The New York Times reports that, in the wake of today’s attempted second wave of public transit attacks in London, New York City will begin checking bags on a random basis at subway and commuter railway stations, and on buses and ferries.

New York takes the threat of another terrorist attack quite seriously — but unfortunately nowhere near as seriously as it takes political correctness.

“No racial profiling will be allowed,” announced Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly. “It’s against our policies.”

NYC’s subways alone carry 4.5 million passengers on an average weekday. For every unshaven Middle Easterner clutching a Koran and wearing an “I Love Osama” t-shirt that the police search, they need to do the same to about 10,000 nuns, schoolgirls, and stockbrokers to convince the ACLU they aren’t indulging in sensible behavior by targeting the people who are targeting us. In the extremely unlikely event that a Muslim-looking person gets stopped and happens to have a nail bomb in his backpack, all he has to do is refuse to be searched. The cops will send him on to the next subway station to try his luck again.

But no matter how many advantages you give to the terrorists who are trying to maim and kill us, the ACLU will never quite be satisfied.

“Random police searches of people without any suspicion of wrongdoing are contrary to our most basic constitutional values,” screeched Christopher Dunn, associate legal director at the New York Civil Liberties Union.

So Mr. Dunn, are you saying that the searches shouldn’t be random? That we should start focusing on the sort of people who are likely to be terrorists? No? Didn’t think so.

Boston tried random baggage checks at rail stations during the Democrats’ convention in 2004. The ACLU, the National Lawyers Guild, and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee objected to the point of going to court over it. Passengers were selected based on random numbers using clicker-counts of riders, so that no one could accuse authorities of picking on likely terrorists. Since Arabs were in no way singled out, why was the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee involved? Perhaps they were concerned about the thin chance that this strategy would actually thwart a terrorist attack, thus preventing a young Arab from celebrating his cultural heritage by blowing some innocent women and children to bits, and thereby contributing to the rich tapestry of diversity.

Eventually we are going to have to chose between the bizarre anti-religion known as political correctness and simple survival. I wish I had more faith that we will chose wisely.

Hat tip: Little Green Footballs.

Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Said Van Helsing @ 6:11 pm | Permalink   

1. Bishop of Yesterday Morning

   Today’s dose of NIF - News, Interesting & Funny … It’s Stop the ACLU Thursday (and one day closer to Friday)

   Trackback by NIF — 7/21/2005 @ 7:11 pm

---

2. Good post. I can understand why Ray Kelly would not want to have police officials accused of racial or ethnic profiling . . . Those little old Irish ladies in their 80s ought to be carefully scruitinized, though. Or the 3 year old who is traveling with Mommy on the way to school with a backpack. Buddhist monks are a concern. In fact, everyone except for those who wear rags on their heads. Yep. Gotta be politically correct.

   BAH.

   Comment by Mustang — 7/21/2005 @ 7:38 pm

---

3. The day will come when racial profiling is part of the policy.

   Comment by THIRDWAVEDAVE — 7/22/2005 @ 12:24 am

---

4. Not going to work; the checks have to be random, and not racially biased. Our 7/7 terrorists were British. It’s not just ‘Them’ now; it’s ‘Us’ too.

   Comment by Hannah — 7/22/2005 @ 4:25 am

---

5. Hannah, perhaps it is possibly “us,” and we’ve had our own home-growns here that even went to fight with the Taliban. But if the London homicide bombers were British citizens, they still belonged to a specific profile: male, 18 to 30-something, and of Middle Eastern descent. We simply can’t be blind to this 800 kg gorilla due to PC nonsense.

   When randomly generated numbers produce a hit on a blue-haired, kindly old lady, and a young man with a backpack (or suitcase, even) is standing right next to her — whether clearly “Arab-looking” or not, and YES even Arabs will agree that Arabs look… well, Arab — and IF the policy STILL dictates that the blue-hair gets the full-cavity search and the chap walks… then that’s simply wrong wrong wrong. We’re shooting ourselves in the foot in the GWOT, with policies like this.
   

   Comment by The MaryHunter — 7/22/2005 @ 6:24 am

---

6. Oh come now TMH, we can’t racially profile. I mean, if you are looking for wolf you’d better check all the sheep too! Heck, we can’t even shoot to kill these guys, cuz they might not be carrying a bomb. And if they are not carrying a bomb, then we are just bad people who racially profile. Of course, if they are carrying a bomb and it goes off and hundreds of people in a subway station die, well, that is just the price their ivory tower.

   Comment by Duncan Avatar — 7/22/2005 @ 6:40 am

---

7. The last sentence (dunno what happened) should read :

   Of course if they are carrying a bomb and it goes off and hundreds of people in a subway station die, well, thati is just the price we must pay to the P.C. gods in their Ivory tower.

   Comment by Duncan Avatar — 7/22/2005 @ 6:41 am

---

8. I agree, we should definitely be targeting Arabs because they target us. I think we should take profiling one step further though - all white Christians carrying bibles or with jesus stickers on their cars should be stopped and search before passing near an abortion clinic, just to make sure they don’t have any bombs or rifles. We should also stop any pickup truck with southern plates and confederate flag sticker to make sure they aren’t going to harass or lynch any black people. While we’re at it, we should also frisk anyone who looks like a republican before they can be allowed to enter a courthouse in case they are intent on harming the thousands of “activist judges” that plague our judicial system.

   …you people are incredible, ever stop to think that a terrorist might not be Arab? Ever stop to think that not all Arabs are terrorists? Ever stop to think at all?

   Comment by Matt — 7/22/2005 @ 8:58 am

---

9. I don’t know about racially profiling, but we could do some basic profiling. I.E. We could at least limit our searches to people who, as comedian Lewis Black pus it, can “pull sh*t off”. This means not searching old ladies and young children. It means not searching families traveling together. You search the young and the healthy, especially traveling alone. Not all terrorists are middle eastern looking and if we just start searching middle eastern/arab looking men then they will simply find some way to find someone who doesn’t fit that profile to carry it.

   Comment by KraftyOne — 7/22/2005 @ 9:14 am

---

10. What are the alternatives to profiling? I can’t think of any which would promote security.

    Therefore, let the profiling begin! I’m tired of this post-9/11 atomosphere and of living from one news alert to the next, all this brought on by MUSLIM TERRORISTS, who were also Arab males.

    Yes, there’s the possibility of Islamomaniacs’ finding others to do their dirty work. Therefore, all of us need to learn from the Israelis’ programs in how to recognize a terrorist. Also, the ones who don’t fit the profiling might have family who would turn them in before an attack. It won’t be so easy for the nonprofiled to hide themselves.

    If there’s a nuke attack, or even another attack on the same scale as 9/11 here on our shores, things are going to be a lot uglier than profiling.

    If moderate Muslims want to be Americans, they need to BE Americans in every sense of the word, especially with regard to turning in those who are traitors or subversives. When I see that happen, I’ll begin to believe in moderates. Until then, I do not.

    First remedy: It’s past time for zero Muslim-immigration. We can’t separate the good guys from the bad guys, and until we can (if that day ever comes) immigration control is the first place to start. Second, anyone preaching treason and sedition, especially in a mosque or in an Islamic center, should be immediately deported, along with his extended family. Third, stop labeling Islam as a religion. It’s first and foremost a political ideology, an ideology sworn to our destruction; correct labeling will relegate Islam to a status below First-Amendment rights.

    Comment by Always On Watch — 7/22/2005 @ 9:35 pm

---

11. Saturday Morning Reads

    I’ve said it before (though I’m not sure if I’ve posted it here) that Democrats are the reactionary party. Their ideology is based on whatever isn’t Republican instead of any honest ideology with the country’s interests in mind.

    Trackback by Alpine Summit — 7/23/2005 @ 3:58 am

---

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, website trumps email, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website