I got searched today.
I was walking down the street, heading to my subway station, when I saw two New York City Police officers standing on either side of the entrance way. Several people, mostly women, passed them and made their way down the stairs without incident. As I got closer, I knew today was my day.
I made plans to go to the gym after work, so in addition to my small briefcase, I had a knapsack with gym clothes. I thought for a second I might be able to get by, but as I approached, the officer on the left asked me to open my bag.
These random searches recently imposed by Mayor Bloomberg and the NYPD, following the second wave of London subway bombings, are a clear violation of our civil rights. Police need probable cause of an actual or intended crime in order to ask someone to open their personal belongings. I had committed no crime, yet for some reason known only to that officer, I was selected for a search.
For a split second I thought of arguing this point, but I also knew that while they have trampled on this right, they have decided they will also deny anyone access to the subway who fights to uphold their own rights. I needed to get to work on time, so I acquiesced.
Now there are some who will argue that we have to do this to make the city safe. Nothing could be more inaccurate and facetious. These random searches presume that police can predict a terrorist’s next move. They presume police will spot the right person at the right time—akin to finding a needle in a haystack—or that the very presence of so many officers will deter anyone from bringing a bomb onto the train.
What does a terrorist look like and what criteria are they using to decide who gets profiled today? (Quick, what do they Oklahoma City and Atlanta Olympic bombers have in common?*) And what would a cop do if he did find a bomb in a backpack anyway? Are they trained to safely remove these devices?
The slow erosion of our civil liberties in the name of national security is an old ploy often used by petty dictatorships to control people and maintain power. You can employ that argument to justify anything. “Terrorists are known to use the telephone and the Internet, so we must randomly tap phone lines and intercept email messages for national security reasons.” “We need to monitor what websites people visit and what books they check out of the library, for national security.” “We need the right to randomly walk into people’s homes without search warrants and check to make sure terrorists aren’t hiding there…for national security purposes, of course.”
Here is the big fat lie George Bush won’t own up to. You can’t fight a “war on terrorism.” Terrorism isn’t a thing or a place. There is no terrorism headquarters we can bomb and disrupt their activities. You can’t throw up a roadblock and catch terrorism at the borders. Terrorism is a belief system, a strategy used by those who lack other means to fight. It has no central leader but rather lies in the hearts and minds of anyone who feels marginalized and is angry and desperate enough to act. Any one of us could become a terrorist if properly motivated to defend a cause we hold dear. Thus, the answer to the question, “what does a terrorist look like” is that he/she may be any one of us or none of us, depending on our power and position in society. But, they aren’t searching all of us, that would be too cumbersome. They are instead randomly selecting whomever they want by some unknown, unstated, set of criteria.
Police attempts to protect the subways overlooks the fact that a determined terrorist isn’t targeting things or objects, but rather is interested in creating fear in the minds of the public. It isn’t an airplane or an office building or a subway or a bus they want to hit, but our comfort levels in carrying out everyday ordinary tasks. No doubt the trains are safer now, as are the airlines. But how about our movie theaters? Can you say with certainty that parked car you just passed isn’t filled with explosives? How about the mailboxes and garbage cans we take for granted on every street corner? Will sidewalks become the next targets? If so, how can anyone ever possibly protect these spaces?
We will only be able to address this most recent (as in post 9/11) spate of terrorism around the world when Western nations address the root cause. In this case, that means re-examining, correcting, and taking responsibility for the failed Middle East peace process between Israelis and Palestinians. This administration seems in no great hurry to do that. Muslims and Arabs the world over believe the West, namely the United States, has unfairly favored Israel and treated them with disdain. Lacking the means to wage war by conventional methods, these angry and disaffected people fight in the only way they can, through acts of terror.
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq—justified on a stack of lies, unfounded claims, and misplaced priorities—has been the greatest recruitment tool for terrorist networks they could have possibly hoped for. Instead of going after Osama Bin Laden, the real culprit behind 9/11, we instead went after Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, who posed no threat to the U.S. other than once calling for the assassination of George Bush Sr.
The “War to Avenge My Daddy’s Honor” and capture of Hussein was, in Bush Jr.’s words, supposed to make the world safer. It has not. But it has moved us closer and closer to the point of being less free in our thoughts, actions and movements, and in so doing, has enabled the terrorists to win.
The Village Voice has more on these random searches.
*The perpetrators were all white males. Yet no on has once talked of profiling, rounding up or questioning scores of white men.