The 9/11 terrorists are not a threat. They are dead remember?

We have not heard a peep from them, Times Square, shoe bomber and underpants bomber included. They were all incompetent wannabes.

Now the Irish Republican Army... Those guys were terrorists. They caused many deaths, injuries and property damage. There was always another incident around the corner.

my apologies... I was not saying every account was hyperbole... I was referring to those which begin with something like... 'today I encountered an obese black tsa officer'... you already know, from the outset, that this is a report that cannot simply rely on the facts as weight, but have to introduce hyperbole to try a garner sypmpathy.

another example would be the case where someone was given a pat down but said something along the lines of 'my children were upset, crying and scared for their mommy'.

again, those posts needing to introduce hyperbole to win an argument just dont seem to carry weight.

or people that go out to the airport with a planned strategy, in advance, to make an issue of engaging with the tsa to try and bait them.

I am NOT saying all posts are as such, and that there are not genuine issues out there. there clearly are, but unfortunately, the hyperbole detracts.

does the poster complaining about their children being upset think their case is the same as an 80 year old lady being strip searched?

Do you know what else would save lives? Reducing the speed limit on highways to 30 MPH and having random breathalyzer tests every three miles. But we choose not to do that. I can't understand why, since far more people are killed every year in car accidents than were killed on 9/11.

The American public needs to learn a little bit about the availability heuristic.

And your comments about "hardcore constitutional individuals," by which I believe you mean "those that think the Bill of Rights should be more than toilet paper," are completely out of line. The Constitution is the law and, more importantly, exists to limit the power of the federal government, not expand it.

There is nothing wrong with complImenting (Don't worry, I get that one wrong a lot, also.) a TSO who did a good job or went above and beyond. I've done it, in writing, more than once.


Have you met my mother-in-law?

Ouch! Vicarious slap from my wife. Seriously, honey, I was kidding. Just going for the cheap laugh. Yes, I know she's not 90. Put down the knife. Please! Yes, I know who John Wayne Bobbitt is. Honey, I was just kidding! Oh, nooooooooooooo.........

Mike

On that we can agree. I know from others here that a few posters have over the years managed to actually turn some readers away from the anti-TSA argument, due to their hyperbole and posting style. (And on the flip side, some of the posters here who represent TSA actually turned some readers against TSA, due to their hyperbole and posting style)

Nonsense. I have been on FT for a million years and I can categorically state that there has never, ever been hyperbole in the TS&S forum(s).

Mike

I agree with you that this really is annoying. But only your second example could really be called hyperbole...

The other types of posts I would broadly classify as an appeal to emotion, perhaps, and agreed that the excessive "baiting" stuff is kind of ridiculous unless done well (I would, for example, appreciate somebody filming inappropriate behavior, etc.)

That is part of the internet phenomenon though, where keyboard-warriors try to feel better about themselves by being bigger and badder.... armchair "lawyers" and medical experts... whatever.

You'll notice there are actually quite a few reasonable people, and just try to focus on their contributions.

Good post. I see mostly reasonable discussions with few arrogant posters who exaggerate about TSA.