White House racism is being claimed by Seema Jilani, who calls the Secret Service racist for her treatment at the entrance’s security checkpoint.
As previous reported by The Inquisitr, the White House racism allegations claim the Secret Service boldly applied double standards in regards to a journalist attendee’s wife, Seema Jilani, who was trying to get keys from her spouse.
Jilani, who was not in possession of a ticket, alleges the security staff engaged in racial profiling due to her skin color and identity as a Muslim. As she attempted to obtain the needed keys from her spouse, security allowed several white women without tickets to pass through as she watched in horror.
Jilani takes a stand on both the alleged White House racism and the practice of racial profiling for security purposes:
“Despite being a native English speaker who was born in New Orleans and a physician who trained at a prestigious institution, all people see is the color of my skin. After this incident, I will no longer apologize, either for my faith or my complexion. It is not my job to convince you to distinguish me from the violent sociopaths that claim to be Muslims, whose terrorism I neither support, nor condone. It is your job.”
In her narrative about White House racism, Jilani takes a swipe at conservatives, saying, “I suppose the “support the troops” rhetoric by the right only applies to white veterans.” She’s outraged that earlier in her life she was asked whether she “would wear a burqa or if my parents would arrange my marriage during interviews.” She calls bigotry for anyone who makes “dirty looks at my hijabi friend.”
The problem I have with all this is that Jilani conflates actual racism and hate crimes toward Muslims with racial profiling designed and intended for security purposes. When police investigate a crime, they create a profile of what the suspect most likely looks like based upon past history, demographics, and known facts.
For example, I’ve seen police create early profile of potential suspects. The suspect is rendered in drawings as being black based upon crime statistics in the area, although the real suspect may prove to be white in the end. But it must be mentioned there is a debate over the accuracy of racial profiling and black crime statistics.
In regards to national security, terrorism targeting America tends to involve suspects who are Muslim, highly educated, and non-white. Obviously, this racial profile of a potential suspect is not going to be 100 percent and evidence of this is the white Boston bombing suspects.
The United States and much of the western world seems to be the only ones who care if racial profiling for security purposes offends anyone. Israel regularly implements racial profiling at airports, while our TSA is not allowed to discriminate even though terrorist suspects tend to fit certain recognized patterns. The interesting part is that in Israel they don’t even have a Hebrew word or term for the English phrase “racial profiling” because they believe the practice is so self-evident. Despite any claims of White House racism, racial profiling works well despite its unfortunate side effects, with Israel suffering no issues in airports since 1972.
On a personal level, I happen to live in an area where a local Muslim mosque helped the 9/11 terrorists by picking them up at the airports and giving them cars. Locals know these Muslims were celebrating in the streets early on, so people tend to be suspicious. Still, I have several friends of middle eastern, one who was at my house this past night. But should I be considered racist if I choose to employ racial profiling around anyone associated with that mosque based upon this history?
What do you think about these claims of White House racism in regards to racial profiling and security?