Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Profiles in Correctness (Mineta's Opposition to Profiling of Airline Passengers)
Weekly Standard ^ | 9/18/06 | Philip Terzian

Posted on 09/09/2006 11:33:31 AM PDT by freespirited

Ordinarily, the changing of the guard at the Department of Transportation is not an occasion for reconsidering matters of national security. But the retirement of Secretary Norman Mineta, and the nomination of Mary Peters to succeed him, might afford an opportunity to rethink and improve how we fight on one front in the war on terror.

As everybody knows, the recent arrest of more than 20 alleged jihadists in Great Britain jolted airport security procedures. The would-be terrorists had planned to detonate explosives on as many as 10 U.S.-bound passenger jets in mid-August using chemicals found in common household products. Immediately, a wide array of articles, ranging from toothpaste to bottled water to lipstick, were banned from carry-on luggage.

Americans are strongly in support of the war on terror, and recognize that new realities may require the adaptation of old habits. We have long since grown accustomed to the security procedures instituted since the first epidemic of airline hijackings 35 years ago and, most especially, since 9/11. But Americans are equally aware that the rules are sometimes capricious and unreasonable. In establishing guidelines for screening airline passengers, for example, Secretary Mineta was particularly concerned with avoiding any hint of "profiling." Accordingly, your 90-year-old Methodist grandmother flying from Dubuque to Springfield on a round-trip ticket was just as likely to be subject to close random scrutiny--her shoes removed, her body patted, her suitcase ransacked, her knitting needles confiscated--as a 20-year-old "student" from Riyadh traveling from Hamburg to New York.

Moreover, while it remains forbidden to bring a penknife or a lighter on board an airplane, despite the presence of armed marshals and the reinforcement of cockpit doors, no such rules apply to railroad or bus passengers. A terrorist attack on a bus or train--not to mention a subway or ferry--could be just as catastrophic as an assault on a plane. This is not to say that the sort of security that now applies at airports should be extended to subway stops and bus stations. But it does suggest two good reasons for Secretary-designate Peters to review and reform transportation security when she takes office.

First, there is no harm in acknowledging that the sort of person who is likely to be a terrorist is not just any citizen who happens to walk into an airport, but someone with specific, comprehensible characteristics of age, national origin, sex, religion, and behavior. So far as we are aware, no jihadist plots have been perpetrated against Americans by little old ladies from Dubuque, but several terrorist attacks--in particular, 9/11--have been carried out by young Muslim men of Middle Eastern origin. No, not all young men, not all Muslims, not all people from the Middle East, are jihadists or potential terrorists. Of course not. But common sense, and the overwhelming preponderance of evidence, should make it obvious to airport security personnel where to concentrate their energies. The amount of wasted time in airport security, and the trouble expended confiscating harmless items, is irrational when compared with the actual threat we face.

Second, while Americans support the war against terror, they do so against various odds. The fact is that certain political figures, and certain elements in the media, regard the war on terror not as a common struggle in which we all have a stake, but as a political strategy of the Bush administration. It is not difficult to find cynicism in coverage of the war, or skepticism about its danger to our national life. In our view, the confused and confusing principles governing transportation security only add to such cynicism and skepticism. When Americans are, in effect, mistreated as they go about their business at airports--regarded with suspicion, subject to humiliating searches and seizures, forced to endure long delays and hostile questions--it undermines confidence in their government's determination to vanquish terrorism. This is especially true when they know that they are subject to such indignities not because they are effective, but because they have become a habit, or it might be politically incorrect to do otherwise.

Let's be clear: We strongly favor smart, effective policies that ensure, as much as possible, public safety as we travel. We also recognize that security in the age of terror will result in occasional inconvenience and official intrusiveness. That is a price everyone is willing to pay.

The operative word, however, is "smart." Do the principles that govern transportation security reflect policies designed to protect innocent people and identify and apprehend terrorists? Or are they a random assortment of panicky procedures, petty harassments, and P.C. rules that exasperate Americans, and breed mistrust about the most important issue of our time?


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: airlinesecurity; airports; fifthanniversary; mineta; profiling; terrorism; transportation
Recall President Bush saying at the second debate in 2004 that he had made some mistakes in appointing certain people to key positions? I wondered if he was thinking of Mineta.
1 posted on 09/09/2006 11:33:33 AM PDT by freespirited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freespirited

If he was, we wouldn't have had to suffer so long with his inanity. I think he was referring to Whitman.


2 posted on 09/09/2006 11:35:23 AM PDT by 308MBR (I'll be back for YOU, Jack, and I'll let the MACHINE speak! That's right. That's right.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Norman Mineta left a terrible stain on the administration.


3 posted on 09/09/2006 11:36:11 AM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee

If only red mice bite people and that no blue mice bite people and that no old blue mice ever bite people, why do we let red mice go by and check old blue mice?


4 posted on 09/09/2006 11:46:54 AM PDT by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
Mineta always seem to make reference to his family's internment during WWII when explaining his policies and, over time, convinced me that his insistence on inconveniencing the average American traveler by trying to eliminate all possible weapons, instead of doing anything to identify potential terrorists, was his "payback."

I don't know if Mineta is warped or stupid -- but, it doesn't really matter -- his impact on reducing traveler safety while, simultaneously, destroying the economics of the airline business will be with us forever.
5 posted on 09/09/2006 11:49:23 AM PDT by vetsvette (Bring Him Back)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
Recall President Bush saying at the second debate in 2004 that he had made some mistakes in appointing certain people to key positions? I wondered if he was thinking of Mineta.

Not only a nunber of bad ones but keeping the Klintoonistas in other positions. That has convinced me that the head guy buys into the "Two-Party Cartel" which is controlled by the elites & at our expense.

6 posted on 09/09/2006 11:50:08 AM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

7 posted on 09/09/2006 11:53:16 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
The ridiculous policy of searching people in wheelchairs, Olsen Twin look-alikes, and 80 year old nuns will continue until the next disastrous terrorist attacks which will have been committed by young Middle Eastern males. I hate to think that it would take another 9-11 incident to bring our security officials to their senses, but that may be the case.
8 posted on 09/09/2006 11:56:34 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
As a matter of policy, all Cabinet officers tender their resignations at the beginning on a reelected President's second term. Bush had the option of accepting Mineta's resignation at that time and chose not to.

Bush made some other lousy choices. I am willing to bet that Alberto Gonzales is a major reason why the Bush administration actually trails Clinton's in prosecuting companies that hire illegals and in deportations.
Robert "PC" Mueller, director of the FBI, is another horrid appointment.
9 posted on 09/09/2006 11:59:45 AM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
OPM (Office of Personnel Management) has rated the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) management as the worst off the worst for the last couple of decades. Logic tells me any change to the FAA/DOT would be for the worse.
10 posted on 09/09/2006 12:03:35 PM PDT by mountainlyons (Hard core conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee
Norman Mineta left a terrible stain on the administration.

Klitonoids have a tendancy to leave stains here and there!

If discrimination is such a terrible thing why isn't Minetta sharing office space with Charles Manson? That's discrimination!

11 posted on 09/09/2006 12:09:09 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist (If a monkey bangs away at a typewriter twice a week for ten years it could write an M. Dowd column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: vetsvette
Mineta always seem to make reference to his family's internment during WWII when explaining his policies and, over time, convinced me that his insistence on inconveniencing the average American traveler by trying to eliminate all possible weapons, instead of doing anything to identify potential terrorists, was his "payback."

A Cabinet secretary who would endanger the U.S. population in order to extract "payback" for an injustice to his family that occurred a half century ago is not fit for public office.

13 posted on 09/09/2006 12:16:45 PM PDT by freespirited (We have met the enemy and it is Wal-Mart. ---The Democratic Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Mineta was horrible, absolutely the wrong person for the job.


14 posted on 09/09/2006 12:54:04 PM PDT by Mount Athos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Mineta is the dimmest bulb I have EVER seen!!!! I watched him say he didn't want to profile because he had been in an internment camp! Sad, but FDR made a hard decision and so should have Mineta....for national security.


15 posted on 09/09/2006 12:59:55 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy ("When Cabals Go Kabooms"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
They should have left Mineta in the internment camp.
16 posted on 09/09/2006 1:58:07 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BW2221

I think Mineta was given a "pity post".


17 posted on 09/09/2006 2:22:20 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy ("When Cabals Go Kabooms"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Mineta: Sit down, shut up and get out of the way.


18 posted on 09/09/2006 6:31:47 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (Stop the ACLU - Support the Public Expression of Religion Act 2005 - Call your congressmen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson