by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright January 4, 2002
All Rights Reserved.

olitical correctness can't stop law enforcement from using common sense, hunting down terrorists and doing their job. Skating the razor's edge between racial profiling and national security, an American Airlines' pilot ejected an Arab American Secret Service agent from his plane on Christmas day. En route to Crawford, Texas to join Bush's Secret Service detail, a yet-to-be-named agent claims discrimination. Creating a national brouhaha, the incident highlights sensitivity among Arab Americans and raises legitimate questions about police practices. Since Sept. 11, law enforcement has worked nonstop to prevent more terrorism, including the most extensive nationwide crackdown on subversives ever. Atty. Gen John Aschroft took undue heat rounding up possible suspects, even where probable cause looked legitimate. But the anonymous Secret Service agent underscores the upside down logic preventing airport security from really working. Worries about "civil liberties" can't eclipse decisive moves to prevent terrorism—including reasonable steps taken by pilots.

      Pilots have the ultimate say in flight safety. After 9/11, airline personnel take security very seriously. Only one day before the Christmas day incident, "shoe bomber" terrorist Richard C. Reed was apprehended in Boston with plastique packed in his sneakers. While both sides trade charges, certain facts remain indisputable: A Middle Eastern looking man tried to board a flight with a concealed gun claiming to be a Secret Service agent. When the pilot inspected his documents, he found probable cause for more investigation. When questioned, the agent became rightfully annoyed and mouthy. "The captain saw an inconsistency the way the paperwork was filled out and so he wanted to deny passage . . . until the situation could be resolved," said American Airline's spokesman Todd Burke, suggesting that the pilot would rather be safe than sorry, given the heightened alert since 9/11. Despite this context, the agent and civil rights groups were outraged by the Airline's treatment. But looking at the situation, it's clear that the burden of proof lays with agent not the airline.

      Once travelers attempt to board flights, it's not up to airline personnel to verify the accuracy of passengers' credentials. Without minimally complete paperwork, passengers—including armed Secret Service agents—should expect safety checks and further delays. "This incident had absolutely nothing to do with the agent's ethnicity. It's about American Airlines confirming that an armed individual is indeed who they say they are," added Burke, justifying the pilot's compliance with federal rules permitting him to remove suspicious passengers. Concerned about liability, American Airlines went a bit overboard stating that racial profiling had "absolutely nothing to do" with this incident. Everyone knows that all Sept. 11 suicide hijackers were Middle Eastern. How could any responsible law enforcement agency—or others for that matter—not take ethnicity into account? "Suffice it to say that if this guy was a white non-Muslim he would not have had a problem," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington based lobbying group.

      According to American Airlines, once questioned, the passenger became "very hostile" and made "loud and abusive comments," raising more suspicions and leading the pilot to embark without the agent. Desperately trying to explain himself, any innocent person would feel annoyed and mistreated. Anything less would seem disingenuous and even contrived. Yet attorneys representing the agent went to the other extreme. "It was the pilot who was rude, unprofessional and demeaning," said attorney Christy Lopez, claiming that her client was cooperative, calm, and professional during the entire episode. Remaining entirely composed under the circumstance isn't credible. Nor is the Airline's claim that the agent became "very hostile." Had an armed passenger really become "very hostile," airport security would have placed him in custody. As it was, airport personnel corroborated the pilot's account that the agent's behavior was "unprofessional." No one blames the passenger for getting mad. But can you really blame the captain for protecting his flight?

      Demanding an apology and unspecified damages, the agent's attorneys are making a case for racial discrimination. Even President Bush remarked he'd be "madder than heck" if one of his security team was discriminated against. "The company vigorously resents any suggestion of racial discrimination," said American Airlines in a written statement, though not disputing that "racial profiling" led the pilot to request examining mug shots of other suspected Arab terrorists. While the agent hasn't ruled out a lawsuit, he's pressing his case for some type of restitution. "It has never been my desire to make this incident personal. This case is only about the facts," said the agent in a written statement, belying exactly the opposite of his actions. Engaging attorneys and Islamic lobbying groups sounds like someone who took things very personally. When airport security confiscates toenail clippers and knitting needles, Pilots and elderly grandmas also have feelings. But they don't hire attorneys to clear their good names. It's not the airline's fault that the unnamed agent was Middle Eastern or, for that matter, was carrying a book with Arabic writing on the cover.

      Rather than letting the unfortunate incident go, the agent chose to play "the race card," enlisting attorneys and Islamic rights' groups for his defense. What infuriates so many people is that since 9/11 ordinary travelers endured added airport security and lengthy delays all in the spirit of good citizenship. When the system finally worked and a responsible pilot tried to preempt another disaster, he's accused of racial discrimination. What about "reverse discrimination" of everyday travelers subjected to burdensome searches and seizures when they don't even remotely fit the profile of suspected terrorists? Screaming about discrimination, moaning about civil liberties, threatening lawsuits, and coercing political correctness can't interfere with common sense when dealing with heightened security. No reasonable person could fault the captain for protecting his passengers and flight crew—even if he erred on the side of caution. Certainly the disgruntled Secret Service agent has the capacity to comprehend the bigger picture since Sept. 11. Allowing lobbying groups to grandstand, pounce on publicity and exploit a tragic situation doesn't help their cause.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for the Los Angeles Daily Journal. He's director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in political consulting and strategic communication. He's author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2012 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.