Originally Posted by Jotmo
All of the argument against profiling are based on the assumption that it would be the ONLY criteria for screening, and that ONLY those who meet the profile would be screened.
No, that's not what those who have argued against profiling assumed. Please reread the arguments.
But to deny that Muslim male roughly between the ages of 17 and 40 do not STATISTICAL have a greater chance of actually being a terrorist intent on doing harm to Americans is simply denying a FACT. Sticking your head in the sand to avoid reality will not make it go away.
If you look at terrorrist attacks in the US alone, it's pretty evenly balanced between Muslims and non-Muslims over the long run. Now, if you're talking about groups like Al Qaeda in general, then yes, there are more Muslims out there to get us. But a couple problems arise:
(1) How is the TSA supposed to know what religion someone subscribes to? There are white Muslims, Asian Muslims, African Muslims, Arab Muslims and so on.
(2) How is the TSA supposed to know how old someone is?
(3) We know that groups like Al Qaeda are smart enough to use people who don't fit the male, 17-40 description. They use women (witness the husband-wife duo in Jordan a few days ago). They'll use people who aren't in that age range.
(4) What is the TSA supposed to do if a 25 year old Muslim male presents himself at the checkpoint? (Remember that the 9/11 hijackers didn't have any prohibited items on them, and many
did get an extra careful screening by the checkpoint staff.)
If we fail to acknowledge who the enemy is, we cannot fight them. I fear that America will not be waken for this Utopian PC dreamworld by anything short of a mushroom cloud over a major city. Even then, I have my doubts.
Actually the concern is that some want to narrowly define the enemy to the point where we're getting less security for our effort instead of more.