Woman arrested for flying while Arab

[Trekker4747]

In the end, I'm conflicted on this. I think it's horrible what happened to those three, yet I can't lay the blame solely at the feet of those who responded to the situation or the person who made the initial report. We have crafted a society that led to this, but I'm not even sure how that happened. There are a lot of factors, from all the blame thrown around after 9/11 and our willingness to sue for any little thing to the shock of a major attack with little history of prior smaller attacks to get us used to it, and more. I can see some of the pieces of the puzzle, but I'm not sure how we go there or how to fix it.

We are probably not talking about people who just don’t like brown people; the person or persons who made the report came to a conclusion that was wrong. But we are asked – nagged, really – through ad campaigns to report anything suspicious. Here in Boston, you hear announcement on the train that "if you see something, say something."

But what is suspicious? A trained law enforcement officer and a regular person will have wildly different ideas of what is suspicious enough to be watched or reported. Especially on the 10th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil. Did the person come to the wrong conclusion? Yes. Was he or she wrong to report it? If I stand by my assumption that it was not malicious mischief, I have to say no.
Once that report is made, law enforcement must follow up on it. There’s a protocol, and that protocol includes strip searching and handcuff restraint, as well as interrogation. It’s inconvenient and humiliating and violative, but you cannot have some officer or agent just activate their own bias and say, She looks like a nice lady, I’ll just let her go. Everyone gets treated at a baseline (which is, I hope, at least courteous), and if the person is uncooperative or argumentative, there is an escalation of force. The blogger has a right to feel angry, absolutely; that does not mean the officers acted inappropriately. We are outraged because the suspicion was unfounded. It would be a different story if they had found explosives in someone’s shoe.

It is a no-win situation, because there is no definition of suspicious behavior; sometimes it’s going to be right, and sometimes, as happened with this lady in particular, it will be wrong. And nobody will know which way it will fall until the situation plays itself out.

And, by the way: probable cause is NOT necessary to take a person suspected of terrorist activity off a plane. It by definition falls under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant rule under the Fourth Amendment.

Maybe the investigating teams should have considered things a bit more. Is the fact that three brown people are sitting next to one another and spending a lot of time in the bathroom really enough to make this level of response?

Did three brown people sitting near one another on a plane, some spending a lot of time in the bathroom, really warrant delaying the plane, chasing it with jets and then police cars, sending it to a isolated part of the runway, in a rather public manner arrest three-people and then hold them and treat them like criminals for several hours?

Is that all it really takes?

I think something a little less extreme could have been done.

Or maybe some standard of suspicion could be set that goes off of something a little more severe than three brown people sitting next to each other, two of whom spend a lot of time in the bathroom and they were talking to one another!

Hell, try eating airport and airplane food/drink and not spend a lot of time in the bathroom!

And if you think what these people were doing was "suspicious" enough to warrant all of this action ask yourself this question:

What if they were white?

What if everything they did, supposedly, on the plane happened exactly as claimed only these people were white. The foreign tongue/accent they were speaking with being whatever you want it to be.

Would this have happened?

And do you not think there was something a little less severe that could have been done to ensure the safety of the plane and those in the airport? Did these three people really have to be detained in this manner? Couldn't the plane have gone to a distant tarmac, have everyone get off the plane while dogs sniff the passengers -required to get off with their arms raised/whatever- as people disembarked and lined up on the tarmac meanwhile investigators go through the cabin and luggage compartment.

And what's bad is that in the light of all of this there's no public apology. TSA, DHS or whomever doesn't come out, publicly, and say what they did here was wrong, nothing was found, and that they're sorry for doing this to those three passengers.

Nope the three get a "Sorry" from the guy driving them back to parking lot and that's about it. Hell how about they get some free miles on their traveler's card or something?

But it's probably better to do all of this insane bullshit and treat a woman who is an American citizen like she's a terrorist on the scantest of information and embarrass her in such a display in the name of "safety."

And if there's hole in our security system so large that this kind of response is required on such tiny information then we've got even larger problems.

A story like this should carry with it a much larger outrage from the public but has it been mentioned at all on the news about what happened here beyond just a simple "another day of Homeland Security."

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I'm not sure what to think about this. What those three had to endure is awful and is certainly a violation of their rights. (They did detain and interview everyone on the plane, and I got the impression that those three were some of the first to be let go, so that's something.) However, the authorities were responding to a report of suspicious activity, however stupid that report was. The person who made the report is most likely a little too suspicious of Arab-looking people and shouldn't have made the report, but that person was also told (like the rest of us) by our government to use their own judgement and report suspicious activity, no matter how minor. That person was just doing what they were told a good citizen should do and reported what they deemed to be suspicious. Once that report was made, the authorities had to respond as they did, even though I imagine most of them knew early on it was stupid and there was nothing going on because if they were wrong and there was something going on and they didn't fully investigate it there would be hell to pay.

Here's the way I look at it. Were they to get a warrant to arrest and search someone, they would have needed probable cause. Did they have it in this case? Absolutely not. Nor did they have any lower standard that actually justified a stop. They had no specific description of suspicious activity. They probably didn't have any formal statement from the person reporting the activity. All they had was "someone said something was suspicious." That's unjustified no matter what. If they wanted to, they could have continued to watch those three individuals and investigate them, but that's it. In fact, it appears they did do a background check. That gave them no more information to justify a stop than they had previously. Once they realized all they had was a vague accusation, at best they could have asked to question her briefly. They should not have handcuffed her nor strip searched her. Nor should they even have taken her outside the airport to a cell.

 

[RoJoHen]

I'm curious to know what kind of extra precautions were being taken prior to these passengers boarding the plane in the first place. It's the 10th Anniversary of 9/11. You'd think security should have already been heightened to the point where any "suspicious behavior" would have been caught early on...not after the plane had already landed!

 

[farmkid]

I'm not sure what to think about this. What those three had to endure is awful and is certainly a violation of their rights. (They did detain and interview everyone on the plane, and I got the impression that those three were some of the first to be let go, so that's something.) However, the authorities were responding to a report of suspicious activity, however stupid that report was. The person who made the report is most likely a little too suspicious of Arab-looking people and shouldn't have made the report, but that person was also told (like the rest of us) by our government to use their own judgement and report suspicious activity, no matter how minor. That person was just doing what they were told a good citizen should do and reported what they deemed to be suspicious. Once that report was made, the authorities had to respond as they did, even though I imagine most of them knew early on it was stupid and there was nothing going on because if they were wrong and there was something going on and they didn't fully investigate it there would be hell to pay.

Here's the way I look at it. Were they to get a warrant to arrest and search someone, they would have needed probable cause. Did they have it in this case? Absolutely not. Nor did they have any lower standard that actually justified a stop. They had no specific description of suspicious activity. They probably didn't have any formal statement from the person reporting the activity. All they had was "someone said something was suspicious." That's unjustified no matter what. If they wanted to, they could have continued to watch those three individuals and investigate them, but that's it. In fact, it appears they did do a background check. That gave them no more information to justify a stop than they had previously. Once they realized all they had was a vague accusation, at best they could have asked to question her briefly. They should not have handcuffed her nor strip searched her. Nor should they even have taken her outside the airport to a cell.

I agree that's what they should have done. In a sane and reasonable world, that's what would have happened. However, as was pointed out above, if they had not gone full force and treated it as an actual incident, and it turned out there was a bomb or something and they missed it, there would be lawsuits to defy imagination and EVERYONE involved would have lost their job and there would be calls for criminal charges. If we're going to allow a society that accepts no failure and demands absolute security, we're going to have incidents like this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting the way it was handled; I'm just arguing that this is a result of the society we've crafted.

 

[Gov Kodos]

And, by the way: probable cause is NOT necessary to take a person suspected of terrorist activity off a plane. It by definition falls under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant rule under the Fourth Amendment.

And so slips away another piece of the Constitution, perhaps we can add a few more things to the list down the line.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

ETA: ^ While exigent circumstances justifies an absence of a warrant, since when does it justify an absence of probable cause?

I agree that's what they should have done. In a sane and reasonable world, that's what would have happened. However, as was pointed out above, if they had not gone full force and treated it as an actual incident, and it turned out there was a bomb or something and they missed it, there would be lawsuits to defy imagination and EVERYONE involved would have lost their job and there would be calls for criminal charges. If we're going to allow a society that accepts no failure and demands absolute security, we're going to have incidents like this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not supporting the way it was handled; I'm just arguing that this is a result of the society we've crafted.

And there should be lawsuits anyway for their violations of civil rights. 42 U.S.C. §1983 was designed for this kind of situation. Her Fourth Amendment rights were violated. If they're terrified of a civil suit and want to cover their asses, they should have avoided this activity rather than done exactly this.

They should have said, "OK there are concerned citizens. What can we do within the law to make sure people are safe." They could have taken affirmative action without stepping this low.

 

[Trekker4747]

If I recall correctly one of the "great" things the USA PATRIOT Act does is allow HSA and other law enforcement agencies to circumvent The Constitution, civil liberties, and what have you in the name of "saving America" from "terrorists."

So if they felt they had sufficient cause (i.e. someone saw three brown people sitting near one another, two of whom USED THE BATHROOM AROUND THE SAME TIME! (Gasp!)) to think terrorist activity was going on with the plane then they could basically do whatever they wanted without a warrant or any real "cause."

So it's possible that what happened here was perfectly "legal" for law enforcement and government to do.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I'll have to read the USA PATRIOT Act. I don't think it allows detention without at least reasonable articulable suspicion for US citizens on US soil. I would be shocked if it did otherwise. That strikes me as a violation of both the habeas corpus clause and the Fourth Amendment.

 

[RoJoHen]

I thought Bush got rid of Habeas Corpus. Or did we bring it back while I wasn't looking?

 

[Ghost07]

I don't know much about the "Law" or politics, but I do believe that the paranoid person who reported these people should stay off planes in the future. He/She seems to be too fragile to be allowed on a plane.

Somewhere towards the beginning of this thread, somebody predicted that this government could round people up the way Hitler did...with the full co-operation of the populace. That is wrong. They would NOT have full co-operation. I know I wouldn't cooperate, and neither would other sane people. I must believe that the majority of people in this country would go for the head of the president who allowed such a thing to happen.


A few years ago, a very fine Doctor was arrested because he sent money to a charity in Tehran. Of course, he was born in that city, and made the mistake of sending money home to help at the hospital where he trained. To this date, he is still locked away in a Federal prison. Years of his life lost because he was born in the wrong city.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I thought Bush got rid of Habeas Corpus. Or did we bring it back while I wasn't looking?

He did not. There were several attempts to get around it (just as shameless, but not a suspension). He was not authorized to suspend the writ.

One, immediately after September 11, the Justice Department detained many suspected terrorists as "material witnesses" even though there were no attempts to call them as a witness. There are still ongoing lawsuits related to this.

Two, Congress removed the power of the Supreme Court to hear appeals from detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Although the writ was available, there was no court that could lawfully issue it. The Court essentially ignored Congress and decided to hear the cases anyway saying that it was essentially the same as suspending the writ unlawfully.

The writ is still in effect, not that this woman was detained long enough for that to be a factor.

 

[PKTrekGirl]

When the PATRIOT Act was announced we knew that they had won.

^ THIS.

I don't know why any of you people who supported the Bush Presidency and his actions after 911 (including he Patriot Act, the invasion of Afghanistan & Iraq, etc.) are surprised by this. And don't tell me many of you were not in favor of it, because I was nearly a lone ranger on that issue around here for a VERY long time and took a lot of grief for being so.

The Patriot Act virtually assured this sort of thing would happen. And could continue to happen - not only against Muslims, but against ANYONE or ANY group the powers that be choose to arbitrarily label 'potential terrorists' at any given time. That thing destroyed our constitutional rights. And so no one should be shocked by this kind of behavior. Because we LET it happen.

If you supported the passage of the Patriot Act under the 'if you didn't do anything wrong, you shouldn't mind' mentality...well...you are merely reaping what you have sown.

 

[Davros]

This is seriously fucked up.

 

[bluedana]

One, immediately after September 11, the Justice Department detained many suspected terrorists as "material witnesses" even though there were no attempts to call them as a witness. There are still ongoing lawsuits related to this.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government in the lead suit (Al-Kidd) and dismissed the claim.

This incident and others like it should not have occurred, for many reasons. But there are so many misconceptions regarding what is and is not allowed under the 4th Amendment and why, and what the USA PATRIOT Act does and does not do, that it keeps us as a people from striking a balance between due process and security. The Supreme Court has had ample opportunities to strike it down as unconstitutional, but has not done so yet. Maybe they had reasonable suspicion (the standard applicable to non-routine searches), maybe they didn't. But that is a different question from whether you agree with the response or the Act (if that even applies here).

 

[Trekker4747]

Reading on it real quick, it seems that the USA PATRIOT Act only allows for the detaining of non-citizens for an indefinite amount of time and even there there's a bit of bureaucracy it has to go through to get there.

It could probably be argued these passengers were detained as "non-citizens" until their citizenship could be authenticated, but who knows?

Eitherway, it's hard to argue that the USA PATRIOT Act did not create an environment where this kind of stuff can happen more easily and put us in an environment of fear.

 

[Rory]

it's ridiculous, it's discrimination pure and simple.

things like this make me sad, people hating people or assuming their criminals purely because of their skin tone, you would think people would have stopped doing that by now

 

[Sean Aaron]

If their protocol for a single report of 'suspicious behaviour' is to send in the troops with handcuffs and guns, well maybe they need a better protocol! Perhaps the flight attendants, or the air marshal they were presumably carrying, being so security conscious on such an important date, could observe the persons in question to see if they noted any suspicious behaviour? Find a reason to talk to them and engage them in conversation to gauge their response? That might be what in the thief-taker trade we like to call a proportionate response to uncorroborated intelligence from an untested source.

Exactly what I was thinking: surely staff corroboration would have been sufficient to avoid this and if you are sending guys with guns, how about simple professional courtesy since you have no evidence they're mad bombers - otherwise you'd just blow their brains out John MacClane-style, right?

I'm sorry there's no real excuse for this. If I didn't have relatives in the States I wouldn't set foot there given how intrusive the security measures have become. Shit, going to Israel isn't as big a pain in the ass!

 

[JarodRussell]

the US is on the verge of an Arab-American internment

What, no love for Guantanamo?

 

[Sean Aaron]

I just read a very good editorial by a Canadian journalist who also happens to be Muslim. He hasn't had the same experience as this woman has but traveling has nonetheless become a hassle for him.

That was really good.

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

I just read the AP account of this. It's disturbing how many of the commenters after the story are applauding the actions of the police. Here are a few:

Good! Glad to see we are hard at work trying to stop terrorists.

Good job by the police and everyone involved. This needs to be done daily. The Arabic/Muslim people should not blame TSA/Police or America for this. They need to blame those Arabic/Muslim terrorists for putting them in this situation with such cowardly acts.

I'm not mad at what they did to her. They were simply keeping people out of harms way. and if something looks suspicious or out of the ordinary then please go for it. Its another person looking for attention and money just because they can use the 'race card'.

My hats off to the TSA and the cops. Screw this muslim b**&^&h~~!