"Patriot Act Raid" Followup

Many commentors here on Hit and Run were quite skeptical of the veracity of an account of a Times Square restaurant raid allegedly under the aegis of the Patriot Act that I linked to in this entry. Over on the Lone Wacko blog is a more thorough followup that, while not settling the matter, leans toward the conclusion that the event did occur, though it may have been more an old-fashioned immigration raid than a specifically Patriot Act excess.

Comments

[Fred App]

OK, so let's assume that it was an immigration raid. Does that make it any less excessive or any more acceptable? The idea that in this country you can be held hostage for two hours for the crime of eating in an Indian restaurant boggles the mind, regardless of which bumbling law enforcement agency is at fault.

[Brian]

Thanks for the update, BD...

It seems pretty obvious that something happened...

I hope this gets picked up in the media so that Homeland Security will be pressured to issue a statement. Even if the raid story is exagerated, or if HS's response is utter BS (I imagine it would be) at least it will get people thinking about the abuse potential of this horrendous legislation.

Hats off to Lonewacko et al for the legwork...

[Shannon Love]

I think we need to define a new mental syndrome:

Patriot Act Panic Syndrome or PAPS.

PAPS exhaust its victims by causing them interpret almost any police action as the coming of the new fascism even though in most cases the police action draws little or none of its authorization from the Act. People around PAPS sufferers soon grow numb after the many cries of "wolf" and ignore real threats to civil liberties when they eventually appear.

Dangerous thing PAPS.

[rusty]

lone whacko's post basically boils down to...this Jason guy seems like a nice kid so his story must be true

[Lonewacko]

Well, no. What makes it likely that it's true as written or for the most part is that both the LAT and the ACLU verified it. I did take his word for the LAT and the ACLU verifying it, but I think that's pretty safe to do.

If he had been a raving loony, or if he had verged off into RESIDENT SHRUB PUTS PUPPIES IN A BLENDER territory, I would have reported that. While I could have interrogated him in a hostile manner, I did not do that.

The best thing to do is wait for HS's statement, or the lack thereof. If this goes to court or similar, then all parties can be cross-examined.

[joe]

You all can complain about tax and spend, Nanny state liberals all you want - but when law enforcement starts getting out of hand, kicking in doors and sticking guns in people's faces, the NRA and the Federalist Society aren't going to come to your rescue.

Let's hear it for the ACLU!

[Kevin Carson]

Shannon Love is right, in a backhanded sense. Much of what Ashcroft's jackboots have been doing since 9-11 is authorized, not by the USA Patriot Act, but by counterterrorism legislation passed under Clinton. The 1997 Counter-Terrorism Act, sponsored by Janet Reno's butt-boy Chuck Schumer, gave the President authority to label any organization a "terrorist" group, by executive fiat, and to apply the civil forfeiture provisions of the RICO statutes against it. I figure that, not the Patriot Act, was the point at which the Bill of Rights became a relic we just kept around as an example of good penmanship.

[rusty]

thank you mr. carson. sometimes late at night I reminisce about the people I met at the many huge protests after Waco. Then my wife kicks me and tells me that if people are only fighting to fight other people and not fighting for principles nothing will ever change.

[Camille]

Rusty, would you (gently) remind your wife that some people are fighting other people who hold certain ideas that are counter to their principles; and that, ultimately, those with principles closer in alignment to natural law will be successful in bringing about change.

[JD Weiner]

joe: Until the cops kick down your door looking for your illegal guns, at which point the ACLU mumbles something about having something to do somewhere else and hurries off (probably to defend the entitlement - I mean, "right" - of favored groups - oops, sorry, I mean "minorities", or was that "underprivileged groups" this week? - to special consideration from the government). The ACLU does do some good work, but they're not exactly evenhanded about it. I wouldn't give 'em any of my money; I'd rather donate to the Institute for Justice.

[Spektator]

"PAPS exhaust its victims by causing them interpret almost any police action as the coming of the new fascism even though in most cases the police action draws little or none of its authorization from the Act."

Shannon, my love, is THAT why the cops kept repeating "We're at war, damn it! We're at war!"?

Using that (lame) verbal shield, where do you suppose this police action drew its authorization from?

[Croesus]

Was Officer Barbrady there?

"Nothing to see here."

[Kevin Carson]

Rusty,

Alex Cockburn was one of the few principled people on the left to speak up about Waco and Ruby Ridge and express sympathy for the constitutionalist/militia criticisms of Jackboot Reno. He warned the mainstream left that they were passing up an irrecoverable opportunity for a left-right alliance against the police state, just because "those people read the Spotlight instead of the Nation, not our type at all."

Maybe if more folks had taken his message to heart, it would be a little easier to rally Freepers against Ass-crap today.

[Patrick]

Yes, I'd like to second that: I'd rather donate to the (much saner) INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE, too. The ACLU has outlived its welcome.

(Thanks for reminding us, JD.)

[s.m. koppelman]

INS visa-checking raids on restaurants involve sealing off the entire restaurant and detaining the customers for several hours?

The skepticism about Halperin's account seems to be based on (1) his employment with a left-leaning, secular, European-based refugee support group instead of a Southern Baptist refugee support group, (2) the mistaken notion that New York's "Indian" restaurants are owned and staffed by Hindu Indians when in fact it's no secret that most are owned by Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, and (3) pantywaist liberal traitor New Yorkers probably deserve to be held at gunpoint by anonymous Federal agents in secret, unreported raids for something and this will only be worth caring about when God-fearing white Christians from Texlahoma get held in similar raids on their Armageddon Preparedness clubs.

[A. Hitler]

Sieg Hail, Koppelman! Ich like der name. Koppelmann. Good ol' pure name from der Fatherland, Jah?

But vee hav to remembur dat vee are at ein libertarian site that ees lookink fur eine more reasonable balance.

Pleese meet me in Berlin. I veel buy you ein bier, and vee kann talk about such extremisms some more, jah?

[geophile]

Koppelmann, you'll have to supply us with some quotes to back up those accusations. I haven't kept up with the discussion religiously, but I suspect that you exaggerate. The first reason you claim I address below. The second hadn't even occured to me. The third, though I've no allegiance to organized religion, seems like thoughtless stereotyping, and is inappropriate on this site given the specifically humanist nature of Libertarians.

MY skepticism about the incident, as stated in my comments under the original post on the topic, had very little to do with the things you suggest. However, the fact that the author has far-left-oriented political preconceptions is not irrelevant. I do think that issues surrounding immigration enforcement need to be closely observed by liberty's allies, but my questions as to the veracity of the article are legitimate ones. I stand by my original impression of the article, which was that it was a plausible-sounding overall, but that many of its details reek of ideologically-motivated fabrication and/or ebellishment, thereby casting some doubt on the scenario as characterized by the author.

[s.m. koppelman]

Greetings, Citizen Geophile! I'm looking at your comments on the original post. You seemed to have some trouble believing the story based on how Halperin depicted the agents talking. "They only say shit like this on COPS," a TV show in which a camera crew videotapes cops. You conclude: "[if] I were to honestly believe that these quotes are legitimate, I'd have to throw out everything I know about human nature."

Maybe it's time to throw out everything you think you know about human nature; just don't accuse me of coercing you. It's the farthest thing from my mind.

I gather you haven't had the pleasure of listening to law enforcement officers talk to civilians at athe scene of a crime or a raid. Blustery, quasi-authoritative officialese, peppered with histrionic requests to sit down and shut up ("We are at war, we are at war and this is for your safety") just like one hears on COPS is the norm in my experience.

Though Mr. Halperin was undoubtedly being sarcastic when he said "like most Americans, [he] did not recognize the extent to which this bill foregoes our civil liberties", it's nice to see someone both upset about it and able to write a competent firsthand account.

If you make civil liberties a low priority and prefer to lie down with the Bush-Ashcroft camp because you're more comfortable with their views on dumping fertilizer runoff in the Everglades, that's understandable. But you may want to keep a gun under your pillow and sleep with one eye open. If and when you get caught up in a similar raid, just remember that the Cato Institute probably won't give a rat's ass. They'll be too busy preparing briefs in favor of dumping fertilizer in the Everglades on behalf of oppressed sugar-plantation holding companies.

[David Reese]

The law enforcement quotes from Jason Halperin's account didn't sound like something from COPS, but from bad B-movie actors. The fact that the elements of this story are so perfectly tuned to the worst fears of the Patriot Act make it sound conjured up.

The story is still plausible, and such raids have taken place, and will take place, with or without the Patriot Act. The problem I have with the story is that there is not one independently verifiable piece of information in it.

It's ironic how people who are know for being so skeptical of media, government, and business are so quick to believe an unsubstantiated story like this.

Whether you believe it's true or not. Whether it suits your agenda or not. The story remains unsubstantiated. No two ways about it.

[Rhodes Janna Bernstein]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://penis-exercise.nonstopsex.org
DATE: 12/20/2003 07:34:21
Against boredom even the gods contend in vain.

[McCargo Janine]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://hardcore.sexmuch.com
DATE: 01/09/2004 09:09:02
Even a philosopher gets upset with a toothache.