aleaf

If I understand this correctly, it only counts if wearing the cat suit turned her on.

Or perhaps if it was a real cat suit.

ew.

birdstrike

If you are lucky, someday you will understand.

If not, you have great promise with the TSA.

aleaf

Ew.
I think I'm going pull a Babs on this one. To paraphrase Barbara Bush, I'm not going to "waste my beautiful mind on something like that". Again, ew.

Reminds me of the joke about the difference between kinky and perverted. Kinky is when you use a feather. Perverted is when you use the whole chicken.

Hey now, there is no reason to be mean.

birdstrike

"missionary" encapsulates perverted. @:-)

What do you say we explore what a whole chicken can be used for?

aleaf

Send a picture. (of you, not the chicken)

KTW

The liquids reg has never been a set it stone not allowed. That is simply not possible. Too many people must have certain items. They might try and say no if you let them. If you do not they can't. No grey area.^

studentff

I disagree in one sense; the war-on-water is the first example of three very bad things that keep people from getting on board even if TSA claims it is the "patriotic" thing:

1) banning a harmless items (for an extended period) because of TSA's apparent inability to tell them from threats. All previous bans were of perceived threat items (even the silly bans like small screwdrivers and nail files), not admitted harmless items. IMO an appropriate response to the 8/06 "threat" (which I still don't find very credible because of technical issues and the fact that the bad guys had neither bombs, passports/visas, nor tickets) would have been to implement 3-1-1 for a few weeks or a month, and use that time to develop a sane screening policy.

2) banning an entire state of matter. That's how you end up with ludicrous claims like a kid's juice box being considered a bomb.

3) banning an item that most people need and/or want to carry in their everyday lives and on an airplane. It's hard to get the population on board for that, but easy to get the population on board for bans of guns, large knives, and large bombs, because people generally don't need or want these objects on their person. (Banning the small penknives that many people carry is a lesser example of this problem; it's hard to accept that it is perfectly safe for me to carry such an object to work but not on a plane.)


Or, place your water bottles in the plastic tray. Now I admit, we'd probably complain about such a policy in this forum, but it would be a whole lot less onerous than banning water.

Not likely; too much sense.

If TSA PR really wanted to convince the public liquids were a threat, they needed a demo video not just of an unspecified boom. They need to show the liquids in water-bottle size containers (prove the size argument), show actual people willing to carry those liquids around as through a checkpoint (prove the components are stable enough to make it through), show the containers passing an ETD swab (prove TSA's claim that they couldn't detect the threats), show the assembly process (prove that it is something that can be done in an airport/plane without lab conditions and without arousing suspicion), and then show an explosion big enough to rip a large hole in a pressurized tube. IMO that they didn't do such a demo is almost proof that it is impossible and that the threat was mostly a farce.

halls120

there is not much that can annoy me faster than the idea that if we aren't full and eager participants in TSA's moronic and unnecessary security measures than to insinuate that we aren't being patriotic. (And I know you aren't making this argument.)

This is such unadulterated BS.

Folks, 9/11 did not happen because gate security was lax. It happened because of the airline policy regarding hijackings - which at that time, crews were instructed NOT to resist. The plain fact is that before 9/11 anyone could have successfully hijacked an airliner with nothing more than a ball point pen held to the throat of a crew member.

Folks, I work in government, and have for the past 32 years. In the national security arena most of that time. What has been going on for the last 7 years is a slow moving but real national tragedy. We are wasting billions of taxpayer dollars on unneccessary procedures and equipment, and while on occasion we actually do something right, those successes are overshadowed by the numerous failures that occur on an all too frequent basis.

The waste and false sense of security provided by TSA is one of the few places the public has access to this massive government failure. Yet there is no outrage, which frankly puzzles me.

Rant over. You may all return to your regularly scheduled program.

oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate

Well, I wouldn't say NO outrage -- there is this forum, after all!

mikeef

Is there anyone else trying to figure out what a "furry" is by reading the vague descriptions in this thread? This is getting to be very interesting. Ah, my sheltered suburban upbringing, coming back to bite me.

Mike

oneofthosepeopleyouloveto hate

Mike,

Keep the brain bleach handy if you plan to Google it!

LessO2

I know the context in what you said, and I'm not trying to attack you here, but there is a LOT more disdain of the TSA and individual screeners than just outlined in this forum.

Cee

LOL. At first I thought you were talking about really hairy people! I feel for ya! Keeps the job interesting tho...
That was a great episode!
The TSO's and STSO's on my shift collectively decided how we were going to handle it at my CP. We advised the TSO's that they can use their discretion, and we (STSO's) will support them in their decisions. We talked about the 3.5 oz jars of crew, half full tubes of toothpaste, etc. For the most part we are going to stick to the 3-1-1 policy as it was, but we are going to use our common sense. If we make an exception, we have to inform the passenger of that, and that it may not get thru another CP somewhere else. We will see how it works out.

P.S
CLELOSER, didn't the White Sox kick your butt last night? CLELOSER is kinda fitting

joer

Last year, the furries shared a hotel with the Milwaukee Brewers.

As for what furries are, all anyone needs to know is that this exists. Enjoy your nightmares.

So, did the screener make them take their tails off? How would they sit in the airplane seat with it on?

Peetah

Gone.