Quote Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Good.

Everyone here prattles on about we wouldn't catch 5% of the terrorists using this method, as if for that reason we shouldn't try at all.

The obvious thing is-which opponents of this seem to ignore-is that you don't just use profiling. Ideally, you'd use a system like the Israeli airline uses, which involves a brief questioning of all passengers and longer questioning of suspicious individuals.
The main point of counter-terrorism is intelligence. Alienating the population which the terrorists live in, and on whom you're relying for information, is counter-productive. If keeping them onside means giving up the tool of racial profiling, so be it.

But our resistance to profiling is enourmously stupid. Becuase of some lefty dillusion, we think that we should stubbornly ignore the reality of our situation and that being blown up because we searched old women is better than *gasp* facing the fact that the terrorists are not white Christian John Smiths.

Crazed Rabbit
Because it alienates the Muslim population on whom you rely for intelligence. If you want to see effective counter-terrorism at work, look at European police, who for decades before 9/11 have been dealing with terrorists who were racially similar to the target population, who weren't readily distinguishable by facial characteristics. Despite this lack of obvious tools, we managed to deal with them. Why not learn from our experience?