Saturday, 20 July 2013

Femi Adesina: One day, they’ll tell us Kudirat killed herself


By  
Since he was sentenced to death by hanging in January last year for the 1996 murder of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola, I’d had mixed feelings about the fate to befall Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, the Chief Security Officer to former Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha.
Something in me wanted him hanged so that the course of justice would be duly served, and those with propensity for evil would take warning, while another thing in me cringed at the very idea.
Hang Mustapha after almost 15 years in Kirikiri prisons, standing trial? Fifteen years! That was like first waving a man over hellfire for that long a period before then dropping him into the cauldron. He would be many times dead by then.
I was between and betwixt. I wanted Mustapha hanged, I also wanted him freed, what a dilemma! Have you read Snake, that classic poem by D. H. Lawrence? Then you would understand my mixed feelings.
The poet had gone to his water-trough on a hot afternoon, only to meet a long yellow-brown snake drinking from the same place. “He sipped with his straight mouth, Softly drank through his straight gums, into his slack long body, Silently,” wrote D. H. Lawrence. And there came the poet’s dilemma. He began to hear two voices.
One, the voice of his education, and the second, the voice of his naturalness. “The voice of my education said to me He must be killed, For in Sicily, the black, black snakes are innocent, the gold are venomous.” But what did the second voice say?
The poet described the feelings evoked in him by that second voice this way: “But must I confess how I liked him, How glad I was he had come like a guest in quiet, to drink at my water-trough, And depart peaceful, pacified, and thankless, Into the burning bowels of this earth?”
The poet was transfixed, as the snake drank enough “and lifted his head, dreamily, as one who has drunken, And flickered his tongue like a forked night on the air, so black, seeming to lick his lips, And looked around like a god, unseeing, into the air, And slowly turned his head, And slowly, very slowly, as if thrice adream, Proceeded to draw his slow length curving round, And climb again the broken bank of my wall-face.”
As the snake retreated to where it came from, that was when the voice of the poet’s education became predominant. D. H. Lawrence took what he called “a clumsy log,” and “threw it at the water-trough with a clatter.” It did not hit the snake, but the creature writhed like lightning, and disappeared into the black hole from which it had come. But the poet regretted his action. “I thought how paltry, how vulgar, what a mean act! I despised myself and the voices of my accursed human education… And I wished he would come back, my snake…”
That was a 1923 poem by D. H. Lawrence. Today, 90 years later, one is experiencing the same dilemma. Hang Al-Mustapha, no, free him. Bludgeon him, no, let him drink free at your water-trough and go. Let him pay fully for the crimes he committed as Abacha’s CSO.
No, he has suffered enough. Between and betwixt, oscillating between two opinions… However, let’s make one thing clear at this point. Al-Mustapha is not an assassin, he’s not a murderer, no matter what we think or feel. Feelings have nothing to do with the law.
Emotions or sentiments have no place. Only cold, plain, hard facts do. Emotion says Al-Mustapha ordered the killing of people like Pa Alfred Rewane, Dr Shola Omosola, Olu Onagoruwa’s son, the shooting of Alex Ibru, Pa Abraham Adesanya, and was generally behind the disappearance of many others during Sani Abacha’s evil regime. So, he is guilty, and must be hanged. But the law says otherwise.
This law, which they say is an ass. Even if the law was present and saw Mustapha performing all those heinous acts, it still asks you for evidences.
If you can’t provide any rock-solid one, the law tells you the accused is not guilty, even if he is as guilty as hell. That was what happened last Friday at the Court of Appeal in Lagos. The honourable justices, irrespective of what they felt personally about Mustapha, said he had no case to answer on Kudirat Abiola’s murder.
So he not only got discharged, he was also acquitted. Even if some of the justices personally wanted the accused hanged upside down by his toenails, or right side up by the very hair of his head, they had no choice, as the cold facts were not there. So, Al-Mustapha went home a free man. I say it again, the law is an ass.
But it is a supreme ass, before whom we must all bow, otherwise, anarchy will ensue in the land. What were the points of law raised by the justices that made them overturn the earlier death sentence given last year by Justice Mojisola Dada of the High Court? No direct evidence that Mustapha and his co-accused, Lateef Shofolahan, conspired to kill Kudirat. The statements of the prosecution witnesses were contradictory.
Sergeant Barnabas Jabila, popularly called Rogers, who had earlier confessed that the former CSO sent him to kill Kudirat, later recanted. The bullet extracted from Kudirat’s head was not presented at trial. Other witnesses who ought to have been called were not called. And on, and on. And the justices submitted: “In a criminal trial, the burden of proof is to prove beyond reasonable doubt, and this is a chain that cannot be broken.”
True. No matter how we feel about Mustapha’s acquittal, it was solid on points of law (as far as we laymen know). And one other thing to be deduced is that the prosecution was poor, sloppy, wishy-washy, harum-scarum. I think the prosecutors were the ones who did the case in. They are the ones who opened fresh wounds in the hearts of the Abiola family, particularly Kudirat’s children, last week. How can you handle such landmark case and bungle it?
God give us attorneys like the one we read as youngsters in the Perry Mason series, written by Erle Stanley Gardner, the American bestselling novelist.
Al-Mustapha is back home, good luck to him. But I hope he’s not feeling like a hero. The bitter truth is that he was part of what has gone down in history as perhaps the most evil regime in this country. He wielded power as if there would be no tomorrow. But tomorrow came, as it would always come, and yesterday’s man of power was soon fighting for his own life. Let people learn.
Power should be held for the good of the people, and not for personal aggrandizement, not for tyranny, nor for gratuitous masturbation. Use power wantonly like Al-Mustapha did, face the consequences someday later. Only that you may not be as lucky as he is now, escaping the gallows by the skin of his teeth.
Why did we develop some empathy for the ex-CSO along the way? The trial was too long. Almost 15 years to try a case? Damn too long, and let our judiciary hear it. The judicial system begs for reforms, and we need it speedily.
That is the way justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done. Do it expeditiously, with no room for filibuster. No room for villains to suddenly becomes heroes overnight. Remember the tortoise, which caught his father-in-law stealing yams from his (tortoise’s) farm.
What did he do? He chained the in-law to a tree beside the road on market day. As people went to the market, they laughed the in-law to scorn, calling him all sorts of names, deriding and excoriating him for being a sneaky thief. Tortoise was having a ball, and refused all the entreaties of his father-in-law for mercy.
However, by the evening hours, when people were returning from the market, and still saw the in-law manacled to a tree, their comments changed. Tortoise became the villain. You want to kill your in-law?
What did he steal from you, is it not just yams? Is that why you must kill him? Tortoise, you are wicked. Your other in-laws should denounce you. They must withdraw their daughter from you immediately. When a trial lasts for as long as Mustapha’s did, it becomes like the case of tortoise and his in-law.
The villain turns a hero. On the flipside, there’s another lesson to learn in fidelity from some people who stood by the embattled CSO through thick and thin. Irrespective of what people felt and said, they remained true to Al-Mustapha.
They include his brother Hadi, founder of Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC), Dr Frederick Fasehun, soccer coach (of the wobbling and fumbling fame) Fanny Amun, publisher of Conscience International, Chief Abiola Ogundokun, and many others. Like the Yoruba people say, no matter how evil the day is, there are people who stick to you like a shadow. There is a friend who sticks closer than a brother.
Good to see people who remain true to their convictions, irrespective of people’s judgment. Having said all the above, however, if truly Al-Mustapha was involved in the murder of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola, he can only be acquitted in the human court. Another judgment lies ahead, in which no guilty can ever go free.
It is the divine judgment. The Good Book says the sin of some people goes ahead of them to the judgment seat.
I believe murder is one of such sins, and whoever murdered Kudirat for fighting for the revalidation of her husband’s electoral mandate of June 12, 1993, will not, and can not, escape the judgement of God. It is sure, inexorable, immutable.
And it is only a matter of time, as nobody lives forever. Again, Al-Mustapha’s acquittal does not mean we should automatically close the file on Kudirat’s murder. The fact remains that on June 4, 1996, the woman was gunned down in the streets of Lagos.
Some people ordered the gruesome act. Some others pulled the trigger. Whodunit? We need to know. For more than 60 years, the world was still hunting down and prosecuting those who perpetrated crimes against humanity under Nazi rule in Germany. Why then should we draw the curtains on who killed Kudirat after just 17 years?
The Department of State Security (DSS) has been doing a great job in tracking down insurgents in recent times. Can they not also be vested with this assignment? Or is the trail cold already? No, it should not be, not as long as those who gave the order and those who actually pulled the trigger are running free.
But Nigeria is a funny country. Kudirat’s murder may join the long list of such unresolved killings: Harry Marshal, Bola Ige, Bisoye Tejuosho, Aminoasari Dikibo, Funsho Williams, and many others. The way things are going, we may soon prove right our foremost filmmaker and leader of Iroko music band, Dr Ola Balogun, who said in a text message early this week: “One day, they’ll tell us that Kudirat Abiola killed herself.”
Yes, maybe it was self-slaughter. She actually put the gun to her own temple, and pulled the trigger! Nigeria? What a country!
DailyPost

US: Queen of IRS tax fraud’ on Facebook gets 21 years in prison after stealing $20 million


queen-irs
  • 0
     
    Share
  • Mother of three boasted she was ‘Queen of IRS fraud’ on Facebook
  • Police alerted to scam after spotting drop in drug-dealing
A mother of three, who taunted authorities to catch her as she stole about $20 million from the IRS, has been jailed for 21 years.Rashia Wilson, who pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft earlier this year, admitted to stealing more than $3 million but the figure is believed to be much higher.
Tampa police were first alerted to the fraud in 2010 when they noticed a drop in drug dealing in the area.
As Wilson, who became known as the ‘First Lady of tax fraud’ was sentenced on Tuesday, she was denied the chance to hug her three children, aged between 2 and 12, good-bye, according to the Tampa Bay Times.
‘She knew what she was doing was wrong. She reveled in the fact that it was wrong,’ U.S. District Judge James. S. Moody Jr. said.
The 27-year-old, who also pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, had boasted on Facebook that she was untouchable.
‘I’m Rashia, the queen of IRS tax fraud,’ the post stated. ‘I’m a millionaire for the record, so if U think indicting me will B easy it won’t, I promise you! U need more than black and white to hold me down N that’s to da rat who went N told, as if 1st lady don’t have da TPD under her spell. I run Tampa right now.’
A psychologist brought in to testify for the defense argued the Facebook post was a sign of Wilson’s bi-polar disorder, which made her liable to brag.
Lavish: Wilson, who lived in a large house, spent the money on designer handbags, big screen TVs and cars
Lavish: Wilson, who lived in a large house, spent the money on designer handbags, big screen TVs and cars

Pay back: Wilson's $90,000 Audi A8 is towed from her Florida home
Pay back: Wilson’s $90,000 Audi A8 is towed from her Florida home
Valerie McClain told the court that ‘adolescent bragging’ in Facebook posts is consistent with manic-phase behavior. Wilson had bi-polar diagnosed when she was 14.
Wilson’s fraud was discovered during a two-year investigation called ‘Operation Rain Maker’, named in reference to all the money raining down on the suspects’ mail boxes, according to ABC News.
The multi-agency investigation included Tampa Police Department, IRS-Criminal Investigations, the Secret Service, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Hills­borough County Sheriff’s Office.
Those involved in the tax fraud operation used stolen Social Security numbers to file returns, according to the Global Dispatch.
The scam meant that ordinary taxpayers had to wait for up to a year to receive their refunds.
Rashia Wilson
Rashia Wilson
Sentenced: Rashia Wilson, who has been jailed for 21 years, has been in trouble with the police before

Rashia Wilson
Rashia Wilson
Previous convictions: The 27-year-old has been booked on several occasions by Florida police since 2004

Rashia Wilson
Rashia Wilson
Arrest record: Wilson has been arrested previously for grand theft auto, robbery, battery and affray
Wilson, whose mother was addicted to cocaine when she was born, and whose father was in prison while she was growing up, came from a life of poverty to extreme wealth.

HOW WILSON SPENT HER MILLIONS

$90,000 on an Audi A8.
$30,000 on her son’s first birthday party, which included carnival rides for children to play on.
Designer handbags from Prada, Gucci and Louis Vuitton.
Jewellery, including a custom-made necklace spelling out her name in jewels, which she wore in a photograph that showed her posing with stacks of money.
When police searched her Wimauma home they removed electronic goods, including large flat-screen TVs.
Although she still claimed food stamps during her fraud, she used the ill-gotten gains to fund a lavish lifestyle which included spending $30,000 on her son’s first birthday, buying a $90,000 Audi and designer handbags and sunglasses.
Wilson also had a custom-designed necklace, spelling out her name in jewels, made for her, according toFox News.
As well as finding designer goods at her home in Wimauma, police said the number of security cameras around the property had raised suspicions.
Wilson has been ordered to $3.1 million in restitution.
The amount reflects the estimated loss to the government at the time of her plea. The investigation later found the figure to be higher but the judge agreed to honor the plea agreement.
She will owe the restitution with co-defendant Maurice Larry, who has sentencing hearings due in August and September.
Scam: The investigation was named Operation Rain Maker because of the money raining down on suspects' mail boxesScam: The investigation was named Operation Rain Maker because of the money raining down on suspects’ mail boxes
At the time of the investigation, 13 people were arrested for charges including identity theft, scheming to defraud and fraudulent use of credit cards.
Tampa police major Ken Morman told ABC last year that a decline in drug dealing suggested criminals had found a more lucrative business.
He said the suspects would use hotel rooms and rented houses to train recruits about how to commit the fraud.
NewsRescue

How Fraudulent Allocation of Oil Blocs in Nigeria Made Folorunsho Alakija the Richest Black Woman In the World

How Fraudulent Allocation of Oil Blocs in Nigeria Made Folorunsho Alakija the Richest Black Woman In the World FEATURED
Indiscriminate allocation of oil blocs in Nigeria dates back during the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida when he, Babangida, started the process of discretionary allocation of oil blocs
to indigenous firms. Discretionary allocation of oil blocs entails that a president or head of state (as the case may be) can reward a mistress with an oil bloc with capacity for cumulative yield of over $20 billion dollars without much sweat.
Babangida, Abacha, Abdulsalami and Obasanjo awarded discretionary oil blocs to friends, associates, family members, party chieftains, security chiefs and all categories of close allies with wanton disregard for any procedures.
It is worthy to note that, recipients of such oil blocs will get funds from ever willing offshore financiers and partners to graciously settle the benefactors, the awarders, facilitators and the Commander-in-Chief through fronts. These settlements mostly paid into foreign accounts runs into hundreds of millions of dollars according to the potential yield of the bloc.
Sometimes, the awarder (sharer of national cake and direct intermediaries) demand additional stakes in the bidding company. The awarder sends fronts as part of the directorship and management of the bidding firms without leaving a link to them. That is how the oil bloc national cake is distributed to a few Nigerians. This is largely how Folorunsho Alakija made so much money to become the richest black woman in the world, with so much money to make Oprah Winfrey second after her.
According to what can be referred to as a hagiography by Ventures Africa, a largely unknown monthly Pan-African business magazine. The magazine describes her as a "billionaire oil tycoon, Fashion designer and philanthropist".
How did Alakija go from Babangida's clothier and hair dresser to "billionaire oil tycoon" with an alleged net worth of $3.3 billion dollars? Well, that's where Ventures Africa's carefully written hagiography starts to break down.
"In May 1993 Alakija applied for an allocation of an Oil Prospecting License (OPL). The license to explore for oil on a 617,000 acre block – (now referred to as OPL 216) was granted to Alakija's company, Famfa Limited. The bloc is located approximately 220 miles South East of Lagos and 70 miles offshore Nigeria in the central Niger Delta".
She was awarded a license by the Federal Government to explore for oil on a 617,000 acre bloc in the Niger Delta. Her known qualifications for the award of a 617,000 acre oil bloc were essentially that she made really nice clothes for Maryam Babangida.
"This was in 1993. Many wealthy Nigerian businessmen and military bigwigs who had been allocated oil blocs by the military administration at the time had no clue as to the technicalities in operating an oil bloc, so many of them typically acquired OPLs, and then flipped them off to international oil companies for substantial profits. But Alakija decided not to sell off her license.
She had no expertise or experience to even operate a Palm oil business talk less of running an oil field. In September 1996, she entered into a joint venture agreement with Star Deep Water Petroleum Limited (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Texaco) and appointed the company as a technical adviser for the exploration of the license, transferring 40 percent of her 100 percent stake to Star Deep. Subsequently, Star Deep sold off 8 percent of its stake in OPL 216 to Petrobas, a Brazilian company. Folorunsho Alakija and her family owned 60 percent."
Alakija had no expertise or experience running an oil field. This is the most important thing you need to know about 'the richest black woman in the world'. She had no expertise or experience doing the thing from which she became stupendously and improbably rich.
Alakija was not qualified to be awarded a license to produce palm oil, much less crude oil. Ventures Africa won't say it but the truth is Folorunsho Alakija is allegedly worth $3.3 billion dollars because Ibrahim Babangida's wife's favourite fashion designer somehow acquired a 617,000 acre oil bloc now worth $3.3 billion dollars of Nigeria's money.
The relationship between Folorunsho Alakija, the richest black woman in the world and Late Mariam Babangida as widely held, was the reason why the Company, Famfa Oil Limited owned by Alakija, was awarded the leasehold rights to OPL 216 on August 10, 1993. Alakija was not qualified to be awarded a license to operate oil field, the truth is Alakija is allegedly worth $3.3 billion dollars because she was Ibrahim Babangida's wife's favourite hair dresser and fashion designer, she, Alakija, somehow this was how she acquired a 617,000 acre oil bloc now worth $3.3 billion dollars of our common wealth. If this is not outrageous then, I don't know what is.
In September 1996, she entered into an agreement with Star Deep Water Petroleum Limited and appointed the company as a technical adviser for the exploration of the license, transferring 40percent of her 100percent stake to Star Deep. Subsequently, Star Deep sold off 8 percent of its stake in OPL 216 to Petrobas, a Brazilian company. Folorunsho Alakija and her family owned 60 percent.
Let's go further, Signature bonuses which are paid when an investor successfully bids, wins and signs agreement with the petroleum ministry, running into tens of millions and sometimes hundreds of millions of naira, is often waived off. There is actually no waiver; rather a diversion of what would have been paid to government coffers is paid into private purse as appreciation gifts. That is why those in the Petroleum Ministry dread retirement as though it signifies going to hell fire. No matter how little your influence, something substantial must enter your hands especially in hard currency. This was how Folorunsho Alakija became the richest black woman for doing nothing and knowing nothing in an industry she knew nothing about.
iPaidABribe

After Morsi’s ouster, Egypt’s old guard is back — and Muslim Brotherhood is out


Hussein Malla/AP - Egyptian army special forces soldiers stand guard near the Republican Guard headquarters, in Cairo, Egypt, Friday, July 19, 2013. Thousands of protesters are holding rallies across Egypt to demand the reinstatement of ousted President Mohammed Morsi.
CAIRO — When the military ousted Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Zeinhom Hassan Ibrahim slaughtered a sheep, hired a DJ and threw a block party for his neighbors.
Ibrahim, a former parliamentarian from longtime ruler Hosni Mubarak’s now-defunct National Democratic Party, had lived through the year of Mohamed Morsi’s rule in blinking disbelief, as if the whole world had turned upside down.
Demonstrators hold trays with bites decorated with small portraits of the government members during a protest in front of the delegation of the Spanish government in Catalonia, in Barcelona, Spain, Thursday July 18, 2013. Spain’s prime minister brushed off demands he should resign after text messages emerged showing he had a cozy relationship with a disgraced political party treasurer who amassed 47 million euros ($61 million) in secret Swiss bank accounts. The spectacle of alleged greed and corruption has enraged Spaniards hurting from austerity and sky high unemployment with no end in sight. (AP Photo/Emilio Morenatti)

Photos of the day

Corruption protests in Spain, Hemingway look-alike contest, Texas abortion bill signed, Mandela Day and more.

World Digest: July 19, 2013

A major Shiite shrine is shelled near Damascus; new unrest roils Indian-controlled Kashmir.

Kerry announces tentative agreement to resume talks

Kerry announces tentative agreement to resume talks
Israeli and Palestinian negotiators to meet in Washington within a week “or very soon thereafter.”

After Morsi’s ouster by military, Egypt’s old guard is back

After Morsi’s ouster by military, Egypt’s old guard is back
The country is experiencing a striking return to the way things were before the 2011 revolution.

Waiting for the royal birth is the hardest part

Waiting for the royal birth is the hardest part
A rumor-fueled paranoia sets in for the media and the royal-obsessed as they await Britain’s next noble.

Cartel boss falls, but Zetas brand is strong and replacements await

Cartel boss falls, but Zetas brand is strong and replacements await
Analysts say the “meritocracy” of the Mexican drug cartel’s ranks might help it withstand leadership changes.
But now, things are finally getting back to normal.
Egypt’s new power dynamic, following theJuly 3 coup that ousted Morsi, is eerily familiar. Gone are the Islamist rulers from the once-banned Muslim Brotherhood. Back are the faces of the old guard, many closely linked to Mubarak’s reign or to the all-
powerful generals. And for a seemingly broad array of Egyptians, that’s exactly the way they want it.
The overthrow of Morsi has yielded a new appreciation for military rule in a country that so recently shunned it, and a striking return to the way things were before the 2011 revolution against a Mubarak regime that was widely considered irredeemably corrupt and exploitative.
Telltale signs of the old guard are cropping up in Egypt’s new cabinet, where Mubarak-era figures abound and Islamists are absent; in the halls of the nation’s justice system, where prosecutors are investigating the nation’s pre-coup leaders on charges of incitement; and in darkened jail cells, where prisoners are blindfolded, handcuffed and interrogated about their adherence to the Brotherhood.
Gen. Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, the man who delivered news of Morsi’s dismissal on national television, has now assumed the role of deputy prime minister in addition to his earlier titles of defense minister and commander of Egypt’s armed forces. Few observers doubt that he pulls the levers behind a facade of civilian rule.
In the state-run media, the old-guard rhetoric of Mubarak’s 30-year reign has made a full-throated return, with patriotic montages and copious praise for the armed forces. Private networks have gotten in on the act, too.
So far, aside from Brotherhood-led protests, there’s been little backlash against the return to the old ways. Egyptians who once demanded punishment for the “feloul” — the so-called remnants of Mubarak’s regime — say that a year of disastrous Brotherhood rule has put everything in perspective.
“I don’t care if they are feloul, as long as they fix what the Brotherhood did,” said Mohamed Mahmoud, a locksmith who voted for Morsi and later joined the protests to oust him.
Eleven out of 34 cabinet ministers are veterans of Mubarak’s regime. Two were members of Mubarak’s National Democratic Party, a group that was dissolved after his 2011 fall. Defenders of the old guard say it’s inevitable that the government will include Mubarak-era officials because they are the ones actually qualified to run the country.
“For over a year, the Muslim Brotherhood government proved to be incompetent. So we have to work with these experts from the old regime,” said Ahmed Sarhan, an aide to Ahmed Shafik, the retired air force commander who lost to Morsi by a slim margin in last year’s election.
WashingtonPost

Obama asks Americans to ‘do some soul-searching’ in aftermath of Trayvon Martin case


Video: President Obama discussed the George Zimmerman acquittal in the killing of teenager Trayvon Martin during a surprise appearance at the White House briefing on Friday.
Directly wading into the polarizing debate over last weekend’s acquittal of George Zimmerman in the killing of Trayvon Martin, Obama tried to explain the case through the lens of past discrimination that still weighs heavily on African Americans.
Gallery
More from PostPolitics

Obama: ‘Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago’

Obama: ‘Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago’
The president spoke in deeply personal terms Friday about the Trayvon Martin case.

Will 'stand your ground' laws be repealed? Don't count on it.

Will 'stand your ground' laws be repealed? Don't count on it.
Four reasons why "stand your ground" laws won't be reversed.

Obama's remarkably personal speech on race in America

Obama's remarkably personal speech on race in America
For the first time in his presidency, Obama spoke from the heart on race.
The nation’s first black president, recognizing the disconnect between how whites and blacks were reacting to the Zimmerman verdict, sought to explain why the acquittal had upset so many African Americans.
“I think it’s important to recognize that the African American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away,” Obama said.
Obama first inserted himself into the controversy surrounding Martin’s killing in March 2012, when he said from the White House Rose Garden, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” On Friday, he recalled that statement and added, “Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.”
Obama’s 18-minute remarks, delivered extemporaneously during a surprise afternoon appearance in the White House briefing room, was the most extended discussion of race in his presidency. He has generally avoided talking about race relations, although he delivered a memorable speech on the topic during the 2008 campaign and wrote about his own experience of discrimination in his memoir, “Dreams From My Father.”
A Florida jury’s verdict last Saturday that Zimmerman was not guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Martin has inspired protests and a heated national debate over racial profiling and gun laws.
With the Justice Department reviewing the case and weighing federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, Obama offered no opinion on the verdict itself.
Obama followed reaction to the trial all week, talking about it with family and friends, a senior administration official said. He summoned his top aides on Thursday to tell them that he wanted to comment publicly on the shooting death of Martin as well as the discrimination he has felt personally.
Obama wanted to “speak from the heart,” the official said, explaining why he opted against reading from a prepared script. He spoke in a hushed and at times halting voice, pausing periodically to compose his thoughts.
“There are very few African American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store,” Obama said. “That includes me.”
He continued, “There are very few African American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.”
WashingtonPost

Obama takes on race

By Greg Sargent

Obama has often been called upon to use his unique historical position as the first black president to engage the nation in a conversation about continuing racial injustice. In a surprise appearance in the White House briefing room just now, he waded into the debate over the shooting of Trayvon Martin in a remarkably personal manner that will probably cause far more extensive ripples than even his big 2008 race speech did.
Obama’s remarks will be chewed over for some time to come, but I just wanted to focus for now on a couple aspects of it. Obama made what amounted to an extended plea for people to try to understand how African Americans might view the shooting of Trayvon. He then segued into a discussion of “stand your ground” laws:
I know that there’s been commentary about the fact that the stand your ground laws in Florida were not used as a defense in the case.
On the other hand, if we’re sending a message as a society in our communities that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there’s a way for them to exit from a situation, is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we’d like to see?
And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these “stand your ground” laws, I just ask people to consider if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman, who had followed him in a car, because he felt threatened?
And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.
Obama is stating that the evaluation of such laws cannot be divorced from a racial context. In his initial response to the verdict, Obama avoided the topic of race, and alluded only to the “passions” that it had unleashed, in essence striking the tone of conciliation that has become so familiar. Today Obama placed the debate over the shooting — and over stand your ground laws — squarely in the context of the African American experience and the country’s history of racial discrimination, arguing, in effect, that race is inevitably the subtext of such arguments.
Indeed, Obama used his own experience to drive home that point. In the part that will probably get the most attention, he discussed his own experience of being followed in department stores and hearing car doors get locked when he walked past. But to me his personal comments were most interesting at the end, when he brought his children into it:
As difficult and challenging as this whole episode has been for a lot of people, I don’t want us to lose sight that things are getting better. Each successive generation seems to be making progress in changing attitudes when it comes to race. It doesn’t mean that we’re in a post-racial society. It doesn’t mean that racism is eliminated. But you know, when I talk to Malia and Sasha and I listen to their friends and I see them interact, they’re better than we are. They’re better than we were on these issues. And that’s true in every community that I’ve visited all across the country.
And so, you know, we have to be vigilant and we have to work on these issues, and those of us in authority should be doing everything we can to encourage the better angels of our nature as opposed to using these episodes to heighten divisions. But we should also have confidence that kids these days I think have more sense than we did back then, and certainly more than our parents did or our grandparents did, and that along this long, difficult journey, you know, we’re becoming a more perfect union — not a perfect union, but a more perfect union.
It should be noted that Obama downplayed expectations for any kind of federal prosecution of George Zimmerman. “It’s important for people to have some clear expectations here,” he said. “Traditionally, these are issues of state and local government — the criminal code.” In other words, this likely won’t end in the way many Martin supporters hoped.
And so, after delivering what was at bottom a very pessimistic message — racial discrimination is very much still with us, and any conversation politicians have is unlikely to do all that much to fix things — Obama sought to end on a more optimistic and conciliatory note. To use the formulation he often employs, he was saying the arc of history is bending in the right direction.
All of us who have kids, I imagine, look at them and marvel at how much smarter and more sensible they seem than we are. It’s a way of telling ourselves that the world they grow up in will be better than our own. Given the country’s awful history of racial discrimination, it was particularly interesting and dramatic to see the nation’s first black president –  himself perhaps the best known symbol of racial progress on the planet — look to his own children, and their interaction with their peers, as a source of hope that the world continues to become, however slowly, a better place.
WashingtonPost

President Obama’s sad view of America

By Jennifer Rubin

President Obama’s extensive remarks in the White House Briefing Room this afternoon were as surprising as they were gratuitous. He had already made one statement asking citizens to respect the George Zimmerman verdict. Today he did so again but offered no specific policy recommendation with regard to race (although he used it as a forum to assail “stand-your-ground” legislation that ultimately was not at issue in the case).
In fact, Obama undid some of the closure he provided in his earlier written statement by intoning: “If a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.” So the jury was biased? The trial unfair? I can’t fathom why the president of the United States would stoke that sort of second-guessing.
Barack Obama
Barack Obama (Olivier Douliery/ABACAUSA.com)
The media seems fixated on “how personal” the speech was. I am baffled by that response. He is the president of the United States, the only elected leader there to represent us all and to provide cohesion, but here he was channeling Oprah Winfrey. He cheered for emotionalism and for the perspective that insists it is always about race:
And I don’t want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African American community interprets what happened one night in Florida.  And it’s inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear.  The African American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws — everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws.  And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case.
What about the proposition that we regard individuals and their actions on the merits, that we view criminal defendants with the presumption of innocence and that we avoid pouring our own biases into a judgment about a fellow citizen? The jury system is all about rising above past grievances, grudges and suspicions. The Zimmerman jury put down its historical baggage, but the president asks that we sympathize with and encourage those who won’t.
Perhaps he is laying the groundwork for the obvious: After stirring emotion, the president can’t deliver a civil rights prosecution of Zimmerman because the facts aren’t there. “I know that Eric Holder is reviewing what happened down there,” he said, “but I think it’s important for people to have some clear expectations here. Traditionally, these are issues of state and local government, the criminal code. And law enforcement is traditionally done at the state and local levels, not at the federal levels.” And of course his own FBI found no evidence of racism. Odd that he didn’t mention that.
Even his analysis of African Americans’ troubles seemed condescending and defensive:
Now, this isn’t to say that the African American community is naïve about the fact that African American young men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system; that they’re disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. It’s not to make excuses for that fact — although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context. They understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.
The violent past is responsible? Perhaps Obama might concede that a breakdown in the family, a coarsening of the culture and a host of other facts might be responsible. But today was all about seeing things, you see, from the narrow perspective of race.
The president acknowledged partway through his remarks that the conversation about race he and his attorney general are urging is better done without politicians. Precisely. So why was he there? Anti-racial bias is at an all-time low, interracial marriage is rising and, as he pointed out, with each successive generation race becomes less of a big deal.
The presidency is not a parochial office, yet Obama fosters a view of America that says African Americans can’t help but see the country in terms of race. That is a sad and depressing view of our country. It suggests that African Americans can’t judge their fellow citizen individually, by the content of their character. It doesn’t require that we grow beyond the past or that we see things as they are now.
The president at the very end argued that “those of us in authority should be doing everything we can to encourage the better angels of our nature, as opposed to using these episodes to heighten divisions.” Too bad he doesn’t follow his own advice.
WashingtonPost