LESSON OF THE “JOKESTER” QATARI DIPLO…PROFILING ENJOYS WIDE SUPPORT
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304168004575177890913868472.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion#printMode
The Lesson of the Joking ‘Shoe-Bomber’
‘Profiling’ turns out to have widespread public support.
By L. GORDON CROVITZSince 9/11, one of the big open questions has been how willing Americans are for all forms of intelligence to be used to stop potential terrorists. In particular, profiling by suspicious behavior has been largely off-limits as overly subjective, giving authorities too much discretion to target people. Judging by the reaction last week to what looked like a second shoe-bomber incident, the new consensus is “better safe than sorry.”
Last Wednesday, news reports had a terrorist trying to blow up a United Airlines flight to Denver from Washington. Fighter jets were scrambled and some 5,000 flights in progress were alerted to another potential 9/11. It turned out to be a false alarm—but an educational one.
A flight attendant had noticed the smell of tobacco smoke after a first-class passenger left the forward lavatory. Another passenger found a bag of tobacco he had left behind. An air marshal on the flight confronted the suspected smoker, who denied it and said, “I’m trying to light my shoes on fire.”
This turned out to be a sarcastic reference to the failed attempt by shoe-bomber Richard Reid in 2001. The latest episode came just a few months after the Christmas Day attempt by another al Qaeda-trained terrorist, a young Nigerian, who failed to set off explosives hidden in his underwear. The marshal on the Denver flight was not amused.
The joker and smoker was later identified as the third secretary in the Qatari Embassy in Washington, 27-year-old Mohammed al Madadi. The reaction to the incident could have been to ask whether the infractions were so minor that everyone overreacted, perhaps because the man was from an Arab country. Instead, the overwhelming reaction was support for the airline staff, air marshals and Air Force.
This matters because government agencies may finally be planning to profile by behavior. The Obama administration recently announced it will no longer scrutinize all travelers from 14 mostly Muslim countries, a procedure put in place after the Christmas Day would-be explosives incident. Instead, agencies will combine behavioral information with other intelligence. The administration has not given details, perhaps partly out of squeamishness about profiling.
The administration’s nominee to run the Transportation Security Administration last month testified in support of the Israeli model for airport security. The nominee later dropped out for unrelated reasons, but this approach combines data mining with close assessment of each traveler.
Israeli security personnel have great discretion in singling people out for questioning. They take many behavioral factors into account, from how people travel to body language and eye contact. The U.S. has some “behavior detection officers” to help keep air travel safe, but it needs many more, with better training.
The case of the Qatari diplomat at least establishes the principle that egregious behavior justifies authorities being able to use their judgment to deter potential terrorists.
It was hard to find anyone crying foul or seeking recrimination. The New York Times ran a page-one story headlined, “Few Worry About Overreaction on Jet.” Under the heading, “Diplo Immunity Ain’t Kryptonite, Buddy,” Josh Marshall wrote in the liberal Talking Points Memo blog, “I mean, are we really to believe that this guy took his diplomatic immunity as free rein to crack a joke about the need to light his shoe bomb.”
A New York magazine item asked, “Why do we even have diplomatic immunity?” And from the Daily Beast, “Let’s hope he remembers his nicotine gum” as the Qatar government, which invoked diplomatic immunity, ships him back home.
It didn’t help the diplomat that the reason he was flying to Denver was to make his monthly visit to Ali Saleh Kahlah al Marri, a Qatari citizen serving an eight-year term at the federal “Supermax” prison in Florence, Colo. Marri confessed to being part of an al Qaeda sleeper cell sent by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to “enter the U.S. no later than Sept. 10, 2001,” and await instructions.
Marri studied cyanide compounds in Peoria, Ill., until his arrest in December 2001. He was held as an enemy combatant in a Navy brig until President Obama last year decided to give him a civilian trial. He pleaded guilty to giving material support to al Qaeda and was sentenced to 15 years, with credit for time already served. (Of course, if Marri were still being held in the military system, there would have been no right to consular visits and thus no Denver flight incident.)
The broader lesson of this incident is that Americans will support reasonable antiterror procedures, even ones that depend on an intelligent use of judgment, even when suspicious behavior turns out not to be terrorism. If the antics of the diplomat from Qatar now help give U.S. authorities courage to assess behavior along with other information when targeting terrorists, he will at least have served some community service.
Comments are closed.
