Can APC Cure Nigeria's Headache? (1) By Chido Onumah

Chido Onumah

As the merger of the country’s major opposition parties crystallized a few months ago into a mega party known as All Progressives Congress (APC), I received an email from my friend, Richard Mammah, who wanted to get my opinion on the new party. “Is the new mega party in Nigeria a marginal improvement over where we are coming from?,” Mammah asked pointedly. My immediate response was emphatic: “It is (if it succeeds). It is important that genuine democrats and progressives find a way to key in as soon as possible.”

Since then, there have been debates (among progressives) about the desirability of “joining” the new party. Expectedly, the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) responded to news of the merger with disdain. “No merger will succeed against us in 2015” was the party’s official position through its former national secretary, Olagunsoye Oyinlola, who spoke to journalists in Abuja. Oyinlola dismissed the merger as “gang ups”.
“We don’t think we are threatened by what we would call gang ups”, said the former governor of Osun State who was sent packing by the court in 2010 before he could complete his second term. “In those days when the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) and Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP) closed ranks, it was called an accord. When the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) and Great Nigeria People’s Party (GNPP) did the same, they called it gang up.
“Honestly speaking, ganging up is an indication of some weaknesses. Why can’t a party stand on its own and contest elections if it is sure that it would be acceptable to the people? You don’t need to gang up. If you are ganging up then you don’t have the strength. The only true national party today that cuts across every nook and cranny of the Nigerian federation is the PDP. Gang up has never succeeded; it will not succeed.”

Oyinlola’s diatribe was upped by Governor Sule Lamido of Jigawa State who described the opposition parties as “inventions of the last two years”. “They are the invention of pain, agony and anger”, Lamido said, adding, “They thought PDP is like them. We have political party history from 1998 when they were not in existence. Those who were talking in ANPP, ACN and CPC were formally PDP members that were flushed out in the field by the party (PDP).”
Bamanga Tukur, the national chairman of the PDP, in his now infamous reaction to the merger described his party as the “Messi of Nigerian politics”. “If you go for a contest, you have the striker. You know Lionel Messi (Barcelona and Argentine football star)? PDP is Messi in that contest. They (opposition) are no threat at all. It is better, it inspires PDP to action. In that contest, tell them Chairman said PDP is the Messi.” Football lovers in the country must feel insulted and incensed by this laughable comparison.
Of course, the PDP is grandstanding and its disdain for the APC is borne out of fear more than anything else. I can understand the position of the Oyinlolas, Lamidos and Tukurs. It is one that demands no response. For them, there is no meaningful job other than being in the corridors of power. And that has to be done by any means necessary. I felt differently, however, when I read a response on the merger from a much younger former colleague, Ohimai Amaize, who “joined” the PDP by way of political appointment about three years ago.
In his piece, “The APC, is it a merger or ‘maga’?” Amaize asked, “What is the core ideology of this new contrivance? What is its blueprint for Nigeria’s regeneration? An existing manifesto or some consultants are still working on it? When will it be ready? Perhaps, a few months to the next general elections! And this is part of the problem. Contrivances don’t work”.
According to Amaize, “The assumption by some of our youth that Nigeria will be transformed simply because some ‘big guns’ within the political class have assembled under the toga of a new opposition party remains nothing but an illusion. The notion that a group of recycled politicians uniting against the ruling PDP in the name of ‘opposition’ will present an already-made change,  is at best, a hasty journey to a land of frustration. It is not that simple. There is nothing like already-made change. Nirvana does not exist. We must humble ourselves, bury our pride and work under existing political platforms no matter how educated and enlightened we think we are”.
Amaize admonished Nigerian youth to be wary of the APC. “When this new opposition party was being formed, what was its agenda for the youth?” Amaize wondered. “Is there any or will it hurriedly cook up one within the next few days? Which of the pro-APC youth activists on Twitter can confidently tell us the youth agenda of their new party? How many of my fellow Twitter busybodies were consulted to share their ideas for this merger before it was hatched? None! Because as far as they are concerned, you are not important in the scheme of things and do not exist”.
These are legitimate questions from a very “concerned” young Nigerian knowing Amaize’s antecedent before he joined the “transformation” wagon. However, the analysis shows a shallow and opportunistic reading of history. It presupposes Amaize is “happy” with the way things are in the country and if ever there is any talk of change, it can only take place “under existing political platforms”. And by this I am sure he means the PDP.
Of all the arguments in support of the emergence of APC, or what the response of genuine democrats should be to the new party, two stand out. In his piece “APC and the continuing crisis of Left politics in Nigeria”, Adagbo Onoja concluded that, “As long as there is no Left party or a broad based democratic coalition in Nigeria, comrades would have no options than spread to whichever platform they find space to continue the struggle in whatever ways possible”.
In his article, “Reflections on party combinations”, The Guardian, March 7 & 14, 2013, Edwin Madunagu noted: “The announcement of a merger of the leading opposition parties in Nigeria is a development which no serious political formation or tendency in the country can ignore or dismiss with cynicism of the type: ‘they always do this whenever a major election approaches’”.
“Yes, ‘they’ always announce coalitions, alliances, mergers, working agreements, etc, and the more uncharitable commentators may also remind us that they almost invariably fail to achieve their minimum post-announcement objective, that is, to actually deliver a living (and not a still-born or mortally sick) child”, Madunagu wrote. “When we have granted the cynics and pessimists their due, we may still insist that we are confronted with a development, which rules out the option of ‘Siddon look’.”
These two arguments speak for themselves and capture, to a great extent, what the response of radical and progressive elements, particularly youth and students, should be with regard to the APC as we head toward 2015.
To be continued.
Saharareporters

Hard View: Sacrificing Peace Or Justice

Hannatu Musawa

Justice or peace? Basically that’s what it boils down to. Since the beginning of the offensive by Boko Haram, there has been widespread debate about how to bring the bloody onslaught to an end. With so many divergent voices lending themselves to the debate of whether the particular strategy developed along the lines of amnesty is appropriate, given the surrounding circumstance; it’s anyone’s guess as to which side of the pendulum president Jonathan will ultimately land on the matter.
There is no doubt, the section of Boko Haram and other extremists that ignite this debate are a mob of ignorant, depraved, erroneous, wicked and misguided zealots  who have committed the most vile,  heinous, evil and immoral crimes against innocent people; women and children whom have done absolutely nothing to them. And for that, under any structure or belief system, there has to be retribution. In any country of the world, criminal prosecution of those accused of committing crimes is a fundamental aspect of a victim’s right to justice. However, sometimes the concept of remedial justice for victims often has to be balanced against the need to deal effectively and progressively with the atrocities and not provoke or maintain further violence. In such a circumstance, a restorative justice approach incorporating amnesty, focusing on the normative rather than the punitive objectives of criminal law, may be the more appropriate model. And that is how the issue of amnesty for Boko Haram comes into the fray, since the current situation we are in could be said to lend itself to such a circumstance.
From time immemorial, amnesty has been employed as a means of promoting settlement and advancing reconciliation in societies that have emerged from repression. But even though, it is a tool that was historically often utilized in conflict resolution, it was never entirely viewed as the best option; only a necessary one. When atrocities are committed with such impunity, as is the case with Boko Haram, and are merely dealt with by forgiveness and restorative justice, for the concept of human rights to have real legitimacy, they must connect up with retributive conceptions of justice. And a carte-blanche amnesty for Boko Haram, despite the atrocious mass murders and butchering they have subjected innocent Nigerians to, does not meet up with that standard.
Putting the issue of human rights aside for now, whether amnesty is the wisest course for the government to pursue with Boko Haram essentially remains a matter of debate and perception. Instead of examining the pros and cons of amnesty for Boko Haram on a large scale; instead of making arguments about setting bad precedents, previous amnesty agreements with criminal, renegade Niger Delta militants and not negotiating with ghosts, I opt to examine what the adoption or rejection of amnesty really means; what it would represent. Perhaps, if we remove all our emotional and sentimental blinkers, and break down the implications of any amnesty deal to their very basic indices, we might have a different way of assessing what the adoption or rejection of amnesty for Boko Haram really represents.
Fundamentally, in its simplest form, the adoption of amnesty for Boko Haram entails a choice between peace and justice. Peace and justice; two resolutions that inspire and give way to each other, would normally go together and complement each other. Ideally, any strategy adopted in this matter should incorporate both concepts. But when we are dealing with the kind of amnesty we are discussing at this immediate time within the backdrop of the atrocities that have been committed, the amnesty may only offer the best prospect for peace, not justice. Within this our particular impasse, unless Boko Haram surrender and offer them-selves up for trial and prosecution today, the two concepts certainly cannot be applied in a manner where they co-exist together. There is just no getting away from it, Peace verses Justice must be brought to a direct point when we talk about amnesty for Boko Haram. And if there is a dichotomy between the two, as suggested in this case, and a single choice has to be made, what ought we to prefer?
I have my own personal views on the issue and find that, for me, it is a battle of conscience for the past against the present. The past, because for the victims and for the crimes that have already been committed, justice should be served. The present, because the innocent people existing within the eye of the storm deserve some reprieve, deserve peace. But a third facet of this reasoning, the most important one, is the future. Given a singular choice between the concept of peace and justice, which option has the ability to actually change the status quo and provide the most stable and secure future for Nigerians?
History shows that in countries which have come out of oppressive regimes and trials where crimes against humanity were committed, the peace deals that sacrifice justice often fail to give way to the expected peace in the long run. Whereas justice initiates a fundamental change in society that adjusts the situations that allowed for the conflict, peace deals arguably only restore societies back to a state of non-war; principally one that allowed for the crisis in the first place. One would be hard pressed to find a case where a system that selects justice ever leads to a return to that conflict. Therefore based on this argument, peace should never be favored over justice, only to allow it to inspire justice.
On the other hand, while international and national criminal trials promote justice, the quest for justice can be a long winding road and can exacerbate divisions and may even hinder the achievement of peace. Usually, those who face the potential for prosecution may be reluctant to lay down arms, giving way for the violence to continue. Instead, amnesties for perpetrators are often thought to promote peace and reconciliation, though it is sought at the expense of retributive justice. Amnesties can also provide the calm environment necessary for reflection and dialogue to end the conflict.
It is essential for the government upon pondering their decision on whether to give amnesty to Boko Haram to gauge the views of the population most affected by the violence rather than instigating plans based on the views of politicians and dogmatists. The communities, the families, the businesses, the various ethnicities residing in the red zones, those that have been targeted, hounded and slaughtered should have the first-refusal to make an input into the decision government makes about amnesty. It is their views that should count first and foremost. Unless the government and security agencies have concrete plans to ensure the security of every family living in the target communities, it is their cries, their anguish and not those of the naysayers not directly affected by the violence or those politicizing and tribalizing the issue, which the government should take into account, in addition to providing full reparation to all the victims and their relatives.
Any initiative that the government eventually applies in regards to amnesty for terrorists should ideally balance the demand for justice against the need for peace and reconciliation. And while the lack of amnesty for Boko Haram can provide accountability and amnesty can provide stability, the attainment of both at this very point in time is almost impossible. A choice has to be made on the resolution the government will adopt. And the choice needs to be made pretty soon… People are dying.
So as we continue to unravel this morbid, dark drama that Boko Haram has visited upon us, we can be certain that the choice is not about which group of criminals deserve amnesty and which don’t, it’s not about a perverse allegiance to ethnicity or religion, it’s not even about an incompetent government lead by a president that does not seem to have a clue; it’s about what we are willing to sacrifice; Justice for the cause of Peace or Peace for the cause of Justice?
Over to you President Johnny, Sir! So what will it be…; Peace or Justice?
  Saharareporters

HYPERTENSION: Pharmacists Caution Against High Consumption Of Noodles, Paracetamol

As Nigeria joins the rest of the world to mark this year’s World Health Day, with the theme “High Blood Pressure”, the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria, PSN, has cautioned against unrestrained consumption of foods such as noodles which are high in salt content, and drugs such as paracetamol that contain sodium, as a way of effectively addressing risk factors for raised blood pressure or hypertension.
Giving the warning in a statement to mark the Day in Lagos, President, PSN, Pharm. Olumide Akintayo said: “The risk of developing high blood pressure can be reduced by reducing salt intake, eating a balanced diet, avoiding harmful use of alcohol, taking regular physical activity, maintaining a healthy body weight, and avoiding tobacco use.”
Akintayo observed that reduction of hypertension in the Nigerian population can only be effected through strong public health policies such as reduction of salt in processed food and widely available diagnosis and treatment that tackle hypertension and other risk factors together.
His words: “The Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria, PSN, admonishes the consuming public on dietary patterns which is critical in hypertension. Some popular diets like some brands of noodles account for 61 percent of daily salt requirement in the smallest packs.
“Newly promoted brands of soluble paracetamol with about 450mg of sodium per tablet which transcends 2.7g daily when six tabs are taken a day will be inimical to the health of hypertensives and so call for caution,” Akintayo said.
More
Naij.com

Nigerians too timid to push for revolution, says Rivers Governor, Amaechi

Abdulrahman Abdulmalik

Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi

Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers on Saturday said most Nigerians have resigned themselves to lives of suffering and lacked the necessary courage to force a change in their country.
Speaking in Ado-Ekiti, the Ekiti State capital, at the second Nigeria Symposium for Young and Emerging Leaders, Mr. Amaechi said Nigeria would not undergo a forceful revolution anytime soon because citizens are too timid and unwilling to make sacrifices.
He said the terrible living standards in Nigeria had made the country long ripe for a revolution but that citizens needed the kind of courage that forced change in Libya, Egypt and elsewhere. and has ruled out the possibility of having a violent revolution in the country.
He said, “Yes, revolution can happen outside Nigeria. But here, I do not think so. Tell me what happened in Sudan, Libya, Zimbabwe and other countries that have not happened here.
“Our elasticity has no limit. You do not pray for electricity to be regular but you know that some Nigerians pray ‘God, let the light be stable today.’  We pray without working to solve our problems and we think God will do what we are supposed to do for us.”
The governor, who said he would never support Nigeria’s disintegration, said whoever wanted a change in Nigeria must be prepared to face up to guns and other instruments of intimidation and harassment.
A lot of young people across the country attended the symposium which also had  Ekiti State Governor, Kayode Fayemi, polician and businessman, Pat Utomi, Chief Executive Officer of Sahara Group, Tonye Cole, among others in attendance.
 PremiumTimes

A Warning to Young People: Don't Become a Teacher

Nothing I have ever done has brought me as much joy as I have received from teaching children how to write the past 14 years. Helping young writers grow and mature has been richly rewarding and I would not trade my experiences for anything.
That being said, if I were 18 years old and deciding how I want to spend my adult years, the last thing I would want to become is a classroom teacher.
Classroom teachers, especially those who are just out of college and entering the profession, are more stressed and less valued than at any previous time in our history.
They have to listen to a long list of politicians who belittle their ability, blame them for every student whose grades do not reach arbitrary standards, and want to take away every fringe benefit they have -- everything from the possibility of achieving tenure to receiving a decent pension.
Young teachers from across the United States have told me they no longer have the ability to properly manage classrooms, not because of lack of training, not because of lack of ability, not because of lack of desire, but because of upper administration decisions to reduce statistics on classroom referrals and in-school and out-of-school suspensions. As any classroom teacher can tell you, when the students know there will be no repercussions for their actions, there will be no change in their behavior. When there is no change in their behavior, other students will have a more difficult time learning.
Teachers are being told over and over again that their job is not to teach, but to guide students to learning on their own. While I am fully in favor of students taking control of their learning, I also remember a long list of teachers whose knowledge and experience helped me to become a better student and a better person. They encouraged me to learn on my own, and I did, but they also taught me many things. In these days when virtual learning is being force-fed to public schools by those who will financially benefit, the classroom teacher is being increasingly devalued. The concept being pushed upon us is not of a teacher teaching, but one of who babysits while the thoroughly engaged students magically learn on their own.
During the coming week in Missouri, the House of Representatives will vote on a bill which would eliminate teacher tenure, tie 33 percent of our pay to standardized test scores (and a lesser, unspecified percentage for those who teach untested subjects) and permit such innovations as "student surveys" to become a part of the evaluation process.
Each year, I allow my students to critique me and offer suggestions for my class. I learn a lot from those evaluations and have implemented some of the suggestions the students have made. But there is no way that eighth graders' opinions should be a part of deciding whether I continue to be employed.
The Missouri House recently passed a budget that included $2.5 million to put Teach for America instructors in our urban schools. The legislature also recently acted to extend the use of ABCTE (American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence), a program that allows people to switch careers and become teachers without having to go through required teaching courses.
It is hard to get past the message being sent that our teachers are not good enough so we have to go outside to find new ones.
And of course to go along with all of these slaps in the face to classroom teachers, the move toward merit pay continues. Merit pay and eliminating teacher tenure, while turning teachers into at-will employees are the biggest disservice our leaders can do to students. How many good classroom teachers will no longer be in the classroom because they question decisions by ham handed administrators looking to quickly make a name for themselves by implementing shortsighted procedures that might look good on resumes, but will have a negative impact on student learning.
If you don't believe this kind of thing will happen, take a look at what has occurred in our nation's public schools since the advent of No Child Left Behind. Everything that is not math or reading has been de-emphasized. The teaching of history, civics, geography, and the arts have shrunk to almost nothing in some schools, or are made to serve the tested areas. Elementary children have limited recess time so more time can be squeezed in for math and reading.
Even worse, in some schools weeks of valuable classroom time are wasted giving practice standardized tests (and tests to practice for the practice standardized tests) so obsessive administrators can track how the students are doing. In many school districts across the nation, teachers have told me, curriculum is being based on these practice standardized tests.
That devaluation and de-emphasis of classroom teachers will grow under Common Core Standards. Pearson, the company that has received the contract to create the tests, has a full series of practice tests, while other companies like McGraw-Hill with its Acuity division, are already changing gears from offering practice materials for state tests to providing comprehensive materials for Common Core.
Why would anyone willingly sign up for this madness?
As a reporter who covered education for more than two decades, and as a teacher who has been in the classroom for the past 14 years, I cannot remember a time when the classrooms have been filled with bad teachers. The poor teachers almost never lasted long enough to receive tenure. Whether it is was because they could not maintain control over their classrooms or because they did not have sufficient command over their subject matter, they soon found it wise to find another line of work.
Yes, there are exceptions -- people who slipped through the cracks, and gained tenure, but there is nothing to stop administrators from removing those teachers. All tenure does is to provide teachers with the right to a hearing. It does not guarantee their jobs.
Times have changed. I have watched over the past few years as wonderfully gifted young teachers have left the classroom, feeling they do not have support and that things are not going to get any better.
In the past, these are the teachers who stayed, earned tenure, and built the solid framework that has served their communities and our nation well.
That framework is being torn down, oftentimes by politicians who would never dream of sending their own children to the kind of schools they are mandating for others.
Despite all of the attacks on the teachers, I am continually amazed at the high quality of the young people who are entering the profession. It is hard to kill idealism, no matter how much our leaders (in both parties) try.
I suppose I am just kidding myself about encouraging young people to enter some other profession, any other profession, besides teaching.
After all, what other profession would allow me to make $37,000 a year after 14 years of experience and have people tell me how greedy I am?

 HuffingtonPost

Uruguay Legalizes Gay Marriage

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay — Uruguayan lawmakers voted Wednesday to legalize gay marriage, making the South American country the third in the Americas to do so.
Supporters of the law, who had filled the public seats in the legislative building, erupted in celebration when the results were announced. The bill received the backing of 71 of the 92 members of the Chamber of Deputies present.
"We are living a historic moment," said Federico Grana, a leader of the Black Sheep Collective, a gay rights group that drafted the proposal. "In terms of the steps needed, we calculate that the first gay couples should be getting married 90 days after the promulgation of the law, or in the middle of July."
The "marriage equality project," as it is called, was already approved by ample majorities in both legislative houses, but senators made some changes that required a final vote by the deputies. Among them: Gay and lesbian foreigners will now be allowed to come to Uruguay to marry, just as heterosexual couples can, said Michelle Suarez of the Black Sheep Collective.
President Jose Mujica, whose governing Broad Front majority backed the law, is expected to put it into effect within 10 days.
Nationalist Sen. Gerardo Amarilla opposed the law, saying it "debases the institution of marriage" and affects the family, especially in its "role in procreation."
The vote makes Uruguay the third country in the Americas after Canada and Argentina to eliminate laws making marriage, adoption and other family rights exclusive to heterosexuals. In all, 12 nations around the world now have taken this step.
While some countries have carved out new territory for gay and lesbian couples without affecting heterosexual marrieds, Uruguay is creating a single set of rules for all people, gay or straight. Instead of the words "husband and wife" in marriage contracts, it refers to the gender-neutral "contracting parties."
All couples will get to decide which parent's surname comes first when they have children. All couples can adopt, or undergo in-vitro fertilization procedures.
The legislation also updates divorce laws in Uruguay, which in 1912 gave women only the right to unilaterally renounce their wedding vows as a sort of equalizer to male power. Now either spouse will be able to unilaterally request a divorce and get one. The law also raises the age when people can legally marry from 12 years old for girls and 14 for boys to 16 for both genders.
Outside congress, gay couples holding hands, transvestites and transgender couples jumped in celebration when the result was announced. People in costumes carrying Uruguayan and rainbow flags danced to electronic music.
"I have all the rights and obligations of everyone else. I pay my taxes and fulfill my responsibilities, why would I be discriminated against?" said Roberto Acosta, a 62-year-old retired gay man.
Mujica, who spent more than a decade in prison for his actions as a leftist guerrilla in the 1970s and still lives on a ramshackle flower farm in a poor neighborhood on the edge of Uruguay's capital, has pushed for a series of liberal laws recently. Congress agreed to decriminalize abortion, but Mujica had to suspend an effort to put the government in charge of the marijuana business, saying society has to reach consensus on that idea first.
Uruguay's Roman Catholic Church asked lawmakers to vote their conscience and challenged the label of "marriage equality" as a false pretext, saying it's "not justice but an inconsistent assimilation that will only further weaken marriage."
HuffingtonPost

Mystery Of 1938 'Time Traveler' With Cell Phone Solved?

The mystery surrounding a video that appears to show a young woman talking on a cell phone in 1938 may be solved. The explanation, if true, is sure to disappoint many conspiracy theorists.
The black-and-white footage shows a group of young people, possibly factory workers, walking out of a building. A brunette in a light-colored dress smiles into the camera, her hand pressed to her ear. She is holding what looks to be a large portable phone.
The Daily Mail reports that the clip surfaced online about a year ago and kicked off speculation about a time traveler caught on camera. Recently, a YouTube commenter who goes by the handle Planetcheck claimed to know the woman in the footage.
Though the version of the YouTube clip with Planetcheck's original comments has been removed, the Daily Mail and Yahoo! News blog The Sideshow copied some of Planetcheck's claims before the video disappeared.
According to the posts, Planetcheck professes to be the grandchild of the cell phone woman. Her name is Gertrude Jones, Planetcheck writes, and she was not a time traveler.
"She was 17 years old," Planetcheck writes. "I asked her about this video and she remembers it quite clearly. She says Dupont [the company that reportedly owns the factory in the video] had a telephone communications section in the factory. They were experimenting with wireless telephones. Gertrude and five other women were given these wireless phones to test out for a week. Gertrude is talking to one of the scientists holding another wireless phone who is off to her right as she walks by."
Wireless phones in the 1930s? YouTubers were skeptical.
Answering YouTube critics who questioned why such an amazing device received so little notice for several decades, Planetcheck blamed the factory owners:

Maybe they decided it was too far advanced for people and they abandoned the idea. ... Ideas are hatched, prototypes are made and sometimes like this phone they are forgotten until somebody discovers some long lost film of the world first wireless phone and marvels at it.

Planetcheck also claimed to still have the phone in a glass box somewhere. (We'll believe that when we see it.)
David Mikkelson, founder of Snopes.com, a website that specializes in analyzing popular Internet theories, told The Huffington Post in a telephone interview that videos like this one are as difficult to disprove as they are to prove.
"You can take any piece of WWII footage showing someone holding something to the side of their head talking, and claim it is a time traveling cell phone user," Mikkelson said. "Film clips aren't of sufficient resolution to see what the people are carrying. It could be anything from a handkerchief to a hearing aid, or who knows what. And this video is silent, so you can't even tell if the person is engaged in a two-way conversation."
Mikkelson added it is plausible Dupont could have been working on some sort of hand-held prototype, similar to a walkie-talkie. Still, he remained skeptical.
"I doubt it would have just been handed out to a young woman working at the factory," he said. "And why isn't there documentation?"
Neither Planetcheck nor Dupont could not be reached for comment.
A similar "time traveler" video captured the imaginations of conspiracy theorists in 2010. The clip consists of unreleased footage from a 1928 Charlie Chaplin film and shows a woman in the background walking while appearing to talk on a cell phone. Was she a time traveler, or was she just holding her hand up to her face as she passed in front of the camera?
And who could forget the photo of a 19th-century man who looks uncannily like actor Nicolas Cage? While some speculate that Cage is a time traveler, others joked that he might be a vampire. Cage has denied both rumors.
HuffingtonPost