Racial Profiling In Airports

Eradicating terror in America has been, and should remain on the agenda as one of the main efforts of the United States government. Post 9/11, there has been a wide amount of change seen in security, particularly in airports around the country. Speaking with people about the differences of security in airports before and after 9/11, makes it obvious that the United States has made it a priority to minimize threats to public safety. Along with increased security in airports, there has been a surge of racial profiling of Muslims in America. Subsequent to the San Bernardino attacks in California, the issue of racial profiling as being effective and politically correct has been a topic of controversy. The term racial profiling, has recently been

associated with discriminatory actions, and harassment when, in turn people should consider racial profiling as a buffer of security. Some people argue, that without racial profiling, lives will be lost, while others argue that it is a violation of the constitution. Both arguments, are neither right nor wrong. Theoretically, it is impossible to tell if racial profiling is effective in counterterrorism efforts, but there must still be a system to prevent terrorist attacks from happening in America. By examining both sides of the argument, the issue of racial profiling is not one easily contested.
I would like to begin by saying that racial profiling should not be about political correctness, but about threat assessment. After attacks in America, like in San Bernardino, too many people put emphasis on being politically correct. Focusing on the political correctness, is like turning a back to the enemy, and eventually it will lead to disaster; America cannot focus on being politically correct if the country wants to prevent terrorism from happening. I do not mean to say that anyone who are Muslim in America should be prosecuted or harassed, but I do insist, however, that individuals that have been to countries where radical Islam is prominent—Muslim or not, should be screened by national security when re-entering the United States. In Asra Q. Nomani’s article titled Airport Security: Lets Profile Muslims, the author cites a study from New York University’s Center for Security and the Law ‘Terrorist Trial Report Card’, observing that a majority of the defendants in terrorism trials were U.S citizens. The author notes that, “Law enforcement officials familiar with the cases said many of the Americans were ethnically connected to Pakistan, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt” (Nomani). To reiterate again, it does not matter if the person is Muslim or not, if they have traveled to countries where the practice of radical Islam is highly promoted, they should be profiled and screened. This is to put emphasis on the fact that Americans can become terrorists as well. To say that all terrorists are Muslims, born and raised in the Middle East is ignorant, and little minded. In the last section of Nomani’s essay, she proclaims, “We have to choose pragmatism over political correctness, and allow U.S. airports and airlines to do religious and racial profiling” (Nomani).
The counterargument to this idea, is that racially profiling Muslims in airports is not ethically, or legally right.

In Kamalakar Duvvuru’s article titled, Muslims Should Not Be Profiled in the War on Terror, he tells multiple stories, about seemingly innocent Muslims being held up in airports because of their race and or religion. In one story in particular, the author reports how, “[s]ix Muslim imams were lead away in handcuffs from a US Airways flight after passengers complained that they were praying in the terminal before boarding the plane” (Duvvuru). I would like to first say, that there are many other religions where people pray, and might I add that many people are fearful of flying and might decide to pray before getting on an airplane. I cannot say for sure, but identifying these men as being Muslim, while also praying before getting onto the plane is most likely what prompted the individuals on the plain to complain. In airports, Americans have the right to say something if they do not feel comfortable about flying for whatever reason. It is legal to tell authorities at an airport if you do not feel comfortable, and there is also the notion, “If you see something, say something.” The wrong in this situation, though, is that the flight was cancelled after the situation, and the men were taken into custody. A simple fix to this situation would be asking the people to switch their flights, for example. From a legal stand point, there may be some instances where a

citizens rights are disbanded, and the perpetrators of these crimes should be prosecuted, but human rights violations should not be the focus in racial profiling. I do not mean to sound insensitive, or say that all Muslims in America are terrorists, but Muslims living in America need to realize that some of the members of their religion and background mean harm; instead of being nonnegotiable and resistant, they must accept that right now, one of the only security measures available is profiling those who are Muslim for the protection of America as a country.
There have been programs implemented under the Obama Administration to escalate the involvement of the government with the Muslim-American community, but the problem with this is that many Muslims living in America do not trust the government.

Just like, many people today say they do not trust the government, the Muslims in America feel they are under extreme prejudice everywhere they go. In Kamalaker Duvvuru’s article, he writes about a few scenarios, one of which includes someone who was in the National Guard, where the individuals and their families experienced discrimination (Duvvuru). Since this religion is widely practiced among individuals, even in America, there is no doubt that there are service members in America who are Muslim. That being said, this connects to my aforementioned thoughts about people not being profiled because they are Muslim, but being profiled because of the countries that they have come from or traveled to. While there are programs in place to foster more communication with American Muslims, the government is still secretly profiling and tracking these individuals. In the beginning of Duvvuru’s essay, he talks about a group of 2000 immigrants singled out and questioned in 2004 about the activates taking place in their mosques, and, “None of those interrogated were charged with national security offense” (Duvvuru). Although this article was written a few years ago, I would assume that the same practices are still being implemented

today.
In conclusion, neither side of the argument is absolutely right or wrong. Some of the ways that Muslims in America are discriminated against violates their constitutional rights, and should not go unnoticed. Today, there is no way to measure the exact effectiveness of racial profiling in being a means of counterterrorism. People have the right to be nervous if someone identified as Muslim is on their plane, is that right in my mind, no, but that is the reality of America today. Some people fear Muslims. Whether they are in an airport, a train station, hotel, or other public place; in society today, as it always has been, there will always be racist and prejudice people. In the future, I think that America should come up with new programs to help Muslims who have been wrongfully prosecuted get justice and seek support. On the other hand, there must be a different way of screening for terrorists in this country. Technology is advancing every day, and so are the means and practices of terrorists in America; Americans are being recruited through social media, the internet, and by groups while traveling to certain countries in the Middle East. America has put American Muslims under the water where they have no way of getting out. There must be a different way to profile terrorists in the future, or America will become a country rooted by racial prejudices and, “[r]acial moral superiority,” as Duvvuru asserts.