Muslim Activist Detained After Refusing Staten Island Ferry Bag Check, Predictability Ensues

[Weatherman2020]

Maybe Obama can provide legal assistance.


Self-styled "community organizer" and "civil rights activist" Hesham El-Meligy was detained earlier today by the NYPD after refusing a bag search while attempting to board the Staten Island Ferry.

Predictably, El-Meligy is claiming racial profiling and "Islamophobia," and insisting his rights were denied. But fellow Staten Islanders are pushing back on his claims.

Muslim Activist Detained After Refusing Staten Island Ferry Bag Check, Predictability Ensues

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor guy. He should probably move back to Egypt.
Sounds like New York is too mean for him.

 

[Brynmr]

Guess he thinks Obama is still president.

 

[Rob37]

What a fucking douche bag. They should of given him the boots.

 

[RodISHI]

His facebook claims on his avatar "a radical hombre" Hesham El-Meligy | Facebook

Here is a facebook cache page this guy is funky. 「Hesham El Meligy」のプロフィール | Facebook
Evidently he thinks he has special privileges and will be seeking to sue over his alleged claim of being unfairly treated. Activist is handcuffed after refusing Staten Island Ferry bag check

He tried to be the comptroller for New York 2013
People called him out for lying.

(edit) Radical Hombre is the logo of a group that is saying "make New Mexico Mexico again"
From his FB page:
So, this morning, around 7:50 am, while walking toward the entrance of the waiting hall, inside the Staten Island Ferry Terminal in St. George, trying to take the 8:00 am ferry boat to Manhattan, while the terminal was busy with rush hour passengers from all walks of life, many of whom were carrying all sorts and sizes of purses and backpacks, an NYPD officer (male. I have his picture) took a step and extended his arm obstructing me from moving and told me to get to a nearby table manned by other NYPD officers so they can search my backpack.

The manner in which this was done made me feel I was being singled out because of how I looked, my perceived religious affiliation, ethnic, and national origin backgrounds. The officers said it was random. I have no doubt that many are in fact stopped randomly, but the manner this was done in my particular case made it feel different. The location was very busy with people in the rush hour trying to use the ferry to get to Manhattan, and there were no less than 5 people, immediately in front of me, carrying all sorts and sizes of purses and backpacks. The officer apparently had his eyes on me from a distance and let these individuals go, then took a couple of steps in between moving people (very busy rush hour foot traffic), extended his arm to stop me from moving, and told me to go to the table.

While I don’t know what was going on inside the mind of the officer who stopped me and if my feelings were correct, I am more concerned about my and the people’s rights that I consider this policy of randomly searching people to be in violation of.

The 4th amendment is clear on prohibiting searches or seizures unless based on a probable cause of suspicion of criminal activity, among other conditions. This “random” check goes against the text and the spirit of the supreme law of the land. Also, while the officers gave me the option to leave the terminal and take other means of transportation to Manhattan, it is an infringement of my right to travel freely without molestation and due process of the law.

When the officer stopped me and told me to go to the table, I said “no thank you”. He replied that he’s not asking me, but telling me, and I replied again “no, thank you”. For the next few minutes I kept refusing to grant consent for search and kept reminding the officers that they swore an oath to uphold the constitution of the United States, and the content of the 4th amendment. There were also more than one NYC DOT employees who were part of this situation. The officers and the DOT personnel kept telling me that these are the rules and I either submit to a search or leave the terminal (not take the ferry to Manhattan). I requested to speak with a supervisor, which one of the officers (female) said she was the supervisor. I then requested to speak with someone above that supervisor, but she declined. I then requested her to call/radio the captain (of the 120 precinct, which is right across the street from the terminal).

After a few minutes of this back and forth and people started gathering and interfering, the female officer put me under arrest, which I complied with without resisting. They took me to the area of the booking room on the side, searched me, frisked me up and down, searched my backpack, and after about 45 minutes they gave me 2 summonses for trespassing and disorderly conduct, and released me. I lived in 3 countries, been to 4 continents and never in my 45 years been arrested. I didn’t plan this in advance, it just happened.

While under arrest, after being searched and frisked, I engaged in a dialogue with the officers telling them this is not personal and encouraged them to look deeper into the constitution and bill of rights vis a vis the practice that caused this situation. I told them that I believe it’s the policy they are enacting and the training they are receiving that is the main problem. I explained to them that the ferry terminal is a government (public) travel facility, not a privately owned building where the owner has the right to discriminate against who s/he allows in. We engaged in a deeper discussion about this and related issues, and at the end I hugged the few officers who were there and told them again that it is not personal.

This is not about the officers per se, but I do strongly fault the policy and training. The officers are enacting a policy that they had no say in, and they acted based on training they had no say in designing. That doesn’t absolve them from their responsibility toward upholding the constitution, but again, it’s more about policy and training.

Randomly choosing people or racial, ethnic, or religious profiling goes against the text and spirit of the supreme law of the land. It’s ineffective and discriminatory in nature, and open the door for even more abuses. No state or local law, and no public facility rule can go against the constitution. I am aware that neither I nor the officers have a decision-making ability to stop this abuse and that if a litigation ensued it might end up in the Supreme Court, but I just had to take a stand.

A friend told me: “I'm more encouraged by folks standing up and refusing to be abused. We will have exactly the level of oppression that is tolerated”, which reminded me of Frederick Douglas’ quote from 1857: “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both."

I am no hero, but I took a step and stood up. The more people stand up to these abuses, the better our chances in pushing them back. Benjamin Franklin said: “Those who give up essential liberty for little temporary safety deserve neither.”

LikeShow more reactions
CommentShar