| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| US to begin profiling air passengers |
| 2010-04-02 |
| The United States will announce Friday it plans to begin profiling US-bound passengers in a major shake up of air travel security measures, US media said. Under the new measures to begin this month, and which will apply to US citizens as well, the level of screening of travellers will depend on how closely their personal characteristics match against intelligence on potential terrorists. The measures will replace mandatory enhanced screening of all passengers travelling to the United States from 14 mostly-Muslim nations, put into place following a failed Al-Qaeda attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound flight on Christmas Day. “It's much more tailored to what intelligence is telling us and what the threat is telling us, as opposed to stopping all individuals from a particular nationality,' said an unnamed US official quoted by The Washington Post. The announcement to be made by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) comes after a three-month review of security protocols, said the Post, citing a senior administration official. “It is much more surgically targeting those individuals we are concerned about and have intelligence for,' the official said, according to the New York Times. The current “no-fly' list is to remain in place under the new procedures, but supplemented by cross-referenced information that may see passengers subject to further screening even if their names are not flagged, the Wall Street Journal said. Characteristics such as nationality, age, recently visited countries, and partial names will be used alongside the “no-fly' list, the Journal said. The move aims to avoid the intelligence failures that allowed the alleged Christmas Day bomber, Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, to board the Detroit-bound flight from Amsterdam wearing underpants rigged with explosives, even though US intelligence had been alerted to information on him. Fragmentary intelligence on a possible attacker - a partial name, certain physical characteristics, or nationality - would be forward by the DHS to airlines and foreign governments, the Los Angeles Times said, and the information used as a guide on who would be screened. “This is not a system that can be called profiling in the traditional sense. It is intelligence-based,' said the official, quoted by the New York Times. US government guidelines prohibit authorities from singling out people on the basis of race or ethnicity, but the Christmas Day plot swiftly recharged the delicate debate surrounding racial profiling. In the wake of the botched bombing at least one lawmaker, Republican Peter King from New York, called for US authorities to be less hesitant on the issue. “The fact is while the overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding people, on the other hand 100 per cent of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims, and that is our main enemy today,' he told Fox News after Abdulmutallab was apprehended. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #13 And it didn't even take them a decade! |
| Posted by: gorb 2010-04-02 22:46 |
| #12 "guess our security is closing in on '5th grader' level of smarts." That'll be a huge leap in IQ for them, abu. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-04-02 21:19 |
| #11 my 11 yr old reading over my shoulder sees this headline and says "Finally" guess our security is closing in on '5th grader' level of smarts. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2010-04-02 21:03 |
| #10 Just goes to show you how the left have zero principles. If W proposed this they would be screaming as loud as they were able but since it's one of their own, barely a recognition of the fact. Don't ever believe any motivation from the left is anything but a play for political advantage and power. |
| Posted by: Hellfish 2010-04-02 14:42 |
| #9 TW, why do I suddenly not feel safer flying? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-02 14:23 |
| #8 I thought profiling was so un-PC to this crowd. Republicans are stupid, JohnQC -- everyone knows that. So their profiling would a priori be bigotry enforced. But this profiling is scientific, surgically targetted, by an intelligent, coolly intellectual, Progressive regime, and therefore must be done. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-04-02 12:49 |
| #7 First if they followed the friggin rules that idiot would never would have boarded the plane (xmas day bomber). I would not have been allowed to board the plane without and ID and passport. Also I think that if we give EVERY Arab and Muslim a little extra scrutiny it would go a long way toward security. Heck we might be able to keep our shoes on when we go to the airport and maybe not have to answer stupid question. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2010-04-02 12:09 |
| #6 The third factor which must be considered is that, while the vast majority of Muslims would not do such acts themselves, they do not, and will not, condemn other Muslims who do such acts. Not just generically saying that "Terrorism is bad", as some of the wittier are wont to do; but to specifically condemn Muslims who commit terrorist acts as "bad Muslims who should be stopped and punished." This is all the difference in the world, and entirely justifies profiling of ALL Muslims, on the theory that, "If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas." On 9-11, Muslims around the world either celebrated or said nothing. This meant that they were either sympathetic or indifferent. So today, when they protest against being profiled, the western nations can shrug and say that we are indifferent as well to any inconvenience they must suffer because of their behavior. In future, if they wish to be treated as civilized people, they must purge the uncivilized people from their ranks. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2010-04-02 09:55 |
| #5 I thought profiling was so un-PC to this crowd. I thought profiling was owned by the vast right-wing conspiracy of racist, homophobe, rich capitalist, beer swizzlin, wrastlin-watching Tea Partiers--you know everyone who is not nearly as smart as Bill Maher,Keith Olbermann, and Rachel Maddow. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-02 09:51 |
| #4 Well...as long as the Evil Bushitler isn't doing it, I guess it's okay. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-04-02 09:44 |
| #3 I'd settle for "After". |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2010-04-02 09:05 |
| #2 After the War, the majority of Germans were found to have hated Hitler and the nazis as well. Next factoid please. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-04-02 08:08 |
| #1 "The fact is while the overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding people, on the other hand 100 per cent of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims, and that is our main enemy today," Outstanding? In what sense? We'd be doing ourselves all a favour by just sticking to the truth. Most muslims are not inclined towards acts of terrorism is truthful; the overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding people is barmy nonsense and unhelpful. Mostly outstanding my ***e. |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2010-04-02 06:03 |