Next to overt acts of terrorism, intimidation is a most powerful weapon in the arsenal of Islamic terrorists in their war against the U.S. and the West. Acquiescence to intimidation is celebrated by our enemies as much as images of planes striking U.S. buildings. Although it lacks the same level of visual impact, it cuts as deep within the fabric of our security and way of life. It is a tactic that is currently being used adeptly against ordinary citizens, businesses, law enforcement, politicians, and even our judiciary by Islamists intent on imposing their agenda on the West. Their objective is to dominate and ultimately eliminate our Western society from within. Their stealth tactic is intimidation.
Witness, for example, the results of the Christmas Day bombing attempt on Delta-Northwest Fight 253 by a Muslim terrorist. The response by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under the current leadership of Janet Napolitano, was to impose a series of new restrictive security procedures aboard aircraft already filled with passengers and flying at 35,000 feet, instead of addressing the threat at a more reasonable elevation, such as at ground level.
To believe that restricting lavatory use and keeping blankets off the laps of grandmothers will make air travel safer is to believe in a myth that should be insulting to every law abiding air passenger. All passengers are not the problem, and not all passengers pose a threat to air travel. To make air travel safer, we must identify potential threats before they board an aircraft. To do so, we must first break free from the bonds of political correctness and admit, without feelings of guilt or reservation that the threat is originating from Islamic terrorists and those who facilitate them.
We must immediately implement an aggressive program of comprehensive profiling that takes into account religion, ethnicity, country of origin, citizenship and countries recently traveled. We must also factor in other conditions including but not limited to methods and times of ticket purchases, luggage and carry-on conditions, connections and destinations, and traveling companions.
Most importantly, we must immediately employ and effectively utilize well trained and seasoned behavioral profilers at every commercial airport terminal to identify potential high-risk passengers. Additionally, properly trained plain clothes security personnel, asking strategic, probative questions of passengers, working strategically within the throngs of traveling public inside the air terminal must work in tandem with each other and with those manning the security check points. Further, those who man the checkpoints must be well trained and must know exactly what to look for as well.
I would argue that not only would the system be exponentially more effective than the current “Napolitano Doctrine of exposed laps and hold it until you land,” it is far less invasive than full body scans that might allow prying eyes a look at a passenger usually reserved for spouses or family doctors. Truth be told, the former would be less offensive to a bona fide peaceful Muslim than having his wife’s body exposed to a stranger seated behind a machine. Why then, is there such resistance to the implementation of such a comprehensive security process?
Copyright © Douglas J. Hagmann and Canada Free Press
Douglas J. Hagmann and his son, Joe Hagmann host The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, a live Internet radio program broadcast each weeknight from 8:00-10:00 p.m. ET.
Their new website is The Hagmann & Hagmann Report.
Douglas Hagmann, founder & director of the Older articles by Doug HagmannCommenting Policy
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement