JFK illegally targeting Muslims, groups say

Islam 'illegally' and routinely profiles people all over the world in order to set them up for murder by mujahidin armies--that's okay, since we're talkng about 'legitimate' religious practices like genocide in Sudan, flying commercial jetliners into skyscrapers of US cities, eliminating Israel and the Jews, or bombing India. Stuff Muslims have been doing to the rest of the world for at least the past 14 centuries. No big.

However. Not to worry, everybody, that is as long as you're not caucasian and/or Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, animist or Zoroastrian or of African descent. As long as you're not one of the aforementioned Islam's not "profiling" you. Breathe a sigh of relief everybody!

Islam doesn't profile YOU.

And the dish ran away with the spoon!

I flew from JFK to Atlanta and back this month. On the southbound trip, I sat next to a man in a turban. I purposefully engaged him in conversation. He was a perfectly ‘normal’ guy.

limes: Did you ask him if he was a Muslim? Hindus and Sikhs also wear turbans, my friend. Many Muslim males wear nothing at all on their heads.

A young Christian girl from Trinidad and Tobago was detained on entry at JFK, chained to a chair in a dark room, interrogated, and deported. Why? Nobody knows. The girl was part of a group of Christians who were visiting NYC to attend a church conference.

The U.S. has no reason to treat Christians so shabbily, but it has just cause to scrutinize and interrogate Muslims.

The problem with Muslims is that they seem to believe that they are so superior to everybody that they should not be treated differently no matter what they do. Sorry, life doesn't work that way, and whining, bitching, moaning certainly won't change it or get you all any sympathy. Muslims would do well to stop the terrorism that comes from their community instead of celebrating it. If they continue bombing and killing, pretty soon, they'll either be deported wholesale from many a Western country or forced to have their own airlines El Jihad Air which no Western country will allow flyover rights.

Islam 'illegally' and routinely profiles people all over the world in order to set them up for murder by mujahidin armies--that's okay, since we're talkng about 'legitimate' religious practices like genocide in Sudan, flying commercial jetliners into skyscrapers of US cities, eliminating Israel and the Jews, or bombing India. Stuff Muslims have been doing to the rest of the world for at least the past 14 centuries. No big.

Posted by: pythagoras at August 24, 2006 09:46 PM

Islam is designed not only to discriminate (such light words don't mean anything in Islam) against but to, at the least, subjugate and at the most, eliminate non-muslims. Ever wonder why Islamic countries have have on immigration/foreign policy? Well, the policy is simple, no immigration of non-muslims. Hostility towards non-muslim foreigners.

The immutable truth is, hostility, not benevolence, is at the heart of Islam.

I purposefully engaged him in conversation. He was a perfectly ‘normal’ guy.

Posted by: limes at August 24, 2006 09:52 PM

What is your point? All with turbans are not muslims and all muslims are not in turbans.

JFK illegally targeting Muslims, groups say ..GOOD FOR EM.

Remember Not All Muslims Are Terrorists, But All Terrorists Are Muslim

There is a struggle at JFK between those who favor profiling and are discussed by regulations that force security people at the airport to subject 65 year old grannies from Iowa to under go pat downs and those who think everyone should suffer so that we "don't discriminate".

Many, many security people at JFK who wish they could profile in the open and not have to risk there jobs to do the right thing, protect the American public.

Many, many security people all over the country come to Jihadwatch for the truth and have learned that Islam is at the core of the problem.

The American public should voice their support for profiling and those in the DHS who risk their jobs to do the right thing.

After the next big attack all of this nonsense will stop, pity it will take the loss of American lives to change things.

CaribPundit:

"if they continue bombing and killing, pretty soon, they'll ....be deported wholesale from many a Western country"

I can't see that happening unless a civil war breaks out in the country in question, and the muslims are forced out that way. The political classes seem willing to put up with just about anything from these people, and seem to be of the opinion that their native populations should meekly do the same.

Arwa Ibrahim complains that she and her sister were "treated like animals" by the US customs agents who were rude and made them wait.

If they REALLY want to experience treatment like animals, the sisters should return to their birthplace to both be married, (without their consent), to their uncle who will welcome the girls as breeding stock, while preventing them from an education or even leaving the house unaccompanied. Allah knows best.

Now is the time for all Americans to come to the aid of their country. It is not a civil war that is on the horizon, it is a war. It will be one we all have to fight, but don't worry. You all will know your place, and we will win. Just let not forget this time what we are fighting. Islam is the evil we all must drive from this planet.

Good luck to us all.

In my most humble opinion, ALL muslim passengers coming from a muslim country should be profiled , detained if necessary and expect it. The muslim male that drove his SUV into the students in N.C. was also born in Iran and raised in the U.S. This gives reason to, you never know.

I'm sure if these women asked politely for water, they would have been given some. They probably were NOT going to get a pizza though.

If they were detained for six hours, I'll bet there was a problem with computers or something. Something the employees couldn't help. Wouldn't THEY prefer the employees did their job? Do THEY want a jihadist blowing up their plane?

Robert Spencer characterizes as "clear thinking" what Congressman Peter King said:

"First of all, it's not ethnic or racial profiling," King said Wednesday. "What I'm saying, though, is that screeners should have the right to ask additional questions of a person who belongs to a particular ethnic or religious group if members of that group have threatened the United States."

I wouldn't call that clear thinking, I'd call it muddled thinking: he clearly contradicts himself. And Congressman King does so because even as he is trying to respond rationally to the PC Police, he is also at the same time trying to placate their irrationality.

In a sane world, we would have overt Muslim profiling, we would integrate racial/ethnic factors into our Muslim profiling, and we would openly admit without apology that this is what we need to do for reasons that should be plain to any thinking rational person.

See my 2-part essay on Racial Profiling and the Problem of Islam on my blog for further analysis that explains in excruciatingly sensible detail what I'm talking about:

http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/07/racial-profiling-and-problem-of-islam.html

http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2006/07/racial-profilingpart-two.html

Also, I more recently posted a capsule addendum where I noted the excruciatingly obvious reason why we must integrate ethnic and racial factors into our profiling methodology:

"The problem with simply going ahead to "profile Muslims" in the abstract (particularly with the lofty notion that this can be done without integrating racial data) is simple: we cannot know which of the hundreds of thousands of people who pass through our hundreds of airports throughout the West on a daily basis are Muslims, and which are non-Muslims, for the following reasons:

1) Such public spaces as airports have vast and chaotic movements of people in constant flux, and our profiling screeners will have limited resources;

and

2) any kind of universal system of identification that denotes who is Muslim will be resisted by the dominant PC Multiculturalism in the West, and will for anti-Western reasons be resisted by most of the Muslim countries whose cooperation we would need for such a system."

Ah yes, the poor muslims, always the victims. (Sarcasm off.)

How come the ACLU types don't talk about this kind of targetting:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/24/news/italy.php

That girl is dead -- the victim of another honour-killing.

No other community on the planet does this kind of stuff. Why don't the liberals say something?

Poor babies. Why are they complaining? At least they get to leave the airport with their heads, hands, and feet still on.

Dhimmi Dean Pork Sausage:

Today Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following statement in honor of Laylatul Meraaj, Muhammad's ascent to Heaven:

"Yesterday Muslims in America and around the world celebrated a very special day in the Islamic calendar, the ascent of Mohammad to heaven. Traditionally, Muslims celebrate this day with reflection and prayer.

"Muslim Americans continue to make tremendous contributions to our nation and I am proud that America is a country of diverse faith and beliefs. On this special holiday I send greetings and best wishes to all Muslims."

And just what "tremendous contributions" do Muslim Americans make to our nation there....Howie? Heeeyaaaawwwww!

A bit off-topic, but today astronomers decided that Pluto is no longer a planet. Which is kind of appropriate because Pluto was originally discovered in the '30s and was controversial then.

Truly I say, if someone was around in the '30s, they would be having deja vu, today. And not just because of Pluto and all the 30's retro cars that are in the dealerships now.

Oh, and if Muhammad is in Heaven, I'll eat my hat.

"On this special holiday I send greetings and best wishes to all Muslims."

-Howard Dean

Ha. You know what the muslims are saying to that?

"We'll eat him last."

"It was a really humiliating experience -- humiliating because we were treated like animals," she said

That is better treatment than what infidels receive from muslims in islamic lands.

I don't an arguement for profiling here,do you?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by?
a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40?

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40 ?

3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

a Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:a

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

a Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old
American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver
trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

11.In 2000 The USS Cole was attacked in the bay of Yemen killing several American sailors by.

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40?

12. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles
to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

13. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

14. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:?

a buddhist fanatic

a Christian extremist

a Jewish radical

Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40?

Nope, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?

So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winning and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest they be guilty of profiling.

AS "Forrest Gump" so aptly put it, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Just one quick comment comes to mind, Its about high time.

Why are not these *normal muslims* protesting against their own very evil ideology that advocates plotting and killing infidels? Set your own house in order and your atavistic murderous instincts.

We the infidels too have a lot more grievances,injured feelings and regard for our fellow beings' lives.Hence profiling is entirely justified.

pythagoras; Thanks for the comment. Yes, he was muslim. And I must admit to some ignorance when it comes to Hindu and Sikh cultures. Limited to some westernized friends and acquaintences.

Just a shade OT, but I would expect to be profiled if I was standing outside of a planned parenthood, or women's clinic if I was standing out there with a wooden cross, and holding a bible.

I would hope the authorities would watch me closely in order to make sure that I was not going to kill a doctor, and bomb the clinic...

I wonder if the ACLU would be willing to take up a case for the Army of God or something.

humiliating because we were treated like animals," she said.

you know she is lying with just that statement. people from Western Cultures, the majority treat our animals very well. if she was treated like she was our dogs, she would have food, water and a hug. so you know she was lying, she is mostly likely relying on how her culture treats animals. no wonder they burga these muslim women, too stupid to fight back.

remote control: we cannot know which of the hundreds of thousands of people who pass through our hundreds of airports throughout the West on a daily basis are Muslims, and which are non-Muslims"

What about using something obvious like someone's name? The airlines have the passenger list. The name Muhammad is a pretty common one for Muslims. What are other common names? And aren't these names generally different from Christian Arab names and Hindu names and Sikh names (those who might racially resemble those we wish to profile)?

Trouble is, islam is not limited to a race. There are black muslims, there are muslims from South Asia, who resemble some Hindus, there are Mongoloid muslims, and on this site itself, I saw a video of Serbian muslims, and they were white. Names would be the best way to profile, for starters, though I fear that muslims will then start taking up false names. It would be somewhat harder for them to do that, so, with names, we can profile successfully, for now.

"In a sane world, that would be called common sense."

Absolutely. If we are looking for a Mafia Don, we don't look for a Swedish guy with a Swedish accent. Though we must be doubly on guard against the exception to the rule, we must nevertheless accept reality that exceptions prove the rule.

In the final analysis these so-called objections to "racial profiling" (BTW, most Arabs are Semite-Caucasian) are really not about "racial profiling" at all. It's about making all of us more vulnerable to lethal attacks from Islamic Fascists-using this kanard to that end. The issue is not really the issue on this matter.

Caroline,

"What about using something obvious like someone's name? The airlines have the passenger list."

I'm all for using every possible means to determine who is a Muslim and who is not a Muslim in places like airports; and I'm all for minimizing any inconvenience and indignity that might be caused by the "collateral damage" that no profiling system can avoid completely. I was talking about integrating racial/ethnic factors into a profiling system as a supplement to other techniques, not as the be-all and end-all that would exclude all other techniques. So of course, if one were constructing a Muslim profiling methodology, one would want to include the use of passenger names. If you think about it, though, that technique by itself would have too many holes to work by itself, without other supplementary techniques.

My second objection to the passenger-name technique is even more material: a good deal of profiling of any kind is necessary as a pre-emptive measure, as a measure before you have sufficient information. That's the whole point of profiling: we don't always have the luxury of having sufficient information, or of being able to gather sufficient information in an easy, orderly, and timely fashion -- particularly this is the case with such an unpredictably volatile evil as Islamically inspired terrorist attacks. In such sprawling, chaotic and populous spaces as an international airport, there will often be contexts or situations where law enforcement need to know -- and to intercept -- before people can be processed in an orderly and limited fashion. In such contexts or situations, the profiling tool has to fall back on the less refined level of simply spotting what is pre-determined to be the more likely suspect based on a broader methodology. A mitigating rule of thumb for profiling should be that the broader and less refined a profiling tool is, the less harsh or aggressive should be the action taken against the person profiled -- unless, of course, exigent circumstances (which can vary in degree) warrant modification thereof.

The integration of the racial/ethnic factor would be hierarchical or gradational:

1) Since most Muslims of the world are non-Western non-whites and most whites of the world are Western non-Muslims, our broadest winnowing criterion will be non-white, followed closely by non-Western.

Subsets of this basic factor would be:

a) Since the ratio of proven dangerous Muslims have been composed more of Pakistanis and Arabs than other ethnicities, our next broadest criterion would be those who look like Pakistanis and Arabs (remember, we are at the stage of profiling where you can't check a person's passport in an orderly fashion, nor for that matter verify that passport as genuine, let alone take the time and trouble to ask questions).

b) Our third broadest criterion would be North Central Asian [Muslims] and SE Asian [Muslims] (again, who "look like them" in the absence of being able to verify).

c) And fourth would be black African [Muslims].

The main factor, and each of the three subsets of gradations, would entail slightly different types of vigilance and actions by the profilers.

Think of profiling as a multi-tiered, multi-pronged, dynamic system, where some aspects may be held in temporary abeyance unless some threshhold of exigency is met, and where different techniques are utilized in different contexts and situations depending on a variety (usually, as with places like international airports, a constantly shifting variety) of factors. Throw into this complex and dynamic mix the additional, obvious factor that the terrorists will be adapting in order to elude profiling -- not to mention the horrifically deadly potential of this particular enemy plus their penchant to strike anywhere by surprise --, and you will be left with no rational reason to wish to exclude racial/ethnic factors in Muslim profiling.

You know your mother told you their were no monsters, well that was not true. Their are monsters and they are called Muslims. After all Muslims started the slave trade, if you look back in history. They had their hands in most of the dirty things that went on . THEN THEY SET BACK AND SAY, WE ARE BEING TREATED BAD. Well it is time they are treated like they treat the world. I hope all of America see through the mist that evil creates for them.
If you have a bad tooth, it is not bad to pull it. Time this abscess is cut from America. It is not profiling, just good dental work.

Picking someone to interview out of a line of people wanting to board an aircraft is the simple part. The questioning session is the part requiring training and experience and a little time but it can be done effectively. Body language speaks volumes but only to those who understand the language. We can learn and we need to do it quickly. Norman Maneta has been the biggest enemy of profiling and why Bush hasn't sacked him is puzzling and disturbing.
I don't think jihadis wear clothes which make them easy to spot but they do bring their 8th century attitudes(don't leave home without it).

Muslims do have particularily nasty attitudes. If you do not believe it--go to a Muslim neighborhood anywhere.

Re profiling, it is clear that some of it must be done even though it is very unfortunate that we need to target so many innocents. However, I remember a Israeli case a few years back in which the blond Irish wife of a Palestinian/Arab was carrying stashed explosives that she claimed she was fully unaware of. In addition, consider that many Hispanics can easily be mistaken for Arabs. Consider also that there are white and black Moslems, not to mention Asian Moslems (Indonesians and Malaysians). In such cases, how could profiling work? Are the TSA employees that astute? Most don’t know geography much less history. For example, do they know that there are many Moslems in Ethiopia, even though it is not a ‘country of interest?’

Yes profiling can help a bit, but woe be unto those who rely on it too much. I think using an Israeli type system is the only possible solution.

CaribPundit: The problem with Muslims is that their religion, Islam, incorporates first degree murder into its core ideology, places no value on human life whatsoever, and acts out its murderous doctrines all over the world on an absolutely apocalyptic scale.

And you're concerned about their air of 'superiority'?????!??!??

Alert: Over the past 15 centuries Islam has murdered several hundred million innocent human beings, snuffed out entire civilizations, subjected humanity to endless wars and subjugation, and cast dark shadows over the fate of our species.

'Hostility' doesn't begin to cover the horror lurking within this ideology!

You're preaching to the choir.

limes: Muslims first of all are not permitted to conversely honestly with non-Muslims, so it is difficult if not impossible for a non-Muslim to see the entire personality of most Muslims they encounter. True, many Muslims seem okay people on an individual basis at least on the surface.

But what you and many people don't apparently realize is that Muslims inhabit a totalitarian political society presided over by their mosque authorities (even if they live in a western nation, their allegiance is to the 'ummah', not the nation-state they happen to live in). Muslims who do not 'submit' to al-lah (more likely their mosque leaders' demands) can be subjected to punishment by those same mosque leaders (punishments that may include execution). Thus, Muslims who seem 'normal' may be coerced by their mosque leaders into activities that include or support acts of terrorism against non-Muslims. You cannot discern this about most Muslims from engaging in a few hours of conversation with them.

It takes more than a few hours to get to know someone!

From the above article title; JFK illegally targeting Muslims, groups say. About bloody time!

Arjun, part of the problem is that when somebody converts to islam, they often take a muslim name and keep their given name. So when they want to "blend in" they just use their birth name. It is a typical ruse for muslims to cry "racial dixcrimination", when they know all too well that islam is a religion, not a race. Unless you consider it a race to see how quickly they can conquer the world and impose sharia law.

read this story and understand why the muslim whining is OUT OF PLACE:

I knew a kid son of a brazilian woman and a japanese man. The kid looked way more japanese than south american. He was currently in italy with the mother, his dad was in Japan while the brother in london. He was a frequent flier to meet his extended family. He had double passport. He had a western first name and a japanese last name.

He told me that when he was travelling and showing his japanese passport he was never searched. When he showed his brazilian passport he was questioned, searched, his bags inspected etc.

This is because in mainland europe there is a screening to find drugs from south americans travellers. It's not unfrequent that some Venezuelan/brazilian/whatever gets caught with drugs.

You never hear any south american complain. The honest people understand this traffic needs to be stopped and they don't feel targeted, the targets are the criminals.

This is how decent and honest people react to profiling. The opposite way in which moslems react.

Television - thanks for that detailed reply. I guess I was thinking more narrowly about the issue of profiling in deciding whom to pull out of a security line for more thorough inspection before boarding an airplane, at which point one would already have been required to present identification. Obviously there is the issue that many jihadis will purposely refrain from exterior indicators (dress) of being Muslim, leaving them indistinguishable from Indians and Christian Arabs and Christian black Americans etc. I was merely thinking that racial profiling would target all these folks unnecessarily as well (and use up unnecessary time and resources etc), when the more obvious key to whether someone is Muslim or not often lies in their name and someone's name actually comes closest in a way to the concept of "ideology" - which is what we want our profiling to get at in the end, as people tend to name their children in accordance with deeply held beliefs. Hence my name Caroline is pretty much a dead give-away that my parents were Christian. Out of curiosity I googled 'common Muslim names', 'common Sikh names', and 'common Hindu names'. It's all there. Its a relatively easy matter to link the reservations desk to a database which spits out likely affiliations of this sort (assuming the screeners couldn't master this sort of thing on their own), which would in a sense subject everyone to profiling but then the people we want to target through that profiling- (and it should be obvious here that I have no problem with that, I’m just addressing complaints that there’s no practical way to do that as Islam is an ideology rather than a race and people can easily change their dress and shave their beards etc) – would be subjected to more thorough searches - of their baggage and shoes and persons (and liquids, including false bottoms on their drink bottles).

Bohemond makes an interesting point though. I didn't know that alot of Muslim converts kept their birth names while taking a Muslim name on the side. Alot of Muslims by birth could also legally change their names(although they would have to live with that consequence 24/7, having stripped themselves of a central part of their identity). Obviously no system is fullproof. As you point out its more a "multi-tiered" approach. An interesting side effect of profiling for name and dress and so on, however, would be to create an impediment to the expansion of Arab culture that invariably accompanies Islamic expansion and which is manifested in converts adopting Arab names and dress. That right there would create some impediment to the appeal to converts of assuming a sort of alternative identity because they're sick of their own. It would be just a bit more problematic to be tempted to play dress up.

Bohemond_1069: "Unless you consider it a race to see how quickly they can conquer the world and impose sharia law."

That was funny.(smiling emoticon)

Treated like animals? I would have thought that would have made her feel right at home. I mean, she is a muslim woman right? I guess it is ok to get it from your culture, and husband, but ohh the humanity not from the Infidel dogs too! That is where she draws the line damnit!

You should have seen this interview live, it so smacks of bullshit, much ado about nothing.

I wish, I really do, that they were profiling and pulling aside muslims, but sadly they aren't. A gray haired anglo saxon grandmother is more likely to get pulled aside than a Muslim or someone who looks Arab or "Asian"..and that is per instructions give to the TSA..

Anyway check out this POS lie (and of course CAIR is behind it) "I Was Made to Feel Like an Outsider in My Own Country" - Muslim-Americans Say Racial Profiling Led to Detention, Harassment at Airport

Even the whine is crap, America is a secular society, not a muslim (sharia society) therefore America is not a Muslims "own country", regardless of where they were born.

Mackie :Sirhan Sirhan is a Christian Palestinian, not a muslim.

Just to keep the record straight.

Mackie :Sirhan Sirhan (the guy who shot Bobby Kennedy) is a Christian Palestinian, not a muslim.

Just to keep the record straight.

Caroline,

In a nutshell, my position is that racial/ethnic markers would have to be integrated to some degree into any rational profiling system; while one would try to minimize their influence, one would never be able to eliminate them. And secondly, this (as well as other features of any rational profiling system) will inevitably incur "collateral damages" -- many non-Muslims who are non-white non-Westerners will be inconvenienced. Until we accept these unavoidable necessities, we will be erring on the side of unduly endangering our lives.

The name-checking technique would work best in an airport situation, and within that situation, only in terms of the already normal process by which people are funnelled onto the airplanes -- and since an airplane in flight is (and probably will remain) the most common target for terrorist activity, it would be a good technique (though it would still have a few holes).

With other kinds of public spaces -- such as the airport itself, or the planes in hangars or on the tarmac, or city centers, or shopping malls, or political rallies, or infrastructure utility structures situated amid population centers, etc. -- a Muslim profiling system would have to rely more heavily on the racial/ethnic factors simply because it would be much more difficult to properly and in an orderly fashion filter out the actual Muslims from those who could be Muslims because they happen to look like Muslims.

Also, as the future unfolds, one could well encounter scenarios such as the following:

A policeman sees a couple, man and woman, who look "ethnic" and seem Middle Eastern and they are oddly spending too much time looking at and photographing certain angles of a bridge or a major power station located near a public park. So the policeman goes over and questions them. He asks them to produce identification papers. Their papers indicate that they are not, in fact, Muslims. Now, what can one policeman do to verify the authenticity of these papers? I think, in a situation like this, that policeman should have the authority to detain that couple and either bring them in to the police station or get on his police radio to get someone to research and verify that couple's status. After their status has been verified as non-Muslim, they will be released. But then, our Western police forces (all the way down to local levels) would have to have the ability to verify identification, a central information system. Getting that organized and implemented would be very complex and difficult -- processing hundreds of millions of people, many millions of them in flux (including immigration, etc.) --, and would, of course, have to jump the PC hurdle of being "Islamophobic" and "racist".