On YouTube’s Digital Playground, an Open Gate for Pedophiles
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/03/world/americas/youtube-pedophiles.html
flemme de lire l’article, la version bullet point sur cuicui est déjà juste complétement flippante (il y a une légion de crapules à décapiter) :
▻https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/1135535437441748992
#youtube #pédophilie #ai
MoA - June 04, 2019 - Tiananmen Square - Do The Media Say What Really Happened ?
►https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/06/tiananmen-square-do-the-media-say-what-really-happened.html
Since 1989 the western media write anniversary pieces on the June 4 removal of protesters from the Tiananmen Square in Beijing. The view seems always quite one sided and stereotyped with a brutal military that suppresses peaceful protests.
That is not the full picture. Thanks to Wikileaks we have a few situation reports from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing at that time. They describe a different scene than the one western media paint to this day.
Ten thousands of people, mostly students, occupied the square for six weeks. They protested over the political and personal consequences of Mao’s chaotic Cultural Revolution which had upset the whole country. The liberalization and changeover to a more capitalist model under Deng Xiopings had yet to show its success and was fought by the hardliners in the Communist Party.
The more liberal side of the government negotiated with the protesters but no agreement was found. The hardliners in the party pressed for the protest removal. When the government finally tried to move the protesters out of the very prominent square they resisted.
On June 3 the government moved troops towards the city center of Beijing. But the military convoys were held up. Some came under attack. The U.S. embassy reported that soldiers were taken as hostages:
TENSION MOUNTED THROUGHOUT THE AFTERNOON AS BEIJING RESIDENTS VENTED THEIR ANGER BY HARASSING MILITARY AND POLICE PERSONNEL AND ATTACKING THEIR VEHICLES. STUDENTS DISPLAYED CAPTURED WEAPONS, MILITARY EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES, INCLUDING IN FRONT OF THE ZHONGNANHAI LEADERSHIP COMPOUND. AN EFFORT TO FREE STILL CAPTIVE MILITARY PERSONNEL OR TO CLEAR THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE TO ZHONGNANHAI MAY HAVE BEEN THE CAUSE OF A LIMITED TEAR GAS ATTACK IN THAT AREA AROUND 1500 HOURS LOCAL.
There are some gruesome pictures of the government side casualties of these events.
Another cable from June 3 notes:
THE TROOPS HAVE OBVIOUSLY NOT YET BEEN GIVEN ORDERS PERMITTING THEM TO USE FORCE. THEIR LARGE NUMBERS, THE FACT THAT THEY ARE HELMETED, AND THE AUTOMATIC WEAPONS THEY ARE CARRYING SUGGEST THAT THE FORCE OPTION IS REAL.
In the early morning of June 4 the military finally reached the city center and tried to push the crowd out of Tiananmen Square:
STUDENTS SET DEBRIS THROWN ATOP AT LEAST ONE ARMORED PERSONNEL CARRIER AND LIT THE DEBRIS, ACCORDING TO EMBOFF NEAR THE SCENE. ABC REPORTED THAT ONE OTHER ARMORED PERSONNEL CARRIER IS AFLAME. AT LEAST ONE BUS WAS ALSO BURNING, ACCORDING TO ABC NEWS REPORTERS ON THE SQUARE AT 0120. THE EYEWITNESSES REPORTED THAT TROOPS AND RIOT POLICE WERE ON THE SOUTHERN END OF THE SQUARE AND TROOPS WERE MOVING TO THE SQUARE FROM THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE CITY.
The soldiers responded as all soldiers do when they see that their comrades get barbecued:
THERE HAS REPORTEDLY BEEN INDISCRIMINATE GUNFIRE BY THE TROOPS ON THE SQUARE. WE CAN HEAR GUNFIRE FROM THE EMBASSY AND JIANGUOMENWAI DIPLOMATIC COMPOUND. EYEWITNESSES REPORT TEAR GAS ON THE SQUARE, FLARES BEING FIRED ABOVE IT, AND TRACERS BEING FIRED OVER IT.
Most of the violence was not in the square, which was already quite empty at that time, but in the streets around it. The soldiers tried to push the crowd away without using their weapons:
THE SITUATION IN THE CENTER OF THE CITY IS VERY CONFUSED. POLOFFS AT THE BEIJING HOTEL REPORTED THAT TROOPS ARE PUSHING A LARGE CROWD OF DEMONSTRATORS EAST ON CHANGANJIE. ALTHOUGH THESE TROOPS APPEAR NOT TO BE FIRING ON THE CROWD, POLOFFS REPORT FIRING BEHIND THE TROOPS COMING FROM THE SQUARE.
With the Square finally cleared the student protest movement ebbed away.
Western secret services smuggled some 800 of the leaders of their failed ’color revolution’ out of the country, reported the Financial Times in 2014:
Many went first to France, but most travelled on to the US for scholarships at Ivy League universities.
The extraction missions, aided by MI6, the UK’s Secret Intelligence Service, and the CIA, according to many accounts, had scrambler devices, infrared signallers, night-vision goggles and weapons.
It is unclear how many people died during the incident. The numbers vary between dozens to several hundred. It also not known how many of them were soldiers, and how many were violent protesters or innocent bystanders.
The New York Times uses the 30th anniversary of the June 4 incidents to again promote a scene that is interpreted as successful civil resistance.
He has become a global symbol of freedom and defiance, immortalized in photos, television shows, posters and T-shirts.
But three decades after the Chinese Army crushed demonstrations centered on Tiananmen Square, “Tank Man” — the person who boldly confronted a convoy of tanks barreling down a Beijing avenue — is as much a mystery as ever.
But was the man really some hero? It is not known what the the man really wanted or if he was even part of the protests:
According to the man who took the photo, AP photographer Jeff Widener, the photo dates from June 5 the day after the Tiananmen Square incident. The tanks were headed away from, and not towards, the Square. They were blocked not by a student but by a man with a shopping bag crossing the street who had chosen to play chicken with the departing tanks. The lead tank had gone out its way to avoid causing him injury.
The longer video of the tank hold up (turn off the ghastly music) shows that the man talked with the tank commander who makes no attempt to force him away. The scene ends after two minutes when some civilian passersby finally tell the man to move along. The NYT also writes:
But more recently, the government has worked to eliminate the memory of Tank Man, censoring images of him online and punishing those who have evoked him.
...
As a result of the government’s campaign, many people in China, especially younger Chinese, do not recognize his image.
To which Carl Zha, who currently travels in China and speaks the language, responds:
Carl Zha @CarlZha - 15:23 utc - 4 Jun 2019
For the record, Everyone in China know about what happened on June 4th, 1989. Chinese gov remind them every year by cranking up censorship to 11 around anniversary. Idk Western reporters who claim people in China don’t know are just esp stupid/clueless or deliberately misleading
In fact that applies to China reporting in general. I just don’t know whether Western China reporters are that stupid/clueless or deliberately misleading. I used to think people can’t be that stupid but I am constantly surprised...
and
Carl Zha @CarlZha - 15:42 utc - 4 Jun 2019
This Image was shared in one of the Wechat group I was in today. Yes, everyone understood the reference
Carl recommends the two part movie The Gate To Heavenly Peace (vid) as the best documentary of the Tiananmen Square protests. It explores the political and social background of the incident and includes many original voices and scenes.
Posted by b on June 4, 2019 at 03:00
▻https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiananmen-square-world-marks-30-years-since-massacre-as-china-censors-all-mention/ar-AACl8Sy?li=BBnbcA1
▻https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=Tiananmen&exact_phrase=&any_of=&exclude_words=&document_dat
▻https://twitter.com/Obscureobjet/status/1135970437886881792
▻https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/89BEIJING15390_a.html
▻https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/89BEIJING15411_a.html
▻https://www.ft.com/content/4f970144-e658-11e3-9a20-00144feabdc0
►https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/03/world/asia/tiananmen-tank-man.html
▻http://www.fccj.or.jp/number-1-shimbun/item/984-the-truth-about-tankman/984-the-truth-about-tankman.html
▻https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq8zFLIftGk
–---
Here’s Minqi Li — a student of the “right” (liberal) at the time ["How did I arrive at my current intellectual position? I belong to the “1989 generation.” But unlike the rest of the 1989 generation, I made the unusual intellectual and political trajectory from the Right to the Left, and from being a neoliberal “democrat” to a revolutionary Marxist"] — about 1989.
It is in the preface of his book “The Rise of China”, which I don’t recommend as a theoretical book. It doesn’t affect his testimony though:
The 1980s was a decade of political and intellectual excitement in China. Despite some half-hearted official restrictions, large sections of the Chinese intelligentsia were politically active and were able to push for successive waves of the so-called “emancipation of ideas” (jiefang sixiang). The intellectual critique of the already existing Chinese socialism at first took place largely within a Marxist discourse. Dissident intellectuals called for more democracy without questioning the legitimacy of the Chinese Revolution or the economic institutions of socialism.
[...]
After 1985, however, economic reform moved increasingly in the direction of the free market. Corruption increased and many among the bureaucratic elites became the earliest big capitalists. Meanwhile, among the intellectuals, there was a sharp turn to the right. The earlier, Maoist phase of Chinese socialism was increasingly seen as a period of political oppression and economic failure. Chinese socialism was supposed to have “failed,” as it lost the economic growth race to places such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Many regarded Mao Zedong himself as an ignorant, backward Chinese peasant who turned into a cruel, power-hungry despot who had been responsible for the killing of tens of millions. (This perception of Mao is by no means a new one, we knew it back in the 1980s.) The politically active intellectuals no longer borrowed discourse from Marxism. Instead, western classical liberalism and neoliberal economics, as represented by Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman, had become the new, fashionable ideology.
[...]
As the student demonstrations grew, workers in Beijing began to pour onto the streets in support of the students, who were, of course, delighted. However, being an economics student, I could not help experiencing a deep sense of irony. On the one hand, these workers were the people that we considered to be passive, obedient, ignorant, lazy, and stupid. Yet now they were coming out to support us. On the other hand, just weeks before, we were enthusiastically advocating “reform” programs that would shut down all state factories and leave the workers unemployed. I asked myself: do these workers really know who they are supporting?
Unfortunately, the workers did not really know. In the 1980s, in terms of material living standards, the Chinese working class remained relatively well-off. There were nevertheless growing resentments on the part of the workers as the program of economic reform took a capitalist turn. Managers were given increasing power to impose capitalist-style labor disciplines (such as Taylorist “scientific management”) on the workers. The reintroduction of “material incentives” had paved the way for growing income inequality and managerial corruption.
[...]
By mid-May 1989, the student movement became rapidly radicalized, and liberal intellectuals and student leaders lost control of events. During the “hunger strike” at Tiananmen Square, millions of workers came out to support the students. This developed into a near-revolutionary situation and a political showdown between the government and the student movement was all but inevitable. The liberal intellectuals and student leaders were confronted with a strategic decision. They could organize a general retreat, calling off the demonstrations, though this strategy would certainly be demoralizing. The student leaders would probably be expelled from the universities and some liberal intellectuals might lose their jobs. But more negative, bloody consequences would be avoided.
Alternatively, the liberal intellectuals and the student leaders could strike for victory. They could build upon the existing political momentum, mobilize popular support, and take steps to seize political power. If they adopted this tactic, it was difficult to say if they would succeed but there was certainly a good chance. The Communist Party’s leadership was divided. Many army commanders’ and provincial governments’ loyalty to the central government was in question. The student movement had the support of the great majority of urban residents throughout the country. To pursue this option, however, the liberal intellectuals and students had to be willing and able to mobilize the full support of the urban working class. This was a route that the Chinese liberal intellectuals simply would not consider.
So what they did was … nothing. The government did not wait long to act. While the students themselves peacefully left Tiananmen Square, thousands of workers died in Beijing’s streets defending them.
Posted by: vk | Jun 4, 2019 3:21:31 PM
#Chine #démocratie #histoire #4689
Gobierno mexicano deporta a un centenar de migrantes cubanos
TAPACHULA, Chiapas, 12 de agosto de 2016.-Bajo un estricto dispositivo de seguridad, el gobierno de México inició este viernes la repatriación de unos cien inmigrantes cubanos que en los últimos 15 días se entregaron voluntariamente al Instituto Nacional de Migración (INM) de la ciudad de Tapachula, para solicitar un salvoconducto que les permita trasladarse libremente a Estados Unidos.
México devolvió a su país 80 mil migrantes en seis meses
México ha detenido de diciembre a mayo 80 mil personas y las ha devuelto a su lugar de origen, además de que en este periodo 24 mil personas solicitaron refugio en el país y de seguir esta tendencia a fin de año serán 60 mil, indicó el gobierno mexicano para argumentar al estadunidense las acciones que ha realizado en materia migratoria.
En el documento donde se detalla la posición de México en materia migratoria presentado este día en la conferencia que se realizó en la embajada mexicana en Washington, se detalla que el país ha trabajado para abordar el aumento de los flujos migratorios desde Centroamérica para lo cual ha ofrecido la opción de solicitar el estatus de refugiado, se adaptó el marco legal para ofrecer tarjetas regionales a aquellos que desean quedarse o a quienes buscan trabajar en los estados del sur, así como aumentando las acciones de control migratorio en la frontera sur de México y el istmo de Tehuantepec.
Sin estos esfuerzos, los flujos de migrantes que llegan a la frontera de Estados Unidos podrían ser mayores. “Sin los esfuerzos de México, un cuarto de millón de migrantes adicionales llegarían a la frontera de Estados Unidos en 2019”.
Agregó que desde diciembre de 2018 hasta mayo de 2019, México ha detenido alrededor de 400 personas por actos delictivos relacionados con el tráfico de migrantes. Indicó que desde diciembre pasado, México, siguiendo sus principios humanitarios, permitió el ingreso de ciertos migrantes centroamericanos afectados por la implementación unilateral por parte del Gobierno de Estados Unidos de la Sección 235 (b)(2)(C) de la Ley de inmigración y naturalización.
Ante ello, desde el pasado 29 de mayo, México ha aceptado 8 mil 835 migrantes retornados en espera de una audiencia de asilo en los tribunales de Estados Unidos. Sumado a ello, hay 18 mil 778 personas que esperan en un puerto de entrada fronterizo de Estados Unidos, dentro del territorio mexicano, para presentar sus solicitudes de asilo debido a la implementación de un sistema de metering.
Reiteró que la imposición de aranceles junto con la decisión de cancelar los programas de ayuda en los países del norte de Centroamérica podrían tener un efecto contraproducente y no reducirían los flujos migratorios. “Las tarifas podrían causar inestabilidad financiera y económica, lo que significa que México podría reducir su capacidad para abordar los flujos migratorios y ofrecer alternativas a los nuevos migrantes que han llegado recientemente al país”.
“La propuesta de México es trabajar junto con Estados Unidos y el resto de la comunidad internacional, particularmente con los países involucrados en el tránsito del flujo, con el objetivo final de reducir la migración forzada al acelerar el desarrollo económico y el bienestar de El Salvador, Guatemala y Honduras. México cree que solo esto abordará las causas fundamentales de la migración y brindará una respuesta integral”.
Aseveró que el país continuará trabajando con Estados Unidos para abordar temas de interés común. “Tenemos fe en el diálogo y en la política como un instrumento para evitar una confrontación costosa e innecesaria. Creemos que nuestros países pueden llegar a un acuerdo sobre cómo enfrentar un asunto en el que nuestros enfoques difieren. Nuestra dignidad mexicana se fundamenta en varios pilares y el actuar a partir de principios profundamente arraigados con un límite claro a lo que se puede negociar es uno de ellos”.
▻https://www.jornada.com.mx/ultimas/2019/06/03/mexico-devolvio-a-su-pais-80-mil-migrantes-en-seis-meses-9535.html
#machine_à_expulsions
Mexico Cracks Down on Migrants, After Pressure From Trump to Act
They arrived at dusk, dressed for combat, pouring from government vehicles. A phalanx of military and police personnel swarmed a small hotel in the center of Tapachula, this scrappy city near Mexico’s border with Guatemala. Their target: undocumented migrants.
Agents rushed door to door, hauling people away, while migrants shouted or ran out the back, scampering over the rooftops of neighboring homes, witnesses said.
It was one of several raids here last week to sweep up migrants, part of a broad Mexican crackdown against the surge of Central Americans and others streaming toward the United States. In recent weeks, the Mexican authorities have been breaking up migrant caravans and setting up round-the-clock roadblocks along common routes north.
Detentions and deportations in Mexico are multiplying quickly, sowing fear among the many thousands of Central Americans and others crowding the migrant shelters and budget hotels here in southern Mexico, most of them hoping to reach the American border.
“So scary,” said one Cuban migrant at the hotel. “The fear never goes away.”
The Mexican government has been under intense pressure from President Trump to block the tens of thousands of undocumented migrants trudging north each month. With the American authorities unable to stop illegal immigration into the United States, Mr. Trump has taken aim at countries in the region — including Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, the origins of most of the migration — threatening punishment unless they to do more.
Last week, Mr. Trump stunned officials and business leaders on both sides of the American border by promising tariffs on all Mexican imports unless Mexico stopped undocumented migrants from crossing into the United States.
Sign up for The Interpreter
Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.
Migrants in the lobby of Santa Teresa de Jesus Hotel in Tapachula. Last week this hotel was the site of a raid by the Mexican authorities that detained seven Cubans.CreditDaniele Volpe for The New York Times
Image
In Washington on Monday, Mexico’s foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, warned that the tariffs would simply undermine Mexico’s existing efforts to control migration.
“Tariffs could cause financial and economic instability,” weakening the Mexican government’s ability to solve the problem, Mr. Ebrard said. He and other officials are holding talks with the Trump administration this week to defuse the situation, but they warned that Mexico could respond with retaliatory measures of its own.
President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico insists that his country has been doing its part already, arguing that the crisis stems from a complex array of social and political problems across the region that would take billions in international investment — not punitive measures — to fix.
But their recent enforcement efforts aside, Mexican officials admit that their southern border is highly porous, with thousands of migrants slipping across every month through hundreds of known illegal crossings.
Along the Suchiate River, which marks part of the border between Mexico and Guatemala, scores of rafts cross within view of an official border bridge. Made of wooden planks lashed to tire inner tubes, they float back and forth throughout the day, openly carrying undocumented migrants, local residents and black-market goods.
According to the raftsmen, the recent crackdown by the Mexican authorities has not affected their illegal traffic. Marvin Garcia, a veteran raftsman, said that at just the crossing he works, more than 150 undocumented migrants had crossed during a recent two-day period.
As for the Mexican border patrol and other security forces, “they spin through from time to time, nothing more,” he said, adding, “They don’t do anything.”
Despite the pressure from Mr. Trump, Mexican officials have insisted that they will not “militarize” their southern border by building a border wall or saturating it with security forces.
Analysts say Mexico doesn’t have the resources to harden its 700-mile-long border with its Central American neighbors, especially since the nation is already stretched thin dealing with record levels of violence throughout the country.
And even if the Mexican government tried to fortify its southern border, analysts contend, it would probably not be enough to stop the unremitting surge.
In April, more than 109,000 people were apprehended at or near the southwest border of the United States, the highest monthly total since 2007. Many were traveling in families, which have continued to arrive in historic numbers despite Mr. Trump’s various efforts to stop the flow.
The mass migration was underway when Mexico’s president, Mr. López Obrador, took office on Dec. 1. But as a populist and lifelong champion of the poor, he campaigned on a platform of protecting migrants’ human rights, vowing to reject what he called the heavy-handed, enforcement-first approach of his predecessors.
At first, his administration opened its arms to migrants, broadcasting abundant work opportunities in Mexico and starting a program that gave expedited, yearlong humanitarian visas to just about everyone who applied. Officials also let the large and frequent migrant caravans entering from Central America to move relatively unimpeded across Mexican territory.
In the first four months of his administration, deportations fell 38 percent compared with the last four months of his predecessor’s term. But the permissiveness encouraged more migration from Central America, with many seeking to use Mexico as a thruway to the United States.
In late March, Mr. Trump threatened to close the border with Mexico to thwart migration. He also moved to cut off aid to the Central American countries sending most of the migrants to the United States.
Mexico appeared to respond quickly, with detentions and deportations jumping almost immediately.
In April, nearly 15,000 migrants were deported by Mexico, up from about 9,100 in March, according to government statistics. The monthly tally climbed even higher in May. Over the last two months, the López Obrador administration deported 67 percent more migrants than its predecessor did during the same period in 2018.
“The López Obrador administration clearly wants to create a different approach to managing migration that treats migrants more humanely,” said Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute in Washington. “But faced by the exponential growth in the flow and the pressure from the Trump administration to stop it, they have mostly fallen back on an enforcement-only approach, like previous Mexican administrations.”
The Mexican government has not entirely abandoned its efforts to accommodate migrants and absorb them into the nation’s fabric. It has sought to expand eligibility for work and visitor visas for Central Americans. And some migrants’ advocates say it has done a better job than past administrations of promoting its asylum program, which is on track to receive about 60,000 applications this year, about double the number last year.
Many thousands of migrants, often as a last resort to avoid deportation, have applied for visas or asylum in Mexico. But the rush has overwhelmed the government’s migration agencies, which are crumpling under the weight of severe backlogs and budget cuts. Despite the relentless increase in migration in recent months, the division that handles enforcement, the National Migration Institute, suffered a 23 percent reduction in its budget this year.
The delays are evident here in Tapachula, the main city in this part of Mexico and a major way station for migrants en route from Central America to the north.
Thousands of migrants fill the city’s shelters and budget hotels, or crowd cheap rooming houses, waiting months for a resolution to their applications.
Karina Orellana, 24, her partner, Jorge Alberto Martínez, 43, and Mr. Martínez’s nephew, David Martínez, 25, arrived here from El Salvador a week ago expecting to be received with open arms by the Mexican government. They planned to apply for refuge in Mexico and relocate to the northern state of Nuevo León, where they heard there were jobs.
They were not expecting the enforcement crackdown or the long bureaucratic delays. Mexican officials told them their asylum petitions could take at least five months to process.
“The news says one thing and the reality is different,” said Ms. Orellana, who was staying with companions at the Jesús El Buen Pastor del Pobre y El Migrante shelter, where nearly 600 people are crammed into a space fit for about 250.
The long waits have driven some migrants to give up and hit the northbound trail again.
“Many are asking, ‘When does the train pass?’” said Rosibel López Gómez, the manager of the Jesús El Buen Pastor shelter, referring to the cargo train known as The Beast, which many migrants board illegally to cross Mexico.
Some have resorted to contracting smugglers. In fact, the Mexican crackdown and Mr. Trump’s efforts to restrict immigration have benefited the migrant-smuggling industry and the corrupt Mexican officials who abet it, analysts say.
Mr. López Obrador and officials in his delegation to Washington say they are optimistic about reaching a deal with the Trump administration. The Mexican president suggested over the weekend that he was willing to “reinforce” the government’s migration-control strategies — as long as human rights were not violated.
But on Monday, Mexico’s ambassador to the United States, Martha Bárcena, said there was a limit to the Mexicans’ flexibility in the negotiations. “And the limit is Mexican dignity,” she said.
Mr. López Obrador has for months been pushing a strategy to address the migration crisis by attacking the root problems that are compelling people to leave their homelands.
Supporters of the approach hope the United States will become a major donor and participant. But Mr. Trump has instead moved to cut aid to the three Central American countries that send most of the migrants trying to cross the United States’ southwest border.
Last week, the Trump administration signed a two-year agreement to deploy up to 80 agents from the Department of Homeland Security to Guatemala to help train its law enforcement officials and conduct investigations aimed at stemming illegal migration.
But analysts wonder whether the American offer will extend much further.
“López Obrador is right that the only long-term solution for stopping out-migration from Central America is to invest in security and prosperity in the countries of origin,” Mr. Selee said. “But it’s unclear whether his government will put serious resources into this, and even less clear if the Trump administration will help.”
▻https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/03/world/americas/mexico-migration-crackdown.html
