When a father reports his son, no need to profile
For reasons that have never been entirely clear, conservatives hate something they call "political correctness" and are eager to profile persons based on their race or religion. That's not only morally wrong, but it's also stupid. It wouldn't work to prevent terrorist attacks.
U.S. Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee, has been taking to the airwaves complaining that "political correctness" has led to terrorist attacks under the Obama administration. According to TPM,
King is one of several figures to appear on Fox News over the weekend and rail against the "political correctness" that they say has led to incidents like the Fort Hood shootings, and most recently, the attempted attack on Flight 253.
The terrorist watch list already has more than 500,000 names on it - which is part of the problem. That makes it ineffective. No way can our security
apparatus keep on eye on 500,000 people. How many names would it have if we started profiling every Muslim?
In most of the last decade's terrorist attacks or attempted terrorist attacks, there has been more than enough evidence based on persons' BEHAVIOR
to keep them under close scrutiny. That was true of several of the 9/11 attackers; it's also true of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. His father REPORTED HIS
BEHAVIOR TO AMERICAN AUTHORITIES back in October.
It is simply inexcusable that the nation's security apparatus is so rule-bound and bureaucratic that reports from Abdulmutallab's father didn't immediately put the guy on the no-fly list. According to The New York Times:
Nigeria's This Day newspaper cited family members as saying Umaru Mutallab had been uncomfortable with his son's "extreme religious views" and had reported him to the U.S. embassy in the capital Abuja and to Nigerian security agencies six months ago.
The newspaper said the son had relocated to Egypt and then Dubai, where he cut family ties, after leaving London.
Some bureaucrat reported that "reports from family members" don't automatically put someone on a watch list. They don't? Why not? How often does a father come in to an American diplomatic office to say, 'I'm worried about my son; I think he's become radicalized; he has traveled to Yemen'?
We don't need racial or religious profiling - which would bog down security lists. We just need a few people in our security network with some common sense.


