Tuesday, December 29, 2009


Over the past few days we have heard a lot about "profiling". Last Friday, on Christmas day, a person tried to blow up an airliner as an act of terrorism. Oh wait, let me correct that, ...a potential human caused disaster.

This guy has an Arabic name, was traveling from Yemen-an Arabic country which has known ties to sponsoring terrorism, was reported by his own dad to be a threat to America, was on a "watch list" for the State Department or Homeland Security, bought a one-way ticket for cash to America, stated that he planned on being here for two weeks, had no luggage... He gave us just about all of the "red flags" you could want in order to stop him from doing damage. He carried, on his person, explosives that were sewn into his underwear. While in flight he tried to detonate the explosives but only succeeded in causing a fire. Passengers gained control of him after a struggle.

It could not have been much more clear that this guy was a threat, if he had it printed on his forehead. Yet, with all of this, he was allowed to board the airliner with no questions asked. He almost killed about 300 people.

Over the weekend, government leaders appeared on various TV talk shows and discussed this situation. When one admitted that the terrorist was on a terrorist watch list, he was asked why no one was then watching him. The answer back was, "There are over 500,000 names on that list." Evidently our government does not have the resources to keep track of these people. We seem to have the resources to bail out every conceivable company on Wall Street, to bail out banks, to bail out GM and Chrysler, to add thousands of pork barrel projects to bills, to take over health care for 300,000,000 Americans, to screen our emails, to listen in on our phone calls, to read our blogs. But, we do not have the money to keep us safe.

So, my question is, what is wrong with profiling? If we cannot screen everyone who tries to get on an airliner, why not thoroughly screen the passengers who fit the profile of a terrorist? It is not hard to figure out who these might be, pretty much every one of the terrorists who have attacked American interests over the past ten years have several things in common. They have Arabic names, are of Arabic decent, are Muslim in faith, are men between the ages of 16 to 45, have similar skin color, have black hair...

What they do not have in common are: none are elderly white women, none are black children, none are Jews or Christians, none are blue-eyed, none have blond hair...

It seems so clear that singling those who fit the profile out for more intense screening would make us all safer. So, why don't we do it? Because that would be "profiling". We would rather be politically correct (PC) than physically safe. The people in charge of security at major airports (TSI) are prohibited from profiling. So, they pull the 75 year old, white woman aside to pat her down for weapons. While they are doing this, the 30 year old Muslim with a back pack passes through security with no scrutiny.

Limited resources? Then use them wisely. Put the money and man power to work where they can do the most good. Profile, Profile, Profile!

How does our government respond to the latest bombing attempt? They suggest new rules for passengers on airliners. You must have your hands in plain view, on your knees, with nothing else on your lap and you cannot get out of your seat during the last hour of the flight. Why? Because this guy tried to hide what he was doing with a pillow and it happened during the last hour of the flight. How stupid are they? How stupid do they believe we are? How stupid do the real threats think we all are?

We will continue to profile shoes, laptops, shampoo, pillows, etc. But, we will not profile the guy who could be the poster child for your typical terrorist. Our negligence will result in another deadly attack. The terrorists change their methods and all we ever do is respond to the last attack.

Rest easy, in the words of the Secretary of Homeland Security - you know, the one person who carries the responsibility for keeping our homeland safe - Janet Nappy, "All systems functioned appropriately." What a dangerous joke she is! It is not just her, she is typical of the liberal mindset. We are bad and they are misunderstood. If we tell them we are sorry they will like us. We must have done something to deserve all of this. We need to get past being a military superpower. Let's all just talk and get along. The real terrorists are the Christians, conservatives, x-military, gun owners, patriots who want to protect the Constitution.

No wonder we are a target - we project weakness to our enemies. They see right through BO and see nothing but an empty bag of hot air.

No comments:

Post a Comment