Saturday, June 14, 2008

Why I care about the 5-4 ruling, and how it effects me personally.

Roughly a week after September 11 I received a voicemail on my cell phone indicating that I needed to call the local FBI back to have a conversation. I didn’t think anything of it because I thought it was just one of my friends screwing around with me. The next day to FBI officials rang my door bell at my house in East Boston, MA, which was less then a mile away from Logan Airport. I was surprised to say the least. They starting asking me questions and held up pictures of the hijackers and asked me if I knew them. I answered their questions, and told them that I had only seen the pictures on the news in the days right after the attack. Finally they told me that a neighbor had told them that “A muslim looking guy moved in next to door some months ago. I never see anyone go in or out of the house during the day, but on the weekends I see a lot of people over there.” That is what they had to go on. I explained to them that I usually went into work between one or two, and I usually came home at around three or four in the morning because that is the schedule I liked to keep as the International project manager for a telecommunication company, and of course being young and owning a house let me have quite a few parties when I was not working. They called some of my friends, and even talked to my boss at the time and I had thought that this was the end of it.

Before I continue let me give you some background information. I’m a brownie - meaning my parents are both Indian, but I was born in the United States. I guess for some people the name, Vinod Tonangi, sounds slightly islamic. I have no idea, nor do I care. though I was raised Hindu I am a non-believer of any organized religion. I thought it was an isolated incident and I forgot about it. After leaving my old position I had started my own telecommunication company, and worked with people all over the world. Working with technically integrated societies was just not as profitable as emerging societies because telecommunication costs were already low and did not leave me any room for a significant margin. I preferred to work with countries that were, at the time, less technology advanced. Some of these countries were Brazil, Kenya, and Eastern Europe, however many of these countries I worked with were also in the middle east such as Syria, Jordan, and Iran. I received a shocking letter indicating that I was currently under investigation under Homeland Security because I had wired a money to a telecommunication company in Iran. Since this was now the second time I had this issue I was quite scared after hearing stories of what has happened to other innocent people in the current Administration, but I quickly sent them all the information that they asked for. I included contracts, invoices, email discussions, and a summary of what my relationship was with the company in question. This happened almost two years ago. Today Homeland Security still holds the money in question, and whenever I ask for an update they tell me it is “still under review”.

I understand the government should follow any and all leads, and I am happy to provide them information if they require it. I also understand the fact that I being a brownie may single me out to get “random” checks in the airport, or the fact that they always stare at my passport for 15 minutes since I have visited quite a few countries during my position as international project manager for a previous company, but my fear was that if I was incorrectly implicated in any crime I would never be able to tell anyone my case. It would have been quite easy for the government to freeze all my business bank account, by personal bank account, or even take my house. I was not just worried for me, but for my wife who besides working for my company has never worked for another American company in her life. I met her while I was living in Eastern Europe working on a project.

“The Constitution doesn’t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right shall not be suspended except in cases of rebellion or invasion.”

Statements like this from Alberto Gonzales, and the increasing removal of our civil rights such as the Patriot Act continued to make me cringe. When I read that the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling instated some of our precious civil rights that I used to take for granted when I was younger, I was ecstatic. People always ask me why I am so passionate about Barack Obama becoming our next president, and I have to answer them that not only am I a political geek, but this is an extremely personal issue for me, and I know other supporters are very passionate because it is personal them. If you forget about your political loyalty for one minute, and just focus on the facts it is easy to see that we should have never lost as many as our rights as we did after the attack in September. I’m glad to see that we, as a country, are now trying to correct the injustices that many of us agreed to when we lived in a state of fear. I applaud the Supreme Court, albeit a quiet applause due to the close ruling, and I hope our elected legislative officials continue the trend.

It’s starting to feel like America again.

4 comments:

Unknown said...

Excellent post, Vinod!

This is crucial. Either all of us have basic rights, or none of us do.

Thanks for sharing the enormous difference this makes on a personal, individual level!

Hopefully, we can all work together to turn America back into the kind of country it is supposed to be.

Anonymous said...

Wow...another good blogger..this was good and at the same time things like this piss me off. Ive been stereo typed as well..not in the same context as you...but I can imagine ...hope you dont mind if I blogroll you my blog is hellakali.com

Anonymous said...

Vinod, I am disappointed to hear you worked with the government so closely. Do you really think forking your personal/business information is a way to get the beast off your back? In some cases, this only leads to more harassment. In other cases, it leads to conviction because, the more dubious "evidence" they gather, the stronger their case against you is (note: dubious is critical here). Forget the post 9/11 world; in law enforcement, dubious evidence is nothing new, and trying to be helpful works against you. Giving them the information they want is not the way to vindicate yourself; just ask the many people whose lives have been ruined. You'll find quite a few of these stories on CourtTV (these are not fictional stories - and CourtTV has a new name, by the way). Also check out The Innocence Project (read stories of people who did the very same as you only to find themselves in jail for life).

You do have an option: a lawyer. I am not able to afford a lawyer in case the government harassed me, and it's possible you are not either. I know the right thing to do would be to call a lawyer and let a lawyer deal with this, but the reality is that I wouldn't be able to afford a call to a lawyer. The government's money is endless, but if you can afford a good lawyer, go for it. In some cases, organizations like the ACLU may help you out.

Your neighbor should mind his/her business. It's none of his/her business what times you come and go. My neighbor goes home late, but I am not calling the FBI.

Last, your name does not sound "Islamic" at all. Not even slightly. Those who say otherwise are wholly ignorant of "Islamic" names (i.e. Arabic names, but I am sure, on a linguistic level, there are similarities between Hindi and Arabic).

Martin said...

Honestly, you shouldn't be doing international business with countries that have been considered "bad guys" since the mid-70s without expecting at least some amount of scrutiny. I know a little old lady English Professor who traveled to Iran to research Englishman who "turned Turk" (converted to Islam in the Ottoman Empire, Persia, Morocco, etc.) from the Persian perspective because her specialty was renaissance representation of Muslims in English drama. This is a completely head-in-the-clouds, academic type of scholarship, but because of her status as a faculty of a university whose physics department had a small nuclear reactor (RPI), she was put on all sorts of watch lists.

I felt bad for her, because she was a scholar -- her work is above national borders and transcends time, even. I will admit though that I have a bit less sympathy for your case, because I don't think the pursuit of the all-mighty-dollar is an admirable use of personal liberty and civil rights. There are plenty of developing nations out there that have a "positive" relationship with the United States out there that you could have restricted your services to I'm assuming. Would it have given competitors an advantage? Sure... But I think taking the hit would have been morally appropriate.

All the best though, and I hope big brother stops caring about your activities.