TSA's Gift

As airport full-body scan images and Transportation Security Administration anecdotes go viral, the Washington Times editorial staff has come through with a timely reminder of what all this is really about: the societal perversions and distortions that are the byproduct of the insanity of political correctness toward Islam.

We know that every hijacking and bomb threat involving airlines involves Muslims—almost always male Muslims and almost always between the ages of 18 and 35. Men know this. Women know this. Christians know this. Jews know this. Hindus know this. Atheists know this. Muslims know this. Politicians know this. American voters know this. Everyone knows this. Yet we have a massive American airport security apparatus designed and constructed and implemented based on a steadfast determination to proclaim that what everyone knows shall be considered irrelevant. The result is a system that is monumentally more expensive, intrusive and less effective than it could be if we simply applied common sense and intelligence to detecting what we know constitutes the threat.

We can all recite the mantras of political correctness: we mustn’t profile; not all Muslims are terrorists; airport inconvenience and a small amount of privacy rape is a small price to pay to preserve an America of pluralism and diversity and multi-culturalism and ‘mosaics’ and tolerance and non-judgmentalism and compassion and on and on and on. We’re tired of political correctness as a suicide pact.

The Islam-in-America question is generating more and more serious consideration, which we are happy to have contributed to here here, here, here, and here. The unpleasant fact is that the sharia law of Islam is fundamentally incompatible with the America of the founding. There is simply no realistic way to reach a legislative or societal solution which says that sharia law shall be honored in America (or the UK or France, for that matter) this far but no farther. High-minded Beltway intellectuals like Michael Gerson will try to talk themselves out of this reality until they run out of pixels or ink, but the most they will accomplish is to make themselves feel better and more high-minded. The reality won’t change.

Ironically, however, even the high-minded intellectuals and Islamic apologists tend to acknowledge that it sure would be nice if some of the more violent and absolute doctrines of the Koran and sharia law were moderated from within Islam. We laid out one version of this approach three years ago.

Well, we suggest that a tremendous impetus for this desired moderation of Islam from within would be much more likely to materialize if our airport security authorities (and our Department of Homeland Security) publicly and unapologetically declared that security screening will henceforth focus on identifying Muslim radicals and extremists and sympathizers—and this is because we understand that this is where the threat resides and are determined to stop it for so long as it remains a threat. The declaration could include a commitment to carry out security procedures with civility toward all Muslims flying through American airports, but unless and until we hear from the Islamic community a more public, forceful, unified and consistent denouncement of Islamic terrorism in all its forms, we will not act as if we are stuck on stupid.

Would it be unpleasant for an innocent Muslim to be singled out for security screening? To some degree, yes. But that’s the price of being Muslim for so long as Muslim authorities do not moderate the doctrines of their ‘religion’ that are spawning the so-called radicalism that seeks to kill innocent people on airplanes.

The standard PC whines about this approach just don’t cut it. “Gee, we’re making them change their religion and we don’t do that in America!” No, we are not making them change their religion. We are following common sense security measures for airport safety to address a threat that we can plainly see and accurately profile. If Muslims don’t like the inconvenience enough to help drive changes to their religion, they don’t have to. But the rest of us don’t have to endure full body scans and pay for a ridiculous system that wouldn’t even be needed if all passengers behaved as we do.

Or what about, “You can’t do this; it will just make them mad and more determined to blow up airplanes!” This tired illogic actually serves to bring the debate back to the top level Islam-in-America question: why are we even thinking of accommodating a religion where the slightest offense or inconvenience is believed a legitimate justification for more cold-blooded murder?

It should be a simple, clear and unequivocal societal no-no to blow up innocent civilians on airplanes. Nobody gets to do that—no matter what their gender, language, birthplace, or holy book. And if one subset of humanity clearly identifies itself as unwilling to abide by this societal no-no, then society must be sane enough to say we know who you are and we will stop you. You are welcome to convince us that the targeted subset should not include you, and you are invited to moderate your religion or take other steps to further isolate and stop the growth of the targeted subset, but until we are convinced that the threat has been removed, we will continue to act with common sense to protect our society.

The American people are ready for this common sense approach. TSA’s move to full-body scans and gropes has only increased their readiness.

Paul Gable

November 16, 2010