Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Profiling in Statement Analysis: Part One: Racial Divide

A 7th victim of a serial killer has been found in Connecticut.  Investigators think they have a suspect.

Clearly the serial killer is "white, middle aged, under-employed, living in his mother's basement, pot-bellied", and yells, "Ma!  More meatloaf, now!"

Welcome to the 80's.

This is not the profiling of Statement Analysis.  Nor is it racial profiling so vilified by politicians today, and so very stressful to law abiding black citizens.

Statement Analysis profiling is something entirely different.

We take, for example, an Anonymous Threatening Letter and, line by line, word by word, and even punctuation mark by punctuation mark --asking:

Who would use this word?

This presupposes that highly educated people might speak differently than uneducated people;

That older people might speak differently than younger people;

That people from one region might speak differently than people from another region;


hold on here,

Men and Women just might speak differently from each other.


Oh, by I am not done yet...

Question:  Do people of different races use different expressions or figures of speech, too?


1.   Politician:  "of course they do not, you racist!"

2.  Politically correct thinker:  "I refuse to answer such a racist-charged question!"

3.  Person to whom the threatening anonymous letter is addressed:   "Yes."

The person threatened cares little for anything but the truth, and the safety of his or her family, from the threat in the anonymously written letter.

Would you like to study Anonymous Threatening Letters in Statement Analysis?

Would such a study lead me to being charged with a "hate" crime, or "hate speech" in America?

It would in Europe.

When I write, my background, experiences, and personality emerges.  Some like it, and some do not. Some strongly disagree with my view points, but enjoy the analysis here.  Some agree with my view points and like the analysis here.

Some hate both.

As they say, "case of rum; case of rum."

Statement Analysis seeks truth.  Truth and political correctness do not always agree, but tell this to:

a.   The recipient of a threat
b.   A law enforcement official entering a life-endangering situation
c.   A company who can see, in the application, that the applicant has clear designs on gaining employment in order to file a suit and score a big settlement.

If they hold to false, illogical principle, they go ahead and hire, in the name of equality, and make sure their insurance premiums are up to date, or...

they exercise wise discernment.

When I write, I reveal myself.

When you write, you reveal yourself.

When we speak, we choose words, in less than a microsecond that indicate our life experiences, our schooling, our region, our beliefs, what things we treasure, what things we fear, what things we embrace, and so on.

"From the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks" comes from antiquity.

The heart is the seat of the intellect and the emotions.  Human nature does not change, nor does truth.

Truth is timeless, beyond culture, and when we assert that truth is not truth, truth does not yield to us, no matter how much we deny the existence of gravity, when we purpose to jump.

Therefore, Statement Analysis, as a scientific process, gets to truth regardless of agenda, and even within the system itself, particularly Analytical Interviewing, the process holds safeguards against agenda impacting the conclusion.

Before we get to this, we must deal with the elements of societal pressure against truth and try to understand, as Statement Analysis does, from the shoes of the person, himself.

Our presuppositional thinking is for accuracy, not ethics, and it forces the analyst to have empathy with both victim and perpetrator in order to understand the situation, and enter the perceived reality that is verbally expressed.

If your own sensitivities preclude you from such an exercise, avoid the rest of the article.

Should this scientific process that discerns truth from deception, and reveals who we are, be discarded because of a few, short sighted, narcissistic politicians who benefit from emotional extortion for votes, say so?

 Let's first, in Part One, look at some elementary points, including racial profiling and its impact upon everyone.

What about racial profiling?

If a neighborhood is predominantly black, and a crime has been committed, chances are the perpetrator both lives in the neighborhood and is black.

This is not the profiling of Statement Analysis.

Consider the impact of racial profiling on both investigators and citizens. 

Have you ever been pulled over by a police officer?

Chances are:  you have.

What was your body's reaction?

Let's look at it from the perspective of your body and your brain's directions to your body . What was it like for you?  What is it like for most people?  Then, what is it like for the officer is examined.

The person has pulled you over, against your will.  This was not your choice, nor would it have ben your choice had you the option.  This means that you are not in control.  Depending upon your personality, age, and life experiences, this negative experience will have a wide range of impact upon people.  It can be anything from fleeting fear to sleep loss, trauma, to self-medicating, and so on.

In fact, this is what I wrote about in the case of the 70 year old veteran who was using a golf club as a cane when targeted by a racist cop:

handcuffs restricted his ability to protect himself and being kept overnight in a jail cell, at his age, having never been arrested, impeded his ability to follow his nighttime routine.  Without a psychological evaluation, my guess is that this false arrest will impact him, one way or another, for the rest of his life.

Next, if you do not know why you have been pulled over, it is likely that your brain knows:

The person walking to my car is armed with deadly force. 

What may happen?

Under fear, your body has specific reactions, depending upon your perception of the risk:

Your breath quickens.
Your pulse rate heightens.
A flush of hormones may produce anxiety.
Your pupils dialate slightly, increasing your vision.
Your ears tingle as your sense of hearing increases.
Blood moves from your mid region area to your arms and legs:  the flight or fight hormone.
Your brain tells you that you have no reason for flight or fight, which either produces a slight calm, or a feeling of paralysis:  you do not move.
You quickly take inventory of the police officer walking towards you:  his gait, his height, weight, face expression, age, and even if, by habit, he it tapping his weapon.
You wonder if he is a good citizen, control freak, or so insecure that he must get lots of overly polite terms from you.

Your mind takes quick assessment:  "Where is my license, registration, insurance card, did I put it in the glove box, or did my wife have it inside, should I reach over to the glove box, no, I better put my hands on the wheel so he seems them, is my headlight out, what speed was I going, I was going the same as everybody else, what time is Little League, I will be late now, who does this guy think I am a a criminal or something I can't afford this ticket what is going to happen to my insurance my husband is going to be so angry dad is going to find out he will never let me use his car how much is this going to cost what about my driving record this can't be happening..."

All this is happening quickly for you and is disrupted with the officer's words:

 "Did you know you were going 45 in a 35?" and lets you go with a warning.  He was pleasant and polite.  You apologized as you did not realize it was a 35 and were going speed of traffic.

No matter how well this ended, it was a stressful experience.

Did you ever consider what it was like for the officer?

Did you know that officers are frequently injured or killed in traffic stops, mostly by traffic, but also by those armed in the vehicle, as we saw in Mississippi this week?

The two officers' lives are over.

They will never experience middle age success.  They will not know their grandchildren sitting on their laps.  They will not know what it is like to be a 25 year veteran of law enforcement, a wealth of wisdom, respected by their peers.  They will not see the Grand Canyon, go on a hiking trip, or walk their daughters down the aisle at their weddings.

What of their loved ones?

They will be in mourning the rest of their lives.  They will experience deep embitterment, and even hatred.  Their faith will be tested.  They will not share in all the things the officers will now miss.  They have been robbed, deeply, of that which can never be replaced.

If the color of the skin of the shooter is different from the victim, deep hatred within race may occur.  They may battle this, or they may yield to it.

It creates an artificial boundary:   "Us versus Them."

Back to our pull over.

The officer pulling you over is acutely aware of the statistics of how officers can be injured or killed in this situation.  As he approaches your car, he, too, is assessing the situation.

When he hears disrespectful words coming from a driver's mouth, he wonders what it is that has emboldened a seemingly unarmed citizen to speak this way to an armed officer.


The "hands up" lie has gone around the world many times, willfully embraced by some, to justify hatred and anger.  It has strengthened the Us versus Them division.

The pulling over of a vehicle is a stressful or even a traumatic event, in some degree, for all.

Consider:  You, the driver, are not the only one on high alert. Your reaction is being judged by the officer, just as you are judging his demeanor and reactions.

"white power"

This was recently found to be text'd by San Francisco police officers.  They are now under investigation.

Are they skinheads, using the flag of St. Andrew (of which they know nothing about) demanding the re-institution of slavery, while illicitly targeting black citizens?

Or, might there be something else going on?

As a white male, I have read the racist and hateful targeting by those with political agenda.

Recently, Heather and I had a good ourselves.

Someone posted a racist joke about  black people having chickens in their backyard.  The punchline  was used to ridicule blacks.  No chuckle there, but be patient.

                       This is my backyard as a junior high science experiment created:

yeah, I'm the one on the right 

Heather and I wondered:

Why do white, middle aged males, slightly overweight, of Irish descent have chickens in their backyards?


We did.

It's healthy to laugh at ourselves and not take ourselves too seriously.

But consider that the jokester and the joke itself, contain no deadly force, contrary to what is popularly said today. Consider also that we were born before everything was offensive to everyone and that all one needs to do is say "when the school band plays the national anthem, I don't feel safe" to have it stopped.  When one group said that clapping causes fear, so "just use jazz hands", Heather opined that this may discriminate against the visually impaired who count on clapping to know an audience's reaction.  (I thought she was putting me on with the 'jazz hands' story, but she wasn't. A fictional writer would be laughed off for such things).

I grew up routinely hearing Irish jokes which we laughed at, as kids, but my mother did not.  She said, "You weren't there when signs said, "Irish Need Not Apply."

It put the humor in a different perspective.

Offense is not only everywhere but it is used in both propaganda's deception and to "game the system" for money.  It is what politicians use to create the "Us versus Them" mentality, hoping that the math works out that there are more "Us" voters than there are "Them" voters.

The biggest problem in uniting people as "Us" is that it leaves out the rest.  Sometimes those that are left out remain indifferent, but if they hear enough times that they are not part of "Us" eventually, they will begin to have pride in being a "Them" member, and now we have the inevitable "backlash" that happens in every  human organization.

Recall the Treaty of Versaille pummeled Germany into "Them" and when they had enough of being marginalized, they began to feel pride over not being "Us" and organized as "Them" which means confrontation.  Each group that assembles artificially will be known by various characteristics but all share one:  they must demonize the other.  Recall the tweets of the Boston University professor's hate of white males.  She is rallying support among blacks, while whites are growing embittered.  Eventually, should it continue, the whites will solidify with other non-blacks and the artificial demarcation will grow stronger.

Race baiting has its consequences.

Please consider the following as we return to the traffic pull over.  Consider the stress on the driver and consider the stress on the officer.

Being pulled over is a stress-inducing event for most people, with the trauma being anything from a few minutes of fear, to the need for medical intervention, and anything in-between.

Next picture the potential for this trauma to occur to you on a regular basis.

This will have varying effects from some finding that their body adjusts to it, reducing the trauma, right up to another fearing to leave the home over the potential for it to happen.

Most people report being pulled over "a few times" in life.  What happens when it is more frequent?

Let's continue but now add something to the equation:

The officers who keep pulling you over are not only armed with deadly force, but for the most part, all dress the same. 

The uniform is an important element in officiating.  It allows citizens to recognize assistance just as it allows for crimials to recognize deadly force, which is what happened in Ferguson.  The perpetrator was aggressive to an officer, in uniform, in a marked vehicle, suggesting that his confidence had some basis to it, increasingly the likelihood for the deadly confrontation.

Walking down a dark alley, you see the figure of a man, and immediately your body goes through its response:

eyes let in more light to see in darkness;
ears tingle;
Blood moves, even from surface areas, to protect you against stabbings, while increasing strength to legs and arms,
pilo-erection of hair on your neck...

But when you see (discern) a uniform, the brain signals the body:  "stand down", and the body follows suit.  You consider yourself safe, due to the presence of the uniform.

That is, unless you have had continual negative association through racial profiling.

You may whisper a prayer of thanksgiving for the law enforcement official before you.  The uniform caused you to have a bodily reaction of a positive nature.

Back to our racial profiling.

You are not being continually being pulled over but are living under its constant threat.  It is unnerving.  Those pulling you over are armed with deadly force, but you are not.  You have not done anything wrong, but each time you get into your vehicle, your nerves are alert and the increase of stress is taking its silent, but eventually, deadly, toll upon your body.

Each time you see the uniform, instead of comfort, you feel yet another increase in stress.

Let's now assume that this is not something that went on for a few months, as bad as that might be, but it is something you heard about before you were old enough to drive, and something you are aware of, experienced, and live, every day, for all the years that you have been driving.

The police lights in the rear view mirror cause your body to react.
Being pulled over causes your body to react.
The uniform, itself, causes a slight increase in stress, as your body react negatively.

Next, you note that your skin color and the skin color of the police are different.

You learn that you are being pulled over, that is, you live under the threat of being pulled over, because of the color of your skin:  something of which you have no control over.

You can't change the color of your skin and you don't have the money to move to another neighborhood.  You hate the stress, but you also hate the crime in your area.  

You now live under the constant threat, every day of your life, of being pulled over, which is a stressful event that you have no control over for the pigment of your skin, which is something you have no control over.

Therapists will tell you that the feeling of impotency can lead to rage.

If every day of my life that I got into my car I felt the possibility of being pulled over by someone who does not look like me, my nerves would be fried, exhausted and numb, and perhaps, lead to long-term damage to my health.  That I do not live under such anxiety currently does not excuse me from wanting to understand those who do.

If every day I went to work I had to fear that my judgment made, at any time, used to protect law-abiding citizens, could lead to me being called "racist" or "bully" or "Uncle Tom", and even lead to me losing not just my job, but my freedom, my nerves would be fried, exhausted and numb, and perhaps, lead to long term damage to my health.  That I do not work under such anxiety does not excuse me from wanting to understand those who do.

Life has enough unexpected "curve balls" thrown at us to give us our fill of stress.  Unexpected illness, death, divorce, car accidents and so on, lead us to conclude that life is anything but guaranteed.

Everyone experiences this.

Will I lose my job today?
Will I get into a car accident?
Will my daughter's blood test come back with cancer?
Will my children have a chance in this life, to experience success?

These are uncertainties that we share one with another.

One thing, however, is missing from this list:

"Will I be pulled over by a police officer, who will be armed with deadly force, accusing me of something I did not do?"

Most do not wake up wondering this thought, adding it to their list of concerns.  

Imagine living under this.

When you look at the scenario, you note:

1.  I am this color, police are that color.
2.  I wear this clothing, police wear that clothing.
3.  I am unarmed, police are armed.
4.  I didn't do anything, police are targeting me as if I did.
5.  This is not in my control, it is in their control.
6.  My skin color is not in my control, and I cannot change it.

It is utterly humiliating as it is a fear that is needless and unnecessary; that is, it is artificial.

I can control my behavior.

I am not compelled to rob someone on the street.  It is something I control.  When I walk down the street and do not rob anyone, I hold no expectation that someone in uniform, armed, is going to stop me as if I did rob someone.

Did you note what developed in the "Scenario" above?

It creates an artificial division of "Us versus Them."

It unites people in an artificial manner, criminal united on the same "team" as the law abiding citizen.

It chooses side, not based upon business, education, or even by civility.

It causes sides to be chosen based upon an element of which no control may be exerted over. 

It sweeps away justice, becoming the ultimate pragmatic twist of fate:  justifying illicit means to reach a particular end.

This may befall the six Baltimore police officers as the prosector's own words revealed:

She wants personal gain and their lives will not be of consideration, nor will justice.

"No justice, no peace, no racist police!" in spite of the officers' race involved.  The anger of the may is not based upon rational, critical thinking, but some of it will be based upon years of either being targeted because of race or:

belief that one has been targeted because of pigmentation.  Even when untrue, if believed, the body's reaction will be the deadly infusion of incessant stress.

Depending upon your age, you may have grown up with, "two wrongs don't make a right" rehearsed in your hearing by your parents. This, of course, became the very remedy that political short-term thinkers embraced.  To fix discrimination, we will discriminate.

The stress and anger of racial profiling often leads to further injustice, in the name of justice, while removing all justice.

The end result of this madness is in reactive anger.

This is the inevitable backlash of fascism, or the forcing of ideas against a peoples' will.

Bully someone long enough and he will eventually fight back.  Deceptive use of race, as a political tool, will lead to even more anger.

What did pollsters find when OJ was acquitted?

Black citizens routinely said, "We knew he did it, but for too long, blacks have been falsely accused..."

Where did this notion come from?

It came from politicians who slighted statistics, bending them in deceptive ways (leaving out critical areas) to play the race card for their own personal, short term gain.

We thought, back then in the 90's , that race relations were strained.  Today, we long for those days.

Judgment is inescapable.

In training Human Resources, I tell a story of how a young man came and applied for a job, slovenly dressed.  He was right on time for his interview, and I said to him, "Thank you for stopping by.  It was nice of you to show up in your work clothes, and I recognize that you did not have time to properly dress for the interview, so let's keep our appointed time, tomorrow, ok?  Thank you for stopping in, but I have you scheduled for tomorrow at 1."

We may want to claim that no one has a right to judge us by our appearance.  This includes our clothing, hair style, tattoos, and so on.

We can make a stand for our individuality with powerful arguments.

Yet, when one walks into a job interview with an appearance that suggests "no preparation nor pre thought", the person who has the power to hire you or not, has a negative impression about you.  All your protests about judgment will mean nothing when stood up next to a missing paycheck.

People do judge.  We all do.  Judgement is inescapable.

Now, picture that you are a police officer working at a middle class wage, or just slightly beneath, at a department that

1.  Expects excellence
2.  Cannot afford overtime.

Not only this, but you love being an officer and believe in justice.  You want to do a good job. You respect the hard working citizens in your community, and feel sorry for the lost, but very violent youth, who work hard at video games and work hard at not working hard.  You feel a debt of protection to store owners in your neighborhood.

Outside a convenience store that has been victimized so often it is called the local "Stop and Rob" shop.

Two males dressed with "hoodies" to hide their faces are standing outside of it.

Both have dark skin.

One has his hand inside the front pocket, which immediately causes you to consider that he is armed.

You know that this shop has been robbed more than 24 times in the past 24 months and that 20 of the robberies, caught on security video, were from dark skinned males, who were young, and wore hoodies.

Question:  how does a police officer who is expected to protect this store  not profile?

If the two males were dressed in shirts and ties, would the same officer think to himself, "they're going to rob this place" ?

Black officers have it, sometimes, even more challenging than non-black, in this type of situation.
To whom does he belong?

Which "team" is he on?

To whom does his loyalty belong?

To justice?  To the store owner?  To the thugs?  To the misguided youths?  To the politicians?  To his fellow officers?  To the community?

At least with the scientific application of Statement Analysis, we are on the side of truth.  We do not need to answer any challenge.

What must it feel like when a black suspect whispers the word "brother" to a black officer?

This is what happens when politicians seek to make a name for themselves by exploiting race:

It creates an "Us versus Them", which is now what we see in Baltimore:

Us:  black citizens

Them:  police, both black and white.

In any and every "us versus them" scenario, one or the other  must have the moral high ground.

We saw this when the politicians:

changed "thugs" to "misguided youth" and "Bloods and Crips" into 'security guards.'

Deception follows quickly.

What deception did we hear of?

We heard it from our president on down, and consider the emotional impact upon black citizens:

1.  One political party was blamed over the other.  "Republicans" ruined your lives.
2.  Money was not being spent for black schools.  "Your kids are not worth what white kids are.
3.  Only the federal government can protect you.  Local police are bad.  Feds are good. The local police want to harm you, even the black officers betray you.  "

The emotional response is more potent than the intellectual response.  The lie is more fascinating than the truth.  The hype sells more papers than the fact.

1.  Intellectually:  Republicans have not governed in Baltimore in 50 years, bottom to top.  This was a deception.

2.  Intellectually:  More money, per student, is spent in Baltimore than in most places in the entire country, black or white.  Yet test scores are so low that these kids have virtually no chance in competing for jobs or, if given jobs for sake of their pigment, will be ill equipped to adequately do their jobs and eventually, will be dismissed for their failures.

3.  Intellectually:  Freddie Gray should have been secured and we need to find out why he wasn't.  Yet, did three black officers deliberately refuse to secure his seatbelt so he would be fatally injured because his skin was dark?  It is not logical.

Instead, Mosby is going to argue that a knife that opens with a "spring loading" is not a "switch blade" as if it matters when stuck inside the stomach of a victim.

How powerful have these three intellectual responses been in Baltimore?

Police now routinely say things like, "I have to find a new job" as politicians continue to chant "who will save the children?" to already vulnerable "parents" who fear for their children's lives.

Racial profiling, as a stated practice, leads to an "us versus them" anger, simmering from long term incessant stress.

Politicians are exploiting this stress, and exploiting the fears of parents, for their own gain, even while flaming the racial prejudices or...

creating those that did not exist previously.

The Backlash 

If you bully someone, you may expect human nature to do what human nature has always done:

bully back.

Michelle Obama complained that she, as First Lady, went into Target and no one approached her.  She intimated that this was because she was black and then, to add insult to injury, the one person who did approach her asked her to get something off the shelf for her!

The implication was clear:  as a black women, "folks" instinctively moved away from her, but one "folk" assumed that, as a black woman, she had to be a worker and asked for help.

This was part of a recent speech she gave about race at a University.  She was showing how racism impacted her emotionally, and kept her from sleeping at night.

The problem?

It is a lie.

Years ago, she used the same story on television and explained it in more detail:  the elderly woman who asked her to get something off the shelf was very short, and Michelle Obama is 5'11" tall.  She said "it made me feel good to help her."

Yet, by lying to the audience, she is helping to further solidify the "Us versus Them" artificial demarcation that inevitably leads to the "Them" growing first tired of the insult, and then angry and the anger leads to...

Those today, who are using faux "tolerance" in speeches to bully their views upon others will, one day find that they will long for the clock to be turned back, so they could temper their demands and turn the into reasonable calls for tolerance.

Push and push and eventually, the push back will come to push back.

I would like to interview the officers who text'd things like "White Power" in San Francisco.

Will we find the stereotypical racist nonsensical jargon?


Perhaps we will find something else.  Perhaps we will find that they were not racist until they were pushed into it by constant condemnation.

"Sensitivity Training" leads to anger and resentment; the very opposite of its intended purpose.   Build up enough anger, and the reaction will not only be anger, but will likely be without rational thinking, or justice.

Politicians making themselves into "social engineers" do so in order to be elected for the short term, which, using their name and office, will allow them to make money elsewhere in business.  They will say anything and everything to accomplish this means and when they are confronted by the rare politician who believes his own words, and hopes to facilitate positive change, they will pounce upon him with the intent of emotional persuasion that even the genuine man or woman running for office, will be labeled as "morally inferior", including false claims of "racist" or "___phobe" or other fascist like bullying language.

As said many times, racism, that is, the hatred of a race, is not sensible.  It is without "sense."

When one race presents itself as "superior", what does this accomplish?

It unifies its perceived opposition.

This is the backlash.

What happens, for example, to white police officers who are by-passed for promotion in favor of black police officers who scored lower on the Sargent's test but got the position due to pigmentation?

They will be unified.

They will grow in anger and resentment.

Who will they become unified with?

What about black officers who now are demanded to "join" one group or the other, unjustly?  They work together, every day, and must trust each other.  This damages trust and divides unnaturally.

Does Baltimore seem so absurd now?

Who is unified?

Suddenly, black criminals, black looters, rioters and lawless ones, along with career, professional criminals (gang members) have become united, on the same team, as those who stood before the cameras, well dressed and educated, all on one "team" united against "the other team."

Who was the other team?

Who were the "bad guys"?

They were the police.

When Mosby mentioned how this was not a reflection of "all" police officers, the emotional portrait had been completed already, and the stage is set for the upcoming federal investigation where police officers will now be under even more pressure as the federal government is coming to Baltimore to investigate police officers:  including jokes they may have told one another that may now be used to destroy their careers.

As if they were not under enough pressure!

What about the dedicated police officers who happen to have darker pigment?  Where do they get to "fit in" with the artificial demarcation?  What of those who worked hard for promotion and scored highly on exams because of the hard work?

From news today:  "Law enforcement officers at Washington, D.C.’s annual Police Week tell The Daily Caller that the anti-police climate is taking its toll on the men and women in uniform and that morale is low in departments across the country.
One source told TheDC Monday night that officers have stepped back from engaging in proactive policing, because they often see the same violent criminals they arrest immediately released on to the streets."

Since I have used the chicken joke against the Irish, am I a bigot against the Irish?  Am I now to be seen as a perpetrator of "hate crimes" against Irish - Americans?

Racial profiling has a uniting effect on a race, no matter that some are law abiding and some are law-despising.  Racial profiling, like Michelle Obama's  lie about "folks", has the same unfortunate consequence.  When people who disagreed with her husband were shouted down as "racist", the inevitable anger grew.  Instead of making the issue the point of debate, they are silenced.

When people are not heard, they grow angry.

Profiling police as inherently racist, including black officers, and as bullies who just target innocent citizens will also solidify them and put them in a defensive position.

Where might this lead?

Danger to the law abiding citizens of Baltimore, at the hands of criminals, has increased.  How many shootings have their been since the riot?

Police officers will be more hesitant to intervene and if they can safely remove themselves from a position because they fear losing their jobs, human nature tells us;

they just might turn a blind eye.

Would you?

If you saw a thug robbing a store and knew that if you arrest said thug that by tomorrow night, some smooth talking, well dressed politician might be on television telling the world that this poor unfortunate youth was targeted by you and that you...

Well, you get the picture.

What about if you are a black police officer?  If you do your job, you are "betraying your people" as if there is unity between gang members and police officers by pigmentation.  This is not only a national folly, but puts individual police officers in unjust artificial scenarios.

They do not get paid extra for the extra stress.

In Statement Analysis, a profile emerges of all of us when we speak or write.  In this sense, everything is autobiographical.

Yet is is that "profiling" itself, has gotten a reputation so intense that it may never be rehabilitated.

Once upon a time, it was a great thing to be a Pharisee.

Christ so pummeled the reputation of Pharisee that it never recovered, even to this day.

So it is that to deliberately ignore statistics, in the fear of being labeled with "hate" can lead to an increase in crime, injury, loss and death.

A profile emerges naturally from Statement Analysis but even the use of "profile" has become a lightning rod for trouble.

Police are now being caught in the middle.

Realistically, outside of politicians, no one wants racism in law enforcement.  Citizens do not want it. Politicians do because it gives them a 'cause' and someone to 'demonize', just as Hitler chose the Jews.  He sought to strengthen the "Us versus Them" and when the German nationalism was established, he needed a new "Them" to further unite the "Us", and the Jews made a convenient scapegoat.

Where did the notion of "genetically superior race" come from in Germany?

Hitler didn't invent it.

The allies did.

The allies portrayed "the Hun" as a base, war like menace to Europe.  This led to the "Us versus Them" with the "Them" growing angry enough to begin with "We are not inferior" in protest that eventually led to, "Inferior?  We are superior!" 

No surprise there.

Racism, itself, is illogical.  It harms everyone but the few who profit from it.

Because of the influence of the few, the politicians, the professional trouble makers, officers of all race find themselves not knowing which way to turn.

If they do their job, they could be called racist.

If they remain passive, and not do their job, they could be terminated and civility is in doubt in their communities.

Race baiters make law enforcement a far more difficult job than it is and this profession has been unjustly targeted by politicians.  Those that have disagreed have been shouted down as "racists" and as "bullies."

These are, for most of them, new terms.

How are they to do their jobs under this artificially imposed atmosphere?

Racial divide has increased dramatically of recent years.  Let us hope that some semblance of rational thinking will return.

We're better than this.

Next up: We will look at how profiles emerge naturally from words.  This is universal to all of us, as we are known by the words we use.


Tania Cadogan said...

There was a farcical case here recently.
A headteacher faced a 6 month hate crime investigation by police and council bureaucrats because at a achool meeting, an autistic student was referred to as special needs.
A students father complained saying his child would feel offended.
He said his child was highly intelligent and use of the term 'special needs' was a hate crime.

This is a generally accepted term used though out education.

Finally after fighting for 6 months, she was cleared of any wrong doing.

I would ask the father how he would define his autistic child.

i would ask if he is claiming any additional benefits his child might be antitled to.

I would ask if he has ever referred to his child as special neds in any communication with anyone.

I would ask what he calls his child.

You think it is bad in the States, try living in the UK.

Tania Cadogan said...

Sadly there is a need for profiling.
Currently there is a war going on between muslims and non muslims despite what the governments are saying.

On the whole muslims tend to be predominantly of arabic appearance.
Most terrorists are muslims although there are a few women who have committed atrocities.

Airports and the like need to profile.

Mr and Mrs Joe Blogs aged in their 70's and white, return tickets from NY to Heathrow are not likely to be muslims planning to blow up a plane.

Mr Hussein a syrian national flying from NY to Heathrow alone and one way is a prime example of a risk, given what we know.
Common sense says do a more thorough check on him than the two old dears.
We know who is likely to atack us from previous experience.

if you are white in a white neighbor hood which doesn't have a lot of money and a problem with gangs then you will find it is usually a white guy doing the crime.

The same goes for black neighborhoods.

A white guy robbing a black neighborhood is going to stick out like a sore thumb and vice versa.

If you know what the likely target is and you know who the likely perpetrator is going to be, you will look more carefully at those that fir the expected profile, it is common sense.
Something which has been thrown out the window in the quest for political correctness.

If you are expecting a terrorist attack, such as a bombing or hijacking in the current situation, you aren't going to pull over every Jew or Monk or Nun or Christian when you know it will in all likelihood be a muslim.

If it were the other way round and it were muslims being targetted by Christians or jews, you would be checking out every white person especially those dressed a specific way such as priests or Nuns or wearing a kippah.

Sad to say we have men dressing as women to commit attrocities and even robberies as they are covered head to toe with sometimes not even the eyes visible, and not being searched thoroughly in case of causing offence to a 'muslim'.

These days hard as it may seem, even children need to be searched simply because anyone who is going to commit an atrocity isn't going to think twice about using a child, something we have seen all too often, even in daesh videos.

wreyeter72 said...

I laughed at this one - because my dad is a white, middle-aged, slightly overweight man of Irish descent who - you guessed it - has chickens in his backyard in suburban Denver. LOL Must be more common than you think.

Tania Cadogan said...

Being 4'14 a lot of stuff on the top shelf is out my reach.
Sometimes i can haul an item to the front edge enough for me to catch it as it falls (unbreakables)
Other times the item is too fragile to allow me to risk dropping it, or, i can't hook it with my walking stick.

In such cases i will look around for the tallest person (usually male) and ask them or their female partner if i can borrow his bodily oparticles to reach something for me.

I will ask if there is anything from the bottom shelf they need whilst i am bottom shelf height.

I will always say thank you.

If i can reach something someone else can't i will get it for them, such as if they are in a wheelchair/mobility scooter/crutches or even, shorter than me.

It is called being polite and helpful.

I don't feel resentment if someone asks me to get something because i am a woman, i figure it as a good deed for someone struggling.

Michelle obama plays the race/gender card when she thinks it will get her point across.
She will do something not because it is polite, generous or simply kind, she will do it with an eye on publicity and making her look good or look put upon because of her race or gender.

She feels the world owes her and by gum she is going to milk it for all she is worth once he is out of office.

Do not be surprised if she one day decides to stand for office ( or if she divorces him)

Anonymous said...

Why make yourself appear to be shorter than you actually are, Tania Cadogan? Is this to make yourself appear to "look put upon" or that you feel the world owes you something and by gum you are going to milk it for all it's worth because you are so short?

By saying you are 4'14" you are not really as short as you want to make yourself appear to be. There are 12 inches in a foot. By the correct standard of measurement; since you claim to be 4'14" this tells us that you are actually a rather normal height of 5'2", which IS a very average height and not such a big deal as you want to make it appear to be by stating that you are only 4'14".

Why the play on words? How could you know how Michelle Obama "feels", any more than I know how you "feel"? Why would you care anyhow how Michelle Obama feels or if one day she decides to stand for office or if she should decide to divorce her husband?

Statement Analysis Blog said...

Michelle Obama lied.

This blog is about deception.

Michelle Obama is increasing racial divide in our country.

It was Michelle Obama who introduced height into the issue. She wanted the audience to believe that because she was black, even as First Lady of the United States, the white "folk" were not interested in her.

No matter how incredible that sounds to the average reader, she did so in order to flame the already burning nation.

Trouble makers live for the Baltimore riots. They pounce on them and do not care about the black business owners who have lost everything there.

They do not care about the black law abiding citizens who get up and go to work every day and hate being lumped in with the violence and the politicians who have no back bone.

As to Hobnob's height, understatement takes a bit longer to process.
It's worth it.


Anonymous said...

No matter how you attempt to process the understatement; Hobnob, by legal weight standards, is 5'2" and not 4'14" and that's a fact.

Anonymous said...

"She wanted the audience to believe that because she was black, even as First Lady of the United States, the white "folk" were not interested in her."

This is a true statement.

"Michelle Obama is increasing racial divide in our country."

By telling the truth?

"They pounce on them and do not care about the black business owners who have lost everything there".

This is also a true statement.

"They do not care about the black law abiding citizens who get up and go to work every day and hate being lumped in with the violence and the politicians who have no back bone."

This is another true statement.

However, Michelle Obama does not need to worry about the color of her skin, she is affluent and well educated. The spokes of her wheels have been well greased. She can earn a highly lucrative income in years to come when most of you all can't.

Michelle Obama will never fade away into the sunset. She will not need to worry about running for public office or divorcing her hubby, she will earn fees just for making public appearances and serving on foundations that none of you could ever hope to dream of.

I'm curious; exactly what harm does Michelle Obama's future prospects bring to any of you?