Respecting Our Fallen Officers, As A Monster Becomes A Black Martyr

The recent events in the East Bay (CA), towards the end of March 2009, are disturbing to say the least.

We here in the SF Bay Area lost four fine people on Sat. March 21st. ~ Sgt. Mark Dunakin, Officer John Hege, Sgt. Ervin Romans, and Sgt. Daniel Sakai ~ Family men, public servants, proud members of the community - and, Oakland city Police Officers. Four genuine community helpers gunned down in a vicious display of cowardice and frustration. That day will not be soon forgotten, and certainly not in that community, as we prepare for a memorial such as is rarely seen outside of celebrity or larger public office.

The reason is simple - these four officers became bigger than their own individual lives simply by doing their jobs, by serving and protecting. And in losing their lives, while keeping the peace, these officers have certainly elevated above the rest of us. They are deserving of our respect, our prayers, and our remembrances of them. And if nothing else, their passing serves as a valuable reminder of just how dangerous and important their position in our community can be, and of how selfless some people are by taking on such responsibilities.

But during these grieving times, it is strangely apparent that some choose this moment to spread their own frustrations, by somehow showing “respect” for the thug who gunned down four men who were simply doing their duty. This is what makes it hard to accept society as a whole, and these are the reasons that keep many of us separated.

Unrepentant thug, Lovelle Mixon, was a wanted parole-violator. He had used a phony ID when stopped for a traffic violation on Sat. March 21, 2009. He showed no signs of care when he opened fire on the two officers who had pulled him over.

Lovelle’s sister, Enjoli, was upset that the news kept referring to Lovelle as “the parolee.” She went on record to the media touting Lovelle as someone “who was turning his life around” and was “not a monster.” He just “didn’t want to go back to jail.” Well, who does? But shooting at police offers is about the worst way to work out problems.

Lovelle didn’t just shoot two officers and run. He came back to fire more rounds, execution-style.
- But he is “not a monster.”
He then ran like a coward and hid in his sister’s apartment, placing her in possible danger as well.
- But he is “not a monster.”
When he blasted more officers through a door, killing a third, it was to be “expected”, and even as they dragged him out of the apartment, he was able to kill one last officer.
- But he is “not a monster.”
He has a violent background, committed armed robbery, and has committed at least one previous murder.
- But he is “not a monster.”
He has been linked to six rapes, including that of a 12 year old school girl.
- But he is “not a monster.”

If that is not a complete description of a human monster, then what is?
Yet, Lovelle Mixon got his wishes - he did not go back to jail, and he definitely “changed his life” permanently.

And with that, the tale turns bizarre, as a handful of others in the neighborhood claim the shooting of the officers was a sign of the mounting tensions between the community and the police. “Remember Oscar Grant.” came some chants. Somehow that was meant to justify the actions. It almost seems as though this ragtag select group of Mixon supporters felt his death was in the wrong. From the malicious intent Mixon posed, it was so very right to shoot him.

It’s strange that this particular group of people never look at themselves as part of the problem. They see only what they accuse others of seeing - black skin. This does not by any means apply to the majority, except to those who feel their lives have become pointless. They wear their blackness not as a culture, but as a mark of shame. To them, it is the equivalent of wearing cross-hairs. Whenever opportunity arises, it will be the cry of “What about the black man?” as a sign of suffering. These are the people who drag down their own. The fact that there are countless black role models, many in the highest positions in our country, doesn’t seem to make a difference. The fact that our country has moved so far ahead as to have elected our first black President, as well seems to leave them unfazed. We have seen Martin Luther King’s dreams begin to unfold. And yet the complaining, and almost ritualistic, spiritual self-flagellation continues.

And that’s when these fringe portions of the community got together during everyone’s time of mourning, to cry out injustice for the shooting of poor, misunderstood Lovelle Mixon. They have formed a march in remembrance of their own new-found hero, a martyr by the name of Mixon. One doesn’t have to be black to feel that this type of action could cause 400 years of black American ancestry to collectively roll over in their graves. Martin Luther King was a hero. A man of peace who had a plan, an idea, a dream. But yet, todays’ society chooses a thug, a murderer, a child rapist - a monster - to represent them as their new idol. To this thug they bestow respect? The word “pathetic” is hardly even applicable. I truly feel sorry for those people. Nothing productive comes of it.

To the rest of the community, to those whose hearts have poured forth in understanding that this was a tragedy to everyone, I feel for them. I feel for the families and friends of the slain officers. I feel for the Oakland Police Department. I feel for all the people, on all sides, of the Oakland community who feel less safe, less secure for losing those who patrolled their streets. I feel for anyone who has honest feelings of compassion for the real tragedy that took place.

A coward may have taken the lives of four of Oakland finest, but he will never remove their memories. Brave men may have been taken from us, but their purpose and souls continue.

How Bad Are AIG Execs? Compare 1940s Nazi Germany vs AIG 2009

After hearing so much from both sides of the coin about AIG and their executives - who have suddenly realized how the law works, when it benefits them - I finally figured out a proper analogy over the situation at hand.

To begin with, assess what a "bonus" really is. It is an enticement, an award for a job well done. It is given to someone who has benefited others. To go back a bit, there used to be regulations and laws against bad risks in business. Eventually the system was deregulated, which is how problems began. AIG was just another insurance company, who found a way to jump onto the mortgage industry. They began guaranteeing banks around the world, opening doors for very bad risks in the housing market. Practically anyone could buy a house, in some cases even with no job.

AIG basically said, "Just do it." to the risky lending and never thought it would bottom out. Sounds like a pyramid scheme. Well, the inevitable, and unthinkable happened - it bottomed out. All the top AIG execs had been pushing in that direction, and they got the pay-off - a failed company. And now that the Fed and American people have to foot the bill to get it back on its feet (and basically cover some bad home buyers too), the AIG execs expect bonuses that they were promised in contract. The bad thing is - it's a legal demand. The moral thing is - it's wrong! It was those same execs that got us into this mess to begin with. They should be in prison for doing what they did, essentially a sham. But alas, it still was legal at the time.

Moving back to where I started, my analogy. Follow this (partially) hypothetical thought -

Nazi Germany, 1940s.
An Auschwitz prison guard is entrusted to "do away with" the prisoners. He is contractually offered a bonus if he "keeps his numbers up." And so he does, because that is the law of the land at that time.

1945, America wins. Recognizing that Germany itself is essentially good and necessary (unlike the Nazis), America offers to pay reparations to rebuild Germany into a sound structure again.

The Nuremberg trials (which represents America's current outrage, 2009). All the prison guards are being questioned for their part in atrocities. The one particular Auschwitz guard brings up, and demands his bonus for his exemplary work in what he was asked to do.

The moral question here:
1) Is the guard entitled to his contractually promised bonus, for "doing a good job" for his superiors, as he was asked to do. Or,
2) Should he go to prison for being part of the whole problem, hurting people along the way, and helping to get Germany (as in AIG) into the very mess of needing to ask for reparation money to begin with?

And so it's no wonder that AIG head Edward Liddy has asked his employees to give back the bonus money. BUT, it's doubtful that Liddy's intentions were honorable. Liddy in fact made it public that the very executives who received their bonus money, were now (justifiably) receiving death threats. So the money return is more to ensure that no harm comes to AIG employees or their families.

Note to Edward Liddy and the AIG cronies -
Japanese culture has had a long-standing ethical custom called "Hari Kari." That is suicide by blade, done when one has committed shame upon his family or superiors. Although, I would suggest that more for Bernie Madoff, whose actions actually have caused suicide in innocent people.