Are you implying that what I said was factually inaccurate? If so, you're more than welcome to prove what I said was inaccurate.

and this is the crux of the problem we have as individual travelers. They know they have us singled out and that as individuals we want to get to where we are going and will put up with this nonsense to a certain degree, but not enough to actually stand up for our rights and get arrested and go through what Phil went through. The "you tell them whos boss and we'll show you" attitude is pervasive among these government employees and their goal doesn't always appear to be stopping terrorism on planes.
When you are a hammer everything looks like a nail, is what I often find when dealing with these people. I feel like they tend to look at everyone as a problem and they have to show us they are the boss and that we are all in imminent danger on a regular basis. This just needs to end.

But there are ways nails can be bothersome to people wielding a hammer.

No question, what you mentioned DOES need to end. And there ARE means to properly bring up complaints and have actions taken.

But too many times, people either try to one-up the screeners on-the-spot fueled by heat-of-the-moment emotions, or just come onto this board and make some really ridiculous comments.

And there is the vicious circle that will seemingly never end. The way things are handled now on both sides, it won't end anytime soon.

Appears to be a rather elegent process (in a sinister kind of way). If you say you are not a traveler, and they say "submit or leave", you have the option of leaving. If you say you are a traveller, if they say "submit or leave", there's almost a 100% chance you'll submit, as you have some place you were heading to. I suspect they ignored anyone who stated they were not a traveller.

So as per voluntary, it appears volutary is... submit, or leave.

What stuck with me is that this took place before the CP, no after. So it appears that the barrier for entry has been moved back another ring, from the CP, to the airport building doors. The sterile area, and boundaries of administrative searches, appears to be quietly working back towards the airport property land border.

What you said was non-constructive bordering on ridicule.

BUT, when there are 100 million nails and only ONE is bothersome, do you treat all of them as bothersome? Thats what TSA does to all of us, treat everyone as if we are a terrorist when the reality is that none of us are.

What is the point of saying stuff is voluntary but then putting up such a hassle and threatening to call the police when someone refuses? Just call it mandatory, less confusion that way.

You can volunteer to be swabbed or you can volunteer to be arrested. The TSA is all about choices, you know.

Or you can put in your headphones and not hear them. Let them chase you all over the airport as you rock out to "Living in America".

Actually, it's "you can voluntarily submit to this, or you can leave". You don't have to submit, yet if you don't you'll be asked to leave. There is an option in this decision tree. If you don't leave, they'll call an LEO to cite you for trespass. The check is voluntary, yet conditional to continue travel. :)

Call it what it is
 

Random and Everywhere is just another make-work ploy to ensure that the TSA continues to grow, even if passenger volume shrinks. The roving bands of "secondary screening" teams have nothing to do with security - as if they would find anything dangerous in the cursory pawing through of carry on luggage they do - and more to do with finding something to keep teams of 5 people occupied for an 8 hour shift through the reduction in airport traffic during the economic downturn. Just more empire building as usual. You want smaller goverment - here's an agency ripe for pruning!