quote:

---

Patriot Raid
By Jason Halperin, AlterNet
April 29, 2003
A month ago I experienced a very small taste of what hundreds of South Asian immigrants and U.S. citizens of South Asian descent have gone through since 9/11, and what thousands of others have come to fear. I was held, against my will and without warrant or cause, under the USA PATRIOT Act. While I understand the need for some measure of security and precaution in times such as these, the manner in which this detention and interrogation took place raises serious questions about police tactics and the safeguarding of civil liberties in times of war.

That night, March 20th, my roommate Asher and I were on our way to see the Broadway show "Rent." We had an hour to spare before curtain time so we stopped into an Indian restaurant just off of Times Square in the heart of midtown. I have omitted the name of the restaurant so as not to subject the owners to any further harassment or humiliation.

We helped ourselves to the buffet and then sat down to begin eating our dinner. I was just about to tell Asher how I'd eaten there before and how delicious the vegetable curry was, but I never got a chance. All of a sudden, there was a terrible commotion and five NYPD in bulletproof vests stormed down the stairs. They had their guns drawn and were pointing them indiscriminately at the restaurant staff and at us.

"Go to the back, go to the back of the restaurant," they yelled.

I hesitated, lost in my own panic.

"Did you not hear me, go to the back and sit down," they demanded.

I complied and looked around at the other patrons. There were eight men including the waiter, all of South Asian descent and ranging in age from late-teens to senior citizen. One of the policemen pointed his gun point-blank in the face of the waiter and shouted: "Is there anyone else in the restaurant?" The waiter, terrified, gestured to the kitchen.

The police placed their fingers on the triggers of their guns and kicked open the kitchen doors. Shouts emanated from the kitchen and a few seconds later five Hispanic men were made to crawl out on their hands and knees, guns pointed at them.

After patting us all down, the five officers seated us at two tables. As they continued to kick open doors to closets and bathrooms with their fingers glued to their triggers, no less than ten officers in suits emerged from the stairwell. Most of them sat in the back of the restaurant typing on their laptop computers. Two of them walked over to our table and identified themselves as officers of the INS and Homeland Security Department.

I explained that we were just eating dinner and asked why we were being held. We were told by the INS agent that we would be released once they had confirmation that we had no outstanding warrants and our immigration status was OK'd.

In pre-9/11 America, the legality of this would have been questionable. After all, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized."

"You have no right to hold us," Asher insisted.

"Yes, we have every right," responded one of the agents. "You are being held under the Patriot Act following suspicion under an internal Homeland Security investigation."

The USA PATRIOT Act was passed into law on October 26, 2001 in order to facilitate the post 9/11 crackdown on terrorism (the name is actually an acronym: "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act.") Like most Americans, I did not recognize the extent to which this bill foregoes our civil liberties. Among the unprecedented rights it grants to the federal government are the right to wiretap without warrant, and the right to detain without warrant. As I quickly discovered, the right to an attorney has been seemingly fudged as well.

When I asked to speak to a lawyer, the INS official informed me that I do have the right to a lawyer but I would have to be brought down to the station and await security clearance before being granted one. When I asked how long that would take, he replied with a coy smile: "Maybe a day, maybe a week, maybe a month."

We insisted that we had every right to leave and were going to do so. One of the policemen walked over with his hand on his gun and taunted: "Go ahead and leave, just go ahead."

We remained seated. Our IDs were taken, and brought to the officers with laptops. I was questioned over the fact that my license was out of state, and asked if I had "something to hide." The police continued to hassle the kitchen workers, demanding licenses and dates of birth. One of the kitchen workers was shaking hysterically and kept providing the day's date – March 20, 2003, over and over.

As I continued to press for legal counsel, a female officer who had been busy typing on her laptop in the front of the restaurant, walked over and put her finger in my face. "We are at war, we are at war and this is for your safety," she exclaimed. As she walked away from the table, she continued to repeat it to herself? "We are at war, we are at war. How can they not understand this."

I most certainly understand that we are at war. I also understand that the freedoms afforded to all of us in the Constitution were meant specifically for times like these. Our freedoms were carved out during times of strife by people who were facing brutal injustices, and were intended specifically so that this nation would behave differently in such times. If our freedoms crumble exactly when they are needed most, then they were really never freedoms at all.

After an hour and a half the INS agent walked back over and handed Asher and me our licenses. A policeman took us by the arm and escorted us out of the building. Before stepping out to the street, the INS agent apologized. He explained, in a low voice, that they did not think the two of us were in the restaurant. Several of the other patrons, though of South Asian descent, were in fact U.S. citizens. There were four taxi drivers, two students, one newspaper salesman – unwitting customers, just like Asher and me. I doubt, though, they received any apologies from the INS or the Department of Homeland Security.

Nor have the over 600 people of South Asian descent currently being held without charge by the Federal government. Apparently, this type of treatment is acceptable. One of the taxi drivers, a U.S. citizen, spoke to me during the interrogation. "Please stop talking to them," he urged. "I have been through this before. Please do whatever they say. Please for our sake."

Three days later I phoned the restaurant to discover what happened. The owner was nervous and embarrassed and obviously did not want to talk about it. But I managed to ascertain that the whole thing had been one giant mistake. A mistake. Loaded guns pointed in faces, people made to crawl on their hands and knees, police officers clearly exacerbating a tense situation by kicking in doors, taunting, keeping their fingers on the trigger even after the situation was under control. A mistake. And, according to the ACLU a perfectly legal one, thanks to the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act is just the first phase of the erosion of the Fourth Amendment. From the Justice Department has emerged a draft of the Domestic Securities Enhancement Act, also known as Patriot II. Among other things, this act would allow the Justice Department to detain anyone, anytime, secretly and indefinitely. It would also make it a crime to reveal the identity or even existence of such a detainee.

Every American citizen, whether they support the current war or not, should be alarmed by the speed and facility with which these changes to our fundamental rights are taking place. And all of those who thought that these laws would never affect them, who thought that the Patriot Act only applied to the guilty, should heed this story as a wake-up call. Please learn from my experience. We are all vulnerable so speak out and organize, our Fourth Amendment rights depend upon it.

Jason Halperin lives in New York City and works at Doctors Without Borders/Medicins San Frontieres.

---

'Nuff said.

quote:

---

Azizza said this about your mom:
I have serious doubts as to the credibility of that article.

---

So do I. It's just too much of a coincidence that he'd work at Doctors Without Borders too.

quote:

---

Bloodsage had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
You'll notice that a good portion of the staff of Alternet is from Santa Cruz.

'Nuff said.

---

Which means... what?

quote:

---

Nobody really understood why Shazorx / Modrakien wrote:
Doubt the story is true, however the fact that such a thing would be legal if it happened is scary enough.

---

Luckily we live in an existence where things that can happen won't neccessarily happen.

quote:

---

JooJooFlop had this to say about (_|_):
Luckily we live in an existence where things that can happen won't neccessarily happen.

---

Yeah, but when it comes to laws regarding personal freedoms I'd rather be safe than trust that there will never be a corrupt enough goverment in power to exploit the flaws. (Yes as much as I dislike them, I put things like mass arrests of 'insert racial group here' beyond the Bush goverment).

[ 05-16-2003: Message edited by: Shazorx / Modrakien ]

quote:

---

JooJooFlop had this to say about (_|_):
Luckily we live in an existence where things that can happen won't neccessarily happen.

---

"It can't happen here. (Oh yeah?) Take a look around at the cities and the towns." - Ich Bin Ein Auslander, Pop Will Eat Itself

though i don't belive the article, the patriot act does concern me.

[ 05-16-2003: Message edited by: diadem ]

quote:

---

ACES! Another post by Faelynn LeAndris:
This story actually just went live on Fox 4 News here in Dallas. The White House is saying yes, an abuse of power was made, by some republican party working outside the official goverment. On what grounds, and what for, they didn't say, the spokesman just said they are "Undergoing an investigation, which the White House is backing 100%"

---

Heads will roll from the sound of it.
I am saddened by this event. Perhaps though it will lead to this abomination of a law being overturned.

quote:

---

So quoth Kermitov:

Which means... what?

---

Have you ever been to Santa Cruz?

Santa Cruz is the very Archetype for liberal Northern California. Makes San Francisco look like a hotbed of Republican activism.

So the fact that most of the employees are from UC Santa Cruz betrays an inherent bias in their reporting. Which can also be seen in their mission statement, if you go to the Altnet site and read carefully. They say a lot about "jouralistic integrity," but it's always with the purpose of enabling activism or critiquing the administration. . .meaning their agenda is anti-administration regardless.

The basic facts of the story may or may not be true as reported--I guarantee the commentary was put there with an agenda.

They may not be a perfect organization, but at this point, we need a much firepower against this act as possible.

I am a Republican, but I also come from a work in a city our last mayor was arrested for "sexual activity with a child" and was caught only becuase he was under investigation for corruption. No one was too surprised. Why? Becuase many people do what they can get away with.

I belive in this country. Some of my friends and family put their lives on the line and taken lives to defend it. But the patriot act stands against everything they fought for and are fighting for. It is a sign of panic that undermines our way of life.

[ 05-17-2003: Message edited by: diadem ]

[ 05-17-2003: Message edited by: Taeldian ]

quote:

---

Taeldian had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Shouldn't this law be illegal as the Constitution overrides all other laws?

---

It's hard to fight a law and have it declared unconstitutional when you're deprived of legal counsel and any due process by said law.

Excuse me while I go spraypaint a few of the Ten Commandments on the roof of our house, so the predator drone spycraft will know my family's one of the good ones.

quote:

---

Bloodsage was naked while typing this:
Have you ever been to Santa Cruz?

Santa Cruz is the very Archetype for liberal Northern California. Makes San Francisco look like a hotbed of Republican activism.

So the fact that most of the employees are from UC Santa Cruz betrays an inherent bias in their reporting. Which can also be seen in their mission statement, if you go to the Altnet site and read carefully. They say a lot about "jouralistic integrity," but it's always with the purpose of enabling activism or critiquing the administration. . .meaning their agenda is anti-administration regardless.

The basic facts of the story may or may not be true as reported--I guarantee the commentary was put there with an agenda.

---

I live about an hour away... Have YOU ever been to Santa Cruz? They have nice beaches.

quote:

---

We were all impressed when Kermitov wrote:

I live about an hour away... Have YOU ever been to Santa Cruz? They have nice beaches.

---

No; I've never been there. I often speak on subjects where I have no data whatever.

Your second point is pure non sequitur. . .leading me to suspect your first. If the best you can do to refute my point is "they have nice beaches," I laff.

quote:

---

There was much rejoicing when Bloodsage said this:
I often speak on subjects where I have no data whatever.

---

'Sides. . .while I can be accused of being a lot of things, uninformed usually isn't one of them.

quote:

---

Bloodsage wrote, obviously thinking too hard:
No; I've never been there. I often speak on subjects where I have no data whatever.

Your second point is pure non sequitur. . .leading me to suspect your first. If the best you can do to refute my point is "they have nice beaches," I laff.

---

Well... your point had as much to do with the bias of the article as my point had with refuting yours.

Nonetheless, Santa Cruz does, in fact, have nice beaches and at the boardwalk and pier you can watch seals play on little platforms that they built. It's quite neat. Wish I could have gone today. The weather here is absolutely beautiful. But alas. I had to work.

However, after work I did go take a look at the Collings Foundation B-17 and B-24. They are in town at Moffet Field right now. Got some neat pictures, I hope, maybe I'll post them when I get them back from the developer. That was fun too.

quote:

---

Kermitov had this to say about dark elf butts:

Well... your point had as much to do with the bias of the article as my point had with refuting yours.

Nonetheless, Santa Cruz does, in fact, have nice beaches and at the boardwalk and pier you can watch seals play on little platforms that they built. It's quite neat. Wish I could have gone today. The weather here is absolutely beautiful. But alas. I had to work.

However, after work I did go take a look at the Collings Foundation B-17 and B-24. They are in town at Moffet Field right now. Got some neat pictures, I hope, maybe I'll post them when I get them back from the developer. That was fun too.

---

Not so.

Anyone who knows anything at all about Santa Cruz or its university will know the inherently ultraliberal, antiadministration bias of anything written there. They are like PETA, only with a broader agenda. One should treat political commentary originating there just as suspiciously as if it were an article by PETA.

The basic facts of the article may or may not be accurate--look for them to be spun severely, however. Which, frankly, is rather obvious from the most cursory read. "OMG, they hand their fingers on the triggers!" indeed.

And, yes, there are very nice beaches there.

quote:

---

Bloodsage wrote, obviously thinking too hard:
Not so.

Anyone who knows anything at all about Santa Cruz or its university will know the inherently ultraliberal, antiadministration bias of anything written there. They are like PETA, only with a broader agenda. One should treat political commentary originating there just as suspiciously as if it were an article by PETA.

The basic facts of the article may or may not be accurate--look for them to be spun severely, however. Which, frankly, is rather obvious from the most cursory read. "OMG, they hand their fingers on the triggers!" indeed.

And, yes, there are very nice beaches there.

---

Anyone who knows anything... aaaand cue the broad sweeping generalization.

The article is biased as hell, I'll give you that one. Discounting something on the grounds that "It's from Santa Cruz so it *must* be liberally slanted," however, is... stupid. You narrowed it down to the staff of that particular publication and that was better.

I would like to remind you that UC Berkeley has an award winning republican newspaper.

quote:

---

And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Bloodsage was all like:
Which, frankly, is rather obvious from the most cursory read. "OMG, they hand their fingers on the triggers!" indeed.

---

That rubbed me the wrong way, especially considering that the only time that an officer of any kind of law enforcement has their finger ON the trigger, isntead of next to it, is when they are intending to pull it.

quote:

---

And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Trillee was all like:
And what's wrong with being liberal?

---

No blood for oil!

quote:

---

There was much rejoicing when Iron Parcelan said this:
No blood for oil!

---

Aaahhh It makes so much sence! hehe =)

quote:

---

From the book of Trillee, chapter 3, verse 16:
And what's wrong with being liberal?

---

It would take me a week to list all of the reasons.

quote:

---

Azizza Model 2000 was programmed to say:
It would take me a week to list all of the reasons.

---

Don't you mean make up?

I consider myself a very conservative liberal, or a very liberal conservative. I pretty much stand in the middle and piss in the direction I feel is right on an issue by issue basis.

I would, however, like for Mr P to elaborate on his "19 years late" statement. Not out of disagreement, but rather out of a genuine interest in his point of view.

quote:

---

Azizza had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
It would take me a week to list all of the reasons.

---

*laughs*

quote:

---

Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael attempted to be funny by writing:

I would, however, like for Mr P to elaborate on his "19 years late" statement. Not out of disagreement, but rather out of a genuine interest in his point of view.

---

1984 + 19 = 2003, I think that's what he meant by that.

quote:

---

Kermitov probably says this to all the girls:

Anyone who knows anything... aaaand cue the broad sweeping generalization.

The article is biased as hell, I'll give you that one. Discounting something on the grounds that "It's from Santa Cruz so it *must* be liberally slanted," however, is... stupid. You narrowed it down to the staff of that particular publication and that was better.

I would like to remind you that UC Berkeley has an award winning republican newspaper.

---

I'm not talking about Berkeley, am I?

So far, you've managed to call what I said stupid, and comment on the beaches, but haven't said a single word in refutation. Find me a Santa Cruz-based conservative anything, and we'll talk.

Further, if you'll read the mission statement of Altnet, like I mentioned, you'll find a PETA-esque "fight the establishment" undercurrent quite at odds with, and strewn amongst, the vanilla comments about journalistic integrity.

It's fine if you want to disagree, but you'd better start bringing something to the table other than accusations of stupidity and comments on the scenery. Or simply admit that I nailed the climate of the entire town, and you just don't like it.

quote:

---

Trillee probably says this to all the girls:
And what's wrong with being liberal?

---

Nothing. I'm quite liberal on a host of subjects.

The trick is to have intelligent, independant opinions on various topics, rather than adopting a particular canon whole.