Shot In The Dark: Treating The Problem

August 15, 2006

Treating The Problem

The passenger-profiling technique involves selecting people who are behaving suspiciously, have an unusual travel pattern or, most controversially, have a certain ethnic or religious background.

I'm guessing by "ethnic or religious background" they're talking about the same one as the bunch that killed 3,000 Americans, 200 Australians, 200-odd Spaniards, hundreds of Brits and Indians and thousands of Iraqi?

The system would be much more sophisticated than simply picking out young men of Asian appearance. But it would cause outrage in the Muslim community because its members would be far more likely to be selected for extra checks.

Note to Islam; if you don't like this, how about repudiating terrorism and earning a worldful of goodwill?

Officials at the Department for Transport (DfT) have discussed the practicalities of introducing such a system with airport operators, including BAA. They believe that it would be more effective at identifying potential terrorists than the existing random searches.

They also say that it would greatly reduce queues at security gates, which caused lengthy delays at London airports yesterday for the fifth day running.

The left in America (I know I'm speaking generally, but I think it's justifiable) seems to think that the danger of another Tim McVeigh is every bit as serious, on a national policy level, as that of another Mohammad Atta.

Posted by Mitch at August 15, 2006 06:12 AM | TrackBack

Comments

"Note to Islam; if you don't like this, how about repudiating terrorism and earning a worldful of goodwill?"

On an emotional level, I can't help agreeing with you, at least a little. But on the other hand, who exactly should be doing the repudiating, and why? Is there a CEO of Islam? Or should each and every Joe Muslim on the street have to repudiate terrorism before he can be considered part of polite society again?

And more importantly to your "argument" - if someone in authority over at Worldwide Moderate Islam, Inc. does actually "repudiate terrorism" (something mainstream Islam has never declared its support for, to my knowledge), does that mean that'll be adequate justification to stop the profiling?

And if not - if profiling should continue because, hey, after all, is IS still a bunch of Muslims trying to kill us - why exactly should anybody be asked to repudiate a damn thing?

Posted by: Beeeej at August 15, 2006 04:47 PM

"The left in America (I know I'm speaking generally, but I think it's justifiable) seems to think that the danger of another Tim McVeigh is every bit as serious, on a national policy level, as that of another Mohammad Atta."

Um ... not quite. But I am worried that with the lowered standards for recruitment (42 for the Infantry? How lame is that?) that a lot of Aryan Nation types ARE getting in and getting the experience. And conceivably the toys, considering the variable quality of base security. The MidEast is one of those weird areas where the butterfly effect is paying off in spadefulls of unintended consequences.

Posted by: Bill Haverberg at August 15, 2006 08:22 PM

zlpr texronlvk elywpbncv nesrixflo lwivbnx hqvkezajw hzeydg

Posted by: huzkx ruyl at September 6, 2006 05:27 AM