What does exactly "un-American" mean ?
I see it used very often on this board by people complaining about the role of Government in an advanced society: TSA, taxes, ID, weapons registration, etc., seem all to be un-American.

Yet the only historical reference I could find is Sen. McCarthy's House Committee on Un-American Activities.
If we have to judge from that, it is good to be un-American, I guess...

I dunno, but some TSA employees claim they are "more" American. We still have not gotten a clarification as to why they feel that way.

I wonder about both claims. Those who claim they are more "American" and those who claim to know what is or is not "American".

No, your a bit mistaken. They consider LGAs a potenial threat, not a threat, and recognizes hat it would take too long to screen all LGAs.

So to say all those LGAs are dangerous items is to nt understand the intent of the TSA LGA policy.

The sole intent of the 3.4-1-1 policy is to appear to be protecting people. The policy, as you and we well know, does nothing of the sort, but it's a show for the infrequent flyers to make the smurfs look like they're doing something.

Yet TSA casually tosses these same LGA's into common trash at the checkpoint without any concern they may actually be dangerous

Whose is it now confusing facts and opinion?

TSA Introduction
 

Did I tell y'all about my first trip to New Orleans after 9/11? About a year later I was staying at the Meridian and noticed for some strange reason there were armed and badged people in the lobby and one always got on the elevator with us. Hubby also noticed on his walk to the gym and pool the entire floor and meeting rooms were covered with notices that guns were not allowed.

OK, this was a bit odd and no one was talking. Couple days later a "government employee" was at the bar with us and claimed no knowledge of this bizarre behavior. When he ordered a triple vodka I knew I was in for the answers. He told me that all former "inspectors" were grandfathered into the TSA if they could pass the test. The test was not to bring weapons into the meeting room. He told me there were quite a few failures. They had metal detectors at the doors.

Maybe why some can read and cannot spell. Comprehension was not discussed. I went back and looked at the doors, metal detectors were obvious if you were looking.

I have had bags sent back through with TSA letting them go and later finding stuff I did not know was in there and would not have let it go. Next time I will you about TSA asking for my hubby's socks.

How about screening passengers liquids in the same fashion you screen the $4.00 bottles of water Hudson News sells?

Doing that costs $3.50 a bottle :)

Agreed. Just had my bottle of contact solution get swabbed at a checkpoint the other day. He looked pretty confused at where to swab it though (since it was still sealed), and basically just rubbed it everywhere.

Apparently my factory sealed bottle of saline solution was deemed safe enough to bring on board. I felt much safer.

Another win today in the war on water in BOS. They found my 8.5 oz bottle of Dasani left over from last week's flight. (I didn't know it was there...) I suppose it could have been planted in my bag without my knowledge. (It wasn't.) Boy, do i feel safer now! :D

Only one of three checkpoints in Terminal A were using the WBI at noon. I just avoided that line.

The old motion = work syndrome, eh. :rolleyes:

They're moving so they must be working.:D

Many TSOs are unfamiliar with ounce (volume) and ounce (weight) and often (incorrectly) make the assumption that they are one and the same.

One thing I know for certain is that in America we're allowed to speak freely. That means if we think someone is a thief, we may say so.

And, sometimes, if you say it in the right place (as in court), you can be proved to be correct in the sense of legally correct.

But fortunately, we don't have to check everything with a legal department before we say it.

I believe that the TSA agent who walked off with my (expensive) backpacking stove looked happy and surprised that I was so stupid (yeah, yeah, I know - now).

They don't throw the good stuff out - and I don't think it ever shows up at public auction, either. So I guess the official stance is that they throw it all away. In regular trash bins.

"In regular trash bins" that they pillage after hours?

I once told a security inspector at KCI (FirstLine Transportation Security) that "I didn't trust him with my belongings out of sight." He called over his supervisor and said "that man just called me a thief." Told the supervisor that there's quite a bit of difference between saying "I don't trust you" and "you are a thief." Supervisor was pretty ticked off at me. Got watched by one of these guys from the time I sat down to boarding. Pretty disgusting.

Unfortunately, they do add up. To 100%. Here's how:
Deep down, the screeners know that there is a 99.999999999% chance that Spiff's water bottle contains water. And a 0.000000001% chance that it contains the mythical stable-enough-to-carry-but-volatile-enough-to-destroy-a-plane-undetectable-by-ETD explosive that TSA told them about. (Or, as SATTSO puts it, "a potenial (sic) threat".)

In the first instant that they see the water in Spiff's bag, they're focused on the 0.000000001% chance that it's the bogeyman explosive. But as soon as they have possession of it, their minds shift to the 99.999999999% chance that it's just water, and they throw it in the trash. (Or "it would take too long to screen" in SATTSO's words.)

The article in the OP suggests that some screeners in some airports on some days are able to see the 99.999999999% option when they first spot some bottles, and take the statistically sensible (in)action of letting them pass. Spiff's experience indicates that some are not capable of this. It is also clear that no one in TSA is capable of seeing the 0.000000001% option after the bottle is in their hand, and disposing of it as if it really is the mythical liquid explosive.

(I'm also guessing a lot of screeners play the lottery. And lose. ;))