| | As new US rules on profiling individuals from ‘high security risk’ countries come into operation today, the Daily Telegraph carries comments from Khalid Mahmood MP (pictured) and Dr Shaaz Mahboob, of British Muslims for Secular Democracy, supporting moves to introduce passenger profiling in the UK.
|
Mahmood, MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, tells the paper:
"I think most people would rather be profiled than blown up. It wouldn't be victimisation of an entire community.
"I think people will understand that it is only through something like profiling that there will be some kind of safety.
"If people want to fly safely we have to take measures to stop things like the Christmas Day plot. Profiling may have to be the price we have to pay.
"The fact is the majority of people who have carried out or planned these terror attacks have been Muslims."
Whilst Mahboob tells the paper:
"We have seen that certain types of people who fit a certain profile – young men of a particular ethnic background – have been engaged in terror activities, and targeting this sort of passenger would give people a greater sense of security."
He adds, for purpose of sensitivity presumably, "Profiling has to be backed by this type of statistical and intelligence-based evidence. There would be no point in stopping Muslim grandmothers."
So, only young Muslims then, because that narrows the scope of discriminatory policy?
One wonders how many Muslim constituents Mahmood spoke to before offering his opinion to the Telegraph? The question is poignant because in printing the response of Shaaz Mahboob the paper states: ‘…many British Muslims now agree with Mr Mahmood.’ Really?
ENGAGE readers have an opportunity to correct the paper’s insinuation that Muslims support the introduction of profiling at airports by writing to the paper (email: dtletters[at]telegraph.co.uk) and distancing themselves from Khalid Mahmood and Shaaz Mahboob’s remarks.
Curious that Mahmood should claim that profiling wouldn’t be “victimisation of an entire community”. Is it his contention that profiling isn’t discriminatory or a highly visible form of stigmatisation?
Further, in claiming that “people will understand that it is only through something like profiling that there will be some kind of safety”, is Mahmood suggesting that Muslims should willingly sacrifice their liberties at the altar of prejudice? And doesn’t such a move only reinforce the stereotype that all Muslims must be treated as potential terrorists until proven otherwise?
It would seem the research findings of the Open Society’s Justice Initiative have fallen on deaf ears. The report, ‘Ethnic Profiling in the European Union: Pervasive, Ineffective and Discriminatory’, issued by the body in May 2009, stated that ‘A host of bad outcomes stem from ethnic profiling, including stopping, searching, and even arresting innocent people; overlooking criminals who do not fit the established profile; undermining the rule of law and perceptions of police fairness; stigmatizing entire communities; and alienating people who could work with police to reduce crime and prevent terrorism.
‘The use of ethnic profiling in the fight against terrorism both stems from and reinforces stereotypes that associate Muslims, foreigners, illegal immigrants, extremism, and terrorism as points along a “continuum of insecurity.”
‘Ethnic profiling feeds the logic underlying public discrimination against Muslims, and impedes efforts to integrate immigrant and minority populations and address racism and xenophobia. Worse, ethnic profiling stigmatizes entire communities and makes them less likely to cooperate with police. In addition, ethnic profiling has several immediate effects on those subjected to it, ranging from deprivation of liberty and invasion of privacy to less visible but equally insidious and widespread effects such as increased fear and marginalization. Finally, …there is little evidence that ethnic profiling has in fact increased law enforcement effectiveness in combating terrorist violence.’
Perhaps Khalid Mahmood might read the report and avail himself of how Muslims really feel about the prospect of introducing passenger profiling at airports? The Guardian reports that Shami Chakrabarti, director of the civil liberties group Liberty, has warned the government against profiling.
"Has no one noticed the terrorists' ability to capitalise on discrimination, or the recruits from a range of different backgrounds? Whether on the street or at the terminal, suspicious behaviour is a sensible basis for search by policing professionals; race or religion is not," she said.
Quite so. Update: The RICU factsheet on border security can be read here.
|
