If true (and we only have one side of the complaint), this description of a disabled man's experience at the hands of the TSA at Boston Logan airport is an appalling indictment of the natural progression of the "security as theatre" mentality of the TSA:
Normally, my episodic mutism is not really a problemSai sometimes can't speak due to a spasticity disorder, and so depriving him of pen and paper was equivalent to depriving him of the means to communicate. Absent any indications that he was a threat, since they eventually let him proceed to his flight without permanently confiscating any materials, once can only conclude that the TSA stopped him because he was "different" rather than because he was "threatening".
However, the [TSA] agents deliberately both prevented me from accessing writing materials, and then deliberately confiscated those materials and physically prevented me from accessing them after they saw that I was writing a protest of their actions, thereby preventing rather than accommodating my right to speech.
Picture the scene. You're a terrorist intent on bringing down a flight. You have worked out some way of bringing a plane-threatening weapon through security. So you choose to pass through a TSA checkpoint "pretending" to be unable to speak, in order to avoid drawing attention to you and your payload. *** mind blown***
Incidentally, Sai's detailed nit-picking scrupulously-detailed description of his treatment is totally consistent with his geek personality (and employment in a Mobile Internet security firm), so I'd give substantial credence to the details of his account.
Anticipated changes to TSA procedures as a result of this incident: none. I'm already convinced that their primary function is an employment scheme. They make little, if, any, positive contributions to aviation security, and if any contribution is made it is immediately outweighed by their stupid, predictable reaction to the abnormal, and their focus on creating an unpleasant travelling experience.