Until we stop all pacifists and their murderous ways we will never be safe as a country. I think it is good to keep them off of my plane - who knows what kind of violence they will inflict...
This is yet another example of Tom Ridge doing his best to protect the citizens of the U.S. and the extremist arm of the liberal party doing its best to run a smear campaign against the US Govt. In the post-911 world that we live in, we must make small sacrifices in our lives in order to achieve the appropriate freedom/security balance. Maintaining a list of higher probability offenders is sound policy. This list will *reduce* the number of people who are inconvenienced at the airport, not increase it. It will target the efforts of the screeners on the people with likely motives to do harm to the U.S. However, this policy does not even begin to encroach upon these people's individual freedoms in a manner that is unreasonable or unusual. All it does is subject them to additional screening -- a truly minor inconvenience. The extreme liberals will try to paint this as an issue of "Big Brother" imposing his will or act like Ridge is installing a camera in their shower. They will try to paint a wild, ridiculous picture in which we are no longer free. This is ludicrous. Profiling is an absolutely necessary and rational way to prevent crime and terrorist activity. Each and every one of us profiles people, animals, and other things on a daily basis. I do not handle snakes because they have a history of biting. I do not sit on nails because they have a history of cutting skin. I do not eat plastic because it is widely recognized as not being edible. In a similar manner, I do not suspect Norwegians of attempting to hijack planes because they have no track record of doing so. I do not suspect a farmer from Nebraska to carjack me because they have no history of doing so. Too often the profiling debate turns irrational because of a reluctance to use common sense and a preference to not invoke feelings of racial guilt. This leads to poor policework and a less safe environment for all.
I would agree with T_J. It is very "poor policework" indeed to assume that pacifists are terrorist threats. I suggest they put their resources into tracking angry male business types who can be annoyed by minor inconveniences like gum smacking or poorly handled lasagna orders. But honestly, rimbaud has raised an interesting point. If we can keep pacifists off of planes, I would probably endure fewer complaints of "this isn't the vegetarian meal I ordered!" in my vicinity.
I would truly hesitate to use the word "pacifist" when referring to the the angry, venomous mobs that blocked streets, wasted law enforcement resources and disrupted economic activity in cities such as New York and San Francisco. These angry mobs have an axe to grind and will stop at nothing to draw attention to themselves.
