Delta refuses boarding to Poop Strong man for flying while brown and wearing the security theater shirt I designed

Back in 2007, I designed a shirt for Woot! that featured a screaming eagle clutching an unlaced shoe and a crushed water bottle, surrounded by the motto MOISTURE BOMBS ZOMG TERRORISTS ZOMG GONNA KILL US ALL ZOMG ZOMG ALERT LEVEL BLOODRED RUN RUN TAKE OFF YOUR SHOES. Among the lucky owners of this garment is Arijit "Poop Strong" Guha, who proudly wore it this week as he headed for a Delta flight from Buffalo-Niagara International Airport to his home in Phoenix.

But it was not to be. First, the TSA Delta agents questioned him closely about the shirt, and made him agree to change it, submit to a secondary screening and board last. He complied with these rules, but then he was pulled aside by multiple Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority cops, more TSA, and a Delta official and searched again. No one found anything untoward, but --

The Delta official told Arijit he wouldn't be allowed to board, and neither would his wife. Period.

When Arijit complained about this, the Niagara Transport cops got "aggressive," questioning him further and noting in their discussions that "he looks foreign." Now Arijit understood that the problem was Flying While Brown. The Niagara Transport cops had lots of dumb questions, like why Arijit's wife hadn't taken his last name, why he had opted out of the pornoscanner, and then they sicced the drug-seeking dogs on him.

Delta rebooked them for a flight the next day, but didn't offer Arijit and his wife a hotel room overnight -- and when they turned up at the airport, they discovered that their "confirmed" seats weren't confirmed, and unless eight passengers on the oversold flight agreed to fly later, they wouldn't be getting on that plane, either.

It turns out that Delta has a pattern of removing brown people from its airplanes when its pilots and passengers evince thinly veiled (or obvious) racist fears, too.

Having been booted from our flight, the transit police now began to aggressively question us. At one point, I was asked where my brother lives (he was the one who gifted me the shirt). A bit surprised by the irrelevant question, I paused for a moment before answering.

“You had to think about that one. How come?,” she asked. I explained he recently moved. “Where'd he move from?” “Michigan,” I respond. “Michigan, what's that?,” she says. At this point, the main TSA agent who'd questioned me earlier interjected: “He said ‘Michigan’.” Unable to withhold my snark, I responded with an eye-rolling sneer: “You've never heard of Michigan?”

This response did not please her partner, a transit cop named Mark. Mark grabbed his walkie-talkie and alerted his supervisor and proceeded to request that he be granted permission to question me further in a private room. His justification?: “First he hesitated, then he gave a stupid answer.” Michigan, my friends, is a stupid answer.

And then, he decided to drop any façade of fair treatment: the veil was lifted, this was about who I was and how I looked: “And he looks foreign.”

Well, Buffalo is pretty close to Canada, so maybe he thought I looked Canadian. What does a Canadian look like anyway? Whatever it is, I’m sure that’s precisely what he was thinking. Certainly he wasn’t implying that dark-skinned people are not real Americans and that white people are the only true Americans. (I wonder what those who settled this land well before the arrival of Europeans would have to say about that.)

Arijit Vs. Delta


  1. These kind of situations always reminds me of East Germany and the STASI, who seem to have been reborn in the U.S. only under various government agencies. 
    I do wonder however, why do Americans complain about other nations who are so abusive to its citizens, but are perfectly fine when their own government does it to them?

      1. The guys who work in the huge white building with the big dome on top of it are suspiciously silent on the injustices going on in the USA.

        Which I guess means the big failure of US citizens is that a majority of us voted for them.

        1. No, only a majority of those US citizens who voted for “them”.  I think it was George Carlin who pointed out that a majority of US citizens votes for No One in essentially every presidential election.  No One is usually the best candidate so I salute the wisdom of my fellow Americans.

          Since I have zero control over US party politics and that’s where policy and candidates are decided (to the extent that it’s not just a charade in the first place) I don’t accept that the terrible candidates on offer let alone the ones who actually get elected are my responsibility.

          I think my response is pretty fair considering how consistently USians actually do complain about the very serious problems in the USA.

          Edit: Wait a second…are you suggesting we’d be in a better position if we had elected McCain/Palin? Because that WAS the other option.

          1.  You can’t just say you complain about it, but do nothing. That’s whining.
            Not taking responsibility for your elected officials in a supposedly democratic system isn’t really helping. Like it or not, they represent YOU. Or at least claim they do. 

          2. Key words: “supposedly”, “claim”

            I suspect you have just as little control over your own political system if not less and you’re just using this opportunity to talk shit to USians.  It’s a great idea.  It’s really helping my cynicism and hopelessness.

          3. > Since I have zero control over US party politics and that’s
            > where policy and candidates are decided

            We just had a primary election in Minnesota, and the turnout was 9%.  So I guess that leaves 91% of the voting public who will shake their heads at the options on the general election ballot, because they have confused ‘not showing up’ with ‘having zero control’.

          4. @ relawson Don’t some states allow a none of the above option in some ballots? In the UK we have had a NOTA (none of the above) party which aimed to field candidates in all constituencies. (Then again there is the nun of the above option and the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence).
            In the UK anybody over 18 can stand for parliament as long as they are sponsored by ten electors from the constituency they wish to serve and pay a £500 deposit to encourage only serious contenders. Hehe.

          5. There is always the option of spoiling your ballot paper – which is generally understood as a vote for none-of-the-above (well, this is how it works in the UK at least). Actually turning up and entering a spoiled paper is much stronger than not showing, which is usually brushed off as general apathy.

            As a side thought, I’d like to bet none of the various electronic voting systems out there have a spolit-my-vote option. That’s a serious omission.

          6. I believe the problem is not the system but the two parties entrenched within.
            The media outlets consistently marginalize any third party candidate. In fact, it’s so bad that if you don’t run as a republican or democrat you are labeled a third party rather than referring to the actual party name to which the candidate is a member.The upshot of the situation is that no one from an outside party has any chance of being elected to any office which participates in federal policy or lawmaking.Of those in the two parties, it’s become increasingly clear that no one of any worth will be supported by either party. They want people they can easily control. This leads me to suspect that all elected politicians at the federal level are people who have something in their past or present which the party can hold over their heads to ensure that the party line is towed and tight.

            The electorate, not having a valid choice of candidates is aware (at least on some level) of the situation and has dropped out of participating in the corruption. Sure, there are those who would say not voting is the problem, but I ask you, why vote when both parties are running the same machine?

            I think Mario Savio said it best when he shouted –
             “There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part! You can’t even passively take part! And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels…upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop! And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!”

        2. You know if I was the man in the huge white building who had his own private airplane I don’t think it’d really be a blip on my radar either…

          It’s like anything else the government passes, it’s probably not going to affect anyone actually making those laws in the first place.

          1. bcsizemoe, xzzy said ”
            The guys who work in the huge white building with the big dome on top of it”.  The “man in the huge white building who had his own private airplane” is the President. He lives in the White House. The White House does not have a dome.

      2. Those vast queues of people who meekly submit to everything without saying a word and walk through the cancer-ray machine without question, they aren’t complaining.

      3. Judging by all that blog comments rage, most of  those who complain seem to complain that the surveillance systems keeps hassling and catching the wrong guys.  Hardly more.  

    1. I actually read the original post and he has in this case good things to say about the TSA they apparently were polite professional and told him they had no issues.  His abuse came from the airline and the local Transportation Police. Still this kind of stuff is a major reason why my family opted to rent a car and spend 6 days on the road (3 there and 3 back) to visit my parents this summer instead of just flying out.

      1. I’m sure once enough of us start travelling this way they’ll just start stopping us and searching us and our cars.  … I realize they already do this, but, I mean, you know, all of us, every trip. 

    2. Why? Consider that it’s working exactly as intended and the real issue here is insufficient deference.

  2. What does a Canadian look like anyway?

    They have goggles and red capes and fly around in balloons, I hear.  And they’re, you know, disrespectful of the TSA, which is surely a crime by now.

      1. Why am I imagining something like a mash up between the bug eye scene in Total Recall (original) and any blood scene in Evil Dead 2….*shudder*

      2. Completely tangential, but… You know what the Quebec student protest nick-name is, right? Printemps Erablé — literally translated into “Maple Syrup Spring, a Quebecois pun on “Arab Spring”.

  3. If you continue to fly, despite the TSA being in place, you’re part of the problem.  Just. Say. No.

    There are plenty of ways to rationalize your “need” to fly, but they rarely boil-down to more than “but I really, REALLY want to” or “it would personally inconvenience me not to”. Well, things are already plenty inconvenient for the Mr. Guhas of this world, and your continued support of the system only helps to keep things bad. It’s easy to say “I wish things were different”. Instead, say “boycott, boycott, boycott”.

    Edit: so many of you describe visiting distant family as a “need”. It just, really, simply isn’t. I understand why it’s important, and that’s why you make the choices you do, but no one’s twisting your arm. You all make your own decisions, and if that means giving your money and approval by means of your cooperation to this agency, it’s because you decided that the issues at hand just aren’t important enough to you for you to change your behavior in a meaningful way. Maybe that doesn’t make you a bad person, but it absolutely means you’re part of the ongoing problem.

    1.  No car.  I live in MA.  Parents live in FL.  Open to suggestions, especially since I hated flying even before this bullshit.

      Let me guess: “I suggest you never visit your parents for the rest of their lives!”

      1. Bus, train, maybe saving? A used car doesn’t cost more than a couple plane tickets, anyway.

        I’m filing this under “but I really, REALLY want to”.

        If it helps, just ask yourself, “would my folks really want to see me that badly if they knew I had to tacitly approve the harassment of innocents in order to visit them?”

        1. Bus — cost more than flying and take three days instead of three hours. Train — cost WAY more than a plane and take a day or two instead of three hours. Buying a car…really? It’s not just the one-time cost of buying a car. I live in a city and it would cost a significant proportion of my rent just to park it let alone insure it, fuel it, and maintain it. I have no other use for a car other than driving to FL. Why don’t you throw out “ponies” and “airships” while you’re at it?

          Christ, what an asshole.

          Edit: I don’t consider my family an inconvenience. Hence the “kind words.” I wasn’t talking about how I would have to skip my trip to Maui.

          1. Thanks for the kind words.

            Yeah, like I said, choosing not to fly can be inconvenient.

            Edit: Sorry, I really didn’t intend to imply that your family is an inconvenience. I meant that due to added time and expense, alternate forms of travel can be more inconvenient than flying. So, you can say “I can live with the TSA” and have it easy, or say “that’s just not acceptable” and have it a little harder.

          2. He’s got a point why don’t you just ride a unicycle, or strap on some rollerblades and stop being so lazy.  It’s not like taking buses would cost you a full day in travel time or anything.  I mean we all get loads of vacation time right?

          3. Actually, I completely forgot that I had a private jet buried behind some shit in the back of my 46 car garage.  I’ll just use that.

          4. So in summary, you’d rather save a bit of money and be part of the problem.

            It costs slightly more to buy fairtrade food as well, but I’m not into slave labour so I justify it.

            I’m not sure why there’s an assumption that there should be absolutely no trade off for standing up for what you believe in.

        2. Bus and train aren’t realistic options for a lot of the places people need to go for work/family.

          As an example: I live in the same province as my hometown. My hometown is 16 hours from my current city. If I fly, I could fly there for a long weekend and not miss a day of work. If I drive, I need to take time off work (and be travelling for 16 hours instead of 2 hours).

          1. @NathanHornby:disqus It’s easy to say that when you’re living in the UK – shorter distances, better and often cheaper public transport options, longer holidays… for many people (such as myself), 30+ hours driving for a weekend break would be a deal breaker (especially with kids involved), so the ‘minor cost’ would be ‘not seeing family’.

          2. @NathanHornby:disqus : A general boycott wouldn’t even be effective anyway. The TSA isn’t a private for-profit company that has to deal with any meaningful form of competition or concern itself with things like “customer satisfaction.”

            The protest you’re describing is akin to saying “if you don’t like racial profiling by the highway patrol then just boycott the roads.”

        3. My mother lives in Scotland, any suggestions here? You should know, my kids don’t swim particularly well.

          1. I’ve read a number of accounts of travel by cargo ship that said that it was much nicer than a cruise ship because it wasn’t a floating theme park filled with tourists.

          2. @Antinous_Moderator:disqus I’ve actually looked into that for myself, but unfortunately they don’t allow kids onboard. I do know single people who have had good experiences though, so that could be an option for them. As far as I know, it does involve planning a few months ahead if you are interested.

        4. You do realize that many plane-free travel options ceased to exist when the airline industry came on the scene, right? Booking a stowage-class ticket on a steamer to Paris isn’t as feasible an option as it was in the 1930s.

          You might as well ask people to protest internet censorship by communicating via telegram.

          1.  Never seeing distant family members in person or wasting entire days of limited vacation time is a “very minor inconvenience”?

            Boycotting doesn’t work if the cost is massively higher for the person boycotting than the boycotted. 1% of the population sacrificing a large proportion of their few vacation days just so the airlines will see a 1% drop of customers isn’t going to work in the long term (and you won’t convince more than 1% of the flying population to make the sacrifices you ask). I’m pretty sure the TSA has had a larger effect than that on tourism, and it hasn’t changed anything.

          2. @Nathan Hornby:

            Not using the internet wouldn’t change policy. Starving airlines of money will change airport policy.

            The TSA is a government agency, sport. What do you think are the odds that the Department of Homeland Security gives two shits if a few civil libertarians decide to take a cross-country bus trip?

      2. Amtrak has service from Boston’s South Station to Florida.  Way more leg room, and you can get up and walk around. It’s not as fast, but you see a lot more.

      3. Those who really have to fly should get a really dark fake tan and wear that t-shirt.

        If enough people play the Spartacus gambit, the airlines will be put in the dilemma of either educating their staff or enforcing a de-facto boycott on *themselves* by refusing large numbers of paying customers.

      4.  Take Amtrak.  It’s awesome!  I take Amtrak all the time from Baltimore to Florida.  If you can spring for it, the sleeper cars are the most luxurious way to travel I’ve ever experienced – far better than first class on an airplane, because you get privacy.  You can lock the door and it’s like a hotel room. 

      5.  Take a bus, Car pool with a friend. Take a train part way.  I can think of a few ways. Oh and the ever present “hitch hiking” LOL

      1. Maybe the state could partner with the private sector to build an inter-island boat.  One big enough to transport cars.  Like a ferry, but really big– not just a regular ferry, but maybe some kind of super ferry.  Just an idea.  

    2. If you continue to fly, despite the TSA being in place, you’re part of the problem.

      That’s some real nice victim blamin’, that is.

      1. I don’t read it that way.  He’s not talking about the victim, he’s talking about you.  But not about me, actually – because I stopped flying after one experience shortly after 9/11, where I was not permitted to help a person in distress because I did not have a uniform.  Fuck the airlines, let them die.

    3. Edit: so many of you describe visiting distant family as a “need”. It just, really, simply isn’t.

      How dare people put emotional attachment to family over your hope that enough economic pressure will build up to encourage reform of abuses at airports, huh? It’s sad they can be so selfish as not to care how things affect other people.

    4.  How about where one’s employer wants to send them to someplace that is not part of the Americas continent? Like Hawaii, Japan, Taiwan, China, etc.?

    5. It is in no way feasible for an “ethical boycott” of the airline industry to have any impact whatsoever on whether or not there is the TSA.  It’s a really nice thought that everyone would just say “I’m willing to make big sacrifices to try and effect change” but that simple isn’t going to happen.  Business travelers aren’t going to quit their jobs in order to stay off planes, and people aren’t going to waste time and vacation days to drive thousands of miles which can be flown in hours. 

      It may be difficult to effect change through non-economic means, but the TSA came to being that way and will have to cease that way as well.

    6. Sure, I could go ahead and quit my job when they need me to go to Hawaii or Europe, but that seems pretty drastic. 

  4. I have that shirt, but I’ve never had the balls to wear it through airport security…my hat’s off.

    1. I kind of wish I had that shirt.  But I too lack the testicular fortitude to wear it to the airport even if I had it. Which is good, because I’m pretty sure my wife would refuse to bail me out.

  5. Stories like this–plus my own nightmare of overzealous “security” procedures (denied a pre-purchased ticket at the counter and no refund all because my credit card included my company’s name in addition to the name on my driver’s license) are why I’ve been on flight strike since 2007. I drive instead–and enjoy the trip a HELL of a lot more. 

    Arrive two hours before your flight? I’m already out of town and well underway when I used to be waiting with no shoes on. That 45-minute to an hour delay? Not for me, thanks. Now I’m THREE hours underway. You get the idea.Now hear this, TSA…some of us vote with our $$$. Not nearly enough of us, though.

    1. Not to mention the US is gorgeous to drive through. Even the flat parts in the middle have some lovely scenery if you’re willing to get off the interstates. I just got done with a 5500 mile road trip and it was many times more enjoyable than any vacation I’ve taken that involved a plane. 

      For people on a time crunch, there are some diminishing returns. If you accept that dealing with the airport theater is going to suck away at least a day of your life once you factor in all the delays and weariness caused by flying, cars are really only equivalent up to a range of about 700 miles (about the best you can hope for in a day of driving before fatigue sets in). 

      Anything longer than that an a plane is faster.. but I still maintain it’s a lot less fun. America is beautiful.

  6. I gotta say, the shirt is kind of the equivalent of joking “yeah, some guy gave me this suitcase to take with me” when they used to ask “has any unknown person or persons contacted you about carrying luggage for them blah blah.”  It’s funny when you’re not in an airport.  

    1.  I don’t agree with this statement at all.  In no way do these situations come close to being the same thing.

    2.  I gotta say it’s not like that at all.  Do you think the shirt might blow up?  A bag can, but I don’t think a T-shirt can. 

      1. True, the shirt is not likely to blow up, but the situation sure did. You tease the lion at your own peril.

        1. That lion got his claws and teeth handed to them by the people. If they don’t respect their master, it’s time to take those teeth and claws away.

  7. ZOMG why are these sold out? That shirt is amazing.  Put them back on sale and donate some proceeds to poop strong, I will buy one!

      1. That’s an amazing shirt! I fly with my pin hat (50+ pins on one baseball-cap sized hat), which includes the Amnesty button my Irish friend sent me. 

    1.  Seconded. I want one of those SO BAD. Have they been selling them for 5 years straight and just now ran out again, or were they a limited-time run?

  8. Homeland Security and the TSA need to be abolished. They have done more to tarnish the reputation of this country than any other bureaucracy in as long as I can remember.

    1. I believe it is over 1 Trillion US spent on Homeland Security, PBS Frontline did a story on just how many non-descript HS buildings have been built.  Was it money well spent?  Pretty much the worst terrorist incidents such as the Shoebomber, the UNderwear bomber, and the Times Square bomber were caught by other passengers on the planes – and in the case of the Times Square -other vendors alerted the police.

  9. Similar stories…

    Once I was given a lot of extra scrutiny and had to explain in great detail why my laptop had an EFF “Come Back With A Warrant,” sticker across the top. “What does this mean?” to which I said, “It means come back with a warrant.”

    Second I had a hoodie on from the band The Cult. It said on the back: “Destroy L’America” That was a fun one to explain and a very extensive groping.

    I had another experience where I opted for the groping and they not only made me wait 30 minutes, but they stood around talking about me and laughing as if I’m the idiot because I won’t go through their sexy undressing machine.

    1. “Actually, you guys are probably the bigger risk, right? Why are you evading atttention by working here?”

  10. Hold the phone, here — don’t the TSA now frequent bus terminals? And what about the frakkin’  carbon footprint, driving instead of flying?

    1.  International flights can use around 1 ton of carbon for each passenger, and I imagine cross-country flights aren’t any different.  I suppose if you’re travelling with the whole family or friends (say 4 people), driving cross-country would be less carbon intensive.

  11. As a resonant aside, it should be noted that I have flown to three cities in Canada and one in Jamaica since obtaining my NSK passport. In all incidents I have offered my Canadian passport as identification, along with my provincial/driver’s identification as well as the NSK passport. The only weirdness experienced was enroute back to Calgary from Jamaica — the official looked at me like I was wearing a tinfoil hat. Other than that, no authoritarian freakouts, yet.

      1. It’s funny you say that. I used to wear that very same shirt when I traveled — before I started wearing this one. Turns out I got far fewer “random” searches with that one. And so, it’s back to wearing that one. 

  12. When this shit starts up, he needs to pull out his iphone and start video recording. He should have his iPhone out or a camera around his neck at the airport, since he is brown.

    1. At least in the airports I’ve been in, recording is prohibited at the security areas.  I wonder if he wouldn’t have gotten in more trouble if he’d whipped out the recorder.

  13. They told us all of the terrorists were brown and evil out to get us, the sad thing is these so called security experts are the biggest terrorist threat to the country.

      1. Until they invoke state secrets to kill the story in court, and then arrest the journalist as a suspected terror suspect or leaking “classified” information and disappear them down a hole as a reminder to anyone else that wants to challenge the Government.

        So the difference between us and a dictatorship seems to be we just don’t understand we are screwed yet.

        1. Well, maybe the journalist’s work will be to expose those barriers. If TSA agents are required to sign an oath of secrecy, that’s still information we don’t currently have. The entire operation is opaque.

  14. The man being brown is not the problem. Don’t know why it’s included in the story other than for gratuitous race-chat. The shirt’s messaging is obviously the issue. I mean, in case no one flies anymore because of the horror of TSA, the security screeners employed in this useless effort represent the most delightfully diverse racial cross-section one could ask for in this country.

      1. Okay, I’ll bite. Of course, it isn’t a threat. I assume a screener seeing the words “terrorist”, “bomb”, “kill” – just went whaaa? as the wearer was hoping they’d do in this tiny lounge act in the larger security theatre.

        1. The shirt was an I.Q. test and TSA scored at about room temperature. 

          Here’s a hint for TSA if they get a retest: Real terrorists don’t wear shirts that says “TERRISTS” or “BOMB”. 

        2. Going “Whaaa?” isn’t a problem. It’s going from “Whaaa?” to questioning based on the “Whaaa?” to  “First he hesitated, then he gave a stupid answer,” to “And he looks foreign.”

          Man, I hate the “Why did you hesitate?” question, have done ever since I was a teenager and a bus conductor decided I was claiming a child’s fare illicitly and started questioning me. How about, “I hesitated because it was a fucking stupid question, and you’re a jumped-up gauleiter with an inflated sense of self-worth and I don’t know why I’m fucking talking to you anyway?”

          Ahem. Sorry. Thirty-five years ago and it still rankles.

    1. The man being brown is not the problem. Don’t know why it’s included in the story other than for gratuitous race-chat.

      So that “he looks foreign” comment… just a casual conversation-starter?

        1. Let me turn that around.  If a white man wore that shirt through airport security, do you think there would have been a problem?  I’m going to say the answer is “NO”.  Since the transit police specifically said “he looks foreign.”

          1. I imagine there might have been a problem, but the “brown” aspect bumped it to a whole ‘nother level.

        2. C’mon.

          I totally get it.  You’re just not a ‘fact-based person’ and you’re tired of being picked on because of it.

          1. The c’mon meant This scenario doesn’t ignite without the t-shirt. Ask Arjit Guha if TSA has ever singled him out like this before. I’d accept his answer, of course.

        3. Given that I’ve been randomly selected for special screenings somewhere between 30 and 50 times over the last decade, I’d say yes.

          1. I’ll assume this is really you, thanks for responding. By special screenings, if you mean like this last encounter with the t-shirt that ended with denial of service, I’d sue the airline and TSA. Clearly you’re a marked man with or w/o the t-shirt. If special screenings means wanded, groped, x-rayed, bag-sniffed – I’ve got at least 25. I despise it, too. Sorry I misspelled your name.

        4. Sure, the shirt was obviously part of the issue too. But you’re going out of your way to imply that race wasn’t even a factor.

          Which brings us back to that “he looks foreign” comment… just a casual conversation-starter?

    2. Did you get a chance to read the post above? It can answer your question:

      And then, he decided to drop any façade of fair treatment: the veil was lifted, this was about who I was and how I looked: “And he looks foreign.”

    3. Actually, I have a theory that Delta did this to get the conservative traveller. I call it the Chick-Fil-A Strategy, of discriminating just so that you can get more dollars from bigots.

  15. Has any terrorist… anywhere… ever… been apprehended wearing a T-shirt obviously intended to attract MORE attention from security personnel?

    1. I would just like to say thank you for putting spaces after your ellipses.

      Frankenwords bad.

        1. Making a note to reduce personal usage… of ellipses… when commenting on… BoingBoing. 

          My Best, Bruce

  16. Seriously, the guy was asking for it wearing that.

    I mean, couldn’t he have left his brown skin at home before getting on the plane? Didn’t he think for one second that it might scare the people around him? 

    Those guilty of being brown-in-public should have a little consideration for those around them before stepping outside looking like that.

    1. *Reads first sentence*
      Oh great, another victim blamer.
      *continues reading*
      *realizes the sarcasm oozing out of the post*
      *bursts out laughing*

      I do have to say, that was a pretty good one.

  17. Cory, can you make this shirt available for purchase again? I’m sure a LOT of us who missed it the first time would like to get it. Not being brown, I could even wear it to the airport… :/

    If not, is there a high res version of the art we could use to make our own? Or would that be a violation of the licensing, if it’s being made by a commercial printer?


  18. I don’t know what I”m more erked at…the blatant BS that the TSA did to this guy, or that he got the one Woot shirt that I was not able to get.  =)

  19. He has a right to wear what he wants but a shirt with the words “terrorist” and “kill” printed on it might not be the most pragmatic choice if a person wants to travel by plane without delay. He could have been slick about it and worn it under another shirt which he could have removed mid flight.

      1. He wasn’t prosecuted for wearing the shirt. He knew wearing a shirt with words like “terrorist” and “kill” through an airport would draw attention to himself and, surprise, he got extra attention.

    1. You may be a teeny-tiny bit unclear about what a “right” is with respect to the behavior of a government agency.

  20. First Poop Strong clashes with the health insurance industry, then the TSA?  Next week copyright trolls?

  21. My question is “What in the hell does this shirt mean” and “who is stupid enough to design it?”

    I think it is pretty stupid to try and board a plane with a shirt that says “Kill us all” or “Bombs”.  Even before 911 I think this should be inappropriate., I don’t care what the color of your skin is.

    Although an “intelligent” terrorist would probably not wear something like this, it does not mean that a disturbed person would not.

    1. In all other free societies around the globe – you know, those USians like to belittle as inferior – people have rights and you don’t lose them because you behave inappropriate. Either you break laws or you don’t.

      1. He didn’t question his right to wear the shirt. He questioned the common sense of wearing it in an airport.

    2. Regarding your first question, if you can’t figure that out for yourself, maybe you’re not in a position to be calling anyone  “stupid”.

      Regarding the second question, maybe it was stupid not to read the very first sentence of the post?

  22. guy who wears attention grabbing shirt gets attention. Both the kind he hoped for, and the kind he expected, with just a little bit different kind of crossover between the two than he had planned. Let’s all continue to join him in acting like we’re accomplishing something here.

  23. The biggest travesty about the TSA and airline screening in the US is that it doesn’t actually make us any safer.

  24. This shows precisely why we need our passenger train system back. It was pretty good when I was young and way cool to boot. Possibly more energy efficient, but not sure about than one.

  25. I can’t believe they questioned her why she didn’t take his last name. For fuck’s sake, why does everyone in the Niagra Falls area have to be so damn old fashion…and racist.

    1. In the extraordinarily unlikely event that I wanted to visit my few living relatives, it would be a 2,988 mile car trip requiring 48 hours of driving time. If I drove eight hours per day, that would be twelve days of driving, round trip.

  26. If this man wanted to fly from point A to point B he should have not worn the t-shirt. I am sorry to say the TSA and the airline employees have a lot of power and in today’s times you can not fight with them. What they did was wrong but unless you want to make a political statement you can not win with these guys.

  27. Too tired to read the comments, sorry. 

    Just wanted to say that Delta is the one airline I’ve vowed never to fly on again. When I went to D.C. for the March for Sanity, I was traveling with my friend. We’re both white, but he’s got a long ponytail, and we were only traveling for the weekend. So, of course we had to be a threat. (Neither of us were wearing graphic t-shirts in the airport. We wanted to get to D.C.) 

    First we pulled out of line and got wiped for possible explosives residue. 

    Then when we got to our flight, with only carry-ons, we got shifted to the end of the check-in. The plane was apparently not large enough to hold humans and their carry-ons, so they decided to try to take my luggage from me to check it. (Along with few other people’s.) I told them to shove it (politely) as I was carrying anti-convulsant medication in my one bag, and couldn’t risk it going missing for the weekend on the opposite side of the country. They nearly removed us from the plane because I didn’t want to be separated from medically-necessary prescription drugs or carry them in hand. At the last second, one of the Phoenix Airport general security people arrived and told Delta that they were being asshats.

    We made the flight, and I will never fly Delta again.

Comments are closed.