Magic City Morning Star

Advertising | RSS Feed | About Us 

Last Updated: Oct 13, 2013 - 12:38:22 AM 

An eclectic mix of news and information
Staff Login
Donate towards our web hosting bill!

Front Page 
  -- Local
  -- State
  -- National
  -- IRS News
  -- Win at Work
  -- History
  Tech Notes
  -- Comics
  -- R.P. BenDedek
  -- Kenneth Tellis
  -- M Stevens-David
  -- Down the Road
  Today in History
  -- Editor's Desk
  -- Guest Column
  -- Scheme of Things
  -- Michael Devolin
  -- Tom DeWeese
  -- Ed Feulner
  -- Jim Kouri
  -- Julie Smithson
  -- J. Grant Swank
  -- Doug Wrenn
  Agenda 21
  Book Reviews
  -- Old Embers

Web Directory Reviews
WDR Directory of Directories
Restore The Republic - The Home of the Freedom Movement!

Jack L. Key

Is Racial Profiling Really Needed?
By Jack L. Key
Jan 25, 2008 - 9:41:11 PM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

We read and hear a lot about the pros and cons of racial profiling these days. Many Americans believe that after the horrors of September 11, 2001 ANY means may be used to stop further murdering and suffering of innocent people by Islamic jihadists.

And then there are those who believe that using race, religion or other singular means to distinguish particular persons from others is wrong, and/or prohibited by the constitution, no matter the reasons. The federal government has allowed minimal profiling in the recent past, but says now the practice is prohibited. In my city there is a TV station, an ABC affiliate, who will only describe a murder or robbery suspect by gender, approximate age, height and weight, with no photo or whether illegal alien or citizen.

At last count there were 281 million of us who fit that description.

What's wrong with this picture? Thousands of Americans murdered at home and military actions in two foreign countries where thousands more have died trying to protect us from further harm are not enough for us to use any means or technology to stop the killings?

I'm reminded of what the Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez had to say in an article published in a Spanish newspaper in May, 2007, and has made it's rounds of the Internet the past few months. Rodrigez was reflecting on Europe's murder of 6 million Jews during World War Two, and then trying to make amends by allowing 20 million Muslims into Europe.

He wrote, "Just because we wanted to show ourselves and the world we were cured of the disease of racism and intolerance, after we had destroyed a chosen people who produced great contributions to science, art, and trade, and then finally became the conscience of the world. We replaced them with 20 million Muslims who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism, lack of tolerance and crime and poverty. And thus we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, and intelligence for backwardness and superstition. What a terrible mistake made by a miserable Europe."

Do we in America want to make a similar mistake? Do we tell ourselves we must be politically correct and show the world we do not practice racism or intolerance while allowing Muslim terrorists into the country and those already here to spy and plan and kill by suicide practices that are aimed at innocents? If you are a farmer and a beetle has been eating your corn, will you make efforts to rid your crops of it? If you are a mother or father and you're told of a vicious new disease affecting children, but a vaccine is available, will you take your children for shots?

Many Americans have become so insulated from reality they imagine the United States can suffer a defeat in the War on Terror without any inconvenience to themselves.

Should we say absolutely no profiling? Let’s pause a minute and do some reflecting. The following are actual events from history. Yes, they really happened. Do you remember?

In 1968, Robert Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male extremist;

In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, Israeli athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists;

In 1979, the U.S. Embassy in Iran was stormed and occupied by Muslim male extremists;

During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped and held in Lebanon by Muslim male extremists;

In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon was blown up and many killed by Muslim male extremists;

In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American murdered and thrown overboard by Muslim male extremists;

In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, Greece and a U.S. Navy diver on board was murdered while trying to rescue passengers by Muslim male extremists;

In 1988, Pan Am flight 103 was bombed and many murdered by Muslim male extremists;

In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed for the first time by Muslim male extremists;

In 1998 the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim male extremists;

In 2001, September 11 occurred, and over 3,000 civilian Americans were viciously and intentionally murdered, including many women and children and billions in property damage losses in New York City and Washington, DC and a field in PA-by Muslim male extremists;

In 2002 the U.S. began fighting the War on Terror in Afghanistan and Iraq against Muslim male extremists - over 3,900 Americans have perished so far in service of their country;

In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered, and others beheaded by Muslim male extremists;

In 2003-2007 US Navy ships have been attacked and damaged while in port and in international waters and innocent people kidnapped and tortured by Muslim male extremists.

In years before and since 9/11, Britain, Spain and other European and Asian countries have had many citizens murdered by Muslim male extremists and it goes on and on and on.

Is there a pattern here to justify profiling Muslim males?

It seems useless to me to spend billions of tax dollars for homeland security just so airport screeners can conduct random searches of 80 year old women, children, airline pilots with proper ID, the Secret Service detail of the President of the U.S., 85 year old congressmen, Medal of Honor winners and former governors, to name a few. But Muslim males will be exempt because that's profiling.


Why not ask the presidential candidates their opinions on this subject? Let's put some politicians on the spot and ask direct questions about this and other equally important issues confronting Americans? Put the fixed TV debates to rest, and let 'em answer some real questions for a change, face to face, eye to eye. Hang the media and ACLU and their race and feminist "issues" out to dry.

What we're talking about in this election year is not just the same old issues, although some are certainly important. This one is about the life and welfare of ourselves and our families, and our children's children. Do we really want a white female socialist or a black male of Muslim parentage leading our country and us?

Is that a "profiling" question?

Jack L. Key is the author of Gideon’s Trumpet, a novel of war and peace in the 21st century, and a veteran of the US Navy. He is a retired healthcare professional, and writes features articles and political commentary for the Internet and prints media. Contact him at:

© Copyright 2002-2013 by Magic City Morning Star

Top of Page

Jack L. Key
Latest Headlines
Recent Happenings According to the Associated Press
Carter's Folly: Dancing With Hamas
More Loony Tunes and Other Oddities, Lies and Nursery Rhymes
The Media Empire Strikes Back: It's Election Time Again
The Superman Syndrome: Even the Man of Steel Has Trouble Surviving Today

A Dinosaur of Education - a blog by James Fabiano.
Shobe Studios
Wysong Foods - Pets and People Too