"publishing stuff" is not incompatible with undermining the government, it is the means by which the mining under is accomplished. From a govt perspective, Assange is just a guy publishing stuff like bin Laden is just a guy making video tapes. They are interested in knowing if he is doing more than just publishing stuff.

I'm not particularly thrilled with the way the government is reacting to WL etc., but I also recognize that it's rather difficult to tell apart real threats from unthreatening people who behave in many ways like the real threats would. Appelbaum can say he's not going to hurt anyone, but that's what any terrorist can say. His actions may be perfectly legal, but also probably constitute probable cause.

He hasn't been arrested, he's been searched. That is exactly what I'd expect the police to do in such cases. Your neighbors report a blood curdling scream from your house? The police come and check it out. It's not illegal to scream, but you'll still get asked a few questions.

When does it become harassment? We've probably crossed that line, but what's the solution? Once you're screened and land successfully, you're exempt from future screening? That'd be a pretty big security flaw.

Bin Laden was A) not a citizen and B) I think he did a little more than make videotapes.

Let's be honest here, the problem with wikileaks isn't the (nonexistent) threat to national security, it's their politics. These meatheads at the airport weren't concerned with national security, they were concerned with teaching this liberal pansy a lesson. Short-cop-syndrome writ large.

Honestly, I don't think the meatheads at the airport even knew he was a liberal pansy. I could believe somebody at the top put him on the security watchlist knowing what happens at the bottom, but I really doubt the meatheads keep their own list of people needing lessons.

Did you read the tweets? The border patrol dudes were former army and sounded pretty personal about it. If it mentioned wikileaks in the dossier (which I presume it did), then these guys have heard of it, and specifically have heard of the collateral murder video.

Do you think the tweets are an unbiased objective account of the events that transpired? I view them as a sort of color commentary. Anyway, which ones do you think were personal? His experience doesn't sound any different from what I expect anyone who gets bonus screening to get. It's inconvenient and adversarial. I assume that's the rule, not the exception.

Did you notice how they held him until the minute his connection left and then let him go?

It sounds way more like harrassment than screening to me.

Welcome to your government (excuse me if you're not American, I'll assume you are). This is one of many standard MO's I've seen all through this exchange between CBP and Jake.

I'm a foreign citizen working in US on a visa, this has happened to me in the past - and I'm just here to work. I'm not suspected of doing anything illegal.

Immigration/Border Patrol in China is far, far more friendly than the US's. If Citizens don't like it and feel it is harassment then they should be campaigning to change it.

It may be legal for a US citizen to be a nazi, but it also is one of those questions on the entry questionnaire that indicates that the immigration authorities are interested in whether you are.

Actually, that question is only asked of those requiring visas and visa-waivers.

A US citizen re-entering America wouldn't be asked that question. The specific question also pertains to specific Nazi activity C1939-1945 rather than Nazi'ism in general.