I suspect you know as well as everyone else that no one really expects <deleted> to answer most (all) of the questions asked. It's just a continuation of the ongoing rhetoric of TSA and its inability to respond to concerns of the public.

If <deleted> was a TSA sock puppet (jury is still out) then I think we would get some answers, just not honest ones.

To what end? Would you actually believe anyone from the TSA when they say that it won't happen again?

Need we mention the urine incident(s) again?

I would have said "failure," rather than "inability." It's not a certainty that the TSA is unable to respond. It is certain that they have not. Whether this indicates an inability or an unwillingness (or both) remains to be seen.

Note that this observation doesn't apply to <deleted>. His failure to respond is pretty clear.

I posted a comment on the TSA Blog asking some questions about this incident. My comment was censored even though it complied fully with the illegal TSA posting guidelines.

Never expect honesty or compliance with the Constitution by anyone associated with TSA.

Not based on my training and opinion.

Anyone with access to it could theoretically fire a functioning capgun.

I do not know of any kind of address being done at this time, remember, I am a frontliner, not an HQ guru.

That seems to be a common trend when I post...

I am not certain that most of those sock monkey jokes would make it past the moderators here!

The problem with that, is that most of the time, I do not know the response any quicker than most of you folks here. I wish I were in a position to distribute more timely information in some cases, but I am just not that high up the food chain.

Sadly, you may be right.

Then why pick on <deleted>? He's been more forthright and participatory here than a number of his colleagues ... I'd think we'd want to encourage his sort of behavior rather than ask him unanswerable questions and then blame him for refusing to defend the indefensible ...

Precisely. I seriously doubt the issue here is with documents or policies, but with how they play out at the checkpoint. Talk is cheap; what we need is observed changes in behavior.

I think you may just have hit on why people treat <deleted> as the TSAs whipping boy.

For everything he's ever said about how things are supposed to be, they never seem to go that direction...

Right, a shirt. Not a sail. Not a circus tent. How could they think it could fit them?

I do my best to tell you how it is supposed to be, because I also do my best to try and do it that way all day, every day. I may never make an impression or change on a large scale, but I do what I can within my limited sphere of influence. By posting it here (as well as other locations), I hope that some folks that work for TSA may take something positive away from it - such as not to create a scene over a tiny little quarter sized plastic gun. It also lets more people know that when things are not done right, they can file complaints (I understand that is an area providing opportunity for improvement at our agency) and get more information into the system for redress.

At the same time, keep in mind that I have very limited information I can give out here - 99% of the time I am informed of things at the same time you folks are. I am not going to disclose SSI, but I am going to continue to comment on how I think that a passenger should not have had a hard time taking the item that is the subject of this thread, through a checkpoint.

I've seen more than a few that a regular shirt might fit.

They're the skinny, weaselly-looking ones.

If true, that explains much about why the TSA "employees" at the checkpoint are at least as confused as the traveling public.

And "SSI" is nonsense. Utter nonsense. Pure "what makes the roses bloom" nonsense. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. "SSI" is merely an excuse for thieves, thugs, and morons to make up "policy" out of whole cloth and maintain plausible deniability.

Filing complaints about the TSA with the TSA is like micturating in a vector contrary to the prevailing meteorological conditions.

If you knew the mid to upper echelons of TSA management, you'd understand just why TSA is the way it is. To call most of them as dumb as a box of rocks would be unfair to rocks.

That's obvious to anyone observing their "operations."

It's equally obvious to anyone observing the employees "working" on those "operations."

Honest answer? <deleted> is an easy target from an agency that has a dismal record of dealing with the public.

For the record I don't think a claim that I picked on <deleted> in this thread can be made.

I want that on a T-shirt.