On Air: Can profiling stop terrorism?

If you are from one of 14 countries – including Nigeria, Afghanistan and Cuba, and flying into the US you will now face enhanced screening, including body pat-down searches and carry-on baggage checks.

 These countries have been selected because the American authorities deem to be a security risk. Many of you say this leads to profiling, which we discussed a little on WHYS last week  but has continued ever since. 

Nicholas Guariglia argues on Pajamasmedia.com

“that profiling our enemies wherever they may be – most imperatively, at the location and moment of attack – is not only logical, but ethical.  He also says : Americans aren’t asking for a green light to discriminate against Muslims. We simply want security officials to stop asking Grandma to take her clothes off at the airport.”

Khalid Mahmood, a Labour MP,  says it has become necessary to ‘profile’ passengers from certain racial and religious groups in order to weed out possible terror suspects. He said:

 “I think most people would rather be profiled than blown up. It wouldn’t be victimisation of an entire community.”
This blogger was recently stopped entering the US  believes it doesn’t work because Al-Qa`idah and like–minded terrorists can find some who does not fit the profile at airport to do their heinous crimes.

David Blackburn of the Spectator says
Profiling is not a human rights issue, being blown-up certainly is. Racial and religious profiling is not a panacea. However, profiling is essential for improving the safety of all passengers; that is self-evident.

Rod Liddle also from the Spectator last month argued that certain groups carry out certain crimes: The overwhelming majority of street crime, knife crime, gun crime, robbery and crimes of sexual violence in London is carried out by young men from the African-Caribbean community. Charlotte Gore on her blog responded that the majority of crime in London was committed by whites.
So is crime carried out by certain groups? or is it perceived to be carried out by certain groups?

194 Responses to “On Air: Can profiling stop terrorism?”

  1. 1 safeer,s
    January 4, 2010 at 12:07

    Profilling is there to come out of fear situation or in order to maintain safety,But on contrary it is understood that the fear of mind must be cleared in the sence to have the feelings of satisfaction.Sometimes inspite of critcal and strong safety measure the uncertain is happened.But still profilling matters alot.

    • 2 Ann Lorraine
      January 4, 2010 at 19:45

      Rather than calling this racial profiling, isn’t it just basic caveman survival instincts??? If you are walking down the street and see a tiger on one side and a dog on the other side, which side will you take? Humans are waaay too sensitive and ready to fight over ANYTHING! I’m so SICK of it.

      • 3 Muffy
        January 4, 2010 at 19:59

        I am a white, middle-aged woman who was practically strip searched in Chicago after returning from Italy. I have been targeted many times and I look as normal and boring as anyone. I’m tired of “people of color” people saying that only THEY are targeted. It is not true, and only creates a huge chasm between races.
        Come on humans – let us unite not divide.

      • 4 Jennifer
        January 4, 2010 at 20:19

        I agree with you on calling this “racial profiling”; call it common sense caution. I think some people are WAY too touchy about security measures that are supposed to be in place for the protection of everyone.

        I really think that there needs to be increased focus on these measures for the safety of EVERYONE who is in an airport/on a plane. Pat me down; search my belongings please; for everyone’s peace of mind mine included.

  2. 5 guykaks-nairobi
    January 4, 2010 at 12:09

    “Profiling can it stop terrorism?”NO.I think it will reduce the numbers and chances of being blown off..what i feel is that the terrorist can still find other avenues from different countries/airports and cause havoc.

  3. 6 sascha
    January 4, 2010 at 12:09

    So, now everybody is guilty till proven the contrary!
    This is the behaviour of the FULL BLOWN ALCOHOLIC.
    Tackle the “visible”symptom while you cover the REAL cause!!!
    Get loaded BUT make sure your breath doesn’t give you away!
    Once again it is visible that the US constitution is made to avoid change.
    Obama is NO different to Bush!

  4. 7 James Ian
    January 4, 2010 at 12:09

    Can’t hurt.

  5. 8 Alex Kiss
    January 4, 2010 at 12:22

    Profiling is the first essential step for cowardly politicians to finally admit what everyone else knows – that Muslims are the biggest single source of terrorism in the world today.

    Target them and you immediately reduce the risk.

    Of course there will be howels of protest about descrimination and racism. But as a low risk, law abiding male the current laws desriminate against me, as do many current conventions in the world.

    Too long have the moderate majority of Muslims kept quiet about the rot in their own ranks. And such silence is starting to look like tacit agreement with the radical agenda.

    Perhaps if the moderates really feel the injustice of profiling they will start to take steps to erradicate this rot themselves, for it is not something the rest of us will ever be able to do effectively.

    As for the argument that the terrorist will simply use people who don’t fit the profile – well the risk is still reduced because it is much harder to radicalise those who don’t fit the profile.

    • 9 Mike in Seattle
      January 4, 2010 at 15:25

      That’s funny, there are plenty of non-Muslims here in the United States that have shot up schools and blown up government buildings. What about them?

      • 10 Josiah Soap
        January 4, 2010 at 20:43

        Mike I have seen many of your absurd posts on this sort of topic. None of these people have attempted to board an aircraft and blow themselves up along with the passengers. We are talking about airport and airplane security and it appears that only muslim fanatics are blowing up planes at the moment. Therefore it is just common sense to profile muslims in airports. But maybe you’d rather worry whether or not you are offending muslims rather than potentially saving the lives of innocent people?

      • 11 James Ian
        January 8, 2010 at 07:25

        You call them Crazy idiots. They are not necessarily the ideological, religious, political extremist that we have come to accociate with the name “terrorist”

    • 12 Colleen
      January 8, 2010 at 02:15

      Well said Alex.

  6. 13 Eusuph
    January 4, 2010 at 12:49

    I don’t think it can create any difference because in the coments some one talked of some specific countries which are on target.
    I ask this,”what if most of the blowers are US and UK natives who are jelousy of the ruling government in US and want to create a fire thru out.”
    what do u think is the solution, thanks Eusuph in Somalia.

  7. 14 Frank in the USA
    January 4, 2010 at 13:03

    Profiling can reduce and help prevent terrorism. If it saves but one human life, it is worthwhile. Travelers of all races and ethnicities should be proud to submit to the minor inconvenience of extra airport screening. It demonstrates they’re doing their part to help eliminate the madness of mass murderers who delight in turning Westerrn jet airliners into flaming piles of rubble, blood and corpses.

    We all need to pitch in to stop this horrific threat to everyone’s safety. Who feels their own personal sense “dignity” trumps the saving of others’ lives? Please step forward and let your selfish selves be known.

    • 15 shree
      January 5, 2010 at 19:17

      How could US government even able to do that when its own WHITEHOUSE is not safe, where an ordinary couple could blew up the security? One who can not even secure Whitehouse are trumpeting to secure US.
      Targeting only certain group is certainly unfair.

  8. 16 Eusuph
    January 4, 2010 at 13:07

    I dont think that any progress can be made until the west are pre-ocupied with the term “MUSLIMS”.
    Surely muslims are not agressives and explosive as the Christians let’s be frank and touch the wound and Cure it.
    Your’s Eusuph.

  9. 17 Ibrahim in UK
    January 4, 2010 at 13:11

    (Sorry for length of original post- old habbits!)

    Profiling the way it operates now won’t work.
    Nationality doesn’t work because people can have multiple nationalities. Or Al-Qaeda will recruit Egyptians or Jordanians (they’re not on the list).
    Colour or race don’t work because terrorists come in all shapes and sizes and looks.
    Religion doesn’t work because passports don’t specify religion. Even if they did, a terrorist could lie (sneaky as they are).

    What happens when the first oridinary-looking white terrorist blows something up? Or a sneaky terrorist who was helping grandma with her heavy luggage slipped something into her pocket? Is it worth waiting for that to happen to prove that racial profiling isn’t the answer to this problem?

    Terrorism is more similar to organised crime. How do we tackle organised crime?

  10. 18 Ibrahim in UK
    January 4, 2010 at 13:12

    PS: Cubans are a security risk?

  11. 20 scmehta
    January 4, 2010 at 13:28

    Any data-base is primarily meant for short-listing and targeting; Hence, it is very logical and essential to work on profiles, racial and others.

  12. January 4, 2010 at 13:39

    Oh my God, Iraqis are included ??? I do feel sort of special… Oh my God, I am dangerous, I do really like how it feels !!! ;)… With my love… Yours forever, Lubna in Baghdad…

  13. 22 Promise from Nigeria
    January 4, 2010 at 13:51

    To think of profiling as a measure to stop terrorism is like fighting an enemy with a broom stick.NO! profiling won’t solve the problem,it will only embarass the innocent

  14. 23 Alex Kiss
    January 4, 2010 at 14:08

    I am neither narrowed minded nor brain-washed – I am widely read and travelled.

    What I see quite clearly is that terrorism uses our open minded, fair and inclusive values against us, in order to subvert them, the intent to replace them with the very things you accuse me of.

    When I have passed through border controls in Muslim countries (and Israel) I have encountered deep suspicion and intense scrutiny because of my race and nationality, whilst locals are waved through unchecked. This is profiling in action, but I understand it perfectly and respect it utterly. We as a country have abused too many other nations in the past to expect no less.

    But now we in turn are being abused, and therefore we too have the right, and the responsibility to mitigate risk, to shore up our eroding values and protect innocent travels from those that seek to harm us.

    When you get on a bus, do you take the free seat by the little old lady in preference to the drunken lout? Which is more likely to pull out a knife and stab you for no reason you can understand? Our inate sense of self-preservation teaches us to perform profiling every day of our lives. It is common sense to do so at airports.

    That little old might actually be a psychotic killer, the lout the nicest man you will ever meet. But really, do you want to risk it?

    • 24 Ibrahim in UK
      January 4, 2010 at 15:19

      Racial profiling assumes you have to make a choice between risks, and the choice is based on prejudices and/or past experiences, which may turn out to be wrong.
      I think that Anti-terror screening does not have to choose between one risk or the other, it has to mitigate all the risks, and it should not make assumptions of guilt or innocence. They should ensure that neither the lout nor the little old lady are able harm anyone on the flight.

  15. 25 patti in cape coral
    January 4, 2010 at 14:21

    In the case of terrorism, aren’t terrorists starting to recruit people from countries that are not on the blacklist? Would they particularly recruit people who don’t fit the usual physical characteristics of a terrorist? I’m not sure if it is a bad or good idea to profile, but terrorists seem remarkably adaptable to me. In any case, there are things that may help, but I don’t think terrorism can completely be stopped.

  16. 26 Robert
    January 4, 2010 at 14:23


    Profiles are often too broad to do any good. Simply stopping everybody of a certain race and age group is unlikely to find a bomber (remember that the British bombers on 7/7 where UK citizens and would have past this simple profile). Even then you need for the profile to be accurately used by those on the grounds. Over worked security staff at airports will not have the time to probably review all the people walking past. It soon descends into a useless exercise of stopping people at random.

    If the profiles are done correctly then they do have a use within a larger scheme of security measures. These profiles need to be specific and very targeted. The full resources need to be allocated to doing this task. Half measures will not work. The perception of security by random stops should not replace real security.

  17. 27 gary
    January 4, 2010 at 14:35

    Vigilance is the best defense against terrorism. If one’s enemies are of a particular ethnicity, cultural background, or nationality, then profiling is an effective means of watching. However, such a narrow perspective signals an intelligent adversary of the requirements for not fitting the profile. Therefore, it is best to focus on finding and stopping the causes and means of terrorism, rather than being overly concerned with the physical appearance of a particular terrorist.

  18. 28 t
    January 4, 2010 at 14:39

    You’re missing a big point in this.

    Excluding WHYS, when you hear the world “Muslim”, what do you see in 99% of the MSM? A dark-skinned person. The last time I checked, there are roughly a billion Muslims in the world? These come in all shapes, colors and sizes as well.

    What’s next? Are you going to search every single Muslim that comes into your country? And whil you’re at it, are you going to search all of your Muslim citizens as well?

    How is giving into a kneejerk reaction going to solve anything?

  19. January 4, 2010 at 14:40

    I watched America’s Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan on a Sunday morning news talk show (Meet The Press seen here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34665249/ns/meet_the_press/ns/meet_the_press)

    Mr. Brennan brought up a very good point which I can directly relate to. He said that profiling a person’s actions, including places of travel and known associations is far more effective than simply racially profiling. I am Romani with Russian and Egyptian in the mix as well, and while I can pass easily for a white person, I have cousins who can’t. I have met many people who look just like me, were born into Muslim families, and could be converted to terrorist ideology as easily as anyone else. I am clean cut, average looking and about as suspicious looking as any average American male who appears to be “white”, yet I could just be a “sleeper” and would never be put through the screening that one of my darker cousins would endure. If I had traveled to one of the countries known to harbor and sponsor terrorists I would fully expect to be put through extra screening. How is profiling all people from Muslim countries any better in any way than profiling a person’s actions?

  20. 30 Nelson Isibor
    January 4, 2010 at 14:42

    Since the hunters have learnt to shoot without missing, the birds also have learnt how to fly without perching.

    Terrorists who are hell bent on causing havoc will simply switch tactics and recruit willing people outside these countries (there are never shortages of recruits).

  21. 31 t
    January 4, 2010 at 14:47

    If you realy want security, then why not make everybody go thru body scanners and bad searches? And, charge all passengers a really high tax to pay for this added security? A lot of critics keep saying that we need Israeli-style security. What they don’t realize in the States is that some Israeli companies are already involved in Stateside airport security.

  22. 32 Ian in Vanuatu
    January 4, 2010 at 14:59

    If the general idea of this profiling is to stop death, injury and grief in the US, then I think the wrong group is being targeted.

    In 2008 alone, more than 37,000 Americans died (and many more were injured) as a result of vehicle accidents. It doesn’t really matter if this is considered ‘normal’ and terrorism is ‘abnormal’, the end result is the same – people die and others are left to grieve.

    Perhaps driver profiling would be more useful than ‘terrorist’ profiling.

  23. 33 Count Iblis
    January 4, 2010 at 15:01

    It can work in many cases, but not against Al Qa’ida. In that case the terror threat will increase if we start to profile people. Al Qa’ida will do anything to launch a successful terror attack against the West. If we start to profile people, then Al Qa’ida will simply give their operatives that profile that will get them past security checks most easilly. They’ll simply behave as non Muslims, they will eat non halal food like pork on board etc. etc.

  24. 34 dan
    January 4, 2010 at 15:13

    @Alex Kiss
    Thanks I could not have said it any better.
    To those Arab & Muslim groups who will scream about their civil rights I say that the ultimate denial of civil rights is when a Muslim terrorist blows up the plane that I am on.
    Before you complain, clean up your mess from your religion that has been hijacked and made the world see every Muslim as a terrorist. You have been betrayed by your very own.

  25. 35 Roy, Washington DC
    January 4, 2010 at 15:18

    No, because they’ll just use someone from a country not on the watch list to carry out the next attack. Nigeria wasn’t considered a suspicious country, and look at where the person behind the latest security scare came from.

  26. 36 Nigel
    January 4, 2010 at 15:26

    Like military force and legal murder, if profiling does not address the root cause of the problem it will resolve nothing. Once again by adding more layers of the same we are showing the world that we are plumb out of ideas and most probably the next move will be made by those who wish to hurt us. On BBC radio this morning the point was made that the success of Israeli system was not the two layers that used technology and searches but rather the intelligent layer that relied on the quality of the security official, the questions they aksed and the information that such person was armed with. Brains over brawn wins every time.

  27. January 4, 2010 at 15:50

    Profiling isn’t the only means to keep potential terrorists at bay from US soil. If terrorists can’t get into the USA, they can devise means to attack its interests around the world. The US should also have extra budget to militarily support the countries where terrorism can hatch easily and spread in other countries like Pakistan which has recently become only second to Iraq in terms of bombings.

    The US needs the help of other countries to identify potential terrorists. There can be a terrorist, say, of Algerian descent, who has a French nationality, name and passport who can escape draconian profiling. There can be a European who has just converted to terror

    On the whole is a matter of vigilance on the part of everyone from states to individuals to keep any land safe from mad attacks, on land, sea or in the air.

  28. 38 ESCe
    January 4, 2010 at 15:52

    Yes ! It helps but not foolproof. It don’t search a bunch of retirees that is on a group tour. It is inevitable but muslims are the main terrorist now. Come on , muslims , you got to understand.

  29. 39 bob in bismark
    January 4, 2010 at 15:54

    Profiling will only stop those who fit the profile. People who complain about profiling can thank the others that ruined it for them. Time to learn to deal with it or stop flying into the States. It’s as simple as that.

  30. 40 Roy, Washington DC
    January 4, 2010 at 16:06

    Also, the TSA has a long history of taking measures that are kneejerk reactions that ultimately make nobody safer. It isn’t surprising that they are the ones that came up with this profiling idea.

  31. 41 Guido
    January 4, 2010 at 16:10

    If security controls were effective, aeroplanes would be the safest places on earth.

    In the fight against terror we should focus on the reasons for terror. Why do people in Europe hate there host countries so much, that the kill humans?

    Profiling is discrimination, discrimination causes hate, hate causes terror.

  32. 42 suzann Dodd
    January 4, 2010 at 16:22

    I was profiled. This is to show you how useless this method was. Leaving Jamaica for the United States I was checked FOUR TIMES before leaving the island. I am about 5 feet tall, one hundred pounds.

    While I was being harassed the other passengers were walking on the plane. I was checked entering Norman Manley airport, leaving Norman Manley Airport, landing in Donald Sangster, and leaving Donald Sangster…all in Jamaica.

    I was checked Twice upon arrival in Orlando Florida.
    While I was being checked, other passengers moved freely.

    This is the current stupidity in place, which allows any terrorist to board untroubled. All one
    has to do is find someone like me to engage the authorities interest.

    What needs to be done is that a new law be passed.

    Any Muslim traveling on a Western flight is to sit in the middle seat between two very large
    male persons who are informed that if any action of questionable nature is performed they have a right to kill him.

  33. 43 patti in cape coral
    January 4, 2010 at 16:23

    Remember that huge x-ray type machine in the movie Total Recall? People would just walk in front of it and it was so big it could see several people at a time. Can we do something like that yet? That way we check EVERYONE, and then body check those with something funky that sets off an alarm. Or maybe that is still only in sci-fi world.

    • 44 Tom K in Mpls
      January 4, 2010 at 22:15

      They had that topic here a couple of months ago. There are systems using ultra low level x-rays that show *everything* in and under the clothes. Russia is using them and the US is working on legal questions before deploying it. Some people fear it for many personal reasons, but the deployment plans would appease all but the truly paranoid.

      Privacy precautions would include: no cameras in the viewing area, the viewer would not see or know who is in the scanner, the scanner would not be networked ( no hackers ) and the scanner has no image storing capability. It would simply be a tool to quickly sort out people that *need* to be frisked. While it would not stop unarmed/unequipped wanted terrorists from traveling, it would be very useful in stopping dangerous items, with less delay than we currently face.

  34. 45 Robin C
    January 4, 2010 at 16:25

    America reveals its prejudice by the inclusion of Cuba. Old grudges die hard on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

    Funny how they ‘now’ will allow HIV positive persons to visit, no doubt in the hope that they come seeking medical services.

    January 4, 2010 at 16:25

    I do not fear terrorists as I do fear those that profile others. The biggest fear for me would be the airport authorities and their so called securities. They are the ones who have always allowed the terrorists go through when they don’t match their profile mappings. The second thing could do with profiteering that has gone on for decades in terms of banned drugs and probably plane loads of illeagal uranium.
    My mind still refuses to take in the idea that no one knew that that failed bomber had anything. They knew and probably it was just an idiot somewhere who was duped that the guy was hiding drugs. The material that was to incinerate the aircraft was just another “substance” like “speed”. Don’t most of you entertain notions that drugs should be legalized?
    We have a ban on animal trophies too but only children and fools should listen to that. They are still getting smuggled. My take is, no terrorist can succeed unaided by those who are supposed to protect you. Body scans? It is advisable that you all go through that if you are on the plane. It is meant to give you security as a traveller.

  36. 47 Andrew in Australia
    January 4, 2010 at 16:37

    Why are so many people so sensitive? Let’s face facts that there ARE a specific segment of society who are continually linked to terrorism and terrorist acts against the west. Profiling is one tool in the arsenal of methods used to preotect the rest of us. If it works, then all the better and to a point it does provide information to agencies involved in this endeavour. For those crying foul and playing the racism card, it does become tiresome. If blonde Swedish people were the main perpetrators then they would be singled out, if Elvis impersonators were the culprits, then.. you get the point. The fact is that anti-west terrorism is a stronghold of militant Islam and those groups have a specific profile, until that changes the profile remains.

  37. 48 Andrew in Australia
    January 4, 2010 at 16:39

    @ Eusuph

    “Surely muslims are not agressives and explosive as the Christians…”

    Current events around the world would prove that comment wrong.

  38. 49 mohammad
    January 4, 2010 at 16:41

    Profiling by country may be an effective means to slow terrorists down, but by no means will it stop them- especially the “home grown” variety.
    And as far as the “muslims are terrorists” comments- how many muslims are in the IRA?

  39. 50 audre
    January 4, 2010 at 16:42

    What will you include in the profile? Is there such a thing as a description that covers all terrorists?

    Unlike many, I never thought Obama was going to save the world but I never thought that he would be a fear monger either.

    Fear is such a destructive emotion.

    Finally, the Cubans are on the list??? Now that is madness!

  40. 51 Robert Macala
    January 4, 2010 at 16:47

    Profiling can and will work, we just have to examine the causes and America and the world is making progress everyday. But we have to be patient…
    American presence in the Middle East has not
    yet won the “hearts and minds” in Iraq,
    Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, now Yemen. But everyday we are working at it, we just sent more troops to Afghanistan. And let’s see our Israeli allies are doing a wonderful job of convincing Palestinians that expanding Israeli borders and building Walls is good thing for world peace and understanding. The world
    has to be patient, meanwhile air travel has once again become an experience, filled with excitement and

  41. 52 Francisco from Spain
    January 4, 2010 at 16:49

    Hi, I think increasing security measures is never wrong, but I disagree with being subject of extra security procedures. As an european union citizen I was profiled in airport when I went to the US, they got my fingerprints and picture.. also I was given stupid questions about the motive of traveling there, once I got through all that I don’t understand why I have to do it again, they know my background and they know I’ll never do anything wrong, so I don’t understand why I have to be cheked again and again, it’s a waste of time, security should only be focus on the people who are the real threat, not harmless and normal citizens

  42. 53 K. Newton
    January 4, 2010 at 16:51

    Well, yes and no. It can definitely help reduce the amount of people traveling from certain parts of the world, but it seems as if that’s about all it can do. Like someone else said, there are terrorists in every country, and profiling could simply provide a false sense of security.

  43. 54 John in Salem
    January 4, 2010 at 16:55

    Profiling is a fact of life and something that each of us does every day, automatically, every time we look at another person. We make subconscious assessments of others – we group them by “type” – based on race, sex, clothes and dozens of other non-politically correct criteria and then rely on our intuition to tell us if they’re a threat or not.
    Telling airport screeners to specifically ignore certain groups and second-guess their intuitions will not make anyone safer. We pay them to be suspicious on our behalf and if you don’t like it, don’t fly.

  44. 55 t
    January 4, 2010 at 16:56

    We all know that the States already has a bad reputation worldwide with intl. travelers. Now with this “enhanced security”, is this going to have a huge effect on tourism? And, with an already lousy economy, how will the travel industry deal with it?

  45. 56 Anthony
    January 4, 2010 at 16:57

    Yes it can. It can stop (or dramatically slow down) a lot of things… the question is though, where do we stop.

    -Anthony, LA, CA

  46. 57 Gary Paudler
    January 4, 2010 at 16:57

    It’s just silly and useless, like taking our shoes off as we pass through security (thanks a whole helluva lot Richard Reid). This latest nonsense is just political theater so that politicians can pretend that they are protecting us and we can pretend that we are protected.
    I would bet that everybody reading this has thought something like “If I was a terrorist, here’s what I would do and the authorities haven’t even thought of how to prevent it.” Do a show where we phone or email with our terrorism ideas. You’d be doing the governments of the world a great service by letting them know all the modes of attack that they haven’t considered (the terrorists have!) and maybe get them to admit that they really aren’t able to protect us from every possibility and maybe get us to admit that, for most of us, there is very little to worry about.
    Cuba? How about Holland?

  47. January 4, 2010 at 17:02

    I think profiling is not the answer, I heard them saying something like traveling for the citizens of the countries listed will cost them more money, the terrorist have all the patience and money. Patience in case of any delay. I hope the U.S government is not only tring to create more source of more revenue from the innocents.

  48. 59 Tony from Singapura
    January 4, 2010 at 17:03

    I see profiling as a time management compromise. It is entirly possible for a western muslim convert to become radicalized and be drawn into the Evil Plot.

    So this is the potential loophole that will be exploited next.

    I want checks to be also applied rigorously to those who dont fit the profile, otherwise we will get caught out again !

    I travel regularly, and I dont mind jolly good frisking if it means I will make it to my destination. I am happy to give up a good amount of privacy and dignity for this purpose.

  49. 60 Alan in Arizona
    January 4, 2010 at 17:20

    I’d gladly disrobe if it meant a safe flight. Probe, scan and run a psychological profile on me once a year to approve my travel. I don’t mind if it means I can trust everyone else on the flight and not have to worry about some guy trying to set his tidy whitey’s on fire. Maybe then I’ll be able to sleep again on a flight.

  50. 61 James
    January 4, 2010 at 17:23

    Man, can’t stop terrorist! We have spread the seeds of terror and they can’t be recalled, just as the seeds of nuclear bombs can’t be recalled by man! We can however reduced the opportunities for terror attacks! It will require a lot of compromise by each and everyone of us all around the world.

  51. 62 A R Shams
    January 4, 2010 at 17:25

    Profiling may lessen the chances of terrorism but it cannot alone stop terrorism and hence other stratigic measures associated with profiling may be useful towards controlling terrorism.

  52. January 4, 2010 at 17:25

    It does seem difficult to establish a well proven point, all the expensive technology in the world can not compare to the simple use of an expert Police Dog Team in action.

    A properly trained police dog will indicate a clear message to a properly trained handler, every time a suspect person passes through a passenger check point, within a reasonable distance of the dog.

    Tthe presence of a good police dog and a uniformed officer at a check point triggers off a scent of fear in anyone of guilty knowlege, or in possesion of a stolen or illegal object.

    The bodily signs are quite clear to the trained eye, and are already producing good results by expert observers at check points, such as Customs Officers, with and without specialist dogs.

    The presence of a well built Police Officer in impressive uniform accompanied by an equally impressive, large police dog will produce even better results on a would be terrorist in transit, and that is their weakest and most vulnerable time, and the range of detection by a good dog can be as much as twenty five yards, even more with a favourable breeze.

  53. 64 Bert
    January 4, 2010 at 17:26

    It’s one of many tools. Profiling is much like triage in medical emergencies. You do not treat all patients equally. You give precedence to those who are most at risk. Same goes for security threats.

    It’s about time the airline industry respond intelligently to the threat, although it’s still to be seen whether they carry this through. I’ve been at airports where elderly couples were given the pat-down treatment and hand-check of carry-on luggage, just so the security people could demonstrate how they DO NOT profile. To me, that is plain stupidity.

    Ms Napolitano clearly dropped the ball there. There is absolutely no excuse why this 23 year old Nigerian was given a visa to the US or allowed to broad an airliner without extra special precautions, given his history and even the warnings of his own father. That kind of reckless carelessness cannot go unchecked. This situation was just as bad as the original security lapses on 9/11 and prior, as if no one had learned anything.

    • 65 Bert
      January 4, 2010 at 17:36

      If I may add a quick note, I’d reather see a lot MORE profiling going on when granting visas and entry into airports, and a lot LESS military intervention overseas, as a way of managing the terrorist threat.

  54. 66 Robin C
    January 4, 2010 at 17:35

    If you are from any of the listed countries of concern, the message is “Don’t Come”, you are not welcome here. STAY AWAY!

  55. 67 Tamatoa, Zurich
    January 4, 2010 at 17:39

    No, it won’t work.
    It’s nice to see that governments care so much about the safety of their people that they are willing to commit acts that could be violating human rights. But these measures are hostile and repressive and will, if they go too far, sound like things the SS would have done in the past.

    On another note they seem to only screen people who want to commit certain kind of crimes. Personally, I would like every UBS-banker going to America to be screened for means to help rich people to evade taxes. Cause these bankers took a lot of my tax money. I don’t want that to happen again.

    Last, if the US or any other country think their culture/democracy is a culture worth living in, then they are the standard. And therefore they legitimise any screening process that other countries want to impose on their territory, to keep terrorist/threatening people out of their country.

    If you truly believe in your culture you let people in and trust that your way of life will convince others to live the same way when they go back home to their loved ones.

  56. 68 steve/oregon
    January 4, 2010 at 17:41

    profiling will not stop terrorism… nothing will. but it will help to save american lives like a previous poster said if you don’t like it then don’t fly into the country

  57. 69 Nelson Isibor
    January 4, 2010 at 17:43

    Mr Robin Lustig’s blog higlights the point I made earlier on. One thing people fail to realise is that most of these terrorists are intelligent and well educated indivuals, so profiling should not be difficult to circumvent.

  58. 70 steve/oregon
    January 4, 2010 at 17:47

    @ tamatoa
    profiling does not violate a human right we all do it everyday. If I am beat up by a blackman for no reason the next time i see one I will be on guard. While in Iraq I profiled alot of people and it saved alot of lives…….. it works battle tested combat proved. though your naive you do make a good point about way of life. though, people who are brainwashed do not see things the way you or i do

  59. January 4, 2010 at 17:48

    Profiling will not stop terrorism, but it might throw a significant wringer into the terrorist machine. The folks who take affront at being profiled likely nursed other grievances against the West, hence the possible benefit of protection outweighs the potential negative of ill-feeling. The bottom-line is that anyone traveling who wants to land in one piece will be glad for any effort to protect them… no matter the inconvenience or perceived insult of the process to do it.

  60. 72 Michel Norman
    January 4, 2010 at 17:50

    Take the latest episode – the terrorists know that we have certain standards of decency and took full advantage of them – do we really envisage asking every passenger to remove their underpants so they can be checked? – These countries are all either sponsers of terrorism or view it leniently – there is nothing to stop Al Kaida from recruiting someone from britain to plant a bomb – it happened in Tel-Aviv, It happended in London and there was also the Shoe bomber. It is not enough to check these people before they get on a plane, everyone who comes from these countries should be checked when they get off the planes.

    Profiling does not offer a 100% cure – but it does enable greater efforts to be placed on people who are morte likely to be carrying a bomb.

    • 73 Robin C
      January 4, 2010 at 18:08

      “.. It is not enough to check these people before they get on a plane, everyone who comes from these countries should be checked when they get off the planes.”

      Thank you for illustating my point about being good hosts. One question though. For what reason would you search arrivals after landing, Michel?

  61. 74 steve
    January 4, 2010 at 17:56

    People seem to assume “profiling” means to single out muslims for searches,a nd let everyone else go by, which is not the case. It just means enhanced scrutiny for muslims, because islamic terrorism only comes from Muslims. Muslims can be of any race, any ethnicity. In the US, we caught a family that had been training for jihad, and they are as white as white can be. Hence, everyone has to be, and will be scrutinized by security.


  62. January 4, 2010 at 17:57

    It is only logical that certain countries are put on a terrorist ‘blacklist’ when it becomes obvious that individuals or groups from these countries are actively involved in terrorism. Profiling is one of the methods to keep a tab on dangerous suspects. This profiling needs to be reviewed on a regular basis. Intelligence is key here.Of course other sophisticated methods to curb violence should also be used. No stone should be left unturned as terrorism is like a cancer which needs to be checked quickly. Otherwise the fabric of civilised society would be destroyed. It is better to be safe than sorry. Governments have a duty to protect their citizens adequately and lapses in security should not be tolerated.

  63. 76 Chintan in Houston
    January 4, 2010 at 18:00

    Does anyone truly believe that the any of these 14 countries will be ever dropped off the list after this move?
    My suspision it more countries will be added with time. Most of these countries other than Cuba are predominantly Muslim nations.
    There are 1.4 billion Muslims in the world and the fastest growing population group in the world. Isolation, humiliation in the name of security, is it really worth it? I think not!!

  64. 77 Mike in Seattle
    January 4, 2010 at 18:06

    How about instead of speculating about what feels right in our gut, we actually look at airports which do and do not profile, how they profile, and how effective they really are. Only then can we determine if it’s a good idea.

  65. 78 Ibrahim in UK
    January 4, 2010 at 18:08

    Profiling can actually reduce security. While all the focus and resources will be on checking all potentials fitting a profile, it means they won’t be checking any of the terrorists who don’t fit the profile. If I were an evil terrorist of minimal intelligence, I would send non-profile terrorists to the US in the knowledge that they will not be checked thoroughly.

  66. 79 goki,Nigeria
    January 4, 2010 at 18:11

    The sad but true fact of the matter is that most terrorist acts in the world are committed by moslems this is not to say that i have anything against moslems but the facts speak for themselves from Pakistan to Iraq to Nigeria, i belive that in addition to racial profiling we should have religious profiling.As sad as it is in this world that we live in racial and religious profiling may be the only way to ensure our safty.

  67. 80 Tom K in Mpls
    January 4, 2010 at 18:13

    Profiling is a tool. Just like preemptive strikes, body scanners and an alert public. All are useful, all cause problems, none are perfect. Life isn’t perfect, deal with it.

  68. January 4, 2010 at 18:14

    Profiling is a process that enables and instructs the profiler to be extra careful of the people from these countries whose track records are not good in terrorism.There is nothing wrong or to get agitated over this. If my country is facing terrorist threat, we would also do the same.No sense in being patriotic about your country if yours is a country that nurtures terrorists.I welcome this move. Not only this, the community that promotes terrorism should also be on watch.If you are clean, prove it.

  69. 82 Donnamarie in Switzerland
    January 4, 2010 at 18:26

    Car insurers charge more to insure young people than older ones, and more for young males than young females. They charge more for young males who drive new, high-performance sports cars than for those who drive used economy cars.

    This “profiling” has nothing to do with race, religion or nationality, it’s all to do with statistics. It obviously works, as insurance companies make a lot of money. If the statistics prove that most terrorists are young, male muslims, it makes perfect sense to assess their potential as a higher risk than that of an elderly woman, for example.

    It’s time we de-coupled the issue of who is more likely to commit acts of violence from the idea that following the statistical proofs is somehow a violation of human rights or has anything to do with racial, religious or national prejudice.

    • 83 Ibrahim in UK
      January 4, 2010 at 18:48

      But you can profile a “young” person by checking the age. You can profile a male by checking the sex. It’s much harder to profile a religion. The current list profile conditions do not target a religion. e.g. Egyptian and Jordanian Muslims are not on the blacklist, but Lebanese Christians are. Religion (especially if it changes) is not recorded like age or sex. They are trying to profile something which they don’t know how to define.
      It’s a bit like locking only your front right window because statistically most thieves break in through there. Theives will just go to your left window instead.

      • 84 Bert
        January 4, 2010 at 19:10

        So, add a checkmark for religion, then.

        It is a bit like locking doors and windows. Obviously, thieves can knock down a wall if they are that persistent. But this does not mean you might as well leave doors and windows wide open, either.

  70. 85 Tom in the U.S.A.
    January 4, 2010 at 18:28

    Profiling is a dumb idea. The terrorists will figure out a way around it. Plus, some fruitcake outside the “profile” could also seek to cause harm. Everyone should be subjected to the same security checks. It just makes common sense.

  71. 86 Shannon in Ohio
    January 4, 2010 at 18:34

    These new guidelines are no surprise, but I doubt they will help very much in the end. Terrorists don’t care who they kill, and their countrymen usually suffer the brunt of their deadly actions. If they fear detection at the airport, won’t these radicals just stay home and blow up even more innocent families shopping for food?

    Unfortunately, I think too many of my fellow Americans believe that the new rules will keep the terrorists out of our country, but they fail to remember that these pat downs would do nothing to stop another Ft. Hood-style shooter, or homegrown extremists who rail against secularism and the federal government.

  72. 87 Denise in Chicago
    January 4, 2010 at 18:45

    Profiling may be unpalatable, but I believe it can reduce terrorist threats, especially at airports. For that reason I think profiling should be used. Terrorists will probably find other methods but why not make it more difficult for them.

  73. 88 Cuban pete
    January 4, 2010 at 18:45

    No-one can resist the hypnotic sounds of my Mambo beat – leading to acts of immorality.

  74. 89 M NADEEM DAR
    January 4, 2010 at 18:48


    Profiling is a tool. Just like preemptive strikes, body scanners and an alert public. All are useful, all cause problems, none are perfect. Life isn’t perfect, deal with it.

  75. 90 jens
    January 4, 2010 at 18:53

    there is profiling and profiling. profiling has to happen at different levels. in case of the nigerian fellow, the airport security authorities had already several important clues at hand. single young male travelling on a one way ticket without luggage to study in the USA, should kind of ring a bell…… then we had all the other information at hand, like the dad’s information and his travel restrictions to the UK, that would be the next level. then there was the information available that a nigerian trained in yemen would be a potential terrorist. all there indications are profiling at a different level, but the most important and readily available set of info was easily available to the security personel in amsterdam.

    • 91 margaret
      January 4, 2010 at 19:16

      Well I think we can expect that now terrorists will be buying round trip tickets, will have checked bags, what have you, and so on as just one more “work around” of the system.

      Margaret Tacoma, WA

  76. 92 viola
    January 4, 2010 at 18:57

    Profiling will not completely stop terrorism. It is but one tool. It is a legitimate tool since there are people who are terrorists because they are Muslims who believe they are doing what Allah wants them to do.

    As good old Dr. Phil says, “You can predict future behavior by looking at past behavior.” Past behavior predicts that such people will continue to mount attacks. It would be stupid not to admit this and then use whatever tools you have to prevent them, including profiling.

    Bear in mind that profiles list more than one characteristic that a terrorist is likely to have. Simply being muslim doesn’t get more than a searching look and is non-intrusive and non-threatening. If that searching look sees something else that causes suspicion, only then should security experts investigate further.


    • January 4, 2010 at 20:17

      Their fear of death may be reduced by belief in Allah, but they are motivated by vengeance and retaliation for the invasion and occupation of their lands and the killing of their loved ones. Studies have consistently shown this. Americans need to learn more, think more clearly, and completely ignore the heavily controlled mainstream media.

  77. January 4, 2010 at 19:02

    Profiling won’t stop terrorism,although if it makes things difficult for them,all well and good.The only way to ensure a safe flight is to search everyone involved thoroughly.

  78. 95 Jessica in NYC
    January 4, 2010 at 19:04

    The problem with profiling is that anyone can change their appearance and habits to avoid fitting a “terrorist” profile. This weekend I was able to pass through airport security carrying a 12 oz bottle of water and a 9 oz bottle of body lotion I accidentally forgotten to take out of my bag pack violating US airport security policy. Luckily, I was not profiled since I do not “look” like a terrorist I was not questioned or stopped. I am upset that none of the guards or costly xray equipment caught these items.

    I realized my error when I sat in the plane and was digging for my iphone to turn it off and pull out my book. I should have had to throw them out. I wasn’t sure what to do. While we are demanding foreign nations safeguard their airports, we should do the same with our own airports in the US.

  79. 96 Jerry L
    January 4, 2010 at 19:08

    Neither profiling or any other superficial technique will stop terrorism unless and until the ROOT cause of intolerance and fanaticism is address by the primary fomenters, organized religions with their arrogance, hypocrisy, and ignorance.

  80. 97 Alan in Arizona
    January 4, 2010 at 19:09

    I’d say if people are offended by profiling of travelers coming out of their country, then they should be embarrassed enough to do something to improve their country and the people living there.

  81. 98 margaret
    January 4, 2010 at 19:09

    I’ve been ready for EL AL type security since before 9/11. Treat everyone the same–no matter how inconvenient or intrusive it is. I think EL AL has had zero incidents of aviation terrorism since they instituted their security procedures. People should be able to fly without worring about being blown up or shot down or the plane used as a bomb. I think it is a big mistake to “profile” this or that group or country and publish it–terrorists will just work around that like they have everything else up to date. Remember the shoe bomber was from the UK; the underwear bomber was on a connecting flight–I’ve yet to go through any security when making a connecting flight.

    Margaret Tacoma, WA USA

    • 99 Bert
      January 4, 2010 at 19:30

      In general, you have to go through US security if you connect to a US flight from a flight originating outside the US. Also, flights on US carriers bound for the US often have additional screening in non-US airports, over and above the security that all other passengers go through.

      Profiling does not mean that only non-US citizens are profiled. That’s patently obvious. The Brits learned the hard way that just because someone might have UK citizenship, that person is not immune from brainwashing. The profiling has to take multiple factors into account. And yes, religious beliefs happen to be a prime consideration. We know that. It’s important that well-known correlations not be deliberately ignored. The Pakistanis know this, right? Didn’t they just arrest a group of US citizens?

  82. 100 Joseph Byrne Tossou
    January 4, 2010 at 19:10

    I think profiling helps. If dont have anything to do with terrorism, the issue of profiling should not be a problem.

  83. 101 Michael P
    January 4, 2010 at 19:13

    Yes. Last time I checked, the 911 terrorists and suicide bombers were not French German, Italian, etc. Until the World ceases to put political correctness above security, terrorists will always have the advantage.

  84. 102 Anon
    January 4, 2010 at 19:20

    This is absolutely ridiculous! Richard Reid (shoe bomber) is British and Zacarias Moussaoui (20th hijacker) is French, but there are no restrictions on people of these nationalities. Or the fact that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi has not caused them extra scrutiny. Yet, despite all of these, Nigerians are now going to be profiled when travelling. The nationality of Abdulmutallab is absolutely incidental, as he wasn’t radicalised in Nigeria, but in London when he was at University College. Yet, resources are going to be wasted feeling up innocent Nigerian passengers. This is a classic case of governments being seen to be doing something – these additional measures will not catch Nigerians because there aren’t any Nigerian to catch.

  85. 103 evets
    January 4, 2010 at 19:22

    @ margaret

    Every time I fly to europe and have a connecting flight, there is ALWAYS a security check. You get off the plane, go through customs, then go through security again, and get on your connecting flight.

    While I think single travellers are “picked up” more for scrutiny, it’s not over terrorism, but of concern you are a drug runner. Can’t tell you how many times I’ve been searched by customs until I get preclearance permission..

    Until recently, when I would fly back from Canada to Washington, DC, there was a second level of security due to the proximity of the airport to Washington, DC (right across the river) and you would be patted down again at the gate, and they would by hand go through all of your carryon luggage, beyond the search they did after you cleared US customs in the Canadian airport.

    I recall, that before 9/11 happened, I escorted my mother to a funeral in Florida, had to fly, and my mom was at that time in a wheelchair, so I aided her through security, and it turns out, I never actually was checked myself. My bags were, but I never went through the metal detector. There can be some sloppiness done in these searches.

  86. 104 Steven
    January 4, 2010 at 19:24

    There is the possibility that the organised groups will find smaller groups or people to carry out the planned attacks. And the are bound to hit more than the profiled groups or pp.

  87. January 4, 2010 at 19:24

    no it’s not!
    This is probably what the terrorists want. They’ll now just send a closet non-muslim American or British or some other nationality with the bombs. Special searches should be done of everyone regardless of their origins. Just make the searches fast and efficient.

  88. 106 Onah, Linus Uche
    January 4, 2010 at 19:26

    Not only is it counterproductive, profiling is also a victory for terrorists! I mean terrorists aim essentially to make free people change their way of life, to give up fundamental rights ostensibly for security, and now to stop seeing anything wrong in segregation and profiling. The terrorists must be really happy, they just scored a big victory!

  89. 107 Archibald in Oregon
    January 4, 2010 at 19:27

    As if we have a choice one way or another. It seems that there is an agenda, far beyond the one portrayed in the media. The only problem is that it is implemented, “after” a terrorist event. There will always be a way to thwart security systems, terrorism will never vanish unless the reasons for the act is addressed. People would not join terrorist training camps if they knew and trusted that there were better options. They are obviously feel disenfranchised enough or have been in a bad way long enough that it seems their only option.
    Profile all you want, it will do nothing to relieve the fear and distrust felt on both sides.

  90. January 4, 2010 at 19:27

    What’s the difference between “profiling” and “racism”?

  91. 110 Annette Boyer
    January 4, 2010 at 19:30

    I’m listening to WHYS, and the ‘profiling expert’ suggested that US kids who shoot up schools tend to wear black trench coats. This is a perfect example of the flaw in profiling: the Columbine shooters did NOT wear trench coats. Somehow this myth has stuck, but is not based on fact. Yet my children, who attend high school in the same district, are barred from wearing trench coats. In reality, my kids refuse to wear any type of winter coat, so we are hardly adversely affected, but it shows how profiling is not exactly a science and can lead to unfair targeting.

    Golden, Colorado

  92. 111 Kat in Vancouver, Canada
    January 4, 2010 at 19:30

    As an American living in Canada; I am now ensuring that I do not fly through my home country. I don’t know if any of you have been through US customs or security but it is no longer a pleasant experience. After 2001 I loved the question at the US-Canadian border from US Customs, “Is your last name Muslim per chance?” I am a third generation American Catholic. This just highlights US border protections level of ignorance!!! Why should I have to bring my ancestry with me to take a flight. It is absurd.

  93. 112 Todd in Atlanta
    January 4, 2010 at 19:32

    I propose that we all start going through airport checkpoints in our underwear. Just cut to the chase already!

  94. 113 Huzaifa E
    January 4, 2010 at 19:32

    No, I think it can only limit it.

    Best solution? Do not travel via planes unless it is really necessary. They damage the environment.

  95. 114 Fred In Portland
    January 4, 2010 at 19:33

    Can profiling stop terrorisim? let’s flip the question around: “Does not profiling encourage terrorisim” Well, it seems the answer to both questions would be no.

    Terrorists come from groups of people that are exploited, minimized or ostricized, so maybe we could work on fixing some of those things too.

    • January 4, 2010 at 20:09

      Far worse, they come from groups that are invaded, occupied and murdered, and in the case of Palestinians, dispossessed of their homes, lands, olive groves, and other sources of sustenance. The US invasion of Iraq has dispossessed 4 million, caused the death of over one million, and destroyed their entire society. Israel has invaded, seized and occupied all of Palestine, bulldozed over 24,000 homes, created over 4 million refugees denied their right of return to their homes, and has killed over 1,400 Palestinian children since Sept. 2000. Is it any wonder that their grief and rage produce an occasional act of indiscrriminate violence since the violence against them has been indiscriminate, entirely undeserved, unrecognized and denied resitutive justice?

  96. 116 stephen/portland
    January 4, 2010 at 19:33

    I am on the No fly list and TSA watch list and I am subject to extra security measures every time I fly and I am 100% ok with this.

    Four security staff recently intercepted me as I border the airplane and brought to a room to be searched and questioned for five minutes and I was treated very well and with much respect.

    If you have nothing to hide you should be glad they’re on the ball.

  97. 117 Adam J.C. - US
    January 4, 2010 at 19:34

    I am an Irish-American who supports Sinn Fein. I do not support terrorism or violence of any kind but when I fly back to Ireland or the UK i always get the “random” security check. I know its because of my political affiliations and I’m ok with that. I have noting to hide and flying is a privilege not a right. because of this it is not so much a violation of my privacy but ensuring of ALL of our safety. if people get upset over being profiled then they need to get over their ego and realize that sometimes stereotypes are real time-savers.

  98. 118 andrew
    January 4, 2010 at 19:34

    Let’s not forget that there are limited resources and we have to be strategic. Isn’t there such a thing as adaptive profiling?

  99. 119 Ben TX USA
    January 4, 2010 at 19:35

    Until these suspect countries actually do something about their terrorism problems, they and their nationals should be filtered and scrutinized.

  100. 120 Jonathan (sunny San Francisco)
    January 4, 2010 at 19:35

    Forgive me, but since your guest Bernard Harcourt is too polite to correct you, I will: He’s not from “Chicago University.” He’s (probably) from the University of Chicago.

  101. 121 gideon nwite(usa)
    January 4, 2010 at 19:36

    The young nigerian who tried to blow up the plane lived most of his adult life in the uk, so because he is from nigeria, 50% muslim does make profiling the solution to terrorism, and he is only one person out of over 70 million muslims in nigeria

  102. 122 Gary Paudler
    January 4, 2010 at 19:38

    Your guest just inadvertently made the case against profiling. She described choosing the side of the street with black men in suits or the side with thugishly-dressed black men. Are terrorists so stupid that they don’t recognize those prejudices and adjust their practices accordingly?

  103. 124 Pat Costa
    January 4, 2010 at 19:39

    Should we profile? I think the better question is should we include profiling in our toolbox of security measures. There isn’t one best way of screening; any type of screening will have some leakage. A combination of profiling, high tech scanners, questioning all overlap so that a person who slips through one barrier is grabbed at the next. The terrorists are good at finding the cracks in the system, the more layers security has, the more difficult it is to find a crack in all of them.

    Pat Costa

    Captain (retired) Delta Air Lines

  104. 125 abraham from kuwait
    January 4, 2010 at 19:39

    lol.as far as i have noticed,profiling has not been very successful in preventing acts of terrorism.it hasnot solved israel’s problems.it hasnot solved india’s problems.it didnot solve the troubles in northern ireland and it didnot solve sri lanka’sas problems(until the government started treating all ethnic tamils as possible threats).and i wouldnt want to live in such a society.

  105. 126 Jonathan (sunny San Francisco)
    January 4, 2010 at 19:40

    Why are we having this discussion? Every passenger should be screened by the most effective and efficient means available. Period. It’s so simple. This is a distraction, and an uninteresting one.

  106. 127 Mary
    January 4, 2010 at 19:41

    I am wondering if we could get an Israeli Security response to the question of profiling. Of all nations, it seems to me that Israel has the most experience with questions of security and terrorism.

  107. 128 Kyle R
    January 4, 2010 at 19:42

    What happens when you walk by the group of old ladies on one side of the street and thugs on the other, and one of the old ladies is talking to the thugs, but out of your hearing reach? Do you assume the old lady is in danger, or that the thugs are warm and friendly? Or is the old lady now a thug too? Maybe it would be safer to walk down the middle of the street…

  108. 129 Tom K in Mpls
    January 4, 2010 at 19:42

    The guy speaking against profiling is ignoring the lack of ability to get the ideal suicide bomber he proposes. I’m sure they get the most likely to succedd people they can, but the recruiting base is limited.

  109. 130 Peter
    January 4, 2010 at 19:44

    Profiling is illegal, counterproductive, and only leads to a false sense of security. It is counterproductive because it, like torture and the murder of civilians by drone attacks, only increases hostility toward the United States and creates additional terrorists. It leads to a false sense of security, because we ‘think’ we are looking in the right direction, but – many of those who have already attempted to attack the United States have NOT been from populations assumed to be the most likely (eg – Jose Padilla was Hispanic, and the most recent person was from sub-Saharan Africa. …and let’s not forget Timothy McVeigh – not even Muslim. We need to use our resources wisely, and pursue information with the best possible means – not tell ourselves fairytales about how we ‘know’ where to look and for what to look….

  110. January 4, 2010 at 19:44

    Suicide bombings are products of helpless rage against US, UK and Israeli invasions, occupations and murder of their people. Studies consistently show these very understandable motives, however fruitless and tragic. Thus, the profile of a terrorist is the profile of a group victimized by us. To stop indicidual terrorism, we must stop our national terrorisms.

  111. 132 Angela in Sunriver
    January 4, 2010 at 19:45

    What is that woman thinking? Doesn’t the change in the means to do damage say it all? From hi-jacking to chemicals in underwear. OF COURSE anyone wanting to blow up a plane is going to start using atypical profiles to do the dirty cowardly deed. And cowards they are, now and in the eyes and words of The Prophet, peace be upon him.

  112. 133 Lapog
    January 4, 2010 at 19:45

    Lets be honest. The question should be, “Can _social acceptance_ of profiling will stop terrorism?”…. because profiling is already happening. You just have to be a ‘brown’ to begin noticing it.

  113. 134 mark
    January 4, 2010 at 19:46

    Profiling only exacerbates the underlying problem. It is a science that is useful, but only if we want to keep this “war” going. What is needed is a philosophical weapon that targets underlying psychological causes. That weapon is those truths found in a 1611 King James Bible. I have worked in 30 different countries with every strata of society in the world. Religion is nothing more than a catalyst to conflict. Truth divorced from religious prejudice is the only solution to our current crisis. Trying to prevent a catastrophe already brewing only forces the catastrophe to the field of innocent bystanders. By all means, let’s get down to real solutions and quit wasting money at the expense of human dignity!

  114. 135 Omari(usa)
    January 4, 2010 at 19:46

    To that white lady who spoke about dressing like a thug- Exactly how does a thug dress? Please explain a THUG outfit.

    Because my pants are not as thight as your son’s, i’m a thug?Becaus my t-shirt extends below my belt, i’m a thug?

    Or could it be that black people originated from hot climates where loose clothing is benficial?

  115. 136 K. Greg
    January 4, 2010 at 19:48

    The problem with air travel and terror can be solved quite simply, it can be done by requiring air travelers to fly nude or nearly so and with pork and piglets on-board all air flights to America! All people can be terrorists with the correct stimulus so profiling will harm innocents. Inside the US there have been no bombs originating from inside this country, the threats have originated from outside here. If you want to fly fly free!

  116. 137 Tom D Ford
    January 4, 2010 at 19:49

    The central defining and uniting characteristic is that they are Conservatives.

    Timothy McVeigh, Robert Hanson, Osama bin Laden, the 911 Arabs from Wahabbi Saudi Arabia, the Taliban, the Al Qaeda suicide bombers, all of them are or were Conservatives.

    Start from there.

  117. 138 Iskander
    January 4, 2010 at 19:50

    She says that Pakistan is not trying to stop terrorism. Thousands of Pakistanis have died in either as civilians dying in bombings or in the army fighting against these terrorists. If people spend time in Pakistan you will understand what it is to live in fear for your life. It doesn’t happen once every few years, it happens everyday.

    This ignorance is horrible.

  118. 139 Akin in Atlanta
    January 4, 2010 at 19:51

    As a Nigerian national I absolutely don’t mind getting extra security screening. It is for my own safety so why should I object? However I think it’s time to improve security across the board, and not wait until another individual from another nation,gender, religion attempts an attack. I don’t buy the notion that some people could be exempt from intense screening under any pretext, yes that includes the elderly white ladies, please. It only takes one to slip through to make the damage, not acceptable by any means.

  119. 140 evets
    January 4, 2010 at 19:51

    I went through security at Heathrow in November, and I can say that was the first time in my life I have ever been felt up by a guy. It was to the point that it made even me, uncomfortable, but I understand why they have to do it.

  120. 141 evets
    January 4, 2010 at 19:53

    @ Tom D Ford

    “The central defining and uniting characteristic is that they are Conservatives.”

    And if you look to the terrorism in the 1960s-1980s, it was all left wing, socialist, “progressives”. Something tells me the Baader Meinhof gang members were not very socially conservative..

  121. 142 Brian Foster
    January 4, 2010 at 19:54

    To the woman who thinks it’s a good idea to stick to the side of the street with the older women on it:

    Maybe if you went up to that crowd of scary people and tried to have a conversation with them, you might contribute to lessening the motivation to harm people, in general.

    Think about us, rather than just yourself. THAT’S the real problem. Them, us, we’re all the same: we don’t consider things from THEIR perspective.

    A stupid and suicidal idea. Let’s try something different and see what happens. Let’s try the Golden Rule.

  122. 143 Irv
    January 4, 2010 at 20:02

    Put a pig on every flight, no self respecting Jihadist will want to die with a pig!

    • 144 Chisy/Zambia
      January 5, 2010 at 07:48

      @ Irv,
      Haha, now thats really high tech…wonder why we all never thought of that. Hmmm, maybe we can also train sniffer pigs. The dogs have taken too many of these jobs! LOL

  123. 145 Alan in Arizona
    January 4, 2010 at 20:06

    @ Monica

    Racism deals with a persons ethnic roots. A country on the list may have numerous ethnic groups.

    Profiling for the screening coming out of a country will deal with numerous racial ethnic groups.

    So calling it racism when listing a country for additional screening isn’t a logical connection.

    They try and call it racism when the Border Patrol here in Arizona pulls over a van loaded with 20 people and the bumper is dragging on the ground. These 20 people can be from numerous ethnic groups from all of Central and South America. Even a few from Caribbean countries.

    In actuality it’s just profiling for certain actions that Americans don’t normally perform. Like 20 people in a 8 person van. 99.9% of people living any length of time in America wouldn’t do that.

  124. 146 Meena
    January 4, 2010 at 20:07

    I totally agree with the other gentelman’s point of view. Profiling is just scratching the surface. Breakthrough, out of the box technology in security scanning is the only answer to airline safety, not the usual profiling strategies that have been done for a long time.
    I totally disagree with Pat, even if there is a chance of 1% failure, it is a big deal. Our security should be 100% perfect at all times, and an effective scanning for everyone is the answer. I am sorry the terrorist group have often outsmarted any of the sampling techniques.

  125. 147 Don
    January 4, 2010 at 20:08

    One thing I noticed about the examples Pat Brown cited to defend racial profiling were both flawed. Referencing the long trenchcoats of some high school students and the thug style of dress that some young men sport. Both of these are characteristics the people in question CHOOSE to display. It speaks to their state of mind. A person being profiled for the country they hail from is not at all comparable.

    Also, upon hearing her repeated insistance that “that 99% of the time that won’t happen” in response to the other panelists assertion that if you clamp down on one group of people those groups will use people who don’t fit that criteria…I was reminded of a quote I came across recently that goes “When we say something is impossible, it just means we haven’t seen it yet”

    All of this obsession with profiling stems from the same mentality that consumes people addicted to gambling. They both want to find a system. One that will guarantee success. The truth is, there is no system. You educate the screeners on suspicious behavior and spotting the earmarks of deceptive behavior.

  126. 148 Harrison Picot
    January 4, 2010 at 20:20

    TSA means “Thousands Standing Around” any many people think that (as many others have suggested) terrorists will just change tactics) but the TSA make passengers feel better, even if they are annoyed by taking their shoes off or whatever is required. The new system will let passengers see people being harassed but it won’t be them, thus it will be perfect system, looks good, does nothing. A politician’s dream. A tax on others is always a good tax.

    • 149 Kat in Vancouver, Canada
      January 4, 2010 at 20:38

      haha@Harrison – That is true enough. How many security guards does it take to change a light bulb?

  127. 150 Kat in Vancouver, Canada
    January 4, 2010 at 20:29

    Right now after this discussion, I am thinking of taking vacations in my home town. Does anyone want to undergo the possibility of having their human rights and dignity taken away from them in the name of security? Not me. It doesn’t make me feel safe. It actually makes me feel vulnerable and powerless.

    Time to consider getting local and moving away from international travel. We as citizens who fly have the right to vote on this issues so by spending your dollars locally not only are you helping your economy but sending a message to airlines and governments that some people do not approve of their barbaric measures.

  128. 151 Ido Giveadamn
    January 4, 2010 at 20:33

    Get real!
    Customs officers profile people all the time on ARRIVAL at airports. Thank goodness they do, or we’d all be stopped.  So what’s all the fuss about? They have used a mixture of profile factors -not just race – for years.
    We rely on the authorities to keep us safe when we fly, and quickly point fingers when things go wrong.   If they think profiling will help (and we can assume they genuinely do) then we should  leave it to the professionals and stop pandering to armchair experts and notions of ‘unfairness’. 
    It’s a fact that the terrorists who want to blow up innocent people are, almost without exception nowadays, Muslim extremists.

    It’s that simple and we won’t be safer if we tell the professionals to ignore that factor (as one of many) when deciding where the risks are likely to come from.

    We need to stop moaning about the niceties of profiling and let the professionals do their job in the best way they think they can.   
    Because we ALL need them to that.   
    Simple as that.  


    • 152 Kat in Vancouver, Canada
      January 4, 2010 at 23:49

      @Ido – why do you trust the professionals? Have you ever had an experience where you were mistreated by security or customs?

  129. 153 Tom D Ford
    January 4, 2010 at 20:55

    @ evets
    January 4, 2010 at 19:53

    “And if you look to the terrorism in the 1960s-1980s, it was all left wing, …”

    My point is, what makes people go to the extremes, what makes people turn to Conservatism or Communism?

    We had far less troubles when we had moderate societies, Regulated economics, moderate Republicans and the normal Centrist Democrats. The last thirty years of Conservatism has hurt everybody but a very few extremely wealthy Conservative Republicans.

    Moderation to the max!

  130. 154 William Wallace
    January 4, 2010 at 22:03

    They may feel us up, they may take our above 100ml cans and bottles……but they’ll never take our FREEDOM!!!!

  131. 155 Agwo Turu Mbe
    January 4, 2010 at 22:30

    Why is Nigeria on this list? Why isn’t Britain included?

    What of the case of Richard Reid the British shoe bomber, what of the 7/7 bombers or the failed glasgow bombers? Is it not fact that Britain has more terrorist and extremist than Nigeria?

    Or did Nigeria produce Carlos – The Jackal, Al-Nagrahi, IRA, ETa, Timothy McVeigh, or the 911 bombers? Are Nigerians worse terrorists than Kenya or Tanzania? why are they not on the list?

    Just because of some crazy guy who was educated and radicalised in Britain and had not lived in Nigeria since he was 12 years, Nigerians are now profiled as potential terrorist.

    This kind of profiling is not fair or just to the 70 million christain Nigerians who will now be profiled as “potential muslem terrorist” .

    As history has shown us, this kind of double standards would only be counter productive.

  132. 156 Thomas Murray
    January 4, 2010 at 23:38

    Can profiling stop terrorism?

    No. But it will cut it back a bit.

    I was listening to a young Englishwoman being interviewed about increased (foreign) airport security on one of our cable news channels. The gist of her observations was the time length (2 hours) it took to pass through the various levels of security — they were now examining every object in carry-on bags, she said.

    This increased security — and attendent threat — is just so very sad.

    Gone are the days when I could have a holy cow at the X-ray inspection counter at Dulles Int’l in Washington, DC, about the unexposed film in my camera bag with a lit cigarette dangling from my mouth. It was about 1975 (I think), a time when the little gray plastic film cans were also a favorite container for holding pot. The X-ray attendent smiled and told a fellow security guard to pass my bag AROUND the machine.

    As I was listening to the young Englishwoman extolling the virtues of airport programming, I was thinking to myself, The next successful bomber is going to be a young Englishwoman.


    –Louisville, Kentucky, US.

  133. 157 steve
    January 4, 2010 at 23:52

    Customs doesn’t profile for safety. THey profile to see if you are a drug runner, or smuggling thi ngs, or n ot declaring items that should be declared. Has nothing to do about safety, and has to do with revenues and drug laws.

  134. 158 Reverend LMF McCormack
    January 5, 2010 at 01:40

    There is plenty of technology to do thvery close checks WITHOUT molesting passengers or holding up traffic unduly. The Russians have it and use it. Indeed, they are happy to broadcast the fact on RT. I suggest someone call them and get consulting on it. Better yet, call them, see what they use, buy , install and use it and quit yapping about it.
    For those Americans who are so ready to throw away Liberty I have this to say: Those who sacrifice Liberty for security deserve neither!

  135. 159 Abram
    January 5, 2010 at 02:18

    The caller from Nigeria was frank, sincere and free enough to state that he and his countrymen are ashamed of the actions taken by their wannabe-terrorist brother. Yet, I have never experienced non-African Muslims being angered by the many and many terrorist acts their countrymen executed in the name of their faith. What could be the reason?

  136. 160 Bert
    January 5, 2010 at 02:24

    Don says: “The truth is, there is no system. You educate the screeners on suspicious behavior and spotting the earmarks of deceptive behavior.”

    And that is profiling too!

    Whatever the screeners are trained to do, they must be trained to expend most of their time and effort on the most likely suspects. Country of origin is one simple factor, especially if that country of origin is notoriously bad about their own security inspections.

    I have little doubt that whatever factors have been mentioned are incomplete and are subject to rapid revision. I wouldn’t get too hung up on the specific criteria mentioned in the press in this past week.

    • 161 Don
      January 5, 2010 at 10:59

      The profiling that is at issue is racial profiling. But training screeners to recognize suspicious behavior isn’t profiling because it doesn’t attempt to identify a certain group or demographic as a focus of special attention. Just individuals of any age, sex or race that exhibit suspicious behavior. And by suspicious behavior I mean as defined by those training the personell working with facial and body language “tells” that are said to be consistent from one culture to another. The screeners should have to complete extensive instruction in identifying the tells of a person who is hiding something/being deceptive.

      • 162 Bert
        January 5, 2010 at 16:55

        Sorry, but “racial” profiling was never even the issue. If anything, the profiling might be on religious grounds, not race.

        The point I’m trying to make is that as soon as one establishes criteria for profiling the passengers, be it behavior, nervous ticks, shifty gaze, body language, what have you, there will be the same nauseating complaints about how this “discriminates” against certain people. As in, “just because I look like a criminal, I keep getting searched at airports.”

        Profiling is essential. Otherwise, the security system becomes totally clogged chasing after shadows.

  137. January 5, 2010 at 02:29

    Aint it just wonderful how our security sources, 24 hours after a diabolical radical racist atrocity can tell and inform the world of the nature, type and detail of the desparate individual lurking in our midst,,,, but that same information held, never prevented the atrocity?

    do you know animals these days are traine to give away dirty rotten suspects carrying contraband at airports, but humans paid to do likewise are failures

  138. January 5, 2010 at 02:51

    NO. I just saw a quick film on the internet about bionary explosives. One drop of the stuff can explode a watermelon so as to vaporize it. It is heat activated. What they need to do is take all suspects and put them in a chamber and expose it to heat if they blow up fine better they do it in a chamber than on a plane. Tell them if they blow up they will rot in hell forever as Allah hates them.

    troop on the Oregon Coast

  139. 165 Richard in Arkansas (USA)
    January 5, 2010 at 02:56

    Profiling is the dumbest thing I’ve heard of. Do people actually think that people who would commit such henous acts are that stupid? You start profiling one set or several sets of people, they just start using different people and or sexes.

    You just have to set a certain standard for everyone to meet and be done with it.

  140. January 5, 2010 at 04:50

    if profiling is neccassary , everyone should be gone through this process then, if it is being pracitced only for few nations, i don’t think that gonna work. I agree with TOM D Ford, that what makes someone extremist, we need to know the cause, as em from the country which has been under the attacks of these militants and terrrorist. So the authoroties should look into this issue and try to figure out what they have gain from this SO CALLED WAR ON TERROR.

  141. 167 Etherion
    January 5, 2010 at 04:51

    In a war against ignorant, savage cowards, anything goes.

  142. January 5, 2010 at 06:43


    Profiling will not really help as terrorism will never be short of finding people who are or can be converted to their way of thinking and so indulge in any form of terrorism.

    That the 13 countries that have been short listed for the “pat down” are Islamic countries, speaks volumes for their state of mind.

    That the person who indulged in the failed Christmas terror was a Muslim who had travelled widely and used this information to board the flight at the Netherlands, shows that the terrorists are well informed.

    The terrorist will not be deterred by failour as this will only show them that this particular tactic failed and they will look for other ways to deal their deadly blows.

    To Defeat terror one has to defeat the cause, then the effect will deminish as they will see it as a lost cause and then terrorism will die down.

    But that is alright to speak of for it call for sustained effort all the time, not in bits and pieces.

    Thanks for listening!!!


  143. 169 Chisy/Zambia
    January 5, 2010 at 07:37

    Read alot of talk about rights….all sounds very nice! But rights come with responsibilities. If as a community/race/religion…etc, we either deliberately breed or actively turn a blind eye to those amongst us who tarnish our image, then we only have ourselves to blame. Everyone hates profiling, but I guess deep down we all knew it would get to that. Desperate people do desperate things and the US merely wants to protect its citizens who are under threat literally through out the world.

    Agreed the US carries some of the responsibility for some of the extreme views about them because they have poked their noses too many times in other peoples business…but then again, look at what happens when no one does anything…you get a Rwandan Genocide.

    Its a double edged sword. Profiling sucks, but if you dont like it that much, dont go to the US! its simple.

  144. 170 Ronald Almeida
    January 5, 2010 at 07:41

    You can not cure a disease just by fighting its symptoms.

  145. January 5, 2010 at 10:48

    To my way of thinking, profiling makes sense. Until little old ladies start blowing themselves up on airplanes, it makes not a lick of sense to SPEND THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME searching their belongings, and making them take off their shoes. And there are many many people who should just have their papers scrutinized, and asked a few questions.

    The people who are willing to blow themselves up in an airplane are men from 17-40. They are Muslims often, traveling alone, perhaps they paid cash, and may be sans luggage.

    Also, I think carry on luggage should be done away with. People should be allowed to bring on their laptops, blackberrys, and Iphones and use them on the internet. But no luggage. Nothing bigger than a laptop bag.

  146. 172 Ingle
    January 5, 2010 at 10:49

    Ronald Almedia is quite right.

    Not only all these new regulations are just fighting the systoms however. The wars in Iraq and Afgahnistan are just making things worse too.

    We would not be targets for terrorism if the USA and Britain had not messed about in the affairs of other countries. The root of the trouble started by trying to force a certain opinion onto to other cultures. Such behaviour will always lead to resistance – as we can see only to well in Palastine.

    To stop terrorism we must convince people that our way of life is better. Just killing off those who think differently has never worked.

  147. January 5, 2010 at 10:51

    We are discussing profiling today, because there are those who do not wish to stop at anything, but to take innocent lives. I am for saving lives and so, if this is the solution to stop innocent lives been lost, so be it. Besides, let us look back at why is terrorism growing? Why is it that the US pump huge money in countries alleged to be breeding grounds for terrorits in the form of support for the government of these countries in order to overcome the terrorists, yet there numbers and tatics continue to grow? I am thinking the other way around. I think if terrorism stops or ends, then the huge financial aid to these governments will equally cease to exist. Therefore while we are fighting terror, let us look at it from all points.

  148. 174 Greg
    January 5, 2010 at 11:02

    I wonder why Britain is not on this list!

  149. 175 Colin Sundaram
    January 5, 2010 at 13:01

    05. 01. 2010

    Dear All,

    What else will you do to combat terrorism? I do not think playing music in the ears of terrorists will do any good or change their attitude. The only and effective way is to make all possible efforts/methods to detect them. Indeed it will cost hell of a lot to develop new technology and employ more people to hunt the bigots down; unfortunately there is no other option. Blind faith is the cause for all these however, what is the solution. Regious terrorism is the worst enemy of humanity despite the fact that religions were borne to help people to lead a peaceful life. Any one who uses his/her common sense will realize that religions were the politics of the ancient to reform and restrict savage like people who lived a few thousand years ago. Unfotunately, the mantra then to control or make people to listen to civilized way of life was to make every advice as God’s otherwise nobody could have managed to make them listen and obey. Unfortunately, people who live in this twenty first century stick to the same dogmatic practices without change hence they remain a threat to democracy and advanced way of thinking and living.

  150. January 5, 2010 at 13:24

    Million of thanks to the international communities for the good work they have done to sudanese people by guarding them to follow the C P A.
    2009 is the successful year to citizens of sudan becaues three laws were agreed and peaceful signed.

  151. 177 claudine
    January 5, 2010 at 14:45

    How good we have the BBC and other news agencies.
    Now the muslim terrorists know exactly which countries are on the “special screening” list and can send their bombers out of other countries.

  152. 178 evets
    January 5, 2010 at 16:08

    You people keep on mentioning that terrorism is because of the west meddling in other nations. If meddling were the case, why aren’t Spaniards blowing up Muslim airplanes and waging international terrorism against muslims the world over due to Muslim occupation of Spain for over 800 years? The west has a LONG way to go before it has occupied muslim lands remotely as long as muslims did european lands.

  153. 179 t
    January 5, 2010 at 17:26

    No it can’t.. For several reasons:

    How do you define “suspicious”?
    What would the CIA and MI6 say if a light-skinned Muslim slipped thru security?
    If Obama and Brown really believe in “democratic values”, why not detain and search everyone? If you choose to come here or live here, you play by our rules.

  154. 180 Peter of Calabar
    January 5, 2010 at 19:49

    Of course, there must be some form of profiling. I am Nigerian but wouldn’t for one moment feel upset for any enhanced search of my body at any airport. For the love of Mike, a Nigerian nearly wiped out about 300 good folks. So far, it has been more than evident that Muslims, Arabs, Middle Easterners and now Nigerians have been engaged in wanting to blow people up. I would scarcely expect western security services to focus attention on Fijians or Nepalese or sun-worshipers from Bengal when the threat is from the afore-mentioned groups. It is hardly relevant that I am Nigerian and likely to be affected. It is the duty of the rest of us who don’t make a living from strapping on bombs to dissuade the few maddened ones from their murderous plans.

    The west should be careful of trying to over please folks who don’t much like them at the expense, peril and danger of their own people. Please!

  155. January 6, 2010 at 00:17

    just cause a guy has’nt shaved for 2 days makes him evil;how can you profile a well dressed business-man or is it a case of the usual_ money-talks

  156. 182 JanB
    January 6, 2010 at 12:29

    I wouldn’t say racial profiling (on airports) is necessary, but profiling based on the country of origin may work. Of course terrorists could still use converts from countries that are not on the list, but those are much rarer than the endless supply of uneducated, easy to indoctrinate boys in the countries on the list.

    “So is crime carried out by certain groups? or is it perceived to be carried out by certain groups?”

    It’s really simple. Let’s say 80% of a city’s population is white and 20% Caribbean. Now suppose 40% of the crime comes from the whites and 60% from the Caribbeans. Then you could say whites commit most of the crime, but clearly the Caribbeans are more criminal. It’s so simple but a lot of the so called “experts” don’t get it…

  157. 183 JanB
    January 6, 2010 at 12:31

    “just cause a guy has’nt shaved for 2 days makes him evil;how can you profile a well dressed business-man or is it a case of the usual_ money-talks”

    That’s just stupid, most of the terrorists who attack the West actually dress in Western clothes and are clean shaven, intelligence services know this, that’s why they want to profile for the country of origin.

  158. 184 Patrick Agbobu
    January 6, 2010 at 18:05

    You must be in another planet, you are fauting the USA for protecting their national interest. If you contitue with your infantile behaviour, the USA will place very conditions or even ban the leaders of the Nigeria government from visiting the USA. If this is done all the western powers will do the same. So the nigeria leaders will be very careful on how they call this, my candid advice to them is to pass on this one.

  159. 185 Patrick Agbobu
    January 7, 2010 at 01:37

    See who is talking as Fela will say shakara oloje. Be very mindful of your statement and I hope you did not release the statement as it will hunt you the rest of your life. The USA has the right to protect itself and national interest. Just look at yourself, corruption in very high places, all the polititical shenanighans, boko haram, religious intolerance and now this infinatile tittle tattatle islamic fanaticism. I think they should ban all of you from entering the USA.

  160. January 7, 2010 at 02:33

    If you have nothing to fear, profiling is not the end of the world. We know the terrorists will be looking for another area and new methods. One thing I know for sure is that Nigerians do not like commiting suicide. It is not by chance that the explosions did not explode. Umar Mutallab cannot take his own life. We can sacrifice our freedom or human right to be safe. But the operators should not abuse their power. And if you do not want your fatty hips to show, please, do not fly.

  161. 187 T
    January 7, 2010 at 04:53

    FYI: After Obama was sworn in, he said he signed 3 Executive Orders. One said he was banning torture.

    Not true for several key reasons:
    U.S. personnel are “banned” from torturing in a country that’s “involved in a conflict.” NOT in others which are at peace.
    U.S. personnel are “banned” from direct involvement in torture. Yet, it’s perfectly ok for foreigners to do it. Who have been trained by the States. Under U.S. supervision.

    Not once were these mentioned in the Stateside MSM.

  162. 188 JanB
    January 7, 2010 at 16:29

    About the criminal profiling: several countries already go after young men with extravagant cars and houses (probable drug dealers or pimps.) The taxes and incomes of these people are monitored more thoroughly than those of others, so profiling is already here and no one seems to have a problem with that. Neither do I, and I wouldn’t have a problem with the police profiling people who are from certain countries, groups of rowdy teenagers on the streets, people who regularly go on six month “holidays” (the length of an Al-Qaida training) in the tribal areas of Pakistan or Yemen or 30 year old men coming from those areas coming to “study” in the West at fictitious universities.
    If lots of people from my country started bombing innocent people abroad I wouldn’t have a problem being searched at the airport.

  163. 189 A R Shams
    January 7, 2010 at 17:26

    Profiling alone is insufficient to control or end up terrorism, rather other useful measures in addition to it are essential.

  164. 190 sylvie
    January 8, 2010 at 15:10

    why not just do body scanning for every person on the flight , if we have to turn up at the airport early so what , search all hand baggage and cut down on the amount allowed in the cabin , also stop all the duty free going on board, only be allowed to buy at your destination …im sure it could be made the same price as the country you are traveling from . some would complain heavily but at least they are alive to do the complaining .we give in to loud angry folk to easily , just stop them from flying full stop .

  165. 191 Colleen
    January 8, 2010 at 18:36

    History lesson.
    Please…to all the people on here that feel Americans deserve terrorism because of the wars in the Middle East.
    Could you please look at your history, especially the UK, hate was manufactured LONG before the US had anything to do with these countries. Shall we only go back to as far as Winston Churchill, who declared them as barbarians?
    As we all know, hate seethes for generations.
    I visit the UK frequently and have a great love for it, but PLEASE do know the history of how and why there is such deep hatred of the west.
    Having witnessed the attacks on 9/11 (I am a New Yorker), which is only an ‘instant’ to all of you, stop complaining…get to the airport early….and knock off the PC (Political Crap). Also, if you feel poorly about the US, please do not come.
    Think before you accuse. That alone, would make this a better world. Till that day, I think it is fine to profile, screen or any other measure available. It is called intelligence!

    • 192 sylvie
      January 9, 2010 at 13:12

      Well Said Colleen , all of Europe and the East have at times shown hate to others , trouble is the little people do not get much in the way of a word in , our powers that be seem to carry on as They wish , sometimes politics is run by ruthless power crazy people who push the countries into wars they do not want , all in the name of whats best for us !! for that read whats best for them , the USA and us in the UK always seem to be at the forefront at interfering in others politics , I know nasty cruel things go on but surely its the population of the country concerned to sort out its leadership , If they interfere with our way of life in our country then maybe we have a case , lots of countries live in the 12 century and until they move forward its a losing battle ,change must always come from within . it seems to me big business runs the west always on the lookout for a profit . would it not be nice to be at peace in our own land ……….

  166. 193 jack ono
    January 8, 2010 at 22:25

    I am a white male and I don.t exhibit my religious believes however it is a common sense that suicide bombers are mostly associated with Islam so if one chooses to exhibit his or her religious believes through clothing I have no doubts that such person would turn the attention of security officers in airports.

  167. 194 Cazz
    February 4, 2010 at 09:20

    I can state categorically that I am not a terrorist or drug smuggler, and yet EVERY time I go to catch a plane at Heathrow Airport, they can’t get their hands on my handbag fast enough.I will put it on the conveyor belt to go through the scanner, and instead of appearing out the other end, it is invariably spirited away, and passed along a line of security staff to be hand searched. They never find anything, because there is nothing to find, but I’ll guarantee you the next time I go through that Airport, it will happen again. I am not a Muslim, or even dark skinned. I am a white middle aged female. So what do these “profilers” think they see in me? If they think I’m up to something, they’re definitely suffering from an over active imagination.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: