---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <aishayolah@yahoo.com>
Date: 1 July 2011 20:17
Subject: Re: [NaijaPolitics] There Are No Perfect Accusers.
To: "NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com" <NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com>
One Revelation After Another Undercut Strauss-Kahn Accuser's Credibility.....
By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON
Published: July 02, 2011
Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.
Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney's office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a "unique dialect of Fulani," a language from the woman's native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.
When the conversation was translated - a job completed only this Wednesday - investigators were alarmed: "She says words to the effect of, 'Don't
worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing,' " the official said.
It was another ground-shifting revelation in a continuing series of troubling statements, fabrications and associations that unraveled the case and upended prosecutors' view of the woman. Once, in the hours after she said she was attacked on May 14, she'd been a "very pious, devout Muslim woman, shattered by this experience," the official said - a seemingly ideal witness.
Little by little, her credibility as a witness crumbled - she had lied about her immigration, about being gang raped in Guinea, about her experiences in her homeland and about her finances, according to two law enforcement officials. She had been linked to people suspected of crimes.
She changed her account of what she did immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Sit-downs with prosecutors became tense, even angry. Initially composed, she later collapsed in tears and got down on the floor during questioning. She became unavailable to investigators from the district attorney's office for days at a time....'
This story is far more complicated than it looks..or looked. Hasty, loud comments will just not do... Click on this link for the full article.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=811746&f=22
Aisha
------Original Message------
From: Dominic Ogbonna
Sender: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
To: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Edo-nationality
Cc: Nigerian World Forum
ReplyTo: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NaijaPolitics] There Are No Perfect Accusers.
Sent: 2 Jul 2011 12:03 PM
Here we go again! What does the author propose? Is she proposing that we just mob any man accused by a woman? Is she proposing that we now run the law courts by faith, believing what women groups want us to believe, irrespective of the evidence? Is she proposing that we abrogate men's rights to fair trials when the accuser is a woman? Or that any man accused of rape by a woman be thrown in jail, even when the facts are screaming INNOCENT? Wasn't this supposed to be about JUSTICE? According to the Prosecutors -not the DEFENSE even, but the prosecutors themselves- barely 24 hours after the case broke, the woman made a phone call to a criminal in jail, where she said things like: 'Don't worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing'. In trying to determine DSK's innocence or guilt, should this matter at all? You be the judge! Dominic
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 5:34 AM, joan.Osa Oviawe <joanoviawe@gmail.com> wrote: "All of this leads prosecutors to believe that she's probably not a credible witness, and that DSK's attorneys will destroy her on the witness stand. They're probably right. Rape accusers seem to be treated with different expectations of perfection than people who report other crimes. Granted, this case is particularly high-profile, which means that prosecutors no doubt want it to be open-and-shut, making the accuser's imperfections all the more troublesome. But I have a hard time believing that a woman with the exact same past would be considered too lacking in credibility had she accused someone of robbing her apartment or mugging her or beating her up. I have a hard time believing that if a man was punched in the face by a stranger on the street that prosecutors would drop the case if it came to light that the victim had cheated on his taxes seven years ago." She's going to pay an awfully large price for this. Women who report assault in the future are going to suffer the consequences of being human beings with spotty histories and personal imperfections and character flaws and terrible past decisions. And we're going to collectively wonder why men feel like they can assault women without repercussion, and why so few women report being raped." There Are No Perfect Accusers. by Jill on 7.1.2011 · 107 comments
in Are you serious?,Crime,Immigration,Law,Misogyny,Politics,Sexual Assault
The big story in the news today is the release on Dominique Strauss-Kahn as the sexual assault case against him teeters. The New York Times features a breathtakingly victim-blamey article about the accuser's credibility, detailing the ways in which she is not a perfect human being:
The sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn is on the verge of collapse as investigators have uncovered major holes in the credibility of the housekeeper who charged that he attacked her in his Manhattan hotel suite in May, according to two well-placed law enforcement officials.
Although forensic tests found unambiguous evidence of a sexual encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a French politician, and the woman, prosecutors now do not believe much of what the accuser has told them about the circumstances or about herself.
Since her initial allegation on May 14, the accuser has repeatedly lied, one of the law enforcement officials said.
There's no indication that she actually lied about being raped; instead, it turns out that she has lied about other things in the course of her adult life (shocking stuff, I know), and her actions immediately following the alleged assault. Here's what she lied about:
According to the two officials, the woman had a phone conversation with an incarcerated man within a day of her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn in which she discussed the possible benefits of pursuing the charges against him. The conversation was recorded.
That man, the investigators learned, had been arrested on charges of possessing 400 pounds of marijuana. He is among a number of individuals who made multiple cash deposits, totaling around $100,000, into the woman's bank account over the last two years. The deposits were made in Arizona, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania.
The investigators also learned that she was paying hundreds of dollars every month in phone charges to five companies. The woman had insisted she had only one phone and said she knew nothing about the deposits except that they were made by a man she described as her fiancé and his friends.
In addition, one of the officials said, she told investigators that her application for asylum included mention of a previous rape, but there was no such account in the application. She also told them that she had been subjected to genital mutilation, but her account to the investigators differed from what was contained in the asylum application.
Also:
The housekeeper admitted to prosecutors that she lied about what happened after the episode on the 28th floor of the hotel. She had initially said that after being attacked, she had waited in a hallway until Mr. Strauss-Kahn left the room; she now admits that after the episode, she cleaned a nearby room, then returned to Mr. Strauss-Kahn's suite to clean there. Only after that did she report to her supervisor that she had been attacked.
Many people are focusing on the fact that her story about the immediate aftermath of the rape has changed. But that's not uncommon — many rape victims continue to go about their business after being assaulted, and in a state of shock do things that many people don't believe seem to sufficiently reflect trauma. And rape victims, of course, are also aware that a showing of "not-traumatized-enough" behavior damages their credibility. It's not totally out there to think that this woman wanted to be believed, and so she omitted the parts of story that she knew would make her less believable. Now that it's all on the table, though, it looks even worse.
None of this is good, but it also doesn't mean that she wasn't assaulted. We're also talking about a woman who is an immigrant, who is of color, who is poor, who comes from a country where authority figures (including police officers) have slaughtered and tortured citizens and are widely distrusted, and who currently lives in an area with large immigrant and poor populations who are targeted by local police. I'd be pretty surprised if she felt totally comfortable around the NYPD and if she trusted the American justice system. Hell, she has friends and loved ones in jail — she's not new to this circus, and I doubt she's under the impression that law enforcement officers are routinely on the side of people like her. While I'm sure the prosecutors told her to be totally honest with them — and that's what prosecutors do in these kinds of cases, because it's much better to have all of the bad information out there so you can deal with it on the front end instead of being surprised by it at trial — I can understand why she might not have disclosed that she was involved with drug traffickers (if that's even the case). It also looks like she might have lied on her application for asylum, at the instruction of an unethical attorney, when she was desperate for legal status. That doesn't justify lying, but it does provide some necessary context.
All of this leads prosecutors to believe that she's probably not a credible witness, and that DSK's attorneys will destroy her on the witness stand. They're probably right. Rape accusers seem to be treated with different expectations of perfection than people who report other crimes. Granted, this case is particularly high-profile, which means that prosecutors no doubt want it to be open-and-shut, making the accuser's imperfections all the more troublesome. But I have a hard time believing that a woman with the exact same past would be considered too lacking in credibility had she accused someone of robbing her apartment or mugging her or beating her up. I have a hard time believing that if a man was punched in the face by a stranger on the street that prosecutors would drop the case if it came to light that the victim had cheated on his taxes seven years ago.
Even though these aren't the typical "she's a slut" attacks (although I'm counting down the minutes until someone suggests she's a prostitute who had sex with DSK for money), there's still an unreasonable level of virtue that we demand from any woman who says she was raped. This woman, like a lot of folks, has lied to save her own ass under dire circumstances. She called someone in jail to discuss the pros and cons of going forward with the rape accusations — something that sounds questionable unless you consider that the incarcerated person may have been her closest confidante, and I would certainly have that exact same conversation with my best friend if I were thinking of getting embroiled in a criminal case. There's still physical evidence of sex, and physical evidence of assault. But it doesn't matter, since she owns five cell phones (DSK owns seven) and lied about an unrelated issue and has some shady friends. Nothing that has come out about her indicates that she wasn't raped. It just indicates that she's no longer our ideal victim, and that's enough to prevent the case from going forward.
My issue actually isn't with the prosecutor's office (although it is a little bit) so much as the media response. Even progressive media outlets are making egregious logical leaps, suggesting that she's probably lying because, well, she just probably is. The reason it's nearly impossible for the prosecution to pursue these charges, even though there's no evidence that she lied about anything related to the actual events surrounding the alleged crime, is because we live in a culture where rape victims need to be flawless in order to be believed. We live in a culture where it's damn near impossible for any woman, when her life is held up to the light, to be considered innocent. We live in a culture where we think it's even reasonable to question a rape victim's "innocence" in the first place. We live in a culture where accusers of high-profile men undergo even more scrutiny than usual from a media hungry for a story and playing by an old rule book. And we live in a culture where the public destruction of every woman who makes a rape accusation is used as fodder in subsequent rape cases, establishing a cycle where we believe that women must be lying because the women before her were lying, so we feel justified in going out of our way to find any scrap of evidence that might indicate she has ever done anything ever in her life that we might find unsavory even if it has nothing to do with the case at hand, and then we use that to determine that she's not credible, and then we use has as another example of how women lie about rape. And then powerful men are even more emboldened and feel more justified in treating women like garbage.
Under the kind of scrutiny this woman has endured, I would surely be deemed a bad victim. I wonder how many of you would be "good enough" to be credible in a high-profile case against a powerful man.
This woman's life is going to be irrevocably changed after this. I'm not clear on what her immigration status is, but given that her asylum application was from 2004, it sounds like it was granted and she's here with asyluee status. It's not a stretch to think that this could mean deportation proceedings for her, and that the entire life she's built here could be gone.
She's going to pay an awfully large price for this. Women who report assault in the future are going to suffer the consequences of being human beings with spotty histories and personal imperfections and character flaws and terrible past decisions. And we're going to collectively wonder why men feel like they can assault women without repercussion, and why so few women report being raped.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
Forum members are reminded that NaijaPolitics is established to be a moderated forum for gavel-to-gavel discussion of political developments in Nigeria, Africa's largest democracy. Freedom of opinion/expression is inherent in NaijaPolitics. Views and opposing views expressed in NaijaPolitics forum are the rights of individual contributors. Mutual respect for people's views is the corner stone of our forum. Freedom of speech applied responsibly within the guiding parameters of Yahoo! Inc (our hosts) and NaijaPolitics Rules and Guidelines (broadcast monthly and accessible to all subscribers in our archives) is our guiding principle. Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
NaijaPolitics is division of Afrik Network Groups.
Latest Version of Disclaimer released (December 15, 2005)Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaijaPolitics/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaijaPolitics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
NaijaPolitics-digest@yahoogroups.com
NaijaPolitics-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
NaijaPolitics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
From: <aishayolah@yahoo.com>
Date: 1 July 2011 20:17
Subject: Re: [NaijaPolitics] There Are No Perfect Accusers.
To: "NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com" <NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com>
One Revelation After Another Undercut Strauss-Kahn Accuser's Credibility.....
By JIM DWYER and MICHAEL WILSON
Published: July 02, 2011
Twenty-eight hours after a housekeeper at the Sofitel New York said she was sexually assaulted by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, she spoke by phone to a boyfriend in an immigration jail in Arizona.
Investigators with the Manhattan district attorney's office learned the call had been recorded and had it translated from a "unique dialect of Fulani," a language from the woman's native country, Guinea, according to a well-placed law enforcement official.
When the conversation was translated - a job completed only this Wednesday - investigators were alarmed: "She says words to the effect of, 'Don't
worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing,' " the official said.
It was another ground-shifting revelation in a continuing series of troubling statements, fabrications and associations that unraveled the case and upended prosecutors' view of the woman. Once, in the hours after she said she was attacked on May 14, she'd been a "very pious, devout Muslim woman, shattered by this experience," the official said - a seemingly ideal witness.
Little by little, her credibility as a witness crumbled - she had lied about her immigration, about being gang raped in Guinea, about her experiences in her homeland and about her finances, according to two law enforcement officials. She had been linked to people suspected of crimes.
She changed her account of what she did immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Sit-downs with prosecutors became tense, even angry. Initially composed, she later collapsed in tears and got down on the floor during questioning. She became unavailable to investigators from the district attorney's office for days at a time....'
This story is far more complicated than it looks..or looked. Hasty, loud comments will just not do... Click on this link for the full article.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=811746&f=22
Aisha
------Original Message------
From: Dominic Ogbonna
Sender: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
To: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Edo-nationality
Cc: Nigerian World Forum
ReplyTo: NaijaPolitics@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NaijaPolitics] There Are No Perfect Accusers.
Sent: 2 Jul 2011 12:03 PM
Here we go again! What does the author propose? Is she proposing that we just mob any man accused by a woman? Is she proposing that we now run the law courts by faith, believing what women groups want us to believe, irrespective of the evidence? Is she proposing that we abrogate men's rights to fair trials when the accuser is a woman? Or that any man accused of rape by a woman be thrown in jail, even when the facts are screaming INNOCENT? Wasn't this supposed to be about JUSTICE? According to the Prosecutors -not the DEFENSE even, but the prosecutors themselves- barely 24 hours after the case broke, the woman made a phone call to a criminal in jail, where she said things like: 'Don't worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I'm doing'. In trying to determine DSK's innocence or guilt, should this matter at all? You be the judge! Dominic
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 5:34 AM, joan.Osa Oviawe <joanoviawe@gmail.com> wrote: "All of this leads prosecutors to believe that she's probably not a credible witness, and that DSK's attorneys will destroy her on the witness stand. They're probably right. Rape accusers seem to be treated with different expectations of perfection than people who report other crimes. Granted, this case is particularly high-profile, which means that prosecutors no doubt want it to be open-and-shut, making the accuser's imperfections all the more troublesome. But I have a hard time believing that a woman with the exact same past would be considered too lacking in credibility had she accused someone of robbing her apartment or mugging her or beating her up. I have a hard time believing that if a man was punched in the face by a stranger on the street that prosecutors would drop the case if it came to light that the victim had cheated on his taxes seven years ago." She's going to pay an awfully large price for this. Women who report assault in the future are going to suffer the consequences of being human beings with spotty histories and personal imperfections and character flaws and terrible past decisions. And we're going to collectively wonder why men feel like they can assault women without repercussion, and why so few women report being raped." There Are No Perfect Accusers. by Jill on 7.1.2011 · 107 comments
in Are you serious?,Crime,Immigration,Law,Misogyny,Politics,Sexual Assault
The big story in the news today is the release on Dominique Strauss-Kahn as the sexual assault case against him teeters. The New York Times features a breathtakingly victim-blamey article about the accuser's credibility, detailing the ways in which she is not a perfect human being:
The sexual assault case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn is on the verge of collapse as investigators have uncovered major holes in the credibility of the housekeeper who charged that he attacked her in his Manhattan hotel suite in May, according to two well-placed law enforcement officials.
Although forensic tests found unambiguous evidence of a sexual encounter between Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a French politician, and the woman, prosecutors now do not believe much of what the accuser has told them about the circumstances or about herself.
Since her initial allegation on May 14, the accuser has repeatedly lied, one of the law enforcement officials said.
There's no indication that she actually lied about being raped; instead, it turns out that she has lied about other things in the course of her adult life (shocking stuff, I know), and her actions immediately following the alleged assault. Here's what she lied about:
According to the two officials, the woman had a phone conversation with an incarcerated man within a day of her encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn in which she discussed the possible benefits of pursuing the charges against him. The conversation was recorded.
That man, the investigators learned, had been arrested on charges of possessing 400 pounds of marijuana. He is among a number of individuals who made multiple cash deposits, totaling around $100,000, into the woman's bank account over the last two years. The deposits were made in Arizona, Georgia, New York and Pennsylvania.
The investigators also learned that she was paying hundreds of dollars every month in phone charges to five companies. The woman had insisted she had only one phone and said she knew nothing about the deposits except that they were made by a man she described as her fiancé and his friends.
In addition, one of the officials said, she told investigators that her application for asylum included mention of a previous rape, but there was no such account in the application. She also told them that she had been subjected to genital mutilation, but her account to the investigators differed from what was contained in the asylum application.
Also:
The housekeeper admitted to prosecutors that she lied about what happened after the episode on the 28th floor of the hotel. She had initially said that after being attacked, she had waited in a hallway until Mr. Strauss-Kahn left the room; she now admits that after the episode, she cleaned a nearby room, then returned to Mr. Strauss-Kahn's suite to clean there. Only after that did she report to her supervisor that she had been attacked.
Many people are focusing on the fact that her story about the immediate aftermath of the rape has changed. But that's not uncommon — many rape victims continue to go about their business after being assaulted, and in a state of shock do things that many people don't believe seem to sufficiently reflect trauma. And rape victims, of course, are also aware that a showing of "not-traumatized-enough" behavior damages their credibility. It's not totally out there to think that this woman wanted to be believed, and so she omitted the parts of story that she knew would make her less believable. Now that it's all on the table, though, it looks even worse.
None of this is good, but it also doesn't mean that she wasn't assaulted. We're also talking about a woman who is an immigrant, who is of color, who is poor, who comes from a country where authority figures (including police officers) have slaughtered and tortured citizens and are widely distrusted, and who currently lives in an area with large immigrant and poor populations who are targeted by local police. I'd be pretty surprised if she felt totally comfortable around the NYPD and if she trusted the American justice system. Hell, she has friends and loved ones in jail — she's not new to this circus, and I doubt she's under the impression that law enforcement officers are routinely on the side of people like her. While I'm sure the prosecutors told her to be totally honest with them — and that's what prosecutors do in these kinds of cases, because it's much better to have all of the bad information out there so you can deal with it on the front end instead of being surprised by it at trial — I can understand why she might not have disclosed that she was involved with drug traffickers (if that's even the case). It also looks like she might have lied on her application for asylum, at the instruction of an unethical attorney, when she was desperate for legal status. That doesn't justify lying, but it does provide some necessary context.
All of this leads prosecutors to believe that she's probably not a credible witness, and that DSK's attorneys will destroy her on the witness stand. They're probably right. Rape accusers seem to be treated with different expectations of perfection than people who report other crimes. Granted, this case is particularly high-profile, which means that prosecutors no doubt want it to be open-and-shut, making the accuser's imperfections all the more troublesome. But I have a hard time believing that a woman with the exact same past would be considered too lacking in credibility had she accused someone of robbing her apartment or mugging her or beating her up. I have a hard time believing that if a man was punched in the face by a stranger on the street that prosecutors would drop the case if it came to light that the victim had cheated on his taxes seven years ago.
Even though these aren't the typical "she's a slut" attacks (although I'm counting down the minutes until someone suggests she's a prostitute who had sex with DSK for money), there's still an unreasonable level of virtue that we demand from any woman who says she was raped. This woman, like a lot of folks, has lied to save her own ass under dire circumstances. She called someone in jail to discuss the pros and cons of going forward with the rape accusations — something that sounds questionable unless you consider that the incarcerated person may have been her closest confidante, and I would certainly have that exact same conversation with my best friend if I were thinking of getting embroiled in a criminal case. There's still physical evidence of sex, and physical evidence of assault. But it doesn't matter, since she owns five cell phones (DSK owns seven) and lied about an unrelated issue and has some shady friends. Nothing that has come out about her indicates that she wasn't raped. It just indicates that she's no longer our ideal victim, and that's enough to prevent the case from going forward.
My issue actually isn't with the prosecutor's office (although it is a little bit) so much as the media response. Even progressive media outlets are making egregious logical leaps, suggesting that she's probably lying because, well, she just probably is. The reason it's nearly impossible for the prosecution to pursue these charges, even though there's no evidence that she lied about anything related to the actual events surrounding the alleged crime, is because we live in a culture where rape victims need to be flawless in order to be believed. We live in a culture where it's damn near impossible for any woman, when her life is held up to the light, to be considered innocent. We live in a culture where we think it's even reasonable to question a rape victim's "innocence" in the first place. We live in a culture where accusers of high-profile men undergo even more scrutiny than usual from a media hungry for a story and playing by an old rule book. And we live in a culture where the public destruction of every woman who makes a rape accusation is used as fodder in subsequent rape cases, establishing a cycle where we believe that women must be lying because the women before her were lying, so we feel justified in going out of our way to find any scrap of evidence that might indicate she has ever done anything ever in her life that we might find unsavory even if it has nothing to do with the case at hand, and then we use that to determine that she's not credible, and then we use has as another example of how women lie about rape. And then powerful men are even more emboldened and feel more justified in treating women like garbage.
Under the kind of scrutiny this woman has endured, I would surely be deemed a bad victim. I wonder how many of you would be "good enough" to be credible in a high-profile case against a powerful man.
This woman's life is going to be irrevocably changed after this. I'm not clear on what her immigration status is, but given that her asylum application was from 2004, it sounds like it was granted and she's here with asyluee status. It's not a stretch to think that this could mean deportation proceedings for her, and that the entire life she's built here could be gone.
She's going to pay an awfully large price for this. Women who report assault in the future are going to suffer the consequences of being human beings with spotty histories and personal imperfections and character flaws and terrible past decisions. And we're going to collectively wonder why men feel like they can assault women without repercussion, and why so few women report being raped.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.
------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
Forum members are reminded that NaijaPolitics is established to be a moderated forum for gavel-to-gavel discussion of political developments in Nigeria, Africa's largest democracy. Freedom of opinion/expression is inherent in NaijaPolitics. Views and opposing views expressed in NaijaPolitics forum are the rights of individual contributors. Mutual respect for people's views is the corner stone of our forum. Freedom of speech applied responsibly within the guiding parameters of Yahoo! Inc (our hosts) and NaijaPolitics Rules and Guidelines (broadcast monthly and accessible to all subscribers in our archives) is our guiding principle. Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
NaijaPolitics is division of Afrik Network Groups.
Latest Version of Disclaimer released (December 15, 2005)Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaijaPolitics/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NaijaPolitics/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
NaijaPolitics-digest@yahoogroups.com
NaijaPolitics-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
NaijaPolitics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment