news-record.com

OPINION

Leonard Pitts Jr.: Jihad Jane shows evil has many faces

Monday, March 15, 2010
(Updated 4:00 am)

Evil is not a color.

It has no particular religion nor creed, nor style of dress, nor gender nor geographic home. Evil is an equal opportunity employer.

One hopes we learn at least that much from the adventures of Jihad Jane.

That, according to federal prosecutors, is the name Colleen LaRose used when she went online to say how "desperate" she was to do something to help Muslims. That desperation allegedly led her deep into the shadowy world of fundamentalist extremism.

LaRose, prosecutors say, used the Internet to recruit would-be terrorists. She allegedly sought to kill a Swedish artist who had angered Muslims by depicting the Prophet Mohammed with a dog's body. LaRose is also said to have agreed to marry one of her conspirators. According to the indictment, she wrote that it would be "an honor & great pleasure to die or kill" for her intended.

Seven alleged members of the would-be terror cell have been apprehended in Ireland. That's in addition to LaRose, who was arrested in Philadelphia in October. She was indicted last week.

Which ought to serve as a rebuke to the guy standing in the airport security line grumbling at how the TSA agent is running his wand over some dewy-eyed grandmother who obviously isn't a threat.

Even more, it should rebuke pundits like Cal Thomas, Ann Coulter and Kathleen Parker, who, in the wake of Sept. 11, argued for ethnic profiling in airport security. Pat down swarthy, bearded young men with Middle Eastern accents and exotic head gear, they said, and leave the rest of us alone.

Jihad Jane is the reason that's a dumb idea. She is, according to published reports and photos, 4-foot-11, 105 pounds and 46 years of age, with pale skin, blond hair and blue eyes. She is, literally, a citizen of Main Street, USA, having made her home on that thoroughfare in the Philadelphia suburb of Pennsburg, where she was a caretaker for her boyfriend's father. Until, that is, she disappeared, along with her boyfriend's passport, which she allegedly intended to give to her terrorist fiance.

There are several good arguments against profiling. It's morally wrong. It's an abridgement of civil liberties.

But the most compelling of them is embodied by Jihad Jane. Put aside squishy appeals to conscience and principle and deal instead with hard pragmatism. Pragmatism will tell you that to concentrate solely on swarthy Middle Eastern men is to turn a blind eye to everyone else. But as demonstrated by LaRose, by convicted terrorists Richard Reid, Jose Padilla and John Walker Lindh, and any number of others here and abroad, terror comes in both genders and all cultures and shades.

And here, it might be fruitful to recall a point Kathleen Parker made in her 2002 column on profiling. She noted her own profile ("a smallish, middle-aged, Anglo-Saxon, 14th-generation American" woman) and asked pointedly: "When was the last time a U.S. citizen fitting my description hijacked an airplane?" The question becomes darkly comic in the wake of this arrest. LaRose, after all, fits the same profile, at least in the broad parameters, and if she didn't hijack an airplane, we can assume it wasn't for lack of ambition.

The moral of the story: To depend for our safety on profiling is to open a gap in our already gap-ridden security. It creates a blind spot. One can envision TSA giving some Middle Eastern businessman the third degree while a tiny blonde saunters by with a bomb in her purse.

So we should be thankful for the vigilance of federal authorities who nabbed Jihad Jane. In the process, they remind us: Evil is not a color, a religion, a gender or a style of dress.

That shouldn't need saying. Somehow, it always does.

Leonard Pitts Jr. is a columnist for the Miami Herald. Send e-mail to him at lpitts@miamiherald.com.

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

tahoeman1971

March 15, 2010 - 6:45 am EDT

Great idea Leonard. Let's ignore all the hay in the haystack and focus on the needle to be politically correct. I have never in my life seen someone so "opposed" to racism as "obsessed" with race as Pitts.

Conundrum

March 15, 2010 - 7:07 am EDT

I don't think that Mr. Pitts is obsessed with race. He just wants fairness. It is amusing though, that any African American who talks about race, is defined as a racist. I've always associated "racist" with someone along the lines of a George Wallace, Jesse Helms, Bull Connor, or Louis Farrahkhan for his anti-semitic statements. I think that people (some, not all white males) cringe at columns that focus on race, because of the pathological behavior behind issues like slavery and Jim Crow. I have to run back to my Merriam-Webster to revisit the word racist.

nemo0037

March 15, 2010 - 7:28 am EDT

Why is it that whenever anyone points out the errors that racial profiling would incur, so many people pop up to shout "politically incorrect"? The point of this column is that you CAN'T tell "needle" from "hay" in the security queue just be looking. Is that really such a hard message to understand and agree with?

I'm surprised that Pitts did not also mention terrorists such as Timothy McVeigh and the Unabomber. Many of the terrorists that Americans have had to deal with over the past few decades have been non-Arab. And don't forget the home-grown terrorists from here in the south, with the white hood and titles like Grand Dragon.

In order to help enhance the safety of the community (it can never be guaranteed, you know), accept the bother of being checked by the TSA when you fly. And hope they are perfect for all your flights.

Get A Clue

March 15, 2010 - 9:33 am EDT

People who do not understand math and who would also sacrifice innocent lives in order to remain politically correct must vow to never write about that which they do not understand.

Take a look at the 19 or so 9/11 terrorists. Look for similar features.
Take a look at "Jihad Jane."
Jane is a statistical outlier. Of course we need to expand our search beyond the obvious, but one Jane does not justify every single American being treated like a potential terrorist.

2fer

March 15, 2010 - 11:31 am EDT

Actually, people who understand math and have an inkling about undercover operations would know that groups like Al Qaida have been looking for statistical outliers since swarthy males are too obvious subjects.
The reason that 9/11 was virtually inevitable is that airlines and passengers complained so much about basic search and ID procedures that standards were lowered until everyone, including swarthy men, could get through or around unchallenged. Unless we treat everyone, American or not, male or female, young or old, like a potential terrorist, the terrorists will exploit the archetype we exclude from examination. The terrorists are primitive in many ways, but they are not as stupid as people who want to lower standards for convenience.

Get A Clue

March 15, 2010 - 12:03 pm EDT

It's not nearly that simple, and we need not throw out the baby with the bathwater in order to achieve an appropriate measure of safety via public transportation. There is a huge difference between racism and political correctness, between feeling safe and being safe.

Panacea

March 15, 2010 - 6:35 pm EDT

On this issue, I respectfully disagree with Mr. Pitts.

Profiling works. It's not about race. It's about commonalities in criminal behavior. And it catches the bad guys, whether they be terrorists or gang bangers.

2fer mentioned that Jihad Janes is a statistical outlier. That's true; few homegrown white women are Islamic fundamentalists. This case proves there is a risk, and we do know (as 2fr mentioned) that al-Queda is attempting to recruit "normal" looking Americans. So the time is not yet to lower our guard.

And we should remember there are plenty more Timothy McVeigh's out there.

9155

March 15, 2010 - 10:43 am EDT

Pitts would have a hard time digging for baitworms. He wouldn't know where to look.

9155

March 15, 2010 - 11:37 am EDT

A friend told me he saw Pitts trying to buy a loaf of bread at a shoe store.

tonymo

March 15, 2010 - 10:44 am EDT

Folks, don't take Lenny "the Pitts" seriously. He's been waiting 30 years to write this coulmn. He's been praying for a "Jihad" Jane type to show up so he can pretend that 99.9999999999% of all terror acts have NOT been carried out by dark skinned Muslim males.

At least he's taking a break from his usual "racism around every corner" mantra. How did this clown ever managed to get hired by a large publication? Never mind!

rmacz

March 15, 2010 - 11:51 am EDT

Just thank someone down at the N&R....and they do not understand why they are failing, and Rupert Murdoch is doing so well....ha!...and don't forget Rush!
For years, the three networks had a monopoly with one newspaper towns....not anymore!

left-wing conspiracy theorist

March 15, 2010 - 4:24 pm EDT

Don't you find it interesting, though, that most of our home-grown terrorists are caucasian males?

universalgenius

March 15, 2010 - 11:19 am EDT

There this goes again picking on some little blonde blye eyed female this time twisting and distorting in his sicko crackhead pea brain when in fact this racist bigot lib idiot cant conceal his real motive. Why dont he just say he hates whites and move to some pagan Muslim nation? His only prob is real Muslim nations have a way of dealing with liberals. Ask Malcom X who he is trying to copy. X was lucky to get out of Mecca alive but was hushed so he wouldnt expose the Chitown fakes. Pitts in all his hatred clearly suffers from that dreaded disease of envy called white wantabe-ism like bleached MJackson. Ignorance. Accept who you are and others who are different than you. Practice what you preach. Stop picking on blonde females and confusing the issues. You kid noone but yourself.

2fer

March 15, 2010 - 11:35 am EDT

Illiterate, irrational, and vulgar. What a spokesperson for white Christianity and civilization! This is a joke blog, isn't it?

left-wing conspiracy theorist

March 15, 2010 - 4:26 pm EDT

This is a bizarre post, isn't it?

Panacea

March 15, 2010 - 6:25 pm EDT

Bizarre poster, anyway.

9155

March 15, 2010 - 12:24 pm EDT

I guess we should send 30,000 troops to the artic circle next, after all, let's be fair about this thing.

jstevenh1952

March 16, 2010 - 8:31 am EDT

I find Pitts an annoying person. Probably a "black apologist" who does what he can to piss white people off. And based on the posts here, he's pretty good at it.

It is hard to find positive things to say about him. Annoying, just annoying. My last read on him.

boxster

March 16, 2010 - 10:31 am EDT

Got a question for you, Leonard. You are in the airport waiting to board. You are a careful and informed person so you notice those around you. Three middle age men of Arab descent to your right confer quietly in their own language as they huddle over a laptop computer. Three white middle age women to your left confer quietly over a laptop computer. As you observe, neither group interacts with anyone else and both appear nervous as boarding time approaches. How do you feel? Do you have any suspicions of either group or do you dismiss both due to some abstract "moral" objection to "profiling"? What if anything do you do? Be honest with yourself - if not with your readership.
Your point of the risks of turning a "blind eye" to other than the "typical" terrorist is well-taken and part of the already existing national security efforts. But to ignore the overwhelming evidence of the prototype terrorist is to assume much, much greater risk. All in the name of civil liberty and "political correctness". Do you think those hijacked passengers experiencing their last moments as they plummeted to the earth gave that point much consideration? Would you?

9155

March 16, 2010 - 12:20 pm EDT

We profile all the time in every day life. Basketball teams do it when they foul the worst foul shooter, advertizers do it, I'll bet police do it when they try to figure out who burned a cross in someones yard. It's called "most likely", and Pitts is profiling when he attributes conservatives political stances to racism. Maybe Pitts can lead a commission to reinvestigate the lynchings, minus profiling.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search