had a machine gun [backstreet-merch.com] on it on the day I was travelling. At security I was asked to turn it inside out (by the guys with actual machine guns), which I did, and that was that. Thankfully I wasn't wearing one of my other t-shirts... [photobucket.com]

    • Re:seriously? (Score:5, Informative)

      by deanklear (2529024) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:56AM (#41094535)

      Here's something more pathetic:

      When Charles Swift, a Lieutenant Commander with JAG, went to meet his client and terrorist suspect Salim Hamdan, the jailers at Guantanamo asked him to take off his name tag, so the suspect wouldn't know who he was. Swift asked how he was expected to establish a relationship with his client if he isn't allowed to know his name, and eventually told them that he wasn't going to take it off.

      Hamdan was laying in his cell, with his hands shackled to his feet in a fetal position. Once Swift convinced them to let him out of his chains, he then tried to shake Hamdan's hand as they were introduced, and again, the officials there said they weren't allowed to have any physical contact for national security reasons.

      In the documentary Secrecy, he stated the following:

      If you're to the point that you can be the executioner without telling anyone about it, and not having anyone look at it, and being able to do all that in secret, what's left? What's left?

      If I can decide the reasons you will be held in jail for the rest of your life, and I alone get to know them, and I don't have to tell anyone, what's left?

      When laid bare, their argument is, there is no limit on Presidential power. The President ultimately decides his power, and no one else. Yet, fundamentally that was what they had claimed for the commissions. Fundamentally, that was what they had claimed for interrogations for wiretapping, all of these things, and done it in secrecy.

      But the Hamdan case had the opportunity to begin to pull back the blanket of that bare, raw assertion of power.

      Never mistake the actual purpose of the TSA and the security state: it's a raw assertion of power of the Executive to ignore due process. That erosion of the foundations of our legal system represents a continuing threat to our democracy, and at least in my opinion, far exceeds the dangers posed by terrorism. It's literally eliminating the difference between our society and the society that totalitarian extremists desire; the only difference is in who has the key to our chains.

      What happened to the Hamdan case? The Supreme Court ruled the commissions at Guantanamo lacked "the power to proceed because its structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949."

      In response, the US Congress proposed a new law, the Military Commissions Act, aimed trying to give the President the power to create a commission that could ignore the UCMJ and the Geneva Conventions. And it passed in 2006.

  • by Maow (620678) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:06AM (#41093687) Journal

    From the same site [rt.com]:

    What would have likely been a routine flight out of a Florida airport this weekend ended with a woman being sent to the emergency room after TSA agents insisted on groping a traumatized rape victim in a security pat-down that put her in the hospital.

    Live free or die indeed.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:15AM (#41093835)

      America is the only country that gropes It's passengers. Israel profiles, & has no hijackings.

      • by cffrost (885375) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:40AM (#41094223) Homepage

        America is the only country that gropes It's passengers. Israel profiles, & has no hijackings.

        Profiling by ethnicity doesn't work; for one thing, it's vulnerable to proxy bomb attacks. I've posted links on this many times before; search for the "Carnival Booth" paper from MIT. I recommend Schneier's site or DuckDuckGo.

        El Al's security apparatus (behavioral profiling, interviews, luggage depressurization, and tarmac security, off the top of my head) have been said to be infeasible due to scalability in a country of over 300 million. However, I haven't seen an data to back up this claim, nor have I done the math.

        I'm not saying I support the current system; I find it deplorable and refuse to fly, going on six years. I'd like to see a return to sane, pre-2001-09 security procedures. At least, that's what it'd take to get me to voluntarily set foot on a commercial airliner again.

        • by geminidomino (614729) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:51AM (#41094445) Journal

          El Al's security apparatus (behavioral profiling, interviews, luggage depressurization, and tarmac security, off the top of my head) have been said to be infeasible due to scalability in a country of over 300 million. However, I haven't seen an data to back up this claim, nor have I done the math.

          Oh, the math is easy.

          Doing it THAT way would require them to actually train (as opposed to simply recognizing the threat color scheme) and pay skilled-worker wages, as opposed to giving a badge to -- well, to what we have now (See? I was nice)

        • by mjr167 (2477430) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @09:14AM (#41094909)
          Isreal actually trains thier security to look for suspicious behavior instead of assuming everyone is a suspect. Profiling doesn't neccessarily mean "assume all blacks/arabs/hispanics/whater are guilty." I can also mean "the suspicious looking guy might be guilty so lets go talk to him." You will also notice that countries that are actually afraid of terrorist bombings don't have long lines outside security checkpoints because terrorists like to bomb the checkpoints. If you care about security you get everyone through the check point as quickly as possible. We just like harrassing innocent citizens.
        • by DrYak (748999) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @10:58AM (#41096753) Homepage

          I'm not saying I support the current system; I find it deplorable and refuse to fly, going on six years.

          Before the current policies (groping, irradiating, etc) began: What has been the rate of *successful* terrorist attacks over the previous 10 years? (I'm asking about actually successful attempts. I'm not talking about idiots who almost won a honorary darwin awards by setting their pant on fire, or got zerg-rushed by the rest of the passengers. Or the crazie raving lunatics who got encouraged by a cover agent who had to provide them the whole (fake) material and an actual plan, just so they would act out something [stupid] and get caught because otherwise they would have kept mumbling things and drooling alone)
          How does their annual death toll compare against victims of car accidents and victims of cardio-vascular diseases ? (To take the 2 leading causes of death in the developed world). Or even compared to victims struck by lightning (to take another example of dramatic and rare cause of death) ?

          My opinion is that such common sense analysis will prove that we aren't gaining much by all this theater appart from inconvenience, and that (no matter how much tragic and traumatic it has been for the victims of 9/11 and their families) the impact of terrorism is a very small and insignificant occasional bump in the statistics.

          It's as useful as the simpson's tiger repellant rock.

          We would gain much more by a "War on cars!!!!" and "War on burgers!!!!" than a "War on ter'rists!!!" But we still have to wait longer for those.

  • by Sparticus789 (2625955) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:06AM (#41093699) Journal

    If the Miss Universe pageant had been boarding that plane, the TSA would have been to busy putting them through the body scanner to even notice this guy's shirt.

  • fear itself (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:08AM (#41093709)

    Hi folks,

    Just as a brief FYI, we're REALLY starting to worry about you Yanks.
    Please get your house in order, before things get truly out of control.
    If you wait much longer (and we may be talking seconds here), the choice will be gone.

    With compassion,
    the Rest of the World

  • Quite a lot (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ah.clem (147626) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:10AM (#41093735)

    >> Just how much humiliation is the general American public willing to tolerate in the name of 'security'?"

    Quite a lot apparently, quite a lot.

  • TSA info chart (Score:5, Informative)

    by worf_mo (193770) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:10AM (#41093737)

    The TSA info chart [onlinecrim...degree.com] is quite interesting.

  • The real story link (Score:5, Informative)

    by OzPeter (195038) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:14AM (#41093809)

    Arijit's actual blog Arijit Vs. Delta [blogspot.co.uk]

  • Love the Shirt! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dopaz (148229) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:15AM (#41093831) Homepage

    Where can I buy that shirt?

  • Simple...Don't Fly (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cpt_Kirks (37296) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:18AM (#41093877)

    I see no reason to submit to their bullshit. I have not flown in nearly 7 years, and don't see it happening any time soon.

    If enough people simply refuse to fly, the airlines will go belly up, or they will lobby to remove the TSA. Though, the private thugs they replace them with probably won't be any better.

  • Illusions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by chill (34294) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:19AM (#41093883) Journal

    While some people grumble and complain about the process, I've also encountered many people who believe what the TSA is doing is actually protecting them from terrorism.

    More to the point, they honestly believe that there are terrorists right around the corner just waiting to blow them up. Not in an abstract but THEM, specifically. You know, it could happen anywhere so it could happen to YOU and it could happen HERE!

    Their lives are so boring and mundane they get a thrill over the possibility that something important could happen to them or someone they know. Even if it is something like a terrorist attack, it makes them feel special. As if the town of Bumfuck, Nowhere was chosen special for a target.

    It gives them something to gossip about. "What if..." It is essentially one of the same motivations that drives people to buy lottery tickets. They can dream "what if..." and not have to face the dull reality that is their life.

    It's really sad.

  • Not the TSA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bickerdyke (670000) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:20AM (#41093901)

    As most of you, I only read TFS, but this wasn't the TSA to blame.

    It's completly in a pilots discretion if he want's to have some prankster on board who doesn't care if the whole flight gets delayed because of a funny shirt.

    He has the right to remove anyone from the plane. For anything else, complain to the airline afterwards.

    This system works as long as you put somewhat reasonable and responsible people in the cockpit. And if he pulls that stunt too often, he'll be sanctioned by his employer. That's a completly different situation from some minimum-wage guy who only would get sanctioned for NOT bullying people around and gets paid (and perhaps rewarded) for strictly following procedures, not thinking about if that would be stupid.

    Please note: I don't say what the pilot did was right, but he had the right to make that descision.

    • by tgd (2822) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:53AM (#41094485)

      Please note: I don't say what the pilot did was right, but he had the right to make that descision.

      This is what happens when make pilots stop drinking before their flights ...

  • Text of the shirt (Score:5, Informative)

    by martyros (588782) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @08:23AM (#41093945)

    First, its important to know exactly what the shirt said. Neither the summary nor the article quote it, but the image printed on the shirt [blogspot.com] seems to say:

    BOMBS ZOMG ZOMG TERRORISTS GONNA KILL US ALL ZOMG ZOMG ALERT LEVEL BLOODRED RUN RUN TAKE OFF YOUR SHOES MOISTURE

    Now, it's always been pretty clear to me that just saying the word "bomb" in an airpot is a recipe for trouble. Lots of signs are posted everywhere saying that all statements must be taken seriously, even if they're said in a joking manner. In other words, you just don't joke about bombs in an airport.

    Secondly, the summary doesn't make it clear that it wasn't the TSA who took issue with things, and ultimately kicked him off the plane, but that it was a guy from Delta. It seems completely plausible to me that some of the other passengers saw his shirt and really were "very uncomfortable". Maybe they shouldn't have been, but nonetheless they were. Given that there were customers who were uncomfortable, and the fact that this guy really should have known better than wear a shirt with "bomb" on it in the airpot, I can see why the Delta rep kicked the guy off the flight.

  • by INeededALogin (771371) on Thursday August 23, 2012 @10:01AM (#41095729) Journal
    Bought the shirt back in the post 9/11 days and accidentally wore it coming home on an international flight. I saw it as a patriotic shirt, but wife saw it and flipped out while we were at the airport. Got asked about the shirt by TSA, explained that it was technically a patriotic shirt and was good. An anti-TSA shirt is technically a patriotic shirt as well. Sad day:-(

There are never any bugs you haven't found yet.

Working...