Danny's right, I have no idea how passenger profiling will work in practice. However, as an educated layman I'm going to need some convincing to believe that you can accurately assess a person's intent just from a couple of questions and a look at their ticket. And I'm going to need a lot more convincing before I believe that profilers are going to be entirelly colourblind in deciding whom to take aside for further questioning. I don't understand how you can be so dismissive of this issue, Danny.
I also fail to understand how you can say that the media is trying to convince the public that the security we have now is ``as good as it gets''. It's precisely the sort of article we're discussing here that shows security as it is is really pretty hopeless and needs to be tightened. I take it we're in agreement on that point.
My argument is that it's better to tighten measures that keep the tools of the terrorist's trade off aircraft than it is to adopt measures, such as profiling, that risk inflaming racial tensions. Scoff all you like, but until someone demonstrates otherwise, then I believe that is what they will do.
Taildragger, from your post it's clear that you understand the benefits that this type of article brings, yet still you can't quite bring yourself to admit that the reporter may have been justified in doing what he did. The story ``might encourage other more nefarious persons to give it a try themselves''? I hardly think so. Firstly, guards will be that much more alert after a publicly embarrassing expose like this, and secondly, if someone's got the fanatical mentality of a terrorist, then it's going to take a lot more than a newspaper article to sway their decisions one way or the other.
I'm not trying to suggest that what this reporter did is in any way revolutionary, or worthy of special praise -- it's just a typical, bread-and-butter expose and it's been done many times before. But the fact that it still CAN be done clearly shows the need for improving our approach to airport security. And the fact that it was done publicly means someone may be embarrassed enough to actually do something. Democratic societies need this type of reporting. Period.