From the Washington Post:

The Transportation Security Administration notified airline carriers Sunday of the changes for all flights entering the United States -- with an emphasis on a "full body pat-down and physical inspection of property" for all people who are citizens of or are flying through or from nations with significant terrorist activity.

Sounds reasonable, right?  The recent would-be mass murderer from Nigeria might have been refused entry onto that Northwest Airlines plane if he had been subject to a full body pat down.  Furthermore, he fits the profile of an al Qaeda terrorist:  a single, 20-something Moslem male who has lived in countries known to host terrorist training camps.  Sure, no one wants to be frisked, and it may seem like an unacceptable intrusion strictly on the grounds of one’s religion, age, and domicile.  Certainly, ethnic profiling plays a role as well, and we all think that’s a terrible thing, correct?

Not me.  In fact, I have been the subject of profiling, and have even been frisked at gunpoint.  In 1981, I was stopped from boarding a flight from Munich to Berlin.  Just as I was about to enter the plane, a machine gun toting policeman barred my way, while another immediately began patting me down from behind.  Why?  Because at that time the German terrorist group, the Red Army Faction (also known as the Baader-Meinhof Gang) had been very active, and had recently killed a very prominent German politician.  And I fit the profile:  male, 20-something years old, long hair, beard.

To tell you the truth, I didn’t really mind being frisked.  It lasted all of about ten seconds, and was the source of interesting conversation for the next year or so.

Nevertheless, what I don’t like about these new rules is the choice of nations whose citizens are to be targeted for this increased scrutiny.  They include the following:  North Korea, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and Cuba.

Look at that list of countries and tell me if you see one that seems out of place.  Hint:  it’s the only one that is in the Western Hemisphere.  Cuba is on the list of nations because the US State Department has named Cuba one of just three state sponsors of terrorism in the entire world.  The other two are Iran and North Korea.  The other states on the airport scrutiny list are considered terrorism-prone nations.

But why is Cuba on this list?  Can you name a single act of terrorism from the past 30 years that can be traced to either the Cuban government or Cuban citizens acting on their own?  If you were sitting next to a Cuban on an airplane, would you be concerned for your safety?  Me neither.  If you were sitting next to a fidgety 25 year old Moslem man who was holding the Koran while praying intently, would you be wishing a little harder than usual that the plane would hurry up and land?  Me too.

Cuba is not a state sponsor of terrorism, despite what the US State Department says.  In 2003, a CIA report to Congress contained this sentence:

We have no credible evidence … that the Cuban government has engaged in, or directly supported international terrorist operations in the past decade, although our information is insufficient to say beyond a doubt that no collaboration has occurred.

That last phrase is a classic case of CYA – Cover Your Ass.  You could say the exact same thing about a lot of countries, some of which are close allies of the United States.   For example, where is Turkey on the airport watch list?  Since 9-11, at least 112 people have been killed in terrorist attacks inside Turkey, and those killed include Americans, Britons, and other Western nationals.  77 of those were killed in Istanbul.  While most of the attacks were instigated by Kurdish militants seeking independence from Ankara, at least 33 of the deaths were caused by al Qaeda attacks that specifically targeted Western interests.  Does the State Department want us to think Cuba is a greater terrorism threat than Turkey?  Or does the fact that Turkey is a NATO ally whose support we need for our endless War on Terror mean that terrorism there is of no real import?

Getting back to Cuba, after 50 years, it is high time for the United States to realize Cuba’s government has some staying power, and that our hostility toward it has been utterly counter-productive.  To call Cuba a sponsor of terrorism does nothing but divert our attention away from real threats to our security, and further soils our relations and credibility with much of the rest of the world.