Dr. Pipes'positon regarding terrorist profiling

Submitted by Carmen Waggoner (United States), Jun 14, 2006 at 11:07

I completely agree with Dr. Pipes' position on terrorist profiling. As a linguist, I also understand the importance of speaking the language used by terrorists; not having a native fluency in Arabic results in missing the nuances only natives can understand; therefore, using informants who have a native or near native fluency in Arabic is an invaluable tool.

As Dr. Pipes' article clearly indicates, the role and the success of such informants is crucial in the battle against terrorism. With regard to the reason why there is a generalized attitude against the open adoption of profiling, I, as a psychologist, believe that the US Government has taken this attitude of denying profiling and, at the same time, covertly encouraging it. This attitude, which is meant to coddle the Arab world, could be interpreted as "diplomacy"; it "saves the face" of the opposition. Fortunately, racial profiling has and continues to be the most successful way to destroy terror.

We are engaged in a battle we must win. Just as one cannot be pregnant just a little bit, either one is pregnant or one is not. Openly recognizing this point will add strength to our position; the opposite (the 'coddling the ennemy") is interpreted as weakness. It is time to stop this waste of time and face the war for what it is, A WAR WE MUST WIN.

Carmen Waggoner, Ph.D.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".