# Obama and Gates vs. the Cambridge cops



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

https://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/obama_cambridge_police_acted_stupidly_072209

Just one link of many.

I'm sure we've all heard about this by now. Unless this just blows over, or is covered up, here's my prediction: Obama will apologize.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

The White House has already issued a clarification - the President said that the police acted "stupidly" but did not mean the officer was stupid.


----------



## obxsouth (Mar 18, 2009)

Stupidity seemed in no short supply with all parties on Professor Gates' porch. Once he had presented sufficient ID, the matter should have ended then and there, because it had been established that in fact, no B&E had occurred.
(I must say it's a sad commentary that Dr. Gates' neighbor, who alerted the police, did not recognize him. I would guess that given that Dr. Gates is one of the high profile members of the Harvard faculty, he would have been easily recognized. It's a commentary on the fact that we are a nation of strangers in many respects.)
But Dr. Gates, by virtue of some of his reported comments at the scene, seemed to pour gasoline on the fire. But if I were in his shoes, I'd be upset as well.
As for President Obama, the most important of his statements was that he did not know all the facts. None of us do, save the parties involved. Perhaps in this instance, the President should have withheld any judgment until all the facts were known. Unfortunately, an opportunity to address more questions on health reform was lost because of this story.


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

As William F. Buckley once said, I'd rather be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the entire Harvard faculty.

Gates sounds like he has a massive chip on his shoulder.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

You have to appreciate the irony of the black sociology professor accusing a white police officer of racism based on...stereotypes of white police officers.

And being completely wrong, and an asshole about it to boot.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

PedanticTurkey said:


> You have to appreciate the irony of the black sociology professor accusing a white police officer of racism based on...stereotypes of white police officers.
> 
> And being completely wrong, and an asshole about it to boot.


Yeah, because YOU were in his living room and know what was said.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

Gates' prejudiced diatribe was especially ironic given the fact that the police officer that arrested him teaches the racial profiling class at the police academy.

https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99KBEAO1&show_article=1

The fact that none of the media has bothered to talk to any of the eyewitnesses (which include civilians as well as both Harvard University and Cambridge police officers, and at least one person with a camera who caught Gates screaming at a black officer) is pretty telling in itself.










Kind of reminds me of Holmes' observation about the dog that didn't bark in the night.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Don't report Interchange posts unless they contain racist or hate speech or invite/condone illegal actions. This thread contains none of the above.

If you disagree with the views expressed, reply or seethe - your choice. 

If you just don't like what you're reading, don't read it and certainly don't report it!


----------



## memphislawyer (Mar 2, 2007)

Well, I could see where Gates was already peeved that the door would not open and he was what, coming back from a flight somewhere. Maybe he was already in a bad mood and then the police show up. I am not excusing any action that he overreacted, just saying there are explanations. Maybe he did overreact, but maybe the Cambridge police could have gotten a neighbor to calm him down, tell them they will deal with it in the morning and leave without arresting him.


----------



## David V (Sep 19, 2005)

Why has no one mentioned the neighbor who didn't recognize another neighbor?


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

David V said:


> Why has no one mentioned the neighbor who didn't recognize another neighbor?


The other person with Dr. Gates was the cab driver, whom no one would have recognized.

Frankly, if I were breaking into my own house, or trying to jimmy open the lock on my own car, I'd hope that someone would stop by to see what was going on. And I'd be prepared to explain and provide identification as necessary.

The police claim that Dr. Gates provided his Harvard ID, not a drivers' license with his address. But one would think that someone as educated and intelligent as he would say something more thought-out than "why? Because I'm a black man in America?"

I think Obama fell into a trap. He sided with the black man while admittedly not knowing all of the facts. This will be a major event for people who are racist, or people who are concerned that Obama is racist, or people who are concerned that Obama will act racist because the "black power structure" has made it clear that he owes them something for their support.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

I think Obama is absolutely right. It was a stupid arrest. The fact that they dropped the charges says as much. Once the cop found out it was Gates's house, that was cop's cue to say "have a nice day, sir," and go away. 

Sure, Gates could have defused the situation and not yelled. But he wasn't violent, he just yelled, in his own home, at the cop. He was coming back from China, probably irritable and tired. And like every black man in America, he knows plenty about white cops hassling black guys for no reason--maybe first hand. 

So yes, he lost his cool. But that doesn't make the arrest of a middle-aged man, who has proved he's in his own home, any less stupid.


----------



## smallwonder (Jun 29, 2009)

I think both Gates and the cop were foolish during the incident. Lets call it water under the bridge and move on.

What I don't understand is how a cop can arrest someone for yelling at them. Unless Gates made a verbal threat at the cop, there should be no basis for an arrest. I work for the Social Security Administration as a Program Analyst; however, I started off as a claims representative--dealing with the public. In the course of my job, taking disability claims, I had to hear so much crap from the claimants. Many times we had to detain the angry claimant and contact Federal Protective Service for assistance. Unless the claimant made a threat, FPS would not arrest the claimant. To be honest, even if the claimant made a threat, FPS would rarely arrest the person. I am a federal employee and dealt with beligerent people constantly. This local cop couldn't deal with Mr. Gates?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

I don't understand what people don't understand.

The charges should be reinstated IMHO. According to reading the report; Gates was clearly disorderly. He wasn't charged with B&E. To say, he shouldn't be charged with disorderly after he showed ID saying he was in his own home is to mistate the premise IMHO. He shouted at a Police Officer while failing to comply with lawful orders during an investigation of a crime; reportedly in progress. You can't do that; no matter who you are. 

I am willing to concede some of the facts may be at question and that is fine; two sides to every story. However, if he was disorderly; he should be charged no matter who he is. And if he was in his own home he shouldn't be charged with B&E and he wasn't. Where is the abuse of the truth here?

It's the same with these people claiming "racial profiling". Racial profiling is not at issue here. Gates was not selected and questioned by Police because he was black, Gates was on the premises of a site that was the subject of a 911 call. The police has a responsibility and obligation to question him, ask for his ID, and state a purpose for being there, and if he is alone or not. These are valid questions and Gates should have answered them. Apparently, Gates refused to produce ID showing he lived there, only WHO he was. And stated that the Police should be cautious because of WHO he was. Frankly, that's not compliance with a police officer.

Whether the neighbor overreacted or reacted due to a racial bias is irrelevant to the cop's actions, but could have played a role. Still, it's not "racial profiling." And once a call is made the Police have to respond and investigate.

If Gates is an expert on these issues and one of the top 100 professors in the nation; he should be smart enough to deal with the situation rationally and respect that the cop is doing his job. Obama said he was looking for Empathy in a Supreme Court justice. Where is the empathy for the Police officer by Gates? Imagine how many times an officer over 17 years has to deal with a possibly dangerous situation and don't be beligerent and inflame a situation if there truly isn't one there. 

"Hi, Officer, I'm Professor Gates, this is my home. Sure, I have ID. So, my neighbor was looking out for me and misinterepreted me breaking into my own home? Well, certainly that's not your fault. I'm glad you came out. I've been in China. What if it was a burglarly? I'm glad she and you were looking after my interest. You know back-in-the-day no one would care about a black man being robbed. Thank you for the job you do protecting ALL citizen's property. Have a Good day!"


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

Skip Gate's raison d'etre is playing the race card. It's his bag, umbrage. He's Harvard's Henry Louis Gates, Jr.!!!

He'll exploit this situation as long as anyone will listen. He'll dine out and garner university lecture fees on this for years, not to mention another PBS series. A hero, set for life.

He's one-up on his 'vard colleague Cornel West in publicly mau-mauing the flak vest wearers, street cred.

Where's Al Sharpton? 

Was Skip on Charlie Rose tonight? Tavis Smiley? Bill Moyers Friday? Stir this $#!+

Oh, sweet, righteous, remunerative outrage!


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

ksinc said:


> The charges should be reinstated IMHO. According to reading the report; Gates was clearly disorderly. He wasn't charged with B&E.


Arrests for disorderly conduct are usually BS, and this one looks like no exception. Yelling at a police officer is a crime?



> To say, he shouldn't be charged with disorderly after he showed ID saying he was in his own home is to mistate the premise IMHO. He shouted at a Police Officer while failing to comply with lawful orders during an investigation of a crime; reportedly in progress. You can't do that; no matter who you are.


Right, but you can't be arrested for being disorderly in your house. Really, I don't think you can be arrested for it after the cop says "let's take this outside," either.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

The cops should've known who he was,maybe the cops haven't watched his programs before.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Beresford said:


> Gates' prejudiced diatribe was especially ironic given the fact that the police officer that arrested him teaches the racial profiling class at the police academy.
> 
> https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99KBEAO1&show_article=1
> 
> ...


Not intending to distract any one's attention from all this marvelous acrimony but, did anyone notice that the Professor's metal belt buckle and watch are both yellow gold...he is coordinated...and the silver color of the handcuffs does provide a rather jarring contrast. Who wouldn't raise their voice in outrage!


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Arrests for disorderly conduct are usually BS, and this one looks like no exception. Yelling at a police officer is a crime?
> 
> Right, but you can't be arrested for being disorderly in your house. Really, I don't think you can be arrested for it after the cop says "let's take this outside," either.


I should've qualified that as "disorderly _towards a cop_." Need a little more coffee to fire on all cylinders.

Edit: On third thought, these laws vary wildly. I have no idea what the law is up there.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

eagle2250 said:


> Not intending to distract any one's attention from all this marvelous acrimony but, did anyone notice that the Professor's metal belt buckle and watch are both yellow gold...he is coordinated...and the silver color of the handcuffs does provide a rather jarring contrast. Who wouldn't raise their voice in outrage!


See! He was overdressed. Cops don't like that.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

Lord Foppington said:


> I think Obama is absolutely right. It was a stupid arrest. The fact that they dropped the charges says as much. Once the cop found out it was Gates's house, that was cop's cue to say "have a nice day, sir," and go away.
> 
> Sure, Gates could have defused the situation and not yelled. But he wasn't violent, he just yelled, in his own home, at the cop. He was coming back from China, probably irritable and tired. And like every black man in America, he knows plenty about white cops hassling black guys for no reason--maybe first hand.
> 
> So yes, he lost his cool. But that doesn't make the arrest of a middle-aged man, who has proved he's in his own home, any less stupid.


I'll second this.

Professor Gates seems to have acted very belligerently, demanding the officers' name and badge number, and in essence accusing him of racism. It's akin to making jokes about a bomb in an airport. It is technically illegal? No. Stupid? Yup.

Still, none of these are against the law, and his arrest seems utterly unjustified.

There are no heroes here.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

Orsini said:


> See! He was overdressed. Cops don't like that.


He's got a beard, too. They probably figured he was a pimp. Throw in "contempt of cop" and the result is just about inevitable.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

obxsouth said:


> Once he had presented sufficient ID, the matter should have ended then and there, because it had been established that in fact, no B&E had occurred.


While I have no idea what the real story is here, after hearing what the police officer said merely presenting ID was not the end of the matter. The officer said that he had been told that there were two subjects who appeared to be breaking into the home.

Upon entering the home he encountered only one person and he said that he had no way of knowing if this person was one of the two that he had been told about or if perhaps there were two unknown persons hiding in the house. He couldn't simply walk away at that point until he accounted for this other person.

According to standard police procedures he said that he asked the Professor to step outside while he determined what was going on. He said that this was not only for the officer's safety but also the Professors since he still didn't know what was going on and if there were actually intruders in the home. He said that is was at this point that the Professor became enraged and started calling him a racist. He gave the impression that the Professor was non-cooperative from the get go, in other words making the officer's job far more difficult than it should have been.

Keep in mind that when a police officer arrives at a scene they usually have very limited information. It's possible that lives could depend on how they handle the situation. What if the officer had left and a few minutes later the Professor had been murdered by two intruders hiding in the house? I suppose we would now be talking about how the Cambridge Police Dept. failed this Black homeowner by not doing a thorough investigation. If the homeowner had been White the officer surely would have looked into the situation more deeply because after all he was told that there were two intruders.

While I am opposed to racism in any guise, reading about some of the accounts of racism over the past few years has left me with the feeling that in too many cases this charge is being used as an expression of anger over a situation that has nothing to do with race. Is it racism if a Black person gets treated like crap by a white waiter or waitress in a restaurant? If so, what is it when I get treated like crap by that same waiter or waitress?

I have no answer to this. My point is that if I was Black would I be claiming a racial motive? But since I'm White and the waiter was White, what do I call it? I think there is a perception in the Black community that White folks don't get treated badly by other White folks. I wish that were true.

While it is just speculation, I have a feeling that what we really have here isn't about race at all. I suspect it's more about power and status. A powerful public figure used to getting his way angry at being directed to do this or that by a lowly police officer.

When the officer said that one of the first things the Professor said to him was "Do you know who I am?" all I could do was cringe. How often has this phrase been spoken by the rich and powerful as they bully people they view as beneath them. I have a feeling that it's less about race than it is about power, getting one's way, and a lot of testosterone. Crying "race" in such situations does more to impede progress in racial matters than any other thing.

Cruiser


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

In addition to being a jerk and a person who makes his living stereotyping White America, I'm wondering if there was contraband in the house and Gates freaked out at the notion of a cop coming in. And why haven't they interviewed the "taxi driver?" Or the other witnesses?

"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the ***** race before the public. Some of these people do not want the ***** to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well." Booker T. Washington


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

smallwonder said:


> I think both Gates and the cop were foolish during the incident. Lets call it water under the bridge and move on.
> 
> What I don't understand is how a cop can arrest someone for yelling at them. Unless Gates made a verbal threat at the cop, there should be no basis for an arrest. I work for the Social Security Administration as a Program Analyst; however, I started off as a claims representative--dealing with the public. In the course of my job, taking disability claims, I had to hear so much crap from the claimants. Many times we had to detain the angry claimant and contact Federal Protective Service for assistance. Unless the claimant made a threat, FPS would not arrest the claimant. *To be honest, even if the claimant made a threat, FPS would rarely arrest the person.* I am a federal employee and dealt with beligerent people constantly. This local cop couldn't deal with Mr. Gates?


I worked at a bank right out of college as a loan officer. On one occasion a guy was making threats to one of the personal bankers because his account was overdrawn. The police were called and he was ordered to leave, but he was not arrested. They arrested him later that afternoon after he returned to the bank and threw a brick at the window.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Arrests for disorderly conduct are usually BS, and this one looks like no exception. Yelling at a police officer is a crime?
> 
> Right, but you can't be arrested for being disorderly in your house. Really, I don't think you can be arrested for it after the cop says "let's take this outside," either.


Disorderly may be the wrong charge, but then how about interferring with the investigation, obstructing justice. To me disorderly seems like an appropriate charge because the others are over-stated/over-kill. However, you can't refuse a lawful order and beligerently interfere with a police officer performing his job without expecting consequences. He was responding to a 911 call. Did he have probably cause to be on the property and question anyone he found there? Yes; I think he did.

The police asks them to step outside for their own safety and in this case specifically because Gates refused to say if he was alone in the house and refused to provide evidence that it was his house.

There's a distinction between, "Sir will come outside and talk to me?" and "Let's take this outside." Especially once Gates responded with "No I will not and your Momma is outside."

Gates should get what he deserves here and it is the sanction of the community - a slap on the wrist disorderly charge and an attitude correction is needed IMHO. Gates acted to inflame the situation and acted like a loose-cannon.

As has been reported The Police Officer apologized immediately for "not knowing who he was", but still needed ID that showed that was his house. Gates refused to produce ID with an address on it such as a drivers' license.

I think common sense and probably the law require you to provide a state issued ID to the Police on request. His University ID doesn't qualify.

I was once stopped in Georgia and got abused pretty badly by a Decatur Police for my Florida Drivers' license and produced my student ID to verify why I was out of State and had not established permanent residence, but this is a professor with a residence. Again, we are told how smart Gates is and what an expert on this issue in particular he is; so he should have been extra compliant not more beligerent IMHO.

At best he totally embarrassed his University, but I wouldn't be surprised if most of the population there probably think he made them proud.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm really not sure of the extent to which a citizen can resist or non-comply with the orders of a police officer, but I completely agree that the cop had every right to ask Gates to leave the house and to use force if necessary to remove him, as part of the investigation. There were two perps reported, remember? And asking for the ID is also fine, not sure if the cops can "make" you produce ID unless you're driving, though.

But Gates was arrested for yelling at police officers and making an ass of himself after the investigation was finished. That's uncool.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I'm really not sure of the extent to which a citizen can resist or non-comply with the orders of a police officer, but I completely agree that the cop had every right to ask Gates to leave the house and to use force if necessary to remove him, as part of the investigation. There were two perps reported, remember? And asking for the ID is also fine, not sure if the cops can "make" you produce ID unless you're driving, though.
> 
> But Gates was arrested for yelling at police officers and making an ass of himself after the investigation was finished. That's uncool.


Ok, I agree with what you are saying, but consider that the cops have to end the situation and maintain order/control. So, they arrest him and charge him with disorderly; and then the charge is dropped. He was not "abused" or "violated."

That doesn't automatically mean he shouldn't have been charged. It may mean that, but also the officer has limited tools at his disposal. It's not a perfect solution, but it keeps things from getting out of control.

If Gates' thesis was correct he would have been "Rodney King'ed." And clearly he wasn't. Faced with a tense situation, a beligerent ass, and a 911 call - I think the officer handled it pretty well. And a process is in place to review and find the solution after things have calmed down.

My personal vote would be leave the charge and make Gates' learn some humility by a slap on the wrist and a day of community service, but I think dropping the charge doesn't make the initial charge "stupid."

Down here we are allowed guns in our cars without a permit to carry, sometimes if there is a gray area - a cop will frequently charge with suspicion of carrying concealed and take the weapon. Then later they drop the charge after the investigation if your weapon checks out as not stolen, etc... Cops are not judges and when in doubt and especially confronted with beligerence they are going to charge you with something so it starts the review process by the law - DA, judges, etc. All they have is one hammer if they can't talk you down nicely and that clearly wasn't being allowed by Gates. Otherwise it goes in as "no action taken" which gets nothing done.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Here I'm going to have to disagree with you. The cops ought not arrest people unless they have probable cause of a legitimate offense. Now there are indeed a lot of offenses out there that are very vague or subjective (like disorderly conduct, breach of the peace, etc.), but they are suspect and aren't supposed to be used like this.

There are other tools at their disposal which are related to the burglary investigation (probable cause to arrest, reasonable suspicion to detain and pat down), but once that was all cleared up, I think the cops should (and do) have to just sit there and listen to citizens b****.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Here I'm going to have to disagree with you. The cops ought not arrest people unless they have probable cause of a legitimate offense. Now there are indeed a lot of offenses out there that are very vague or subjective (like disorderly conduct, breach of the peace, etc.), but they are suspect and aren't supposed to be used like this.
> 
> There are other tools at their disposal which are related to the burglary investigation (probable cause to arrest, reasonable suspicion to detain and pat down), but once that was all cleared up, I think the cops should (and do) have to just sit there and listen to citizens b****.


I think you are probably correct, but in practice Police do use those vague and subjective offenses to pass things on to administration of justice review. I think as it matters here, it's something they do regardless of whether someone is black or white and it has more to do with the "predicament" the Officer feels he is being placed into by the lack of cooperation and beligerent attitude of the citizen.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

PedanticTurkey said:


> once that was all cleared up, I think the cops should (and do) have to just sit there and listen to citizens b****.


That's just it, I don't think the matter had been cleared up. According to what the officer said this all happened while he was trying to get the Professor to step outside the house while he got the facts together and tried to ascertain where the second suspect was, if there was a second suspect. Remember, he was told that there were two men breaking into the house. The officer wanted both the Professor and himself outside for safety reasons while this was checked out.

For example, what if one or more intruders had been holding a member of the Professor's family at gunpoint in a back bedroom and had ordered the Professor to get rid of the cop or else? I know that sounds like a movie script, but we are looking at this with hindsight. That officer had no way of knowing what he was dealing with and he couldn't simply leave, especially after being told that there were two intruders and he could only account for one person.

Many years ago I was a child abuse investigator in a major city. All too often we were damned if we did, and damned if we didn't. If we forcibly removed a child from a home we would be portrayed in the newspaper as home wreckers, an example of government coming in and tearing a family apart. Ask my friend what happens if you don't remove the child and the child later dies at the hands of an abusive parent or boyfriend of the Mother. Then they want to prosecute you for not doing your job.

Unless you have been out there in the middle of the night making these type decisions you really have no idea what it's like. The Professor should have assisted the officer with his investigation and let him go on his way without all of this racism talk. Like I said before, the officer's description of what happened makes a lot more sense, common and otherwise, than what the Professor is saying.

Cruiser


----------



## obxsouth (Mar 18, 2009)

*Thanks*



Cruiser said:


> While I have no idea what the real story is here, after hearing what the police officer said merely presenting ID was not the end of the matter. The officer said that he had been told that there were two subjects who appeared to be breaking into the home.
> 
> Upon entering the home he encountered only one person and he said that he had no way of knowing if this person was one of the two that he had been told about or if perhaps there were two unknown persons hiding in the house. He couldn't simply walk away at that point until he accounted for this other person.
> 
> ...


Excellent post. These are great points. I'd forgotten about Dr. Gates' driver. And, for the record, I did note early on the fact that one of Dr. Gates' neighbors did not recognize him in his own neighborhood. As I said, it is a sad commentary, in that it points up the fact that in many ways, we are a nation of sterangers.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Cruiser said:


> That's just it, I don't think the matter had been cleared up. According to what the officer said this all happened while he was trying to get the Professor to step outside the house while he got the facts together and tried to ascertain where the second suspect was, if there was a second suspect. Remember, he was told that there were two men breaking into the house. The officer wanted both the Professor and himself outside for safety reasons while this was checked out.


No, that's just not how it went according to either party. The cop says he eventually got Gates's ID, confirmed who Gates was, and was going to leave. Gates started (or kept) shouting and demanding the officer's name. The cop said he couldn't understand what someone was trying to radio to him, so he said let's take this outside, where Gates kept it up and was arrested.


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

If Gates were a big-mouthed white Harvard professor--shooting his mouth off to a beat cop and got put in cuffs, most of us would be tickled. To me, this isn't so much about race as about a Harvard prof thinking that he is above the rest of us. It's too bad this incident is going to inflame a bunch of passions that probably have nothing to do with the actual incident.

As far as the president's remarks--jeeze--even I know that, when you're the president, you don't comment on local law enforcement/court cases. That's been the rule since Nixon almost derailed the Charles Manson case.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Here I'm going to have to disagree with you. The cops ought not arrest people unless they have probable cause of a legitimate offense. Now there are indeed a lot of offenses out there that are very vague or subjective (like disorderly conduct, breach of the peace, etc.), but they are suspect and aren't supposed to be used like this.
> 
> There are other tools at their disposal which are related to the burglary investigation (probable cause to arrest, reasonable suspicion to detain and pat down), but once that was all cleared up, I think the cops should (and do) have to just sit there and listen to citizens b****.


I absolutely disagree. If it gets to the point where people can abuse police officers and other emergency responders like firefighters, things will break down quickly. The point of the police is they are there to maintain civil order. From all I have read, Gates was being totally abusive of not just one but several police officers. The charges should not have been dropped and he should have at least been slapped with a civil fine and a notation on his record. Plus a referral to Harvard for whatever further disciplinary action was necessary (he was being abusive on University property, faculty housing).


----------



## Mr_David (Jun 14, 2009)

In Mufti said:


> If Gates were a big-mouthed white Harvard professor--shooting his mouth off to a beat cop and got put in cuffs, most of us would be tickled. To me, this isn't so much about race as about a Harvard prof thinking that he is above the rest of us. It's too bad this incident is going to inflame a bunch of passions that probably have nothing to do with the actual incident.


Completely agree. Whatever color or creed you are, when you decide to be a colossal, impudent jerk to the police, you shouldn't be surprised when they charge you as disorderly. Some people start off with a chip on their shoulder, and everything that goes wrong seems to feed their fire.

If the police arrive at my home under the auspices of capturing a possible intruder, my first reaction would be to let them do their job. If it turns out to be a mix-up over a jammed door, then I kindly explain the situation and life goes on. Gates' reaction and demeanor are what exacerbated the situation, not his race.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

When I was 19 my younger brother and I stopped by a local car dealership to check out a Jeep I was thinking of buying. The lot was closed (it was around 9:30 pm in the summer), but they left it open to drive through and there were no no-trespassing signs. As we were getting back into my car after checking out the Jeep, two squad cars pulled up blocking us in. The first officer asked what we were doing and asked to see my license and insurance card. I gave them to him and told him we were just checking out a Jeep I was considering buying, but wanted to look at it without being bothered by a salesman. He then said something about someone stealing cars on that particular lot and cuffed the two of us. We were then leaned over the hood of our car (which was hot) while he searched my car for "tools used to break into cars". 
My brother was visibly annoyed and at 17 he could be pretty mouthy, so I told him to keep his mouth shut. After tearing through my car and dumping the contents of my glove compartment on the floor and emptying my trunk, we were uncuffed and told to leave. The second (younger) officer turned and apologized and said they were just trying to catch the guy who had stolen some cars. 

As soon as my brother and I got back into the car, we wrote the first officer's name and car number down. I was really pissed off, but I kept my mouth shut. My family knows a lot of cops and some of my relatives are cops, but I didn't bring any of that up while we were being harassed thinking that would only make things worse. I did file a complaint with the PD the next morning. 

You feel very powerless when you are being pushed around (or in my case cuffed) by a bully cop, but it is best just to keep quiet and file a complaint later. Gates should have just given him his ID and kept his mouth shut. If he felt he was being abused by the officer, he could have filed a complaint later.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

I've been thinking...when Gates became belligerent, aggressive and obnoxious (for whatever reasons he may have had), if the Sgt had just tazed his a**, we wouldn't be having all these word exchanges about the "perps" arrest on disorderly conduct charges... that were subsequently dropped! Why is it so difficult to keep things in perspective?


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

The latest:



> AP: A black police officer who was at Henry Louis Gates Jr.'s home when the black Harvard scholar was arrested says he fully supports how his white fellow officer handled the situation.
> 
> Sgt. Leon Lashley says Gates was probably tired and surprised when Sgt. James Crowley demanded identification from him as officers investigated a report of a burglary. Lashley says Gates' reaction to Crowley was "a little bit stranger than it should have been."
> 
> Asked if Gates should have been arrested, Lashley said supported Crowley "100 percent."


This is the black officer that Gates was screaming at in the picture in my prior post.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

ksinc said:


> I think common sense and probably the law require you to provide a state issued ID to the Police on request. His University ID doesn't qualify.


This is as anti-American as you can get. WERE NOT A POLICE STATE!!!!

Legally you can yell anything you want at a cop and they can't even say anything against you, much more do something. Don't you know your basic civil rights?

This is common knowledge. Did you even go to school in the US? You should know theses without even going to school.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> No, that's just not how it went according to either party. The cop says he eventually got Gates's ID, confirmed who Gates was, and was going to leave. Gates started (or kept) shouting and demanding the officer's name. The cop said he couldn't understand what someone was trying to radio to him, so he said let's take this outside, where Gates kept it up and was arrested.


The cops can not arrest somebody without probably cause. The cop, if he wanted to hear something on the radio should have stepped outside himself, after all, Gates is not proven guilty, so could be innocence and- arresting innocent people is a crime.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

And why shouldn't the POTUS be surprised at the controversy around what he said. Let's look at the facts:

1) Gates is black
2) Gates is a Harvard professor
3) The cop is white
4) White cops racially profile (isn't this an indisputable fact?)

All the pieces were in place. He pretended to give a well reasoned analysis based on what he thought the narrative should be given the facts stated above. He threw in a bit of humor and charm and that's that. Four hundred years of racism wiped out like that! Let's move on to the next item on the agenda.....world peace. 

I guess it never occurred to him that his pal is and has made his name race bating. And I suppose it would never occur to him that Gates could be, and was, a grade "A" a**hole. 

Much much for a president that transcends race.


----------



## LoneWolf (Apr 20, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> ....I did file a complaint with the PD the next morning....


What happened as a result of the complaint?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> I've been thinking...when Gates became belligerent, aggressive and obnoxious (for whatever reasons he may have had), if the Sgt had just tazed his a**, we wouldn't be having all these word exchanges about the "perps" arrest on disorderly conduct charges... that were subsequently dropped! Why is it so difficult to keep things in perspective?


Ha! "Don't taze me Bro!" :icon_smile_big:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

WA said:


> The cops can not arrest somebody without probably cause. The cop, if he wanted to hear something on the radio should have stepped outside himself, after all, Gates is not proven guilty, so could be innocence and- arresting innocent people is a crime.


He not only had probable cause he witnessed the disorderly conduct firsthand.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Obama offers a beer to both Gates and Crowley:



It was unwise of him to say "stupidly," as that's a buzzword that incites sensationalism at every turn. Had he said "irrationally" I think people wouldn't be nearly as upset.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

I love how this thread started by insulting the President for commenting on this case without knowing "the facts" - and following that we have TWO PAGES of posts from people that also have no clue about "the facts"


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

WA said:


> This is as anti-American as you can get. WERE NOT A POLICE STATE!!!!
> 
> Legally you can yell anything you want at a cop and they can't even say anything against you, much more do something. Don't you know your basic civil rights?
> 
> This is common knowledge. Did you even go to school in the US? You should know theses without even going to school.


As I said, the proper charge might have been an obstruction of justice charge, but I think they were charging him the lesser crime up there as a courtesy and routinely drop the charge.

Down here it is called - resisting officer without violence and it is almost always later dropped. It is used as a technique to get control of a situation that is getting out of control.



> OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE *843.02 Resisting officer without violence to his or her person.*--Whoever shall resist, obstruct, or oppose any officer as defined in s. (1), (2), (3), (6), (7), (8), or (9); member of the Parole Commission or any administrative aide or supervisor employed by the commission; county probation officer; parole and probation supervisor; personnel or representative of the Department of Law Enforcement; or other person legally authorized to execute process in the execution of legal process or in the lawful execution of any legal duty, without offering or doing violence to the person of the officer, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. or s.


The Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that must identify State laws were not Un-Constitutional. In Florida we have one if the officer is investigating prowling or similar charges like say a B&E.

I'm sure someone already reported you "unfair" post and personal attacks. So, I won't share my view of what you can do with your Anti-American claim.

Has news of the Patriot Act reached your cave? We aren't a police state? Please use your extended unemployment benefits to buy a clue.

If the cop was a racist he would have taken him inside and beat the crud out of him, not asked him to go outside with witnesses.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> I love how this thread started by insulting the President for commenting on this case without knowing "the facts" - and following that we have TWO PAGES of posts from people that also have no clue about "the facts"


I believe I stated some facts in my post above.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> I love how this thread started by insulting the President for commenting on this case without knowing "the facts" - and following that we have TWO PAGES of posts from people that also have no clue about "the facts"


I re-read the first handfull of posts in this thread; including your post at #6 and I find no one insulting the President and only one person mentioning in brief the President's own admission that he did not know all the facts.

So how did "this thread [start] by insulting the President?"


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

LoneWolf said:


> What happened as a result of the complaint?


I heard he had to go to sensitivity training or something like that.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> I love how this thread started by insulting the President for commenting on this case without knowing "the facts" - and following that we have TWO PAGES of posts from people that also have no clue about "the facts"


I started it - in part to see the fur fly, but mostly because I was curious to see the range of responses from intelligent, well-dressed men - and I insulted no one, not even BO.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

I think he was referring to the initial responses to your thread, not the topic post itself.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

So what was the beer that Obama was offering to the guys? Was he trying to get them drunk?


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Jovan said:


> I think he was referring to the initial responses to your thread, not the topic post itself.


Exactly. This entire controversy around the POTUS comments was that he was speaking before knowing the facts.


----------



## Jovan (Mar 7, 2006)

Howard said:


> So what was the beer that Obama was offering to the guys? Was he trying to get them drunk?


He's apparently trying to make amends to both of them.


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

The MA statute follows:

A disorderly person is defined as one who:​

 with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
 recklessly creates a risk thereof
 engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
 creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.

The Professor could not have been convicted of Disorderly Conduct. 1 and 2 don't apply because he was in his house and not in public. 3 does not apply because he did not engage in fighting or violent behavior - he said dirty words - and speaking isn't violent behavior. Throwing a punch is. 4 does not apply because his actions served a legitimate purpose - to get a cop out of his home.

This cop is a dope. All he had to do was notice the pictures of the suspect all over the home. You would think that would be a clue. And who breaks into a home with luggage? Most cops are tools and have Barney Fife syndrome. He was excited he got to arrest someone!


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

Stringfellow said:


> This cop is a dope. All he had to do was notice the pictures of the suspect all over the home. You would think that would be a clue. And who breaks into a home with luggage? Most cops are tools and have Barney Fife syndrome. He was excited he got to arrest someone!​


Have you been in Dr. Gates' home lately?

Also, the reports I've read were that he dropped his luggage at the back door and then tried to get in the front.

There were three police officers - one white, one black, and one Hispanic. The white one teaches the diversity/sensitivity course at the police academy.

Fortunately, you don't have the attention or the credibility of the President, or law enforcement officials across the country would be publicly demanding an apology for such a boneheaded, bigoted generalization of their profession.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Miket61 said:


> Have you been in Dr. Gates' home lately?
> 
> Also, the reports I've read were that he dropped his luggage at the back door and then tried to get in the front.
> 
> ...


I totally agree.

It's amazing how the race-baiters are ignoring the fact that only one of the policemen was white. Also, any number of black policemen have defended the policeman's actions.

Only politicians, liberals and race-baiters are defending Gates. (Liberals are probably just covering Obama's premature statement.)


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

Miket61 said:


> Have you been in Dr. Gates' home lately?
> 
> Also, the reports I've read were that he dropped his luggage at the back door and then tried to get in the front.
> 
> ...


I did not say the cop was racist or that he had racist motives. I said he was a dope. You brought race into the discussion.

I also heard he dropped his luggage at the backdoor. How hard is it for the cop to look at the backdoor and see the luggage?

What should have happened is the cop should have entered the home and seen the Professor. He should have put him in handcuffs. Then the Professor should have said, "You nitwit, I live here. See the pictures on the wall that have me in them? See my driver's license with my address on it? See my luggage out back? You're a dumb ass! And you smell funny. [insert other "dirty words" here]"

Then the cop should have said, "I am terribly sorry Professor. This is obviously your home. Let me release you from those handcuffs. Have a good day."

But instead the cop arrested him to show that he was a bad ass cop! I don't think he's a racist cop. Just a dumb jerk cop - they come in all colors.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Stringfellow said:


> You brought race into the discussion.


No - Gates and Obama did. That's the problem here.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> I did not say the cop was racist or that he had racist motives. I said he was a dope. You brought race into the discussion.
> 
> I also heard he dropped his luggage at the backdoor. How hard is it for the cop to look at the backdoor and see the luggage?
> 
> ...


Continue to amaze us with your thorough knowledge of police procedures. This is priceless.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Stringfellow said:


> The MA statute follows:
> 
> A disorderly person is defined as one who:​
> 
> ...


Nice to see that you spent slightly more time learning the facts & accusations here than the President did before speaking. But not much more time.

Nobody denies that Gates was arrested for the disturbance _outside_ his home. Sheesh.


----------



## obiwan (Feb 2, 2007)

Stringfellow said:


> I did not say the cop was racist or that he had racist motives. I said he was a dope. You brought race into the discussion.
> 
> I also heard he dropped his luggage at the backdoor. How hard is it for the cop to look at the backdoor and see the luggage?
> 
> ...


Remind us again how many years you spent in uniform enforcing the laws of the land?

I'll tell you I spent over 18 years in uniform and always enjoyed being critiqued by the Monday morning quarterbacks...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Jovan said:


> I think he was referring to the initial responses to your thread, not the topic post itself.


But, as I pointed out none of those posts "insult President Obama" either.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Exactly. This entire controversy around the POTUS comments was that he was speaking before knowing the facts.


But, that's not what you said. You said "this thread started by insulting President Obama."



mrkleen said:


> I love how this thread started by insulting the President for commenting on this case without knowing "the facts" - and following that we have TWO PAGES of posts from people that also have no clue about "the facts"


All we're asking you for is the post number(s).


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> But, that's not what you said. You said "this thread started by insulting President Obama."
> 
> All we're asking you for is the post number(s).


Give me a break with your "play dumb" comments here.

You know full well that EVERY criticism of President Obama's comments focused on two things...him saying that he didnt have the facts and then speaking about it anyway...and his mention of racial profiling in his commentary on the incident.

The fact that those two things are not implicitly stated in this thread MEAN NOTHING to the tone and tenor of the thread.


----------



## obxsouth (Mar 18, 2009)

*This thread*

I entered one of the early posts about the president not knowing the facts in the case. I do not believe that I in any way insulted the President. If some of the members here perceive that I did, I am sorry. It was not my intent.
This whole story, while it does play into the larger issue of racial profiling in America, would not have received the play that it has in recent days without the reality of the 24-hour news cycle.
Is it a legitimate news story worthy of legitimate discussion? Yes? Are there more important issues that need to be discussed? most certainly.
And while I in no way could even pretend to understand what it's like to be black in America, I do understand what it's like to have a physical disability in America, and I have dealt with similar issues related to discrimination.
Forgive the aside. I say all this to say that I am a bit disappointed with the sometimes insulting tone of some of the posts I've seen on the Interchange, on this and other matters. The fundamental issue in the Gates/Cambridge PD/ Obama affair is respect. I don't mean to lecture, but it's something to ponder as we chat here.


----------



## obxsouth (Mar 18, 2009)

*A postscript*

Please forgive the typos in my earlier post. And to be clear, I should have said I understand what it is like to be a minority in America, as a result of CP.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Give me a break with your "play dumb" comments here.
> 
> You know full well that EVERY criticism of President Obama's comments focused on two things...him saying that he didnt have the facts and then speaking about it anyway...and his mention of racial profiling in his commentary on the incident.
> 
> The fact that those two things are not implicitly stated in this thread MEAN NOTHING to the tone and tenor of the thread.


Do be clear: I'm not playing dumb; I'm openly questioning the veracity of your claim. So, how was this thread started by President Obama being insulted? Or do you simply retract your claim? Or just give us the post number? That's putting you on the spot - not playing dumb.

You don't have to be all defensive and insult me, just substantiate your claim. We can't even disagree with your opinion if you can't substantiate your point of view.

If you want to backpeddle and say Obama was "criticized from the start" of this thread then show us that, but remember that you used your premise to criticize others.

You didn't make a vague observation about the tone and tenor of the thread, you made an explicit accusation.

I will say by my read the thread is pretty critical of Gates; Obama not so much. So, No I don't know full well what what you claim, but thank you for attempting to be insulting to me in your complaint about the imaginary insulting comments of others.

Again, I'm sure the regular Interchange post reporters made special note of your unfair post.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

obxsouth said:


> *I entered one of the early posts about the president not knowing the facts in the case. I do not believe that I in any way insulted the President.* If some of the members here perceive that I did, I am sorry. It was not my intent.
> This whole story, while it does play into the larger issue of racial profiling in America, would not have received the play that it has in recent days without the reality of the 24-hour news cycle.
> Is it a legitimate news story worthy of legitimate discussion? Yes? Are there more important issues that need to be discussed? most certainly.
> And while I in no way could even pretend to understand what it's like to be black in America, I do understand what it's like to have a physical disability in America, and I have dealt with similar issues related to discrimination.
> Forgive the aside. I say all this to say that I am a bit disappointed with the sometimes insulting tone of some of the posts I've seen on the Interchange, on this and other matters. The fundamental issue in the Gates/Cambridge PD/ Obama affair is respect. I don't mean to lecture, but it's something to ponder as we chat here.


Indeed; you didn't. You may have been critical, but it was polite criticism.

What would be really beyond logical would be for those defending Gates' right to yell his criticism at a law enforcement officer performing a 911 investigation to be appalled at someone politely explaining the lack of wisdom in saying the Police "acted stupidly" without knowing all the facts.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

Obama has shown as much understanding of police procedure as he has for military operations, or economics, or national security, or science, or medicine....He's a phony, a con man....a Rainmaker. I hope those who cast their "feel good votes" for this guy get over it and act quickly to minimize the damage. They may have done irreparable harm to our Republic.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> Give me a break with your "play dumb" comments here.
> 
> You know full well that EVERY criticism of President Obama's comments focused on two things...him saying that he didnt have the facts and then speaking about it anyway...and his mention of racial profiling in his commentary on the incident.
> 
> The fact that those two things are not implicitly stated in this thread MEAN NOTHING to the tone and tenor of the thread.


So, if criticism was based on his specific and public actions, that's "insulting." Like saying someone acted "stupidly," that would be "insulting" too.



stringfellow said:


> I did not say the cop was racist or that he had racist motives. I said he was a dope. You brought race into the discussion.
> 
> I also heard he dropped his luggage at the backdoor. How hard is it for the cop to look at the backdoor and see the luggage?


_I _brought race into the discussion? The entire incident was about race. Dr. Gates' comments while this was going on indicated that he felt that being seen breaking into a house should attract no suspicion whatsoever, and no interest by law enforcement, because he was a "black man in America" and would be assumed to be doing something wrong (like breaking into a house) solely because he was black. And not because he was, well, you know, breaking into a house. With an accomplice.

How hard is it for a cop to go through the medicine cabinet and look for prescription bottles with his name on it? How hard is it for him to go into the kitchen and verify that Dr. Gates' favorite kind of coffee was in the cabinet? How hard is it for him to make sure the suits in the closet fit? The luggage at the back door is only relevant when the man at the front door, who was just seen breaking into the house, politely explains that he was returning from a trip and his door was stuck. Dr. Gates gave up his opportunity to say "I know this looks bad, but..." because he was screaming about the alleged racial discrimination by three police officers of three different races.

*​*​


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://apnews.myway.com/article/20090726/D99LQDSG0.html

It's not about him either. :icon_smile_big:



> "If my experience leads to the lessening of the occurrence of racial profiling, then I would find that enormously gratifying," Gates said on The Root. "Because, in the end, this is not about me at all; it is about the creation of a society in which 'equal justice before law' is a lived reality."


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Miket61 said:


> So, if criticism was based on his specific and public actions, that's "insulting." Like saying someone acted "stupidly," that would be "insulting" too.


Who said anything about insulting?

I said this is a case of pot calling the kettle black. A bunch of people saying that President Obama should have kept his mouth shut because he didnt know all the facts.....then go on to pontificate on what they think happened, even thought they ALSO do not have all the facts.

As for the racial element to this, I agree that Gates was the one who played the race card first - but again, without knowing what actually happened - we have no idea why he brought it up. It is just as possible that the officer did make some inappropriate comment to him, as it is that Gates blew the whole thing out of proportion acting like an idiot.

The truth will come out at some point...and when it does, at least half of us will be eating crow.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Miket61 said:


> ...How hard is it for a cop to go through the medicine cabinet and look for prescription bottles with his name on it? How hard is it for him to go into the kitchen and verify that Dr. Gates' favorite kind of coffee was in the cabinet? How hard is it for him to make sure the suits in the closet fit?....


I would not have pegged you for such a happy, closet Soviet. :icon_smile: In the US, what you imply is so easy isn't allowed without a valid search warrant. But in those dreaded communist places, such things are commonplace. So we're told.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> Who said anything about insulting?


You did. Post #12.



> I said this is a case of pot calling the kettle black. A bunch of people saying that President Obama should have kept his mouth shut because he didnt know all the facts.....then go on to pontificate on what they think happened, even thought they ALSO do not have all the facts.


There's a big difference between a bunch of opinionated blowhards using _noms de plume_ on an online forum and the President of the United States making comments. The man to whom the Director of Homeland Security reports needs to choose his words carefully when expressing opinions about law enforcement actions.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Liberty Ship said:


> Obama has shown as much understanding of police procedure as he has for military operations, or economics, or national security, or science, or medicine....He's a phony, a con man....a Rainmaker. I hope those who cast their "feel good votes" for this guy get over it and act quickly to minimize the damage. They may have done irreparable harm to our Republic.


You must have a different definition of "rainmaker" than I do. When I was in sales, a rainmaker was someone who achieved excellent results and brought a lot of money into the company. That definition does not fit with what you are saying.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Miket61 said:


> There's a big difference between a bunch of opinionated blowhards using _noms de plume_ on an online forum and the President of the United States making comments. The man to whom the Director of Homeland Security reports needs to choose his words carefully when expressing opinions about law enforcement actions.


Unless the truth reveals that the cop DID use inappropriate terms to Mr Gates. Guess time will tell.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> You must have a different definition of "rainmaker" than I do. When I was in sales, a rainmaker was someone who achieved excellent results and brought a lot of money into the company. That definition does not fit with what you are saying.


I believe rainmaker in this context refers to those during the dust bowl who claimed they could produce rain for a nominal fee.

For all the talk of a "teachable moment" and talk of how this has shed light on our continued racial problems I might add that from everything that has been reported, this became an issue because of Gates himself.

There are some in this country who are quick to play the victim and any injustice is automatically rooted in racism. Therefore the cause for the transgression is instantly transferred to the perceived offender vs. the minority.

The irony in many of these cases is that those claiming to be victims of such behavior have simultaneously achieved a level of success in this society precisely from knowing how to manipulate such levers.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> You must have a different definition of "rainmaker" than I do. When I was in sales, a rainmaker was someone who achieved excellent results and brought a lot of money into the company. That definition does not fit with what you are saying.


I was referring to someone like Starbuck in the Richard Nash play/movie -- a classic Rainmaker. These were con men who would travel the land during a drought promising that they could make it rain. They were treated like royalty until people got wise to their game. If they got lucky, it would happen to rain before they got tarred and feathered.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Jovan said:


> He's apparently trying to make amends to both of them.


I think it's good to make amends with someone and to bury the hatchet,that way the problem is solved and the guys can move on.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Someone sent me this in an email this morning in regards to 'taunting Police officers.'



> The other day I went downtown to run a few errands.
> I went into the local Coffee shop for a snack. I was only there for about 5 minutes, and when I came out, there was this cop writing out a parking ticket.
> I said to him, 'Come on, man, how about giving a retired person a break'?
> He ignored me and continued writing the ticket.
> ...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Quay said:


> I would not have pegged you for such a happy, closet Soviet. :icon_smile: In the US, what you imply is so easy isn't allowed without a valid search warrant. But in those dreaded communist places, such things are commonplace. So we're told.


BTDT

You should also see the look on your Russian translator's face when you ask her "Hey, what's Russian for, 'do you have a search warrant?'."
ic12337:

I was just trying to lighten the mood ...


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Someone sent me this in an email this morning in regards to 'taunting Police officers.'


For some strange reason this reminds me of the old Jerry Clower story about the football coach who got angry after the referee called a penalty on his team. The coach ran out onto the field where the referee was retrieving his flag and shouted "you stink."

The referee calmly picked up his flag, walked fifteen yards further back, held out the flag, and asked the coach, "OK, how do I smell from here?"

Cruiser


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

pt4u67 said:


> I believe rainmaker in this context refers to those during the dust bowl who claimed they could produce rain for a nominal fee.
> 
> For all the talk of a "teachable moment" and talk of how this has shed light on our continued racial problems I might add that from everything that has been reported, this became an issue because of Gates himself.
> 
> ...





Liberty Ship said:


> I was referring to someone like Starbuck in the Richard Nash play/movie -- a classic Rainmaker. These were con men who would travel the land during a drought promising that they could make it rain. They were treated like royalty until people got wise to their game. If they got lucky, it would happen to rain before they got tarred and feathered.


Thanks, I only knew the term from work and the movie with Matt Damon and Danny DeVito.


----------



## SlowE30 (Mar 18, 2008)

I'm definitely no Obama fan, but I can understand his slip up by using the "stupidly" term - how would you like every word you said every day (and you say a lot of words) to be recorded and analyzed? 

What really ticks me off is that he didn't immediately appologize. There's no excuse for that. BHO was in the wrong (appologize when you say something "stupidly"). Gates was in the wrong (don't mouth off to police officers, especially after being warned). 

If I were an officer, I would be very hesitant to go drink a beer with two people who already thought I was wrong, whose jobs are speaking, arguing, and spinning.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

SlowE30 said:


> If I were an officer, I would be very hesitant to go drink a beer with two people who already thought I was wrong, whose jobs are speaking, arguing, and spinning.


On the other hand, this is also an officer who teaches the anti-profiling course at the police academy and attempted to save the life of a famous black athlete who had a heart attack during a practice. This is someone that Dr. Gates should be applauding, not excoriating.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

SlowE30 said:


> I'm definitely no Obama fan, but I can understand his slip up by using the "stupidly" term - how would you like every word you said every day (and you say a lot of words) to be recorded and analyzed?
> 
> What really ticks me off is that he didn't immediately appologize. There's no excuse for that. BHO was in the wrong (appologize when you say something "stupidly"). Gates was in the wrong (don't mouth off to police officers, especially after being warned).
> 
> *If I were an officer, I would be very hesitant to go drink a beer with two people who already thought I was wrong, whose jobs are speaking, arguing, and spinning.*


Very good point.

Of course, Obama has yet to make any real apology.

To his credit, the officer is willing to take what he can get from this President (in this case, the President declining to call the police "stupid" again) and try to put it behind him and move on for the good of the country.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

SlowE30 said:


> I'm definitely no Obama fan, but I can understand his slip up by using the "stupidly" term - how would you like every word you said every day (and you say a lot of words) to be recorded and analyzed?


I tend to agree to some extent with this. I don't think anyone other than the President or a former President can understand just how much under a microscope he is.

On the other hand, he had to know this question was coming. From what I have heard he was actually prepared for such a question (although I'm sure he didn't know where, when and from whom it would come). I very much doubt that it was an "off the cuff" remark. He had thought it through and in his typical elitist arrogance I believe he thought he would get praise for telling it like it is.

I wonder what this poor cop is going through. When he answered that call I doubt he figured on ending up with the national media at his door step.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

pt4u67 said:


> I tend to agree to some extent with this. I don't think anyone other than the President or a former President can understand just how much under a microscope he is.
> 
> On the other hand, he had to know this question was coming. From what I have heard he was actually prepared for such a question (although I'm sure he didn't know where, when and from whom it would come). I very much doubt that it was an "off the cuff" remark. He had thought it through and in his typical elitist arrogance I believe he thought he would get praise for telling it like it is.
> 
> I wonder what this poor cop is going through. When he answered that call I doubt he figured on ending up with the national media at his door step.


I've thought about that and if that played into why he arrested Gates. I mean if you had this guy saying "do you know who I am? and you don't know who you're messing with ..." wouldn't you charge him so you could get something on the record in your defense even if you knew it was not going to stick and might even be the wrong charge? He had to figure if he walked away Gates would be on CNN explaining how he was "harrassed" by the Police for no reason. The SGT seems to have acted pretty smartly; to me.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

ksinc said:


> I've thought about that and if that played into why he arrested Gates. I mean if you had this guy saying "do you know who I am? and you don't know who you're messing with ..." wouldn't you charge him so you could get something on the record in your defense even if you knew it was not going to stick and might even be the wrong charge? He had to figure if he walked away Gates would be on CNN explaining how he was "harrassed" by the Police for no reason. The SGT seems to have acted pretty smartly; to me.


I don't understand how a man can break down his own front door and not think that someone would find this strange. Even if he _did_ live there, what if he was estranged from his wife, who had thrown him out and gotten a restraining order?


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Gates flat out admits that he had made up his mind that it was racial profiling from the minute he saw the officer. Don't bother to learn the facts, just make up your mind right then and there. That's probably what they teach at Harvard. That, or maybe he's not as smart as he thinks he is?

Now, hopefully, he knows how foolish he was. But he also knows that most of his supporters don't, or they are willing to accept "but I'm black" as an excuse for any conduct towards the police. So don't expect an apology any time soon.


----------



## obiwan (Feb 2, 2007)

Gates seems to have a history of racist remarks;


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

obiwan said:


> Remind us again how many years you spent in uniform enforcing the laws of the land?
> 
> I'll tell you I spent over 18 years in uniform and always enjoyed being critiqued by the Monday morning quarterbacks...


I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.

If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. *If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass.* This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


Yes; we would - IF that was what happened, but it isn't an honest representation of the facts - the guy was not arrested for breaking into his own home.

The Professor wanted to show he was a bad ass and could berate a cop trying to do his job and call him a racist without any substantiation. The cop demonstrated to Professor Gates what happens when you do that - you get arrested for disorderly and later the charges are dropped. Most jurisdictions have some kind of bogus charge like that for exactly this situation so the cop can maintain control.

Gates is the dope.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


It seems that you have issues that need professional attention. Seriously.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

This reminds me of a joke



> This SGT goes into a bar and he sets this one foot tall midget also dressed in a SGT's uniform up on the bar and orders two beers and a straw. The bartendar says he's sorry, but he can only serve one beer unless the midget can show ID and no way the midget is a SGT in the military. The one SGT says I'm SGT SMITH and this is SGT JONES. The bartendar asks how can he be a SGT if he is only one foot tall. SGT SMITH says hey SGT JONES tell the bartendar about that time we were in Africa and you told that witch doctor to go to hell!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Does anyone know if these are true?



> When you actually read what's in the health care bill you feel you are now living in North Korea:
> Page 22...mandates the govt will audit books of ALL Employers that self insure
> Page 30....govt. committee decides what treatments you get
> Page 58...govt. will have real-time access to individual finances & a National ID card will be issued
> ...


taken from here:



> The proposed health-insurance bill from the House of Representatives refers to mentally disabled people as "retarded" -- a term advocates, relatives and physicians find outdated and offensive.


https://www.nypost.com/seven/07262009/news/nationalnews/retarded_house_bill_181448.htm


----------



## obiwan (Feb 2, 2007)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


You are really out of line with this aren't you, I take offense to your slanderous comments... But then again what could we expect from someone who was not there and thinks he knows everything?


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

Stringfellow said:


> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope.


No, only you.

If I were breaking into my own home, I would fully expect that someone would see me doing it and call the police. Which, as I'm not a drugged out hippie or conspiracy theorist, I would assume would appear to assist in protecting my property, and not to hassle me. I would treat them with courtesy and respect because I know that what I'm doing doesn't _look_ like something a law-abiding person would do.


----------



## brokencycle (Jan 11, 2008)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


And if it turned out there was an intruder, and Professor Gates had been killed after the officer left, everyone would be out for blood because he wasn't protecting black American home owners.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

'This Is Incendiary’: CNN Anchor Criticizes Cop’s Call for Obama Apology


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

obiwan said:


> You are really out of line with this aren't you, I take offense to your slanderous comments... But then again what could we expect from someone who was not there and thinks he knows everything?


1. It would be libel, not slander, since it was written. And since it's truthful, it would not be libel either. Yeah, you're not a dope at all.

2. You were just as much not there.


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

ksinc said:


> Yes; we would - IF that was what happened, but it isn't an honest representation of the facts - the guy was not arrested for breaking into his own home.
> 
> The Professor wanted to show he was a bad ass and could berate a cop trying to do his job and call him a racist without any substantiation. The cop demonstrated to Professor Gates what happens when you do that - you get arrested for disorderly and later the charges are dropped. Most jurisdictions have some kind of bogus charge like that for exactly this situation so the cop can maintain control.
> 
> Gates is the dope.


God bless America, where people can be arrested in their own homes for charges that will later be dropped! America - the country where people have to censor themselves even in their own homes so dumb cops can maintain control.

If you would like, I could take a dump on the Bill of Rights and save the government the trouble.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> God bless America, where people can be arrested in their own homes for charges that will later be dropped! America - the country where people have to censor themselves even in their own homes so dumb cops can maintain control.
> 
> If you would like, I could take a dump on the Bill of Rights and save the government the trouble.


Well, they shot that lady with her baby in her arms standing in her own doorway; didn't they?

You're really just catching on; and this is the first thing to capture your attention?

And bigger charges than that get dropped all the time



> Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi (born 9 June 1954), is a 1976 West Point graduate and U.S. F.B.I. sniper who was charged with manslaughter following the shootings during the Ruby Ridge standoff. The charge was dropped and Horiuchi was later deployed during the Waco Siege.


Some coincidence there, huh?

The truth is probably closer to Gates being lucky he was black and the Officer was immersed in the issue of Racial Profiling and Minority Communities:Law Enforcement.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

obiwan said:


> Gates seems to have a history of racist remarks;


Wow,the words that came out his mouth,black,white,watermelon,unbelieveable!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


Stringfellow, you may state your position regarding the incident; even express your opinions regarding the facts of the matter but, you may not throw spurious, unfounded insults directed at members who happen to hold differing opinions. Limit your comments to the issue and stop with the name calling! It adds nothing to the discussion.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> I thought you sounded like a dope. Must be a cop thing.
> 
> If this had no racial component and if this had not been a Harvard professor, we would all think this cop was a dope. If everyone involved was white, and the public found out a guy was arrested for disorderly conduct when a cop found him breaking into his own home, we would all think the cop was an ass. This is no different. The cop wanted to show he was a bad ass and that the Professor couldn't talk to cops with "bad words" so he arrested him for a bogus charge that the Professor never could have been convicted of. The cop is not racist (that we know) but he fore sure is a power hungry retard cop - like every other cop.


That kind of stereotyping is senseless. Anybody who interferes with a policeman on duty is taking a chance at being arrested. By the way, don't you politically correct folks avoid the word "retard?"


----------



## fenway (May 2, 2006)

A point that I've not seen brought up:

Professor Gates was asked for an ID and produced his Harvard ID. The police officer asked for a second ID and Professor Gates allegedly went off on him and refused to comply.

I've seen many opinions given that the officer should have backed off with the first ID. That proved who Professor Gates was.

*Professor Gates may be different, but my Harvard ID does not have my address on it. * To a police officer, it would prove who I was, but would not prove that I had a right to be there.

Just my two cents. I have not seen anyone raise this point.


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> That kind of stereotyping is senseless. Anybody who interferes with a policeman on duty is taking a chance at being arrested. By the way, don't you politically correct folks avoid the word "retard?"


Talk about stereotypes. Who knew all "politically correct folks" did the same thing? And who knew I was one of them?

I use the word "retard" when it fits. I also say the "dirty words." I am still waiting for my toes to curl, my hair to fall out, and to be struck my lightning. I'll let you know if it happens.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> I use the word "retard" when it fits. I also say the "dirty words." I am still waiting for my toes to curl, my hair to fall out, and to be struck my lightning. I'll let you know if it happens.


Please do. It would be cause for celebration.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> Talk about stereotypes. Who knew all "politically correct folks" did the same thing? And who knew I was one of them?
> 
> I use the word "retard" when it fits. I also say the "dirty words." I am still waiting for my toes to curl, my hair to fall out, and to be struck my lightning. I'll let you know if it happens.


Gee, you sure told me.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

fenway said:


> A point that I've not seen brought up:
> 
> Professor Gates was asked for an ID and produced his Harvard ID. The police officer asked for a second ID and Professor Gates allegedly went off on him and refused to comply.
> 
> ...


According to Gates, he produced both a Harvard id and his driver's license right away. Here's his side:

I've already said my bit about this incident. I think was a silly (better word than stupid, to me) arrest, which is why the charges were immediately dropped. Anyway, that's what Gates said happened, and everyone will have to believe what he finds most plausible.

Here too is a link to an interview, where Gates gives his account in his own words:


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

fenway said:


> A point that I've not seen brought up:
> 
> Professor Gates was asked for an ID and produced his Harvard ID. The police officer asked for a second ID and Professor Gates allegedly went off on him and refused to comply.
> 
> ...


Even a DL does not prove he is supposed to be there. He could have been recently divorced or separated from his wife and have a restraining order against him. The cop would not know anything about him until he checked it out. The police were called to the house by a neighbor and they were not going to leave until everything checked out. If Gates is going to be mad at someone, he should be mad at his neighbor for calling the police in the first place. Or here's a crazy idea: try getting to know your neighbors. I wouldn't have to worry about the cops being called if I were in the same situation because I know all of my neighbors.

The crazy thing about all of this is that it is not like the police just rolled up and saw him trying to get into his house, they were caled there. How can they be "profiling" if they were called by the neighbor?


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Laxplayer said:


> Even a DL does not prove he is supposed to be there. He could have been recently divorced or separated from his wife and have a restraining order against him. The cop would not know anything about him until he checked it out. The police were called to the house by a neighbor and they were not going to leave until everything checked out. If Gates is going to be mad at someone, he should be mad at his neighbor for calling the police in the first place. Or here's a crazy idea: try getting to know your neighbors. I wouldn't have to worry about the cops being called if I were in the same situation because I know all of my neighbors.
> 
> The crazy thing about all of this is that it is not like the police just rolled up and saw him trying to get into his house, they were caled there. How can they be "profiling" if they were called by the neighbor?


The person that called was NOT a neighbor, she was a "passerby" who noticed Gates and his cab driver trying to enter the premises.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^Even if the reporting person was not a neighbor, Laxplayer's point is still spot on. How can the police response constitute racial profiling, if they were dispatched to the scene in response to a 911 call for assistance? It was not...Gates simply conducted himself in the manner of your average, every-day, bigoted a**hole! Bigots come in all colors, shapes and from all economic profiles!


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

According to the police, 911 caller didn't cite race!

911 call recording.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

eagle2250 said:


> ^^Even if the reporting person was not a neighbor, Laxplayer's point is still spot on. How can the police response constitute racial profiling, if they were dispatched to the scene in response to a 911 call for assistance? It was not...Gates simply conducted himself in the manner of your average, every-day, bigoted a**hole! Bigots come in all colors, shapes and from all economic profiles!


He makes about four points in his post, several of which are totally disputed by the fact that it was a passerby and not a neighbor.

But glad you see through to the one that supports your point of view.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> He makes about four points in his post, several of which are totally disputed by the fact that it was a passerby and not a neighbor.


Wasn't she calling at the behest of an elderly neighbor. She essentially told the 911 operator that most of what she was reporting was what the elderly neighbor told her which would mean that the initial concern here was that of a neighbor.

It is also interesting that the police tapes show that the officer reported Gates to be uncooperative almost from the get go. It appears that he had not identified Gates yet when he called in that he was talking to someone who claimed to live there but was being uncooperative. This is much more consistent with what the officer is saying now than it is with what Gates is saying now.

I'm trying to keep an open mind here but it seems that the more we know, the more Gates appears to be the villian in all of this. The officer apparently has a spotless record, teaches the race relations courses for the department, and previously didn't hesitate to adminster CPR to a Black athlete in an effort to save his life; not to mention that he also is being supported by the Black officers who know him personally including the Black officer who was on the scene when Gates was arrested.

It almost isn't plausiable that a man with this record went into Gates' house with the attitude that Gates has described. Also, don't you think that if there were any skeletons in the officer's closet in this regard they would have emerged by now? I'm beginning to think that Gates simply lost control and to cover his rear now he is leveing the charges of racism; however, it is unfortunate from his perspective that he was unaware of the background of the target of his charges.

At the same time I'm still trying to keep an open mind and I sincerely hope that sufficient evidence appears that will clear this up one way or the other. In too many of these type cases there is a rush to judgement such as in the Duke lacrosse team charges.

Cruiser


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> He makes about four points in his post, several of which are totally disputed by the fact that it was a passerby and not a neighbor.
> 
> But glad you see through to the one that supports your point of view.


My mistake, I thought it was a neighbor. It still doesn't change anything. The police were still called, they did not initiate the investigation. They were not just out cruising the neighborhood looking for black men to pick on. The woman on the phone gave the police the address.

The woman on the phone states that two men were seen barging into the door of a house. She goes on to state that she did not know if they lived there or not...it is up to the police to investigate whether or not they should be there. I mean, what are they supposed to do? Ignore the call?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...ls_caller_did_not_bring_up_race_of_gates.html


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Laxplayer said:


> My mistake, I thought it was a neighbor. It still doesn't change anything. The police were still called, they did not initiate the investigation. They were not just out cruising the neighborhood looking for black men to pick on. The woman on the phone gave the police the address.
> 
> The woman on the phone states that two men were seen barging into the door of a house. She goes on to state that she did not know if they lived there or not...it is up to the police to investigate whether or not they should be there. I mean, what are they supposed to do? Ignore the call?


No, not at all, the police responded as they should have. But it being a passerby and not a neighbor certainly renders your comment about you not having to worry about the cops because you know your neighbors - moot.

Secondly, I still don't get the point about the caller not mentioning race in her 911 call, and how that fact somehow that negating the possibility of racial profiling.

Racial Profiling doesn't only pertain to "predetermining who you are targeting", it is defined as _"the inclusion of racial or ethnic characteristics in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or an illegal act or to behave in a "predictable" manner. It is often confused with the more comprehensive Offender Profiling."
_
No one is saying the officer in question was sitting on the street, looking for black men to hassle. But if the Sargent was in any way more comprehensive or aggressive in his investigation and questioning of the suspects because of their color, THAT TOO could be construed as "racial profiling" - which is the definition that Gates and his friends are using in their claim.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Gates will use whatever definition gives him the most attention with little regard for fairness. It is he, not the police officer who needs a "teaching moment."


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Gates will use whatever definition gives him the most attention with little regard for fairness. It is he, not the police officer who needs a "teaching moment."


So can we assume that you were IN the house that day and are privy to what "actually" happened?

If you read the statement that Professor Gates made through his attorney, it directly contradicts your statement and that of the officer in question.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Just as a tangential observation ... it seems like the stereotype most people a grabbing onto (if they do) is the one of Harvard Professor and not Black Man. 

:teacha:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> So can we assume that you were IN the house that day and are privy to what "actually" happened?
> 
> If you read the statement that Professor Gates made through his attorney, it directly contradicts your statement and that of the officer in question.


No we can't, and you know it. A lot of black police officers including the one who was there are backing up the police officer. You probably also already know that.

Before you assume that I'm a kneejerk conservative, I assure you I'm not. Plenty of the folks on the right don't care for me either. What's clear here to me is that a rich, powerful man is trying to (and failing miserably) at) mopping up the floor with someone he clearly sees as inferior to himself. The "race roles" may be the reverse of the stereotypical situation but this is elitist snobbery and disregard for those below them at its worst.

Gates seems to be believing that there is a teaching moment here. It is clear to me that he does not feel he needs to learn any lessons himself.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> No we can't, and you know it. A lot of black police officers including the one who was there are backing up the police officer. You probably also already know that.
> 
> Before you assume that I'm a kneejerk conservative, I assure you I'm not. Plenty of the folks on the right don't care for me either. What's clear here to me is that a rich, powerful man is trying to (and failing miserably) at) mopping up the floor with someone he clearly sees as inferior to himself. The "race roles" may be the reverse of the stereotypical situation but this is elitist snobbery and disregard for those below them at its worst.
> 
> Gates seems to be believing that there is a teaching moment here. It is clear to me that he does not feel he needs to learn any lessons himself.


If you were not there, then NOTHING should be clear to you.

Professor Gates statement is no more or less believable than the police report. Just depends on who you feel is a more credible source.


----------



## Miket61 (Mar 1, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> If you were not there, then NOTHING should be clear to you.
> 
> Professor Gates statement is no more or less believable than the police report. Just depends on who you feel is a more credible source.


Were YOU there?


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> If you were not there, then NOTHING should be clear to you.
> 
> Professor Gates statement is no more or less believable than the police report. Just depends on who you feel is a more credible source.


It's not quite as simple as that. Gates has a history. He's on record making racially charged comments. This is a situation that plays right into the narrative. It is true, none of those were there. But then when sitting in a jury none of us are witnesses to a crime but are asked to make a judgement based on the facts presented.

Though the rigors for evidence here is not the same as in a court of law, from everything that I have read and heard (from all media) leads me to believe that this guy, Gates, had a knee jerk reaction to a situation that fit perfectly with his outlook on life. Other officers on the scene corroborate the report, the city's PD stands behind, and most importantly, I don't hear Gates himself making a big stink. If he were truly profiled and arrested based solely on race he would be eating off of it until that officer were fired.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I think a police report from a situation where there were three police, only one of who was white is far more believable than any politician or professor who makes his living by accentuating the appearance of racism wherever it can be manufactured.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Miket61 said:


> Were YOU there?


No, thats why I havent gone on a rant about how unprofessional the officer behaved - nor have I tried to rip Professor Gates a new one.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I think a police report from a situation where there were three police, only one of who was white is far more believable than any politician or professor who makes his living by accentuating the appearance of racism wherever it can be manufactured.


And that is your opinion.

If you listen to the police radio communication posted on boston.com today - you do not hear, in any of officer Crowley's transmissions anything close to an irate Professor Gates in the background.

I think the truth is some mixture of all the hyperbole and conjecture. But since I believe that you should have to do something extraordinary to get arrested in your own home, I am unwilling to jump on either side.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> And that is your opinion.
> 
> If you listen to the police radio communication posted on boston.com today - you do not hear, in any of officer Crowley's transmissions anything close to an irate Professor Gates in the background.
> 
> I think the truth is some mixture of all the hyperbole and conjecture. But since I believe that you should have to do something extraordinary to get arrested in your own home, I am unwilling to jump on either side.


I don't think he should have been arrested either.
I do think this would have been a non issue if Gates had just handed over his DL.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Just as a tangential observation ... it seems like the stereotype most people a grabbing onto (if they do) is the one of Harvard Professor and not Black Man.
> 
> :teacha:


That's one demoralizing lesson of this incident. People are eager to assume the worst of any professor just because he's a professor. I've known all kinds of professors. Some are pompous jerks, some are interesting, bookish nerds, some are really nice and fun to talk to. And so on and on and on.

But the most demoralizing lesson of this is how readily some people have been to demonize Gates as a crazy firebrand radical without actually knowing anything about him.

He was singled out in Dinesh D'Souza's book Illiberal Education (a book I do not admire) as an appealing, moderate voice during the culture wars at Duke in the 1990s. Gates has always presented himself as a moderate. He would cringe, he said, to hear anti-white talk in his family. He passionately acknowledged the powerful influence of his (white) mentors at the University of Cambridge. He also has been eager to point out that his ancestry makes him 50% white. His daughters' mother is a white woman. He has consistently criticized Afrocentrism and the whole "Black Athena" thing, and attacked the anti-intellectualism of black youth culture. He's an advocate of intelligent discussion as a key to racial reconciliation, and supported working through the courts, not the streets, for positive change. He has been accused of neo-conservatism by those to the left of him.

I admit he had a bad day. But to use this incident as an occasion to traduce his whole career, as an accomplished writer and teacher, is deeply and quite sadly misguided.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Lord Foppington said:


> That's one demoralizing lesson of this incident. *People are eager to assume the worst of any professor just because he's a professor. *I've known all kinds of professors. Some are pompous jerks, some are interesting, bookish nerds, some are really nice and fun to talk to. And so on and on and on.
> 
> But the most demoralizing lesson of this is how readily some people have been to demonize Gates as a crazy firebrand radical without actually knowing anything about him.
> 
> ...


I would disagree in that I was not speaking beyond specifically "Harvard Professors."

Some of my Professors were great mentors as well.

Some of the clips of him speaking prior to this even are not intelligent, moderate discussion key to racial reconciliation IMHO. He might very well be a neo-con - that might jolt some who have the wrong working definition of the word.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

ksinc said:


> I would disagree in that I was not speaking beyond specifically "Harvard Professors."
> 
> Some of my Professors were great mentors as well.
> 
> Some of the clips of him speaking prior to this even are not intelligent, moderate discussion key to racial reconciliation IMHO. He might very well be a neo-con - that might jolt some who have the wrong working definition of the word.


More specifically then: I have known quite a few Harvard professors. Some of them have been very charming, modest, unassuming, and interesting people. Some just charming and interesting. Some none of those things. Pretty much what you'd expect of any group of high-achievers.

As for those clips, I don't know what they are, so I couldn't respond. I wouldn't put myself in the position of trying to defend everything the man's ever said.

What is not in doubt is this. The tenor of Gates's career in general is moderate, and he has done valuable work in literary studies--facts that have been recognized by conservatives, liberals, and radicals alike.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> No, not at all, the police responded as they should have. But it being a passerby and not a neighbor certainly renders your comment about you not having to worry about the cops because you know your neighbors - moot.
> 
> Secondly, I still don't get the point about the caller not mentioning race in her 911 call, and how that fact somehow that negating the possibility of racial profiling.
> 
> ...


Well please tell us mrkleen, if you had been the responding officer, exactly how would you have carried out your response? You obviously feel that you know more than those who have actually worn the uniform and done the work.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> And that is your opinion.
> 
> If you listen to the police radio communication posted on boston.com today - you do not hear, in any of officer Crowley's transmissions anything close to an irate Professor Gates in the background.
> 
> I think the truth is some mixture of all the hyperbole and conjecture. But since I believe that you should have to do something extraordinary to get arrested in your own home, I am unwilling to jump on either side.


I'm far more inclined to believe the policeman who was just going about his job than any political manipulator on the right or the left. The person I don't believe is on the left this time. However, I also don't feel (like at least one police person who is giving interviews says) that Gates needs to apologize to the policeman's mother. "Your mama" and other things like that, while not nice, are clearly not a personal insult to anyone's mother (to the person hearing them maybe, but to no one else.)


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I'm far more inclined to believe the policeman who was just going about his job than any political manipulator on the right or the left. The person I don't believe is on the left this time. However, I also don't feel (like at least one police person who is giving interviews says) that Gates needs to apologize to the policeman's mother. "Your mama" and other things like that, while not nice, are clearly not a personal insult to anyone's mother (to the person hearing them maybe, but to no one else.)


Gates says he didn't say that or anything about his mother, anyway.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

"Comrades in Arms"

https://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/07/26/nr.comrade.in.arms.cnn


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

eagle2250 said:


> Well please tell us mrkleen, if you had been the responding officer, exactly how would you have carried out your response? You obviously feel that you know more than those who have actually worn the uniform and done the work.


I have no ideas what ACTUALLY happened in the house - so I have no idea who was right and who was wrong - or what mixture of attitudes from the two men caused the situation to end as it did. I do know that the burden for arresting someone "in their own home" is very high, which is why Officer Crowley kept asking Professor Gates to "step outside".

Further the idea that you can only question the way someone performs their job "if you have done the job yourself" is completely BUNK. You dont need to be a major leaguer to know when a guy is dogging it - and you dont need to be a law enforcement officer to know a man should not be arrested for breaking into his own home.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

That's not why he was arrested and you know it.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> That's not why he was arrested and you know it.


No I dont, and NEITHER do you.

Gates was arrested for dissorderly conduct. A charge which is virtually impossible to bring against someone "in" their own home. You connect the dots as to why Gates was asked to step outside on the porch. It isnt all that complicated.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

The police reports and tapes of the calls, etc. are all out there. Almost everything that led anyone to even think racial profiling was involved has been disproven. Nothing the police officers has said has been proven false.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> The police reports and tapes of the calls, etc. are all out there. Almost everything that led anyone to even think racial profiling was involved has been disproven. Nothing the police officers has said has been proven false.


And where in my previous post did I mention RACE or RACIAL PROFILING?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> You connect the dots as to why Gates was asked to step outside on the porch. It isnt all that complicated.


No it isn't and if you take the evidence in it's totality rather than pulling out bits and pieces and looking at those bits and pieces in a vacuum, it appears that the police officer's accounting of the incident is far more consistent with what is known to be true.

Go back to the very beginning of the incident. All the officer knows when he arrives on the scene is that there is a possible break-in in progress with two suspects. He steps on the porch and upon looking in the door he sees a single male standing in the entry foyer. Put yourself in the officer's shoes at this point. Are you going to walk into that house at that point knowing that there is another reported suspect and you don't see him? I wouldn't.

So the officer asked the man to step outside, and the man refused. My question at this point is why didn't Gates cooperate with the officer who was simply investigating a possible crime. Instead of coopering Gates turned and walked on further into the house. At this point the officer entered the house.

This scenario is supported by the police tapes which reveal the officer to be on the radio telling the dispatcher that he had encountered a man who claimed to be the homeowner but that he was uncooperative. It appears to me that the officer was going out of his way to be lenient with this unknown person.

I have a feeling that if a police officer found me at the scene of a possible crime in progress and I disobeyed his instructions to step this way or that, I would be face down with handcuffs on before I knew what had happened. Good grief, doesn't anybody watch "_Cops?_" If the officer's goal was to harrass or arrest Gates, he could have done it right then and there.

All in all, the officer's story just makes more sense.

Cruiser


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

*Yell at a cop?*

Mis quoted original poster. See below..


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

*Yell at a cop??*



WA said:


> This is as anti-American as you can get. WERE NOT A POLICE STATE!!!!
> 
> Legally you can yell anything you want at a cop and they can't even say anything against you, much more do something. Don't you know your basic civil rights?
> 
> This is common knowledge. Did you even go to school in the US? You should know theses without even going to school.


Try this tonight. Walk up to a cop having coffee at a restaurant. Tell him you have a gun and you are going to kill him. Make sure you yell it out loud so everyone can hear you. (It's your "*Right*" remember?)

When you wake up in the hospital handcuffed to a gurney, call your lawyer. You have already been charged with a felony.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> No it isn't and if you take the evidence in it's totality rather than pulling out bits and pieces and looking at those bits and pieces in a vacuum, it appears that the police officer's accounting of the incident is far more consistent with what is known to be true.
> 
> Go back to the very beginning of the incident. All the officer knows when he arrives on the scene is that there is a possible break-in in progress with two suspects. He steps on the porch and upon looking in the door he sees a single male standing in the entry foyer. Put yourself in the officer's shoes at this point. Are you going to walk into that house at that point knowing that there is another reported suspect and you don't see him? I wouldn't.
> 
> ...


That was excellent. It really was. My compliments.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> No it isn't and if you take the evidence in it's totality rather than pulling out bits and pieces and looking at those bits and pieces in a vacuum, it appears that the police officer's accounting of the incident is far more consistent with what is known to be true.
> 
> Go back to the very beginning of the incident. All the officer knows when he arrives on the scene is that there is a possible break-in in progress with two suspects. He steps on the porch and upon looking in the door he sees a single male standing in the entry foyer. Put yourself in the officer's shoes at this point. Are you going to walk into that house at that point knowing that there is another reported suspect and you don't see him? I wouldn't.
> 
> ...


That is YOUR opinion...not what actually happened. Only Gates and Crowley know what ACTUALLY happened.

Here is what Gates said happened:
_
We flew back on a direct flight from Beijing to Newark. We arrived on Wednesday, and on Thursday I flew back to Cambridge. I was using my regular driver and my regular car service. And went to my home arriving at about 12:30 in the afternoon. My driver and I carried several bags up to the porch, and we fiddled with the door and it was jammed.It looked like someone's footprint was there. So it's possible that the door had been jimmied, that someone had tried to get in while I was in China. But for whatever reason, the lock was damaged. 
_

_My driver hit the door with his shoulder and the door popped open. But the lock was permanently disfigured. My home is owned by Harvard University, and so any kind of repair work that's needed, Harvard will come and do it. I called this person, and she was, in fact, on the line while all of this was going on. _

_I'm saying 'You need to send someone to fix my lock.' All of a sudden, there was a policeman on my porch. And I thought, 'This is strange.' So I went over to the front porch still holding the phone, and I said 'Officer, can I help you?' And he said, 'Would you step outside onto the porch.' And the way he said it, I knew he wasn't canvassing for the police benevolent association. All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. And I said to him no, out of instinct. I said, 'No, I will not.'_

_My lawyers later told me that that was a good move and had I walked out onto the porch he could have arrested me for breaking and entering. He said 'I'm here to investigate a 911 call for breaking and entering into this house.' And I said 'That's ridiculous because this happens to be my house. And I'm a Harvard professor.' He says 'Can you prove that you're a Harvard professor?' I said yes, I turned and closed the front door to the kitchen where I'd left my wallet, and I got out my Harvard ID and my Massachusetts driver's license which includes my address and I handed them to him. And he's sitting there looking at them._

_Now it's clear that he had a narrative in his head: A black man was inside someone's house, probably a white person's house, and this black man had broken and entered, and this black man was me._

_So he's looking at my ID, he asked me another question, which I refused to answer. And I said I want your name and your badge number because I want to file a complaint because of the way he had treated me at the front door. He didn't say, 'Excuse me, sir, is there a disturbance here, is this your house?'-he demanded that I step out on the porch, and I don't think he would have done that if I was a white person._

_But at that point, I realized that I was in danger. And so I said to him that I want your name, and I want your badge number and I said it repeatedly._
_The police report says I was engaged in loud and tumultuous behavior. That's a joke. Because I have a severe bronchial infection which I contracted in China and for which I was treated and have a doctor's report from the Peninsula hotel in Beijing. So I couldn't have yelled. I can't yell even today, I'm not fully cured._

_It escalated as follows: I kept saying to him, 'What is your name, and what is your badge number?' and he refused to respond. I asked him three times, and he refused to respond. And then I said, 'You're not responding because I'm a black man, and you're a white officer.' That's what I said. He didn't say anything._
_He turned his back to me and turned back to the porch. And I followed him. I kept saying, "I want your name, and I want your badge number."_
_It looked like an ocean of police had gathered on my front porch. There were probably half a dozen police officers at this point. The mistake I made was I stepped onto the front porch and asked one of his colleagues for his name and badge number. And when I did, the same officer said, 'Thank you for accommodating our request. You are under arrest.' And he handcuffed me right there. It was outrageous. My hands were behind my back I said, 'I'm handicapped. I walk with a cane. I can't walk to the squad car like this.' There was a huddle among the officers; They removed the cuffs from the back and put them around the front._

_A crowd had gathered, and as they were handcuffing me and walking me out to the car, I said, 'Is this how you treat a black man in America?' _

Gates explanation sounds just as plausible and believable as the 3 line one offered by Crowley on the police report. Guess it is just a matter of opinion and perspective.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

dks202 said:


> Try this tonight. Walk up to a cop having coffee at a restaurant. Tell him you have a gun and you are going to kill him. Make sure you yell it out loud so everyone can hear you. (It's your "*Right*" remember?)
> 
> When you wake up in the hospital handcuffed to a gurney, call your lawyer. You have already been charged with a felony.


You conveniently left out the most important part of the story....it happned IN GATES HOME....not at some coffee shop.

Nice try though.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> And where in my previous post did I mention RACE or RACIAL PROFILING?


You seem to be taking the side of those who were originally accusing the police officer of racial profiling.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> You seem to be taking the side of those who were originally accusing the police officer of racial profiling.


And you seem to be taking the side that the police are beyond reproach here.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> That is YOUR opinion...not what actually happened. Only Gates and Crowley know what ACTUALLY happened.
> 
> Here is what Gates said happened:
> _
> ...


Golly gee! From your quotations, it sounds as if Professor Gates and his attorney were doing more assuming than even contributors to this thread, that you have accused of such. Perhaps you might try to enlighten them of their obvious transgressions?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> And you seem to be taking the side that the police are beyond reproach here.


In this case, they certainly are. The Gates quote sounds like a Monty Python skit.

(By the way, we're running circles around you logically.)


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> That is YOUR opinion...not what actually happened. Only Gates and Crowley know what ACTUALLY happened.
> 
> Here is what Gates said happened:
> 
> ...


The conclusions he makes are not plausible.

He admits he had a disfigured lock and busted the door down - then a Police Officer requesting "would you step outside onto the porch?" is a ridiculous demand.

There is no reasonable basis to assume he would have been arrested for B&E if he had cooperated. More plausible is that he also wouldn't have been arrested for disorderly.

So, back to our story then he DEMANDS the officer's name and badge number repeatedly while the officer is still trying to talk to dispatch and finish his investigation.

"He chose poorly." And still all he got for it EVEN AS A BLACK MAN IN AMERICA was a slap on the wrist that was later dropped.

I'd say we've made huge progress with our Policing because I'd have been tempted to choke him out; white, black, or whatever.

Gates does not reference and does not know what the the Police Officer is thinking at this point and remember the Officer was told there were two "suspects."

He was uncooperative and he got caught up in the chaos he created. Who knows how it would have played out if he had been cooperative? He doesn't, his lawyer doesn't, no one does. It's ridiculous for a Harvard Professor to say "And I realized that I was in danger." while he's simultaneously arguing WHO he is and by implication how smart and educated he is. Really? In danger because a White Police Officer wanted to speak to you? Gates is clearly the racist and the more he says the more obvious it is to anyone halfway objective. Gates is the one stereotyping and judging on the basis of color; both white and blue. This guy should lose his tenure or whatever he has that associates him with a University.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

*Henry Louis Gates:*_ Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm being repressed! _


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Has news of the Patriot Act reached your cave? We aren't a police state?


And all that under Bush claiming to be a republican. It seems like it wasn't that long ago when somebody showed me several drivers licences with different names, hair color and style and make up on, and different addresses that he used to con people with. In this state it wasn't illegal yet to have drivers licences with different names. You would think people making laws would be interested in making honest laws.



> If the cop was a racist he would have taken him inside and beat the crud out of him, not asked him to go outside with witnesses.


When did cops need racism to beat people? In the old days cops used to hit misbehaving children, which probably did more for the child than the system of today.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Relayer said:


> *Henry Louis Gates:*_ Come and see the violence inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm being repressed! _


Tell it to the Penguin on top of the Television Set.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> In this case, they certainly are. The Gates quote sounds like a Monty Python skit.
> 
> (By the way, we're running circles around you logically.)


Sure you are...lol.

And BTW, its the officer's case that is unraveling.

https://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/27/gates.arrest/index.html

_The woman who made the 911 call that led to the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. never referred to black suspects when she called authorities for what she thought was a potential break-in. Police in Cambridge, Massachusetts, released the 911 phone call Monday. In the call, Lucia Whalen reports seeing "two larger men, one looked kind of Hispanic, but I'm not really sure, and the other one entered, and I didn't see what he looked like at all."

__ Attorney Wendy Murphy, who represents Whalen, also categorically rejected part of the police report that said Whalen talked with Sgt. James Crowley, the arresting officer, at the scene. 
_
_ "Let me be clear: She never had a conversation with Sgt. Crowley at the scene," Murphy told CNN by phone. "*And she never said to any police officer or to anybody 'two black men.' She never used the word 'black.' Period."

*__She added, "I'm not sure what the police explanation will be. Frankly, I don't care. Her only goal is to make it clear she never described them as black. She never saw their race. ... All she reported was behavior, not skin color." _
_ *In the police report, filed by Crowley, he says he spoke with Whalen outside the home before he approached Gates' house. *
_
_*"She went on to tell me that she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch of Ware Street,"* the report says. "She told me that her suspicions were aroused when she observed one of the men wedging his shoulder into the door as if he was trying to force entry." _

Hmmmm - Lets see where all the "racial profiling" experts defending Crowley are if this proves to be true.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> The conclusions he makes are not plausible.
> 
> He admits he had a disfigured lock and busted the door down - then a Police Officer requesting "would you step outside onto the porch?" is a ridiculous demand.
> 
> ...


He should lose his tenure FOR WHAT? Having false charges brought against him, charges which were dropped hours after they were brought?

What a joke.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Tell it to the Penguin on top of the Television Set.


Seems we've got a Dr. bloody Bronowski on our hands


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

(That one got by me - - - -)

What a ***** of a day it's been on the forum bench.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Not sure what to make of the caller's account. The most probable explanation is that Crowley spoke with someone else at the scene who he thought was the caller.

The caller does mention another woman on the tape.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

The question is how could the neighbor not recognize him,maybe it was somebody he wasn't introduced to and then thought the guy was an intruder.


----------



## SlowE30 (Mar 18, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> Here is what Gates said happened:
> 
> _..._
> _And the way he said it, I knew he wasn't canvassing for the police benevolent association. All the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized that I was in danger. ..._
> ...


You don't see any problem in this overdramatic, racist drivel? Do you call that narrative a statment of fact?

I had some run-ins with police in my college days that didn't work out so great for me, and even I recognize this as a load of carp. Perhaps you should examine your own distrust of authority.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

SlowE30 said:


> You don't see any problem in this overdramatic, racist drivel? Do you call that narrative a statment of fact?
> 
> I had some run-ins with police in my college days that didn't work out so great for me, and even I recognize this as a load of carp. Perhaps you should examine your own distrust of authority.


This was Gates Statement - NOT MINE.

I dont call it a statement of anything other than what Professor Gates said happened that afternoon. It is no more or less credible than that of the police officer, since neither I nor anyone on this board was actually there that day.

I certainly think that Gates adding sensationalized words and phrases pertaining to race could help it be perceived as "over the top" to some...but no more so than say a policeman who submits an inaccurate arrest report.

And by the way, why is it that someone that thinks Gates is the more credible person in this scenario has a "distrust of authority"? Some of the stuff you guys are throwing around in this thread is hilarious.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

It _is_ less credible than the officer's report. At least the cop didn't try to justify his irrational actions by claiming to be able to read Gates's mind...

"_Now it's clear that *he had a narrative in his head*: A black man was inside someone's house, probably a white person's house, and this black man had broken and entered, and this black man was me."_


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

PedanticTurkey said:


> It _is_ less credible than the officer's report. At least the cop didn't try to justify his irrational actions by claiming to be able to read Gates's mind...
> 
> "_Now it's clear that *he had a narrative in his head*: A black man was inside someone's house, probably a white person's house, and this black man had broken and entered, and this black man was me."_


Gates didnt "have to read" anyone's mind to come up with that.

If you are following the story and this thread, you will see that the idea that Crowley was responding to a call of "two black men breaking into a home" - was all Crowley's own fabrication, since the caller to 911 DID NOT say anything about the race of the possible intruders.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> He should lose his tenure FOR WHAT? Having false charges brought against him, charges which were dropped hours after they were brought?
> 
> What a joke.


For being an open racist. That's what would happen to a white professor.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Aren't you the same guy who, not ten minutes ago, said "It is no more or less credible than that of the police officer, since neither I nor anyone on this board was actually there that day."

Decided to start judging credibility, have you?

And Gates' account _is_ absurd, incredible. He obviously knows nothing of police procedure and doesn't evidence a lick of common sense. Racism is all he knows and, go figure, he sees it everywhere.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> For being an open racist. That's what would happen to a white professor.


Unless it turns out that the cop DID use race in factoring the way he handled the situation.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Aren't you the same guy who, not ten minutes ago, said "It is no more or less credible than that of the police officer, since neither I nor anyone on this board was actually there that day."
> 
> Decided to start judging credibility, have you?
> 
> And Gates' account _is_ absurd, incredible. He obviously knows nothing of police procedure and doesn't evidence a lick of common sense. Racism is all he knows and, go figure, he sees it everywhere.


I dont need to judge the officers credibility...him submitting a FALSE police report does that just fine on its own.

Sorry you dont believe the account Gates puts forth. Seems the DA in Middlesex County did.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

mrkleen said:


> I dont need to judge the officers credibility...him submitting a FALSE police report does that just fine on its own.
> 
> Sorry you dont believe the account Gates puts forth. Seems the DA in Middlesex County did.


From no one knowing the facts to stating a fact like you just did? I think you may be ill.

By the way, there are many reasons for charges to be dropped. It implies nothing about who may have been right/wrong.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> I dont need to judge the officers credibility...him submitting a FALSE police report does that just fine on its own.


Grab a dictionary and look up "credibility" sometime.



> Sorry you dont believe the account Gates puts forth. Seems the DA in Middlesex County did.


I don't believe a word Gates said, and I would have dropped the charges also. You clearly don't even understand what Gates was charged with or why the charges were dropped. But go ahead and follow Gates's lead and make an ass of yourself.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Unless it turns out that the cop DID use race in factoring the way he handled the situation.


So, how does that work? If Gates is a racist; Gates is a racist. It has nothing to do with whether the SGT is one too. It appears the SGT is not. Whether the lady said one guy was black or one guy was hispanic does not mean the SGT based his handling of the situation on that. You are arguing Gates argument that he is justified in being a racist. That's not plausible and shouldn't be acceptable by a University.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> So, how does that work? If Gates is a racist; Gates is a racist. It has nothing to do with whether the SGT is one too. It appears the SGT is not. Whether the lady said one guy was black or one guy was hispanic does not mean the SGT based his handling of the situation on that. You are arguing Gates argument that he is justified in being a racist. That's not plausible and shouldn't be acceptable by a University.


If someone claims they were the victim of racial profiling and they were - how are they racist?

The woman who made the call made NO MENTION of the intruders being black, yet in the police report - Crowley explicitly says he spoke to Lucia Whalen at the scene of the crime, and told him that "she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch"

Unfortunately for Mr Crowley, Ms Whalen has since come out to say that not only did she NOT mention "black men" in her 911 call - but that she NEVER spoke to the Sgt at the scene. He made the leap from B&E at X Ware St - to "two black male suspects at X Ware St" all on his own.

Not sure if that meets your defintion of "racial profiling" or not, but it certainly throws a different light on Professor Gates statements.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Grab a dictionary and look up "credibility" sometime.
> 
> I don't believe a word Gates said, and I would have dropped the charges also. You clearly don't even understand what Gates was charged with or why the charges were dropped. But go ahead and follow Gates's lead and make an ass of yourself.


LOL...this is funny. YOU clearly never even read the police report.

Lawrence O'Donnell did a great job ripping this apart in Time Magazine last week.

There is *no crime* described in Crowley's official version of the way Gates behaved. Crowley says explicitly that he arrested Gates for yelling. Nothing else, not a single threatening movement, just yelling. On the steps of his own home. Yelling is not a crime. *Yelling does not meet the definition of disorderly conduct in Massachusetts. *Not a single shouted word or action that Crowley has attributed to Gates amounts to disorderly conduct. That is why the charges had to be dropped.

In classically phony police talk, Crowley refers to "[Gates'] continued tumultuous behavior." When cops write that way, you know they have nothing. What is tumultuous behavior? Here's what it isn't: brandishing a knife in a threatening manner, punching and kicking, clenching a fist in a threatening manner, throwing a wrench or, in the Gates house, maybe a book. If the subject does any of those things, cops always write it out with precision. When they've got nothing, they use phrases that mean nothing. Phrases like _tumultuous behavior_.

We have an uncomfortable choice with Sergeant Crowley. Either he didn't know what disorderly conduct is or he decided to show Gates who's boss the only way he knew how - by whipping out his handcuffs and abusing his power to arrest. Police make the latter choice in this country every day, knowing the charges are going to have to be dropped.

There is a crime described in there. In fact, Crowley's report is a written confession of the crime of false arrest.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> If someone claims they were the victim of racial profiling and they were - how are they racist?
> 
> The woman who made the call made NO MENTION of the intruders being black, yet in the police report - Crowley explicitly says he spoke to Lucia Whalen at the scene of the crime, and told him that "she observed what appeared to be two black males with backpacks on the porch"
> 
> ...


Whether he is a racist stands alone. Maybe he was a racist that was a victim of a "false arrest" as you claim. Regardless, he has acted like a racist before, during, and after the incident. One does not have to resolve this incident to see that Gates is a racist. His own side of the story is a confession of it as much or more so then you claim the SGT's is of his false arrest. Your inability to concede this marginalizes the point you are trying to make. Just as I conceded that Cops use these bogus charges to get control and they are later dropped all the time. You have to be intellectually honest or you lose credibility as you are doing among the others you are debating with. This is the race problem's new root cause IMHO - lack of intellectual integrity. Take for example Gates statement about "One N----- Syndrome" in affirmative action, that's clearly not acceptable dialogue for a moderate reconciler.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> Whether he is a racist stands alone. Maybe he was a racist that was a victim of a "false arrest" as you claim. Regardless, he has acted like a racist before, during, and after the incident. One does not have to resolve this incident to see that Gates is a racist. His own side of the story is a confession of it as much or more so then you claim the SGT's is of his false arrest. Your inability to concede this marginalizes the point you are trying to make. Just as I conceded that Cops use these bogus charges to get control and they are later dropped all the time. You have to be intellectually honest or you lose credibility as you are doing among the others you are debating with. This is the race problem's new root cause IMHO - lack of intellectual integrity. Take for example Gates statement about "One N----- Syndrome" in affirmative action, that's clearly not acceptable dialogue for a moderate reconciler.


Not sure who made you judge and jury of intellectual honesty - but clearly that is what you think.

If you want to start a thread about Professor Gates and how awful of a person he is....go right ahead. As it stands in this case, every day that goes by he looks more and more like the victim here.

Sorry if you cant face that and need to continue to bring up Gates' past to make yourself feel better about your rush to judgment.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Not sure who made you judge and jury of intellectual honesty - but clearly that is what you think.
> 
> If you want to start a thread about Professor Gates and how awful of a person he is....go right ahead. As it stands in this case, every day that goes by he looks more and more like the victim here.
> 
> Sorry if you cant face that and need to continue to bring up Gates' past to make yourself feel better about your rush to judgment.


FWIW it was the Author of Post #47.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> FWIW it was the Author of Post #47.


Strong come back. 

Its amazing what 5 days of facts and 911 tapes can do to a case.


----------



## Gill Gamesh (Mar 28, 2009)

Jumping in a little late here, but I see no evidence of racism in any of Gates' speeches or writing that I've seen including the youtube quote previously posted. To label him such strikes me as incendiary.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Gill Gamesh said:


> Jumping in a little late here, but I see no evidence of racism in any of Gates' speeches or writing that I've seen including the youtube quote previously posted. To label him such strikes me as incendiary.


And you feel the same way about the SGT being assumed to be a racist or racial profiler?

How do you feel about Gates account of when he realized he was in danger because the Cop asked him to step outside and speak with him?

You don't think it's irrational? I've been asked to step outside and speak to a Police Officer before. It turned out there was a report of a man with a long gun in our Student apartment building (off campus) and someone said "I think that guy has some guns." We had four to an apartment with double beds and I had an old muzzle loader deer rifle in my room. There's a difference between realizing you are "in danger" and realizing that it's time to give sober and coherent answers to an Officer investigating a potentially dangerous situation. Yes; I had a heightened sense of "If I act beligerent they're going to think I'm the guy with the gun and go get a search warrant and take all my stuff or just take all my stuff." Instead I spoke to them respectfully and asked them about the reports they had and told them the truth (I only had the one rifle - they were welcome to look at it - it was a muzzle loader) at the end I asked them for a business card. About a day later they arrested a guy in the next apartment building over from me. He had been shooting stray cats and he was the guy someone saw walking around with a rifle.

It strikes me that a lot of the people that claim to know the law and know their rights better are more scared then those of us they claim do not know the law/rights and it doesn't seem to be black/white issue in this thread, but how could I know? We are all blue and gray on my screen 

I did nothing wrong. No one could have any evidence that I did anything wrong. And I had nothing to hide. So, I acted just like that.

I should point out it was a black, female Police officer in Decatur, GA and I'm sure she was profiling me. After all I was a 17 year old, white, college boy and "people like me" probably screwed up their entire town and were the source of most of their disturbances. I treated her with respect and so she was "influenced" to "fake it" with me, but I could just tell. You know what I mean. I mean there's a long history of this stuff....


----------



## fenway (May 2, 2006)

Why am I getting the feeling that mrkleen = Sklp Gates?


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

fenway said:


> Why am I getting the feeling that mrkleen = Sklp Gates?


 Good call, I am SKLP GATES. :teacha:


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

But Skip to My Lou has a much better crossover dribble.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Doesn't this all boil down to the fact that Professor Gates and the "feel real good, soft studies" program he is responsible for at Harvard benefit from all the publicity, while Sgt. Crowley and the Departments lives just become a bit more challenging, as a result of the exchange of words. I wonder, if a person were to look into the enrollment records for the Professor's course(s), would history would show flagging enrolments and declining class sizes for the program?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

I have known police officers who were racists and I have known police officers who were bullies, and they always left a trail behind them. If Sgt. Crowley is a racist or a bully,documentation of that should have emerged by now given the amount of scrutiny that has been given to him. I suspect that just about everyone he has ever encountered has been interviewed by the media and if there was even the slightest bit of dirt it should have come out by now.

The fact of the matter is that the more we know about him, the better he looks in terms of his professionalism. It seems that just about everybody who knows and works with him, Black, White, whatever, speaks in favorable terms of his character and integrity. As long as he has been a police officer it would be hard for him to cover up a racist or bully attitude toward the public.

It simply doesn't make sense that an officer with such a background would suddenly, out of the blue, do a complete 180 and become somebody that there is no record of him ever being previously? That's the part that doesn't make sense to me and I think it's a question everyone should at least address in their own mind.

Even when you read Professor Gates' statement, I don't know how anyone could not be struck by him admitting that he was in effect reading the officer's mind and deciding for himself what the officer was thinking. Is it not at least possible that the police officer that Professor Gates was seeing in his mind was not the police officer standing in front of him. 

In other words, could the Professor have been looking so hard for a bully or a racist that he was sure to find one, whether one was there or not? 

Cruiser


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> I have known police officers who were racists and I have known police officers who were bullies, and they always left a trail behind them. If Sgt. Crowley is a racist or a bully,documentation of that should have emerged by now given the amount of scrutiny that has been given to him. I suspect that just about everyone he has ever encountered has been interviewed by the media and if there was even the slightest bit of dirt it should have come out by now.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that the more we know about him, the better he looks in terms of his professionalism. It seems that just about everybody who knows and works with him, Black, White, whatever, speaks in favorable terms of his character and integrity. As long as he has been a police officer it would be hard for him to cover up a racist or bully attitude toward the public.
> 
> ...


^^^This is what it means to be post-racial and move beyond race. Cruiser, Obama should invite you to the meeting to give the "teaching moment." Your posts have been dead on IMHO.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> I have known police officers who were racists and I have known police officers who were bullies, and they always left a trail behind them. If Sgt. Crowley is a racist or a bully,documentation of that should have emerged by now given the amount of scrutiny that has been given to him. I suspect that just about everyone he has ever encountered has been interviewed by the media and if there was even the slightest bit of dirt it should have come out by now.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that the more we know about him, the better he looks in terms of his professionalism.
> 
> ...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Strong come back.


I agree; and frankly, I am a bit flattered.


----------



## walterb (Dec 24, 2006)

In other words, could the Professor have been looking so hard for a bully or a racist that he was sure to find one, whether one was there or not?

Cruiser[/quote]

I think the Professor wanted to get arrested. He makes a fine living by talking about racial discrimination against blacks so how could he possibly pass up the opportunity to add some personal material to his lecture notes. He as much as admitted that he wants to end up with some teachable material from his experience. He baited the cop and the cop went for it. I think the irony is that Gates hurt Obama much more than the Cambridge Police by exposing Obama's knee jerk bias on matters of race. The poor opressed (impeccably dressed) Professor conferring with his legal team at his vacation home on Martha's Vineyard, accepting apologies from the mayor of Cambridge, and drinking beer at the White House. It sure is tough being an oppressed minority these days.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

Colin Powell's view of the situation:

https://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/28/powell.palin/index.html

"I think in this case the situation was made much more difficult on the part of the Cambridge Police Department," Powell said. "Once they felt they had to bring Dr. Gates out of the house and to handcuff him, I would've thought at that point, some adult supervision would have stepped in and said 'OK look, it is his house. Let's not take this any further, take the handcuffs off, good night Dr. Gates.' "

There's really no reason not to keep discussing this till kingdom come, so I keep doing my bit. Cheers, friends!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Lord Foppington said:


> Colin Powell's view of the situation:
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/28/powell.palin/index.html
> 
> ...


I fixed it for you! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

ksinc said:


> I fixed it for you! :icon_smile_big:


Thanks. Really, both points are ones I agree with (and have stated here).


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Lord Foppington said:


> Thanks. Really, both points are ones I agree with (and have stated here).


I know you do; and so do I. Colin Powell makes sense and I would say he is absolutely in the mold of a moderate reconciler.


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

Lord Foppington said:


> Colin Powell's view of the situation:
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/28/powell.palin/index.html
> 
> "I think in this case the situation was made much more difficult on the part of the Cambridge Police Department," Powell said. "Once they felt they had to bring Dr. Gates out of the house and to handcuff him, I would've thought at that point, some adult supervision would have stepped in and said 'OK look, it is his house. Let's not take this any further, take the handcuffs off, good night Dr. Gates.' "


Colin and I are tight!!! The cop wasn't a racist. He is just a power hungry asshole "do what I say" cop - like 99.9999999% of all cops. The cop wanted to throw his weight around and teach the Professor a lesson; as if that is the job of cops.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Your post says it all. Keep posting that stuff and let everyone see how deeply you really think.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> Colin and I are tight!!! The cop wasn't a racist. He is just a power hungry asshole "do what I say" cop - like 99.9999999% of all cops. The cop wanted to throw his weight around and teach the Professor a lesson; as if that is the job of cops.


Free advice from a lawyer: say no more and hope this thread ends soon.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Stringfellow said:


> Colin and I are tight!!! The cop wasn't a racist. He is just a power hungry asshole "do what I say" cop - like 99.9999999% of all cops. The cop wanted to throw his weight around and teach the Professor a lesson; as if that is the job of cops.


https://www.thepocket.com/wavs/meathead.wav


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

The cop should've said I'm sorry but I didn't mean to arrest you,I didn't know who you were at first.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Howard said:


> The cop should've said I'm sorry but I didn't mean to arrest you,I didn't know who you were at first.


I heard a reported comment that said the SGT did apologize in the house for not knowing who Prof. Gates was when he presented his Harvard ID.


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

A delightful coda (I hope) to this affair:

https://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/officer_suspend.html

The crud really is rising to the top, isn't it?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Lord Foppington said:


> A delightful coda (I hope) to this affair:
> 
> https://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/officer_suspend.html
> 
> The crud really is rising to the top, isn't it?


If this guy has any sense at all he will immediately issue a statement as follows:

"Because this has been ratcheting up and I helped contribute to ratcheting it up, I want to make clear that in my choice of words I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning Professor Gates specifically and I could have calibrated those words differently."


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99OB2EO0&show_article=1


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

No correlation here at all. None.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/new...kd-panther-reversal/?feat=home_cube_position1


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Mike Petrik said:


> Free advice from a lawyer: say no more and hope this thread ends soon.


LOL. That and a two dollars will get you a cup of coffee.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99OB2EO0&show_article=1


Breitbart - AKA *Andrew Breitbart* (born February 1, 1969) is an American conservative commentator for the _Washington Times_, author,[1] occasional guest commentator for political news programs and is best known as a part-time editor of the conservative Drudge Report website.

Seems to be your favorite right wing source these days huh? :idea:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Breitbart - AKA *Andrew Breitbart* (born February 1, 1969) is an American conservative commentator for the _Washington Times_, author,[1] occasional guest commentator for political news programs and is best known as a part-time editor of the conservative Drudge Report website.
> 
> Seems to be your favorite right wing source these days huh? :idea:


Are you ever unpredictable? You attack me or you attack the owner of the web-site, but you never have an actual substantive rebuttal. We're still waiting for you to substantiate your attack on the people starting this thread as insulting President Obama. You are like a caricature of all that is wrong with the nutcase, blogosphere left and you follow the playbook everytime. It does not substitute for intellect or perspective. I digress. Since this issue is so important to you - perhaps you can discuss the comparative objectivity of the AP vs. HuffPo; which you have frequently parroted, even without attribution.

If you are going to attack the messenger instead of the message; at the very least attack the person the article is actually written by if you have a problem with his objectivity: _By JAY LINDSAY __Associated Press Writer_

From your own source:



> Breitbart, who describes himself as "Matt Drudge's *****",[7] *does not write stories on the website, but simply links to other mainstream news wire sources.*


Perhaps you will offer a substantive comment regarding this story posted here: https://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stori..._CALLER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

OOPS! Disclosure


> Associated Press writer Rodrique Ngowi in Boston contributed to this report.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

ksinc said:


> I heard a reported comment that said the SGT did apologize in the house for not knowing who Prof. Gates was when he presented his Harvard ID.


So the cop should've left well enough alone.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

ksinc said:


> I heard a reported comment that said the SGT did apologize in the house for not knowing who Prof. Gates was when he presented his Harvard ID.


If you read the transcript, and especially if you listen the tape, of Sgt. Crowley's radio transmission after arriving on the scene it is clear that he has no earthly idea who Henry Louis Gates is, even after seeing the name. It's like Gates felt that he was famous enough that this cop should know who he is. Notice that he called Gates "uncooperative" prior to knowing his name.

I also note that Crowley immediately asked that the Harvard University police be called to the scene (it was apparently Harvard propery) in addition to back up from his own department. This just doesn't sound like what someone would do if he/she was out to harrass or intimidate someone as Professor Gates suggests. I mean would he really want all those witnesses, including Harvard employees?

Finally I find it interesting that the two Cambridge police officers who arrived on the scene in response to Sgt. Crowley's radio call were a Black officer and an Hispanic officer, neither of which had any issues with Sgt. Crowley's actions and support him now. There apparently has also been no protests of what Sgt. Crowley did from the Harvard police who also were on the scene.

In the transcript, Crowley is identified as 52.



> Officer 52: I'm up with a gentleman who says he resides here (background voice) but uncooperative. But uh, keep the cars coming.
> 
> Male patrol 1: Copy.
> 
> ...


This is what I mean when I say that a common sense look at all of the evidence seems to support what Sgt. Crowley is saying. Common sense would dictate that at least one of those witnesses on the scene at the time of the arrest would by now have spoken up, or at least leaked something to the media, to support Gates description of the events.

Despite what some may think, I did not set out from the beginning to believe or disbelieve either party here. I just looked at what each said and compared it with what we know to be true, and let common sense lead me to where I am now.

I know that there is racism out there and that there are racist cops who come down hard on Blacks and other minorities; but I also know that there are folks out there who won't hesitate to cry "racism" whenever things don't go their way. In a situation like this we must resist letting our stereotypes of either influence our opinions.

When I was a young guy in the military I got thrown out of Charleston SC by the Charleston police. I was, along with some friends, escorted to the city limits in the middle of the night and told to get out and stay out. They told us they didn't want our kind in Charleston, whatever "our kind" was. I was with some Marines so maybe that was it. :icon_smile:

But I did learn a valuable lesson. I know now not to stop at a closed gas station at 2:00 am and go around back and pee on the ground. If the cops see you they think you are trying to break in. We were very nice and explained to the officers that we had a 75 mile drive back to Beaufort and just needed to go to the bathroom. They still threw us out of town without even the courtesy of letting us finish what we were doing.

Cruiser


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Howard said:


> So the cop should've left well enough alone.


Knowing who he is, doesn't mean he lives there, or is supposed to be there. He was reportedly seen bashing in the door and there was a disfigured lock.

How many men do you think have IDs with an address on them and also have a restraining order and no key?

He had a duty to investigate, ask questions, and ascertain what was really going on. Gates refused to be cooperative and was beligerent. In summary, he "acted stupidly."


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> Are you ever unpredictable?


Nope. Just like to wind you up from time to time.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Nope. Just like to wind you up from time to time.


And indeed; someday you may.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> Nope. Just like to wind you up from time to time.


Does "wind you up" sound like "trolling" to you??? When I use the word "troll" I speak as a moderator. Please don't troll. (That's the last "please" you get.)

It is one thing to disagree with someone on here. It's another to gleefully snicker about trolling.

Right now you still have your posting privileges - - -

Disagree, yes. Troll and brag about it, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO - - - -


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Does anybody actually believe some of Gates's little lies--like he was too sick to yell, or that the lock on his front door had been broken by someone else before he got back, found it "jammed," and the driver started hammering on it with his shoulder?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

The people who support him politically are pretending to, at least.

(Don't I get at least a couple "center" points for that???)


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Does anybody actually believe some of Gates's little lies--like he was too sick to yell, or that the lock on his front door had been broken by someone else before he got back, found it "jammed," and the driver started hammering on it with his shoulder?


I can give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't have to say Gates "lied."

Even if I accept his recollections of certain details it doesn't affect my view of how he acted at all.

He doesn't have to be lying; he's just seeing things and interpreting things through a very narrow and racist viewpoint.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Does "wind you up" sound like "trolling" to you??? When I use the word "troll" I speak as a moderator. Please don't troll. (That's the last "please" you get.)
> 
> It is one thing to disagree with someone on here. It's another to gleefully snicker about trolling.
> 
> ...


The uneven way you and Eagle choose to moderate this board is a disgrace, so I am not at all surprised to find you issuing this kind of message.

The Interchange is nothing more than a big old boys circle - with member after member patting each other on the back for expressing the same tired, one sided opinions.

Anytime someone comes out here with a dissenting opinion (in the case of this board, that is usually one of the FEW liberals that have the gumption to actually speak up out here) they are quickly shouted down by the good old boys, often including YOU.

With this kind of bland, one sided discourse, it is no wonder this section of the site is dying a slow death.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> The uneven way you and Eagle choose to moderate this board is a disgrace, so I am not at all surprised to find you issuing this kind of message.
> 
> The Interchange is nothing more than a big old boys circle - with member after member patting each other on the back for expressing the same tired, one sided opinions.
> 
> ...


I HAVE ALSO ISSUED WARNINGS, ETC TO RIGHTIES WHO WERE TROLLING AND CROSSING LINES. YOU WILL BE SUSPENDED IF YOU QUESTION MODERATION IN PUBLIC AGAIN. YOU OPENLY TOLD ANOTHER POSTER YOU WERE BAITING HIM.

ALSO, YOU HAVE VIOLATED THE RULE ABOUT CHALLENGING MODERATION IN PUBLIC.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

What did this beer discussion solve? Nothing,just a couple of guys drinking alcohol and probably getting drunk later.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^I don't think it was ever intended to solve anything, other than to pull the President's a** out of the crack. Obama's original response provided a brief glimpse of the political activist/community organizer that was and remains at the President's core. We are all what we are. Candidate Obama was able to perfectly disguise his reality during the campaign (remember he sat as a congregant in Rev Wright's church all those years and never heard the good Reverend utter racist comments!) but, this time he slipped and he did it on national TV! Now we know.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

Howard said:


> What did this beer discussion solve? Nothing,just a couple of guys drinking alcohol and probably getting drunk later.


What I really liked was that the brands were announced before hand (the President: Bud Light; the officer: Blue Moon; the Professor: Red Stripe - no word on Maryann or the skipper).

I note that in today's stories, however, it appears that the professor had a Sam Adams Light. Apparently Red Stripe didn't poll well.

Biden joined and had a low alcohol beer, which given his recent statements about Russia, was probably for the best.

I was really hoping the police officer would say that he didn't drink beer, and ask for a glass of rose instead. :icon_smile:


----------



## Lord Foppington (Feb 1, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> ^^I don't think it was ever intended to solve anything, other than to pull the President's a** out of the crack. Obama's original response provided a brief glimpse of the political activist/community organizer that was and remains at the President's core. We are all what we are. Candidate Obama was able to perfectly disguise his reality during the campaign (remember he sat as a congregant in Rev Wright's church all those years and never heard the good Reverend utter racist comments!) but, this time he slipped and he did it on national TV! Now we know.


Or it was an attempt to bring people who see things differently together in a sociable way in order to smooth things over and allow them to get past it--and demonstrate that people who strongly disagree on sensitive issues can still be civil, even convivial.

The horror!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Although this is slightly off topic, I couldn't help but laugh at what someone on CNN pointed out yesterday. 

He noted that when Professor Gates was arrested the senior police officer on the scene was a Black Sgt. with 20+ years on the force in a city with a Black Mayor in a State with a Black Governor in a Country with a Black President while he is a tenured Black professor at one of the most prestigious universities in America. 

The only White guy in all of this was the poor old cop on patrol who answered the call. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Lou Dobbs shut down this reporter on CNN who tried to claim that this case (of all cases) shows how racial profiling is a problem. It was great.

Lou Dobbs can be a fool sometimes (Obama's Birth Certificate, for one) but this was cool to watch last night.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Lou Dobbs shut down this reporter on CNN who tried to claim that this case (of all cases) shows how racial profiling is a problem. It was great.
> 
> Lou Dobbs can be a fool sometimes (Obama's Birth Certificate, for one) but this was cool to watch last night.


Even a broken clock is right twice a day...


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

I didn't really care much about what Gates, Crowley, or Obama had to say.

What I really wanted to hear was what Biden said.

You know he probably offered up some real humdingers. Why should we be deprived of that? At least, something of interest would have resulted.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Maybe they sang a few beer drinking songs:


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*Where did you go to school?*



WA said:


> This is as anti-American as you can get. WERE NOT A POLICE STATE!!!!
> 
> Legally you can yell anything you want at a cop and they can't even say anything against you, much more do something. Don't you know your basic civil rights?
> 
> This is common knowledge. Did you even go to school in the US? You should know theses without even going to school.


'We' are, in fact, not required to produce proof of identity to an officer UNLESS a possible crime is being investigated. A B&E was, in fact again, being investigated. Would this jackass have been happier if the police had chosen not to respond and his home had been ransacked and his Rolex stolen?

These officers do a job I cannot do because I would probably just shoot the moron and go on about my business. I appreciate the constraint shown by this officer and am happy to see that Mr Obama has shown, pardon the pun, his true colors. He is a racist first, second and to infinity.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I would stop way short of calling Obama a racist.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I would stop way short of calling Obama a racist.


(Stooping to Gates's level will not help things.)


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> I would stop way short of calling Obama a racist.


I agree. I think that he is probably a good and decent man who just happens to embrace some far left views for the direction he thinks the country should go, with which I happen to disagree.

With regard to the Gates incident, I think he did what many of us would probably do also, he let his friendship with one of the persons involved cloud his view of the situation. When you are the President you simply can't do that, at least not in public. I suspect that he knows that now.

Cruiser


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

I don't believe he is a racist, though he has cavorted with them in the past. He is most certainly prejudiced, however, based on the dictionary definition.

His comments last week during the press conference betray that side of him. He opined and took a definite stance on an issue of which he had, at best, incomplete information. His opinion was informed by a preconceived notion of race relations and police attitudes toward minorities. 

It's a mistake anyone can make, but not just anyone is the POTUS. If he can be so quick and misjudge on such a trivial matter, what about matters of national security and domestic policy. His words that night did not demonstrate that he is racist, but did demonstrate that he is impetuous and naive.


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

pt4u67 said:


> His words that night did not demonstrate that he is racist, but did demonstrate that he is impetuous and naive.


My exact sentiments.


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*Why not a racist?*

If a person makes a decision or takes a position based solely on the race of one or more of the individuals involved, why is he not a racist? A Klansman, such as Mr Byrd, makes decisions and choices based exactly on the data Mr Obama had and I don't think any of us would deny that that Klansman is a racist. I believe we must begin to realize and advocate unashamedly that a racist can be anyone, including a black person. Had David Duke made the statement in reverse that Mr Obama made we would all be jumping down his throat. Let's all start seeing racism as an 'equal opportunity evil' practiced by Mr Gates, Mr Obama and Mr Duke all in equal hate.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

The level of racial hate spoken by Mr. Obama and even Mr. Gates does not approach the level of that expressed by the Klan. To even hint that it does strains a poster's credibility.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

PetroLandman said:


> If a person makes a decision or takes a position based solely on the race of one or more of the individuals involved, why is he not a racist?


He/she would be in that circumstance; however, one cannot automatically assume that someone's position is based on race simply because he/she is the same race as the person he/she is supporting. A person making that assumption is just as much a racist as they are claiming the other person to be.

With regard to President Obama, I don't think we know. Keep in mind that he is a personal friend of Professor Gates. He didn't know Sgt. Crowley. Isn't it just as likely that he took the position he did out of support for a friend rather than due to that person's race?

I had a similar situation at my job years ago. A Black friend of mine was accused of something by a White co-worker who I only knew by name. I'm White, but after my Black friend told me his side of the story I believed him and took his side of the dispute. I did this because he was my friend and I believed him for that reason. So what is that called?

I think there were three big mistakes made here. The first was when Professor Gates instantly took the position that he was being treated like he was because he was Black and the officer was White. It's almost like there is an assumption that White folks don't sometimes get treated badly by other White folks. Maybe the cop was just a jerk who treats White people the same way. There is a danger in shouting racism as we now know from the way some people have treated the Black officer that was on the scene.

The second mistake was when Obama said what he said without the facts.

And the third mistake is calling Obama a racist because he took the side of Professor Gates. That is doing the exact same thing that Professor Gates did when he called Sgt. Crowley a racist.

Like I said, I don't know if what Obama did was based on race or not; but whether it was based on race or friendship or something else, he was wrong to publically speak on it like he did without knowing more about the situation. A President can't do that. He is as much Sgt. Crowley's President as he is Professor Gates'.

Cruiser


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

The President is not a racist! He is however, an activist...whose past history would indicate a very clear and specific list of causes for which he will always be willing to commit his energies and his influence to enlist the support of others. A sympathizer perhaps but no, not a racist.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

DCLawyer68 said:


> What I really liked was that the brands were announced before hand (the President: Bud Light; the officer: Blue Moon; the Professor: Red Stripe - no word on Maryann or the skipper).
> 
> I note that in today's stories, however, it appears that the professor had a Sam Adams Light. Apparently Red Stripe didn't poll well.
> 
> ...


They all could've had a coffee instead of alcohol,I mean what's the difference?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Howard said:


> They all could've had a coffee instead of alcohol,I mean what's the difference?


I think they were stereotyping police officers. Why not a nice merlot?


----------



## obiwan (Feb 2, 2007)

Howard said:


> They all could've had a coffee instead of alcohol,I mean what's the difference?


And donuts too huh?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

I went out drinking with some friends tonight in celebration of a friend's 30th birthday and we were discussing the beers the four of them chose. The consensus: Blue Moon makes some good beers, Sam Adams beers aren't too bad, Buckler is a waste and Budweiser is just plain awful (this is coming from three St. Louis guys). I would have chosen a good German beer. Spaten Optimator would have been my choice, or a nice double bock. My friends are hefweizen fans. 

After 2 Optimators, a Hofbrau dunkel, a Paulaner double bock, a Duvel and two local hefeweizens, I was feeling pretty happy. Gates and Crowley should have had more than one...maybe they would have come to an agreement. 

Good thing my wife was driving. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## KCKclassic (Jul 27, 2009)

+1 for Blue Moon being extra tasty


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

obiwan said:


> And donuts too huh?


hey why not? It's better than getting drunk also they can have croissants with butter or cream cheese.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

I wonder how many different beers they serve at the White House?


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*Levels of 'Sin'*

While I see the points made by several posters, I still maintain that a person cannot make decisions based on race (and other superficial traits) without being a racist. I understand that some of you think this somehow brings my 'credibility' into question, but I still believe that a 'little bit' of racism is racism. To state that some degree of racism is acceptable is to state that racism is acceptable.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Went out to eat last night as part of the wife's birthday celebration. The waitress (cute little red-head, sweet, maybe 21 years old) mentioned that they had Blue Moon beer. I said that I'd try one in honor of Sgt Crowley. She asked who that was. I told her he was the policeman who arrested Prof Gates and had the meeting at the whitehouse with him and Obama. That Crowley's beer of choice was Blue Moon.

Was the first she had heard of any of it.


----------



## dks202 (Jun 20, 2008)

mrkleen said:


> You conveniently left out the most important part of the story....it happned IN GATES HOME....not at some coffee shop.
> 
> Nice try though.


Doesn't matter where it happens. You cannot threaten to kill a cop anywhere, even in your own home.


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*Nice try!*

The incident for which Mr Gates was detained took place both in his home and outside his home aaaaaaaaaaand Mr Gates had produced no evidence that it was his home. I am still amazed how many people are willing to overlook in your face racism when the guilty party is an influential black man rather than an influential white man. I stick by my belief that any racism is an evil thing and should be treated as such.


----------



## Orsini (Apr 24, 2007)

dks202 said:


> ...threaten to kill a cop...


Yup. That's contempt of cop, alright. Bad idea. They don't like it.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

dks202 said:


> Doesn't matter where it happens. You cannot threaten to kill a cop anywhere, even in your own home.


You'd be charged with manslaughter and land yourself in jail.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

She talks about the beer summit this week; and a pretty bad visual.

https://dir.salon.com/topics/camille_paglia/index.html


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Papa was a rollin' stone https://apnews.myway.com/article/20090815/D9A30C6G1.html


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

ksinc said:


> Papa was a rollin' stone https://apnews.myway.com/article/20090815/D9A30C6G1.html


What a gorgeous parallel! It underscores Gates' arrogance.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

dks202 said:


> Doesn't matter where it happens. You cannot threaten to kill a cop anywhere, even in your own home.


I believe in this state if a cop barges into your house you can shoot them dead.

Not everybody wearing a badge and uniform is doing law enforcement.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^What a foolish and intentionally(?) reckless comment. I can assure you, were you to 'live out', this stated believe of yours, your life (assuming you survived the experience) would never be the same!


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Papa was a rollin' stone https://apnews.myway.com/article/20090815/D9A30C6G1.html


Clearly the NJ police were profiling old folk rock singers, but the old guy had the last laugh when he refused to play their game and instead was polite to the police. That must have really frustrated the cops who we all know were simply baiting him in an effort to slap on the cuffs.

This reminds me of an incident a few years ago when the police arrested a man at the airport for being a fugitive. The case had just that week been shown on the TV show "_America's Most Wanted_" and a citizen who had seen the program recognized the fugitive walking through the airport. The man did not resist arrest and was taken peacefully.

There was just one problem. After the cops got the guy downtown they discovered that he wasn't the escaped fugitive. No, the man they had in custody was the actor who had portrayed the escaped fugitive on the TV show. The actor was a good sport about the whole incident and even posed for pictures with the police officers who arrested him.

Cruiser


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> Clearly the NJ police were profiling old folk rock singers, but the old guy had the last laugh when he refused to play their game and instead was polite to the police. That must have really frustrated the cops who we all know were simply baiting him in an effort to slap on the cuffs.
> 
> This reminds me of an incident a few years ago when the police arrested a man at the airport for being a fugitive. The case had just that week been shown on the TV show "_America's Most Wanted_" and a citizen who had seen the program recognized the fugitive walking through the airport. The man did not resist arrest and was taken peacefully.
> 
> ...


And you have to figure that to the young cops Mr. Dylan would appear to be just another homeless addict looking to rob some nice beach homes for a $10 needle.

Wow, that's a good story. I bet every Cop has heard that now. If I'm every on the run I'll try the "I'm just the actor that played him on AMW" line and see if they buy it. :aportnoy:


----------

