Thanks. I thought they were Weapons of Thorough Mass Destruction. :)

That's TSA's codename.

thank you Bart ^ as with the rules being "liquid" (pun intented), this makes going to the tsa website on a daily basis easier (tho i will do a 2x check the day before i fly just in case). also, thanks for the clarification on shoes but just to ask......

i have custom orthotics (non gel) but if i remove my shoes, i cannot walk without assistance so if i have it correct, i inform the gatekeeper i have a medical condition (as i have always done), go thru and then get swabbed. is that it or is it gonna be the fully secondary and will i still have to remove my shoes after going thru as that will create a problem as it will take me a good 30 minutes to remove and put my shoes back on (and that's with a shoehorn but i don't think that the tsa will proved a sterile shoehorn so that's my dilemma). also, where those of us at sfo can use the puffer, will that (as it's been in the past) eliminate the need for shoe removal as that was a godsend...puff, wtmd with no alarm and done.

SAT bound
 

Why do I get the felling that the best way to fly these days would be to drive to SAT and begin all my trips there? ^ Too bad it's too far.

At the cute dogs picture, anyone else notice the training is based in Texas? :D

I like this pic better. Is he pretending to smile or smirking at the shoeless sheeple?

http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtrav...ing/index.shtm

Ouch. I know how painful plantar facsiitis is. Mine just doesn't get better. My prthoics do not have gel. I thought only the OTC (Dr Scholl's) kind had gel in them. In my expreience they are not good.

That's my experience too. Custom/prescription orthotics do not have gel. The orthotics have got to have finite elastic modulus to provide the support. Gel's elastic modulus is very low.

Good idea to use this thread. I've certainly been overwhelmed the last week or so (easy to do after 50). Just a couple of comments from my inside-the-Beltway perspective:

1. September will be the earliest that there will be any revisions to the present policy of any substance for one practical reason -- most of Washington takes their vacations in August. It will be virtually impossible to coordinate anything around town because a lot of the key people who must sign off on packages will be in Ocean City or the Outer Banks.

2. The all-shoes-off policy will become permanent just because it's easier for the TSA, and the incidents of last week provided the excuse.

3. Most of the new restrictions will have little impact because there is a solution already existing that, with blinders on now, has zero impact to passengers -- "all" you have to do is to check your luggage. The cosmetics issues will go away because nobody will be able to make the argument that you will drop dead on your flight without lip gloss.

4. It will take a few key Members of Congress to get ticked off at an airport for anything to be done. Guess what -- They are on recess for the most part, so they will have to wait until after Labor Day to get ticked off.

5. After Labor Day, Congress will be so tied up with spending bills and continuing resolutions that airport security won't even be on their radar screens. They will push these out the door by October 1st and then all go home to get re-elected, and won't be back until January -- earlier if there is some pressing need. Congress will be paralyzed after Election Day if one or both Houses changes majority party, because everyone will be jockeying for position and the Democrats will try to block everything that the Republicans will try to push through before reverting to minority status.

6. Chertoff can avoid this issue entirely by just ignoring criticism and by sending out his talking heads to do little more than irritate us even more. Starting in September, he and his senior staff will be busy worrying about how to operate under a continuing resolution (most likely) and figuring out how to submit a supplemental to cover this added bill. Chertoff can also simply run out the clock and stonewall, knowing full-well that most of America are sheople and will simply comply after an initial period of being upset. The "do nothing" option works out just fine for the DHS and TSA.

7. Face it -- this is a niche issue affecting a relatively small minority of Americans who fly, regularly or not. Most Americans on the sidelines on this issue think it's a great idea.

Common sense says that there are one or two common denominators to these kinds of explosives. (I'm not a chemist, so this is just a hunch). If the DHS were sufficiently motivated (and, as I said earlier, there is no compelling reason for them to be motivated), they would establish a tiger team of explosives and security experts and come up with the one or two things you would have to ban that would make in-flight manufacture of these explosives impossible. Then, you would have a ban on a couple of things, not on everything, and everything that looks like everything. But, the easy way out is just to ban everything and compel people to check their bags if they ever want to see their Gatorade again.

A final complication will be that American entrepreneurs, God bless them, will soon market all sorts of things to work around these new conveniences that we will run out and buy in droves. I'm sure we will very soon see pre-packaged cosmetics you can buy at any airport shop -- outside the sterila area, orf course! Some previous examples if you've forgotten: TSA locks, cable ties, those ID holders people wear around their necks with their DL's at the ready for any TSA inspection/verification, and rollaboards with easy-to- remove laptop compartments. On this count, we're our own worst enemy.

If I'm wrong on any of my points, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Not to worry - all those folks who preceded you thru the checkpoint have swabbed the area free of bacteria with their socks. Its perfectly sterile now ;)

What about stick deodorant? Y'know the kind that leaves white maks all over your pullover sweater when you put it on (yeah, that was me) - is that still OK?

Unfortunately the Health Code violation thing is a common misconception. Apparently there is no rule in any state that requires a person to wear shoes to patronize any establishement. There are rules requiring footwear for employees of certain establishements, but not the patrons. So the signs saying no shoes no service are only corporate policies and not health code reasons. Though many companies will use the "health code" as cover for the policy.

Now having just stated the above, I do not agree with mandatory bare feet at the checkpoint, because I feel it does expose us to unnecessary risks of infection.

1) They put this in when most bureaucrats had fled town? Is it a one-way authorization deal?
2) Agreed
3) Wait until folks start finding lost/stolen/damaged goods in any numbers, etc.
4) Members are exempt now - why should that matter?
5) They might use this to deflect from the spending boondoggle.
6) I hope you are wrong, and that we see gradual backpedaling instead - especially if the U.K. authorities do so.
7) Many think it's great - those 35-40% approval ratings don't come out of nowhere. I've seen other polls where the same number, if not more, disagree with the govt.

I can understand your points, which are logical. I'm just putting through alternatives.

First, thanks to BART for keeping us updated. As I predicted last week, the ridiculous knee-jerk rules are already being modified and will continue to evolve as perception of the threat subsides and as the inconvenience increases, not to mention the budgetary issues that affect TSA staffing.

Personally I have to say I am delighted with the ban on perfume, which causes allergic reactions for many of us, though admittedly not while it is in the bottle. :) I would be delighted if the TSA required everyone to shower before boarding, but I don't think that will happen anytime soon. :D


I disagree. Having spent 10 years in the beltway, I can tell you that these restrictions will greatly annoy virtually every member of Congress and more importantly their staff who all travel frequently. Some go home every week, and IAD has always been one of the worst TSA checkpoints, and clearly not going to get any better. The ban on bottled water is particularly absurd and one I think that is unlikely to last for long. The ban on most toiletries is almost as ridiculous and basically forces everyone to check at least one item - so I predict that will be modified as well.

The one thing that does ring true - there are a lot of sheep out there who do think this is a great idea. But their views will not be determinative. Remember, big business contributes millions of $ to campaigns, and these guys travel frequently and are going to be dialing Washington to voice their complaints.

They should just start chopping people's arms and legs off since they can be used as lethal weapons as well.... "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY..." "You don't need to think. Trust us. We're the experts. We can think for you."

I don't disagree that Congress won't eventually get pissed off. My point is the timing -- summer recess, numerous appropriations and authorization bills due, and a mid-term election coming up.

From the TSA website is the following:
"Some solid or powdered cosmetics items are permitted past the checkpoint; however, this is left to the discretion of the Security Officer. To minimize delays and hassle, we recommend that you pack all cosmetics in your checked baggage."

I guess it depends upon who looks in your back when you go through the security line. If that person isn't feeling well or just simply miserable, they may make you toss it.