In the admirable role of protecting the President, the Secret Service chases down a lot of threats, real and imagined. Unfortunately, these days it appears that they are perfectly happy tormenting people without truly verifying their identities (or even looking for them in a phone book).
It begins to appear that the 4th and 5th Amendments are now gone forever.
Spooked
By FREDRIC ALAN MAXWELL
The whole strange thing began nearly two years ago, when an acquaintance e-mailed me, wondering why the Secret Service had contacted him to ask if he thought I was a threat to George W. Bush. Me? A pretzel is more of a threat to Bush than I am. At the time, I was writing an unauthorized biography of Microsoft's C.E.O., Steve Ballmer. I fully expected the Beast from Redmond to keep tabs on me -- which, of course, it did and which, of course, Ballmer publicly denied -- but the Secret Service?
Private investigators have been known to intimate that they're with the government, so I called the Secret Service's Seattle office to report that someone might be impersonating one of their agents. No, the officer responded, they had wanted to contact me for the past eight months but couldn't find me. Weird -- my name and number were in the Seattle phone book. I went to their office to find out what was going on.
After a couple of pat-down searches, I sat in a small room with the good cop, Steve, and the bad cop, whom I'll call Cruella. Steve said they had received a report that, on Oct. 12, 2000, I was overheard in a D.C. bar saying, ''I have friends in the C.I.A. who will make sure Bush doesn't enter the White House.'' I responded that except for the facts that I don't have any friends in the C.I.A. (that I know of) and that I've never thought, let alone said, something like that, I was in Philadelphia that day. Unfazed, Cruella opened an inch-thick file. Everything I've ever done wrong in my life flashed before me. (Took about a nanosecond.) She then said, firmly, ''You've been arrested for trespassing on federal property in Washington.''
The jig was up. Brilliant police work. As was widely reported, in 1986 this son of a librarian was convicted of a petty misdemeanor, having been caught red-handed studying after hours in the Library of Congress. Seriously. I helped lead a successful civil disobedience action protesting evening-hours reductions by not leaving when the new hours went into effect.
''We want your medical records,'' she continued, sliding a paper across the table, ''and want you to sign this release.'' She paused. ''You were in the military, you use the V.A. We can get those records.'' They can? So why do they need a release?
''I'd like to talk with my attorney first,'' I said. ''May we continue this tomorrow?''
Cruella said, ''Yes, but you'd better come back,'' ominously adding, ''I don't want to have to come looking for you.'' I expected her to continue, ''And your little dog, too.''
My attorney relayed the sobering news that, in a rare First Amendment exception, the simple utterance of a threat against a major presidential candidate can get you five years in prison and a fine -- and what I reportedly said qualified.
Sitting in the interrogation room the next afternoon, I gave the agents a copy of my Philadelphia hotel bill from the day in question and again refused to sign the release. (Cruella had been replaced by another, nicer agent.) I told them that I realized that this was a serious charge and said I'd answer any questions they had.
''When was the last time you were in the White House?''
''In the early 90's, for a press conference in the East Room,'' I said. ''Hillary looks far better in person.'' They later confirmed my visit.
''What do you think of George W. Bush?''
''He's grammatically challenged, verbicidal,'' I said. ''I made plans to attend the Gore inaugural.''
I came to believe that it was an investigation in search of a crime. Eventually, they ran out of questions. I left. Steve and Cruella might have been inept, but still, I started looking over my shoulder.
Later, I submitted four Freedom of Information Act requests. The Secret Service ignored them all until my attorney filed suit in federal court. That got their attention, and my Secret Service file recently appeared in the mail. Along with the 85 pages they sent, there was a cover sheet noting, ''In addition . . . 97 pages were withheld in their entirety.'' Much of what I got was blanked out. They spelled my name five different ways, gave my weight variously as 173, 220 and the correct 190 and listed three different birthdays; my height was either 5-foot-9 or my actual 5-foot-11. The report also revealed: ''There is no indication that he has ever behaved violently toward anyone. . . . Most importantly, the subject has no interest in Potus. . . . The subject is focused on and consumed by his book. . . . Case closed.''
Recently, as I sat in a tavern, talking with a few strangers, the subject of George Bush came up. ''He's an idiot going to war for oil,'' said one. ''He's doing his daddy's dirty work,'' said another. ''He looks like Alfred E. Newman,'' said a third. But I didn't say a word.
Fredric Alan Maxwell is the author of ''Bad Boy Ballmer: The Man Who Rules Microsoft.''
The article at the bottom of this post is there to show people exactly how the security "professionals" in this country are treating fellow citizens based on their appearance and cultural heritage, or for no reason at all.
With people from "muslim" countries being detained for days without access to an attorney even after they follow the new registration requirements for Muslim men from certain countries, and others being intimidated and threatened by the authorities, we are headed down the path to darkness.
I could have sworn that we were never going to let this happen in this country...
Patriot Raid
By Jason Halperin, AlterNet
April 29, 2003
Two weeks 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. If you are moved by this account, he asks that you consider donating to your local ACLU chapter.
I've bought my last Nike product. This really won't be much of an issue. I rarely buy sports shoes anyway and Nike isn't a big supllier of NHL gear. Even if either case was true, it wouldn't be a big deal.
The reason for my new attitude about Nike is pretty simple. you see, Nike is claiming that corporations have a right to lie to consumers about their overseas manufacturing practices, and that such lies are protected by the First Amendment.
My only response is "horse-hockey". Corporations are required to tel the truth to investors and potential investors alike, and I''m pretty sure my 401k plan owns stock in Nike and their competitors. I'm also sure that the FTC has something to say about their marketing practices, and saying that they don't use forced or child labor, or that all of their working are pristine an safe impacts their marketing.
Finally, despite a truly bizarre ruling that corporations are protected under the 14th Amendment, corporations are not citizens of the United States, and they aren't people. If they were, they would be subject to the same civil and criminal penalties as actual people. When was the last time you saw a corporation "executed" because it killed someone?
The Nike Case is now headed to the Supreme Court. Hopefully the Justices will get this one right...for a change.
A couple weeks back, during the furor over the Bull Durham controversy, I sent a note to the Hall of Fame to comment on their suddent refusal to honor the movie and its actors based on their previous criticism of the President and the war.
The president of the Hall was surprised by both the uproar and the fact that some people took the time to look into his past as a Reagan appointee and close firend of Neil Bush.
The response I received is below. I expect that this is a form letter, but at least they bothered to respond.
April 23, 2003
Dear Friend:
We have received thousands of letters, e-mails, and phone calls about the cancellation of the Bull Durham events scheduled for April 26-27. Thank you for sharing your feelings with us.
The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a very special place - a national treasure - and my responsibility is to protect it. Politics has no place in The Hall of Fame. There was a chance of politics being injected into The Hall during these sensitive times, and I made a decision to not take that chance. But I inadvertently did exactly what I was trying to avoid. With the advantage of hindsight, it is clear I should have handled the matter differently.
I am sorry I didn't pick up the phone to have a discussion with Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon rather than sending them a letter.
We are so lucky to have Baseball - a game that unites us as Americans. The events of the past week show us all that The Game burns brighter than ever and continues to stir passions in many people.
Our wish is that every American will visit Cooperstown and join us in celebrating Baseball, our national pastime and the greatest game of all.
My Best Wishes,
Dale Petroskey
President