Monday, July 30, 2018

Guest Submission: "We Don't Tip Terrorists" by Jason Henrikson






Here is a submission from analyst, Jason Henrikson, which highlights the thoroughness of working through a public post from Facebook. 

Update: Please note: Since the analysis, the author has admitted writing it and the restaurant apologized to the falsely accused customer. It is interesting to note Jason's work, particularly a single line which gives the author away. 
“I did write it,” Khalil Cavil, 20, told the Odessa American of the note on the receipt, which read “We don’t tip terrorist.”

This allows readers to see some expected results from applying oneself to training in  Complete Statement Analysis






Last night at work I received this note from one of
my tables. At the moment I didn’t know what to think
nor what to say, I was sick to my stomach. I share
this because I want people to understand that this
racism and this hatred still exists. Although, this is
nothing new, it is still something that will test your
faith. All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus
died for these people too. I have decided to let this
encourage me, and fuel me to change the world the
only way I know how. So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!


Last night at work I received this note from one of
my tables.


  1. Where a person starts a statement is important. It shows their priority and sometimes even their motive.

  2. Where a statement begins with the pronoun “I” it is likely to contain  information, even if the author is employing deception. This is why we never dismiss one as a "liar", which leads to failure in Content Analysis. 

    The statement does not start with “I” until later on but has the elements of time and location. This means that time and location are a priority to the subject. Why?

  3. The pronoun “I” is used so the subject now places himself psychologically into the statement.

  4. The rest of the sentence follows the expected truthful sentence structure of the pronoun “I”, past tense verb and object. We can believe that the subject did in fact receive the note from one of his tables. The question we are to identify is did he receive the note in the displayed form with the writing “We don’t Tip Terrorist”?
    1. The subject brings the note closer to him psychologically by using “this” instead of referring to that note. Why does he want to associate himself with the note? Why does he want to be closer to the note with xenophobic remarks?
  5. It is expected that the subject would simply state “I received that note last night”. It follows the Law of Economy, follows the truthful structure of the pronoun I, past tense verb and an object. The breaking of this structure shows sensitivity but we cannot conclude anything further at this point.

We listen to and follow his language.



Did we take notice he didn't receive the note from one of "my customer"?  It is true, technically, that it came from "the table" where he left it!   


At the moment I didn’t know what to think
nor what to say, I was sick to my stomach.


  1. The element of time reappears with “at the moment”. However “the moment” is used and not “that moment” referring to a past time event. Is he going to present tense now? Why is the element of time important to him?
  2. The Rule of The Negative is engaged with the subject telling us what he didn’t think of say instead of what he did think or say. This is a Sensitivity Indicator.
    1. The priority order of thinking and then saying is noted – was he thinking of the $0 tip or was he thinking about the written remarks?
  3. The use of emotion by the subject is also noted. For traumatic events the length of time between the event and the statement is crucial when noting emotions in a statement due to the way an individual mind processes the event psychologically. This is where we look for “artificial placement” of emotions (perfect placing before psychologically processing).
    1. Here is perfect or logical placement of an emotion. Has the subject processed his trauma from last night? Is he perseverating from an earlier traumatic event?
    2. Is this a Need To Persuade/storytelling?


I share
this because I want people to understand that this
racism and this hatred still exists.


  1. Here we have a hina clause which is one of two of the highest levels of sensitivity that is used. Now we see a possible link with the elements of time and place. The subject wants people to know racism and hatred “still” exists. He is highlighting that the racism and hatred is here and it is now – this is emphasized by the word “still”.
  2. Will this be a start of “Sermonizing” and “Virtue Signalling”?
  3. The word “this” again showing closeness of the subject shows he is psychologically close to racism and hatred.


Although, this is
nothing new, it is still something that will test your
faith.


  1. The Rule of the Negative is highlighted again and is asserting that “this” is “nothing new”. In the lesser context we do not know what he is referring to. What is nothing new? If the subject is unwilling and/or unable to tell us we do not interpret.
    1. Is it the racism and hatred that is nothing new or is it the subject’s posting of a potential “hate crime”?

      This is the "Normal Factor" in which the author wants his audience to believe that "Islamophobia" (irrational fear of the ideology of Islam) is a "norm." This is a form of "need to persuade" that suggests the author has not likely experienced negativity towards him, personally, as a "norm." Islam teaches "jihad" and subjugation of "infidels" (non followers), by violent coercion.
  2. Religion is brought into play by using “your” as a disassociation. The subject makes no mention of “my faith” but is “your faith”. This distancing language affirms the "Normal Factor"; he does not regularly experience negativity due to his political/religious belief.
    1. The greater context is that a potential hate crime has been committed by referring to the subject as a terrorist. Terrorism is not solely religious based but can be a political and that is the original etymology for the word terrorist.
    2. The lesser context the subject is psychologically distancing himself from the intended audience’s “faith”. Does he view himself as a believer in any faith? Why does he not align himself with the intended audience’s faith?
  3. test your faith” – is this leakage? Is this showing his motivation that he is testing the intended audience’s faith?

    *Is he testing his own faith and commitment to political Islam? Is he fearful or conflicted about embracing Islamic conquest?


All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus
died for these people too.

Ingratiation Factor and Masking

He now introduces "terrorism" as "faith" followed by reference to "Jesus" (Christianity). Ideology of Chrisitianty opposes deception. The two ideologies are diametrically opposed; based upon reciprocity versus coercion.


  1. The element of time is repeated with his stating of “all day”. This is enforcing the earlier possibility that he is wanting the intended audience to “know” that “racism and hatred” is “still” here and now?
  2. The subject brings in religion and also divinity with reference to Jesus. Is there a link from him brining Jesus into the statement here and “your faith” in the previous statement? Islam also holds Jesus as Isa as an important figure but not in the same way as Christians do.
    1. Using divinity is a Sensitive Indicator – the subject is sensitive to religion and Jesus
    2. By not referring to Isa but to Jesus is the subject specifically targeting the intended audience as a “Christian audience”?
    3. Using “too” (as in “addition” too) as a word he is referencing the alleged perpetrators as well as other people. But who are the other people? He does not include  himself psychologically in this part but who else did Jesus die for?
  3. Is this Sermonizing/Virtue Signaling again?


I have decided to let this
encourage me, and fuel me to change the world the
only way I know how.
  1. The subject is psychologically in the statement with “I” but uses the word “let” which diminishes his responsibility for what comes after. This weakens his commitment
  2. Encourage me and fuel me. These are not expected – in the case of retaliations it is expected that someone would be “forced to”, “no option but”, “must”. Encourage and fuel are weak in comparison. Why is the subject weak about his retaliation?
  3. Change the world – now we know what the subject’s aim and Priority is. He wants to change the world. How does he want to change the world? How does he want the world to be? He does not mention that he wants a world without racism, hatred so what does he want the world to be?


So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!

These are sobering words in context of terrorism and being tested.


Conclusion
Deception Indicated
The subject is deceptive about who wrote the comments on the note. Whether it was he or someone else that actually wrote the note it was not the customers who’s bill it was.
There are many sensitivity indicators in the statement; the main one being the hina clause. Here we see the true intention of the statement; he wants everyone to know that racism and hatred still exists [here and now]. This is also backed up by the elements of time and place in the statement. It is important for him to enforce these exist today.
The sermonizing/virtue signaling about religion/faith and the reference to “terrorist” in the note indicate his likely motivation. Terrorism in today’s context is almost uniquely used for Islamic peoples whereas its true meaning was for political violence. Even though Islam is its own political system the merging of meanings also highlights the subject’s motivation.
The possible leakage of the subject stating “tests your faith” would appear to fit the overall conclusion.
In an employment analysis situation the subject would be deemed a risk to his employer and proves a risk to his current employer due to his religious and political beliefs.

38 comments:

General P. Malaise said...

Linguistic disposition and expected vs unexpected.

the LD (linguistic disposition) of the facebook poster is neutral toward the writer of the note. this is unexpected and indicates the poster is not negative towards the writer which would be expected.

this maybe because he knows the writer or is the writer. later we do find that he wrote the note himself.

TimA said...

The numbers at the bottom are written with a forward slant, the note at the top is written with a slight reverse slant, and the slip was held at a different angle while the note portion was written.

Anonymous said...

Mollie Tibbetts brother spoke of her in past tense

tania cadogan said...

It is amazing what can be discerned regarding truth or deception from a single phrase,a couple of words or even one word.

If people listened more to what is said rather than what they think is being said,read every word rather than skimmed blindly or ignored completely simply because they don't like the person concerned then the world would be a more honest place if not a better place.
Politicians would be more trusted, governments more trustworthy and effective, criminals would fear committing crimes especially knowing their lies would be exposed both that of the criminal and their defense who if not lying outright, at least minimizing or misleading.
Fake news would be seen for what it was and journalism would, i hope, become more effective, more investigative and more truthful be it good or bad news.
Fake hate would die a death since those perpetuating it would be spotted immediately and punished the way a genuine hate crime criminal would have been, the same for those who report fake rape crimes, sentenced to the same length of time a genuine rapist would have been,
Genuine crime victims would get the justice they deserve.

There could be no interference in elections since we would see fake news for what it was.
I still don't know why you don't do what we do in the UK and have a paper ballot since it cannot be hacked.

Anonymous said...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2018/07/30/it-doesnt-matter-what-were-going-through-missing-students-father-wants-help-not-sympathy/

Anonymous said...

I first had to wonder if the young lad wasn't telegraphing a future shift in his faith.

He wrote 'terrorist' and not 'terrorists'.

Step into his destiny? And, what might that be?

All day he had to remind himself that Jesus died for these people, too? I bet he did.
He lives in Texas and Texans are royal azzwipes.

He also uses the word FUEL in relationship to his destiny of changing the world.

Kinda scary imo since he's in Odessa.

He is young at 20, wonder what his family is like? Relatives? Does he visit abroad?

Seagull said...

"I received this note from one of
my tables." This is passive and withholds identity and responsibility. A table is unable to give the subject a note as it's an inanimate object. In a truthful account, it would be better to say, "A customer wrote that on their bill." It's casual and out of context with the situation. The withholding of information is sensitive.

John mcgowan said...

"We Don't Tip Terrorists"

Who is "we"?

Peter Hyatt said...

John,

“We” is critical which shows priority of message; “think of me as more than one.” This need twins us to the contrary.

That it came from the “table” is particularly important as the waiter identified one male for false accusation.

Peter

Peter Hyatt said...

Auto correct again.

The need for plural (masking) tells us to the contrary.

The subject chose a specific victim. He should have been more careful.

There’s also more about the subject personal life in his post.

John mcgowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John mcgowan said...

"Although, this is
nothing new, it is still something that will test your
faith.
All day I’ve had to remind myself that Jesus
died for these people too
. I have decided to let this
encourage me
, and fuel me to change the world the
only way I know how. So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!"


This maybe a leap by me, however, it reads like a terrorist threat, albeit passive. I would be concerned and watch my back if i knew him. I think authorities should look into his background.

John mcgowan said...

^^^ To add,that he uses the word "terrorist" in his hoax allegation is even more worrying. Add in "We" , does he have friends with similar feeling?

General P. Malaise said...

good point John

it would be interesting to know what he thinks his destiny is.

Peter Hyatt said...

General, I wonder about suicidal ideation. Islam provides cover for it; giving meaning to its death cult fixation.

Peter Hyatt said...


Attention

Re: Your Abandoned Package For Delivery

I have very vital information to give to you, but first I must have your trust before I review it to you because it may cause me my job,so I need somebody that I can trust for me to be able to review the secret to you.

I am Mr.Williams G. Emad, head of luggage/baggage storage facilities (Operations,Maintenance,Transportation) here at the Philadelphia International Airport USA. During my recent withheld package routine check at the Airport Storage Vault, I discovered an abandoned shipment from a Diplomat from Africa and when scanned it revealed an
undisclosed sum of money in a Metal Trunk Box weighing approximately110kg. The consignment was abandoned because the Contents of the consignment was not properly declared by the consignee as “MONEY”rather it was declared as personal effect to avoid interrogation and also the inability of the diplomat to pay for the United States Non Inspection Charges which is $3,700USD. On my assumption the consignment is still left in our Storage House here at the Philadelphia International Airport Philadelphia till date. The details of the consignment including your name, your email address and theofficial documents from the United Nations office in Geneva are tagged on the Trunk box.

However, to enable me confirm if you are the actual recipient of this consignment as the assistant director of the Inspection Unit, I will advise you provide your current Phone Number and Full Address, to enable me cross check if it corresponds with the address on the official documents including the name of nearest Airport around your city. Please note that this consignment is supposed to have been returned to the United States Treasury Department as unclaimed delivery due to the delays in concluding the clearance processes so as a result of this, I will not be able to receive your details on my official email account. So in order words to enable me cross check your details, I will advise you send the required details to my private email address for quick processing and response. Once I confirm you as the actual recipient of the trunk box, I can get everything concluded within 48hours upon your acceptance and proceed to your address for delivery.

Lastly, be informed that the reason I have taken it upon myself to contact you personally about this abandoned consignment is because I want us to transact this business and share the money 70% for you and 30% for me since the consignment has not yet been returned to the United States Treasury Department after being abandoned by the diplomat so immediately the confirmation is made, I will go ahead and pay for the United States Non Inspection Fee of $3,700 dollars and arrange for the box to be delivered to your doorstep Or I can bring it by myself to avoid any more trouble but you have to assure me of my 30% share.

I wait to hear from you urgently if you are still alive and I will appreciate if we can keep this deal confidential. Please get back to me via my private Email (offic.fille05@gmail.com)for furtherdirectives:

Thank you.

William G. Emad

tania cadogan said...

Anything in a diplomatic bag (regardless of size of 'bag') is never scanned.

Anonymous said...

Peter

It looks like a 419 (Nigerian) fraud email/letter.

http://www.419scam.org/emails/2014-08/19/00019439.54.htm

Hey Jude said...

As the subject wrote the note, he has self-identified as a terrorist - "we don't tip terrorist" - he refers to himself as a terrorist by choosing to use the singular. If this was not his self-view, he could have chosen to use "terrorists" which would have suggested a general disgruntlement in regard to how he believed people of his ethnicity and assumed religion to be viewed by non-tipping customers - but that's not what he means, as he chose to use the singular, which makes it personal.

He also chooses to turn the single customer, who didn't write the comment, into "we" - the reversal makes it that he - "terrorist" - is discriminated against by imaginary others - "we".

Could it be that he uses the singular because he is the only minority employee?
I think that if he were the only one, and intending to make a general false claim of discrimination, that he would be more expected to have used "terrorists" to highlight that other people like him were sometimes subject to such slurs - but he's happier with identifying himself in the singular. If he were not the only one, I'd still expect him to use "terrorists" if his motive and thinking was just to make the claim that people like him were discriminated against - but he makes it about only himself - "We don't tip terrorist". If that's how he views himself, it is.

Only a few hours have passed, but he has already processed the emotions - I'd expect him to still be sick to his stomach, if really that had happened.

"Step into my destiny" - is worrying from one who self-identifies as a terrorist.

---

He could be a convert to Christianity - it's sometimes the case that Muslims convert, some genuinely, some just ostensibly, for the advantages it gives in some communities. Here we have Muslim immigrants who have become Christians (maybe).








Hey Jude said...

Don't use free wI-if in hotels if you can avoid it - I don't know how they do it, but hackers can max your credit cards before you've even checked out.

Joe said...

The word “terrorist” in the singular is interesting. Looking at the note, I wonder if, originally, the name was circled, a dash made, and the single word, “terrorist” written. Then the “we don’t tip” written above. It looks like it. Maybe ”Khalil - terrorist” did not have quite the impact the author wanted, so the addition of a financial insult was required. The introduction of money being withheld from the victim, elevates the insult to injury by way of pecuniary damage, whilst containing an implied remedy to the insult and injury.

Give Khalil the money that the mean old Islamaphobie denied him.

Jamie said...

It looks like, when writing “terrorist” that he ran out of space- not much room for the “s”.

Hey Jude said...

^ One is meant to work on the understanding that the subject writes or says exactly what he means to say.

Jamie said...

^ One is meant to work on the understanding that the subject writes or says exactly what he means to say.

If that’s the case, then you should rethink your interpretations in paragraphs 1 and 5 at 6:25.

Jamie said...

To put it another way, his goal was to make people think he was called a terrorist. Your assertion that means he self-identifies as a terrorist is making an assumption that he didn’t state. And your implication that his “destiny” comment means he is destined to be a terrorist is out of context and again, not what he stated.

Joe said...

The subject’s words reveal the motive for his writing.

Jamie said...

Joe said...

so the addition of a financial insult was required

Are you saying the “0” in the tip line was fabricated too? I was under the impression the lack of a tip prompted his deceit and desire to whine for money.

Joe said...

Jamie, I didn’t say it but yes. The 0 in the tip line was fabricated too. I think Khalil was probably tipped in cash, which some customers do as a favor so that waiters don’t have to pay tax or share tips. Greed prompted his deceit. What do others think?

Hey Jude said...

Well, he could have written "We don't tip a Muslim" or "We don't tip" - "or we don't tip people named Khalil" - he wrote it, and he described himself as a terrorist on behalf of imaginary others - the customer was alone, so there was no "we" - does he not accuse himself?








Peter Hyatt said...

The presupposition of belief in the statement is critical for accuracy. It’s a bedrock principle of which all deception detection begins with.

You are correct: he identified himself as a “terrorist” not as something else. It’s his choice.

Peter

Hey Jude said...

Peter - thank you.

Peter Hyatt said...

You’re welcome. Keep up the good work and avoid anonymous “experts”

Stay self disciplined and have success!

Peter

habundia said...

"
So to all the haters out there,
keep talkin, your only helping me step into my
destiny!"

Could he be(come) a suicide bomber?

habundia said...

I didn't read the comments when adding my reply.....nice to see my question was yours too.....a possible risk as suicide terrorist.

Thanks for your lessons!

Anonymous said...

His circle around his name looks like a drawing of a bomb.

Anonymous said...

What was the single line ?

Anonymous said...

Oh brother. This stretching gives the analysis a bad rep

Nadine Lumley said...

Peter, this line below feels very racist to me. I feel its not true. Talk to a Muslim, read the Quran, find out for yourself maybe:

Islam teaches "jihad" and subjugation of "infidels" (non followers), by violent coercion.


.