Obama ignores the madness of fighting a politically correct terrorism war
By Jim Kouri
web posted March 16, 2009
President Barack Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder announced on Friday that the term enemy combatant will no longer be used by the federal government to describe enemy combatants captured on the battlefield during counterterrorism and counterinsurgency military operations. To many law enforcement officers and military personnel, this action is the epitome of politically correct newspeak.
As time passes and the events of September 11th become more distant, the voices of America's political-correctness orthodoxy have increased their volume and intensity. They now feel safe in questioning Homeland Security tactics to combat terrorism and are attempting to turn public opinion against law-enforcement leaders.
A major weapon in their arsenal is the accusation of racial profiling by US police and security forces. Another weapon in the war against the war on terrorism is the distortions made regarding the Patriot Act. When one considers the risks to lives and property posed by terrorists, political correctness has now become a weapon of mass destruction.
Most clear thinking Americans were shocked when 9-11 Commission member and former US Secretary of the Navy John Lehman revealed a disturbing fact: the Federal Aviation Administration will be hitting American airlines with stiff penalties for even the appearance of any racial profiling of Middle-Easterners. One airline paid out a huge sum of money to Arab males who filed law suits alleging racial profiling, as well. Yet none of this appeared in the commission's final report.
This leaves many law-enforcement officers incredulously asking: what kind of terrorism war is this? It seems national security and public safety are taking a back-seat to political correctness which in turn thwarts our efforts to detect terrorists and their accomplices.
The National Association of Chiefs of Police's annual survey of our nation's police commanders and security directors provides evidence of our insane infatuation with the politically-correct orthodoxy. The survey reveals that almost 60 percent of police departments enforce a written policy prohibiting so-called racial profiling. At the same time, the survey shows that 88 percent of American police and security executives believe our homeland will suffer a terrorist attack within the next year.
Many Americans even hoped that the 9-11 Commission Report would reveal how political correctness -- in many cases, a euphemism for left-wing ideology -- contributed to the worst terrorist attack in US history. It did not. Some of the same people complaining about the CIA and FBI deficiencies are the people responsible for handcuffing law enforcement and intelligence officers in the first place.
In fact, some in Congress and on the 2008 presidential campaign trail were guilty of having it both ways: they supported the heavily partisan 9-11 Commission and at the same time opposed the Patriot Act, in spite of the law's opponents' inability to provide evidence of even one case where the Patriot Act infringed on American citizens' civil liberties. Their favorite tool for putting law-enforcement leaders -- and the politicos who support them -- on the defensive is to make allegations of profiling.
Criminal Profiling is a law-enforcement tool with a history that began in the early 1980s. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Behavioral Sciences Unit developed the first profile for a serial-killer (which by the way indicated a white male among its criteria). Then, according to former-FBI special agent Robert Ressler, the BSU created profiles for other categories of crime including terrorism. Through the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia, local law-enforcement officers were provided instruction in profiling, which they brought back to their respective police agencies.
Any cop worth his salt will tell you that criminal profiling remains a work-in-progress. As law enforcement learns more about the criminal mind and criminal characteristics, these profiles will continue to be revised. But will there be any need for such research and development if cops are prohibited from using this tool? 
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a staff writer for the New Media Alliance. In addition, he's the former blog editor for the House Conservatives Fund's weblog. Recently, the editors at Examiner.com appointed him as their Law Enforcement Examiner. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty. He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer for NewswithViews.com and PHXnews.com. He's also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 300 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc. If you wish to receive Kouri's emailed law enforcement and intelligence reports, write to him at COPmagazine@aol.com. Simply write "Free Subscription" on the subject line.