In my last posting here at the Spade, I took a look at the uproar over the use of full body scanners and pat downs by TSA agents in our airports. My basic position is that in many ways this is much ado about nothing; while I understand that the searches and scans may be disconcerting to many, and an outright affront to some, the TSA is simply doing the best it can with what it has to work with. I also wrote that I am sort of tired already of hearing people braying about the violation of the 4th Amendment protections that they believe the scans and pat downs represent. My longtime friend and frequent debating partner Brian R, purveyor of  The View From the Island challenged my points about the 4th Amendment issues here, and in so doing made me step back and sharpen the point I was trying to make. More importantly, he got me to thinking about the contradiction that exists, as I see it, in the views of those who are dead set against the scanner/pat down policy at play now on 4th Amendment grounds, yet who have no problem at all with allowing racial, religious, or ethnic profiling to be used at the airports instead of random screening or the aforementioned TSA policy protocol.

Before we go any further, let me be clear that I am not some dyed in the wool opponent of profiling. Like I said in one of my comments on my last post, if you have an area that is a drug dealing spot and most of your dealers are young black males loitering in a certain area, then if you are going to make a dent in the drug traffic look for young black males loitering in the area. Likewise, if most of the people who are hijacking planes or launching terrorist attacks are young Arab or Muslim males, you should probably start there when looking for terrorist suspects. Further, I think that the random screening of certain people is one of the biggest wastes of time in the world when it comes to airport security; I seriously doubt that Christie Creamcheese from Hoboken, with her two toddlers in tow is about to try to commandeer a Boeing 737 and crash it into the Capitol.

However, I do stand amazed that the people on the right who are crying bloody murder over the use of full body scanners and pat downs as this egregious violation of the 4th Amendment have no concern that the use of profiling also constitutes a violation as well. I mean, what is more unreasonable than being treated as a suspect and being exposed to increased scrutiny and interrogation because of your nationality? What is more unreasonable than being pulled out of line or having your bags searched more thoroughly because you look like an Arab, or have an Arabic sounding name? What is more unreasonable than being treated as a potential terrorist simply because you "fit the profile"?

I had a friend once, a kid I worked with at my old job in the textile industry. His family was from Lebanon and moved to Boston when he was about six years old; this kid is American as American can be, because pretty much all he knows is America. His family were at least nominal Christians, living in our small North Carolina community, and were generally well liked. But if we went to a system of profiling, he would be one of the first to be profiled because he is a young Arab looking male and would likely be traveling alone...he would "fit the profile." But would anyone be worried about his being treated unfairly? Would Sean Hannity or Mark Steyn be using radio and television airtime to complain that Hesham's 4th Amendment rights were being violated? I doubt it.

And this is where it comes time for me to call a spade a spade, and I am sure many of you won't like it. Now far be it from me to place the race card, but in this instance there is simply no way around it for me; race and/or ethnicity is one of the major issues in this debate, but no one wants to talk about it. But I will and some of you ain't gonna like it one damned bit.

The reason that people are so up in arms about the TSA's current screening procedures is because it inconveniences them and they are treated like criminal suspects, when they don't feel that such treatment is justified. Why, they are good loyal American citizens, the overwhelming majority of whom happen to be White, and they cannot understand why they should have to be screened. That just makes no sense to them, so they are angry and feel that their constitutional rights have been violated by their being forced to be scanned or patted down.

Conversely, they have no problem with having young Arab men treated as criminal suspects, without any other evidence than their name, ethnicity, looks, or religious background; this, apparently, is not a violation of their 4th Amendment rights. I mean, not all Arabs are terrorists, but all the terrorists that have hit us are Arabs...right? So hey, it's no problem for us to single out the Arab 'other' for special scrutiny, because they just might be guilty and if not, no harm done...right? I mean, that seems to be the attitude of many of the people I listen to talk about this subject. They become indignant when they, or the "80 year old grandmother" is forced to go through the "indignity"of a full body scan or pat down, but they can't seem to see that it is equally unconstitutional to deem people automatic suspects simply because of how they look, or where their families came from. And what do we do when we come across another "Jihad Jane", the blond-haired, blue-eyed American woman who was caught recruiting terrorists to attack America? Where does she fit in the profiling spectrum?


Maybe I have a problem with this while others don't because I am Black, and I know what it is to be "profiled". I know what it is like to walk into a store and have people follow you from the moment you walk in until you walk out, as if you are there for no other reason than to steal from them. I know what it's like to have cops pull you over or follow you because you look "out of place" in a certain neighborhood. When you have been suspected simply because you "fit the profile", your ideas about profiling become a little different than some others.

Now, like I said before, I believe there is a need to do some sort of profiling. I don't believe that we can afford to ignore who it is that has threatened and attacked us in the past when taking current protective measures. What I do want though is some honesty on this issue of profiling from all involved, and I especially want to see a wee bit less hypocrisy from the people who are outraged over the constitutional violations of full body scanners, but are mute on any violations involved with the use of racial, religious, or ethnic profiling. The Constitution was not just written to protect my rights, but to protect everyone from an overreaching government. You cannot claim fidelity to the Constitution and at the same time be willing to allow violations of it...so long as the violations are aimed at someone else.

So which is it folks? Do we honor the 4th Amendment protections for everyone, or is it okay to suspend them for a select few?