Clint Van Zandt - former FBI Criminal Profiler, Hostage Negotiator, and current TV and News Media Crime Analyst

{"contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

Accusations of Racism still Cut Both Ways in America

Professor Henry Gates arrested

Sgt. Crowley says he's done nothing wrong

When Cambridge, MA, police sergeant James Crowley responded to an otherwise routine breaking and entering call last Thursday (7/16/09), he had no idea of the firestorm that call would ignite. In the aftermath, there is no doubt that racism is alive and well in America, and it cuts both ways.

Sgt. Crowley, who teaches other police officers how not to racially profile another person, now stands accused of such behavior himself, and every official from the President of the United States, to the Governor of Mass., to the Mayor of Cambridge have labeled Crowley as either stupid, racist, or both, most without the slightest sense of what really happened that summer afternoon.

According to police reports and witnesses at the scene, a neighbor saw two men attempting to force their way into a residence, one that had recently been burglarized. Responding to the report, Sgt. Crowley (who is white) spoke to the woman (who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent) reporting the break-in and determined that the man she saw had by then entered the house. Crowley, in uniform, then saw a man inside of the rental house and asked him to step outside. The man, later identified as Harvard Professor Henry Gates (who is black), head of the University’s African American Studies Department, refused to come out, indicating "all the hairs stood up on the back of my neck, and I realized I was in danger, and I said 'no' out of instinct." Gates, who once said "he knew every incident of racism from slavery to Jim Crow segregation," then demanded, and was told Sgt. Crowley’s identity for the first of three occasions.

According to the report Gates was also told the police were responding to the report of a break-in and that the reporting witness was just outside. Gates then yelled that the reason the police were really there was “because he was a black man in America.” (Enter the ever present, often played race card.) Crowley, meanwhile, said, as the first responding officer on the scene, that his request for Gates to come out was for Crowley's safety, because, as he would later say, he had three beautiful children and a wife who depend on him and he had to go home each night. Both Professor Gates and Sgt. Crowley state they were in fear for their own individual safety, and the lines were drawn. Gates was not going to be told what to do by a white cop and Crowley was going to find out who the mysterious black man was in the house with the broken front door. They both saw something; something that was entirely different based upon their own life experiences and their individual perception of what the presence of the other man could mean.

Shouting that Crowley “had no idea who he was messing with,” Gates attempted to call Crowley’s Chief and told the police dispatcher “he was dealing with a racist police officer at his home.” When Gates finally relented and provided Crowley with a college ID, the Harvard University police were called to assist. Gates continued to yell at Crowley, and when asked by Crowley to step outside allegedly said, “ya, I’ll speak with your mama outside.” Gates then followed Crowley, who he would later describe as a "rogue cop" outside yelling at him, calling him a racist, and telling him he had not heard the last of this. After being repeatedly asked by Crowley and other officers to stop his disorderly behavior, noting that a number of citizens had now gathered in front of the house, Gates refused and continued to yell, “This is what happens to black men in America!” He was then arrested, handcuffed, and taken to the police department.

Prosecutors have subsequently dismissed the charges against Gates, who said he was considering a law suit against police. Massachusetts’ black governor called the incident “every black man’s nightmare and a reality for many black men,” while President Obama said the Cambridge police had “acted stupidly.” The White House Press Secretary subsequently amended the President’s comments to reflect that “both sides” were to blame. All of this, of course, has become the fodder for radio and TV commentators, with most blacks lining up to support Gates, no matter the facts, and whites seeing this as just another incident of reverse racism.

The truth, perhaps like that suggested by the Presidential Press Secretary, is that while the police acted properly in their initial response to the crime report, and while Gates may have been spoiling for a fight, the police appeared to have overacted to his provocations. After all, police have wide latitude in whom they arrest and who they let go. Who among you has not welcomed a warning instead of a ticket when you were speeding?

Where the story seems to break down is what both the police and Professor Gates could have done to reduce the mounting tensions at the house. Many commentators have stated your first response to police should be to do what you’re told. Black, white, Hispanic and other races can attest to the trouble you get into when you don’t obey the police. If the cops are wrong, if your rights have been violated, taken them to court and sue. That should be the American way. And no one white will ever know what it's like to be black, especially to be challenged in your own home. And if you've never been a cop you will never know what it's like to face what a cop does every day of his or her career, this for little money and, as this incident once again proves, many times little respect, something Gates also felt was missing from the equation.

When will we ever learn, as a nation, that we must all work together and that our first response in such a situation should be to try to resolve it by peaceful dialogue, and not shouts concerning someone’s race or their “mama.” Perhaps the female witness was the real racist, mistaking the men she saw forcing open the door for burglars; but what should she, or Sgt. Crowley have done? Bill Cosby, suggesting this story should not take off like it had racially, said of the President’s statement, “If I’m the President of the United States, I don’t care how much pressure people want to put on it about race. I’m keeping my mouth shut,” thereby suggesting the need to get all the facts before you form an opinion. Are we becoming a country where only a black police officer can confront a black suspect, and so on across the racial spectrum, without someone playing the racial trump card? One of the black police officers at the scene, while suggesting that had he been the first responding officer things might indeed have gone differently, still supports Sgt. Crowley's version of the incident; something that has cause other blacks to call him an "Uncle Tom." And on it goes...

Well, once again it appears the venerable “Dr. Huxtable” was right all along. Lines are being drawn, and they're black and white. If this country is to ever make it through the 21stcentury, we need somehow, as Rodney King said while witnessing the 1992 LA riots, “to all just get along.” Maybe if they can somehow work this out in Cambridge, circa 1630, it will begin right there. And the "teachable incident" that Prof Gates, according to some media reports, appears ready to lecture us all on should be one that both he and Sgt. Crowley sit on the student side for a change and both learn from the incident. There is, after all, much to be learned and much to be understood, this from all sides of this issue. Perhaps we should all try to wear another man's glasses on occasion, this in an attempt to understand what he believes he sees when he looks at us and we at him.

{"contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
{"commentId":8417544,"authorDomain":"jinternetjack"}

Sgt. Crowley had the gun and the badge so he was in charge of the situation. Unfortunately for all of us he lost an opportunity

to demonstrate real leadership to his band of brothers and to the world that he is a man of exceptional character and integrity. He could have used this situation as a teachable moment to modeled for all of us how to diffuse situations that are potentially life threatening by employing exceptional interpersonal skills and demonstrating that the sensitivity strategies that he teaches his fellow officers can be highly effective in de-escalating volatile incidents. Instead of controlling the situation by using his “chill skills” he added super unleaded gasoline and set off a blazing firestorm. What is interesting is his decision to go public after he had time to review his actions and the incident. Taking the high ground was not an option that appealed or occurred to Officer Crowley because he has not internalized what he teaches. I believe maintaining his relationship with his fellow union members was more important to him. During his fifteen minutes of fame he clearly demonstrated that he was not ready for prime time.

So once again pride cometh before the fall of us all. Sgt. Crowley could have given us hope for a better day but instead he led us down the well-worn path that leads through the tunnel, which we have traveled for centuries without seeing the light. All that Officer Crowley, when presented with an opportunity to demonstrate his knowledge and experience, did was allow the incident to become a “bombastic melodrama” full of sound and fury which has become a tale repeated by idiots that will signify nothing.

{"commentId":8417544,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"jinternetjack"}
    Reply#1 - Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:24 PM EDT
    {"commentId":8489316,"authorDomain":"jatkowski"}

    The above comment is in line with what I have to say. I have been on both sides of this issue; I was a Police Officer and I am Black. The Police responded correctly to the call but after the situation got to the point where the "intruder" had been identified and recognized as a resident of the home, the Police should have ended the call. But what happened is Sgt Crowley felt his two honored positions; Police Officer and White man in America was challenged by a Black man, had been disrespected. If the Black man had been afraid or deferential to the Officer, everything would have been okay. That did not happen. People are not disorderly because they don't show fear. They are not disorderly if they raise their voice to Police Officers. Mr.Gates was illegally detained/arrested. He may have angered Sgt Crowley, he may have hurt Sgt Crowley's feelings but he did not break any laws and should not have been arrested.

    {"commentId":8489316,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"jatkowski"}
    • 1 vote
    #1.1 - Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:41 PM EDT
    {"commentId":9144533,"authorDomain":"angevin1"}

    Eloquent. While this may be true. It is almost ideal for ideal the polar opposite I was thinking when I first read credible reports of this unfortunate event.

    Dr. Gates: HAS A PhD. One would think with a PhD along comes the ability to assess situations quickly and defuse them, practically before they get started.

    Dr. Gates reacted as many black men might after a lifetime of seeing and experiencing the trauma of similar situations over the span of his life. I do think his behavior is justifiable. I do not think his behavior was acceptable socially.

    Cops are under-paid. We give them guns, tell them to sort out the good from the bad, deal with our miscreants, and educate them poorly and pay them poorly too. Gates could prob get a job as a cop. Crowley could not get a job teaching at Harvard.

    So no. I don't buy it Clint. I think Dr. Gates should be held to a higher standard socially.

    As for our president: He's a politician. Can we ever remember that: A politician!

    {"commentId":9144533,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"angevin1"}
    • 1 vote
    #1.2 - Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:05 AM EDT
    Reply
    {"commentId":8420956,"authorDomain":"cdrarty"}

    At last someone has seen the real issue through the haze of all the talking heads. When Law Enforncement Officers learn to check their egos at the shower door before dawnning their police garb, we will all learn to show more respect for the Public Servants they are and understand they are their to protect and serve. Thank you for your insight.

    {"commentId":8420956,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"cdrarty"}
    • 1 vote
    Reply#2 - Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:33 PM EDT
    {"commentId":8423694,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

    Personally I'm getting really sick of all this racial BS..... the only racial problems are black and white.. or black and hispanic... or black and asian... is anyone getting the drift here?

    Whites have had to tolerate the views of blacks in America for way too long.... now theres "Black in America II" on a cable station...... why not have a WHITE IN AMERICA now? NO....... that would be racial because us whites have everything dont we? I'm tired of hearing about the indescretions of hundreds of years ago.. GET OVER IT!!

    Theres the BET (Black Entertainment Television) channel.. wheres the WET (White Entertainment Television) channel? Im. sorry that would be racist to have a WET channel wouldnt it? Comedians such as the Wayan brothers or Eddie Murphy and others routinely call each other the "N" word and make fun of whites and how suppressed blacks are .. GOD forbid a white guy should make reference to a dark skinned individual!!!! A comedian named Richard... (Seinfeld) was totally ostracized for his comments.

    People such as Jessica Jackson, ALvina SHarpton need to shut there pie holes and find a real life! Want to advance the blacks in America? Get them to stay in school, get off welfare, get a job, stop fathering 10 kids for the food stamps! Our freakin 1st black president is now entering into the realm of racism as a 1/2 white dude commenting on the actions of the police in Cambridge!

    Asians come here and learn.. they learn... they learn.. they are accepted.. they dont complain.. they thrive and do so well in this WHITE environment... did I say WHITE environment? Excuse me for my racial remark there... HAHA.. Its not a racial remark.. just the Gods honest truth! Its called commitment to their family values! They know the real deal and what AMERICA has to offer anyone with ambition.

    Lets talk about reverse discrimination now!! What is that? We have to have quotas to ensure racial equality in the market place? Colleges/businesses have to allow a certain amount of BLACKS into their establishments so not to appear as racists and face the BS retaliation from a handful of leading black racists!

    More commercials on tv have blacks in them... not proportional to their representation here.. but its the pc thing to do.. right? BS!

    .My family were Irish immigrants settling in Hells Kitchen (Manhattan) in the late 1800s. They were WHITE!!! Looked upon as crap by so many other immigrants who got here just hours before they did... other whites saw them as crap.... but they are...we are... no lomger irish crap... we're Americans.. when will blacks realize they can be Americans too? Try it... you might like it.

    {"commentId":8423694,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
    • 1 vote
    Reply#3 - Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:01 PM EDT
    {"commentId":8430154,"authorDomain":"sakindum"}

    It is typical to here people like rant off without reasoning. It is also stupid not to understand that for every action, there is a consequence. People talk about Blacks getting special treatment like Affirmative Action, Welfare, and Food Stamps. But, can anyone sit down and understand why these programs exist? They exist for a reason. They exist to cover up the grave sins committed by this country. It's like the piece of cake (even the cake is not sweet) you give a child when you mistakenly slap him so he doesn't cry too long. You just can't bare the guilt. Yes, I am talking about the United States of America.

    It does not take an expert to acknowledge the consequences of Slavery, Jim Crow Laws. These were terrible sins committed by this country, The United States of America. Racism was the creation of the White man to justify the wicked treatment of the Black man. This is just the facts. It can't be denied. How do you justify the treatment of Slaves in this country? You justify your actions by diminishing value of the slaves. You tell yourself that they are not humans.

    Even after slavery ends you still had laws that restricted the freedom of the Black man, the Buffalo Soldier. Blacks were denied the basic American rights. This America of which was built on the backs of slaves denied basic rights. Black World War 2 soldiers were denied access to the G.I Bill. Blacks weren't given loans to start business or even to but a house.

    This actions had consequences. We bare the consequences even till today. Many even question why there are cable stations like BET. Does Black Entertainment offend you? BET is the result of Jim Crow Laws, created by the Majority ( Whites). Was it Blacks who wrote segregation laws, or was it the Black man that created the Caste system?

    What would America be like if slavery didn't exist? How would the America have competed all over the world if there wasn't slavery? And you keep hearing of Whites creation of America.

    We just had the first Black President and every idiot thinks America is post racial. How can a country founded on racism (hatred) ever be post racial? Surely, race relations will improve, but America cannot be post racial. The fact that people like still stinks with ignorance is amazing.

    Black In America 2 was good. I still can't wait for Latino In America and White In America. Although, I doubt I will ever see White In America. Whites wouldn't be able to produce a White in America because they are the majority and guilt from the past and present still exists.

    {"commentId":8430154,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"sakindum"}
      #3.1 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:19 AM EDT
      {"commentId":8468532,"authorDomain":"Viz7wis"}

      There is a distinct difference in coming here for a better life. Good!!!! There is a difference in slavery and being an immigrant. You chose...Africans were forced. When tried to escape were whipped, mutilated and forced to perform more hard labor. What is the "it" to get over? If someone smacked you....how long will you trust in them. You may speak to them again; but you will be suspicious of their intentions. Such as, if given the opportunity, they may smack you again. Think about that in a broader context repeated for centuries.

      True, there are many injustices in this United States of America. For a long time, we had no platform. As you mentioned, Black In America and BET; those are our platforms to speak of all of the injustices and to acknowledge the contributions made by the African American Community. For centuries, our voice has been silenced ; taken out of the history books; and propagandized.

      You may not undersand; which is apparent that you don't.. due to the statements you made; however, we know that when you are taught something as a child it is hard to defy your parents or friends take on the African American's plight. Try to think of this way; humane treatment and justice is the banner of America. Let's live it, one and all.

      {"commentId":8468532,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"Viz7wis"}
        #3.2 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:13 PM EDT
        {"commentId":9145012,"authorDomain":"angevin1"}

        You're totally right to condemn the "Post Racial rhetoric!"

        And totally Wrong to suggest that America came up with Racisim.

        {"commentId":9145012,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"angevin1"}
          #3.3 - Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:45 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":8432544,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

          According to Gates, , the police report was an act of fiction. Why do you think the police report is accurate and professor Gates is lying? Why would a Harvard professor who studies, writes, and lectures on racism to a wide range of racial groups. Would jump so quickly to calling sergeant Crowley a racist and talking about his mama. His version of the truth does not seem believable. I don't know of any other time that professor Gates has acted this way. But perhaps, professor Gates' tone seemed irritated. The man did just get back from a long flight from China.

          And what the female neighbor, which I assume is white, but you left out this detail, Zandt. Do you think she is guilty of racial profiling? And why don't she know Gates if they are neighbors?

          Zandt, you're right racism cuts both ways, and you prove this with your one-sided perspective in this issue. But of course, my view is one-sided, too, I guess.

          {"commentId":8432544,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
          • 1 vote
          Reply#4 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:41 AM EDT
          {"commentId":8433591,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

          prof2

          First, a black officer on the scene verified the contents of the police report. Second - the arresting officer had discretion regarding the arrest, but he chose to arrest anyway. A better approach might have been to accept the rants of the professor, give him a business card with the Sgts name and a number for internal affairs and allow the process to have worked itself out without an arrest. The professor started the fire, the officer put wood on the fire, and the president poured gas on it.

          Time for all parties to come together without calls of racism.

          CVZ

          {"commentId":8433591,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
            #4.1 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:29 AM EDT
            {"commentId":8461546,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

            prof2,

            As an additional FYI, the woman who reported the possible breakin has olive colored skin, since you've made skin color an issue here, and she is of Portuguese descent.

            CVZ

            {"commentId":8461546,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
              #4.2 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:05 AM EDT
              {"commentId":9145136,"authorDomain":"angevin1"}

              Additionally, wasn't she in an office situation and not actually a neighbor of Dr. Gates?

              {"commentId":9145136,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"angevin1"}
                #4.3 - Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:56 AM EDT
                Reply
                {"commentId":8434214,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                If anyone, like CVZ, wants to know professor Gates' side of the story. Please look at this site:

                {"commentId":8434214,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                Reply#5 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 10:14 AM EDT
                {"commentId":8434238,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                prof2-1238768Deleted
                {"commentId":8434274,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                prof2-1238768Deleted
                {"commentId":8434366,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                For those who want to know the truth, like CVZ, please look at Oprah Winfrey's radio site. She interviews professor Gates. As a nugget, he denies that he ever talked about sergeant Crowley's mother; or as Crowley, puts it, "mama."

                {"commentId":8434366,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                Reply#8 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 10:23 AM EDT
                {"commentId":8434490,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                CVZ,

                Did the black officer verify the "mama" statement because he didn't on Anderson Cooper 360? Perhaps, he didn't verify it because it wasn't said. If that's the case, then Crowley is protecting his butt because that's falisfying a police report, which probably isn't legal. Don't you agree?

                {"commentId":8434490,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                Reply#9 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 10:32 AM EDT
                {"commentId":8443592,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                No, actually, Gates himself did. And the president weighed in on that, too. And since then, it appears from recent reports that the three of them ARE going to sit down and have a discussion. For the record, too, President Obama stated today that there was overreaction by both men in this instance, now that he knows all of the facts. Holy crap, could it be that there are no absolutes, both sides made mistakes? But that would be boring. It's much more fun for people to quickly fall onto one side of the fence or the other and support their side blindly, in spite of the facts. It seems that every war, fight, and conflict in the world were based on emotion and pride, without open-minded, thoughtful discussion. Look at Israel/Palestine, Northern Ireland, The Iraq War, etc., etc. Once emotions take over, there's seldom reflection and rarely any backtracking.

                {"commentId":8443592,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                • 1 vote
                #9.1 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:28 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8449481,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                "No, actually, Gates himself did. And the president weighed in on that, too. And since then, it appears from recent reports that the three of them ARE going to sit down and have a discussion."

                Based on Oprah Winfrey's radio station, CNN, and CBS, professor Gates never referred to sergeant Crowley's "mama." Where are you getting your facts from? The police report?

                President Obama stated today that there was overreaction by both men in this instance, now that he knows all of the facts.

                How do you know that President Obama knows all of the facts? Again, where are you getting your facts from? According to professor Gates on CNN, he plans to sit down with sergeant Crowley and ask for an apology and confession that he fabricated the police report. Moreover, Gates said that his only reaction was repeatedly asking for Crowley's name and badge, which Crowley did not give and hence broke the law.

                {"commentId":8449481,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                #9.2 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:15 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8450351,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                Prof.- Okay, let's, for the sake of argument, remove the "mama" statement from the argument. Undoubtedly, the police should not have arrested Gates. Now Here is why I believe Gates is neither completely faultless nor a symbol of a man discriminated against due to his race, and could consider an apology on his part as well:

                The professor didn't become indignant after he was arrested, he became indignant the second, to use his words, "A White Cop" stepped onto his property. And his hate-filled tirade did not end after his arrest. While I believe the police should have been able to, as professionals, walk away in the end, I also hope that Mr. Gates will see that he has become as hateful and irrational as the whites who once oppressed and tormented him and the black population. While racism, discrimination, and profiling still exist, this case had none of the elements of profiling. Gates is no more of a hero than the cops who arrested him. He has a disease. It is called prejudice.

                {"commentId":8450351,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                • 2 votes
                #9.3 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:28 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8453116,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                perplexed,

                Your logic is faulty about professor Gates. He is one, if not the, leading scholar on race. Why would this intelligent man enter, in your own words, a "hate-filled tirade" with sergeant Crowley? He debate about race with with many people and many times across the globe. He has never been known to show this type of behavior. Can you name one instance? Furthermore, if you ignore or view the "mama" statement from the police report as false, then sergeant Crowley loses all credibility. The report has to be completely true or completely false. There's no gray area or latitude in this matter. We're talking about the law. We shouldn't make it up as we go--though some people do.

                Prof

                {"commentId":8453116,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                #9.4 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:53 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8453646,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                Okay, but absent the "he said, they" said part of the issue, Gates, as you put it, is a leading scholar on race. And yet in his interviews on the incident, he states that as soon as he saw the "White cop", he knew his "life was in danger", and that when the cop asked him to positively identify himself, he replied, "Why, because you're a white cop and I'm a black man in America?" Hardly seems like gates was looking for a civillized discussion. Hardly seems like the cop could have done anything right in Gate's view because he was, after all, a White Cop. I think it's ironic that Gate's issue is not addressing false arrest, but rather, profiling. It seems to me that Gates PROFILED the officer as soon as he saw his WHITE face. It's EXTREMELY IRONIC that a Scholar who chronicles black history and the evils of bigotry has allowed himself to become a biggot. And his reaction hardly advances the cause of racial equality. It sure doesn't illustrate racial profiling.

                {"commentId":8453646,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                • 2 votes
                #9.5 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 5:35 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8454323,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                By the way, everyone, here are some excerpts from his interview with "The Root". These are his words, and not the officer's assertions. And I think it shows that there was already a conflict in his mind when the cops got there...

                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.’

                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.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?

                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.

                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.”

                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?’

                I'm including some of his words that have been missing both in the arguments of those who find no fault in his actions, and media outlets which have left out his real perspective. And there are other interviews where he adds comments about the "White Cop", etc. Gee, anyone else think Gates could have some deep seated hate and predispositions? Anyone else think Gates might have handled the situation poorly and escalated what could have been a non-issue into an adversarial confrontation? Does that rise to the level of disorderly, an arrestable offense? Not even close. The cops SHould be disciplined. Profiling and racism? Only in the hate filled corners of Gate's mind.

                {"commentId":8454323,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                • 1 vote
                #9.6 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:28 PM EDT
                {"commentId":8455454,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                ,

                Like sergeant Crowley, now, I have to question your credibility. You stated:

                "And yet in his interviews on the incident, he states that as soon as he saw the "White cop", he knew his "life was in danger", and that when the cop asked him to positively identify himself, he replied, "Why, because you're a white cop and I'm a black man in America?""

                What interview are you referring to? Please cite your source. Why should I believe you're being honest and not bias? If you visit Oprah Winfrey's online radio show archive or CNN's video archive, either source has Gates' interview, which completely contradicts your evidence.

                According to Gates, the first thing sergeant Crowley asks him is to step outside. (Now mind you, he doesn't ask if he's the owner of the home, first. He doesn't even identify himself, which sergeant Crowley's report supports.)

                Next, Gates ask him why. Then Crowley responds about the reported B&E from his next door neighbor, a white female, which CVZ forgot to mention in his essay. Then Crowley again tells him to step outside.

                In his interview, Gates reflects on this moment and questions why the officer did not ask about his safety, or ask him if he was the owner of the house. (I also wondered why sergeant Crowley didn't scan the area to see anything that would prove that it was Gates' home. Great police work!)

                Gates also said that after Crowley told him about the B&E, Crowley asked him to step outside again. And again, Gates told him no, but also said that he was the owner of the house. Crowley needed proof. So Gates went into the kitchen to get his identification while Crowley followed behind him.

                When Gates gave Crowley his identification, his Harvard ID and driver's license, Gates said that Crowley asked him was he a Harvard professor. (Now mind you, a month before, black students from Harvard filed complaints against Cambridge police for stopping them and checking their I.D.'s without any cause.)

                Gates became irritated by question and firmly asked Crowley for his name and badge number because he, too, wanted to file a complaint. He repeatedly asked Crowley this, but Crowley did not comply with his request, which, like I said in another thread, is against the law. And Crowley's report supports this.

                There's more to this interview. Please check it out!

                Prof

                {"commentId":8455454,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                • 1 vote
                #9.7 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:58 PM EDT
                Reply
                {"commentId":8436098,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

                Clint.. thanks for opening a bag of worms here...... it's obvious from your responders who is black, hispanic, and white. I should have put white first.. geez.

                You weren't being racial in your remarks, just presenting the facts as you know them, and how they have been reported so far! I've never seen you utter any sort of racial remark in the years i've watched you on TV or read your columns, and this Prof2 doesnt seem to get it.

                Police are faced with dangers everyday in their unrespected line of work, and yes, they need to act on instinct. Statistically, over 25% of the black male population has been arrested or incarcerated sometime during their life. Why is that? I'm sure its not because of racial profiling... i'm sure its because they are committing the crimes and are caught! BTW, wasn't there a black officer present at the arrest who agreed with the charges? I guess that makes him an Uncle Tom then for doing what was right, doesnt it!

                Why do we need to have professors lecture specifically on black history? Why not just history in general? What are they trying to promote? Wasn't there a reverend in the news during the election period who routinely used his pulpit to promote... well you know who he is.. and you know who attended his church.. and we all know his views on America and how he promoted harmony.. I MAKE MYSELF LAUGH!!!

                Bob Dylans lyrical works are used to raise awareness of social problems through poetry classes, and also teach creative writing to students. What does black history teach? We have a whole damn month dedicated to black history in our schools now (february) ... why?

                If this Prof Gates was so in-tune, he wouldn't have resisted and would have cooperated with Crowley, but he chose the low road!

                As far as the Mama comment goes.... Ozzie Osbourne wrote a song.. Mama I'm Coming Home.... maybe he should have titled it Momma I'm Coming Home... either way.. I dont the reference to MOM was spelled out in their dialogue to know exactly... so who cares... hey.. who's your daddy.. or Hoosier daddy? Jeff Gordon was called Hoosier daddy yesterday because he has won 4 races at Indianapolis raceway (which runs sunday afternoon)... he wasnt offended.. maybe if the writer said Who's your daddy.. he might have been!

                {"commentId":8436098,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
                  Reply#10 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:20 PM EDT
                  {"commentId":8447543,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                  Grandpa,

                  As always, you're a beacon of common sense.

                  CVZ

                  {"commentId":8447543,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                    #10.1 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:14 AM EDT
                    {"commentId":9146510,"authorDomain":"angevin1"}

                    "Why do we need to have professors lecture specifically on black history? Why not just history in general? What are they trying to promote?"

                    Grandpa,

                    Why: Because once you study Black History, you'd find out that the garbage passed on to our youth is History, with a caveat: Not all of the truth, just what we want you to know.

                    How do I know: I attended a "black" Institution pursuing my BSN two years ago, and was appalled when I discovered all of the history that I had missed over time. At first, I thought the information was just some "Black-Hyperbole", then quickly realized it was not. I was in turn overjoyed at the new info, and saddened and even mad about the history that I had missed all along.

                    {"commentId":9146510,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"angevin1"}
                      #10.2 - Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:45 PM EDT
                      Reply
                      {"commentId":8436452,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                      "Clint, You weren't being racial in your remarks, just presenting the facts as you know them, and how they have been reported so far!"

                      Grandpa, wasn't the president doing the same as Clint--presenting the facts as he knew them?

                      Where's the latitude for both sides? That's the point I was trying to make with Clint. And please forgive me, if I led you or Clint to think that professor Gates is telling the truth and the sergeant Crowley is lying. it's impossible for anyone to know what happened between professor Gates and sergeant Crowley. What I meant by truth is I didn't see Gates' side of the story in Clint's essay, which made it one-sided.

                      Also, for the record, the black office who verified the contents of "some" of sergeant Crowley's report told Anderson Cooper that he thought the situation would have turned out differently if he was the first on the scene. I hope he doesn't lose his job over that statement! Keep your fingers crossed, Clint and Grandpa.

                      {"commentId":8436452,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                      • 1 vote
                      Reply#11 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:43 PM EDT
                      {"commentId":8437269,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

                      Prof2.. hi..I keep my fingers crossed that someday all this racial BS will be over and my grandson and granddaughter can grow up as I did .... in an environment that I felt I was safe to walk the streets as a kid at night and have fun growing up rather than be afraid of any stranger that says HI to them or to us as we need to be today!

                      Clint is not the President of the United States.. he is an author and commentator and offers his opinons whether right or wrong, and we comment.. Isn't free speach great!

                      The President on the other hand.. speaks for ALL AMERICANS (he was elected to do that)... and he really needs to choose his words more carefully. Stating the Cambridge Police acted STUPIDLY was not a very good choice of words... would there even be a story if he hadn't commented? Now theres damage control at the WH.

                      I do see that you have chilled a bit... first calling him ZANDT.. then CVZ.. now Clint :)

                      Be good be safe and I look forward to more free speech!

                      {"commentId":8437269,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
                        #11.1 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 1:32 PM EDT
                        {"commentId":8447488,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                        Prof

                        As you know, when you become president you no longer speak, in our President's case, as an individual, or again in his case, as a black American; you speak as America. As a rookie president he forgot that and rallied to his friend and his own belief system vs that of the all American President.

                        CVZ

                        {"commentId":8447488,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                        • 1 vote
                        #11.2 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:08 AM EDT
                        {"commentId":8447528,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                        Prof,

                        What we don't need in this country is an unofficial rule that only black police officers can confront and arrest black subjects, otherwise down goes the race card. We are so polarized in the U.S., and tired of the statements of each side, that many of us immediately fall on the side of our skin color. If Prof Gates, by suggesting that we need a teachable moment, means that he is going to lecture the country on how he was wronged, that would not be a teachable moment. (Just a quick example on how you can read into almost any statement?)

                        If we are to be "taught," there needs to be teachers presenting all sides of an issue and not just a white or a black looking through years old racial colored glasses.

                        CVZ

                        {"commentId":8447528,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                          #11.3 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:13 AM EDT
                          {"commentId":8449909,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                          CVZ,

                          "As you know, when you become president you no longer speak, in our President's case, as an individual, or again in his case, as a black American; you speak as America."

                          Your comment doesn't make any sense. When President Obama speaks for America, he speaks for black America because they make up a part of America. Racial profiling affect us all, not just black American. Whereever there is injustice, our president should speak out against it. And if you think he's "rookie" in this area, why don't you make this your platform and run against him--you and the hockey mom, Sara Palin.

                          "What we don't need in this country is an unofficial rule that only black police officers can confront and arrest black subjects, otherwise down goes the race card. We are so polarized in the U.S., and tired of the statements of each side, that many of us immediately fall on the side of our skin color."

                          I think you're absolutely right, CVZ. I found it a little odd, though, that the black officer would say this, especially since sergeant Crowley trains officers in racial profiling. What do you think about that? (To me, it means he must not be too good at his job.)

                          "If Prof Gates, by suggesting that we need a teachable moment, means that he is going to lecture the country on how he was wronged, that would not be a teachable moment. (Just a quick example on how you can read into almost any statement?) If we are to be "taught," there needs to be teachers presenting all sides of an issue and not just a white or a black looking through years old racial colored glasses."

                          First, in order for it to be a teachable moment, you need to consider professor Gates' side of the story...because he was "wronged." Do you know how disorderly conduct is defined by law? If so, you would know that professor Gates did none of this after he stepped outside of his home. Also, you're absolutely right. There should be diverse perspectives talking about racial profiling. But you're sadly mistaken if you think its fruitless to look at historical examples of racial profiling. We should learn from our uncomfortable past, not forget it. How on earth do we make sure that we don't make the same mistakes?

                          Prof

                          {"commentId":8449909,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                          • 1 vote
                          #11.4 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:54 PM EDT
                          {"commentId":8450879,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

                          Clint for PRES!! I'd vote for him! We haven't had a PRES with a mustache since Teddy and then Harding! I dont remember them though, but I read about them in the WHITE history books

                          American History has 44 Presidents thus far... Prof Gates' class teaches theres only 4 presidents.. #3 Thomas Jefferson for fathering a child with a black slave, #16 Abe Lincoln for setting slaves free, #36 LBJ for the great america sweeping social reforms, and #44 Obama for calling a whitey cop "stupid"... maybe thats 1/2 right being he is 1/2 black or is he 1/2 white?

                          Prof.. may I ask what you do for a living being that your ID on here is Prof2 and you seem to be fully in support of Prof Gates? Is he related to Secretary Gates the Defense secretary? or Bill Gates the BILLIONAIRE by chance? Maybe thats how he got his job at Cambridge! no shame in that, Barney Fife got his job because he went to school with Andy Taylor, although Barney wasn't qualified at all! I love those reruns! SIMPLE America....Little House as well.. such wholesome loving family value programs... sort of what MTV has become today! hehehe... the demise of any races values MTV is

                          {"commentId":8450879,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
                            #11.5 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:09 PM EDT
                            Reply
                            {"commentId":8441415,"authorDomain":"angryamerica"}

                            Plain and Simple, Mr. Obama has shown he has a habit of pointing fingers at people, saying they are bad or its their fault to further his agenda’s. That is not a leader and this event was no different – he instinctively defaulted to his finger pointing mentality and proved he lack experience to lead. Is he a racist? I can not say for certain, but he has made the white educated out to be the “bad people”, yet he wants the same group to pay for all his spending. It is that class which pays the most in taxes. Maybe the white community needs an NAACP type group, and maybe the white community should stop paying their taxes – Mr. Obama, you work for us as well! In fact, you should remember you are an employee to ALL America, not just one class or race. Mr. Obama will be remembered as the greatest manipulator and destroyer of the American Spirit.

                            {"commentId":8441415,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"angryamerica"}
                            • 1 vote
                            Reply#12 - Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:29 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8449725,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

                            Spending? What spending? Obama is a fiscal conservative! He just said he has had those frumpy jeans for many years! He has only had 4 suits. If he ran as McCain's VP he would have gotten a new wardrobe!

                            Now i feel so stupid.. my grandson (11months old) just told me that you didnt mean Obamas clothing or personal pocketbook... you were referring to the pocketbooks of others that have made it in America. My grandson is worried that he will have to work till he's 94 to help pay down the current deficit so he can receive a little bit of Socialism Security and afford health care such as basic Tylenol. He said whats the point of trying to excel in life if he has to live under Obamanation ( I think he meant abomination, but its hard to understand him fully at his age).

                            My grandson is a smart boy.. isnt he :) and to think, he's only 11 months old! Wait till he's a 2yo... out of the mouths of babes.....

                            {"commentId":8449725,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
                            • 2 votes
                            #12.1 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:39 PM EDT
                            Reply
                            {"commentId":8450051,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                            Prof.- Okay, let's, for the sake of argument, remove the "mama" statement from the argument. Undoubtedly, the police should not have arrested Gates. Now Here is why I believe Gates is neither completely faultless nor a symbol of a man discriminated against due to his race, and could consider an apology on his part as well:

                            The professor didn't become indignant after he was arrested, he became indignant the second, to use his words, "A White Cop" stepped onto his property. And his hate-filled tirade did not end after his arrest. While I believe the police should have been able to, as professionals, walk away in the end, I also hope that Mr. Gates will see that he has become as hateful and irrational as the whites who once oppressed and tormented him and the black population. While racism, discrimination, and profiling still exist, this case had none of the elements of profiling. Gates is no more of a hero than the cops who arrested him. He has a disease. It is called prejudice.

                            {"commentId":8450051,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                            • 3 votes
                            Reply#13 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:04 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8454420,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                            By the way, everyone, here are some excerpts from Gate's interview with "The Root". These are his words, and not the officer's assertions. And I think it shows that there was already a conflict in his mind when the cops got there...

                            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.'

                            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.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?

                            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.

                            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."

                            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?'

                            I'm including some of Gate's words that have been missing both in the arguments of those who find no fault in his actions, and media outlets which have left out his real perspective. And there are other interviews where he adds comments about the "White Cop", etc. Gee, anyone else think Gates could have some deep seated hate and predispositions? Anyone else think Gates might have handled the situation poorly and escalated what could have been a non-issue into an adversarial confrontation? Does that rise to the level of disorderly, an arrestable offense? Not even close. The cops SHould be disciplined. Profiling and racism? Only in the hate filled corners of Gate's mind.

                            {"commentId":8454420,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                            • 2 votes
                            Reply#14 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:35 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8455649,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                            perplexed,

                            "And there are other interviews where he adds comments about the "White Cop", etc."

                            Again, please cite your source. And what do you think about sergeant Crowley breaking the law by not complying to Gates' request to give him his name and badge number.

                            "Anyone else think Gates might have handled the situation poorly and escalated what could have been a non-issue into an adversarial confrontation? Does that rise to the level of disorderly, an arrestable offense?"

                            No, it does not. Do you even know the law? Here's the definition of disorderly conduct:

                            A misdemeanor consisting of any behavior that tends to disturb the public peace, offend public morals, or undermine safety.

                            Now how did Gates break this law?

                            {"commentId":8455649,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                            • 2 votes
                            #14.1 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:11 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8456263,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                            It is apparent that you did not read my next sentence. It stated that his actions did not even come close to an arrestable offense, or a violation of any law. And you didn't bother to read his exerpts I included from "The Root". No, sir, you have drawn your conclusions, and, like those that don't think the cops did anything wrong, no inconvenient facts are going to get in the way of your pre-formed conclusions. Wow, sounds like maybe you were schooled by Gates at Harvard on, how to quickly jump to conclusions and ignore any relevant facts. Did you even bother to pick up the fact that I don't support the police in this case? That I think the police actions were, in essence, unconstitutional? No, your scripted responses don't allow for that. Here's a thought: Next time you want a debate, listen to the entire position of your intended adversary before you respond. And as for other comments and sources, you do the legwork this time. I did it for you last time so that you might see Gates should not be sainted anytime soon, based on his own comments that you either conveniently overlooked or believe are righteous. And if you believe his comments were just fine, be intellectually honest enough not to skip over them and simply say you agree with him. We could then agree to disagree.

                            {"commentId":8456263,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                            • 1 vote
                            #14.2 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:53 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8456699,"authorDomain":"prof-2"}

                            perplexed,

                            I really don't understand your reasoning, and your line of thought from sentence to sentence is difficult to follow. Try cleaning them up for clarity. As of your last post, you stated:

                            "Wow, sounds like maybe you were schooled by Gates at Harvard on, how to quickly jump to conclusions and ignore any relevant facts."

                            What relevant facts? I'm still waiting for you to cite them...waiting...waiting. Based on your above post from "The Root," Gates asked for Crowley's name and badge number and did not get them. So why do you think it's of out of line for Gates to question Crowley's intent? Moreover, according to MSNBC, 95% of African Americans either have been, has had a family member, or know someone who has experienced racial profiling. So can you fault Gates from acting leery about Crowley?

                            Based on his expertise, Crowley should have put Gates' mind to ease and gave Gates his name and badge number. Instead, he chose to act unprofessional. I really feel sorry for the guy. He has three children, and his career may flatline. I just don't see any promotions in his future.

                            You also stated: "And as for other comments and sources, you do the legwork this time. I did it for you last time so that you might see Gates should not be sainted anytime soon, based on his own comments that you either conveniently overlooked or believe are righteous. And if you believe his comments were just fine, be intellectually honest enough not to skip over them and simply say you agree with him. We could then agree to disagree."

                            First, in a friendly debate, the opponent never present evidence for his opposition. Don't you know this? If you want evidence to support your position, my friend, you better find it yourself. Second, I'm not trying to make Gates a "saint." If Crowley's position was stronger, I would support him, but it's not. He failed to identify himself, according to the law, and he arrested Gates without proper cause. He's at fault and that's why the charges were dropped.

                            Prof

                            {"commentId":8456699,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"prof-2"}
                            • 1 vote
                            #14.3 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:28 PM EDT
                            {"commentId":8457044,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                            Interesting how you cherry-picked which of my statements above you would respond to. You skipped over my first paragraph that responded to your attack on me based on the assumtion that I thought Gates committed a crime. You still haven't read my first post., or where I restated my position in my second post. You are content to miss the whole point of my argument, which is: The police DID WRONFULLY ACT WHEN THEY ARRESTED GATES, and that GATES DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME. But because I believe Gates should reflect on his own actions as well, you assume I MUST support the police's actions. As for my logic being difficult to follow, that may be because you are so intent on seeing Only your own perspective that you can't imagine one could find fault with both parties here. Now, I have to state that I have enjoyed, as you call it, the "friendly" debate we have had. You and I managed to disagree without calling each other names, saying things that were designed to be personally degrading and insulting, or lowering ourselves to the level of some that I've seen in these posts on the two most prevalant sides of the issue. I will let you have the final word, but seriously, thank you for stating your views in a thoughtful, mature manner.

                            {"commentId":8457044,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                            • 2 votes
                            #14.4 - Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:54 PM EDT
                            Reply
                            {"commentId":8459564,"authorDomain":"Inqy"}

                            Racism cuts both ways????

                            Somebody explain why this does not get more publicity:

                            Carnage in Pittsburgh: Deadliest Extremist Attack on Police Officers Since Oklahoma City
                            Posted in Extremist Crime by Sonia Scherr on April 6, 2009

                            More law enforcement officers were killed in Saturday's shooting rampage in Pennsylvania than in any other single violent incident perpetrated by a domestic political extremist since the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

                            Three Pittsburgh police officers were fatally shot when they responded to a domestic dispute at the home of the alleged killer, Richard Poplawski, who had posted numerous racist and anti-Semitic messages on the white supremacist website Stormfront and elsewhere. A fourth was wounded in the hand. The last time more than two police officers were murdered by a far-right extremist was in Oklahoma City, when five officers died in the attack that killed a total of 168 people, according to Mark Pitcavage, director of investigative research for the Anti-Defamation League.

                            In the 14 years since that bombing — which remains the worst act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history — 25 law enforcement officers have lost their lives to white supremacist violence. "We all know that white supremacists lash out violently against people of other races and religions and sexual orientations," Pitcavage told Hatewatch. "We often forget that they also strike out against the people trying to protect us all. Sometimes spontaneously, sometimes planned, they regularly target law enforcement officers across the country."

                            The officers who died in Pittsburgh were Paul Sciullo III, 37, Stephen Mayhle, 29, and Eric Kelly, 41. Sciullo and Mayhle were ambushed when they arrived at the house where Poplawski lived with his mother. Kelly was shot when he responded to help.

                            The Intelligence Report profiled the 15 officers killed by extremists between 1997 and 2004. With help from Pitcavage, Hatewatch compiled a list, presented here in reverse chronological order, of the seven law enforcement officers who died between 2005 and the tragedy in Pittsburgh:

                            • Hillsborough County, Fla., Sheriff's Sgt. Ron Harrison, 55, on Aug. 15, 2007, by a white supremacist.

                            • Bastrop, La., Police Detective Sgt. John Smith, 40, on Aug. 10, 2007, by a member of the racist prison gang Aryan Circle.

                            • Bastrop, La., Police Detective Sgt. Charles "Chuck" Wilson, 34, on Aug. 10, 2007, by a member of the racist prison gang Aryan Circle.

                            • Utah Department of Corrections Officer Stephen Anderson, 60, on June 25, 2007, by a Utah State Prison inmate with ties to the Aryan Brotherhood and other white supremacist prison gangs.

                            • Moscow, Idaho, Police Officer Lee Newbill, 48, on May 19, 2007, by a member of the neo-Nazi Aryan Nations.

                            • Gassville, Ark., Police Officer James W. Sell, 63, on Feb. 4, 2006, by a neo-Nazi who also attacked two people at a gay bar.

                            • Fort Worth, Texas, Police Officer Henry "Hank" Nava Jr., 39, on Dec. 1, 2005, after being shot by a member of the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang.

                            From the Southern Poverty Law Center, April 2009

                            Imagine if Blacks went on this type of terrorist carnage, what would the far right news media be saying about it?

                            {"commentId":8459564,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"Inqy"}
                            • 1 vote
                            Reply#15 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:00 AM EDT
                            {"commentId":8459784,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                            I'd like to think that any media outlet would express outrage at racist, militant radical groups who commit atrocities , irrespective of the race of the assailants. And, I think most would. But I also think you've gotten way off the beaten path here, by citing events that bear no parallel to the discussion here. And, in any case, the vast majority of Americans do not see the "Far Right Media" as relevant or credible.

                            {"commentId":8459784,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                            • 1 vote
                            #15.1 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:45 AM EDT
                            Reply
                            {"commentId":8460600,"authorDomain":"bresia"}

                            I am raising a 16-yeaqr old Black male. One of the lessons I've made sure that he learns since he lives in the US, is that when a White male with a gun - cop approaches you, that individual. is in charge. The lessonb here, the cop in the Gates situation was in charge, hecould have descalted the situation. Unfortunately, Dr. Gates did not think fast enough to realize that the cop was in charge & that he could have been shot like so many innocent Black men are EVERY DAY.

                            Regarding the president's comment - we all evaluate our current experiences/current situations based on our past experiences. I am  sure that this is exactly what happened here. In addition, police profiling of minorities has been something close to the President's heat since he worked in Chicago. His comment should be evaluate within the context of all of this particularly within the context that he is a Black man who more than likely has been wronfully approached by a White cop merely because of the pigmentation of his skin

                            People, including some Blacks should stop hiding their heads in the sand and admit what this country is. My 16-year old is currently in Northern italy. In one of his e-mails to me he commented to me that it feels good to walk into a store & not be followed around because the assumptiom is made that you're a criminal. What does that say about "the greatest country in the world" as call the US? The denial is annoying, just be truthful!!!

                            {"commentId":8460600,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"bresia"}
                              Reply#16 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:09 AM EDT
                              {"commentId":8464656,"authorDomain":"Inqy"}

                              the cop was in charge

                              People fail to understand that in a democracy, it is government by the people, not by institution. As some conservatives have said in the past, in a true democracy the government fears the people, not the other way around.

                              Blacks, Whites, Hispanics or whatever have no business fearing the police or any other government authority. It is supposed to be the other way around. If you or anyone else allows the police to control this type of situation then you are conceding that we are no longer a democratic society. We are no longer government by the people as President Lincoln said. We are now government by institution just as in Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany.

                              The fact that police continue to abuse rather than protect people and so many defend those abusers says far more about society than anyone may care to imagine. It is a sad day when the teachings of our Founding Fathers have been thrown out the window. Very sad indeed.

                              {"commentId":8464656,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"Inqy"}
                                #16.1 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:19 PM EDT
                                Reply
                                {"commentId":8460675,"authorDomain":"bresia"}

                                Sorry about the typos in the aforementioned post.

                                I'd like to say that Ido not disagree with Dr. Cosby. What I do feel; however, is that sometimes when responding to emotionally charged questions we do not respond in politically correct ways or censor what we say, we respond with our truth. It's called being humanwhich is completely acceptable or do we want a robot running the country? Luckyily, I am sure that President Obama's ego is intact enough to brush off some criticisms - he expects it everyday that he is in office.

                                By the way, my 16 year old also said that in Italy he feels as though he's an equal, something that some go out of their way to ensure that he doesn't feel in the US. Let's all accept, but more importantly, admit that racism is alive and well in the US and becoming increasingly more blatant recently. Look at the comment our esteemed congreeman/senator made about abortion and President Obama and Justice Thomas. Why them? Why not two other examples?

                                {"commentId":8460675,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"bresia"}
                                  Reply#17 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 7:26 AM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8461312,"authorDomain":"scottj214-2"}
                                  Who among you has not welcomed a warning instead of a ticket when you were speeding?

                                  On two occasions I welcomed a warning instead of a ticket and was very grateful at the time. Of course, the reason I got warnings instead of tickets might have had something to do with the fact that I was not an arrogant, obnoxious race-baiter threatening to have a talk with the officers "mama". Just a thought.

                                  {"commentId":8461312,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"scottj214-2"}
                                  • 2 votes
                                  Reply#18 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:44 AM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8462154,"authorDomain":"fed-whistleblower"}
                                  fed-whistleblowerDeleted
                                  {"commentId":8466104,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                                  While I do not believe Gates behaved much better than the cops in this situation, (see my above posts) I have to say that I stand corrected on a couple of issues. First, although Gates said some potentially biggoted things to the cops in my opinion, I did some research on Gates online, expecting that I would find previous instances where he talked in a "racially-charged manner". What I found instead were articles in which he explains his positions on racial issues and black history in a very non-inflammatory way, and, in fact, where he credits many of his mentors and friends who were white as inspiring figures in his life. He would not feel that way if he were a racist. I think what we had in this incident in Cambridge was racial sensitivity, which led to a less than rational reaction by Gates to the officer on the scene, which, in turn, escalated the situation and ultimately led to Gates being arrested wrongfully. Second clarification: The article I read where Gates allegedly uses the phrase, "your mama" never cited Gates as admitting to saying that. Whether he said the words or not will never be known, but it was heresay on the part of the officer. I felt that since I had criticized someone I was debating with on this post for "conveniently ignoring facts", that I should hold myself to the same criticism when I got this wrong, in the interest of intellectual honesty.

                                  {"commentId":8466104,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                                  • 2 votes
                                  Reply#20 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:30 PM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8467438,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                  Perplexed,

                                  Except that if Sgt. Gates provided direct testimony as to what Prof Gates said directly to him, such would not be hearsay under one of the many exceptions to hearsay law, to include excited utterances or spontaneous statements. In this case the officer is reporting what another person said directly to him and such could be evidence in court. If you take both men at their word, they both were either saints or sinners, but I believe it was the police officer's job to be the bigger man and to take the hits from the professor and not, as (bresia) above suggested, shoot an innocent black man every day in this country.

                                  The issue here, though, is the problem between races that bubbles just below the surface like a volcano, ready to spew forth at any moment. Perception appears to trump reality on all sides in such emotionally charged situations, and beliefs on the part of both individuals likely played into the total situation, one that, unfortunately, a beer at the White House may not correct.

                                  CVZ

                                  {"commentId":8467438,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                  • 1 vote
                                  #20.1 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:29 PM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8467979,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                                  Perhaps I used a "legal" term that is often used generically, so let me restate: We will never know, beyond a doubt, if the phrase, "your mama" was actually used by Gates. While the statement of the officer technically could be used in court as evidence if there were further legal proceedings, it is nearly 100% likely that Gate's attorney would object, and somewhat unlikely that the statement would carry much weight as direct evidence. Your concluding statement on the problems between races is a great point, but your last sentence, I hope, is not the case. Maybe a handshake and an apology from both parties is a possibility, and it would benefit everyone, on all sides of the argument to see it. It would be a great example for all of us watching the controversy.

                                  {"commentId":8467979,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                                  • 1 vote
                                  #20.2 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:50 PM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8471839,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                  Perplexed,

                                  My hope is as you suggest in your last.

                                  Tks,

                                  CVZ

                                  {"commentId":8471839,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                  • 1 vote
                                  #20.3 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:32 PM EDT
                                  Reply
                                  {"commentId":8476857,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                                  Did anyone hear the 911 tapes that were released today? It turns out the person who reported a possible burglary never said anything about the two people pushing the door in being black or "large black men". Seems like some people jumped to conclusions before all of the facts were available. Too bad for her to be given all the negative attention she received. Maybe someone should apologize to her!

                                  {"commentId":8476857,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                                  • 1 vote
                                  Reply#21 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:42 PM EDT
                                  {"commentId":8499939,"authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}

                                  Interesting article, Mr. Van Zandt:

                                  As a former member of the FBI, I wonder if you would explain to me exactly what law Professor Gates violated the day he was arrested?

                                  {"commentId":8499939,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}
                                    Reply#22 - Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:46 AM EDT
                                    {"commentId":8515596,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                    SmartAmerican,

                                    While your question would be better directed to someone who dealt with local or state law in MA, the police report reflects that Prof Gates was arrested for "loud and tumultuous behavior in a public space," basically a charge of disorderly conduct. As you probably know, the local prosecutor's office subsequently dropped the charge at the recommendation of the police department, in this case a nolie prosequi. Police have wide latitude in this country and citizens can be arrested for any number of infractions, but an arrest many times does not equal a prosecution, as in this case.

                                    Regards,

                                    CVZ

                                    {"commentId":8515596,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                    • 2 votes
                                    #22.1 - Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:34 PM EDT
                                    Reply
                                    {"commentId":8525925,"authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}

                                    CVZ,

                                    Yes, that is what the police report says. But MA law actually says something very different. Unfortunately, I am not a lawyer, so I have to rely on third parties for my legal info; but from what I gather MA law specifically prohibits "loud and tumultuous behavior" from being used as grounds for disorderly conduct.

                                    Adam Winkler, a UCLA Law Professor wrote in a Huffington Post piece:

                                    "There are clear decisions of the Massachusetts courts holding that a person who berates an officer, even during an arrest, is not guilty of disorderly conduct. And yet that is exactly what Gates was arrested for.

                                    The Massachusetts statute defining "disorderly conduct" used to have a provision that made it illegal to make "unreasonable noise or offensively coarse utterance, gesture or display," or to address "abusive language to any person present." Yet the courts have interpreted that provision to violate the Massachusetts Constitution's guarantee of freedom of speech. So police cannot lawfully arrest a person for hurling abusive language at an officer.

                                    In several cases, the courts in Massachusetts have considered whether a person is guilty of disorderly conduct for verbally abusing a police officer. In Commonwealth v. Lopiano, a 2004 decision, an appeals court held it was not disorderly conduct for a person who angrily yelled at an officer that his civil rights were being violated. In Commonwealth v. Mallahan, a decision rendered last year, an appeals court held that a person who launched into an angry, profanity-laced tirade against a police officer in front of spectators could not be convicted of disorderly conduct."

                                    I gather from that the charges were dropped by the DA because if the case went to trial it would have been dismissed by the courts. Again, I am not a lawyer, but I have read the Constitution very carefully. The First Amendment specifically protects citizens from persecution by the government for speech the government--or government officials--find objectionable.

                                    You bring up the subject of police having broad latitude in many cases. That is true. But that latitude only extends so far as an officer can choose to write a ticket, or arrest for violations of law; or the officer can choose to not arrest. As you state "citizens can be arrested for any number of infractions" However, there is no latitude given for making arrests when no crime has been committed.

                                    {"commentId":8525925,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}
                                      Reply#23 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 4:10 AM EDT
                                      {"commentId":8527003,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                      Smart,

                                      It would appear that you had your answer before you asked your question. Next time just state your point for all to see and learn from.

                                      Tks,

                                      CVZ

                                      {"commentId":8527003,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                      • 1 vote
                                      #23.1 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:46 AM EDT
                                      {"commentId":8529006,"authorDomain":"brianjwood"}

                                      What points did you raise? I see a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo which even obviously to me.... you answered your own question?!?! Trying to bait Clint are you? What exactly did you do at the FBI?

                                      I emailed my congressional delegation and asked that they vote NO to Sotomayor and that you be considered for the Supreme Court since you've read the Constitution and are well versed in legal opinions.

                                      {"commentId":8529006,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"brianjwood"}
                                        #23.2 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 10:09 AM EDT
                                        Reply
                                        {"commentId":8527266,"authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}

                                        CVZ,

                                        I had an opinion, yes. But before I made a statement of FACT I wanted to hear from a law enforcement professional. Oddly, Sgt. Crowley's apologists never have a satisfactory answer for the simple points I raised.

                                        Thank you,

                                        SA

                                        {"commentId":8527266,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"SmartAmerica"}
                                          Reply#24 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:12 AM EDT
                                          {"commentId":8533566,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                          SA,

                                          Then you and your point of view must be right and they must be wrong, notwithstanding the results of polls that suggest most Americans believe otherwise, but yours is a statement of FACT and others are only expressing their feelings and beliefs.

                                          Best,

                                          CVZ

                                          {"commentId":8533566,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                          • 1 vote
                                          #24.1 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:14 PM EDT
                                          {"commentId":8535391,"authorDomain":"perplexity"}

                                          Mr. Van Zandt,

                                          Allow me add to your response to "Smart America" that while everyone has their own opinion and there are many viewpoints expressed in this forum, there will always be someone who will not concede to the notion that his own positions might actually be an opinion and that others may have equally strong feelings to the contrary, harboring contempt for anyone who disagrees with him or her. Your article was, in my opinion, well-written and non-inflammatory. I say this as someone who has not agreed with some of your opinions. Mutual respect for each others viewpoint can only exist with those who possess the capacity to respect dissenters.

                                          {"commentId":8535391,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"perplexity"}
                                          • 1 vote
                                          #24.2 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:28 PM EDT
                                          {"commentId":8539123,"authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}

                                          perplexed,

                                          While I always support law enforcement, this based upon my background, I know that we can all make mistakes. In the 1950's a former LAPD chief of police commented that the only problem with recruiting police officers is that we have to get them from the human race. A challenge we all face...

                                          I think that a different response from both individuals in this current matter would likely have produced a far different outcome, but again, that's just my opinion.

                                          Thanks for both reading and writing.

                                          CVZ

                                          {"commentId":8539123,"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064","authorDomain":"clintvanzandt"}
                                          • 1 vote
                                          #24.3 - Thu Jul 30, 2009 5:20 PM EDT
                                          Reply
                                          {"canLink":false,"threadId":"634149","isPrivate":false}
                                          Leave a Comment:
                                          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                          {"threadId":"634149","contentId":"3058064"}
                                          Start TrackingStart Tracking
                                          Stop TrackingStop Tracking
                                          RSS feedSyndicate this contentRecent Articles & Seeds
                                          {"numToShow":"25","section":"clintvanzandt","moduleId":2842,"moduleOptions":"a,v,x,25,t,a,1"}
                                          Clint Van Zandt's Latest Comments
                                          Comments & Feedback
                                          – Show More