![]() |
Originally Posted by Dovster
I don't think anyone who has posted in this thread is "crazy" but I do feel that there are some unreasonable posts.
The problem with that, of course, is once you start ranting and raving you become a joke -- and no serious person listens to what you are saying. There are a great number of arguments that can be made against the TSA policies. I can't even begin to count the number of times that I have said that Security should spend more effort looking for terrorists and less looking for weapons. Quite honestly, I would be less worried about a WWII veteran carrying his souvenir Samurai sword onto a plane than I would about someone who just completed an Al Qaeda training course coming on with a newspaper. Reasoned arguments, however, get ignored and anyone making them is lumped in together with the ranters who are arguing "on his side". You are quite right, of course. I do experience the intrusions as crazy making and control myself quite well at the screening station. Blowing off steam on OMNI is just that. I will wait until we are all required to fly manacled to the armrests, naked and sedated before kicking up a real fuss! :D |
Back to the thread topic of "TSA" and "FLL", I can say that two screeners at T1 were almost overcome with joy at finding the small half empty travel size tube of toothpaste I sloppily hid in a clear pastic baggie instead of wrapping it inside a couple pairs of underwear like I normally do. They even held it up in the air to show the other screeners what they found :rolleyes: I guess that's something else I need to hide in my ever growing front pocket collection.
I did manage to smuggle 6 bottles of Otrivin medicine through YYZ, even with the bag check - they saw the bottles on the xray, but couldn't find them in my bag. Also for the first time, they had me remove my shoes :rolleyes: |
FLL is the worst airport for screening in my opinion.
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
El Al has not banned liquids, etc, but its website does say that they are prohibitted on flights "to the following destinations: England, USA, France, Poland, Rome, Frankfurt and Mumbai!"
It makes it clear that this is not its own decision but it is "Following instructions from the aviation security authorities around the world".
Originally Posted by Dovster
Again, there are plenty of valid, coherent, arguments to be made against this ban but unfortunately they are being lost in an avalanche of ridiculous hyperbole.
FWIW, I rant here under an anonymous username. My letters to the President, the Comrade and his Half-Wit sidekick, and my Congressional delegation are written above my real signature, and you shouldn't assume that I merely cut and paste these rants to compose that correspondence. ;) This is an anonymous message board - I couldn't care less whether I win anyone over with posts here. |
Originally Posted by sonora
FLL is the worst airport for screening in my opinion.
mike |
FLL really is much nicer than MIA in lots of ways, but TSA behavior is not one of them. I have seen some of the worst TSA abuses at FLL, including selection of good-looking young women for pat-downs. Female screeners did the actual pat-downs, but male TSA thugs leered at the scene. I wanted to do something about this but had no good ideas at the time (or now, for that matter). The TSA staff at FLL are simply out of control.
Bruce |
Originally Posted by Teacher49
Can actions qualify as hyperbole?
If so, then the act of requiring shoe removal, and confiscation of chap-stick and bottled water are the hyperbole that drown out whatever sense there may be in so called security measures. Subject people to enough cognitive dissonance and double bind and, sure enough, madness does result. In other words, our policies drive reasonable people crazy. We should be discussing whether, WHEN OUR LEADERS ARE ACTING AND TEACHING THE PEOPLE TO THINK AND ACT IN ILLOGICAL AND INSANE WAYS WE ARE INFECTING OUR POPULACE WITH AN INIMICAL WAY OF HANDLING PROBLEMS THAT ITSELF WILL HASTEN OUR DEMISE FROM OUR EMBRACING VERY USELESS AND INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSES TO BOTH REAL AND PATENTLY IMAGINARY THREATS. We are now ensnared and living in the grip of AN ENTIRE AGE OF INSANE FEAR AND OBSESSION WITH FINDING, FIGHTING AND STOPPING " THE BOOGEYMAN" WHO IS "GONNA GET YOU!" The boogeyman is EVERYWHERE, EVERYONE IS SUSPECTED OF BEING THE BOOGYMAN. We are becoming OFFICIALLY encased, paralyzed in insanity and fear from such nonsense. Reality has entirely departed, on holiday, from life nowdays. |
Originally Posted by bdschobel
FLL really is much nicer than MIA in lots of ways, but TSA behavior is not one of them.
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
On the other hand, FLL is one of the few airports where you can be present while the TSA looks at your checked luggage. This means you can lock it and not be afraid of it being cut open -- or of a screener taking anything out.
|
Originally Posted by Spiff
[SIZE=1]That lying little sack of crap, Comrade Hawley, issued a proclaimation that all shoes have to come off before the WTMD. This idiot's proclaimation comes despite the fact that the x-ray does not detect explosives.
I highly encourage you to file a complaint about Comrade Hawley's disgusting little shoe perversion to the TSA hotline, to your ailines and to your elected representatives. Comrade Hawley ought to be caned and fired. He is an un-American disgrace. But likely he's just an idiot and a commie. That is certainly more likely. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
Depends on the terminal...T1 (CO, B6, NW) has the checked bag x-ray machines downstairs on the ramp level. T2 (Delta, Midway) and T3 (AA, UA, US) has them up on the concourse level.
|
Originally Posted by TierFlyer
Yes, we know how you feel. Alternatively, he is trying his best working inside a box defined by Congress, Presidential decree, the Justice Department, and the ACLU.
None of those agencies/entities mandated this liquids/gels nonsense. Not one of those agencies forced him to 100% Shoe Carnival mode. In fact, the x-ray does not detect explosives. None of those agencies/entities ordered the return of gate harassment either. I maintain my complete derision of Comrade "Kip" Hawley. The man is a complete disgrace. :td: |
[QUOTE=Spiff]No, he isn't.
None of those agencies/entities mandated this liquids/gels nonsense.[QUOTE] Again, you don't *know* you believe. I'm neutral - never met the man, only seen him on TV. He's clearly not dumb, and I'm unwilling to believe someone a fool until they prove it. (See: Jimmy Carter) I never said they did or did not mandate the liquid ban - but that is because I don't know. Neither do you, actually. We don't KNOW what liquid explosive the ROP'ers were trying to brew up in Londinistan, we only know what we read in the paper. (Remember Plamegate - how much of that did they get right?) Was that particular plot right on the heels of some guys getting ready to brew up chlorine gas or smear sterno on the walls of the lav and light it on fire? We don't know. And calling someone a commie (how is he a commie anyway?) just isn't helpful. Plus it gets boring, which is worse. |
Originally Posted by TierFlyer
Alternatively, he is trying his best working inside a box defined by Congress, Presidential decree, the Justice Department, and the ACLU.
|
Originally Posted by TierFlyer
He's clearly not dumb, and I'm unwilling to believe someone a fool until they prove it. (See: Jimmy Carter)
He's a complete un-American idiot. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:24 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.