Anyone interfering with a police officer’s ability to do his (or her) job should anticipate a forceful response from that police officer. The arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. by Cambridge, Massachusetts police Sgt. James Crowley a few weeks ago was by-the-book based upon Gates’ aggressive and disruptive behavior while Sgt. Crowley attempted to depart the scene after responding (properly, according-to-the-book, as required by his job) to a call from a concerned neighbor about a possible break-in at a residence.
Sgt. Crowley did what is required by his job (in order to do his job) in situations such as those, and, that is to cuff and arrest an aggressive, unruly, non-compliant individual at the scene. Such as was Gates who engaged in behaviors that interfered with the Sgt.’s ability to contain and control a situation.
But enter the racist perspectives of Gates — who has also been described as being “tired after a twenty-hour flight from China” and “in his own home” and in Gates’ perspective, an important person who is not to be questioned, challenged or asked for so much as his identification by — oh, gee — a White man, police or no.
I think I speak for the majority of Americans when I opine that Gates was clearly due an arrest by Sgt. Crowley and that Sgt. Crowley was doing a responsible, credible job: responding as asked, exercising caution as required and asserting his duties in controlling a situation to determine whether a crime or crimes had been committed. Whether an officer or people found at the scene under consideration are Black, White, Yellow, Red or Brown, the requirements of law enforcement and responsible citizens remain the same: to behave reasonably with reasonable requests.
Sgt. Crowley made a reasonable request of the two people he found at the property reported and Gates is said to have responded to Crowley’s request for identification with a great deal of outrage and hostility, though he eventually complied. Satisfied, Sgt. Crowley began leaving the scene, Gates pursued him displaying increasingly agitated, irate, aggressive behavior, physically and verbally — going so far as to refer in nasty terms to Crowley’s mother.
No amount of tiredness from a long flight or otherwise, color “status” or self-importance justifies or permits that sort of behavior with law enforcement. The time to argue out the reasons why behavior is out-of-line or conditions of whatever have somehow caused bad behavior is either through attorneys after an arrest and before a trial or at a trial after an arrest before a judge. The police aren’t there to receive bad behavior just because someone’s tired or claims social importance or demands special allowances due solely to one’s race or ethnicity: the “I can be abusive and act badly because of my race/ethnicity/gender/sense of entitlement” excuse doesn’t fly.
Gates behaved badly, threatened Sgt. Crowley in a public place (outside his house) and was cuffed and charged with disorderly conduct, all of which is reasonable based upon the unnecessary erratic behavior by Gates. His verbal insults of the police at the scene, his aggressive behaviors toward them, none of this is usual or customary, it poses possible serious threat to an officer’s safety and in that, the ability of that officer or officers to do their job.
Enter a rogue, irresponsible man in the Presidency who condemns the Cambridge police as having “acted stupidly.” The only persons acting stupidly, in reality, were Gates and that President. Barack Obama made this eager, derogatory smear of the Cambridge police because Professor Gates is his “friend” — and then included a general denigration about the police (who Obama is stereotyping as being “White”): so Obama said, anyone-not-“Black or”Latino” (guess who Obama was referring to) “in this nation” as to law enforcement somehow suffers unjust, “racist” manhandling by this nefarious policing, so Obama declared — and without knowing anything else about the situation by his and staff’s own admission and the Cambridge police department’s confirmation afterward, Obama spoke out of line.
Just as Gates acted out of line. That they are “Black” does not excuse their behavior, rash critical judgments and obvious racial-agitation methods: Gates, at the scene prior to his arrest, accused Sgt. Crowley (who is “White”) of being irritated because Gates, “a Black man” was “all up in his face”. Then Gates used a willing media process immediately afterward to tout his “Black credentials” and continue to frame his outrageous behavior — that inspired his arrest by Crowley — as somehow dismissable because he was Black and somehow Black people get this special privilege of acting like an ass…err…sumthin’…so goes Gates’ horrible racializing, which Obama immediately lapsed into with a huge megaphone embrace while first dropping his prepackaged poise: the real person emerged.
I’ve listened to a few of Gates lectures from his pulpit at Harvard (and this ugly delivery from a church) (what does Gates’ racialism have to do with any “church” or religious context except “racially activist” groups using a religious venue for purposes of fomenting racial/ethnic antagonisms [which typifies much of the violent among Islam, I note]).
Gates has a legacy of ongoing perspectives that are marginalizing based upon racial antagonisms, his perspectives are racially-defined as to the actions of others that his perceptions limit to generalized, extremely negative “overtype” or archtype, he sums-up social animosities he maintains by sweeping all of any race and/or ethnicity that he selects out for defamation into a negated-kind. His overall perspectives are not at all acceptable in any realm of reasonable, non-indoctrinating academics, yet certainly racially agitating toward a destructive conclusion: that it’s excusable or even keen to be a racist if you’re not White by substituting terms other than “racist”: “racial pride” or, in Obama’s case, “Black Liberation”. Gates appears set in a perspective that is deforming, not enlightening: in order to instruct on, say, a disease, one must be stricken with that disease, to instruct on, say, leprosy, one must be leprous; he exploits the context of “being Black” in order to emotionally incite others toward a destructive behavior as to society, to and about others based upon racial criteria. That isn’t academic process, it’s poisonous food, it’s disgusting racial agitation.
Harvard should be ashamed for even having this guy — Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. — on their books.
And about Obama’s rush-to-condemnation remarks during a Press Conference (Obama actually cast aside the many other issues and intruded this remark of his denigrating the Cambridge police and particularly tearing at “White people” in the entire nation by his ugly implications), who Obama actually is, behind the well-rehearsed celebrity poise, was and remains exposed: more than two decades at the instruct of the likes of racialist and very sick Jeremiah Wright did, indeed, twist Barack Obama’s character if not twisted beforehand and simply landing afterward with one who confirmed the twist (what I think, Obama landed with Wright, deeming him “spiritual mentor” because Obama found a confirmation in Wright of Obama’s predetermined racial antagonisms and prejudices).
However, it is great and to his credit that Sgt. Crowley turned on an available tape recorder in his pocket and captured an audio of the scene, which, along with the dispatch recording, proves that police were being asked to respond to a possible break-in and did respond to such. Also great is that another police officer responded with Crowley, (and that second officer is Black) and he evaluated Gates’ behavior in the same context as did Sgt. Crowley: Gates displayed disorderly conduct at the scene, the arrest was credible and reasonable based upon Gates’ behavior.
What’s worse, both Barack Obama and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. have not apologized for their irresponsible behavior. “Act(ing) stupidly” does not even begin to describe both of them.