![]() |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 12965297)
This is the same obnoxious buffoon from Long Island NY who constantly praises the TSA and suggests witch hunts for brown people and Muslims. He is a psycho - he would never read this letter, and if he did, it wouldn't make a difference to him.
He is a gasbag whose only purpose is continually pontificate his dedicate to his version of national security, which conveniently mimics the vision of Himmler and Stalin. I won't let my blood pressure jump over his call for criminal prosecutions against those who posted the manual - I think what he deserves is the treat of this document being continually hosted and posted all over the place until his little head fills with rage and explodes and we can be done with him once and for all. |
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
(Post 12965337)
Aww, don't sugar-coat it; tell us what you REALLY think! :D
|
Can someone please PM me a way of getting the SOP? I tried the link on the first page, found it, but didn't see where I could download it.
Thanks! |
Originally Posted by AngryMiller
(Post 12944293)
Flew out of MSP today. The mood at the checkpoint was decidely chilly. No yelling, bags weren't torn apart. Perhaps they had a sobering briefing from management.
PV had gone silent with no updates either. Blogdad Bob didn't have a good Monday either. As to the validity of the document, I've written many, many documents and suspect that while some sections have changed that the meat of the document still resembles what we're reading today. The vast 'meat' of this document is intact with some minor tinkering and additions. In fact it shouldn't be that hard to make any updates to the document to bring it current just by common knowledge. In my experience as a writer of these sort of 'tombs' - they change very little from version to version |
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
(Post 12965126)
Everything I have read so far there is no Federal law against publishing classified documents let alone SENSITIVE documents. On the downside the Government has tried to use espionage statutes against those that have published classified documents.
The SOP version I am hosting is the second one released. My version had the SSI claim removed and in fact the file name is OP_NO_SSI.pdf I should be safe because there is no claim to SSI made as required by law. King and his buddies are in the minority in Congress right now, so, the best he can do is to run around acting like Foghorn Leghorn. |
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
(Post 12964861)
Fixed.
And here is the real question, do you think the black Suburbans will show up now? "...you have put in charge of a vital function a bunch of strutting martinets whose combination of incompetence and arrogance staggers the human mind and makes them more of a danger to the traveling public than the terrorists they are supposed to be ferreting out. " May we have permission to send copies of your letter to our own Congresspeople? |
Feel free to include as much of my letter that is appropriate in your own letters to your representatives.
I wrote that letter specifically for Rep King in response to a letter he wroe to Nappy. If you are sending it to your Rep you may want to change all the "you" to Rep King. |
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
(Post 12966249)
Feel free to include as much of my letter that is appropriate in your own letters to your representatives.
I wrote that letter specifically for Rep King in response to a letter he wroe to Nappy. If you are sending it to your Rep you may want to change all the "you" to Rep King. Hey TK, looks like this topic has become so radioactive that TSA employees fear coming even remotely close. |
Originally Posted by Trollkiller
(Post 12965126)
Everything I have read so far there is no Federal law against publishing classified documents let alone SENSITIVE documents.
|
I call Representative King's office this morning. Unlike Schumer his phones actually work. I was told to speak with someone from the Committee on Homeland Security and, of course, that guy isn't at his desk.
Not too much of a surprise, I suppose. |
Originally Posted by AngryMiller
(Post 12966292)
Has anyone else noticed the drop off in TSOs visiting this site? Wonder if someone told them that visiting/commenting on this site put their miserable career in jeopardy?
Hey TK, looks like this topic has become so radioactive that TSA employees fear coming even remotely close. TSAers, or alleged TSAers, also seem to be absent from PV, with the exception of Reed from AK. |
Federal law on redistribution of information
44 U.S.C. 3506(d)
With respect to information dissemination, each agency shall— (1) ensure that the public has timely and equitable access to the agency's public information, including ensuring such access through— (A) encouraging a diversity of public and private sources for information based on government public information; (B) in cases in which the agency provides public information maintained in electronic format, providing timely and equitable access to the underlying data (in whole or in part); and (C) agency dissemination of public information in an efficient, effective, and economical manner; (2) regularly solicit and consider public input on the agency’s information dissemination activities; (3) provide adequate notice when initiating, substantially modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination products; and (4) not, except where specifically authorized by statute— (A) establish an exclusive, restricted, or other distribution arrangement that interferes with timely and equitable availability of public information to the public; (B) restrict or regulate the use, resale, or redissemination of public information by the public; (C) charge fees or royalties for resale or redissemination of public information; or (D) establish user fees for public information that exceed the cost of dissemination. |
Originally Posted by ehasbrouck
(Post 12967224)
44 U.S.C. 3506(d)
With respect to information dissemination, each agency shall— (1) ensure that the public has timely and equitable access to the agency's public information, including ensuring such access through— (A) encouraging a diversity of public and private sources for information based on government public information; (B) in cases in which the agency provides public information maintained in electronic format, providing timely and equitable access to the underlying data (in whole or in part); and (C) agency dissemination of public information in an efficient, effective, and economical manner; (2) regularly solicit and consider public input on the agency’s information dissemination activities; (3) provide adequate notice when initiating, substantially modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination products; and (4) not, except where specifically authorized by statute— (A) establish an exclusive, restricted, or other distribution arrangement that interferes with timely and equitable availability of public information to the public; (B) restrict or regulate the use, resale, or redissemination of public information by the public; (C) charge fees or royalties for resale or redissemination of public information; or (D) establish user fees for public information that exceed the cost of dissemination. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 12967253)
You may need a clue X 4 but what point are you making?
Given what I know -- including from his site's link to http://papersplease.org/sf_faq.html-- ehasbrouck, as intended, seems to be reinforcing the point that the American public ought to have nothing to fear in distributing such material/information. |
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 12967253)
You may need a clue X 4 but what point are you making?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:44 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.