USA Flag

Official website of the Department of Homeland Security

Transportation Security Administration

Please Post Off Topic Comments Here

Friday, July 02, 2010
TSA logo

I have long allowed off topic comments. However, after many complaints from folks who would understandably like to stay on the subject, I am providing this post as a place to comment things that are way off topic with the current post.

I’ve added a link to this post on our sidebar so people will know to post off topic comments here.

You now have the option of subscribing to posts, so you’ll be able to keep up with the comments here if you so choose. So it’s not as if your comment is being exiled to the land of forgotten comments. We’ll be paying attention, and you can stay up to date with an RSS feed.

As much as we’d like to hear about your synchronized swimming club, I ask that all comments posted here remain TSA focused and adhere to TSA’s comment policy.

Bob Burns
TSA Blog Team

Comments

Submitted by Blogger Bob on

Bubba Said: Bob, Why did you delete the post I was quoting above? Kind of defeats the point of my post.

@Bubba - I'm not sure what post you're referring to. I haven't deleted any posts.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Anonymous on

"We have reached out to the field and nobody is aware of this incident."

LOL! You are hilarious!!!

Are you surprised

"We have reached out to the blogger and have had no response as of yet."

Have you contacted the ACA about the press release that shows a systemic problem in the TSA?

Has the TSA taken any action based on the press release?

Submitted by Blogger Bob on

Anonymous Said: LOL! You are hilarious!!!

@Anon: As a mater of fact, TSA will be meeting with ACA in the very near future.

Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Anonymous on

Blogger Bob said...

Regarding The Amputee Mommy Post:
We have reached out to the blogger and have had no response as of yet

------------------------------------

When I see a comment from you on her Blog, then I will believe you have reached out.

There is no reason that cannot be done.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"As a mater of fact, TSA will be meeting with ACA in the very near future."

When?

And I mean a specific date?

Submitted by Anonymous on

@TSO87,

"MOONDOG: The restrictions are for liquid,gels,aerosoles and PASTE, peanut butter is classified as a paste soo no anything above 100ml is not allowed"


Since when is peanut butter a paste?

And for that matter, I don't see PASTE on the restricted list anyway. Here's the official TSA page advising passengers of what they can carry. Find paste.

http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/311_brochure.pdf

Submitted by RB on

TSA reported 128 guns found at checkpoints on the TSA.Gov webpage.

Then changed the listing to N/A and later changed it again to 28 guns found.

So what gives TSA?

Submitted by Mad Dog on

Mr. Blogger Bob:

I hope you really love your job, but I pray you meant to say "I am currently working at TSA headquarters" and not truly residing there.


Your bio says:

I worked at the Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) for 5 years and am currently residing at TSA headquarters.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Bob,

Almost two weeks ago, you wrote:

"I'm not avoiding the Nature article. I have several e-mails out to subject matter experts. I can't promise a blog post out of it, but I'm not ignoring it. "

This was, of course, in reference to an article that was published at the end of May. I wonder if you could possibly update us on the progress of your inquiries. Have you heard anything back from the "subject matter experts" that you e-mailed? I'd also like to know, generally speaking, who these so-called "experts are"; i.e. do they include anyone who has not financially benefitted from the implementation of SPOT?

Is it really possible that TSA has no official position on this issue?

----------------------------------------
On an unrelated matter, I wanted to thank you for keeping this thread permanently pinned at the second spot on the blog. A lot of us expected that it would be buried somewhere, and it's nice to see you take this step.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Yes thanks bob for letting us bash you and TSA it makes us feel good!

Submitted by Anonymous on

Blogger Bob said:

We have reached out to the field and nobody is aware of this incident.

------------------------------------

Well, that's it then...

Hey, couldn't we use that same technique to combat terrorism?

"Will all terrorist, please identify yourself to a TSA agent at the checkpoint"

Submitted by Anonymous on

I have been told by a travel agent that TSA is requiring all airline tickets issued for travel between US mainland destinations and Puerto Rico to have a valid passport number before issuing a ticket. Does TSA now require passports for US citizen travel between the US mainland and Puerto Rico? Has such a notification been given to travel agents?

Thanks.

Submitted by TSO Tom on

Bob, in regards to full body scanners, which have not yet been installed at my airport but are scheduled to be either this year or next, please respond to this article which was posted on AOL today, specifficaly please address the health concerns that were raised in this article, along with the privacy concerns that many posters on this blog have raised, and please explain why TSA insists on using this equipment when other countries have stated they will not:

UPDATE, New Q&A:

How does TSA respond to new concerns voiced Dr. Brenner, that radiation from scanners has been "underestimated" and could pose a risk of skin cancer in certain groups including children?

Advanced imaging technology screening is safe for all passengers, including pregnant women and children. Backscatter technology was evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL). All results confirmed that the radiation doses for the individuals being screened, operators, and bystanders were well below the dose limits specified by the American National Standards Institute.

The International Air Transport Association says TSA lacks "a strategy and vision" on how body scanners fit into a comprehensive security plan and amount to "putting the cart before the horse." How does TSA respond?

TSA first piloted advanced imaging technology in 2007, and Congress approved TSA's current deployment plan in May 2009. Following the attempted attack on December 25, President Obama called for accelerated deployment of advanced imaging technology. Since then, TSA has worked closely with airports to identify candidates based on risk, airport readiness, and operational suitability. TSA works with each airport to determine the best location for each machine to process passengers efficiently and achieve its security goals.

Do these machines actually have the capability of detecting dangerous items concealed on the body? The GAO among others has raised questions in this area. Have body scanners been fully tested in this regard?

While there is no silver bullet technology, advanced imaging technology is very effective at detecting metallic and nonmetallic threats on passengers, including explosives. While evaluating imaging technology at airports security officers have identified concealed prohibited and illegal items on passengers attempting to pass through the security checkpoint. Further, this technology doesn't stand alone: it's one part of our multi-layered strategy to minimize risk, deter future attacks and protect the traveling public.

TSA began piloting imaging technology in early 2007. Through the pilot process, TSA gained operational information used to enhance training, improve the screening process and further bolster detection capabilities. Using this critical technology, TSA routinely detects artfully concealed metallic and nonmetallic prohibited items.

TSA completed comprehensive operational testing and evaluation of this technology and is confident that it will significantly increase our detection capability at the checkpoint. TSA's Operational Testing and Evaluation of this technology strongly validates the benefits and efficacy of advanced imaging technology to address the threat we face. When it comes to the safety of the traveling public, the nation's security matters most which is why we're working to quickly deploy advanced imaging technology to keep our skies safe.

Would body scanning machines have stopped the attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmatallab to blow up the Detroit-bound jet on Christmas?

Imaging technology can detect both metallic and non-metallic threat items which includes a wide range of substances to include powders. It is a proven technology and we are highly confident in its detection capabilities.

Submitted by Sandra on

BB wrote on July 14 re amputee mommy:

"Regarding The Amputee Mommy Post:

We have reached out to the field and nobody is aware of this incident.

We have reached out to the blogger and have had no response as of yet.

If I learn anything else, I'll let you know."

Today, the blogger wrote:

"During the past few weeks my blog has received a lot of attention because of the issues I encountered with TSA. I have been in touch with TSA officials about the incident and I am satisfied with the result. I am also pleased to report that ACA will be meeting with officials from TSA to work towards achieving a stardardized approach to amputee screening protocols...."

Seems like somebody is missing something here.

Submitted by Mary on

I have one question.


I was wondering if there is a limit to how many carry ons a person can take if they are taking a son/daughter under the age of two?

Submitted by Chris on

Thank you for this thread, should it matter to the classification of peanut butter as a paste that some people are allergic to it? Of course the chunky peanut butter is less pasty, and that's more dangerous. I'd like to see the TSA's physicist/chemist panel report on chunky v. smooth.

Submitted by GSOLTSO on

Mary asked - "I was wondering if there is a limit to how many carry ons a person can take if they are taking a son/daughter under the age of two?"

Good question Mary. The airlines are the ones that determine the number of bags that are allowed to be carried. When you are preparing to fly the next time, contact the specific airline that you are traveling with, and they would be able to give you the amount of carryons allowed. Sorry I am not able to give you a specific answer, but it can vary from airline to airline! Take care and come see us again sometime!

West
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Anonymous on

So the blog will be updated more often now that the boss is looking? :)

Submitted by TSORon on

RB Said…
Comments TSA? Seems to question TSA's claim of +90% acceptance, eh?

Has TSA been caught once again using propaganda instead of truth?
-----------------------
No RB, but you may have been. Try the following link, to several independent poll’s on the subject.
http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/reading.shtm

Submitted by TSORon on

Mary said...
I have one question.


I was wondering if there is a limit to how many carry ons a person can take if they are taking a son/daughter under the age of two?
----------------------
The TSA does not limit luggage of any kind Mary. Only airlines do that, please contact your airline for their policies.

Submitted by Natalie on

Have you ever had your "TSA Notice of Baggage Inspection" stuffed and crumpled into one of your personal items, so that you cannot see it when you open the bag? When you do find it, the container into which TSA stuffed it is ruined so that you cannot use it? Well, I have. In my Travel-pro hardside check luggage I found my new box of BandAids to be crushed in and to contain not only BandAids but also a crumpled TSA form. What is the purpose of that? All my documents were removed from the flat, transparent zipper pocket that keeps documents flat and just dumped out in the bag any which way. The icing on the cake is that this bag was left unzipped, clothes were dumped off their hangers, and my new dress tiebacks were dragged outside of the box (like strings hanging out) all the way from PHL to GEG. This occured for my check bag on July 13th checked on United at PHL (Philadelphia). What a sloppy and disrespectful job of baggage inspection! Come on, PHL TSA, I'm sure you can do better than this.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"If I disagree with what someone is saying, and comment about it, I am (by definition) being adversarial. I post here because I want to further communication and learn. I am not certain what stereotypes I am perpetuating,"

Things are getting muddled. This is not about you disagreeing with someone. This started because you ventured a guess in response to a post asking for facts.

People raised objections. Your response to those objections, quite properly but un-diplomatically, boiled down to, "You can't tell me what to do. I'll do whatever I want."

There is where you perpetuate a stereotype.

It is exactly the response many expect from someone in the TSA when their actions are challenged or questioned in any way.

At least you did not drop the DYWTFT? bomb or subject them to a secondary screening. :)

Submitted by Anonymous on

Subj: Posting the entire ****** post you are replying to.

Google tl;dr.

People, post any way you want to post. But consider that your post might get more and better consideration is we don't have to scroll half way to Australia before you get to the pint. I mean point.

Submitted by GSOLTSO on

Anon sez - "Things are getting muddled. This is not about you disagreeing with someone. This started because you ventured a guess in response to a post asking for facts.

People raised objections. Your response to those objections, quite properly but un-diplomatically, boiled down to, "You can't tell me what to do. I'll do whatever I want."

There is where you perpetuate a stereotype.

It is exactly the response many expect from someone in the TSA when their actions are challenged or questioned in any way.

At least you did not drop the DYWTFT? bomb or subject them to a secondary screening. :)"

First, thanks for moving this discussion over to this thread!

Second, anyone that knows or has worked with me knows I would never, ever use the dreaded DYWTFT phrase. I wish it had never been put together and used in an airport - it is incendiary and does not serve to resolve the situation. I find that kindness mixed with firmness is the best method of dealing with almost all situations. I can see where the impression that it was a politely worded "I will do what I want" phrase, because in a way it was. I feel we are all entitled to our opinions and we should be able to post them here (within the guidelines at least). It is one of the easiest ways for me to learn what some of the public is thinking. It is also a way for me to get my two cents worth in from time to time. I am not great at diplomacy, I am better than I was when I was younger, but I am not going to travel to exotic countries and work out trade agreements! I will not apologize for giving my opinion, but I will apologize (like I did in the other thread) when I am wrong about things.

As for secondary screening, I can't give a retaliatory screening for anyone (hehe, nor would I want to!). =)

West
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Anonymous on

Why is this post no longer pinned as number two. Are you now planning to bump it off page one?

Submitted by GSOLTSO on

Anon sez - "Why is this post no longer pinned as number two. Are you now planning to bump it off page one?"

Anon, this page has a permanent link in the right hand side of the Home page. It will always be available to you from there. The blog post (like all of the others before it) will continue to move down the list and eventually leave the front page queue.

West
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by Chris Free on

Anonymous said:
"Not to mention the simple fact that, with modern miniaturization, a simple timer/detonator can be hidden up inside a bottle cap, and the bottle filled with something explosive. How much damage would a 2-liter bottle of gasoline do when it explodes next to the security line"

@anonymous:
This miniaturized timer and detonator would still need a power source... and electronics being hidden in the cap of a bottle would be noticeable on an x-ray. It turns out the machines let the TSO's see INSIDE the items as well as the bags.

Submitted by Anonymous on

"Anon, this page has a permanent link in the right hand side of the Home page. It will always be available to you from there. The blog post (like all of the others before it) will continue to move down the list and eventually leave the front page queue.

West
TSA Blog Team"
_____________________________________

West,

I just wanted to point out that this was NOT the case last week, when this post appeared to be permanently pinned as #2. Heck, I even went so far as to thank Bob for the decision....

Submitted by Anonymous on
Chris Free said...
This miniaturized timer and detonator would still need a power source... and electronics being hidden in the cap of a bottle would be noticeable on an x-ray. It turns out the machines let the TSO's see INSIDE the items as well as the bags.
July 18, 2010 2:43 PM

Aren't liquids taken away from passengers BEFORE they go through the xray? As I said, it would be trivial for someone to make a bottle-bomb, hand it over to the TSA, who will carelessly leave it sitting in a trashcan next to the security line, and then blow it up.

Once again: If a bottle of liquid is SO DANGEROUS we can't get on the plane with it, then this DANGEROUS bottle of liquid shouldn't be casually tossed in a trash can. On the other hand, if it's safe enough to leave in a trash can, it is safe enough to take on the plane.
Submitted by Ayn R Key on

Curtis (Bob),

This isn't the first time you've tried "from now on all comments must be on topic." It's hard to implement for one very big reason:

You have a hard time staying on topic.

Seriously, Curtis. You only respond to comments in the most recent post. You never respond to comments in an older post. Whenever a TSO does something particularly boneheaded and people inquire as to your response, you are quick with a puppy post.

Well, that means that the on-topic is now the puppies. Those who are asking for more information on whatever boneheaded thing the TSA is doing are all off topic.

Your job is, among other things, to answer questions about the brain-dead activities of your employer. This is a sure-fire way to never do that.

Submitted by Ayn R Key on

RB Asked...
The why was the childs travel plans interrupted Mr. Security Expert TSORon?

TSORon answered
Because another individual out there has the same name she does, and that person's name is on the list.

Its a pretty simple concept RB.

I gave that answer once. Some TSO said "there are no children on the no fly list" and I answered "That's right, it's only a list of name. There are no people on the list, only names. There could only be people on the list if they printed it out and someone stood on the printout."

I was told by that TSO that I was wrong, that it's not just a list of names. I think it was HappyToHinder. So, Ron, are you sure it is just a list of names?

Submitted by Ken Lin on

For the past year or more, I really miss the TSA Wait Time Calculator which I found very useful.

I check it periodically hoping for an update, but it still say it's under construction. Any news on this, either as end user interface or as a web service?

Thanks in advance.

Submitted by HappyToHelp on

Ayn R. Key said…
“I was told by that TSO that I was wrong, that it's not just a list of names. I think it was HappyToHinder. So, Ron, are you sure it is just a list of names?”

The no fly list is not just a list of names, as confirmed by Timothy J. Healy, Director of Terrorist Screening Center Federal Bureau of Investigation. Placement on the no-fly list requires two components: sufficient biographical information and sufficient derogatory information. They have also confirmed that there are no children on the no-fly and selectee lists as outlined in a previous blog post. No need to bring up people sitting on pieces of paper though the comedy factor is appreciated. :)

Tim
TSA Blog Team

Submitted by RB on

HappyToHelp said...
Ayn R. Key said…
“I was told by that TSO that I was wrong, that it's not just a list of names. I think it was HappyToHinder. So, Ron, are you sure it is just a list of names?”

The no fly list is not just a list of names, as confirmed by Timothy J. Healy, Director of Terrorist Screening Center Federal Bureau of Investigation. Placement on the no-fly list requires two components: sufficient biographical information and sufficient derogatory information. They have also confirmed that there are no children on the no-fly and selectee lists as outlined in a previous blog post. No need to bring up people sitting on pieces of paper though the comedy factor is appreciated. :)

Tim
TSA Blog Team

July 20, 2010 1:09 AM

..............
If a person is to dangerous to fly then why are they not to dangerous to be allowed in public?

The NFL is so UN-AMERICAN in concept that it boggles the mind.

If these people are breaking some law then have them charged so they may face their accusers.

Why is DHS/TSA working against the Constitution of the United States?

Submitted by RB on

In the news are reports of very slow checkpoints all around the country where the Strip Search machines have been installed. Even people going through the Porno-Viewers are often getting pat downs. Along with people having to have their personal papers and money out of their control.

Seems to me that TSA's Porno Viewers are more a hinderance to effective screening than moving the process forward not to mention the unsettled questions of screening minors in this manner.

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous said...
"Try opening your eyes and ears and following the rules and we won't have to yell!"

So TSA is saying it is OK to yell at the "highly trained" TSO who don't know the rules

July 7, 2010 2:39 PM

I see what you did there... You're one cleaver lad...

Submitted by Anonymous on

RB said...
A question asked and gone unanswered;

What issues does TSA have with "Clear Care" brand contact lens solution?

Would a bottle larger than 100 ml not be exempted since it is a medically required liquid?

July 8, 2010 10:48 AM

Dang it RB, I'll put this topic to rest you you can complain about another pointless question... The brand of contact solution you mention doesnt usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So theres not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied? Nevermind...

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...

Dang it RB, I'll put this topic to rest you you can complain about another pointless question... The brand of contact solution you mention doesnt usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So theres not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied? Nevermind...

July 20, 2010 2:15 PM

Anon, I take it you work for TSA.

It shows!

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...

Dang it RB, I'll put this topic to rest you you can complain about another pointless question... The brand of contact solution you mention doesnt usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So theres not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied? Nevermind...

July 20, 2010 2:15 PM

Anon, I take it you work for TSA.

Submitted by Ayn R Key on

So, Tim, are you saying that Ron is Wrong?

Submitted by Anonymous on

TSO Tim said:
"sufficient biographical information and sufficient derogatory information. They have also confirmed that there are no children on the no-fly and selectee lists "

So what happened with the 6 year old?

Submitted by MarkVII on

RE TSM Been here's comment Try opening your eyes and ears and following the rules and we won't have to yell!

Given that there's any number of local interpretations and embellishments of the rules, this line of reasoning doesn't hold a single drop of water because "the rules" are partly unknowable.

On top of that, I've been through checkpoints where all kinds of yelling goes on before the passenger has even had the opportunity to break any of the TSA's various rules -- the yelling starts the moment you approach the WTMD.

Assuming the passenger did actually break a rule (like having a [gasp] tube of lip balm that's not in the 3-1-1 bag), what purpose does the yelling serve? Is is some sort of punishment?

If the TSA taught its personnel to address the passengers in a civil manner, we might have a bit of respect for them. As it stands, the yellers come across as a bunch of power tripping jerks.

Google the words "TSA yelling." The results are interesting.

Mark
qui custodiet ipsos custodes

Submitted by Anonymous on

Anonymous wrote:

"The brand of contact solution you mention doesnt usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So theres not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied?"

Anonymous, on FT a SCREENER advised to "decant" liquids that won't make it through the magic testing procedure and carry them through in "regulation" sized containers in the baggie.

Certainly is easy enough to do with Clear Care.

RB, it seems the TSA's sniffers can't detect percentage of H2O2 in a container so it is all confiscated, whether it's 3% or 93%. A terrible, terrible waste.

Submitted by Earl Pitts on

@Anon: "Dang it RB, I'll put this topic to rest you you can complain about another pointless question... The brand of contact solution you mention doesnt usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So theres not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied? Nevermind..."

Well Anon, so what happens when a person's hands alarm on the ETD because they use a hand lotion with glycerin or shoes alarm because they were walking thru a recently fertilized yard/golf course/pasture? Do you cut off their hands or take their shoes and send them on their merry way? No, they get thru some how. The screener asks what it was, the pax tells them, and TSA says ok and lets them thru after a secondary.

So why is it not a big deal in those instances but when someone brings contact solution thru and tells the screener that's what it is, it's not ok? You don't know if what the pax says is true in any of those instances. Sounds like you're trying to have it both ways, anon.

Earl

Submitted by Anonymous on

so many people!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

I am writing this blog regarding the hiring practices of the TSA with hope the issues I have faced will be corrected and no individual will have to go through the unfortunate and unfair course of events I have faced seeking employment with this agency. After months of correspondence with Congressman Shock’s staff, representatives of TSA , and liaisons within the legislative branch of our government it appears the inquiries from his office ,at my request, along with my many inquiries directly to the TSA to correct inconsistencies and incorrect information may have brought about what may be the worst possible outcome not only for myself but for any person standing up for their rights for equal opportunity .This information stream is what all candidates should monitor, as I did, to insure the process in place is working. I have, over months, provided documentation supporting the claim and illustrating the failure of TSA to process information in a timely basis insuring at least an equal opportunity for positions that are considered in high demand.
Today a conversation with a staff member from Congressman Shock’s office revealed what I consider very disappointing and disturbing news. According to the staff member a conversation with a liaison for legislative affairs commented about my recent conversations with members of the contracted call center representing TSA. I will start by stating that as a child of a father who dedicated his life to the Armed Forces securing our rights I learned at an early age to respect people .It was also instilled in me at an early age there is a distinction between respecting another and allowing yourself to be disrespected and your rights to be trampled.
The recent conversations with call center employees for TSA involved TSA employees talking over me as I tried to explain the changes in the Candidate Dashboard platform, an internet site to monitor a candidates progress through the hiring process, and my disagreement with the information they were presenting. Although I described the documentation clearly illustrating the errors, simply put, they were not willing to listen to me and as I tried to explain myself it was clear the conversations were not going anywhere that day. I ended those conversations politely and contacted Congressman’s Shock’s office to offer the documentation illustrating the errors I had encountered. Curiously, it seems, these calls have somehow made it to the top in the chain of command of TSA according to Congressman Shock’s office whereas months of effort by Congressman Shock’s office to correct the problems just could not seem to get there.
Apparently, a liaison stated The Director for the Transportation Security Administration has heard of the issues regarding the inquiries and acknowledged the Director of the Transportation Security Administration is now familiar with my name in association with the issues I have brought forth and has personally shed a shadow of negativity over my reputation and most certainly my opportunities now and in the future to secure a position with TSA. “The Director knows who he is and that’s not good”, would fairly reiterate the words from the staff member as told to me by a member of Congressman Shock’s office. One would hope the Director would have at least objectively viewed the documentation and history of the problems, investigated the facts we have diligently tried to bring forth and work through before making his assumption and one can only hope the liaison has spoken out of turn.
In a leadership position, such as the Director of the Transportation Security Administration, one would hope an individual’s effort to correct what has been done and protect their rights for equal opportunity would be valued not condemned.

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...
RB said...
A question asked and gone unanswered;

What issues does TSA have with "Clear Care" brand contact lens solution?

Would a bottle larger than 100 ml not be exempted since it is a medically required liquid?

July 8, 2010 10:48 AM

Dang it RB, I'll put this topic to rest you you can complain about another pointless question... The brand of contact solution you mention doesn't usually make it through the Checkpoint because it alarms the liquid testing equipment. So there's not way to clear the liquid since it alarmed, thus its not allowed. Satisfied? Nevermind...

July 20, 2010 2:15 PM

............
OK, Clear Care brand contact lens solution alarms TSA's high technology chemical testers.

Doesn't this bother anyone?

That TSA cannot distinguish between a perfectly harmless medical liquid and one that is hazardous?

Isn't this like using an atomic bomb to kill a single fly?

How much do these testers cost that cannot distinguish between harmless items and those that are not harmless? How much tax money has TSA wasted on these devices? As much as the non-functional puffers that TSA tossed in the trash?

Who at TSA is responsible for purchase decisions? A name and office please!

Submitted by RB on

Anonymous said...
I am writing this blog regarding the hiring practices of the TSA with hope the issues I have faced will be corrected and no individual will have to go through the unfortunate and unfair course of events I have faced seeking employment with this agency.

....... snipped a whole lot.....

In a leadership position, such as the Director of the Transportation Security Administration, one would hope an individual’s effort to correct what has been done and protect their rights for equal opportunity would be valued not condemned.

July 21, 2010 9:22 PM


Anon, I would suggest that TSA has done you a favor by roadblocking your application process. TSA is the worst agency to work for, as graded by its on employees, save one other agency in the whole of United States government.

However, if someone in TSA has unfairly blocked your applicatoin process then I would suggest contacting a lawyer. Make TSA answer why they discriminated against you under oath.

Pages