Shah Rukh says America needs to offer more 'warmth'

After his detention at a US airport sparked a furore in India, Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan asked people back home not to take the issue further, even as he said that America needs to offer "a little more warmth and speed in its processes".

In Houston where he arrived from Chicago to attend a 'Meet and Greet' carnival, Khan who was "inspected" at the Newark airport on his arrival from India, said he respected the procedures the US requires incoming foreigners to follow but maintained his experience was "not pleasant".

The actor, who had earlier told his fans that he did not feel like stepping on US soil again, said while everybody loves what America has to offer "but I think it needs to offer a little more warmth and speed in its processes".

However, he requested "everyone" back home not to take the issue "further than it should be".

"I didn't mean it to be like this. Because I had to make a few calls to get out of that place, so I guess it became a big piece of news," he told a news channel.

Khan, 43, was stopped and questioned at Newark airport on his arrival from India for about two hours on Saturday and was released only after the Indian consulate intervened, an incident that caused widespread anger in India with the government saying it would take up the issue with the US.

"I just like to tell people that I do understand the anger and angst and disturbance that an incident like this can cause to one's psyche," the actor said.

Khan said: "I think its a little grey or black and we should not spend time on this anymore".

The actor, who is in the US to promote his upcoming film 'My Name is Khan', mingled with his fans here and signed autographs for them. Ironically, the film revolves around a Muslim character and his experiences in a post 9/11 America.

"The film's issue is much larger than just being a stop at the immigration. Its not ironic, may be we made the film because one thinks this is an issue that should be addressed," Khan said.

Commenting on the incident in Newark, he said: "I understand a country has to be a little careful specifically with the things that have happened".

But, he said, instead of doing a retina and finger scan, which is a normal procedure, the immigration authorities kept telling him that his name was "common".

"... They kept telling me your name is common... and I was too polite to ask common to what," he said.

US authorities had denied that the procedure they followed with the Indian actor had anything to do with his name and described it as mere "inspection," attributing it to the delay in the arrival of his baggage.

Khan said America needed to understand that "its not an isolated parallel universe existence for this country".

"There is a whole world which makes all the good and bad that is happening. So if you are scared of violence, terrorism, all of us are responsible for it. It is not that the rest of the world is and America is not," he said.

SRK is bigger than Pitt, Madonna: Gotham Chopra

Shah Rukh "is the sun among stars in the bright Bollywood Galaxy," says spiritual guru Deepak Chopra's son Gotham Chopra, "Yeah, the same guy Newark New Jersey Customs officials detained yesterday for several hours on account of Shah Rukh having the same last name as some dude on a terror watchlist somewhere."

Gotham Chopra blogged about the time his non-Indian wife and he met the My Name is Khan star. As people who are used to bumping into stars, they considered themselves quite immune to being star-struck. But there was this one time that they weren't so immune. "Not Brad Pitt, not George Clooney, not Tom Cruise, Denzel, Bruce Wayne, Gladiator, or any of the other usual suspects. No we're talking the BIGGEST movie star in the world ladies and gents, Bollywood sensation SHAH RUKH KHAN."

Gotham narrates, "My wife Candice who is not Indian has watched countless Shah Rukh Bollywood movies with my two nieces. ...Anyway, so Candice and I are in Mumbai to attend a good friend's wedding. Shah Rukh - who I had met casually a few times before - was in attendance at the party, drawing a huge crowd of admirers as expected. Still, at one point, Candice, myself, and Shah Rukh find ourselves face to face. I shook his hand and reminded him that we had met before once or twice.
"'Of course,' he nodded and smiled, 'it's nice to see you again.' He turned to Candice. 'But madam,' he bowed to her and took her hand, 'it's a true privilage to meet you.' He bent down on his knee and kissed her palm.

"Like I said, her knees buckeled and her cheeks flushed red. She giggled like a school girl and sheepishly looked away. The moment passed as another admirer pulled Shah Rukh's attention away. Candice would gush over it for weeks....

Back to the New Jersey incident, Gotham writes, "This is no joke people. Shah Rukh Khan is the biggest movie star in India, a country of 1.3 billion people, thereby making him the biggest movie star in the world. I'm struggling to find a comparable here in the US. No offense to Will Smith or Matt Damon or Pitt, Cruise, Clooney, Angelina or whomever else you can think of, but they all pale in comparison. Maybe Michael Jackson, God rest his soul, or Madonna are vaguely comparable. Maybe."

"But here's the thing. It's not just American customs agents being provincial, it's the fact that I would guess that in India alone, there are several million Khans. I'm not joking. Khan is one of the most common Muslim names and India is not even an Islamic country. "Ghengis Khan," anyone? Khan is like Jones or Smith. This is how our security works in the US? This is how we are catching terrorists? Are you kidding me?"

The detention was shameful, he states, "A few weeks ago, a big to-do was made about African American Hardvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. getting arrested outside of his own house in Suburban, Massachusetts. Now this. Racial profiling in America, either subtley as it appears to have happened with Gates in Mass (my hometown) or by the book as it appears to have happened in NJ is shameful. It's based on ignorance and it actually perpetuates the same sort of hostility it aims to undo."

He adds, "I'm not going to get all crazy about this and blow it out of proportion, though I do think it's a big deal and could see it blowing up if Indians in India get galvanized. The point is that despite all of our social networking and our flattening of the world and our East-West fusion culture and the fact that people in Milwaukee do yoga , we're still pretty provincial here in the good ol' US of A and there is an implict danger to it."

Gotham concludes, "Trust me on this one, Shah Rukh Khan is no terrorist. That's not my wife's type."

SRK's detainment is not a big deal, Salman

Bollywood has been divided into numerous opinions over Shahrukh Khan’s arrest in the US airport. If Bollywood celebrities like Karan Johar, Priyanka Chopra, Ritiesh Deshmukh, Vishal-Shekhar and Pritish Nandy expressed shock over his detention at the airport then Salman Khan carries an altogether different opinion.

Salman Khan said, "It is not such a big deal, when we go there we too have to go through the security check. There has been no attacks there since 9/11 because of their stringent security measures. I think it is a good thing (the security)."

In the past too, there are ample examples of well known personalities being held for their title and for security reasons. Former President of India, A P J Abdul Kalam, was refrained by an American airline at the international airport here before boarding the aircraft in April 2009.

Bollywood actor Neil Nitin Mukesh too was detained at the US airport when he was on a frequent visit to US for 'New York' shooting for being too fair. Director Kabir Khan also meted with the similar situation.

How American media reported SRK’s detention

'This never happened to Schwarzenegger,' wrote New York Daily News

Even as US officials denied accusations that they detained Bollywood icon Shah Rukh Khan at an airport because he is Muslim, the incident earned him willy-nilly a splash in the American media.

"This never happened to Schwarzenegger," noted New York Daily News reporting how "Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan, who plays a Muslim mistaken for a terrorist in his latest film, says he was racially profiled at Newark Airport and detained for two hours on Friday."

"The 43-year-old 'Tom Cruise of India' - cited last year by Newsweek as one of the world's 50 most influential men - was released only after Indian diplomats intervened," it said describing him "as the international box office sensation" who has appeared in more than 70 films.

It took note of US Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer's statement that "Shah Rukh Khan, the actor and global icon, is a very welcome guest in the United States," Roemer said on Saturday (August 15). "Many Americans love his films."

"But there were no Bollywood buffs in Newark as Khan came through the airport on his way to Chicago for a celebration of India's independence day" it noted. "I told them I am a movie star," Khan said - although the line fell on deaf ears.

The Washington Post in a report from New Delhi said "One of India's biggest movie stars said he was detained and questioned ... causing outrage across his home country and reigniting discussion of the hardships many Indians say they face while travelling abroad.”

The Post also noted the incident followed another recent example of an Indian coming under suspicion for what talk show pundits here call "flying while brown." Last month, Continental Airlines apologised to former Indian president Abdul Kalam for frisking him at the New Delhi airport.

Meghnad Desai, an Indian-born economist, member of Britain's House of Lords and author of books on Indian cinema and globalisation, joked in an interview in New Delhi that the whole thing seemed like a publicity stunt for Khan's new film.

"The US government was an inadvertent accomplice to 20th Century Fox, which is investing millions in this movie," he said. "This was a no-no for India-US relations."

The New York Times too took note of the incident with an agency story headlined "Bollywood Icon Detained at US Airport."

A spokesman for the US Bureau of Customs and Border Protection said Khan was questioned for 66 minutes as part of the agency's routine process to screen foreign travellers and was not detained.

"Due to privacy concerns, Customs and Border Protection cannot disclose the specifics regarding any traveller's inspection," the CBP said in a statement.

"Generally speaking, travellers applying for admission into the United States are subject to inspection. The inspection process may include a more in-depth interview and baggage examination."

"CBP strives to treat all travellers with respect and in a professional manner, while maintaining the focus of our mission to protect all citizens and visitors in the United States," it said, adding," inspection lasted a little more than a hour."

"Unfortunately, Khan's checked luggage was lost by the airline which contributed to his delay during CBP processing," the statement said.

"Travellers may be referred for further inspection for a variety of reasons to include identity verification, intent of travel, and confirmation of admissibility."

Shahrukh detention in US: Obama's effigy burnt in UP

Congress workers today staged a demonstration and burnt the effigy of US President Barack Obama here for detention of Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan at an American airport.

The party workers, who gathered in front of the historic Anand Bhawan, raised slogans against the US administration and termed as an "insult to one billion Indians" the questioning of Khan at Newark airport.

The 43-year-old actor was detained and questioned for two hours at the Newark Airport near New York yesterday.

India to take up strongly issue of SRK's detention

India will "strongly" take up with the US the issue of detention of Bollywood star Shahrukh Khan at an American airport, Civil Aviation Minister Praful Patel said today, asserting that such incidents were unacceptable.

"We will take the issue with the United States government strongly. Such incidents involving Indians due to their religion or nationality should not happen... we will not accept it," Patel told reporters here.

Khan was detained for two hours at Newark airport by immigration officials after his name matched with some names on a common checklist, sparking angry reactions in India. He was released following the intervention of Indian Consulate officials.

The Bollywood actor was in the US to take part in the South Asian Carnival on the occasion of India's Independence Day. Khan had yesterday termed the incident as "uncalled for".

SRK spoke with dignity: Shashi Tharoor

Author, former UN under-secretary general and now Minister of State for External Affairs, Shashi Tharoor has joined the voices against actor Shah Rukh Khan.

Shah Rukh Khan's two-hour detention at a US airport.

Tharoor said, "This also happens to hundreds of innocent Muslims daily who don't have one billion people to stand up for them. It raises real questions about US procedures."

He wrote on his tweet, "To all who asked about SRK, we all found it offensive and have asked the US to look into it. SRK himself spoke about the matter with great dignity."

Yes, minister!

Earlier, Shah Rukh said, "The US has developed religious paranoia over the years. My guard was also denied a visa because he has the same last name as mine."

The Bollywood star was detained for over two hours at the Newark airport, New Jersey. He was released after Indian embassy officials vouched for him. He was in the US to attend Independence Day celebrations. Currently filming for My Name is Khan, he underwent "humiliating" questioning even as he told authorities he was an Indian celebrity. His bodyguards were also grilled.

Several Bollywood celebs are in the US for I-Day celebrations, including Katrina Kaif, Kareena Kapoor and Saif Ali Khan.

SRK was cleared in 66 minutes, say US officials

WASHINGTON: Allegations that Bollywood megastar Shah Rukh Khan was ''detained'' for two hours on account of his last name are incorrect, US Customs and Border Protection officials said on Saturday, maintaining that the process of clearing him lasted a little more than an hour and even that delay was because his baggage had not arrived on the same flight he did.

In clarifications to the media aimed at giving their version of the episode that has created a ruckus in India -- and attracted wide coverage in the US -- CBP officials gave the following sequence of events. After a preliminary check at the immigration counter, Khan was recommended for a secondary check in a separate room (for reasons the CBP would not specify).

Because there were other people ahead of Khan in the room, this process took a little time and this was further extended because the airline had failed to load his checked luggage on the same flight. Still, the whole process took a little more than an hour, officials said, maintaining that ''C.B.P. strives to treat all travelers with respect and in a professional manner, while maintaining the focus of our mission to protect all citizens and visitors in the US.'' The New York Post quoted one official saying the whole process took 66 minutes.

Meanwhile, Khan reeled back a little from his initial rage against the security process, telling a news agency, ''I think it is a procedure that needs to be followed. But it is an unfortunate procedure.'' In engagements in Atlantic City and Chicago over the weekend, he said he does not feel like stepping on American soil anymore, but the ''love and affection of his fans'' would keep bringing him back. He also ruled out seeking an apology for the incident.

The Khan episode attracted plenty of attention in the US and across the world with media outlets and blogs holding forth on the incident. ''Wrath of Profiled Khan'' the New York Post said in a story, while the New York Times blogged on the incident under the headline ''Questioning a Bollywood VIP.'' The incident was also reported extensively in the Islamic world. ''Muslim name holds India Star at US airport,'' the portal Islam Online reported.

While thousands of fans reacted with blind outrage over the perceived slight to their hero, others saw felt the incident was blown out of proportion (variously by Khan, his supporters, and even the media). A few saw it as a publicity stunt. ''He’s come to America tons of time before and it has to happen when he was promoting ''My Name is Khan'' about a Muslim boy who goes to US post-9/11?'' asked Anirudh Bhati, a student from Gandhinagar, Gujarat, in an online message to ToI. ''Now I’m gonna watch the movie no matter what happens.''

Shah Rukh may have been victim of random selection parameter

Actor Shah Rukh Khan's two-hour detention and questioning at the Newark International Airport could well be a result of the random selection parameter built into the US immigration's security system rather than racial profiling.

Now whether that parameter was designed deliberately to focus on people of certain names, religion, background, nationality or race is a different story altogether. On the face of it, Khan may have been randomly picked out by the US Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services' database. The system at the airport threw up Khan's name for any number of variable reasons. It is hard to speculate on the algorithm that triggered it.

Someone might argue that the Khan = Muslim = possible terrorist = detention logic, although profoundly offensive, it seems to have been built into the system with the rationale that it is better to humiliate a thousand innocent Khans than let a potential terrorist Khan enter the US.

However, this explanation does not make sense because Khan has been visiting the US for many years. As a matter of fact, he only recently finished a shooting schedule of his latest film My Name is Khan, which ironically deals with the kind of stereotyping and profiling that he just experienced.

Isn't the Bureau's database designed in a way where the immigration officer, who detained Khan, could have instantly pulled up the actor's record and known about his many past visits? Apparently not, because once the system randomly selects someone it is expected of the officer in question to go through the standard procedure of detention for questioning.

At some level it is understandable that the whole security apparatus has been designed to not just take out potential terrorists in their first attempt but to disrupt their operation at any and every stage. No one at the Bureau is likely to acknowledge that the system works the way it does because of a built-in combination of intelligent and brute logic as well as preordained bias.

Forget the Bureau's own database; a simple Google search of Khan's name would have at the very least made the detaining officer question his action. There are 3,610,000 search results of his name on Google. Depending on when it is searched this number is sometimes even higher. Such a Google search should have stopped any reasonable immigration officer in their tracks to wonder that for a terrorist, Khan has managed a fantastic cover of being one of the world's biggest movie stars.

Perhaps behind creating a security system that depends as much on brute and random logic as intelligent sifting was the deeply embarrassing case of Mohammad Atta, the ringleader of the 9/11 terror attacks.

In 2005, Navy Captain Scott J Phillpott, who was in charge of the Pentagon's counter-terrorism project codenamed 'Able Danger', created a stir when he said in January 2000 his team had identified Atta as a member of an Al-Qaeda terror cell operating in Brooklyn, New York. And yet Atta was able to travel in and out of the US unmolested. Atta's lapse was attributed to the fact that he first went by part of his name as Mohamed el-Amir and eventually travelled to the US in June 2000 as Mohammed Atta.

The result of the security churning that followed 9/11 was the compilation of a list of nearly 1.1 million names who were either terror suspects or people of interest by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The list has been a subject of serious scrutiny and criticism by civil liberties groups, which believe it is sweeping in its reach and more often than not throws up those who have absolutely nothing to do with any terrorist groups.

An internal audit report recently quoted by The Washington Times underscored the failures in managing the list. It said there were at least 10 people who should have been kept out of the US according to the list but were allowed to enter while there were many more who should not have been on it but remain there.

It quoted Democratic Senator Patrick J Leahy, who as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee has oversight of the FBI, as saying "that the FBI continues to fail to place subjects of terrorism investigations on the watch list is unacceptable".

"Disturbingly, (the) report reveals that in 72 percent of the cases, the FBI has also failed to remove subjects from the list in a timely manner. ... Given the very real and negative consequences to which people on the watch list are subjected, this is unacceptable."

It is not clear whether Khan's name is on this list or not but the fact he showed up on the immigration's database it is conceivable that a similar name is on it. However, it should be rather easy for the law enforcement agencies to specifically exclude someone of Khan's global recognition from such a list.

Now that every visitor to the US and even permanent residents are fully fingerprinted on arrival every time it is hard to comprehend why specific names attached to specific fingerprints and passport numbers cannot be exempted. For some reason once a person gets on the FBI watch list it is very difficult to get off. The Washington Times story said some 65,000 names were audited and more than a third of it were outdated.

Security experts say that the random selection parameter is designed to make preventive determination more effective. They acknowledge that one of the negative fallouts is that many innocent people get singled out because of this parameter. They also point out that when the national threat index is higher the system is designed to become less discriminating. In simple terms, during heightened alerts it is possible that the system will sweep up many more people with a set of specific names and backgrounds than it would normally do.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, for all domestic and international flights, the current US threat level is High, or Orange, which is just below the highest Red. That may partly explain how the actor was singled out because of his name. It is a form of profiling based on many parameters such as names, religion, ethnicity and nationality.

As Khan acknowledged the immigration officials were polite but the question is not one of etiquette but effectiveness. Khan managed to stir up those who matter because of who he is. Lesser mortals might have had to go through a more nerve-racking experience once red flags go up against their names and they are asked to step aside at the immigration counter.