Profiling in Defense of Liberty(1)

Profiling in defense of Liberty on the face of it sounds anathema to our Constitution but is it? In several places in our Constitution, the Executive and Legislative Branches are charged to protect the nation (us) from threats both foreign and domestic. Yet, our borders are effectively open and our State Department still functions in a multicultural dreamland handing out visas as quickly as they can stamp them. [Let’s not even talk about our open border and the invasion that is full-throttle. How can our government oversee the dissolution of this nation into a lawless, third world “economic region?] If you think about it, you may see that we already have Supreme Court-sanctioned institutionalized profiling in our university admissions and in our hiring practices. It is variously known as multiculuralism for diversity of ethnicity or diversity of skin color (not for the free exchange of diverse viewpoints) or as affirmative action. The only place we are generally all treated as equally guilty is in our airports and our subways. Today, in my neighborhood when a local 7-11 convenience store is robbed, the news doesn’t announce, “Local 7-11 was robbed this evening by someone wearing something traveling in some direction on South Second Street.” No, they come on the news and say, “Local 7-11 robbed this evening at 9:00PM. Suspect is described as a young, white male with short, black hair, wearing a blue sweatshirt, cut off jeans, running north on South Second Street. Suspect is armed and considered dangerous. If you see suspect, do not confront. Contact local police.” The notice to the public assists the police/law enforcement, warns the public, and (mercy) allows the police to direct their resources so that they don’t apprehend 80-year old, gray-haired white men, elderly black ladies, black youth, or pregnant white ladies. The next time elderly black or white ladies participate in terrorist activities (not to be confused with the tyranny our dear mothers can reign down about our heads and shoulders) then add them to the list of suspected enemy combatants. Otherwise, please let them travel in peace, smiling and proud that those strapping young men with the semi-automatics over their shoulders are there to protect them. A brief perusal of a recent posting from the Patriot Post going back to the murder of Robert Kennedy demonstrates that the terrorists by and large have profiled themselves – Muslim men from 17 to 40 years of age. In a recent op-ed, “Time for Offense” (Washington Times, 8/14/06), Cal Thomas voiced my concern quite well. “This isn’t about “civil rights” and Constitutional protection. These people use our Constitution to protect themselves so they can kill us. Any questions?” Let me state what others have said that terrorism is a tactic. Terrorists are guerrillas, a.k.a. enemy combatants, and should be treated as such. To be clear, they have defined the world as their battleground. In order to better use our resources, we should: 1) start profiling, using the guidelines the enemy combatants/terrorists have given us; 2) stop throwing guerrilla fighters/enemy combatants into criminal courts; 3) start treating guerrilla fighters as soldiers engaged in a self-declared war against our very existence. The appropriate way to treat “home-grown” guerrilla fighters is to declare them traitors, slap them in military brigs, and try them under military tribunals. This is a war and we didn’t start it. But we better win it and now. Blowing up trains, buses, planes, and subway cars is not “criminal activity”. These are acts of treason and of war. Unless we find our General Pattons and General Pershings and perhaps our Harry Trumans soon, we’ll have this war for decades. And we the people will be “terrorized” at every turn as we watch our freedom slip away. That is the goal of the enemy, is it not?