Snopes is often quoted as the 'final word' on something, but a closer look at Snopes' editorializing suggests a less than stellar record and some rather superficial 'analysis.' One may also wonder if the editorial stance holds to a level of politically correct bias.
Recall the Snopes' "investigation" to the European No Go Zones, well known to police, citizens, and those who live both in and near them. How well known? Not only to those who live in or near them, nor to those who have had to enter them as professionals, but with actual addresses given by law enforcement revealing them.
Snopes' "research" showed it to be an 'internet rumor' at best, with Fox News cowering in dhinnitide with their apology over what amounts to semantics.
Europeans do not call them "no go zones", which is an American military expression. They have other names for them, and, since then, we've learned that there are not "dozens of no go zones" but hundreds, and are growing in an unprecedented rate (historically unprecedented excludes military invasion) throughout Europe.
Sweden is now the "rape capital" of Western civilization and is the number one most dangerous country for women, outside of a single country in Africa. Swedish officials and corporate media conspired, similar to the migrant crisis in Germany, to withhold information from the public (for their "own good") and actually attempt to re-classify perpetrators of crime, in order to be incapable of identifying the rapists' common ideology.
It took a string of embarrassing turns in Germany, including a Merkel loyalist breaking rank, and a police union official breaking silence, to reveal the deception agreed upon by both German officials and their corporate or "Main Stream Media" to have the truth reach the public.
Recently, an email was published reportedly from a Czech doctor working in Germany containing details of the migrant crisis' impact upon a hospital.
Snoops covered it and did "analysis" to discredit the authenticity of it, with the inconclusive conclusion.
The conclusion may be inconclusive, but the attempt to persuade by the article's author is clear.
Statement Analysis is best done in first language, yet when we analyze something in second language, we must "step back" and "step away" from small detail, and only analyze the larger context, including communicative language.
Even in second language, we are often able to discern deception from reliability as well as bring forth a general profile of the author including age, gender, experience, and priority.
The following came from Czech TV and is an email from a Czech anesthesiogist working in Germany. She is not under the same restrictions that we saw, even in the language of the Police Union leader, but if she stays in Germany, may face criminal charges for her language, as well as deportation. Germany reports being in a crisis to find doctors and has advertised throughout Europe to bring in doctors and nurses.
Her name has not yet been released.
Here is the English Translation of the broadcast. What can we say about the author of the letter?
First, we should note that the letter asserts the experience of trauma, therefore, we expect the subject to, in any language, give us signals of "personal, close up" experience.
When someone experiences violent crime or high level fear, we do not expect to hear the word "gentlemen" as in "...the gentlemen broke into my home and proceeded to rape and assault my daughter."
What is the expected?
"The ^*&% animals raped my daughter!"
Recall the soft, passive and minimizing language of several "fake hate" accounts, including Charlie Rogers.
If three masked men held you down and cut into your skin, your language is going to show very close contact fear and rage, and not passivity.
Even in rape victims who disassociate we do not find passive or soft language about the perpetrators.
Scopes, however, saw it differently, thinking that anger showed an agenda (as they project their own).
The author of the email is not only angry, she is very angry. Is it justifiable (in her mind; remember, you are not commenting on a political situation, but seeing if the letter was, indeed, written from a female medical professional who was present as claimed) in context?
Next, they questioned the strange way the hospital is conducting the seeing of patients.
Have you never seen a hospital go into emergency mode when over run, and turn into make shift triage and emergency quarters?
All Snopes would have to do is look at some video from 9/11 in New York to see the overall chaos and "on the fly" medical assistance given when numbers exceed the norm.
Snopes, even when indicating falsehood, seems to "go lightly" on certain topics.
Truth cares not for appearance sake. Truth is truth whether it is convenient, digestible, old, new, in vogue, or quite out of favor.
Statement Analysis gets to the truth.
News Announcer: "We will return to the topic of the migrants because I have another letter here regarding the effect of immigrants on the everyday flow of operations. Eyewitness from a Munich hospital: A friend in Prague has a friend, who, as a retired physician, had returned to work at a Munich area hospital where they needed an anaesthesiologist. I correspond with her and she forwarded me her email. "
Here is the email.
Since our words reveal us, without looking too deeply, what do you know about the author? Please note that emphasis has been added to assist you in discernment.
Some questions for you to consider, with none being very deep, as we would go in first language analysis:
Does the language indicate a close up traumatic event?
Does the subject connect herself with this event (or events)?
With the topic of threat, is the response expected or is it soft, passive, and inconsistent with the threat?
Does the language reveal a familiarity with medical procedures and terminology?
Note the external context: this came out shortly after Germany admitted that the estimate was not accurate, and quickly backed away from the open border, no refusal statements.
Are the pronouns consistent? Deceptive statements will sometimes be evident by a single pronoun 'error.'
Where distancing language is used, is it appropriately used? Or, does it signal a disconnect?
Statement Analysis deals with what one says, but also with what one does not say:
Are there areas in which hyperbole and exaggeration could have been used but were not?
Generally, heavily emotional statements contain lengthier sentences. Do you find emotion to "get the better of" the author, or does the author show herself more willing to protect her own image?
In other words, sometimes people embarrass themselves because they are telling the truth.
"I never used the "n" word", Mark Furhman. Here is a calm and collected lie. When one is angry, words fly past the filter, even in second languages.
When there is a change in language, is it justified by the context? Is there a difference, for example, between "Muslims" and "migrants" in the language?
Always note order, and which topics are given the most volume of words; does the order show consistency? Does the order make sense?
Where the volume of words increase, is there an emotional force driving this? If so, you are seeing indicators of veracity.
Lastly, in general terms, does what is reported match here with supremacist ideology? Is there a consistency of thought?
For those of you with experience, you may go further, including gender and background of the author.
Although some of the techniques are advanced and used in advanced trainings, even basic techniques applied evenly here should bring you to a conclusion:
Is this letter from a female medical professional, as claimed, or is it a hoax?
"Yesterday, at the hospital we had a meeting about how the situation here and at the other Munich hospitals is unsustainable. Clinics cannot handle emergencies, so they are starting to send everything to the hospitals.
Many Muslims are refusing treatment by female staff and, we, women, are refusing to go among those animals, especially from Africa. Relations between the staff and migrants are going from bad to worse. Since last weekend, migrants going to the hospitals must be accompanied by police with K-9 units. Many migrants have AIDS, syphilis, open TB and many exotic diseases that we, in Europe, do not know how to treat them. If they receive a prescription in the pharmacy, they learn they have to pay cash. This leads to unbelievable outbursts, especially when it is about drugs for the children.
They abandon the children with pharmacy staff with the words: “So, cure them here yourselves!” So the police are not just guarding the clinics and hospitals, but also large pharmacies. Truly we said openly: Where are all those who had welcomed in front of TV cameras, with signs at train stations?! Yes, for now, the border has been closed, but a million of them are already here and we will definitely not be able to get rid of them. Until now, the number of unemployed in Germany was 2.2 million. Now it will be at least 3.5 million.
Most of these people are completely unemployable. A bare minimum of them have any education. What is more, their women usually do not work at all. I estimate that one in ten is pregnant. Hundreds of thousands of them have brought along infants and little kids under six, many emaciated and neglected. If this continues and German re-opens its borders, I’m going home to the Czech Republic. Nobody can keep me here in this situation, not even double the salary than at home. I went to Germany, not to Africa or the Middle East.
Even the professor who heads our department told us how sad it makes him to see the cleaning woman, who for 800 Euros cleans every day for years, and then meets young men in the hallways who just wait with their hand outstretched, want everything for free, and when they don’t get it they throw a fit. I really don’t need this! But I’m afraid that if I return, that at some point it will be the same in the Czech Republic. If the Germans, with their nature cannot handle this, there in Czechia it would be total chaos. Nobody who has not come in contact with them has no idea what kind of animals they are, especially the ones from Africa, and how Muslims act superior to our staff, regarding their religious accommodation.
For now, the local hospital staff has not come down with the diseases they brought here, but, with so many hundreds of patients every day – this is just a question of time. In a hospital near the Rhine, migrants attacked the staff with knives after they had handed over an 8-month-old on the brink of death, which they had dragged across half of Europe for three months. The child died in two days, despite having received top care at one of the best pediatric clinics in Germany.
The physician had to undergo surgery and two nurses are laid up in the ICU. Nobody has been punished. The local press is forbidden to write about it, so we know about it through email. What would have happened to a German if he had stabbed a doctor and nurses with a knife? Or if he had flung his own syphilis-infected urine into a nurse’s face and so threatened her with infection? At a minimum he’d go straight to jail and later to court. With these people – so far, nothing has happened.
And so I ask, where are all those greeters and receivers from the train stations? Sitting pretty at home, enjoying their non-profits and looking forward to more trains and their next batch of cash from acting like greeters at the stations. If it were up to me I would round up all these greeters and bring them here first to our hospital’s emergency ward, as attendants. Then, into one building with the migrants so they can look after them there themselves, without armed police, without police dogs who today are in every hospital here in Bavaria, and without medical help."