For meget bøvl skræmmer turister fra USA

Men det er ikke angsten for terrorisme, der skræmmer turisterne væk fra flyene til USA. Det gør derimod al den ekstra kontrol og det tidskrævende bøvl, der venter ved ankomsten til USA.

Mere på DR

Årsagen til at så mange skal generes ved indrejse i USA, skriver DR intet om. Men det kan jeg da godt orientere om.

Grunden til at alle rejsende til og i USA skal igennem tidrøvende og nogle gange nærgående sikkehedskontroller er, at muslimske interesseorganisationer og venstrefløjen har gjort profilering umulig. Ja du læste rigtigt. Hvis man havde profileret terroristerne den 11. september ud, så havde det ikke været lovligt at chekke dem.

Det er sådan, at man for at undgå at få for mange muslimer i kontrollerne har indført et computersystem (ATS-P), som udvælger personer til ekstra sikkerhedscheck ud fra tilfældighedsprincipper.

Systemet MÅ IKKE bruge kriterierne ‘ung’, ‘mand’, ‘muslim’, ‘Mellemøsten’.

Selvom vi efterhånden alle husker citatet fra chefredaktøren på den arabiske TV-station Al-Arabiya:

“Alle muslimer er ikke terrorister, men de fleste terrorister er muslimer.”

Uddrag fra bogen Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington (Nelson Current, 2005):

“Sam Podberesky, assistant general counsel at the Department of Transportation, led the meeting. [Former United Airlines vice president Ed] Soliday says he “told me that if I had more than three people of the same ethnic origin in line for additional screening, our system would be shut down as discriminatory.” Podberesky viewed any human profiling as discriminatory, even if it is based on statistical probability. Soliday argued that the “terrorist threat, statistically, is from Muslim males under thirty.” At least thirteen of the fifteen people on the FAA’s own prohibited-passenger list before 9/11 were Islamic extremists. And every one of the suspects on the FBI’s list of most-wanted terrorists were, and still are, Muslim, with nearly half of them named Mohammed.

But Podberesky—a University of Maryland-educated civil-rights attorney, whose wife, Rosita, and son are Hispanic—would hear none of it. He and the civil-rights attorneys working for then-Attorney General Janet Reno were on the same page. “They didn¹t want any minorities seen hassled at checkpoints,” Soliday says.

So “we loaded up the system with randoms to make it mathematically impossible to get three ethnics in line at the same time,” he tells me. Those “randoms” selected for additional security scrutiny include such low-risk passengers as soccer moms, Girl Scouts, and even little old ladies with walkers. To try to identify actual security risks, they programmed the automated system to score each passenger’s profile based on twenty-four secret travel-related factors unrelated to ethnicity, religion, or place of birth, Soliday explains. They gave passengers points for positive travel habits, such as being a frequent flyer or using a credit card to pay for tickets. The points were added up, and passengers who scored above a minimum threshold were not considered high-risk. Those who fell short of it were selected for additional screening. This was the government-approved CAPPS system that was rolled out in early 1998 and run by the airlines on 9/11.

It is still in use today. …”