[Trvlr]

Oh my: quote - "sounds like you have a habit of being held up in security lines." - end quote
Really - based on what, relative to what? Being held up by airport security for frivolous reasons is quite common these days (this website is riddled with accounts of same), and, given the number of flights I've taken, experiences of this nature were actually relatively infrequent - though exceedingly unpleasant when they occurred. Interesting choice of words by the way - "habit" - would you also consider the statements "The people of Iraq have a habit of being bombed", or, "The children of Africa have a habit of starving to death" accurate characterizations of these events, or deliberate attempts at assigning blame where it doesn't belong? Pot, meet Kettle.

quote - "Since you seem to be so big on helping us little people out by defining your big words, I thought i'd do the same for you. Here's the definition of discrimination:"treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit". I'm pretty sure your above quote is discriminatory" - end quote
Doesn't surprise me at all that you are "pretty sure" the quote to which you refer is discriminatory; this conclusion serves your purpose, and your reading comprehension skills are severely lacking. The statement does not, as you suggest, classify all airport service employees as prima donnas; it asserts that additional courtesy would be too much to ask of those that are - and my assertion that airport, and airline staff quite often behave as prima donnas, is based on personal experience, and the "individual merit" (or lack of it) the employees I encountered displayed. However, a valid argument could in fact be made that all airport service employees are prima donnas by definition, given the parameters of their employment within the context of what is supposed to be a free market economy, and verified statistical data. Also, If you bothered to take the time to apply the definition of discrimination to the policies/activities you detail in the second paragraph (I'm not going to quote the whole thing) of your post, I'm "pretty sure" you'd find those policies/activities fall into the realm of what you have chosen to define as discriminatory. For that matter, the fact that the airline industry receives voluminous exemptions from rule of law, and massive subsidies, is again, by your own definition, a discriminatory practice (more on this later in my reply). This, once again, is the core of my complaint. Pot, meet Kettle.

I'd like to digress for a moment and sincerely thank you for your reply; you are validating my complaint in ways I couldn't have thought of myself, even though you may or may not be aware of what your own statements mean. I fear the latter to be the case.

quote - " . . . what happens between when you check in and when you arrive at your gate is something that the airline should not be concerned with. You are a big boy (or girl). You do not need someone to hold your hand from the ticket counter to the gate. You need to assume some responsibility for yourself . . ." - end quote
Interesting example of the hypocrisy which pervades the airline industry. Yes, I am an adult (I hope you consider it fair to substitute this term for your "big boy or girl"), so is every person who works in the airline industry, from the throwers to the CEOs, and, as you have stated, as adults, these individuals need to take responsibility for themselves, and collectively, the (the massive financial failure of) airline industry as a whole. Therefore, what happens between an airline's business plan and its viability (or lack thereof) is something that the taxpayer/consumer, or federal government, should not be concerned with. Apparently, the airline industry DOES IN FACT need "someone" to hold its hand from balance sheet to pathetic balance sheet - and that same "someone", is holding every single adult airline industry employee's hand as well. I've already stated who that "someone" is, and I find it patently offensive that the people with cups in their hands (airline industry employees) who fly for free, demand that the people who fund their very existence and must pay to fly (thrice over - the cost of the ticket, and the raw, as well as opportunity, costs they shoulder as taxpayers), compensate for the discriminatory policies and incompetence which have been mainstays of this industry for quite some time. Stop forcing the general public to continually support, and sacrifice for, an unscrupulous, deficient infrastructure of adults in a society that is supposed to be Capitalist. At this point, you might want to look up the term "prima donna". Pot, meet Kettle.

quote - " If you think that being at the airport 2 hrs before your departure time is a ridiculous request, then don't do it."
I have a better idea, how about the airline industry, and the "big boys and girls" who are employed in it, face the harsh realities of business the rest of us must face (unless you work for a bank or an American car company . . . but I digress), and learn how to sell their product/service in a professional, efficient manner on the level playing field of the free market? Hmmm, sound like Capitalism, or more to the point, the only way the airline industry and its employees will ever be motivated to innovate to the point of self-sustainability? I'm sure this is too much to ask, so I've actually already stated that I'm going to do exactly what you suggest - I'm no longer going to travel by plane unless I absolutely have to.

quote - "You keep saying that you checked in in time for the flight. But you missed the flight, so obviously didn't check in with enough time. Technically, you checked in before the cut-off time at the ticket counter, but it doesn't seem that that was enough time to make your flight, does it?" - end quote
Please refer to my previous reply where I explain the logical fallacy "slippery slope". It has been stated by a couple former airline employees, within this thread in fact, that I arrived in plenty of time to make my flight, even given the TSA debacle and malfunctioning train. The discriminatory and unethical policies of the airline, the sub-standard performance of this industry in general, and the lack of courtesy and actions of the gate agent, are ULTIMATELY to blame for my additional wait. Once again, this is the core of my complaint.

I'm going to focus particular attention on the last sentence of the above quote: quote - "Technically, you checked in before the cut-off time at the ticket counter, but it doesn't seem that that was enough time to make your flight, does it?" - end quote
This one is priceless; who sets the cut-off time at the ticket counter - the passenger or the airline? What is the purpose of the cut-off time? Gee, do you think it would be fair to say, that this is the time that the airline has determined is the boundary between "enough time to make the gate", and "not enough time to make the gate"? If the airline is incapable, with all of their experience with, and control over, what transpires in an airport between the check-in counter and the gate (I am referring directly to your "stuff happens" - "that's life" remarks), of determining what is "enough time" and what is not, exactly how the hell is it reasonable to demand that a passenger be capable of making this determination?

quote - "I also think that any civil liberties organization that got wind of your ideas on how to keep track of people in the airports would be so far up your a$$ they'd come out your mouth." - end quote
You really shouldn't engage in "thinking" - you don't appear to be very good at it.
Exactly how many civil liberties organizations do you see spewing from TSA agents' mouths right now? Or, how many TSA agents do you see seeking medical treatment from the painful rear entry? I would have thought my comment about the Bill of Rights being shredded the moment you enter an airport would have dissuaded you from revealing your utter lack of knowledge in this area to such an embarrassing extent. Do you know what a horrendous violation of your civil rights a "random search" constitutes? Are you familiar with the legal concept "probable cause?" I guess not, but you do seem to be very good at forming false analogies based on bodily orifices . . . more on your inaccurate "tracking" assumptions below . . .

quote - "Asking for cell phone numbers? Tracking EVERY passenger through the airport? Riiiiight."
Are you familiar with face recognition technology? Do you have any idea how many video cameras are already tracking EVERY single human being that enters AIRPORT PROPERTY these days, let alone the airport proper? Are you aware that your cell phone, and every modern cell phone produced already has a tracking feature built in, which you can't turn off? Don't believe me - pick up your cell phone, and go to "Settings", in the settings menu, you will find an option for "Location", select location, and you will find (on most cell phones - I can't say with certainty that this is exactly the case for every cell phone in the world) only two options: "911 only", and "Location on". The "911 only" option, to the best of my knowledge, DOES NOT eliminate tracking; it only limits access to the tracking information. How else would your provider know if you were roaming? How else would your cell phone know which tower to connect to? Ergo, if you have a cell phone, you are already being, and have been, tracked wherever your cell phone receives a signal! With regard to the airport, and passengers giving up their cell phone numbers at check-in; this could be optional, not compulsory like the TSA invasions of privacy. Furthermore, you are referring to a preliminary suggestion which I hoped would spur some kind of discussion as to how airline and airport staff can mitigate the effects of "stuff happening" on paying customers; this was not to be taken as something I've researched extensively, the viability of which I considered already proven. Silly me, why would someone in an industry that is guaranteed funding and special legal consideration no matter how much it sucks care about improving customer service . . .

quote - "I know you've heard those pages before. So to say the airlines make no effort to get missing people on the plane is garbage. Maybe you think we should chip people like we do our dogs, but with GPS, so that you have no responsibilities whatsoever? That way you would never be responsible for your whereabouts ever again. If anyone needed you, THEY could find YOU!"
Yes, I have "heard those pages" - I heard them when I was being delayed by the TSA stormtroopers in Las Vegas, I heard them in Sydney when I was being delayed unnecessarily by an ego-maniac Australian customs agent - and I pointed them out to the parties in question, but, like most prima donnas, they didn't care because they were getting what they wanted regardless of the cost to me. As I've stated, in Sydney, it took an airline employee to come and get me before the customs agent had to stop needlessly harassing me; in Las Vegas, no airline employee came to get me, so the pages, and my complaints, fell on the snide, deaf ears of the post-office rejects. A call to TSA can be just as easily made as an announcement over the PA system. Sometimes, because, as you have stated, "stuff happens", it behooves the responsible service employee to go that extra inch. Did you bother to read my anecdote about Outback Steakhouse? This would be an example of an employee in an industry that is not taxpayer subsidized appropriately taking responsibility for the "stuff which happens" on her watch, instead of forcing the customer to - this is the foundation of a successful service industry, FYI. How is it that this "extra inch" isn't too much to ask of a $10-an-hour employee with relatively little job benefits, or resources at her disposal, but it is too much to ask of an airline employee, and, why is it too much to ask of the airline industry that they utilize technology already employed to harass, control, and abuse passengers, to assist them as well? It wasn't too much to ask of the airline employees in Sydney (although any further courtesy certainly was). Have you figured out what "prima donna" means yet, and why it is such an appropriate label in these cases under discussion?
Your comments after the first sentence of the above quote are nothing more than self-serving "garbage" as you put it, and you can stick them where you won't find the civil liberties organizations to which you referred earlier. I never stated that the airlines "make no effort to get missing people on the plane" - I stated that their efforts in this area should be improved upon, and could be improved upon, with resources they already have access to and are currently deployed. The comments about chipping people like dogs are yours and yours alone; maybe you think cramming your own irrational hyperbole down someone's throat is a legitimate means of bolstering your incredibly weak, and now utterly invalidated, position?

quote - "Good luck in all your travels. I think you just might need it."
Was this supposed to be clever? Anyone who travels can use some luck, for as you have stated "stuff happens". Maybe you should regress to your fascination with bodily orifices and phantom civil liberties.

Anything else, or was this the best you can do?