You raise a very good question which deserves a serious answer. I'll try to answer from my perspective, understanding that others' outlook may be very different.

While I don't think I make a concerted effort to make TSA employees lives more difficult I certainly make absolutely no effort to smooth their path. I do so because I feel obliged to offer at least some defense of what once were considered American core values and to resist the affront to basic human decency those TSA employees constantly present.

Why do I resist, hinder, harass, mock, ridicule, or otherwise make TSA employees lives difficult? Here are a few reasons:

• I reject the notion that I must have my government's permission to contract with a common carrier to move freely across the country. And yet, the no-fly list, mandatory name matching by the airlines, the TDC charade, random gate screening, and the ability of any TSA screener to deny entry to the sterile area for any reason is nothing less than the government's assertion that it may - with no evidence of crime, no probable cause and no reasonable suspicion - arbitrarily abridge the well-recognized right of citizens to travel. Not only that, the TSA insists that citizens have no right to due process and no recourse other than with its own internal procedures.
• I reject the notion that I can be compelled to answer personal questions to satisfy the curiosity of a BDO in order to be able to go about my legitimate business.
• I reject the notion that in order to board an aircraft I have to let a government employee stick his hands down my pants.

In short, I am a human being and an American citizen. Anyone who wishes to infringe on the rights of Americans and the dignity due to any human should expect to get some push back. Those who do so under the color of law or the false claim to be doing so "for your own good" should expect extra push back. TSA and its minions are constantly engaged in a concerted effort to make the lives of travelers difficult, very often with absolutely no corresponding benefit. It should be no surprise that some travelers return like for like.

From reading the news, and reading this board from time to time, one can certainly see that some TSA agents act as you described. I've never disputed that! I said that in my experience 95% have been professional, and perhaps the reason for that is my attitude of not trying to make their lives difficult by not making a huge scene when they ask me my name... I've objected to pat downs by making jokes and expressing my discomfort and the agents invariably share in their disdain for the policies they are forced to follow.

I completely agree with your reasoning, and thanks for answering seriously. My only point of argument would be that I think your anger is mis-directed at the agents themselves. I don't think the agent is enjoying sticking his hands down your pants any more than you are :D.

When the TSA LTSO at DFW asked me to state my name and I politely pointed out that it was on both the boarding pass and ID. I further asked why he was asking that. Was that being a jerk? I think not. The jerk in that case was the DFW TSA LTSO who became so angry I thought he was about to strike me. Complaints to TSA at both DFW and HQ were never even responded to.

Saying your name is not part of an inspection for Weapons, Incendiaries, and Explosives and that is all by regulation that TSA can inspect for. TSA can't just make up any rules they like without changes to the CFR.

If TSA wants to be a jerk agency, which is the real problem, then I intend to resist as much as possible.

If TSA employees don't like what their employer requires of them then I would suggest they find honest work.

(bolding mine)

I give up. Your positive experience 95% of the time is clearly because you exhibit a positive, cheerful, compliant attitude and don't go looking for trouble. If everyone acted like you, everything would just be hunky-dory at the checkpoint.

FWIW, no one, and I do mean no one, is more cringing and obsequious at a checkpoint than I am (I speak my name when asked, I "sir" and "ma'am" and "please" everyone in blue in sight), but I have encountered problems solely because I am an involuntary medical opt-out, ie, I am physically incapable of assuming and holding the position necessary for a scan. This means every time I fly, I get hands between my legs and down my pants. It also means that quite frequently, I am challenged - I am told that my inability will mean a long wait, an invasive, uncomfortable grope, etc, as though my physical limitation exists solely to inconvenience some TSO - you know, I'm guilty of, as you so eloquently put it, 'trying to make their lives difficult'.

Re: your second bolded statement. Completely unprofessional for TSOs to express disdain for the policies, SOP, or the agency at the checkpoint. If a TSO doesn't like the policies and procedures, he/she should take up the matter with his/her management or find another job. He/she is being paid to follow procedure and represent the organization in a positive and professional way. If the TSO wants to make the pax 'comfortable', perhaps instead of 'expressing disdain', perhaps he/she should conduct him/herself in a polite, considerate and professional manner. I think most employers would take an understandably dim view of an employee whose 'customer skills' amounted to bad-mouthing the company policies.

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to explain how you slipped up in the 5% of less-than-stellar experiences you've had. What led to your lapse in attitude that justified a negative or retaliatory response from a TSO?

There was nothing true about what you said, and saying "Yes it was!" does not make it so. You clearly have little knowledge of Israeli security so please don't pretend to.

Because they are making our lives more difficult in exchange for no measurable improvement in aviation security, and at a greater cost to the taxpayer.

Many of these can be found at IAD and MIA.

I spend a lot of time in foreign airports. The difference between TSA clerks and their counterparts at CPH, FRA, BRU, MUC, CDG, STR, AMS is unbelieveable - no barking, no arrogance, no stupidity - just polite, efficient and minimally intrusive and effective security. TSA is a hopeless embarrassment to the entire country.

^^^

I couldn't agree more. It has nothing to do with the differences in procedures (somehow security at foreign airports manages to communicate with pax without barking, signs everywhere, loud taped loops, loud big-screen monitors - and all with a smaller checkpoint staff, all of whom seem to be usefully occupied). Just the polite and professional attitude makes the entire process so much more acceptable.

Hard to believe TSA routinely sends staff to foreign airports on expensive taxpayer junkets to 'advise' them how to do their jobs better - and yet none of them seem to notice the difference in the checkpoint experience. :mad:

I have to respectfully disagree with you on one point. While I certainly have anger directed at TSA management and the craven politicians who fail to hold them to account, I don't think my anger towards the agent is mis-directed. After all it is the agent who is demanding my identification, it is the agent who is asking personal questions, it is the agent who is going through my personal papers and effects and it is the agent who has his hand stuck down my pants.

The issue is not whether the agent is "enjoying" sticking his hand down my pants, the issue is that he is doing so in the first place. If I succeed in making the agent feel embarrassed, ashamed or uncomfortable for his behavior, good. Those who willingly intimidate, embarrass, assault, steal from, harass or otherwise intrude upon their fellow citizens under color of law should feel shame for the simple reason that such behavior is shameful.

1. Jewish Israeli nationals are trusted more.
2. Highly unlikely that the presumed trust level for an American Jew and (for example) an American Catholic is identical.

Overall, it's certainly the case that, given the same nationality, TLV security has higher trust for Jewish people. Not at all saying that this isn't an appropriate threat model for them to use, but also no reason to pretend that it's not true.

Well, our experiences have been different.

I will frequently ask how "stating my name" enhances aviation security. That usually results in a more stern "State Your Name" response from the TSA. Only once did the clerk respond with "I don't know, but they make us say it". So if the clerks asking the question don't even know why they're asking it, they shouldn't expect me to play along. I'm a fairly intelligent person, and I can see no benefit to this question, so I don't play along. I also don't play along with Costco's receipt check charade. I'm a busy person; I don't have the time or patience to engage clerks with their meaningless corporate policies.

If that makes me a jerk, I'm fine with the label.

Fictional characterizations is all the above post is supplying.

I have a lot of knowledge about it, so no need to pretend anything about it. ;)

When asked to "state your name", has anyone ever replied, "Foxtrot Oscar?"

DHS policies only work if they can find someone who's willing to follow them. If the entire flying public made the clerk's life miserable, he'd find another line of work and/or the policies would eventually change.

It was the clerk who took the job in the first place. His choice. So he can pay the consequences of the policies he's been hired to enforce.