Another One Bites The Dust...
 

First and foremost, I do understand the anger concerning the new screening methodology and I'm on the fence on whether or not these policies push beyond the original intent for administrative searches; I feel that the efforts of many of those on this forum and elsewhere may have actually gained traction in legislative action and Court review to finally determine where that line lies. However, it is an utter fallacy and repulsive when so many members of this forum continually insult TSA employees with such colorful names as "goons," "apes," "pedophiles," Nazis," and "rapists" (just to name a few), insult their intelligence by calling them "workfare workfarce," "high school drop out burger flippers," and actually assert that most are criminals. As unfounded and untruthful these statements are when applied to the majority of the workforce, I still attempted to participate in discussions and debates on FT; however, that has come to an end with the disgusting assertion by some posters on TS&S that the TSA employees' actions are treasonous. A good number of those TSA employees were veterans of the uniformed services prior to joining the TSA; these veterans have served in peacetime and in war and continue to do so, since many of them are still members of the National Guard and the Reserves. I count myself proudly among these individuals and have NO REGRETS WHATSOEVER about my chosen profession and the agency in which I serve. I take my Oath seriously, as I have done since first swearing to it over twenty one years ago, and will continue to do so for as long as I am blessed to serve. It is not a responsibility I take lightly; I carry a battered pocket copy of the Constitution in my "bug-out" bag every day to work with me. My fellow employees and I neither ask for kudos or recognition for our efforts nor are we close-minded to legitimate criticism; as public servants it is our duty to have such exchanges with those whom we serve. It is unfortunate that the vitriolic diatribes that have become so prevalent here on TS&S have quelled any real hopes of exchanging information and discussing these issues with all of the concerned parties involved. I actually had a poster earlier this morning hope for me to die in the line of duty upon reading in a post that I was a Federal LEO and also wish for all TSA employees to die from cancer. It is unfortunate that I have even caught myself angrily responding from time to time and that is not the hallmark of an individual making a reasoned response. Since it is quite clear that the opinions of those who serve in the TSA are not really welcomed by so many on FT TS&S in an effort to further discussions and debate, this shall be my final post. For a long time, I have enjoyed the discussions here and have gained a perspective from the traveler's point of view that I have valued and considered when performing my duties and I am thankful to all who aided me in gaining this insight.

Happy holidays and good travels to you all,

TB

Insulting TSA workers only makes it easier for them to dehumanize you.

It's counterproductive.

See: http://www.prisonexp.org/

I agree with everything you have said......and what is funny is you posted at 6:42 this morning and not 1 person has posted a "slamming" reply, which seems that most of the posts in this forum are "slams". I too have opted out of FT, and although I am thick skinned it is beyond me how some people are just plain angry in their lives.....and nothing is ever truly positive in here.....good luck to you and thank you for keeping our country free and safe!!

Nice post but further proof that people can be brainwashed. "Take my oath seriously" and "carry a copy of the Constitution in my bag every day"?

How bout this: try reading it sometime.

You are not a federal LEO. You are a screener. It's that attitude that breeds the disdain you talk about.

Thank you for your military service and Happy Thanksgiving.

OK, I lied. This IS my last post, so off to work I go! Anyway, to your comment above...that's strange because my SF50 says I am a Federal LEO, plus they were kind enough to provide me a badge, credentials, and a firearm to confirm this status. I never have claimed to be a screener, but I am indeed a member of OLE/FAMS. ;)

Thank you and to you as well.

TB

I'm sorry that you are leaving. I hope you will lurk from time to time.

Yes, we get abusive and over the top in our criticism from time to time. It is a somewhat normal thing to do when one feels out of control and is passionate about trying to get things done. Anonymity helps to grease the skids to unnecessary vitriol.

I, for one, do not feel that TSA employees are treasonous and I that you are correct that this goes over the top. But, I do feel that the TSA as an agency has adopted policies that are antithetical to the protection of liberty that The Constitution was formulated to protect. It appears that its goal is to specifically try to find ways to further circumvent those liberties while operating just at the edge of legal permissibility. And they do it with absolutely mind numbingly poor public relations and attitude.

I apologize if any of my criticisms of your employer seemed directed at you personally. I do not know you, except from your postings, and I try to create dialog with some of the TSA folks here and I usually end up being accused of useless rhetoric, or lies, or I do not know anything about what I am writing about. So that door swings both ways.

As for me, if I were to examine the job that I do and how it affects people and the value that it provides, and I found that what I do insults millions of people, alienates them from the government, subjects them to dehumanizing procedures, instills fear whether accurately or not, and is done with an attitude of superiority of we know best so shut up, I would consider that I might look for an opportunity in which I did not have to put myself in that position.

And I would take less money if that is what it meant. My conscience can not be sold.

where was this alleged post?

I find it impossible to speak with respect or appreciation about someone who continues his employment as a paid molester of innocent people who do not want his hands on their body and who can be forced to submit to such monstrous indignities under coercive, punitive laws, and rules and who implements a system of "SECRET LAWS" which the people who are held to obedience of those laws are not even permitted to READ or know that law.

For the people who enable and empower such a system I have nothing but contempt.

Yet, I must agree the poster who wished death and cancer to anyone was "Out of bounds", over the top. That was itself repugnant and unacceptable speech.
**********************
edited to add: I too, thought you presented yourself as a TSA screener. My comment in this thread was framed around that perception of your online persona.

It is unfortunate, but certainly understandable, why the American traveler now sees the TSA as an agency to despise. I have had a good opinion of the TSA employees that I normally encounter, usually MSP, for many years. I am hoping that the employees will understand the reason for the public animosity and also lobby for changes to the current system. Pressure from all sides, including from the ranks, would move the cause along faster.

I've said several times on here that we can hate the TSA without hating the TSOs.

I firmly disagree with what the TSA has implemented as the policy. I personally believe it is unconstitutional. I do not believe touching passengers between their legs or virtually strip-searching them is a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment -- even administrative and special needs searches must be reasonable. I do not believe one person who decided to sew explosives into his underwear is justification for touching passengers between their legs any more than one person shoving C4 inside themselves would be justification for cavity searches.

It is easy for many to say that they would quit their job if they were forced to grope people. But if, say, you're a single parent with children, knowing that if you quit you cannot get unemployment compensation and until you find another job your children may not be able to eat (it takes awhile for food stamps to get approved), it's a much different situation. "If you don't like it you can just quit" is therefore not, in my opinion, the attitude that we should be using to justify abusing individual TSOs.

If you are still reading this thread though, and care to respond, I have a question for you. Have you received the same type of abuse from passengers as you have on here in response to the new procedures?

I am going to somewhat disagree.

The TSA is made up of TSO's and other employees. People make decisions, people take actions. Organizations don't do anything. The people who make up those organizations are the ones doing it.

We shouldn't hate TSO's personally, but we can surely hate the decisions they make and the actions they take. Attempting to transfer responsibility to the organization of the TSA is simply deflection.

What bothers me is hearing one TSA officer comment to another officer, "that I (she) just had an opt-out and that women is going to learn a lesson".

Clearly, you nor your colleagues (on the screener level) developed these new rules, but surely you should not take pleasure in enforcing them as a means of punishment.

Dan

Personally, I'd prefer the OP stick around. We have enough TSOs posting, yet not many FAMs/LEOs. If they really are an LEO, then they have a specific perspective about administrative vs. authoritative searches.

Sorry to see you go, TerminalBliss. You and I have had a number of healthy debates, and there have been times when I've agreed with you, and I've made an effort to acknowledge that.

Safe travels to you. ;)

A FAM is a legitimate federal LEO. A TSO is most assuredly not, and it would be wrong for a TSO to imply such. Unfortunately there are power-tripping TSOs who believe that they are law enforcement (I suspect most of them couldn't get into the military or police academy and have delusions of grandeur).

I have almost always had pleasant interactions with the TSOs at my home airport (BDL) and would not wish ill health or death on anyone employed by TSA even though I find it abhorrent what TSOs have to do now. I will not be travelling with my baby via air, because I will not subject my minor child to the TSA with the procedures that are in place at this time.

My brother is in the Coast Guard and as such is under DHS. I support the general mission of DHS even if I disagree with how it is implemented by the TSA. (For what it's worth, he's no fan of the TSA for a myriad of reasons including having one too many TSOs reject his military ID at the document check!)


I agree, it's not the fault of individual TSOs that they have to enforce these rules. It's also easy for a lot of frequent flyers, many of whom are highly educated and skilled workers who would have little difficulty finding a new job, to say they would quit their jobs if forced to do something they found wrong or unethical. It's not so easy when you do not have the skillset that would enable you to find a new job quickly and many TSOs are in that position.

A number of years ago my husband was in the position of needing to stay in a job he absolutely loathed because we needed the money. Fortunately that's not the case for us anymore and he loves his current job - but I know the frustration he felt in having to go to a job he hated and do things he felt were wrong, because his salary paid the bills. It would have only been more pronounced if I didn't work as well and if we'd had children to care for at the time.

If you are indeed an leo, I am sorry to see you leave and do wish you would reconsider.

My views on TSA and most of its employees are fueled by the hatred I have for them and what they have done and are doing to the traveling public, however even with the hate filled view I have of your employer, I realize there are some good people, very, very few, extremely rare in the case of TSA, but maybe you are one of them.

We each have our own line in the sand that we draw and for a LARGE number of people that line appears to be what your employer is doing with the AIT machines and the enhanced pat downs. TSA has not only crossed that line with this latest assault on the public, but has taken a giant leap across that line:td::mad::mad::mad::mad:

... wave ...

I agree completely. I am reminded of a comment by former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld when asked if he had discussed one of his decisions with the White House. His response: "The White House is a building." He's right. His discussions weren't with the building; they were with the people working inside that building.

Similarly, the TSA is composed of human beings working as its employees. Ascribing hideous and unjustified policy decisions to "the TSA" just enables the human beings responsible to hide behind the edifice of the organization. Don't let them do that.

And, finally, even the lowest-level screener who carries out these policies should be ashamed and, if he or she had any self-respect at all, would find respectable employment elsewhere.

Bruce

I suppose I'm obligated to at least "clear the air" by posting my opinion/impressions of the TSA.

I respect the formulation of and most of the mission(s) of the TSA, and in a basic sense, support the need for some level of security when it comes to air travel, although I do believe that much of the TSA's activities have more to do with the management of public opinion, convincing the average American (an occasional traveler, if at all) that flying is safe, than with actual "security".

Most of the TSA personnel who I encounter seem to be modestly competent, attempting to carry out the duties and responsibilities of their jobs. Now, there are a couple with whom I have personal experience before their hiring which to me seems inexplicable, work and life histories which ought to prevent their hiring for any responsible (or even irresponsible) positions, especially security-related posts.

But, on all too many occasions, I have witnessed actions by individual TSA employees (and managers/supervisors) which can only be classified as retaliatory, more than rudeness, simply indefensible, insulting and unwarranted. The latest "step-up" in procedures glaringly violates even the most modest standards of acceptability. I realize that for the average TSA employee, attitude and actions have much to do with keeping their jobs in a time when jobs may be hard to find, and that how they act and react is much dictated by the decisions and policies of those many steps up the bureaucratic ladder from their modest assignments.

Even if that is true, I sense that far too few front line staffers (and even fewer "managers/supervisors/etc.) have been willing to jeopardize their jobs by protesting the new, unwarranted, unjustified pat down procedures. Nor have our leaders, especially elected officials, been willing to stand up and speak out.

I hope that we are not faced by a sort of mass adoption of the "Nuremberg Defense", the "Just following orders" response which keeps good men and women continuing to employ and not protesting "means" which in no way justify the "end".

I'm glad you're at least thinking about whether what is happening to innocent travelers is reasonable.

The attitude here may not be great, but the attitude of many of your colleagues is worse. Your colleagues who laughed while making a woman yank out her nipple ring with pliers, humiliated a cancer survivor by puncturing his urostomy bag, humiliated a breast-cancer survivor by making her remove her prosthetic breast, and so many more cases, are a major source of the bad attitude. And all of your colleagues who stood by and let those things happen amplify it. Show me a DHS/TSA employee who *actively* condemns these incidents, makes apologies not excuses, and gives specific actions that will be taken to prevent recurrences and provide justice for the victims, and I will refrain from calling *that* DHS/TSA employee any names.

You and your colleagues would get a lot more respect if you would devote some of your efforts to scrubbing your ranks of this type of scum, holding them publicly accountable, and cleaning up your organization's culture and SOP to actively prevent these sorts of actions.

May I suggest you devote some of your new-found time from leaving FT to that noble goal.

I've been lurking for a while, but I finally registered for YOU, TerminalBliss. I hope you continue to lurk (if only to bask in my flattery!). From what I've read of your comments lately, you seem like a reasonable and rational adult, something we need way more of both in and outside airports. I agree that it's completely unfair to degrade TSA employees, but it can be difficult when a TSA employee doesn't return the basic courtesy.

For some of us, it's reached the point where negative TSA encounters far outnumber the positive ones, and this is where communication starts to break down.

It's frustrating when one can research for hours the appropriate protocol for a situation, i.e. flying with a post-surgical cast, only to arrive and discover that the TSA employee assigned to you is either disinterested, unaware, or knowingly refusing to follow the TSA guidelines published for these purposes.

If a TSA agent should never ask you to remove a cast, what recourse does a passenger have when the agent does in fact request this? When a surgeon's letter is produced, stating the cast cannot be removed for an additional 72 hours, and ignored.

This is where the breakdown occurs. When the passenger is dehumanized to such an extent, the TSA employee is dehumanized as well, a process degrading to us all.

It's unfair when people say TSA employees should find new jobs. Very few of us are lucky to have a job at all right now, forget one that we truly love and contributes positively to society. This argument isn't helpful, and it smacks of a position of privilege and classism.

I guess what I'd like you to know, TerminalBliss, is that some of us do feel all people are worth of respect. We just feel respect is a two way street. I hope you will continue to be a voice of reason among your fellow TSA-ers, and remind them of our shared humanity. I hope you'll encourage them to familiarize them with the proper procedures, and the width and breadth, as well as limit, of their authority. I hope you'll remind them to be respectful and courteous, even to passengers who aren't. And finally, I hope you'll remind them of the discomfort experienced by many simply through physical contact with a stranger, and that's part of being human, too.

When I fly tomorrow, I'll opt out of the scanner, and I'll encourage those around me to do the same. I will be polite, but aware of my rights, and I expect to board my plane with my dignity still intact. I hope this isn't too much to ask.

Same here. The fact that TSA management tolerates this kind of behavior is scarier to me than the behavior itself.

A analogy might be a police force that fails to discipline an officer who arrests someone without justification. That officer will just continue breaking the law repeatedly unless someone stops him. The same principle applies at the TSA. Bad apples need to be removed from the barrel. But nobody seems interested in doing that.

Bruce

Oh, bullfeathers! :rolleyes:

Terminal Bliss is a reasonable fellow -- and a sworn law-enforcement officer with a duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States. He should arrest TSA employees whom he witnesses abusing travelers in the manner that studentff described so eloquently. Forget about all this "shared humanity" nonsense. Criminals belong in prison. End of story.

Bruce

TSO's are their own worst enemy. In the early days of the TSA my experiences with TSO's were overall excellent. They were professional enough, generally respectful, and did their job fairly well. That is no longer the case. While there are still some good ones, the majority I come in contact with are obnoxious, rude, disrespectful, and unprofessional.

Until TSA policies change though (no more nude-o-scopes or gropes), my interactions with TSA employees will be fairly minimal as I've now cut back upcoming travel plans by about 70%.

And you missed my point about the fact that saying that is easy when you're not the one depending on that paycheck. How many of them after dealing with a day of feeling up people's crotches *aren't* looking at the want ads when they get home? But until another job is found, they have to eat. And in many cases so do their kids.

Blame Pistole, Napolitano, other people who actually make the decisions about the policy, for the policies. Yes, they are people. But the end-line TSO is not the one who is making the policy. Unless they were hired on in the last month, they likely didn't sign on expecting to have to touch a guy's junk or a girl's hoohah. Some have abused their authority -- fine, hate those TSOs, not all of them.

My experience protesting the Iraq war does color some of my opinion on this issue. I hated the war. I felt it was wrong. Policy-makers and the President, in my opinion, violated international law by attacking a country that did not attack us first -- and just as no terrorist has been caught by the TSA, we didn't find any WMDs. Some soldiers abused prisoners, innocent women and children were killed. I HATED the war, but I did not hate every soldier I saw.

I also dealt with the police in those protests -- I was a legal observer. I saw some abuse their authority. I saw unconstitutional policies come down from higher up in the NYPD's chain and saw supervisory officers make bad decisions (and later a lawsuit was won about the most atrocious day up there, April 7, 2003 -- the city had to pay out $2 mil in damages, after arresting protesters who had not violated a single ordinance, including several senior citizens). I HATED the oppression of free speech, but I did not hate every police officer I saw.

You may not feel baggage screeners are anywhere near as deserving of respect as police officers or soldiers. I agree to an extent. I hate the DMV, too, but don't hate the person at the desk who has to ask the stupid questions -- and I really hated Workman's Comp when they denied paying for the physical therapy my doctor ordered, but I didn't hate the nurse who had to give me the bad news. Just because some people in a profession suck, and just because their bosses are idiots, does not make everyone in that profession worthy of hate.

The contrast is even more profound: police departments have internal affairs units and external citizens' review boards to investigate and respond to complaints about LEO misconduct.* These independent auditors of departmental conduct operate under well-defined rules, answer to both internal and external authorities, and in short enforce accountability to the public both for LEOs' actions and also in the reasonableness of the rules and standards set forth by the department.

The TSA has neither of these, as far as I know. There is no well-defined independent mechanism for investigating misconduct by a TSO, or for reviewing the rules that the TSA has set for its employees' interactions with the public. LEOs understand that they are always under public review, with very real consequences for misconduct; TSOs understand that the public has no effective way of reviewing their actions.

* I'm referring to major metropolitan police departments; smaller departments often don't have well-defined citizens' review boards. Considering the size of the TSA and the scope of its duties, the analogy to the larger departments is meaningful.

<mod>
Believe it or not, sometimes the moderators remove the really offensive stuff. Just because you cannot find it right now doens't mean it didn't happen.
</mod>

Are you then confirming that such a post was made, or are you merely stating that some posts get removed?

TB, I'm sure my little post(if you're still reading) won't matter but I hope you will have a change of heart & stick around. You are what we need on this board. While I dislike the TSA & all the non-sense I appreciate the FAM's & all you all do. Thank you. If your travels bring you to my airport please pm me in advance ( I work PM Mo-fr) would love to have coffee with you. Be safe.

I'll confirm, there were several very, very rude posts that were removed for antagonistic and taunting reasons. It is always hoped that the members of FlyerTalk can dialogue among themselves without resorting to variations of verbal (OK, keyboard) abuse. Thank you for understanding.

We need both sides of the fence here, if only so that we have an opportunity to learn from each other. Lecturing, shouting, insulting people and name-calling are not going to persuade anyone that what they are doing is wrong. It may make us feel better momentarily ('I showed them!') but long term, it's not going to have any positive effect and will instead work to harden attitudes, not break them down. Catchmorefreedombeeswithhoney's handle seems to sum it up very well, even if they are messing with the formatting of the page by having no spaces in there ;)

I wonder when someone wrote
what their intention was? If I was working in the role the member described, I certainly wouldn't be persuaded by their argument - I'd write it off as another hyperbolic rant. Sure, they've stated their opinion, and they are entitled to do that - but when the totality of those opinions are driving reasonable people from FT, that's never a good thing for a forum :(

I think the entire thread was removed. It was really in poor taste and TB responded to several abusive posts with remarkable restraint.

I don't think I've ever responded to one of TB's posts. They've always seemed reasoned, though his unswerving loyalty to his employer (for all it speaks, in isolation, to strength of character) did come across as a bit infuriating. That's really my only problem with some TSA employees--they see their organization's policies as justifiable and necessary, and seem not to want to allow that they may be heavy-handed, not very well thought out, or may cross boundaries.

Naturally, there is no shortage of people here who hold opposite but similarly polarized views. Maybe I'm one of them, though I do think reasonable security measures are important and necessary. However, the debate on security and security measures is no less important. Unfortunately--until very recently, perhaps--the TSA has disagreed.

I tend to agree with Jenbel and ylwae (although just yesterday one of our TSOs implied that our voices ie non-American voices shouldn't be posting on TS&S)

Hyperbole and name-calling tend to sway people against the argument. I am proof of that myself, and I didn't start to really dig past that here until I had some bad experiences and was told some bizarre things that didn't seem right to me.

That is especially true for people talking to non-FTers, or those not necessarily against the AIT or pat downs. Reasoned argument supported by facts seems to go further than using hyperbole, which can close ears to the facts.

But I have also seen what is most people's 'night shift' here, with some very bizarre posts (and user names) which are cleaned up very quickly, so I do know that the moderators are working hard to reduce the amount of mess (for lack of a better word).

I am also saddened that we lost several TSOs over the year who seemed to be willing to post factually and in turn not use names or be derogatory to the general public. They were very valuable to the discussion here because they were willing to respond and answer questions.

When I came to TS&S earlier this year I was shocked to see how some of the regular TSOs spoke about passengers (and still find it loses support for the TSA) I don't know which came first, the chicken or the egg, on TS&S, but as someone standing closer to the side of the TSA I moved across the street to the other side in large part based on how I felt the TSOs treated me (and others) in person and here on TS&S.

> You and your colleagues would get a lot more respect if you would devote some
> of your efforts to scrubbing your ranks of this type of scum

Amen.

Suggested reading for those unaware of Godwin's Law and Reductio ad Hitlerum. As others have said, name calling. e.g "Brown shirts," "bigot," tends to shut down rational discussion and debate while trivializing the horror of truly totalitarian regimes.

"Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions."

Reductio ad Hitlerem "is a pun on reductio ad absurdum, and was coined by an academic ethicist, Leo Strauss, in 1953. Engaging in this fallacy is sometimes known as playing the Nazi card,[1] by analogy to playing the race card.

"The fallacy claims that a policy leads to—or is the same as—one advocated or implemented by Adolf Hitler or the Third Reich, and so "proves" that the original policy is undesirable. The suggested logic is one of guilt by association, a classic confusion of correlation and causality, as if to say that anything Hitler did, no-one else should do, for it will obviously or eventually lead to genocide. For example: "Hitler was a vegetarian, so vegetarianism is wrong [because it leads to mass murder]." The tactic is often used to derail arguments, because such comparisons tend to distract and anger..."

I will freely admit my disdain and disgust for the TSA. I have self-edited many comments because I let my anger get the best of me.

However, I must also point out that there are more and more incidents of TSOs and representatives of the TSA who have blatantly lied to the general public and to the denizen of Flyertalk.

Let's start with this big, fat, hairy whopper from Blogger Bob: "These images are friendly enough to post in a preschool. Heck, it could even make the cover of Reader’s Digest and not offend anybody." To this day, Bob refuses to come clean about his, shall we say, miscommunication with the public despite the Rolando Negrin affair.

Perhaps we should look at the times all of us NEXUS card holders have been told by TSOs that our NEXUS ID was not valid despite what the TSA website said because the "TSA website is out of date."

Or maybe we could look at what is reported right here on Flyertalk today about a screening at RDU where the passenger was told that he had no right to pick his witness for the private screening. That's not what the TSA website says and what Pistole said less than two days ago.

So, where should I muster the energy to give one rat's behind about the TSA? They burned the public trust bridge long ago and continue to try to rekindle the flames on the dormant pile of ash.

I am sorry that TerminalBliss is departing as I like debate, dialogue and even shouting matches from time to time. However, I am not going to play the nice guy when I can never be sure that the TSA person I am talking to is giving it to me straight or reading from Blogger Bob's Reader's Digest playbook.

I give great kudos to those who believe that overarching pleasantries are going to woo the average TSO or TSA rep into a constructive dialogue. I think that is a completely lost cause based on just the dialogue here with some of the TSOs who defend their agency's actions regardless. If we had a video of a TSO shoving his hand into the bottom of a child and yelling "this is what you get for refusing to go into the scanner!" some TSO would justify it claiming that we didn't get the full story or that that procedure had to be done but they can't tell us why because it is SSI.

If the TSA wants to rebuild the trust it wants with the American public, the first place to start is to stop treating the American public as if we are all Al Qaeda operatives. Then, stop with the continual backpatting and immodest lines about being the last line of defense. Do those two things and I might be a TSA advocate.

I wish you well, TerminalBliss.

Agreed. I also find that the (very) frequent assertation that the passengers are embellishing or not telling the truth about these incidents weakens the TSOs stance. The fact is that at least one person must be telling the truth. I know what happened to me, for instance.

People believe all kinds of silly things. Google "Flat Earth Society"! I don't give any credit to such people.

The TSA is an out-of-control rogue elephant that needs to be tranquilized.

Bruce

+1.

TerminalBliss

I have a few points to make about your farewell post.
From a fellow veteran (retired US Navy), thank you for your service
to our country. But serving in the US Armed Forces does not make
every individual someone to respect, there are plenty of scum within
the ranks.

If you are so adamant about taking your job and US Constitution so seriously,
what have you done about the obvious violations you have observed while
employed by the TSA? You may have witnessed theft by your comrades, what did you do. You may have witnessed unwarranted degrading acts upon travelers, what did you do? You may have witnessed many things that as an individual that turned your stomach, what did you do?

I had a job in the civilian sector that supported the military. I was told to
lie to a government representative about some work that was not done, but to say it was. My response was that I was not going to do it. My option was to lie or quit. I chose to quit, and be able to live with myself for doing the right thing.

Everyday that you work for the TSA, you may feel you are doing the right thing, but are you really? When was the last time you came to the aid of a passenger that was being abused, and by that I mean in any way that you would not want your mother to be treated.

Just as you feel sensitive about being called names and being wished dead, we as passengers also have feelings. To be told "D.Y.W.T.F.T" for no other reason than to intimidate, is also very stressful to a passenger just trying to get on a plane.
We as passengers have done nothing to warrant the treatment we receive at an airport.

We all need to take a step back and realize that this idiotic "War on Terror" is having ZERO affect on the real terrorists, and actually destroying this country. We need to work out a compromise and end the "Us against them" when the "them" are Americans just wanting to get on an airplane.