PHOTOS, PAGE 1

       Editor and prime reporter is Doug Terry, a veteran television and radio reporter in   Washington, DC, (details below)

The NY Times online is conducting a lively and, by my reading of the posters, well reasoned debate about the use of so called “profiling” to catch potential terrorists. Some of pointed out that they have been subjected to mistreatment at airports for years because of their ethic heritage. Here is my response:

It is very unfortunate if American citizens, and foreign visitors, are singled out because of their religious and ethic heritage for special (mis)treatment by the TSA and airlines. Those who have posted should remember, however, that citizens of European background (or any background) are also subjected to unfair secondary screening and being placed on "watch lists". This includes the late Senator Edward Kennedy, brother of an American president, who was prevented from boarding flights on two occasions because someone with his name was on a list.

I once bought two one way tickets, one out, one back, from the east to California because it was less expensive that way. I got the SSS mark on my boarding passes, which means I got maximum treatment (unlike the pants bomber from Nigeria, who apparently got no advance attention). This "status" as a person to be watched was really creepy. The ticket agent stared at me like I was some sort of zoo exhibit. I guess she wanted to see what a potential "terrorist" looked like. Because I was subjected to repeat screening at every boarding, I got to see the behind the scenes disgrace of the way people are treated at airports, including a baby in diapers taken from its mother's arms and patted down.

So, foreign visitors, be aware that many are subjected to unnecessary screening. Sooner or later, America will adopt a more mature, balanced approach to the threat of terrorism.

As for profiling, would it have been considered wrong to keep out Germans or Japanese during WW II? No. They were not allowed in, after the US joined the conflict. The challenge now is to not go overboard and continue to allow free movement of people while stopping only the one in five or ten million who might pose a threat. This is a difficult job, but the most important steps are far away from the airports, exactly where the US "system" failed in the case of the pants bomber.

As for the US citizen of Pakistani family background (who posted with the online NY Times, he should make every attempt to get his status with the TSA changed so that he can fly in and out of Washington National. First, the TSA has a dispute process online and he should file with them. Next, he should seek legal counsel and I would venture that there are many lawyers in DC who would be willing to provide some basic assistance without pay. Here in the US, we have fundamental rights and we have the right to appeal decisions of the government without fearing backlash. These rights are what make the country far better, for citizens, than countries where there is no appeal and the word of the government is deathly final.

Doug Terry, 1.5.10

LINK TO THE NY TIMES ONLINE D

http://tiny.cc/04NPU

ISCUSSION

The TerryReport is re-posting this comment below from the NY Times because it makes a lot of sense (except for the last line).

nancy

fort lauderdale

January 5th, 2010

2:21 pm

I fly a lot for work. I consider flying an acceptable risk (just like driving, fixing the roof, mountain climbing and other things I do regularly). Nothing is risk free. Some risks are acceptable and some are not. Each person has to make their own decision about their own comfort level.

I think that many people, myself included, are now much more vigilant when we fly, and much more willing to share our concerns about our fellow passengers. The "passenger team" is my best security these days. I think TSA is largely a waste of time and money. A TSA officer who is feeling crabby will confiscate an ounce of toothpaste; a sympathetic one will let a handicapped child through with his lunchbox (I've seen both events).

As for body scanners, bring 'em on! I do think they'd be better than the current mess.

Nancy

CONTACT THE TERRYREPORT

       HOME PAGE

end