>Instead we have people saying "I am white and I set one off in 2003 in Australia and they let me through, therefore that demonstrates that this is racism" (ign

>Instead we have people saying "I am white and I set one off in 2003 in Australia and they let me through, therefore that demonstrates that this is racism" (ignore every case where non-whites got a couple of quick questions and went through). You are correct that anecdotal reports of white people not being harassed after setting off the detectors is not particularly strong evidence. > Go to JFK or Newark and tell me that they pick on non-whites, and I'll tell you that they must have hundreds of thousands of employees working around the clock to manage that. Racism is not a matter of "white or non-white". The "blows up planes" stereotype is specific to people who look "Arab". And of course they're not harassing everyone who fits their stereotype; the explosive detector surely did play a role (and people suggesting that it was intentionally triggered are being silly). It's just that your estimate of that being "95% of this story" is grotesquely optimistic. >Further what an FBI agent purportedly said during the conversational stage is utterly irrelevant. Perhaps the FBI agent didn't have a sense of the situation before he arrived. I would guess, given his position and the fact that he seemed to be the most competent and perceptive person the author dealt with, that his assessment is as reliable as we can expect to get. It certainly isn't irrelevant. That it was said in conversation is not very relevant. Are you suggesting that he made that comment inaccurately to reassure the author? "You have to understand, we're just very racist"? As for various things that other commenters have said, I'm not sure what response you want from me. I didn't say them. I'm sorry people can't read?