I JUST had another jar of facial cream confiscated at the airport security. The 3.4-ounce jar was beyond the travel limit, the security officer said. I tried to protest, telling her I was carrying the “legal size” limit. “No,” she insisted, “the size limit is 100ml which is equivalent to 3.38oz. This is 3.4oz. See?” she said, pointing to the product label.

Ugh! I hit the liquid danger threshold? It didn’t help that I pointed out the jar was half-empty. But there was no point in challenging “the rule” no matter how nonsensical it may be. I didn’t protest any further, even though it would have been fun to argue – for the sake of playing along – that whoever may be thinking of concocting an explosive mixture out of a moisturizing product won’t have enough liquid to add to his mix because I have already applied a generous amount of it on my face.

And then she asked me, “What do you want me to do with this facial cream?” I couldn’t get myself to respond, wondering if it was a rhetorical question. “So, what do you want me to do with it?” she repeated the question.

I was confused: On one hand, I didn’t have the right to have smooth, beautiful skin; on the other, she wanted my opinion on what she should do with the item she just confiscated. “Use it,” I said. “It’s good for skin ... and brains.”

This theater of post-Bush nincompoopery represents the absurdity of many of the restrictions being imposed by the TSA. In the name of patriotism and the war on terrorism, many of these rules and restrictions are guaranteed nuisances that bring travelers’ inconvenience and trigger an aching desire for sensible explanations.

The inconsistent policy relating to all types of liquid or gel, for example, is utterly mind-boggling. TSA agents would confiscate your carry-on perfume or lotion at the security check (“because liquid is a dangerous element”), but you are allowed to buy a new bottle at Duty Free and carry it with you on the plane.

And here’s yet another farce: A 400-ml bottle of liquid is dangerous. But if you divide the content into parts and transfer them to four 100-ml bottles, it becomes safe? Oh, well, the mind of a terrorist is as complex as the TSA regulations.

Maybe travelers would be less agitated if they have assurance that TSA knows what the hell it is doing instead of staging a seeming satire of itself.

Gene Healy, author of "The Cult of the Presidency," and columnist for the Washington Examiner, refers to TSA “as the leading indicator of the future of government stupidity.”

Quoting security expert Bruce Schneier, Healy says, “Airports are effectively rights-free zones. ... You have limited rights to refuse a search. Your possessions can be confiscated. You cannot make jokes, or wear clothing that airport security does not approve of.” And still, Healy observes that after a decade of operation, “the TSA cannot point to a single terrorist plot it has foiled.”

This is what our fearful and paranoid society has become – a comedic dystopia.