This policy makes exactly no sense. A terrorist can fit more than enough C4 in an iPod or a PSP to blow a nice hole in an aircraft fuselage.

And also implies that somehow putting this stuff in a kippie bag makes the same "dangerous" items safe. Must be magic.

Why??? How does this "enhance" security?

Doubt it does, but it does stroke their ego.

I just got back from a short trip involving the new rules. I was at two airports, Columbus OH and Providence.

Columbus was the "liquid obsessed" airport, with a woman asking me if I had liquids. When I said no, she questiioned me even further, as if she could catch mein a lie. They took no interest in electronics and there was only one boarding pass inspection.

Providence was the "electronics obsessed" airport. I took my laptop out, but left the AC adaptor and headphones in my bag. This upset the 1,000-year-old x-ray reader, who subjected my rather small bag to an endless search, and required a second boarding pass inspection.

Of course the same electronics were of no interest to anyone in five international airports I've visited in the recent past. But NOW they're DANGEROUS!

...while I never have a problem putting my wallet, blackberry, and coins in the same bin as my laptop.

Must all be part of Kip's Inconsistency Directive to keep terrorists on their toes. I feel safer already.

Because it's not about security, it's about "compliance"

Yep, it sounds like a way to "punish" pax without having to resort to fines (the negative PR from which would really be incredible to see), and without the blatant retaliatory secondary.

It's really passive-aggression at its worst. "HAH! You're going to miss your flight if you don't toss that in the trash, because you'll have to go back to the end of the line to put it in a baggie if you don't!"

If you think back to when this was enacted, you may remember that ALL liquids have to be declared at the check point. This means that they come out of the baggage that they are in and they are shown in plain view. If they arent declared then the passenger stands to loose them. Digging them out of baggage is a real time waster.
There is also nothing allowed under, over or inside shoes anymore

TSA is great at wasting people's time. The liquid and shoe carnivals are prime examples.

At least Hudson News is getting rich though, right?

So suppose the TSA does find an undeclared liquid. How have they saved ANY time by sending the pax back to the start of the line? They still had to find the liquid, and I don't think going to a 100% confiscation policy is going to fly; the first time they confiscate an undeclared medication, they're going to be sued.

And the shoes bit is the dumbest load of malarky I've ever heard.

It is going to make me need THREE bins: one for my shoes ALONE, one for my coat/hat/anything else loose I'm carrying (like my camera sometimes), and one for my laptop. That's just downright stupid. If my coat or hat somehow obscures the view of my shoes, then perhaps the TSA needs to be training their x-ray operators better. @:-)

Declared to WHO? Even DEN doesn't use feeders any more.

Can we get an answer where we're seeking clarity to your earlier post?

Nooooooooo ...... you're more likely than not going to be prohibited from putting your shoes in a bin!

We can only pray that there are no "front line security officers" studying proctology.

anyone remember the doctor in the movie "cannonball run" wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee