Ann Coulter

Among the advantages of a deportation presumption is that it would give the FBI increased opportunities to flip Muslim immigrants to informants -- a possibility unlikely to be lost on any terrorists looking for their own new recruits.

A mass deportation order also ought to ease the way for "ethnic profiling." If noncitizens from various suspect countries were under an order to leave, all security personnel would have grounds to look for potential violators of that law.

Everyone is profiling now anyway. No one talks about it, which allows liberals the luxury of ritualistically denouncing racial profiling. Ordinary Americans aren't going to die for political correctness. And airlines aren't going to fly empty planes.

The facts are: (1) Nineteen male immigrants of Middle-Eastern descent recently murdered thousands of civilians on our shores in a coordinated attack; (2) other people answering to the same description have been apprehended in the country as suspected co-conspirators; and (3) according to the attorney general, there are more sleeper terrorist cells at large that the government has yet to identify.

Complaints about heightened suspicions toward people who fit the description of fanatical Islamists go well beyond opposing indiscriminate hate. It is a demand that Americans not even have their antennae up.

Focusing on men of Middle-Eastern appearance is less "profiling" than suspect identification. It is in keeping with the standard police practice of not looking for people over 6 feet tall when the eyewitnesses tell you the perp is 5 feet 2 inches. When looking for the Unabomber, I promise you -- the FBI wasn't rousting Asians or Arabs.

As unfair as it sounds, deporting immigrants from suspect countries will actually minimize cruelties toward vast numbers of vaguely Arabic-looking people. Although many immigrants will be swept up unfairly, all the Sikhs, Hindus and Arab Christians will be relieved to discover they don't scare people anymore.

To be sure, there is a risk that mass deportations might upset the delicate diplomatic maneuvering designed to bring the largest possible number of unsavory regimes into our "international coalition." On the other hand, some countries in the "international coalition" might be forced to conclude that the Great Satan is smarter than they thought. This part of the plan ought to appeal to their primitive sense of honor and boundaries.

But moreover, any sentient being has to realize that some of our "partner" regimes are more plausibly allied with the terrorists. If we don't stop the coalition-building soon, Colin Powell could soon be announcing a "diplomatic initiative" to bring Osama bin Laden into the "coalition." Having allies is great, but let us not forget that it is ultimately our responsibility, not that of foreigners with different interests, to defend this country.