I don’t participate in the “take your liquids out” bullshit at all, ever. I maybe did it for a year or two after the TSA shit show started. I have, dozens of times, pushed Bic lighters through a security X-Ray machine in the outer pocket of my roll aboard. I had one confiscated, once. I have accidentally carried a Swiss Army Knife on my key chain in the same outer pocket at least three times. I did have one of those confiscated in 2002.
Last Sunday, my roll aboard was sent through the X-Ray for a second time, before I was invited to the secondary screening table. The TSA agent swabbed the bag for explosive residue, before she went in for the kill. Ignoring the full size 5oz. tube of toothpaste, the 3oz. travel bottle of shampoo, the 1oz. bottle of eye drops and the 1oz. bottle of e-cig juice, she honed in on the offending item in my toiletry kit. A wine key!
Nevermind the 2" corkscrew that I could pluck a man’s eyeball out with, she was concerned with the 1" lead foil cutter, sharp enough to scratch a man with! She sternly pronounced “This is a blade, sir. You may not pass security with this blade. Would you like to surrender it now or make other arrangements?” I was thinking about all the good times I had with that $5 wine key since I bought it in Long Beach with a six pack of beer in a 7-11 last year. It had been through a lot of airports with me and it was really a sad moment, but I acquiesced.
The moral of the story, I guess, is that while the TSA barkers tell you to take your liquids out (maximum of three, 3oz. TSA-approved containers sealed in a single one quart plastic bag) and put them in a bin, the screeners don’t give one actual fuck about your shampoo, toothpaste, mouthwash or any other liquid in your carry-on.
In case it’s not clear, I hate the TSA and all of the ridiculous bullshit we put up with in this country to get on a plane. It used to be that you could show up to catch a flight 45 minutes before takeoff with a boarding pass and a carry-on bag. Just think about the millions of man-years that have been wasted in the last 15 years on this bullshit security shit show. Actually, it’s so far beyond ridiculous that you’re better off trying as hard as you can to never think about it at all.
Sometimes you have to make a quick assessment, based on the facts at hand and a bit of pure instinct, of whether someone is a stupid moron. Other times, the evidence builds up slowly, and becomes so overwhelming that there’s no longer any question. The debate then becomes “how does someone that stupid, who is clearly a complete and utter moron, manage to function on a daily basis?”
According to your linked article, Obama’s DHS began using the trademarked slogan in 2010. -
*July 2010: MTA licenses “If you see something, say something” to the Department of Homeland Security
Eight years after it turned down Kay’s slogan, DHS licenses his campaign from the MTA, calling it “a simple and effective program to raise public awareness of indicators of terrorism and violent crime, and to emphasize the importance of reporting suspicious activity to the proper state and local law enforcement authorities.”
DHS instructs citizens to report “only suspicious behavior and situations (e.g., an unattended backpack in a public place or someone trying to break into a restricted area) rather than beliefs, thoughts, ideas, expressions, associations, or speech unrelated to terrorism or other criminal activity.”
Among the agency’s partners in the new advertising campaign are Walmart, the NHL, the NFL, the U.S. Tennis Association, Mall of America, various states and municipalities, and The American Hotel and Lodging Association.*
Does blinking help you see better or is it just a nervous tic?
hey, unhinged-do you even comprehend what you cut and paste any more?
Does that say “Report anything you see that you are too stupid to understand”? How the fuck does a professor doing math qualify as something to be reported?
Hahahaha. I think the question should be - Why aren’t internet bullies more effective? People chose to attack a woman because she followed Obama’s DHS guidelines. How dare she. Doesn’t she realize that she’s inconveniencing a man who doodles mathematical equations? :rolleyes:
It’s true - she inconvenienced a man who doodles mathematical equations. And all the other passengers and staff on the plane. And caused a two-hour disruption to an airline and airport - which would have had significant cost implications and knock-on effect.
I would be very happy to get her side of the story. The problem is that she has not seen fit to provide it, and the airline (understandably) is not going to release her information so that people can ask her.
If i were in her position, and people all over the internet were calling me an idiot, and i believed that i had done the right thing, i would probably be seeking out a news reporter to explain why reporting this guy was appropriate.
Sometimes you’ve gotta go with Occam’s Razor. When the guy himself says that he faced questions mainly about his math equations, when we know that he’s a distinguished economist with no criminal or terrorist history, when the airline says that the complaint was “non-credible,” and when they let the plane take off with the alleged terrorist on board, about the only reasonable conclusion left to us, especially in the absence of any statement by the accuser herself, is that she had no good reason to fear him in the first place.
You’ve already made it clear that you refuse to support Obama’s DHS recommendation that it you see something, say something. I’m sure the DHS is disappointed but they’ll manage to carry on without you.
OTOH, I assume ISIS would like to thank you personally for your support.
Its a great anecdote about how badly the TSA works and how inconsistent they are, but had they not changed rules after 9/11 and another attack happened, would you have been upset at security? Lots of people are complaining about what the TSA does, not many are suggesting what they should do to protect us.
After the shoebomber, if they never asked people to remove their shoes, and another shoebomber was successful, would you have blamed them for inaction? After 9/11, would you have blamed them if more terrorists armed with small blades that went through screening took over a plane? I’ve said I wouldn’t, because I’d rather move through security quickly. Put a lock on the cockpit doors and let the passengers fend for themselves is what I suggest.
It’s said that hindsight is 20-20. None of that information was available to the woman at the time she became suspicious of what he was doing or saying. She saw something and she said something. Just like Obama’s DHS had asked to do. It was LATER proved to be inconsequential and everyone continued on to their destination. Burn her, burn the witch for daring to speak out. :smack:
