erictank

Then be damned to those who want to hold passengers to standards which "cannot be revealed". You don't want to say what the rules are? Then I have no respect whatsoever for those "rules" or those claiming to apply them. TSA NEEDS to be accountable to the flying public if it wants ANY buy-in from them - and, by and large, it refuses to be. It violates or ignores its own stated rules (those it bothers to put out). It makes up rules as it goes. When called on it, presented with publically-available TSA sources stating the screeners are doing it wrong, they take cover behind the "Oh, that website isn't accurate" or "The rules were changed this morning" crap rather than admit their error. THIS is our front line of defense, our "accountable and capable" security agency?!?


And none of us were EVER talking about legitimately-classified information either, and you know it.

Talk about absurd...

Random (and randomly-enforced) nonsensical "rules" that are constantly changing DO NOT constitute any sort of valid "classified information". Those rules are what the flying public is expected to abide by - so we pretty much NEED TO KNOW THEM. Additionally, for there to BE any true accountability, either for the public OR TSA, those rules have to be publically-available. If we can't tell what the rules are, we can't abide by them, and we can't hold TSA personnel accountable for violating them on their end - because they can always claim "SSI", and we can't prove them wrong. This is, purely and simply, WRONG.

What part of that is so hard for you to grasp, Bart?

Teacher49

Come on, now. Aging brings a certain amount of confusion of one time and place for another. It happens to all of us, though seemingly more often to some than others, I will admit. Go easy ... one day your past and your present may not be so distinct from each other in your mind.

Wally Bird

So completely irrelevant to the thread then ?

Bart

No different than the comment that was made to me. Yet you point mine out and not the other.

Wally Bird

That comment (or comments - I don't know which one you specifically mean) was clearly made within the context of passengers knowing what is expected of them and the screeners at checkpoints. As usual, instead of addressing that issue directly, you widened it into a waffle about classified information, complete with military anecdotes and Pattonesque rhetoric.

That got old a long time ago, but doesn't seem to have got through.