Friday, September 18, 2009

Yarmouth Society of Friends (Quakers) Peace Fair

Yarmouth Friends Peace Fair

A Peace and Arts Festival


Sept. 19, 2009

11 am to 4 pm.

Yarmouth Friends (Quaker) Meetinghouse

58 N. Main St, South Yarmouth 
  • Handicrafts
  • Music
  • Art
  • Peace Related       Exhibits
  • Attic Treasures

  • Free Market
No - Cost Winter Outerwear (Child & Adult)
  • Sign the World’s Biggest Peace Book
  • Walk the Peace Labyrinth
  • Great Food
  • Children’s Activities             
  • Family Fun

Peace Fair Proceeds to benefit the Cape Cod Council of Churches’ Hands of Hope Outreach Center and Food Pantry in West Harwich.   Please bring a non-perishable food item to donate, if you are able.

For Information Call (508) 432-4757

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Mashpee Teachable Moment (s)! But Is Racism Un-Learnable?

Teachable moments in Mashpee Again, and Again and Again.

Pointing fingers, assigning blame won't help in Mashpee
September 13, 2009 2:05 AM

When a Mashpee police officer shot and killed a Wampanoag man in 1988, the U.S. Department of Justice helped mediate negotiations between town and tribe officials.

Today, the Justice Department is back in town, this time offering cultural awareness training following an alleged incident of racial profiling at a local supermarket.

Deborah Saldana of Mashpee, who is black, said James Lundy, manager of Roche Brothers, almost knocked her to the ground while trying to seize her purse after he accused her of stealing meat from the store. The store has since apologized to Saldana, but company officials said that Lundy denied the assault and profiling allegations.

Following the incident, Saldana claimed that the police officer who responded had falsified his report and that the department refused to help her report the case to the state. Mashpee Police Chief Rodney Collins has denied the report was falsified and said no crime had been committed.

Collins said that Justice Department officials contacted him about free cultural awareness training after they had read articles in the newspaper about the Saldana incident. He said that as long as the agency acknowledged that the training had nothing to do with the Saldana incident, he happily accepted.

"I'm always open to the idea of progressive training, especially when its free," said.

Collins should be commended for accepting the training in the spirit it was offered.

Regardless of whether racial profiling occurred or not, it's incumbent upon police and town officials to turn this incident into a teachable moment.

And that's the intent of two researchers who have weighed in on the case in an opinion piece on the previous page.

Jerome Williams, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, and Anne-Marie Hakstian, an associate professor at Salem State College, are co-authors of a forthcoming book on consumer racial profiling.

Williams and Hakstian qualified their comments about the case by admitting that they could not say conclusively what occurred in Mashpee since they were not there.

"However, we have enough information about the case to say that what happened to Deborah Saldana is typical of what happens to ordinary people of color day in and day out all over the country...," they wrote.

The researchers then asked whether the incident would have occurred if Saldana had been white. "Research suggests it is highly unlikely..." they wrote. "What happens in many retail establishments is that people of color are put under greater surveillance the moment they walk into the store. This typically is based on a persistent misperception that minorities account for most of the retail establishments. The reality is that nonminority shoppers account for most of the criminal activity."

Furthermore, neither black nor white shoppers are the ones most responsible for shoplifting. "...Employee theft (44.5 percent) accounts for a far greater percentage of the 'shrinkage' at the nation's 200 largest retailers than shoplifting (32.7 percent)," they wrote.

Records also show that more than two-thirds of the shoplifters apprehended in many areas are white females between the ages of 25 and 50.

"In conclusion, we urge Roche Brothers and other retailers, the police chief and other law enforcement personnel, and citizens of the community not to be so quick to dismiss claims of marketplace mistreatment based on race, such as the allegations presented by Saldana."

Point taken.

But the researchers should have further qualified their remarks by adding: "While consumer racial profiling is prevalent in our society, citizens should not be so quick to blame the police as many did in the case of Sgt. James Crowley and Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates."

In other words, this is a teachable moment not only for police and town officials, but for all of us.

Copyright © Cape Cod Media Group, a division of Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Saturday, September 05, 2009

The Harwich Port Race Riot of 1848

"The church is responsible for the persistence of slavery. It has shamelessly given the sanction of religion and the Bible to the whole slave system. They have taught that man may, properly, be a slave; that the relation of master and slave is ordained of God; that to send back an escaped bondman to his master is clearly the duty of all the followers of the Lord Jesus Christ; and this horrible blasphemy is palmed off upon the world for Christianity," said Frederick Douglas (1852).

"One more riotous demonstration should have place in these chronicles, but space and time must make it both brief and the last. It occurred in Harwich, Mass, on Sunday, the fourth and last day of a grand anti-slavery convention, held in a beautiful grove, in September of the year 1848.

No building on the Cape could have held half the attendance. Cape Cod at that time was the birth-place and nursery of more sea-captains than any other portion, of equal extent, on the whole Atlantic coast. And many of the most eminent of them were early able and faithful friends and supporters of the anti-slavery enterprise.

But sea-captains were not all abolitionists, else the Harwich Sunday tumult, in defense of the church as "the bulwark of slavery," would not have transpired.

The constitution of the country, the courts, the political parties, the commerce and trade, had all been shown to be conducted in the interest of slavery, and no riotous demonstration appeared. But not so on Sunday, when the churches and clergy were arraigned as the bulwark and forlorn hope of the accursed institution. The mob at Harwich was the result of an exposure of a diabolical deed by the captain of a coaster, sailing between Norfolk and New York, and other northern ports. I am glad to have forgotten his name, and do not care ever to hear it spoken again.

But while in Norfolk, not long before our convention, a slave came on board and asked this captain what he would charge to carry him and another to New York or Boston. A contract was made for one hundred dollars—paid in advance. The captain pocketed the cash, then went on shore, betrayed the poor slave, had him arrested, imprisoned and advertised, and then sailed north, bringing the hundred dollars.

We who knew the slave system, could imagine the fate of the imprisoned victim, though we never heard what it was. The cruel captain never told us that, though undoubtedly he knew, for when he went back to Norfolk he carried the money, found the owner. paid him over the hundred dollars, and received back twenty-five as his reward !

Twenty-five dollars for a deed that no Modoc nor Apache Indian under heaven would ever have done! In cold, unprovoked blood—-never !

Sunday was the fourth and last day of our convention, and not less than three thousand people were on the ground. Some estimated them at four thousand.

I learned all the facts I have just given, from the captain himself, early in the day. In the afternoon, when the crowd was the greatest. I made a full statement of the case, in words as fitting as were then at my command. Of course the effect on the audience was intense, but dependent on the estimate which different persons placed on the transaction between the captain and his helpless victim.

In the tumult, the captain came to the platform, and not having heard my statement, he demanded, in great wrath, who it was that accused him of stealing! He said somebody had just told him he had been accused of stealing. He was answered that his name had not been mentioned there ; and that nothing had been said about stealing. He said he had a right to be heard, and wished to be heard. We cheerfully accorded him the platform. He came forward, and in the frankest, blandest manner, stated his own case ' in his own words. When he concluded, we invited him to a seat on the platform, which he accepted.

Stephen Foster spoke next. He began in quite a conversational tone to say : Mr. Chairman—We have now heard from his own mouth, what our friend had to say of the matter in hand. And he confirms every statement of Mr. Pillsbury, excepting one : he has not told us that he is a member in good and regular standing of the Baptist church, as Mr. Pillsbury assured us he was. Now I wish to ask him if that is also true. He admitted that with the rest. Foster then opened his argument. And those who ever heard him can more easily imagine than I can describe, its power. Every eye kindled, every heart throbbed, with admiration, or with rage and wrath. I had often heard him called "a son of thunder," before. At that moment, he seemed Father of the seven thunders of Patmos, with all their bolts at command. He swayed those hundreds and thousands as prairie cyclones, the vast fields of corn. And yet the captain, really on trial, listened to every word with respect and attention. I knew he heard a voice within, louder, more eloquent than the utterances of Foster, and whose rebuke he could not resist.

The mob spirits now rushed for the platform, and with oaths and curses of stunning power, called on the captain to pitch him down to them. Their number seemed legion ; and their nature and spirit like that other legion, known of old. The captain mildly replied to them that he wished none of their interference nor defense. He left the platform soon after, and moved out of the crowd, and held a long conversation with some Boston abolitionists, who had come down on purpose to attend the convention. And he very frankly told them that he had no fault to find whatever with our treatment of the matter, nor of him. Nor did he ever after complain, that we heard. Mr. Foster kept his feet and held the crowd at bay, showing our religion to be falsehood and hypocrisy, when a member of the orthodox church, who had just come from his meeting, (and it was said from the sacrament), leaped like a lion on to the platform. His eyes flashed fury if not fire ; his teeth and fists were clenched, and he seemed a spirit from the pit, who might have been commissioned to lead its myrmidons in a deadly fray, for such a faith and such a church as his, that a dozen years before had been proved by one of its most eminent members,

"The Bulwark Of American Slavery."

He asked no leave to speak ; paid no respect to president or rules. His first note was a shriek. "It's a lie ; what you say is a lie ; a damned lie ! and I'll defend the church !"

But he was immediately out-voiced by the yelling troop, who leaped like tigers at his heels, as into the arena, and added fearful deeds to his not less fearful words.

What became of my platform companions I did not see. I was immediately seized, and with kicks, blows, and dilapidated clothing, hurled to the ground.

There lay Captain Chase and Captain Smith, of Harwich, both old men, who, with many others, had sprung to our defense. There the two lay, their faces covered with blood ! They were both radical peace men, and only remonstrated with our remorseless assailants. But both of them would willingly have died in our stead, or in our defense. Truer, nobler men, never lived.

Havoc was soon made of our platform and what it contained. It was roofed over, but a temporary structure, for officers and speakers, and aged persons who sought its convenience and comfort. William Wells Brown, one of our eloquent fugitive slave lecturers, was roughly seized up and pitched over back of the platform by the infuriated crowd, down some six or eight feet, and left to his fate. Mr. Foster was rescued and taken away from danger—his Sunday frock coat rent in twain from bottom to top, and his body considerably battered and bruised.

Lucy Stone stood heroically with the rest of us, ready for any fate. But her serene, quiet bearing disarmed the vulgar villainy of our assailants, and she escaped unharmed.

I have seen many mobs and riots in my more than forty years of humble service in the cause of freedom and humanity, but I never encountered one more desperate in determination, nor fiendish in spirit, than was that in Harwich, in the year 1848.

And that mob was wholly, directly and undeniably in defense of the American church. " I'll defend the church," was the wild shout of the baptized ruffian who led the hordes, as he vaulted unbidden to our platform of moral and peaceful agitation and argument in behalf of our enslaved millions. "I'll defend the church," and his infuriated, yelling and blaspheming troop followed him, and commenced their fell work.

Yes, to save the church was that dire scene enacted. The church that Judge Birney had proved out of her own mouth was the " bulwark of American slavery in everyone of her largest, most popular denominations !" Church, clergy, and theological seminary, every thing, indeed, under ecclesiastical control. And Hon. James G. Birney was surely among her choicest leaders and brightest lights.

To my own account of this remarkable scene, perhaps should be subjoined at least an excerpt of the official proceedings of the convention. The following is the close of it :

Parker Pillsbury related a fact illustrative of the truth of the resolution under discussion of a sea-captain, of Cape Cod, a member of the Baptist church.

Immediately the captain's friends reported to him that he had been slandered, upon the platform, and in due time the captain presented himself and demanded why he had slandered him, on that platform ? He was assured that his name had not been spoken by any one on the platform, and that if he would watt for the speaker to conclude his remarks he should have opportunity to say all he wished.

Accordingly, when the speaker sat down, the captain took the platform, and stated the facts precisely as Pillsbury had done, so it was manifest that there was no slander, nor even contradiction between them.

S. S. Foster then proceeded to dissect the transaction, as stated by the captain himself, and to find its moral quality.

It was a process which he well understood, nor did he fail to expose the deformity of the deed, and cause its infamy to stand out in fearful blackness before that great assembly. The captain said he had nothing to reply, and left the platform as quietly as he had come upon it, saying he had not come there to make any disturbance. Foster then held up to the audience, in its true character, the religion, under whose cherishing influence such crimes take root and grow, and asked who would defend such a church? At that moment Captain Stillman Snow, a member of the Congregational church under the pastoral care of Rev. Cyrus Stone, (who we are credibly informed, went about among his people and advised them to stay away from our meeting), this Captain Snow, steaming from his own meeting, rushed through the crowd in front of Foster, screaming at the top of his voice, " I'll defend the church. What you say is a lie, a damned lie ! " His lips trembled, his head shook upon its socket, like a leaf rattled by the winter tempest, while his countenance looked as if the genius of rage had his dwelling there. He made a leap at Foster, which was a signal for his allies. In a twinkling, there was a rush upon the platform. W. W. Brown, a fugitive slave, was seized and thrown over the high back of the platform, where he was trampled on by the throng gathered there. Pillsbury, with torn clothes, was dragged from the platform, receiving as he went, kicks and blows from those behind him. Those in front of him were harmless, awed by his fearless words, and undaunted look.

Again and again, some desperate spirits, with clenched uplifted lists, swore vengeance and destruction, but like the old Roman, Pillsbury calmly replied "strike, but hear me." While he was thus beset on every hand, S. S. Foster was assailed in another direction no less violently. At the first onset he hastened Lucy Stone from the platform, but had scarcely time to turn about, when the mob, thirsting for his blood, closed in around him, seizing him with desperate violence, wherever they could lay their hands upon him, and though they did not " part his garments among them," they quite divided his coat. For a few moments the most terrible confusion prevailed—all ran, without knowing whither they went—so great was the excitement that neither friends nor foes recognized each other. One friend would take hold of the arm of Foster for his protection, and another friend would pull him off. supposing him an enemy.

One friend would step forward to stay an uplifted blow, and another friend would push him aside, supposing that he intended himself to strike. The scene baffled all description. At this juncture a shout was raised that they were riding Foster on a rail. This false cry was most opportune for Brown, who, during the whole time, had been dragged and trampled by the mob. Now his tormentors left him to seethe ruin of Foster, and thus he made his escape, rifled by these pious defenders of the nation's religion, of quite a number of his Anti-slavery Harp. Foster, who had been surrounded by the mob, showed no sign of fear or fright. The man who had never quailed in peril's blackest hour, was not the man now to tremble or flee. But the friends, apprehensive for his safety, urgently solicited him to leave the ground ; and when he did not manifest a disposition to go. they took him, with most unpleasant haste, outside the grove, aided by the mob, who were pushing terribly in the rear, and on all sides.

When Pillsbury ascertained that Brown and Foster were safe, and that nothing more could be done, he, too, left, taking the public road towards the house of Captain Small, a well-known friend of the oppressed. The mobocrats, who had returned to the grove howling and yelling in their rage and disappointment, that Foster was out of their clutches, when they found that Pillsbury was leaving, followed in hot pursuit, raising the dust higher than the trees, filling the air with demoniac screams and yells, which were heard at the distance of more than a mile, and frightful enough to make Pandemonium itself pale. They rushed on headlong about thirty rods, and then, though Pillsbury was walking only a short distance in front of them, for reasons best known to themselves, they turned back to the grove, cursing as they went, and proceeded to vent their rage upon the platform, which they soon demolished.

While they were tearing up the planks they were uttering most dreadful oaths, and vowing vengeance on the lecturers, (should they ever make their appearance there again) who, they said, had assailed their laws and their religion, which they were going to defend. The world will judge what kind of laws and what kind of religion need such a defense. It was a proud day for anti-slavery, and one which the friends will long have occasion to remember with gratitude.

The lecturers were not particularly disturbed until all had been said which they wished to say, until every nail was driven in the right place, and then the mob clenched them. They meant their violence for evil,but God meant it for good. The dragon's teeth, which they were then unconsciously sowing, will yet come up, a host of true-hearted anti-slavery men and women, who will redeem Cape Cod from the false religion which now curses and enslaves it. Much praise is due to the friends, who are too numerous to mention, who so nobly stood by those whose lives the hungry mob were seeking. Nor would we fail to make suitable mention of others, who, during the day on Sunday, were active in exciting the mob spirit. Prominent among them was Henry C. Brooks, a merchant of Boston, of the firm of Crowell & Brooks, 38 Commercial street, son of Obed Brooks, Esq., of Harwich.

The good effect of the mob is already manifest in the increased activity and interest of the friends on the Cape, whose liberal contributions to the cause have been nearly doubled, and who see new reasons for girding themselves to more vigorous effort in behalf of human freedom.

Zebina Small, President.

Charles Stearns,

Lucy Stone,


Only time, space and patience of readers prevent insertion of the whole of the able report of the secretaries of that phenomenal convention. Most of the names of the rioters mentioned in the extract given are suppressed.

No other mob or riot will be described in this work. Such as are given are but representative of many, very many ; some less destructive to property and harmful to person, and some others in those respects a great deal worse.

And now, wondrous to tell, with such records, the church and clergy claim and boast that they abolished slavery ! The real, everlasting truth is, we had almost to abolish the church before we could reach the dreadful institution at all. We divided, if we did not destroy. Not to speak of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church at all, we did divide and even subdivided the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal church. The slavery question certainly produced rupture in the American Board of Foreign Missions, the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions and the American Tract Society, as has been, or as will be shown. If it be said that it was their own internal heat that was consuming them, the answer would be it was not light and fire from heaven, the divine illumination of the Holy Ghost, or their differences would not have been so easily reconciled by surrendering the whole ground to the enemy ; the Northern Methodist Conference retaining thousands of slave-holders and tens of thousands of slaves, and six of the very largest of the slave states, besides Delaware and Maryland. The two missionary boards and tract society threatened at one time some separation or purification, but to what purpose will be made to appear

The institution at Oberlin, Ohio, was first to attempt a new standard for freedom in education and religion, irrespective of sex, complexion or race, with a professedly anti-slavery board of teachers and directors. But Oberlin was at once proscribed by the great bodies of ministers and churches, whose fellowship extended to the south. And even Oberlin never so much as contemplated any separation from our unhallowed union with slave-holders. Instead of it, under an assumed idea or pretense that the constitution was anti-slavery and not pro-slavery, an assumption that no president, congress nor supreme court nor state legislature nor court ever believed for an hour, Oberlin continued loyal to the government, swore by itself or elected rulers to support the constitution, and then kept the oath or made a virtue of perjury and violated it by refusing to return the fugitive slave.

And scarcely had the institution reached respectability in the estimation of more declared pro-slavery ecclesiastical associations, north and south, before the Infinite Patience was exhausted, and with the bolts of eternal justice stove down our already blood-besmeared idol, and buried it beneath the untimely graves of half a million men slain in a thousand battles, their massacred commander-in-chief and president of the nation with his own heart's blood, sealing the sacrifice !



It is time to draw this work to a close. It was undertaken with extreme reluctance at the earnest solicitation of those whose wishes it is my delight to obey, even at any cost of personal sacrifice of my latest years, only if the cause of truth and the demands of history be also subserved. And strict truth and justice to everybody concerned, has been, and shall be to the end, my one constant study and care.

The next chapter may be called " Acts of the Pro- Slavery Apostles," and will have respect mainly to the connection of the church and clergy of the country with the slave system. Their hostility to the anti- slavery enterprise was not wakened into fierce and general opposition till slavery was not only declared a Sin ; such sin as that no slave-holder could be a christian, nor worthy to be fellowshipped as such, whether south or north. The abolitionists insisted that every church and pulpit dictating terms of sacramental communion should hold the man-steaier as just so much greater criminal than the felon of the sheep-fold, as a man is better than a sheep, remembering who He was that asked, " How much better is a man than a sheep ?

" And our warrant for this judgment came from the very highest evangelical authority the church could furnish. Long before slavery had reached the proportions of 1834, or developed half its prospective cruelties, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church had officially and authoritatively taught, citing as their scripture basis, the first epistle of Timothy, first chapter, ninth and tenth verses : "

The law is made for manstealers. This crime among the Jews exposed the perpetrators of it to capital punishment. Exodus xxi, 16 ; and the apostle classes them with sinners of the first rank. The word he uses, in its original import, comprehends all who are concerned in bringing any of the human race into slavery, or in retaining them in it.

Stealers of men are all those who bring off slaves or freemen, and keep, sell, or buy them. To steal a freeman, says Grotius, is the highest kind of theft. In other instances we only steal human property, but when we steal or retain men in slavery, we seize those who, in common with ourselves, are constituted, by the original grants, lords of the earth."

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Does Roche Brothers "Consumer Racial Profile" any of thier customers?

"Chris Rock has a funny line about malls: There are two kinds - the one white folks shop at and the one white folks used to shop at.

Tell us what you think or what have been your own experiences!

E-Mail us your stories to

Does Roche Brothers Racial Profile their minority customers? Does Roche Brothers have a customer profile or does that depend on who your family is or what color or tribe you are from? Doesn't your family deserve better?

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Mashpee Police Chief Says- No Profling, hate crime in his town!

No profiling, hate crime in Mashpee

Published Cape Cod Times Newspaper Editorial Page- My View By RODNEY COLLINS
August 25, 2009

The late Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." In the case of the Roche Brothers grocery store incident that was recently publicized, facts need to be put in perspective.

A woman entered Roche Brothers in Mashpee and placed meat in her shopping cart. The store manager observed the same woman check out without the meat but with a bag. These facts are undisputed. The woman was approached not because of the color of her skin but rather her conduct. It could be reasonably construed as raising suspicion. The manager approached the woman and made a simple inquiry. She was not accused of shoplifting.

The woman demanded the Mashpee Police Department be called and an officer responded. It was determined that the woman had placed the meat back in the cooler prior to leaving the store. The situation was blown out of proportion.

The woman wanted to file a complaint against the manager. The officer inquired as to whether the woman was assaulted. She said no. Subsequently, the woman stated to the press that she was assaulted. She submitted a written statement to the police department indicating that she was "almost knocked to the ground." The woman's version of what happened had conflicting details. As a result, there were no credible grounds to file any criminal complaint.

I was contacted by the press regarding the incident as a result of the woman claiming some form of racial profiling. In my 29 years of law enforcement, the actions of the woman were consistent with a person in pursuit of civil litigation and not facts, and I expressed such opinion.

Then John Bangert, who heads the Harwich Chapter of "No Place for Hate," claimed that the Mashpee Police Department was neglectful by not providing a hate crime form to this woman. Bangert failed to recognize that the form in question is filed by the law enforcement agency of jurisdiction and only after a sustained hate crime has been reported. Bangert further drew premature conclusions without any factual basis from a competent investigation. This suggests bias, the very element he is supposed to detect and prevent.

Moreover, since this incident occurred in Mashpee and not Harwich, I never understood his involvement anyway.

Then another writer defended the "character" of the woman in question while failing to point out none of this would even be necessary if the woman had not made such a public spectacle of this matter. The writer suggests that I took the word of a "white man" over a "black woman." That is factually untrue. I evaluated the inconsistencies in statements of the "black woman" and the credible report of a Native American officer and concluded no "hate" element existed.

The writer also referred to the "humiliating" experience of this woman being confronted in front of so many witnesses. If this is true, then why hasn't one of those witnesses come forward to verify the so-called "accused" account? The writer doesn't hesitate to express her opinion but condemns me for doing the exact same thing. This hypocrisy is typical today but when opinion has absolutely no reasonable basis it becomes irresponsible.

Then the writer suggests that I was insensitive by expressing an opinion because the so-called "accused" has been diagnosed with cancer, as if I had knowledge of it when I made my original statement. Having a mother who died from cancer and a father who is battling it, I don't need any counsel on the impact of cancer.

If a "hate" element existed in this case as has been suggested, I would be the first to advocate appropriate charges. I worked closely with current New Hampshire Attorney General Mike Delaney and then Attorney General Phil McLaughlin to file the first hate crime homicide charge in the state of New Hampshire's history. In fact, I was complimented by Anti-Defamation League for the manner which I handled the case.

However, when no such element exists as in this case, I am not going to manufacture something to appease a distorted perception of reality.

The bottom line is that decisions relative to the Roche Brothers incident had nothing to do with race but rather a woman's conduct, conflicting statements and a store manager's arguable reasonable suspicion. The facts did not support the complainant's claims. There was no bias linked to a protection by law. There was no "accusation" but rather a brief inquiry based upon an observation.

Rodney Collins is chief of the Mashpee Police Department. His email

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

"Whenever someone in our community is wronged, the whole community is wronged!"

The Deborah Saladana situation is important to me because CRP or Consumer Racial Profiling is prevalent here on Cape Cod as well as off cape. Just ask anyone of color that you have a relationship with. Listen to your friends, neighbors, loved ones, and -hear their stories as well.

We need to be talking about this matter as part of our continuing education on Civil Rights, not just putting a poster or picture of Rev., Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in February, or offer MLK Day discounts of goods stores want to sell in the "Market Economy". MLK Day January 19, is a day on, not just another day off.

We need to embrace our beloved community every day all year long. This is the economics of our community, and is not based of the GNP, but rather on the civility we say we are moving towards. Let us all learn from Deborah's dis-ease of "shopping while black" in her Mashpee super market here in the Cape Cod market place. We can be and act better than this folks!

I believe Consumer Racial Profiling is indicative of the continuation of our greater community’s lack of knowledge and understanding as to what our responsibilities are for those of us who enjoy “white privilege. " How can anyone stand still and be silent?

In Harwich of the days of yore, Captain Jonathan Walker was branded on his hand with the initials of SS for slave stealer.

The town folks in Harwich back then thought that Jonathan should mind his own business and return from the Florida and Caribbean region and tend to the families lumber mill ran, from East Harwich in the 1830’s . When the town certainly allowed wind mills with out any controversy.

Very little local support was granted to Jonathan Walker as he lingered in his prison cell in Florida. The Walkers family not only needed to pay for his imprisonment, but he also lost his boat and lively hood for the acts of courage for taking former slaves to West Indies Islands and Mexico, before Mexico as annexed to become the Lone Star, non free, Republic of Texas.

Later a group of northern abolitionists raised funds for his release and bond. He than traveled around the country lecturing on the abolition of slavery. He even came back to Cape Cod along with Fredrick Douglass whom he had met in New Bedford.

He later wrote about his experience in the book sold at abolitionists meetings around the country.

Jonathan's wonderful quote -

“If you are against slavery, you must be a “come-outer” or if you are not, you must be “stay-putter”!

During his youth, Walker was captain of a fishing vessel, but around 1840 he went to Florida and became a railroad contractor. He was interested in the condition of the slaves, and in 1844 aided several of them in an attempt to make their escape in an open boat from the coast of Florida to the British West Indies. After doubling the capes, he was prostrated by illness; the crew, being ignorant of navigation, would all have been drowned if they had not been rescued by a wrecking sloop that took Walker to Key West. From there, he was sent in chains to Pensacola, where he was put in prison, chained to the floor, and deprived of light and proper food.

Upon his trial in a United States court, Walker was convicted, sentenced to be heavily fined, put on the pillory, and branded on his right hand with a hot iron with the letters "S. S." for "slave-stealer". But to some he was "slave savior".

A United States marshal executed the sentence. He was then returned to jail, where he was confined eleven months, and released only after the payment of his fine by northern abolitionists. For five years after his release, he lectured on slavery in the northern and western states. He moved to Michigan about 1850, where he lived near Muskegon until his death. A monument was erected to his memory on August 1, 1878.

Walker was the subject of John Greenleaf Whittier's poem "The Man with the Branded Hand". Whittier heard about Walker's actions after reading a book about him called Trial and Imprisonment of Jonathan Walker. The poem praised Walker's actions.[1] Upon his return to New England, abolitionists hailed Walker as a hero and martyr. John Greenleaf Whittier wrote a poem in 1846 titled “The Branded Hand.” The most famous stanza of that poem went:

“Then lift that manly right hand

Bold plowman of the wave

Its branded palm shall prophesy

Salvation for the slave.”


What is Deborah Saldane guilty of ?

Being an African-American - Yes!

Being a Native American (Blackfeet Nation) decendent - Yes!

Being a woman - Yes!

Being 60 years old - Yes!

Being disabled from cancerous tumor on her leg - Yes!

Someone who walks with a cane and while shopping puts her cane and purse atop an ADA super market carriage for better support- Yes!

Purchasing a Morning Cape Cod Times -Yes!

Purchasing a cup of tea inside Starbucks which is located in Roche Brothers store - Yes!

Someone who was committed to being a teacher in the Mashpee school system for over 15 years -

A loving mother - Yes!
A loving grandmother - Yes!

Was Deborah waiting for her American Cancer Association volunteer driver to take her to Cape Cod Hospital for Chemotherapy- Yes!

Is Deborah a strong women who stands for all of our rights - Yes!

But stealing food NO!

Should we not wrap the very same symbol of freedom around Ms. Saldana shoulders which was proudly flown last week on Cape Cod when, a another fallen soldier was honored for his sacrifice for civil rights and freedom from oppression for Deborah Saldana's as well as for all of our own civil rights and freedom.

We like Jonathan Walker, must never forget our own privilege which makes us OK when shopping while white?

I quote from Dr. Jerome Williams piece - "The United States has legally addressed the issue of consumer racial profiling, however limited the effort. The U.S. Congress designed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to ensure "that a dollar in the hands of a Negro will purchase the same thing as a dollar in the hands of a white" person. In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court described the purpose of Section #1981 of the 1866 act as follows: "The aim of the statute is to remove the impediment of discrimination from a minority citizen's ability to participate fully and equally in the marketplace."

"The Civil Rights Act of 1964 further provides that: "All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation." This law aims "to eliminate the unfairness, humiliation, and insult of racial discrimination in facilities which purport to serve the general public."

Deborah Saldana, is a 60 year old Afro-American woman and resident of Mashpee, Massachusetts. Deborah’s grandfather was William Ulysses Boone, a member of the Blackfeet people and he was born on reservation in Oklahoma during the “Trail of Tears".

Ms. Saldana is also a local member of Mashpee branch of Jehovah Witnesses and congregational member Mashpee Kingdom Hall.

Remember and understand this! Jehovah Witnesses don't not grandstand about realms, other than the Kingdom of God's realms and domain!

"Whenever someone in our community is wronged, the whole community is wronged!" Edgar Cahn

Deborah is in the midst of chemotherapeutic treatment of cancer. She does not drive, but does use public transportation from her home near the entrance of Camp Edwards /Otis air force base on Cape Cod. On Wednesday July 29, 2009 a friend gave her a ride to Roche Brothers and while waiting for her American Cancer Society volunteer driver to transport her to Cape Cod Hospital for treatment.

Ms. Saldana has a cancerous tumor on her leg and walks with a cane. That's is why she uses a cart to lean on, bought her paper, and then goes for a cup of tea at Starbucks Cafe which is located with inside the Roche Brothers (this is a store in a story situation), before transferring to the her ride.

She also occasional uses the restrooms at the store because she does not get back home until after 4pm. The manager is reported in the press to say he had observed Ms. Saldana put meat in her bag. Why would anyone women put a raw packaged of meat in their bag and keep it with them for 7/8 hours ? Ms. Saldana told me the manager asked her “where are you hiding the pork”?

Certainly Roche Brothers was not spending their “pork” in loss prevention, shoplifting determination and accepted consumer racial profiling protocols.
Read the press accounts on my blog and examine this incident yourselves !

Editor's Note: John Bangert

Monday, August 17, 2009

Consumer racial profiling: Bigotry goes to market

"Driving while Black" has been a pervasive problem for African Americans, with more than half of Black men and more than a third of African Americans overall reporting that they have been subjected to some form of racial profiling on the roads. Far more pervasive, however, is what might be called "shopping while Black," or consumer racial profiling.

How many times have you been in a store and found yourself receiving poor treatment that you believed was racially motivated? Maybe you were stalked as a potential shoplifter, or ignored as others got assistance, or handled with outright rudeness? Did you confront the clerk or manager? Simply leave in disgust? Or did you do your best to ignore it and make your purchase anyway?

Our research suggests that most African Americans have a story to tell. A mail survey of 1,000 households that we conducted with professor Thelma Suggs of Purdue University in the mid1990s found that 86 percent of African Americans believed they had been treated differently in retail stores because of their race.

It's a worthy topic year-round, but it seems especially relevant during this holiday shopping period, with the troubled economy making retailers more nervous than usual. According to the National Retail Federation, holiday season sales account for at least 25 percent of total annual retail sales of general merchandise, as people buy everything from clothes to cameras to coffee tables. Holiday sales - excluding automobile and restaurant revenues -- produce about $800 billion annually. But regardless of this year's special crisis, the issue of consumer racial profiling is critical and it would serve retailers' self-interest, not to mention those of all their potential customers, to eradicate it.

Many of these potential customers are African Americans with significant buying power. Black households are estimated to possess aggregate purchasing power of $572 billion in 2001, an increase of nearly 86 percent since 1991. Still, consumer racial profiling persists. It can take many forms, including some that draw incredulity in the 21 st century. There is avoidance, when a sales representative might simply ignore African American customers; discouragement, when a salesperson might delay waiting on customers; rejection, an outright denial of a chance to purchase a product; and finally there can be actual verbal and/ or physical attacks.

"Hidden camera" investigations by television newsmagazines such as Dateline and 20120 and articles in the popular press have documented all kinds of cases. In addition, professors Carol M. Motley of Howard University and Thomas L. Ainscough of the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater note in their own research, based on a field audit study, that African Americans wait longer for customer service in the retail industry than whites of the same gender. Getting a true national picture of this problem and whether it is rising or declining at any particular time is difficult, though. Newsmagazine shows and their cameras aren't everywhere. And there aren't enough social scientists to monitor every store.

Such discriminatory treatment can have serious consequences for retailers. For example, sales at Treasure Cache, a gift shop in Dearborn, Mich., fell more than 50 percent immediately after the death last year of an African American man during a fight with security guards from an adjacent Lord & Taylor store. Businesses also risk costly lawsuits. Dillard's Department Stores, Inc. lost $1.2 million in 1998 after a court ruling found that a store security officer interrupted an African American woman as she redeemed a coupon for free cologne and as a result had violated the woman's rights to enjoy the benefits of her contract with Dillard's.

Some organizations may justify violations against African Americans as collateral damage in their war against shoplifting, though one would expect such concerns would mean that all customers would face scrutiny, not just African American ones. Regardless, the numbers from the annual University of Florida survey on retail losses spotlight a significant point: Employee theft, at 44.5 percent, accounts for a far greater portion of the "shrinkage" at the nation's 200 largest retailers than shoplifting (32.7 percent). Given that fact, retailers might be better off channeling resources to "watch" employees rather than having employees "watch" customers based on race.

For instance, a white employee of The Children's Place Retail Stores Inc. filed discrimination charges against the Secaucus, N.J.-based national chain, alleging that African American shoppers were treated as potential criminals.

She alleged that her white supervisors in a Massachusetts store ordered her to shadow African American customers, to refuse them larger shopping bags and to withhold credit applications. Though the company (which owns 17 stores in Massachusetts and 365 stores nationwide) denies that it systematically monitored Black customers, it settled out of court, agreeing to improve employee training and donate $50,000 to charities. The Children's Place also agreed in December 2000 to spend up to $100,000 to examine its hiring and training practices.

The United States has legally addressed the issue of consumer racial profiling, however limited the effort. The U.S. Congress designed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 to ensure "that a dollar in the hands of a Negro will purchase the same thing as a dollar in the hands of a white" person. In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court described the purpose of Section #1981 of the 1866 act as follows: "The aim of the statute is to remove the impediment of discrimination from a minority citizen's ability to participate fully and equally in the marketplace."

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 further provides that: "All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation." This law aims "to eliminate the unfairness, humiliation, and insult of racial discrimination in facilities which purport to serve the general public."

Though the law is specific about outlawing discrimination in what is termed a "place of public accommodation," it is unclear whether a shopping mall or a retail store constitutes such a place. The public places emphasized were restaurants, hotels and motels places where it was believed discrimination was more likely to occur. Retail stores, food markets and the like were excluded from the act because it was believed there was little, if any, discrimination in such places. In other words, there are loopholes. It is conceivable, for example, that the law would address discrimination at a Woolworth's lunch counter but not necessarily confront any indignities African Americans might have experienced while trying to shop in a Woolworth's store without a lunch counter. But African Americans have never been without recourse.

Sociologist Joe R. Feagin of the University of Florida suggests several coping strategies: withdrawal, resigned acceptance, verbal or physical confrontation, and legal action. In academic circles, marketing researchers tend to aggregate all consumer responses under one of three strategies: exit (leave store), voice (complain, file a lawsuit, etc.) or loyalty (acceptance, continue to purchase from retailer).

For African Americans, it seems, chances are strong that the response did not include pursuing legal action. African American lawsuits challenging consumer racial profiling only began emerging in the 1990s. (We are studying 60 such cases filed between 1990 and 2000.) Still, the number of legal cases measured against the anecdotal and documented evidence of profiling suggests that African Americans are reluctant to file suit.

Social scientists are trying to determine why so few cases reach the legal system. In a series of recent experiments, psychology professor Karen Ruggiero of the University of Texas at Austin and her colleagues demonstrated that stigmatized people attribute their failure to discrimination only when they are certain of that discrimination. People may often avoid making such charges because they fear they have no control over the outcomes, which can be negative and include high costs, financial and emotional.

African Americans may also be reluctant to file suits because they know it will be difficult to prove discrimination. Most incidents do not provide an African American victim a chance to compare the service he or she received to the service a white customer may have received under similar conditions. This is problematic from a legal perspective.

In our ongoing study of the 60 lawsuits filed between 1990 and 2000, we have found some interesting details. More African American women than men have filed lawsuits. The cases also reflect more situations in which groups are present rather than an individual. In many of the cases, there are mixed groups, i.e., African Americans and whites together, and there is differential treatment of members in the two groups. The settings include grocery/food stores, clothing stores, department stores and office equipment stores. Some incidents include denying store access, refusing to serve customers, using racial epithets, asking for different forms of identification, limiting purchases, searching "suspicious" customers, requiring higher available credit limits, charging higher prices for service and asking more rigorous questions on applications. Defendants included major retailers such as Office Max, Wal-Mart, Sears, Dillard's, Macy's and Home Depot. In a number of these cases, the court ruled in favor of the company.

A new chapter on consumer racial profiling opened after the tragic events of Sept. 11. Another group, Arab Americans, have found themselves facing the kind of profiling that has dogged African Americans. Since the terrorists attacks on the United States, Arab Americans report being questioned and detained more, sometimes barred from boarding aircraft and even taken off planes by police and pilots. And it's not just Arabs. Retail profiling may impact anyone perceived to be Middle Eastern, including South Asians, Latinos and even Jews. In one incident, Northwest Airlines refused to let three passengers of Middle Eastern descent board a flight to Salt Lake City. In an apology, Northwest security officials acknowledged that they need to focus on passenger behavior, rather than appearance.

Sikhs have been particularly impacted. It's customary for Sikh men to wear turbans, and since Sept. 11th, they've paid dearly for it. Media reports note how they have been targeted for suspicion and attack though they are neither Arab nor Muslim. Rep. John Cooksey (R-La.) even ran political advertisements advocating racial profiling and has said "someone wearing a diaper on his head" meets the profile of a possible terrorist. At least one Sikh is believed to have been killed amid the hysteria.

Harmeet Kaur Dhillon, a senior litigation associate in the Palo Alto, Calif., office of Cooley Godward LLP, is a member of the Sikh Communications Council, a nonprofit organization composed of key Silicon Valley executives and professionals representing the Sikh community nationwide. The group recently hired a public relations consultant and launched an educational campaign to combat the racial profiling of Sikhs and other groups, including African Americans. It is also calling for congressional hearings on racial profiling.

Disturbingly enough, even African Americans have appeared to be supportive of profiling other groups when it comes to airline security. In a September Gallup poll, 71 percent of African American respondents, compared with 57 percent of whites and 63 percent of non-whites, favored requiring Arabs, including Arab Americans, to undergo greater security checks at U.S. airports. It should be noted that there were only 71 African Americans among the 1,032 respondents, only half as many as would have been needed for the sample to be representative of the U.S. population. Still, a follow-up poll by the Zogby International polling organization also found a higher overall percentage of African Americans favoring greater security checks for Arab Americans.

Besides the obvious reason of fear in the wake of nearly 3,300 people being killed on Sept. 11, there remains a question of why people from a group that has experienced such discrimination for so long might have been so supportive of these practices. Psychologist Stephen C. Wright offers one hypothesis based on social identity theory. Under this theory, when a disadvantaged group wins acceptance, members of the group will sometimes try to enhance that status by being harsh toward the new outsider. Is this what is happening with African Americans and Arab Americans? Far more research and analysis is necessary on the question.

Far more analysis and research on consumer retail profiling is necessary in general. There is now a large body of research on discrimination in major consumer purchasing such as housing and cars. However, economist Peter Siegelman at the University of Connecticut points out that we know relatively little about discrimination in other transactions, such as retail settings. In the meantime, African Americans must remain vigilant against all types of discrimination. Fighting back is key, whether it's through the courts or by wielding the hammer of purchasing power. It's the only way to make sure African Americans receive equal treatment for their equal dollars.

Jerome D. Williams and Geraldine RL Henderson are associate professors in the Marketing Department at the Howard University School of Business, and are affiliated with Howard's Center for Marketplace Diversity. Anne-Marie Harris is an assistant professor in the Management Department at the Salem State College School of Business in Massachusetts.

Printed with Author Permission. Editor Williams, Jerome D "Consumer racial profiling: Bigotry goes to market". New Crisis, The. 17 Aug, 2009.

Copyright Crisis Publishing Company, Incorporated Nov/Dec 2001
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved

Retail racism studied -University of Pittburg

There’s a lot more to racial profiling than traffic stops, according to a recent lecturer here.

“Current scholarship has only captured the tip of the racial profiling iceberg,” said Shaun L. Gabbidon, a professor of criminal justice in the School of Public Affairs at Penn State-Harrisburg.

While popular opinion and the majority of research on racial profiling center on traffic stops, the highway isn’t the only place profiling occurs. Consumer racial profiling — the act of discriminating against customers by retailers based upon their race or ethnicity — is another example.

“Not until after the civil rights movement could blacks even enter certain stores to get service. So we’re talking about fairly recent stuff, so why would we not expect that there would be problems in retail settings just as there are problems in traffic stops?” he said.

Gabbidon visited Pitt Oct. 10 to discuss his research, “Shopping Under Suspicion: Consumer Racial Profiling and Perceived Victimization in the City of Brotherly Love,” which was conducted with George Higgins of the University of Louisville. Gabbidon’s talk was hosted by the School of Social Work’s Center on Race and Social Problems.

Gabbidon said retail racism appears in two forms: lack of service and, more recently, minorities being stereotyped as shoplifters.

Business school research has examined customer service in relation to race, but there’s only a handful of scholarly literature on consumer racial profiling.

Citing a study in which researchers set up cameras in a drugstore to identify the characteristics of people who shoplift, Gabbidon said the research found that while “more people shoplift than we think,” minorities did not shoplift any more than other groups. “That’s a significant thing because we tend to rely on official data sources to determine who commits what offenses,” he said, noting that the official data statistics are “woefully inaccurate.” He said if profiling is occurring, more minorities are likely to be stopped, and consequently more people among those groups will be caught. “If you’re profiling, you’re likely to be stopping people you think are committing the offense. You’re focusing on one group, so your statistics are going to be skewed,” he said.

In choosing to concentrate his academic research on consumer racial profiling, Gabbidon drew upon his experience as a store detective at a suburban Baltimore department store. He said he noticed a trend in calls he’d receive from within the store. “I got a lot of calls about minorities going through the store. ‘Are you watching these individuals?’”

When he’d ask what they were doing, “They were just walking,” Gabbidon was told.“They really didn’t want to articulate what they thought was suspicious about these individuals,” he said.

A promotion took him to pricey Fairfax, Va., where, as the store’s assistant security manager, he was responsible for training new employees. “I’d talk about security, what to look for, the characteristics of people who might shoplift. I never said anything about race or anything like that,” but he’d still receive more calls about minorities. He said clerks are suspicious if a minority person walks into a Polo shop, as if minorities can’t afford Polo clothes.

Gabbidon recounted a time the store security office radioed him about a suspicious person in the store — only to realize by the description that Gabbidon himself was the man the nervous store clerk was reporting.

Gabbidon said the issue of retail racism really is two problems. One is that retailers lose huge amounts of money to theft. “The other problem is that people who walk into the store who are racial or ethnic minorities feel like they’re profiled. So we have those two competing things,” he said.

The underlying theory in his research is that labeling of people is based on stereotypes. “We attach races to particular types of crime,” he said. Stereotypes of the criminal black man persist. He cited an exercise he’s conducted on several college campuses in which he lists the eight most serious criminal offenses and asks students to attach the percentage of arrests they believe can be ascribed to each racial group. “In each case, everybody believes black people commit the most crimes in the United States,” he said. Until that misconception is corrected, profiling will continue, he said. Gabbidon’s research takes a holistic approach to the issue of consumer racial profiling, going beyond merely determining if it exists to discover how people react to the experience.

Gabbidon conducted a phone survey of nearly 500 people in Philadelphia, 47 percent black and 42.5 percent white. Forty-three percent reported they had experienced consumer racial profiling and, of these, 98 percent reported it had happened to them as an adult. Sixty-four percent said they experienced it occasionally, while 26 percent said it happened to them always or almost always.

Gabbidon found that men were twice as likely and blacks were 10 times more likely to report that they experienced consumer retail profiling. Interestingly, while household income did not seem to be a factor, respondents with more education were more likely to perceive themselves as victims of consumer racial profiling.

Department stores, grocery stores and clothing stores were most often noted as the places where the profiling occurred. In 57 percent of the reported incidents, the profiler was a clerk, not store security personnel. Most often, respondents reported being watched or followed throughout the store.

The survey found that profilers came from a variety of races. “It was not just a white person profiling a black person,” Gabbidon said. While 59 percent of the reported profilers were white, 24 percent were black, 11 percent were Asian and 5 percent Hispanic.

The vast majority of those who said they’d been profiled — 82 percent — said they didn’t report the incident. About half still made a purchase and 39 percent of the people said they would go back to the same store again. Seventy-two percent said they told family or friends about what had happened and, in 68 percent of those cases, “Most of them said they’d experienced it, too.”

Why don’t people report these incidents? “‘It’s not a big deal.’ That’s what they said,” Gabbidon reported. “They’ve normalized the treatment as part of the experience. You go into the store; this is what happens. You take care of your business and you leave.”

Gabbidon said he believes there are consequences to that choice, citing the emotional reactions of respondents. Eighty-eight percent said the experience made them angry; 62 percent said it was stressful. Other emotions respondents noted were sadness, shock and embarrassment. Twenty-nine percent said their self worth was impacted by the experience.

“If you internalize these things, it has a negative impact, physically, mentally and otherwise,” he said.

In his study, Gabbidon asked respondents what should be done about retail racial profiling. Almost half said some sort of training on the perils of profiling should be provided; 29 percent felt that diversifying the workforce could help and only 22 percent believed that the profilers should be fired. “People were concerned about the way in which they were treated, but they weren’t all willing to just fire employees. I think that probably a part of that has to do with the whole notion that they normalize it,” Gabbidon said. “In reality, if you’re paying a certain amount of money for a good and somebody else is paying a certain amount of money for the same good, shouldn’t you be getting the same treatment?” he asked. “You shouldn’t be followed around if other people aren’t followed around.”

Gabbidon noted that additional research needs to be done.

“One of the studies we need to do, one of the things we need to find out is where people get their ideas about race and crime. That is one of the problems because people bring their biases to work with them. That’s what it’s really about,” he said. “It’s not just the security person, it’s the clerk who makes the call because somewhere along the line they’ve gotten an idea about who shoplifts or who commits crime. Unless we correct these misguided ideas those calls are going to keep coming.”

Gabbidon said those who feel they’ve been profiled should take action. “You need to confront the retailers,” he said. “If you don’t file a report or complain to somebody, there’s no problem there. If those complaints mount, then somebody’s going to take action,” he said.

“If it’s something that made you uncomfortable, you have to let people know, ‘This is impacting on my shopping experience.’”

Racial profiling in traffic stops came to light because of lawsuits, he said, adding that getting retailers to change may be easier than changing government entities.

“If you hit retailers, it’s a little different than the government. This is a corporation that is in business to make money. And if there is anything that is stopping them from making money, they’re going to look at that. They have to look at it because they can’t exist without making money,” he said.
—Kimberly K. Barlow