What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Adam Lambert sings the 2012 theme song, “Time for Miracles” view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Watch the Adam Lambert music video for the 2012 theme song. See 2012, in theaters Nov 13
200 Comments
- ownon, on 10/11/2007, -27/+200If you want to reclaim this country -- boycott. I quit flying last year after that foolish liquid terror scare. I wrote American Airlines, my normal carrier, and told them I would not fly again till the TSA was disbanded. They wrote me back and told me to write Homeland Security. I wrote them back and told them that "they" do not listen to citizens only corporations.
The election process in this country has become a sham so vote with your pocket book. How often do you hear people complaining about jobs going overseas yet they waddle off to WalMart to buy some plastic piece of Chinese crap for their kids. You have the hypocrites who are "concerned" about illegal immigration yet they have Mexican gardeners and nannies. Don't buy the drugs they're continually hawking on TV. Tired of the lies on TV? Get rid of it. About nine years ago I took my lineman's, cut the cable and threw it across the street -- enough of your mind control. Read; you'll be a better citizen and a better person.
Add your own pet peeves.
Personally, I'd like to see the whole country go on strike. Stock up on some groceries and then go fishing. You want change? Manipulate the money supply just like they do. When "they" see their income stream affected they will change. - drlha, on 10/11/2007, -8/+103mikes1 - this is all very well and good, but in the end you're not going to mount a legal challenge to the TSA while standing in line to get your bags X-rayed. Bowing to the whims of the uniformed guy is what flying is all about, and some of us don't have the luxury of avoiding flying.
Perhaps its time to start up a class action lawsuit or something to get the government to remove the ridiculous restrictions on things like water and toothpaste. - mikes1, on 10/11/2007, -17/+96Were you aware that the TSA has no legal authority to prevent someone from taking water/peanut butter, etc. onto a plane?
The law, upon which the TSA's regulations are based, basically says that weapons, or "dual use" items (things which can be used as weapons, e.g. boxcutters) aren't allowed at all, except for certain specifically authorized personnel (law enforcement). The TSA by law can create a list of such items, and has, which is why nail clippers, BIC lighters, etc. are not allowed.
Water is not, and cannot reasonably be used as a weapon. It is NOT covered under the law, nor are any "look alikes." If the TSA believes a clear liquid is a weapon (explosive?), then they must prove it to be so - water isn't.
Furthermore, even if one could argue that water _is_ a weapon, there is NO exception in the law which would then allow it to be served on a plane or in a McDonalds in the terminal building or delivered from a faucet in a restroom, it would simply not be allowed at all. If water is deemed a weapon, then only law enforcement are allowed to have water in an airport secure zone.
BTW, the same applies to simple tools - pliers, screwdrivers, etc. If the TSA considers them dual use "weapons," then by law, aircraft maintenance personnel are not allowed to possess them in the secure zone. - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -39/+107I quit flying after I realized the insanity of going really fast at 15,000 feet in a flimsy aluminum tube that is full of jet fuel and run by bankrupt companies that always need bailed out by the government.
- bemenaker, on 10/11/2007, -3/+68Nice to see the Congressman sticking with the program. Hopefully, his instance w/ the TSA will also make him think about the ridiculousness of that monstrosity too.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -14/+60Silly me. I thought the point of the article was that he now had 33 cents and some cornmeal left for two days. I thought the whole part about 36 million Americans being undernourished was of interest.
The story is NOT about the big bad TSA... - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -10/+50You've got to be ***** me. The TSA can't tell the difference between jelly and gel?
Or did they consider chunky peanut butter capable of deadly shrapnel? - intense321, on 10/11/2007, -5/+41I don't understand why the congressman couldn't ask for the PB&J back and eat it right there, in front of the TSA official. I would have snarfed that thing down if I knew it was going to be my only meal for the next 48 hours.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+38ownon:
I haven't the slightest frickin idea what you are talking about. What does your story have to do with the food stamp program?
Are you implying that I am apologizing for the TSA? The TSA can kiss my ass. The STORY is about how poorly we treat our poor. the whole TSA is just a sidelight. Did you even read the story?
If you received 3 bucks a day for food, and had to give up two days worth, would you be bitching about the TSA, or worrying about how you were going to eat for the next two days? - accelleron, on 10/11/2007, -1/+32"What the hell do they do with all of the crap they confiscate?"
Last time I went to the airport, someone had a fairly large bottle of Hennesy XO (looked like 750ml, although I'm not sure.) I was waiting within sight of the TSA desk, and as they were talking quite loud, I could hear them pretty well as they bargained who'd take the bottle home. One of them, apparently, had already gotten an expensive bottle of wine this week, and the remaining 2 flipped a coin to see who'd get to take the [~$150-200] bottle.
In other words, they don't call in the biohazard team. The employees know it's a charade. And I'm pretty sure the higher-ups who hired the chimps do, too. - TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -4/+31I am willing to die for my basic freedoms...how about you?
Or are you so scared the terrorists are going to get you that you are willing to give up your freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom to eat your ***** peanut butter and jelly sandwhiches.
But then again what person living on food stamps flies an airplane?
Also food stamp budgets don't need to be raised. We are in a deficit. How about people with food stamps not rely entirely on food stamps and go out and get a job. The government is not there for hand outs - kethraal, on 10/11/2007, -1/+26"Were you aware that the TSA has no legal authority to prevent someone from taking water/peanut butter, etc. onto a plane?"
Do you have a source for that? I'm not trying to be rude -- I just have found it helpful to quote the TSA's own words when in an argument with the chimps at the airport. - Homunculiheaded, on 10/11/2007, -0/+23"The TSA can't tell the difference between jelly and gel"
The TSA are a step up from mall cops, they don't know anything about security all they understand is authority, and that's what they exist to represent. Some idiot telling you that you can't even have possession of water, which is probably the most basic human need. If I can tell you when you can and can't have water, where you can and can't bring water, I own you, there's no question.
It's good that the TSA can't tell the difference between an sandwich and a realistic bomb, because it solidifies that they are an entity without the capacity to reason, and entity created and driven by fear whose sole expression is the repeated assertion of authority.
If a scientist or engineer were to stop you before entering a room and say "sir, I cannot allow you to bring that water into this area" you would assume that they were making a plea to your reason, that for some good, solid reason you cannot yet know, it is in your and their interest for you not to bring water into an area. The TSA eliminates this dangerous confusion, you are being told what to do and you will do what you are told, you do not drink unless we say okay, you do not eat unless we allow you.
"Freedom is Slavery", but much more importantly "Ignorance is Strength". - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+28Coming off another thread about how "Intel is justified for trying to destroy the OLPC through illegal dumping," I'm pretty sure there are few people on Digg who give a ***** about anyone who has to live on $21/week, in America, or anywhere. Sad to say.
- moman, on 10/11/2007, -13/+36@rpfsc
"They try to find the terrorist, we try to find the weapon. Our country refuses to profile, even though terrorists are generally Arab men between the ages of 18 and 40."
What do you think will happen when they start only checking arab men between 18 and 40 and let everyone else through without delay? Do you seriously think that there is not a single non-arab in the world wanting to cause harm to other people?
Also did you know that every single terrorist since the dawn of man was a human being. So by your logic, we should check everyone at the airport, even though the terrorists are a small subset of the group in question (eg. the human race).
Profiling based on any means (race/gender/lifestyle) is simply wrong and does not work / has the opposite consequences (how would you feel if you heard your race is being singled out for additional "processing"; what if you were already unstable to begin with). I'm not saying that we should check everyone at airport, nor do I think we should check noone. We should check suspicious people, but not a single select group. - haggie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+25Last time i went thru security, I asked the TSA monkey if I was required to take my shoes off:
TSA Monkey: "We would LIKE you to take your shoes off".
Me: "But am I REQUIRED to take my shoes off?"
TSA Monkey: "We would LIKE you to take your shoes off."
Me: "That seems like a request, not a requirement."
TSA Monkey: "Correct."
Me: "Ok, I'll keep mine on."
TSA Monkey: "You've been selected for a secondary security check."
Me: "On what grounds?"
TSA Monkey: "Your refusal to comply with our request."
Me: "What request?"
TSA Monkey: "To remove your shoes."
Me: "You said that was voluntary."
TSA Monkey: "It is. Please remove your shoes."
Me: "Do I have a choice?"
TSA Monkey: "No, shoe inspection is required in a secondary security check."
Me: "So, really, I DON'T have a choice about having my shoes inspected?"
TSA Monkey: "Ok, you are all clear."
Me: "Moron"
TSA Monkey: "Excuse me?"
My wife: "Honey, move your ass before we end up in Gitmo wearing ball gags and hoods." - kethraal, on 10/11/2007, -10/+31"but in the end you're not going to mount a legal challenge to the TSA while standing in line to get your bags X-rayed"
You're damn right I will. When fly domestically, I refuse to show photo ID, opting instead for self-selected secondary screening. I get hassled, harassed, and belittled by the TSA all the time -- but in the end, they're just as stuck up in the red tape as we are -- so they do actually have to follow the rules.
Mind you, it takes both determination and a solid grasp of the laws to beat the TSA at their own game, but it can be done. - joebob, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22"I will start to care about all these supposed "undernourished" Americans when I drive through a poor part of town and actually see skinny people. Today, all you'll see is mostly fat "hungry" folks. Hmmmm."
Seems not many people bothered to read the article or even take a 5 minute look at the issues involved. There are many links in the chain that keeps 'cheap food' as basically empty calories. High fat often hydrogenated, corn syrup everywhere, simple carbs galore. But we're americans, only simple answers will do right? - bobcrotch, on 10/11/2007, -3/+23Don't ever oppose the TSA either. They will jerk out out of line, check your baggage, search you again and question you.
They also have the authority to remove you from the line and deny you passage to the 'secure zone' making you miss your flight if you get pissed off or cause any sort of commotion. These people aren't even military or law enforcement they're a bunch of ***** bag air port security employees with a badge and the right to say the ticket you paid for is no good.
TSA is way out of control. - bmcnally, on 10/11/2007, -25/+431) He tried to bend the rules and got caught. The innanity of the rules is not really up for debate, but the fact that he thought they would make an exception and didn't is.
2) How many people on food stamps frequently fly? How many of them carry on liquid/gel/whatever type food items? I highly doubt that the large number of people suffering in poverty is due to their lunches being confiscated at TSA security checkpoints. - AnthonyC, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18I disagree. The welfare system is ripe to be taken advantage of. It needs reform. There are still plenty of actual poor people that need help. The people who take advantage of it need to be punished.
- Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -5/+21Hey, good for him for sticking with it. I've done it on less than $3 a day before, with my own money. It can be done. Oatmeal for breakfast. PBJ for lunch. spaghetti for dinner. Tap water
- Nougat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16@EntropyMan (#6804393)
Funny thing - if they'd been made into sandwiches and brought through in close proximity to children, they'd pass. Did for me. - coit, on 10/11/2007, -9/+24MORAL OF THE STORY: If you are on food stamps, don't fly commercially. You are better off chartering a plane.
On topic, this is a JOKE. Food stamps are not supposed to be your sole source of food money, they are supposed to supplement income you have from other sources. Sheesh! - omnithought, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14@ownon
I agree completely with your sentiments, however, if there's anything the food stamp challenge shows, it's that many people simply don't have the luxury of being able to stock up on food and/or go on strike. I remember a time when I subsisted on ramen and I donated plasma just to get that. No, I wasn't a junkie. Just really poor.
When you're poor in this country, there's a vicious cycle that keeps most people there. Certain people complain about their tax dollars going to welfare, but simultaneously refuse to support anything that might help better those people's lives. I think the food stamp challenge should be mandatory for everyone to experience before taking any kind of political office, barring medical conditions, of course.
We're a nation of lazy, selfish *****. - GTPilot, on 10/11/2007, -4/+17@cutcomp
"I quit flying after I realized the insanity of going really fast at 15,000 feet in a flimsy aluminum tube that is full of jet fuel and run by bankrupt companies that always need bailed out by the government."
Did you really? Flimsy keeps the airplane from breaking up in bumpy air.
Do you still ride in and around cars which aren't federally required to have safety inspections on a regular basis, in which you're driving around with other drivers who need maybe 2 brain cells to get a license? - AlphaEta, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13Reminds me of my old college and grad school diet: Ramen, cheese sandwiches, tea and coffee.
You're right, it can be done, but damn it gets old fast! Also, as you know, it is far from healthy. - spyrochaete, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13A congressman decided to take the food stamp challenge wherein he may eat $3 of food per day. On the second last day of the challenge a TSA worker confiscated his sandwich, for which he spent nearly all of his remaining funds. Where is the title inaccurate?
- graystar, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14I imagine TSA canteens probably have the coolest stuff in the fridge. All that variety that is confiscated really makes it a joy on break time.
- mikes1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13@superkendall
It helps if you read the article before commenting. The TSA has no authority to prevent people from taking peanut butter (or water) through the security screen into the secure area. If they did have that authority, then peanut butter (or water) would not be allowed in the secure area at all (except in the possession of specifically authorized individuals).
Prohibition for weapons is given in 49 USC 46505. The authority for the TSA to screen for weapons (or explosives, or other destructive substances) is given in 49 USC 44901 et seq. 49 USC 44935(h)(3) states that "the term “dual use” item means an item that may seem harmless but that may be used as a weapon." Peanut butter and water do not qualify as prohibited items under law.
49 CFR 1540 et seq. "Screening function means the inspection of individuals and property for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries..." Peanut butter and water do not qualify as prohibited items under regulation.
Also note that the exception in 1540.111(b) only applies to individuals - so if peanut butter or water is a weapon, then only specifically authorized individuals can possess peanut butter or water inside the secure area, and that doesn't include McDonalds workers or flight attendants.
You sound like a sheeple anxious to submit to a fascist state, who hasn't a clue as to what the law actually says and is willing to trade his rights for a meager appearance of security. - superkendall, on 10/11/2007, -10/+21The rules are very clear - ANY gel or liquid counts in the restrictions. Jelly is, in fact, a gel - what do you think makes it take the form it has? In part, gelatin.
Even makeup is covered, and that's a lot more firm than jelly.
The sad thing is if we had congressmen smart enough to read he might have noted he could keep any liquids that would fit within a quart sized plastic bag. Possibly if he had an entire jar of PB & J, it might not have fit - but he could have saved some. The rest of us travellers are perfectly able to understand and follow the restrictions (even if we don't like them) in a way that lets us keep a reasonable amount of things like toothpaste on hand. - carguy84, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13Haha you used to work for the TSA.
- spyrochaete, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14"Look at this article I found lolz" is blogspam. A carefully written story supporting the linked content is not blogspam.
- rarson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Moral of the story: if you need to keep the ***** you have, check it in luggage. If you don't have enough time to check it, then you've got two choices: standby on the next flight, or lose your PB&J. I get tired of people cramming oversized ***** in the overhead compartments while I stand waiting to take my seat because I'm smart enough to check the crap that I don't need and only bring my laptop.
That said, I hate TSA. I hate all the stupid airport regulations. My biggest beef I have with airport security is that it's not effective. We're told that all these stupid extra measures are necessary for our safety, but they don't work. Example: smokers have to ditch their lighters every time they go through security. But the average Bic isn't enough metal to set off a metal detector. So guess what? You leave the lighter in your pocket, and 95% of the time, no one ever knows.
Which is all a moot point, since in places like Detroit, once you get passed the security checkpoints, you can just go to a place like the Fox News sports bar (one of the few smoking areas in that airport) and they GIVE you an entire book of matches, to replace the lighter you had to throw away. Now, if they're taking lighters/matches and just giving them back to you on the other side, then WHAT THE ***** IS THE POINT?
When it comes down to it, people in the '60s and '70s were sublimely unaware of the "terrorist" problem we have today, and they were fine with flying without jumping through hoops just to board a plane. Realistically, the chances of something happening today are probably about the same as they were back then. So let's cut the crap, stop wasting money on security that doesn't work, and focusing on getting where we need to go as quickly and cheaply as possible? All the security in the world isn't going to make up for security personnel that are too lazy to effectively do their job. - bjornski, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Actually, many times what they would do is empty the liquids into a large container by the gate.
Thereby MIXING the chemicals they didn't want mixed on the plane, in the middle of the airport.
That WAS a while ago, and from the Hennessey example above, it seems they've stopped. ;) - AlphaEta, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10That's a good point graystar. What the hell do they do with all of the crap they confiscate?
I guess one of the perks of working for the TSA is a lifetime supply of hair products. - quietcynic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10I don't know why they waste their time on gels and liquids. The other week, I took an international flight and inadvertently brought 10 or so ounces of black powder on board. I'm not even kidding. I only found out when I unpacked the next day, as I had packed quickly and missed it. None of the X-ray or bomb sniffing dogs or anything came across it.
Doesn't that make you feel secure? - Teku, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I know it is gross generalization but I really loath the TSA. Honestly before 9-11 these same people where minimum wage individuals who made sure old ladies got a ride to the terminal. Now after a cursory background check they have the authority to hold up a United States congressman for his peanut butter. wtf? No doubt they are already strongly represented by new unions to prop up their image of this new 'law enforcement' agency, but I hold a certain disdain for them and I always will.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9And how does the TSA know that items they confiscate haven't been adulterated?
Well, the only saving grace there is that no microorganisms would survive in a bottle of scotch. Imagine if someone took out a whole airport full of TSA workers with one desirable vial of whatever. - gforce42, on 10/11/2007, -0/+89/11 made it so that an organization like the TSA is less necesary (although it was created shortly after). Sounds counter-intuitive, but is it? Due to the events of that day, there are few Americans who would hesitate to take action against someone doing something suspicious and/or threatening. The passengers themselves can do more to prevent "plane terrorism" than the TSA will ever be able to.
- TheSolomon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9p0rk917: Well... right, except that's kind of a technicality, isn't it? Sure, you could keep your PB&J and be able to sit in the airport and eat your food, *or* you can give up your PB&J and actually get on the plane and get back to your life. Just because the TSA can't *force* you to get rid of non-weapons doesn't exactly mean it's much of a choice when you're stranded without the plane ride.
- barnis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10reminds me of the last time i flew through Hawaii...i lost my noodles (because they contained a small amount of dipping sauce and all my fruit except pineapple...why is chopped pineapple safe but mango is not...maybe the powerful pineapple growers of Hawaii had something to do with that loop-hole
- Drakensteel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8On a different note:
the TSA really is pathetic. It isn't protecting us, its just giving everyone a hard time. Pity that everyone who actually has the intelligence to see a difference between a bomb and a jar of jam is to busy doing a real job to work at an airport. So the airport gets all the retards who follow the rules just because. One person earlier (i forgot who) mentioned them confiscating it just to keep things even (jelly IS a gel). Why? So what if its a gel, the rules applying to that are not ment to stop people from bringing gels, they are ment to stop people from destroying/taking over a plane. Its just pure stupidity. You should be able to tell the difference between a suspicious substance and food. Now the day a terrorist decides to hide his bomb in a jar of peanut butter I will withdraw my objections, but I severally doubt that will happen.
These restrictions do not make us safer. Most of them do pretty much nothing, and even the ones that are worth a !@#$ the real criminals will simply dodge around. I can assure you that at this very moment with al the plane security, you are only a small bit safer then you were before it. And if you halved the restrictions, you would be just as safe as you are now.
The only reason i can think of them doing stuff like this is, as I said, someone hiding it. However if that is the case, then why dont we all go on the plane completly naked, x-rayed, and cavity searched. just to be sure. - KhyberPass, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Uh, the reason the TSA "failed miserably" on 9/11 is because it wasn't established until 11-19-2001.
http://www.tsa.gov/research/tribute/history.shtm - the6thReplicant, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I love how he thought the amazing routine of going through airport security (take off shoes etc) should be a normal part of life.
I mean Congressman can we have some sanity back. - ownon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6lbts, Thank you for your comment.
I deserved to get Dugg down. It was late at night and I was still wound up and on a rant. To me this article was every bit as much about the TSA as it was about food stamps. I think the TSA is an enormous waste of money and all of this control is ruining the quality of life in this country. - GGzah, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7The point isn't about the TSA confiscating a PB&J sandwich, its that for someone on such a slim budget any disruption (be it food going bad, being lost, etc) is a disaster. While the average person on food stamps is unlikely to be flying, there are many other problems that could arise and leave them unable to feed themselves for a period of time.
- moofer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6These are the same a-holes that rifled through my wife's luggage last weekend at the burbank airport and stole our camera, and battery charger.
- teamwaffle, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I was taking a short flight from Atlanta to Savannah after work once to meet someone for the weekend and just threw some clothes in my backpack that I take to work everyday. When I got to the airport security, they stopped me to empty my bag only to take my can of Campbell's Soup that I didn't eat at work the day before. I'm not on the food stamp diet, but I really miss that can of soup though. It was chicken noodle. Yum.
- brasso, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Its peanut butter jelly time!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 200 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is