I suppose that this just goes to show that airport security is designed to catch dumb terrorists. No competent terrorist would actively try to draw attention to himself while going through security.
Misleading title. Being someone who is "Very arrogant and expresses contempt against airport passenger procedures." is different than someone who complains.
Someone who "became visibly upset and arrogantly pointed his finger in the agent's face when asked why he did not have an airline ticket for a return flight." is different than someone who expresses discontent in a non-threatening manner.
Someone who "became visibly upset and arrogantly pointed his finger in the agent's face when asked why he did not have an airline ticket for a return flight." is different than someone who expresses discontent in a non-threatening manner.
The anecdote described by the agent about finger-waving is not in the guidelines. The actual guideline is very loose and will be interpreted by screeners as they see fit and as they see convenient. And they could use it in both situations you described.
I think you could easily label anyone arrogant if they're questioning authority. Besides, nobody likes arrogant people, and arrogant people cant be "victims", so why not write it into policy? They might as well say they target assholes.
This works because only a terrorist would not like going through security. If you are not a terrorist, you have nothing to hide, and airport security is an enjoyable experience for everyone. U-S-A!! U-S-A!!!
I forgot who first said it but the TSA is what you get when you pay people to use their reptile brains (the part of the brain that mindless reacts to fear).
The things that REALLY keep us safe are pro-active investigations that take place invisibly and silently long before a terrorist gets to the airport.
What happens at the airport, as Bruce Schneier once said, is "security theater." It is an act that makes it seem as though something is being done. It sounds ridiculous, but this is what makes it possible for many people to convince themselves to continue to fly.
I was just going to make the comment about freespeech when they covered it on the video. Either way, I've complained every time I've gone, so this must be new.
Did anyone notice $1.2 BILLION (more) is being spent on a program which has not caught a single terrorist, and has proven to let all sorts of things through?
9 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 36.9 ms ] threadSomeone who "became visibly upset and arrogantly pointed his finger in the agent's face when asked why he did not have an airline ticket for a return flight." is different than someone who expresses discontent in a non-threatening manner.
The anecdote described by the agent about finger-waving is not in the guidelines. The actual guideline is very loose and will be interpreted by screeners as they see fit and as they see convenient. And they could use it in both situations you described.
The things that REALLY keep us safe are pro-active investigations that take place invisibly and silently long before a terrorist gets to the airport.
What happens at the airport, as Bruce Schneier once said, is "security theater." It is an act that makes it seem as though something is being done. It sounds ridiculous, but this is what makes it possible for many people to convince themselves to continue to fly.