Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate - What to do if I'm not cleared by TSA but have done nothing wrong?

I almost opt out and have alarmed the nitro machine few times already. I do not use any medication that can cause that and never have anything in my possession that can be even remotely considered dangerous. My "false positives" have always been cleared by an RPD. I think though it's only the question when the RPD will set an alarm and I will not be cleared. What are my option at that point?
I fly for business and I can't really afford to just walk away. There will be a lot of money lost for me then.

I almost opt out and have alarmed the nitro machine few times already. I do not use any medication that can cause that and never have anything in my possession that can be even remotely considered dangerous. My "false positives" have always been cleared by an RPD. I think though it's only the question when the RPD will set an alarm and I will not be cleared. What are my option at that point?
I fly for business and I can't really afford to just walk away. There will be a lot of money lost for me then.

Unfortunately, that's about the only option you have. As procedures currently stand, TSA has no obligation to admit you to the sterile area of an airport. If you fail to comply with their unpublished, unknowable procedures, as subjectively interpreted by the TSOs conducting your screening, you'll miss your flight.

Options? Try another checkpoint, or try to fly on another day. Or, seek alternate forms of transportation: charter flights, automobile, bus, boat, bicycle, hot air balloon, foot.

We're all guilty until proven innocent.

I almost opt out and have alarmed the nitro machine few times already. I do not use any medication that can cause that and never have anything in my possession that can be even remotely considered dangerous. My "false positives" have always been cleared by an RPD. I think though it's only the question when the RPD will set an alarm and I will not be cleared. What are my option at that point?
I fly for business and I can't really afford to just walk away. There will be a lot of money lost for me then.

MAMOHT,

That's gotta be SOOOO annoying (not to mention unreasonable, as in "unreasonable searches....")

Some observations and questions:

Some over-the-counter lotions will "ping the machine".
So will shoes that have been in contact with fertilizer (e.g. golf shoes, your lawn).
Probably if it has "nitrites" in it; I remember something along those lines.

How many times has this happened in the last few months?
How often do you fly?
Is your business set up for telecommuting so you could decrease the amount of flying?
Can you take the train or drive?

We're all guilty TERRORISTS until proven innocent THIS TIME.

I think your statement is even more accurate with my modifications.
;)

I think your statement is even more accurate with the word I added.
;)

I'm not sure the word innocent is even in TSA's or Homeland Security's vocabulary. :td:

I tripped the machine in EWR because it was dirty. After waiting forever to be patted down, they swabbed my stuff that had triggered the machine and used a different machine. I missed my flight. Not terribly happy.

So, you can trigger even if you don't have anything that will trigger the machine.

I'm not sure the word innocent is even in TSA's or Homeland Security's vocabulary. :td:

It's more like TSA doesn't have sufficient evidence to prove we're a terrorist at a given time. :td:

We're still guilty of course. There's just not enough to make it stick. :rolleyes:

OP: make sure the screener has clean gloves on and they use a clean square for the machine. The screeners have always swabbed their gloves after a patdown and bag check. Your results could be tainted by the last person's (or persons') results.

They have to change their gloves if you ask. Even if they said "I just changed them" make them do it again if you didn't see it (or even if you did :D). Doing so at least lowers the risk of getting hassled in their dragnet.

First, you have to remember the majority of TSA folks seem to be those fired from their local fast-food restaurant. Second, common sense escapes virtually all TSA agents. And lastly, without a passenger's bill of rights that includes TSA, we're at their mercy with stuff like this.

Well, yesterday I asked they guy ti change the gloves and he did that. Still got the red light. I think that could be something related to fertilizer since my wife keeps her gardening stuff in the garage and I probably hit it once in a while or just step on the stuff on the floor. I used to get out of the house 1.5h before the flight and getting to the gate about 40-35 minutes before the departure. Now, I'm trending to leave my house about 2.5 hours in advance. So, TSA easily kills 2 days of my life a year just there. Speaking of the terrorists... Though, can't really blame the TSO. After all their job sucks.

Unfortunately, that's about the only option you have. As procedures currently stand, TSA has no obligation to admit you to the sterile area of an airport.
The words "obligation" and "procedure" are somewhat incompatible. The 14th Amendment clearly says that such an obligation does exist. There clearly has to be some "put up or shut up" point where TSA has to show (I won't use the word "prove") that a passenger is a threat to aviation or allow them through. Now, there's definitely the practical question of what they might ask the passenger to do or how long it might take. We've heard numerous stories of people not being allowed through who refused to "cooperate" with TSA procedures, but I can't think of a single report of a passenger who submitted to those procedures who wasn't admitted, which suggests that it's extraordinarily rare. I've been told that a denial creates lots of paperwork and has to be done at the checkpoint at an STSO level or above.

I based my question on the remark by the TSO during the RPD. He told me that if I alerted the machine again the I would not be able to fly that day. Either he was not aware of the complexity of the procedure or he actually was and was willing to go through that.

I based my question on the remark by the TSO during the RPD. He told me that if I alerted the machine again the I would not be able to fly that day. Either he was not aware of the complexity of the procedure or he actually was and was willing to go through that.
Snarky comments about TSA and its Officers aren't of practical value to OP, who has an ongoing and serious issue.

Given that his issue does not appear to be frequent among the traveling public, it is most likely something localized having to do with items he travels with (whether luggage, contents or clothes worn) are alerting as potential explosives.

How and where one stores luggage and certain lotions, particularly near gardening supplies (fertilizer) and where one generally walks (past a construction site with blasting anytime in recent memory?)

The best thing for OP to do is to think through thoroughly what the problem could be and eliminating it.

Yes, until the alarm is cleared, TSA isn't clearing OP. There's no determination of "guilt" made by TSA and there's no determination that an individual is a terrorist. All that is determined is that there is a physical object tiggering an alert. TSA doesn't make the decision as to what that means. All it does is make the determination that the pax can't enter the sterile area.

Some over-the-counter lotions will "ping the machine".
So will shoes that have been in contact with fertilizer (e.g. golf shoes, your lawn).
Probably if it has "nitrites" in it; I remember something along those lines

Has your car ever been in an accident where the airbag deployed? That "explosion" could set off the machine. If you drive the same car to the airport every time, that could be your contaminant.

Yes, until the alarm is cleared, TSA isn't clearing OP. There's no determination of "guilt" made by TSA and there's no determination that an individual is a terrorist. All that is determined is that there is a physical object tiggering an alert. TSA doesn't make the decision as to what that means. All it does is make the determination that the pax can't enter the sterile area.

Sure? Last time my wife alarmed (E4) on a bag that didn't X-ray well. A lot of digging through it, they sorted out anything electronic or metallic from the rest and ran it back through in IIRC 4 separate batches, as well as half a dozen swabs tested on various machines at the checkpoint.

They never found what caused the alarm, they eventually decided it was lotion or the like. (Perhaps it helped that we were in no rush. It was a long connection anyway and made longer by the first flight being early and second being late.)

At this point you really need to do some experimentation.

Do you regularly see the same TSOs? If so, it may be possible to ask one of them to do an experimental patdown, where they swab each thing / each part or your body individually and see what in particular triggers the alert. Or you may be able to approach the FSD at your airport and say you are having problems regularly triggering the alarms, and you need some help figuring out what you are doing to cause the problem.

Alternatively, you can try eliminating variables one at a time... do you wear any aftershaves or colognes? Use a particular hand lotion of styling product? Hand sanitizer? Strong smelling detergent? Do you fuel your car with diesel? If you suspect your wife's fertilizer is causing the problem, ask her to store it in a different location (or even better, switch to an organic regime!), or park your car outside on days you plan to travel to the airport. Is there a lot of construction near your house?

Worst case, you could buy a set of travel clothes and shoes and change after you arrive at the airport.

Final question, why are you always selected to go through the ETD? Is it "random selection"? Do you opt out and get patdowns? Is it possible that your name is flagged for extra screening?

I seem to vaguely recall the story of a disabled woman who tested positive on an ETD and was sent home, not allowed to travel. She came back the next day in her underwear.

I seem to vaguely recall the story of a disabled woman who tested positive on an ETD and was sent home, not allowed to travel.
I recall that story too. But what I don't recall is whether it was a situation where she declined a further screening procedure or not.

Snarky comments about TSA and its Officers aren't of practical value to OP, who has an ongoing and serious issue.

...

The best thing for OP to do is to think through thoroughly what the problem could be and eliminating it.


Fixing this issue should not be the OP's problem. It is, because of the Stasi-like abomination that TSA is, but it should not be. It should be the screener's obligation to prove that a passenger is carrying WEI (and refer them for arrest if so), not the passenger's obligation to prove they are not. You know, innocent until proven guilty?


Yes, until the alarm is cleared, TSA isn't clearing OP. There's no determination of "guilt" made by TSA and there's no determination that an individual is a terrorist. All that is determined is that there is a physical object tiggering an alert. TSA doesn't make the decision as to what that means. All it does is make the determination that the pax can't enter the sterile area.

Whether or not it is labeled "guilt," TSA is still opting to deny passengers passage to the gate without any proof that the passenger has done anything wrong. (If they had proof, they would rightly refer to a LEO for arrest.) So do you acknowledge that TSA is in the habit of denying passengers their fundamental and Constitutional rights to travel without government interference and freedom of association without due process or effective redress?

I still believe that a brave passenger faced with this situation should demand to be either let to the gate or arrested on explosives charges (not "disturbing the peace" or some trumped up charge). If TSA is willing to deny passage, they should be willing to file a sworn complaint to law enforcement claiming WEI is being carried, and willing to (personally) face charges for filing a false report if they are wrong. As it is now, only the passenger has skin in the game, and TSA can deny passage to the passenger with total impunity.

My point exactly. The problem is not in me triggering the alarm. The problem is in me being treated like a criminal and tested on the machine without any reason.
I'm flying today (or going to the airport for that reason) and I'm already pissed off.

I recall that story too. But what I don't recall is whether it was a situation where she declined a further screening procedure or not.

According to my google search, she did not decline any further screening - failed a nitrate test and was sent home. Of course the fact that whe was in her undies may have tipped the scale (although it should have been in her favor from a purely security related point of view).

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/woman-goes-through-tsa-screening-in-bra-panties-and-wheelchair/

Remember that there is no real accountability and that you have no effective recourse. And the screeners and supervisors know it. Unless their actions are egregious enough to get their names on the evening news, they can abuse you as they wish. There was no real change after the colostomy bag incident, which even got Pistole involved. TSA and DHS have effectively eliminated the ability to seek redress for your grievances in court.

At the very best, you may be able to make a case somewhere, somehow but doing so will take years. There is no effective redress.

I'm not sure the word innocent is even in TSA's or Homeland Security's vocabulary. :td:

... increasingly dropping out of the US military and DOD/NSA's vocabulary too, even when it comes to such US-funded operations that are spying on US persons inside the US.

When the OP has the day ruined by the TSA's amateur role-play, the OP should make sure to inform the relevant legislators in the US House and US Senate. Actually, I suggest starting early -- like before the day is ruined; so write now not later. Paper trails may be your friend and aren't fancied by the TSA.

Like most courts in the US, the US federal district courts and their judges are -- more or less useless -- in restraining the TSA. Even if some US SCOTUS justices will get abused by the TSA, don't expect the rest of the US SCOTUS to be effective in knee-capping the TSA.

Yes, until the alarm is cleared, TSA isn't clearing OP. There's no determination of "guilt" made by TSA and there's no determination that an individual is a terrorist. All that is determined is that there is a physical object tiggering an alert. TSA doesn't make the decision as to what that means. All it does is make the determination that the pax can't enter the sterile area.

Sorry but the above statement is not necessarily true. Equally plausible are:

the screener causes the alert due to improper procedure,
the equipment is faulty,
the test materials (swabs, gloves, etc) are contaminated
the screener falsely claims there is an alert as an act of retribution.


Since the TSA seeks to deprive persons of their constitutionally protected right to travel, one would thing the burden of proof would fall on TSA to prove that a prohibited item exists, not on the passenger.

Remember that there is no real accountability and that you have no effective recourse. And the screeners and supervisors know it.

Yup. Whenever you have a system with authority but not accountability you end up with abuses.

The words "obligation" and "procedure" are somewhat incompatible. The 14th Amendment clearly says that such an obligation does exist. There clearly has to be some "put up or shut up" point where TSA has to show (I won't use the word "prove") that a passenger is a threat to aviation or allow them through.

You should share your ideas with those who manage the no-fly list.

Well, yesterday I asked they guy ti change the gloves and he did that. Still got the red light. I think that could be something related to fertilizer since my wife keeps her gardening stuff in the garage and I probably hit it once in a while or just step on the stuff on the floor. I used to get out of the house 1.5h before the flight and getting to the gate about 40-35 minutes before the departure. Now, I'm trending to leave my house about 2.5 hours in advance. So, TSA easily kills 2 days of my life a year just there. Speaking of the terrorists... Though, can't really blame the TSO. After all their job sucks.

As someone said a bit up-thread, there are quite a few things that will alarm our ETD systems that are common household items. Fertilizer, lotions (glycerin based), some other things. The systems are programmed to detect quite a number of things and alarm when the amounts meet a specific threshold. If you choose to opt out then you will not be able to avoid a standard pat-down and swabs will be taken. You might try changing to a non-glycerin based hand lotion if you use one.

So, lets say that your RPD ends and they are unable to resolve the alarm, what happens next? Law Enforcement is usually called, as are varying levels of TSA management. What happens after that is up to those folks, not the TSO’s on the checkpoint. You could be denied access to the sterile area, it happens occasionally, but in most cases they are going to waste your time and talk and talk and talk, then someone makes a decision. An NCIC check is not uncommon. Normally you get sent to your flight, assuming that it has not departed already, and you are on your way. Sometimes, well sometimes other things happen. Not enough info in your original post to say what, and certainly not enough time in the day to give every possible example.

Good thing that you area aware that this is an issue for you and you plan for the extra time. I wish everyone did.

Good thing that you area aware that this is an issue for you and you plan for the extra time. I wish everyone did.

I wish I still lived in the free country I grew up admiring and that innocent citizens didn't have to "plan for the extra time" when they are doing absolutely nothing wrong.

Sometimes, well sometimes other things happen. Not enough info in your original post to say what, and certainly not enough time in the day to give every possible example.

Please, give examples of the things that your oh-so-benevolent agency might do to someone who cooperates fully and doesn't cause any disruption at all, whose only sin was (literally) stepping in a pile of horse crap on their way to the airport.

As someone said a bit up-thread, there are quite a few things that will alarm our ETD systems that are common household items. Fertilizer, lotions (glycerin based), some other things. The systems are programmed to detect quite a number of things and alarm when the amounts meet a specific threshold.
Well, at least that's one thing that's consistent in a TSA dragnet. :rolleyes:

If you choose to opt out then you will not be able to avoid a standard pat-down and swabs will be taken.
They're not standard pat-downs. They're inappropriate feel-ups done by power hungry pizza box brigaders.

You might try changing to a non-glycerin based hand lotion if you use one.
If I understand this, in order to not have fundamental rights infringed upon by an overzealous government out to get some terrorist boogeyman, the OP should change their lifestyle. How arrogant of TSA to support this.

So, lets say that your RPD ends and they are unable to resolve the alarm, what happens next? Law Enforcement is usually called, as are varying levels of TSA management. What happens after that is up to those folks, not the TSO’s on the checkpoint. You could be denied access to the sterile area, it happens occasionally, but in most cases they are going to waste your time and talk and talk and talk, then someone makes a decision.
So essentially you're saying that the OP could be detained against his/her will, and questioned without access to legal counsel present. That sounds like false imprisonment to me - especially if the passenger is allowed to go to the gate after all of that. (Were I the passenger, I'd get names of everyone involved and have a field day getting an attorney to file complaints. Maybe they go nowhere against the TSA, but I'd like to think that something could be made to stick against the PD.)

An NCIC check is not uncommon.
Papers, please? Papers, please! We'll run a background check on you first to make sure you're not one of the "unclean" people...

Normally you get sent to your flight, assuming that it has not departed already, and you are on your way. Sometimes, well sometimes other things happen.
Translation: Sometimes we merely infringe upon your right to travel freely. Other times we destroy it completely.

Better that millions of Americans, be judged guilty, groped and harrassed, then one terrorist stopped by passengers and embarrass the TSA

Better that millions of Americans, be judged guilty, groped and harrassed, then one terrorist stopped by passengers and embarrass the TSA

That entire statement assumes facts not in evidence: that TSA can be embarrassed. With the number of gaffes they've had just in this year alone, the thought that any degree of incompetence or passenger abuse could embarrass them is getting harder and harder to believe.

If most TSA screeners used their checkpoint behavior at other private sector jobs, they would likely be removed from said private employment very quickly. That's one reason why I would never hire someone with TSA experience on their resume. I'd sooner consider hiring a convicted felon who was released from prison. (The primary difference between the two? The convicted felon at least served his jail sentence and repaid his debt to society.)

I wish I still lived in the free country I grew up admiring and that innocent citizens didn't have to "plan for the extra time" when they are doing absolutely nothing wrong.

I wish that 9/11 had never happened. I wish that the A’s had won the 2011 World Series. I wish that money really did grow on trees. Wishing is a nice pastime, but rarely does it bear fruit.

Well, at least that's one thing that's consistent in a TSA dragnet. :rolleyes:

TSA procedures are consistently designed to be inconsistent. Their equipment, well that’s another story.

They're not standard pat-downs. They're inappropriate feel-ups done by power hungry pizza box brigaders.

Opinions vary.

If I understand this, in order to not have fundamental rights infringed upon by an overzealous government out to get some terrorist boogeyman, the OP should change their lifestyle. How arrogant of TSA to support this.

Try looking up what glycerin is and its uses. Education is a wonderful thing.

So essentially you're saying that the OP could be detained against his/her will, and questioned without access to legal counsel present. That sounds like false imprisonment to me - especially if the passenger is allowed to go to the gate after all of that. (Were I the passenger, I'd get names of everyone involved and have a field day getting an attorney to file complaints. Maybe they go nowhere against the TSA, but I'd like to think that something could be made to stick against the PD.)

Don’t ya just love barracks lawyers?

Translation: Sometimes we merely infringe upon your right to travel freely. Other times we destroy it completely.

Only if one assumes that your personal perception of the law is accurate. Fortunately, there are plenty of actual lawyers out there who actually understand the concepts being applied and know that the government has a vested interest in commercial aviation security and therefore should be engaged at the current level. Travel freely, have a good time, but do so knowing that every form of travel has its regulations and laws. No exceptions.

I wish that 9/11 had never happened. I wish that the A’s had won the 2011 World Series. I wish that money really did grow on trees. Wishing is a nice pastime, but rarely does it bear fruit.



TSA procedures are consistently designed to be inconsistent. Their equipment, well that’s another story.



Opinions vary.



Try looking up what glycerin is and its uses. Education is a wonderful thing.



Don’t ya just love barracks lawyers?



Only if one assumes that your personal perception of the law is accurate. Fortunately, there are plenty of actual lawyers out there who actually understand the concepts being applied and know that the government has a vested interest in commercial aviation security and therefore should be engaged at the current level. Travel freely, have a good time, but do so knowing that every form of travel has its regulations and laws. No exceptions.


Oh, SO much to choose from. In the interest of brevity, however, I'll restrict myself to this: "Try looking up what glycerin is and its uses. Education is a wonderful thing."

It sure is, Ron - perhaps you should try to acquire some.

Glycerin is, among other things, an essential component in many soaps and hand lotions. From Wiki's handy article on the subject, JUST from the pharmaceutical and personal care section: "It is found in allergen immunotherapies, cough syrups, elixirs and expectorants, toothpaste, mouthwashes, skin care products, shaving cream, hair care products, soaps and water-based personal lubricants." Wow. it's EVERYWHERE, basically. For TSA to use equipment which they *KNOW* alarms on common, commercially-available soaps and lotions is not even just pointless - it's freaking ABSURD.

And you choose to DEFEND this idiocy? :rolleyes:

I was helping a friend renovate his basement. We did the framing over the weekend firing off around 200 Ramset shots and I wore the same pair of pants to be comfortable on my Monday am flight.
I got positive and was subjected to the groping. My thinking was residual from the Ramset in my pants probably trigger the positive.
My son's backpack triggered a positive. He was in summer school and took a chemistry course and his though was the way he toss his backpack onto the Chem lab counter has picked up something.

Better that millions of Americans, be judged guilty, groped and harrassed, then one terrorist stopped by passengers and embarrass the TSA

Make that ZERO terrorists.

I wish that 9/11 had never happened. ... Wishing is a nice pastime, but rarely does it bear fruit.
Right back at ya, Ron. I wish that TSA would actually implement some procedures which added true security to their screening process. I wish that TSA employees wouldn't sleep on the job in public and waste taxpayer money. I wish that TSA would actually screen everyone going into the "secure" areas of the airport.

If wishes were horses...

TSA procedures are consistently designed to be inconsistent. Their equipment, well that’s another story.
Standard line to cover up the idiocy again? That TSA cannot get its employees to consistently follow and apply simple policy speaks volumes less to "keeping us safe" (which the TSA has been proven to be incapable of) and more to not hiring people of adequate intelligence/work ethic to properly perform their assigned duties.

Try looking up what glycerin is and its uses. Education is a wonderful thing.
Did TSA do this prior to designing machines that alarm on hand lotion? I think not. That TSA uses machines which alarm on people carrying normal, legally available, everyday goods is simply ludicrous. That they suggest passengers changes their lifestyle to avoid alarming said ludicrous machines is laughable. That they have employees who believe this is acceptable is just sad.

Only if one assumes that your personal perception of the law is accurate. Fortunately, there are plenty of actual lawyers out there who actually understand the concepts being applied and know that the government has a vested interest in commercial aviation security and therefore should be engaged at the current level. Travel freely, have a good time, but do so knowing that every form of travel has its regulations and laws. No exceptions.
No, what we have are legislators who are too afraid of being called "soft" on security to do the right thing and dismantle an organization that serves no practical purpose.

For all the billions of dollars spent, TSA cannot crow about catching even one terrorist who was ready to rain terror and death upon America at a checkpoint. Zip, zero, nada. Not even one.

For all the billions of dollars spent, TSA screeners routinely fail red tests. By some estimates, TSA misses up to 70% of the prohibited items going through its checkpoints. Again, that TSA has missed this quantity of prohibited items without negative consequence (i.e. planes dropping out of the sky) shows how inconsequential TSA is to the security process.

And though we have chicken lawmakers and chicken judges, let's still call a spade a spade. If a TSA screener walked up to me at any location but a checkpoint and performed a standard "pat down", there would be a resulting throw-down in which I'd ensure the assailant would require a trip to the emergency room.

My point is this: what TSA does at checkpoints *is* sexual battery in some cases, and is just plain battery in all cases. That it is done under the color of authority and allowed by our government speaks volumes about our legislators' lack of respect toward our citizens, and not their concern over safety.

Wirelessly posted (Treo: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.7; en-us; NookColor Build/GRK39F) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Better that millions of Americans, be judged guilty, groped and harrassed, then one terrorist stopped by passengers and embarrass the TSA

Now you're getting it, citizen! +10 to your PATRIOT score.

Glycerin is, among other things, an essential component in many soaps and hand lotions. From Wiki's handy article on the subject, JUST from the pharmaceutical and personal care section: "It is found in allergen immunotherapies, cough syrups, elixirs and expectorants, toothpaste, mouthwashes, skin care products, shaving cream, hair care products, soaps and water-based personal lubricants." Wow. it's EVERYWHERE, basically. For TSA to use equipment which they *KNOW* alarms on common, commercially-available soaps and lotions is not even just pointless - it's freaking ABSURD.

And you choose to DEFEND this idiocy? :rolleyes:

Add to all that that glycerin is not explosive - nitroglycerin is. They are chemically distinct and easily separated by standard chemical trace analysis techniques. If the TSA is using technology that can´t tell them apart, they did not do their research and purchased the wrong equipment.

Why am I not surprised?

Add to all that that glycerin is not explosive - nitroglycerin is. They are chemically distinct and easily separated by standard chemical trace analysis techniques. If the TSA is using technology that can´t tell them apart, they did not do their research and purchased the wrong equipment.

Why am I not surprised?

All the detection machines I've used over the years searched for basic stuff... nitrates, organophosphate, graphite etc. If you wanted to isolate particular things like nitroglycerin, then you would need a machine or process just for that. And one for PETN, and one for RDX...you get the picture.

Now, as far as the groping, questions, etc...there is absolutely no excuse for that. A decent, well trained professional (like a BAO) could clear a person in literally a minute. The former welfare recipients manning the checkpoints will never be mistaken for pros.

Glycerin, like you said, is not an explosive. But is sure is useful for a few quick and dirty incediaries.

So what does a tourist/foreigner do?

They are not allowed to stay and not allowed to leave!

Do TSA get into a issue with immigration over this?!

All the detection machines I've used over the years searched for basic stuff... nitrates, organophosphate, graphite etc. If you wanted to isolate particular things like nitroglycerin, then you would need a machine or process just for that. And one for PETN, and one for RDX...you get the picture.

That is simply not true. Chemical trace detection using chromatographic or mass spec techniques, for example, can me calibrated in the same equipment to detect a myriad of different substances or chemical groups.

Glycerin, like you said, is not an explosive. But is sure is useful for a few quick and dirty incediaries.

You still have to make nitroglycerin first, or add some other reactive radical to the base molecule. In fact, glycerin itself is highly hygroscopic, meaning it attracts water, which will decrease incendiary capacity.