person:george soros


  • Un livre sur la vision du monde de Soros
    http://www.dedefensa.org/article/un-livre-sur-la-vision-du-monde-de-soros

    Un livre sur la vision du monde de Soros

    Le journaliste Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent signe un ouvrage qui nous aide à comprendre les motivations du célèbre financier.

    Le multimilliardaire George Soros et son Open Society attirent l’attention d’un nombre grandissant d’observateurs provenant de toutes les tendances politiques. On reproche à ce spéculateur d’utiliser sa fortune considérable, que certains évaluent à plus de 30 milliards de dollars US, afin de financer une pléthore d’organisations non gouvernementales (ONG) qui font la promotion de l’immigration de masse ou de l’abolition des frontières.

    Une société-écran tentaculaire

    Gérant le Soros Fund Management, basé à New York, ce financier d’origine hongroise a fondé l’Open Society Institute qui a été transformé, (...)


  • Facebook accusé dans une enquête du « New York Times » d’avoir participé au dénigrement de George Soros
    https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2018/11/15/facebook-accuse-d-avoir-participe-au-denigrement-de-george-soros_5384127_440

    Une longue enquête du quotidien américain révèle les méthodes de communication et de lobbying pour répondre aux différents scandales qui ont récemment touché l’entreprise. Facebook s’est défendu, jeudi 15 novembre, d’avoir orchestré une campagne de dénigrement visant le financier George Soros, afin de détourner l’attention d’affaires potentiellement dommageables pour le réseau social. Des soupçons qui émanent d’une longue enquête publiée par le New York Times, sous le titre « Delay, Deny and Deflect », se (...)

    #discrimination #manipulation #Facebook


  • Delay, Deny and Deflect: How Facebook’s Leaders Fought Through Crisis - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-data-russia-election-racism.html

    En partie de la manière suivante,

    Matt Stoller sur Twitter : “#Facebook is an impressive company. They both went after our coalition group @FacebookBreakup as Soros-funded AND worked with the Anti-Defamation League to accuse us of anti-semitism. https://t.co/MGZLJZO6hv” / Twitter
    https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1062816375046135808


  • Après l’attaque antisémite, un élu américain d’extrême droite critiqué | The Times of Israël
    https://fr.timesofisrael.com/apres-lattaque-antisemite-un-elu-americain-dextreme-droite-critiqu

    M. Greenblatt dénonce notamment la rencontre de Steve King avec des responsables du parti d’extrême droite autrichien FPÖ cet été.

    A cette occasion, il avait donné un entretien à une publication proche de ce parti, Unzensuriert, dans lequel il reprenait ouvertement la théorie xénophobe du « grand remplacement », et parlait du milliardaire américain George Soros, qui est juif, comme d’une influence sombre et cachée sur les élections américaines.

    Ce que se garde bien de dire le média sioniste, c’est que l’élu en question avance son support d’#Israel comme preuve de son amour des Juifs,
    https://mobile.twitter.com/IAStartingLine/status/1058040186360250368


  • How Vilification of George Soros Moved From the Fringes to the Mainstream - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/31/us/politics/george-soros-bombs-trump.html

    On both sides of the Atlantic, a loose network of activists and political figures on the right have spent years seeking to cast Mr. Soros not just as a well-heeled political opponent but also as the personification of all they detest. Employing barely coded anti-Semitism, they have built a warped portrayal of him as the mastermind of a “globalist” movement, a left-wing radical who would undermine the established order and a proponent of diluting the white, Christian nature of their societies through immigration.

    In the process, they have pushed their version of Mr. Soros, 88, from the dark corners of the internet and talk radio to the very center of the political debate.

    “He’s a banker, he’s Jewish, he gives to Democrats — he’s sort of a perfect storm for vilification by the right, here and in Europe,” said Michael H. Posner, a human rights lawyer and former State Department official in the Obama administration.

    Mr. Soros has given his main group, the Open Society Foundations, $32 billion for what it calls democracy-building efforts in the United States and around the world. In addition, in the United States, Mr. Soros has personally contributed more than $75 million over the years to federal candidates and committees, according to Federal Election Commission and Internal Revenue Service records.

    That qualifies him as one of the top disclosed donors to American political campaigns in the modern campaign finance era, and it does not include the many millions more he has donated to political nonprofit groups that do not disclose their donors.

    By contrast, the network of conservative donors led by the billionaire industrialist brothers Charles G. and David H. Koch, who have been similarly attacked by some on the American left, has spent about $2 billion over the past decade on political and public policy advocacy.❞

    The closing advertisement for Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign featured Mr. Soros — as well as Janet L. Yellen, the chairwoman of the Federal Reserve at the time, and Lloyd Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, both of whom are Jewish — as examples of “global special interests” who enriched themselves on the backs of working Americans.

    If anything, Mr. Soros has been elevated by Mr. Trump and his allies to even greater prominence in the narrative they have constructed for the closing weeks of the 2018 midterm elections. They have projected on to him key roles in both the threat they say is posed by the Central Americans making their way toward the United States border and what they characterized as Democratic “mobs” protesting the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

    The National Republican Congressional Committee ran an ad in October in Minnesota suggesting that Mr. Soros, who is depicted sitting behind a pile of cash, “bankrolls” everything from “prima donna athletes protesting our anthem” to “left-wing mobs paid to riot in the streets.” The ad links Mr. Soros to a local congressional candidate who worked at a think tank that has received funding from the Open Society Foundations.

    Even after the authorities arrested a fervent Trump supporter and accused him of sending the pipe bombs to Mr. Soros and other critics, Republicans did not back away. The president grinned on Friday when supporters at the White House responded to his attacks on Democrats and “globalists” by chanting, “Lock ’em up,” and yelling, “George Soros.”

    #Antisémitisme #Georges_Soros #Néo_fascisme #USA


  • Reinforcement of the southern borders because of nonexistent migratory pressure

    Since Gergely Gulyás, Viktor Orbán’s new chief-of-staff, has taken over, the so-called “government info” press conferences introduced by his predecessor János Lázár are held only every second Thursday. On the last such occasion, on October 25, Gulyás announced that, according to “the information of the Hungarian and European intelligence services, approximately 70,000 refugees are heading toward Hungary along the old Balkan route, and therefore the Hungarian government has offered assistance” to Croatia and has decided to reinforce the Croatian-Hungarian border.

    Prior to that day, I found only one short news item in Magyar Idők which reported that rumors were circulating among refugees stuck in Bosnia-Hercegovina that Zagreb would allow them to cross into Croatia, and from there they could proceed to Western Europe. About 100 refugees spent the night at the Bosnian-Croatian border in the hope of entry, but the Croatian ministry of interior denied the story. The paper gave official figures on the refugee situation in Bosnia. Since the beginning of the year 20,000 migrants have arrived in the country, but 13,000 were turned away. At the moment only 4,000-5,000 refugees can be found in Bosnia, some of whom are clustered in Bihać, close to the Croatian-Bosnian border. Those who manage to get into Croatia unnoticed usually go to Slovenia and from there to Trieste, Italy.

    I looked high and low on the internet to find the 70,000 refugees heading toward Hungary but was unsuccessful. In fact, according to the UN Refugee Agency, only 26,548 refugees arrived in Greece in 2018. So, I suspect that Gergely Gulyás’s story of 70,000 migrants was another instance of purposeful disinformation intended to mislead Hungarians fearful of migrants. Strengthening the Croatian-Hungarian border can serve only one purpose: to keep the fear of migrants alive among the population. I’m almost certain that the overwhelming majority of Hungarians don’t have any idea where Bihać is and that they would be surprised to hear that it is 6.5 hours away by car from #Röszke.
    The story of those migrants who managed to get through from Bihać to Italy, France, or Germany is vividly told by Davide Lemmi in his article “From Bosnia to Trieste, migrants’ journey across the new Balkan route” in Lifegate. The journey’s most difficult leg is the migrants’ stay in Croatia, where they are cautioned to remain in wooded areas near the Slovene border, which is far from the Hungarian-Croatian border Hungary is now reinforcing because of the alleged new migrant onslaught threatening the country.

    Of course, this new “danger” requires more money for border defense. On the very same day that Gulyás announced the new danger coming from Croatia, the government approved another 24 billion forints “for the handling of the extraordinary migratory pressure” that had presented itself. Although since the fence was erected in September 2015 Hungary hasn’t had any “migratory pressure” to speak of, just in 2017 the Hungarian government spent 155.1 billion forints on border defense. Given the opacity in which the Orbán government operates, we don’t really know where these large sums of money have been and will be going.

    Every time the government announces some new real or fake news, the regime’s faithful “national security experts” also show up. Georg Spöttle, a man of dubious past and dubious expertise, is always ready to claim that Hungary is in danger. Since there was a small clash between the refugees and the Croatian police 500 km away near Bihać, Spöttle predicted that “the scene will soon be repeated” along the Hungarian border. Therefore, more policemen and soldiers should be stationed there. In addition, the “weak spots” of the border fence should be reinforced with stronger fencing. It is possible that the source of Gergely Gulyás’s 70,000 migrants who are heading toward Hungary is Georg Spöttle, who told Hír TV that “at this very moment the number of migrants who are stuck in one of the Balkan countries is 60-70,000.” Where this figure comes from no one knows.

    The story of the clash in which some women and children were injured was widely covered in the government media. It is typical of the low level of government journalism that one of the journalists from Magyar Hírlap mixed up the name of the alleged Iranian instigator with the name of a Bosnian town, Velika Kladuša, where a fair number of refugees can be found, something that would be really ridiculous if it weren’t so sad. Figyelő, Mária Schmidt’s daily paper, tried to make “an organized operation” out of the clash between Croatian police and about 150 refugees. Who is behind it? According to the head of the Croatian border police, the culprits are the “Serbian and Bosnian migration centers.” The article calls attention to guide books prepared for the migrants by the Soros organizations in 2015. By making a reference to the Soros organizations’ activities three years ago, the article strongly suggests that these people are still working to help the refugees stranded in Bosnia get across the border to Croatia.

    While I was gathering material pertinent to this post, I couldn’t help comparing the story about the alleged 70,000 migrants heading toward Hungary to the frenzy Donald Trump has whipped up about the Honduran caravan. The caravan is still 1,500 miles from the United States border, and the refugees have an arduous journey ahead of them on foot. Yet the caravan is being described by the president as an imminent “assault on our country.” He keeps talking about criminals, gangsters, Middle Eastern terrorists in the crowd without any proof. He has hinted that the entire spectacle was funded by the Democrats, and he vows to send troops to the border while his supporters cheer. A Republican congressman insinuated that George Soros is financing the exodus. The story gets bigger and bigger with every passing moment in order to create fear and hatred–and, of course, to garner votes ahead of the mid-term elections. As we have seen in the last two days, verbal incitement can easily be translated into action, especially if it is the president who is inflaming passions. Right-wing populists like Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán are playing with fire when they unleash hatred and mislead their followers, creating an alternate reality.

    http://hungarianspectrum.org/2018/10/27/reinforcement-of-the-southern-borders-because-of-nonexistent-migr
    #militarisation_des_frontières #hongrie #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Croatie


  • Moment détente (?) : Une bombe posée près de chez George Soros, le milliardaire cible des nationalistes
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/diversifion/15200-moment-detente-une-bombe-posee-pres-de-chez-george-soros-le-milliar

    Le philanthrope est régulièrement la cible d’attaques antisémites, et accusé de vouloir inonder la Hongrie d’immigrants.

    INTERNATIONAL - Un engin explosif a été découvert lundi 22 octobre dans la boîte aux lettres de la résidence du

    milliardaire George Soros, ennemi juré des nationalistes, rapporte le New York Times.

    Selon le quotidien américain, un employé de cette résidence située dans l’État de New York a découvert l’engin en ouvrant un paquet déposé dans la boîte. "Il a déposé le colis dans une zone boisée et nous a appelés", a indiqué la police, qui est intervenue dans l’après-midi dans le hameau de Katonah, à Bedford, dans le comté de Westchester.

    George Soros, 88 ans, n’était pas à son domicile à ce moment-là. L’enquête a été confiée au FBI.

    Cible d’attaques (...)

    #En_vedette #Divers


  • Words matter. Is it @AP style to call migrants an “army”—above a photo of mothers tending to their infants and toddlers, no less? This is not only incorrect, but it enables a racist narrative sold by this @POTUS and his supporters. Armies invade. These people are running away.


    https://twitter.com/JamilSmith/status/1054163071785037824
    #armée #terminologie #préjugés #invasion #afflux #mots #vocabulaire #migrations #réfugiés #médias #journalisme #presse

    • #Polly_Pallister-Wilkins sur la marche de migrants qui a lieu en Amérique centrale...

      Dear media reporting on the Central American migrant caravan, can you please be attentive to how you talk about it? 1/n
      People are walking, walking not pouring, flowing, or streaming. Walking. They are walking along roads, they will be tired, hungry, their feet will hurt, they will have blisters and sore joints. They are not a natural liquid phenomenon governed by the force of gravity. 2/n
      Their walking is conditioned by the infrastructures they move along like roads, the physical geographies they traverse like hills and rivers and the human controls they encounter like border controls and police checkpoints. 3/n
      All of these things are risky, they make the walk, the journey more difficult and dangerous, esepcially the police checkpoints and the border controls. These risks are the reason they are travelling as a caravan, as a large group attempting to minimise the risks of controls 4/n
      And the risks from gangs and criminals that migrants on their journeys routinely face. Their journey is a deeply embodied one, and one that is deeply conditioned both by the violence they are leaving and the violence of the journey itself. 5/n
      So media please try and reflect this in your storytelling. These people are not a river obeying gravity. They have made an active yet conditioned choice to move. When they encounter a block in their path this can be deadly. It can detain, deport, injure, rape, or kill. 6/n
      And these blockages are not boulders in a riverbed around which the river flows. These blockages, these #checkpoints, border controls or police patrols are human blockages, they are not natural. So please try and reflect the political structures of this journey. Please. End/
      Addendum: there is a long history of caravans as a form political resistance in Central America.

      https://twitter.com/PollyWilkins/status/1054267257944227840
      #marche #migrations #Honduras #Amérique_centrale #mots #vocabulaire #terminologie #média #journalisme #presse #caravane #métaphores_liquides #risque #gravité #mouvement #contrôles_frontaliers #blocages #barrières #résistance #Mexique

    • Migrants travel in groups for a simple reason: safety

      A caravan of Central American migrants traveling to through Mexico to the United States to seek asylum is about halfway through its journey.

      The caravan began on Oct. 13 in Honduras with 200 people. As it has moved through Honduras, Guatemala and now Mexico, its ranks have grown to over 7,000, according to an estimate by the International Organization of Migration.

      The migrants have been joined by representatives from humanitarian organizations like the Mexican Red Cross providing medical assistance and human rights groups that monitor the situation.

      Journalists are there, too, and their reporting has caught the attention of President Donald Trump.

      He has claimed that the caravan’s ranks probably hide Middle Eastern terrorists. Trump later acknowledged there is no evidence of this, but conservative media outlets have nevertheless spread the message.

      It is reasonable for Americans to have security concerns about immigration. But as a scholar of forced migration, I believe it’s also important to consider why migrants travel in groups: their own safety.
      Safety in numbers

      The Central Americans in the caravan, like hundreds of thousands of people who flee the region each year, are escaping extreme violence, lack of economic opportunity and growing environmental problems, including drought and floods, back home.

      Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico have some of the world’s highest murder rates. According to Doctors Without Borders, which provides medical care in crisis zones, 68 percent of the migrants and refugees it surveyed in Mexico had experienced violence. Nearly one-third of women were sexually abused.

      Whether crossing Central America, the Sahara desert or the mountains of Afghanistan, migrants are regularly extorted by criminals, militias and corrupt immigration officials who know migrants make easy targets: They carry cash but not weapons.

      Large groups increase migrants’ chance of safe passage, and they provide some sense of community and solidarity on the journey, as migrants themselves report.
      Publicizing the dangers they flee

      Large groups of migrants also attract media coverage. As journalists write about why people are on the move, they shed light on Central America’s many troubles.

      Yet headlines about huge migrant caravans may misrepresent trends at the U.S.-Mexico border, where migration is actually decreasing.

      While the number of Central American families and children seeking asylum in the U.S. has increased in the past two years, Mexican economic migrants are crossing the border at historically low levels.

      And while most migrant caravan members hope to seek asylum in the U.S., recent history shows many will stay in Mexico.

      In response to Trump’s immigration crackdown, Mexican president-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador has promised to welcome Central American refugees — and try to keep them safe.


      https://theconversation.com/migrants-travel-in-groups-for-a-simple-reason-safety-105621

      #sécurité

    • Trump’s Caravan Hysteria Led to This

      The president and his supporters insisted that several thousand Honduran migrants were a looming menace—and the Pittsburgh gunman took that seriously.

      On Tuesday, October 16, President Donald Trump started tweeting.

      “The United States has strongly informed the President of Honduras that if the large Caravan of people heading to the U.S. is not stopped and brought back to Honduras, no more money or aid will be given to Honduras, effective immediately!”

      “We have today informed the countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador that if they allow their citizens, or others, to journey through their borders and up to the United States, with the intention of entering our country illegally, all payments made to them will STOP (END)!”

      Vice President Mike Pence also tweeted:

      “Spoke to President Hernandez of Honduras about the migrant caravan heading to the U.S. Delivered strong message from @POTUS: no more aid if caravan is not stopped. Told him U.S. will not tolerate this blatant disregard for our border & sovereignty.”

      The apparent impetus for this outrage was a segment on Fox News that morning that detailed a migrant caravan thousands of miles away in Honduras. The caravan, which began sometime in mid-October, is made up of refugees fleeing violence in their home country. Over the next few weeks, Trump did his best to turn the caravan into a national emergency. Trump falsely told his supporters that there were “criminals and unknown Middle Easterners” in the caravan, a claim that had no basis in fact and that was meant to imply that terrorists were hiding in the caravan—one falsehood placed on another. Defense Secretary James Mattis ordered more troops to the border. A Fox News host took it upon herself to ask Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen whether there was “any scenario under which if people force their way across the border they could be shot at,” to which Nielsen responded, “We do not have any intention right now to shoot at people.”

      Pence told Fox News on Friday, “What the president of Honduras told me is that the caravan was organized by leftist organizations, political activists within Honduras, and he said it was being funded by outside groups, and even from Venezuela … So the American people, I think, see through this—they understand this is not a spontaneous caravan of vulnerable people.”

      The Department of Homeland Security’s Twitter account “confirmed” that within the caravan are people who are “gang members or have significant criminal histories,” without offering evidence of any such ties. Trump sought to blame the opposition party for the caravan’s existence. “Every time you see a Caravan, or people illegally coming, or attempting to come, into our Country illegally, think of and blame the Democrats for not giving us the votes to change our pathetic Immigration Laws!” Trump tweeted on October 22. “Remember the Midterms! So unfair to those who come in legally.”

      In the right-wing fever swamps, where the president’s every word is worshipped, commenters began amplifying Trump’s exhortations with new details. Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida wondered whether George Soros—the wealthy Jewish philanthropist whom Trump and several members of the U.S. Senate blamed for the protests against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and who was recently targeted with a bomb—was behind the migrant caravan. NRATV, the propaganda organ of the National Rifle Association, linked two Republican obsessions, voter fraud and immigration. Chuck Holton told NRATV’s viewers that Soros was sending the caravan to the United States so the migrants could vote: “It’s telling that a bevy of left-wing groups are partnering with a Hungarian-born billionaire and the Venezuelan government to try to influence the 2018 midterms by sending Honduran migrants north in the thousands.” On CNN, the conservative commentator Matt Schlapp pointedly asked the anchor Alisyn Camerota, “Who’s paying for the caravan? Alisyn, who’s paying for the caravan?,” before later answering his own question: “Because of the liberal judges and other people that intercede, including George Soros, we have too much chaos at our southern border.” On Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show, one guest said, “These individuals are not immigrants—these are people that are invading our country,” as another guest asserted they were seeking “the destruction of American society and culture.”

      Peter Beinart: Trump shut programs to counter violent extremists

      In the meantime, much of the mainstream press abetted Trump’s effort to make the midterm election a referendum on the caravan. Popular news podcasts devoted entire episodes to the caravan. It remained on the front pages of major media websites. It was an overwhelming topic of conversation on cable news, where Trumpists freely spread disinformation about the threat the migrants posed, while news anchors displayed exasperation over their false claims, only to invite them back on the next day’s newscast to do it all over again.

      In reality, the caravan was thousands of miles and weeks away from the U.S. border, shrinking in size, and unlikely to reach the U.S. before the election. If the migrants reach the U.S., they have the right under U.S. law to apply for asylum at a port of entry. If their claims are not accepted, they will be turned away. There is no national emergency; there is no ominous threat. There is only a group of desperate people looking for a better life, who have a right to request asylum in the United States and have no right to stay if their claims are rejected. Trump is reportedly aware that his claims about the caravan are false. An administration official told the Daily Beast simply, “It doesn’t matter if it’s 100 percent accurate … this is the play.” The “play” was to demonize vulnerable people with falsehoods in order to frighten Trump’s base to the polls.

      Nevertheless, some took the claims of the president and his allies seriously. On Saturday morning, Shabbat morning, a gunman walked into the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh and killed 11 people. The massacre capped off a week of terrorism, in which one man mailed bombs to nearly a dozen Trump critics and another killed two black people in a grocery store after failing to force his way into a black church.

      Before committing the Tree of Life massacre, the shooter, who blamed Jews for the caravan of “invaders” and who raged about it on social media, made it clear that he was furious at HIAS, founded as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, a Jewish group that helps resettle refugees in the United States. He shared posts on Gab, a social-media site popular with the alt-right, expressing alarm at the sight of “massive human caravans of young men from Honduras and El Salvador invading America thru our unsecured southern border.” And then he wrote, “HIAS likes to bring invaders in that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in.”

      The people killed on Saturday were killed for trying to make the world a better place, as their faith exhorts them to do. The history of the Jewish people is one of displacement, statelessness, and persecution. What groups like HIAS do in helping refugees, they do with the knowledge that comes from a history of being the targets of demagogues who persecute minorities in pursuit of power.

      Ordinarily, a politician cannot be held responsible for the actions of a deranged follower. But ordinarily, politicians don’t praise supporters who have mercilessly beaten a Latino man as “very passionate.” Ordinarily, they don’t offer to pay supporters’ legal bills if they assault protesters on the other side. They don’t praise acts of violence against the media. They don’t defend neo-Nazi rioters as “fine people.” They don’t justify sending bombs to their critics by blaming the media for airing criticism. Ordinarily, there is no historic surge in anti-Semitism, much of it targeted at Jewish critics, coinciding with a politician’s rise. And ordinarily, presidents do not blatantly exploit their authority in an effort to terrify white Americans into voting for their party. For the past few decades, most American politicians, Republican and Democrat alike, have been careful not to urge their supporters to take matters into their own hands. Trump did everything he could to fan the flames, and nothing to restrain those who might take him at his word.

      Many of Trump’s defenders argue that his rhetoric is mere shtick—that his attacks, however cruel, aren’t taken 100 percent seriously by his supporters. But to make this argument is to concede that following Trump’s statements to their logical conclusion could lead to violence against his targets, and it is only because most do not take it that way that the political violence committed on Trump’s behalf is as limited as it currently is.

      The Tree of Life shooter criticized Trump for not being racist or anti-Semitic enough. But with respect to the caravan, the shooter merely followed the logic of the president and his allies: He was willing to do whatever was necessary to prevent an “invasion” of Latinos planned by perfidious Jews, a treasonous attempt to seek “the destruction of American society and culture.”

      The apparent spark for the worst anti-Semitic massacre in American history was a racist hoax inflamed by a U.S. president seeking to help his party win a midterm election. There is no political gesture, no public statement, and no alteration in rhetoric or behavior that will change this fact. The shooter might have found a different reason to act on a different day. But he chose to act on Saturday, and he apparently chose to act in response to a political fiction that the president himself chose to spread and that his followers chose to amplify.

      As for those who aided the president in his propaganda campaign, who enabled him to prey on racist fears to fabricate a national emergency, who said to themselves, “This is the play”? Every single one of them bears some responsibility for what followed. Their condemnations of anti-Semitism are meaningless. Their thoughts and prayers are worthless. Their condolences are irrelevant. They can never undo what they have done, and what they have done will never be forgotten.

      https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/caravan-lie-sparked-massacre-american-jews/574213

    • Latin American asylum seekers hit US policy “wall”

      Trump’s new restrictions mean long waits simply to register claims.

      The movement of thousands of Central American asylum seekers and migrants north from Honduras towards the southern border of the United States has precipitated threats from US President Donald Trump – ahead of next week’s midterm elections – to block the group’s entry by deploying troops to the US-Mexican border.

      Under international law the United States is obligated to allow asylum seekers to enter and file claims. However, immigration officials at the country’s southern border have for months been shifting toward legally dubious practices that restrict people’s ability to file asylum claims.

      “Make no mistake, the administration is building a wall – one made of restrictionist policy rather than brick and mortar,” said Jason Boyd, policy counsel at the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA).

      As a result, hundreds, possibly thousands, of asylum seekers have been left waiting for extended periods of time on the Mexican side of the border in need of shelter and basic services. Firm numbers for those affected are difficult to come by because no one is counting.

      Some of those turned away explore potentially dangerous alternatives. Aid and advocacy groups as well as the Department of Homeland Security say the wait has likely pushed some to attempt to enter the United States illegally, either with smugglers or on their own via perilous desert routes.

      While some of those in the so-called “migrant caravan” are searching for economic opportunity, others are fleeing gang violence, gender-based violence, political repression or unrest – all increasingly common factors in Central America and Mexico that push people to leave their homes.
      Menacing phone calls

      When people from the migrant caravan reach the southern border of the United States, they may find themselves in a similar position to Dolores Alzuri, 47, from Michoacan, a state in central Mexico.

      In late September, she was camped out with her husband, daughter, granddaughter, and aunt on the Mexican side of the DeConcini port of entry separating the twin cities of Nogales – one in the Mexican state of Sonora, the other in the US state of Arizona.

      Alzuri and her family were waiting for their turn to claim asylum in the United States, with only a police report in hand as proof of the threats they faced back home. Camping beside them on the pedestrian walkway just outside the grated metal door leading to the United States, nine other families waited to do the same.

      Over the preceding month Alzuri had received several menacing phone calls from strangers demanding money. In Michoacan, and many other parts of Mexico where criminal gangs have a strong presence, almost anybody can receive calls like these. You don’t know who’s on the other end of the line, Alzuri explained, but you do know the consequences of not following their orders.

      “If you do not give [money] to them, they kidnap you or they kidnap your family,” Alzuri said. “They destroy you. They kill you. That is why it is so scary to be in this country.”

      Other people she knew had received similar calls. She also knew that those who didn’t pay ended up dead – pictures of their bodies posted on Facebook as a macabre warning of what happens to those who resist.

      Fearing a similar fate, Alzuri packed her bags and her family and travelled north to ask for asylum in the United States. A friend had been granted asylum about nine months ago, and she had seen on television that other people were going, too. It seemed like the only way out.

      “I had a problem,” she said, referring to the phone calls. “They asked us for money, and since we did not give them money, they threatened us.”

      Before leaving her home, Alzuri said she filed a police report. But the authorities didn’t care enough to act on it, she said. “They are not going to risk their life for mine.”
      No way out

      Despite the danger at home, Alzuri and others in similar situations face an increasingly difficult time applying for asylum in the United States. At the Nogales crossing, asylum seekers must now wait up to a month simply to be allowed to set foot inside a border office where they can register their claims, aid workers there say.

      Those waiting are stuck in territory on the Mexican side that is controlled by gangs similar to the ones many are fleeing, though local aid groups have scrambled to find space in shelters, especially for women and children, so people will be safer while they wait.

      The situation hasn’t always been like this.

      In the past, asylum seekers were almost always admitted to register their claims the same day they arrived at the border. Since May, however, there has been a marked slowdown in registration.

      US Custom and Border Protection (CBP), the federal law enforcement agency responsible for screening people as they enter the country, says delays are due to a lack of capacity and space. But asylum advocates say similar numbers have arrived in previous years without causing a delay and the real reason for the slowdown is that CBP has shifted resources away from processing asylum seekers – not just in Nogales but across the southern US border – resulting in people being forced to wait for long periods or turned away altogether.

      This is happening despite the insistence of high-ranking Trump administration officials that asylum seekers present themselves at ports of entry or face criminal prosecution for crossing the border irregularly. Such contradictory policies, asylum advocates argue, are part of a broad-based effort by the Trump administration to dramatically reduce the number of people able to seek protection in the United States.

      “Our legal understanding is that they have the legal obligation to process asylum seekers as they arrive,” said Joanna Williams, director of education and advocacy at the Kino Border Initiative (KBI), a Nogales-based NGO. “There’s no room in the law for what they are doing right now.”
      A system in crisis

      In the past decade, migration across the southern border of the United States has undergone a dramatic change. Every year since the late 1970s US Border Patrol agents apprehended close to a million or more undocumented migrants entering the country. In 2007, that number began to fall, and last year there were just over 310,000 apprehensions – the lowest number since 1971.

      At the same time, the proportion of people entering the United States from the southern border to claim asylum has increased. Ten years ago, one out of every 100 people crossing the border was seeking humanitarian protection, according to a recent report published by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), a non-partisan think tank in Washington DC. Today that number is about one in three.

      According to Boyd of AILA, the increase is being driven by ongoing humanitarian emergencies in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, an area of Central America known as the Northern Triangle. These countries have some of the highest homicide rates in the world and are wracked by gang violence, gender-based violence, extortion, and extra-judicial killings. “Many of the individuals and families arriving at the US southern border are literally fleeing for their lives,” said Boyd.

      But the system that is supposed to provide them protection is in crisis. Beginning in 2010 the number of asylum requests lodged in the United States started to balloon, mirroring an upward trend in global displacement. Last year, 79,000 people approached the US border saying they had a credible fear of returning to their home country, compared to 9,000 at the beginning of the decade.

      The increase in credible-fear claims, as well as asylum requests made by people already in the United States, has strained the system to a “crisis point”, according to the MPI report. This has led to a backlog of around 320,000 cases in US immigration courts and people having to wait many months, if not years, to receive a hearing and a decision.
      Crackdown

      Senior officials in the Trump administration, including the president, have consistently lumped asylum seekers and economic migrants together, positing that the United States is being “invaded” by a “massive influx of illegal aliens” across the southern border, and that the asylum system is subject to “systematic abuse” by people looking to gain easy entry to the country.

      People working on the ground with asylum seekers refute this. Eduardo Garcia is a communication coordinator at SOA Watch, an organisation that monitors the humanitarian impact of US policy in Latin America. He has spent time in Nogales speaking with people waiting to claim asylum.

      “The stories of many of the people we have talked to… are stories of people fleeing gang violence, are stories of people fleeing because one of their sons was killed, because one of their sons was threatened, because one of their family members [was] raped,” he said. “They have said they cannot go back to their countries. If they are sent back they are going to be killed.”

      Still, the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy on immigration – responsible for the recent child-separation crisis – has also included measures that have restricted access to asylum in the United States.

      In May, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Justice Department would begin criminally prosecuting everyone who irregularly crossed the US southern border, including asylum seekers. In June, that policy was followed by a decision that the United States would no longer consider gang and sexual violence – precisely the reasons so many people flee the Northern Triangle – as legitimate grounds for asylum. Around the same time, CBP appears to have deprioritised the processing of asylum seekers at ports of entry in favour of other responsibilities, leading to the long waits and people being turned away, according to humanitarian workers and a recent report by the DHS’s Office of Inspector General.

      And even as these restrictive policies were being put in place, Trump administration officials have been encouraging asylum seekers to try. “If you’re seeking asylum, go to a port of entry,” Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen said in an 18 June press conference. “You do not need to break the law of the United States to seek asylum.”

      Nogales, Mexico

      “I came here with the hope that if I asked for asylum I could be in the United States,” said Modesto, a 54-year-old from Chimaltenango, Guatemala. In mid-September he was sitting in a mess hall run a couple hundred meters from the US border run by KBI, which provides humanitarian assistance to migrants and asylum seekers.

      Modesto had already been in Nogales, Sonora for several months. Like Dolores Alzuri, he fled his home because criminal gangs had tried to extort money from him. “I worked a lot and was making a living in my country,” Modesto explained. “The problem in particular with the gangs is that they don’t let you work… If you have money they extort you. If you don’t have money they want to recruit you.” And people who don’t cooperate: “They’re dead,” he added.

      The situation Modesto found when he arrived in Nogales, Sonora was far from what he expected. For starters, there was the long wait at the border. But he also discovered that – as an adult travelling with his 18-year-old son – even once he entered the United States he would likely end up in a detention centre while his case slowly made its way through the overburdened immigration courts – a practice that has also increased under the Trump administration. “I don’t want to cross… and spend a year in prison when my family needs my help,” he said.

      Modesto is in some ways an exception, according to Williams of KBI. Many of the people arriving in Nogales, Sonora are families with children. Once in the United States they will likely be released from immigration detention with ankle monitoring bracelets to track their movements. These people often choose to wait and to claim asylum at the port of entry when there is space.

      After more than 100 people piled up to wait at the border in May, local humanitarian groups set up a system to organise and keep track of whose turn it was to submit an asylum claim to US immigration officials. They also scrambled to find spaces in shelters so people were not sleeping on the walkway over the weeks they needed to wait.

      Now, only people who are likely to enter soon are camped on the walkway. When IRIN visited, about 40 asylum seekers – mostly women and children – sat on one side of the walkway as a steady stream of people heading to the United States filtered by on the other. Some of the asylum seekers were new arrivals waiting to be taken to a shelter, while others had been sleeping there for days on thin mats waiting for their turn. Volunteers handed out clean clothing and served pasta, as a CBP agent opened and closed the metal gate leading to the United States, just a few tantalisingly short feet away.

      The slowdown of processing “leaves people stranded – in really dangerous situations sometimes – on the other side of the border, and completely violates our obligations under both domestic and international law,” said Katharina Obser, a senior policy adviser at the Women’s Refugee Commission, an NGO that advocates for women, children, and youth displaced by conflict and crisis.

      As a result, some people arrive, find out about the wait, and leave. “We’re fairly certain that those are individuals who then end up crossing the border through other means,” Williams said.

      The DHS Office of the Inspector General came to a similar conclusion, finding that the contradiction between Trump administration rhetoric and policy “may have led asylum seekers at ports of entry to attempt illegal border crossings.”
      Border-wide

      The situation in Nogales, Sonora is far from isolated, according to Boyd of the AILA. “Recent turnbacks of vulnerable asylum seekers have been documented throughout the US southern border,” he said, including at many ports of entry in Texas and California. In those states, asylum seekers have reported being stopped as they approach the border and told they cannot enter because immigration officials don’t have the capacity to process their claims.

      “Turnbacks form part of a comprehensive set of practices and policies advanced under this administration that appears aimed at shutting out asylum seekers from the United States,” Boyd continued.

      Meanwhile, people like Dolores Alzuri – and most likely some of the thousands of Central Americans who are travelling north from Honduras in the hope of claiming asylum – are left with little choice but to wait. Moving somewhere else in Mexico or returning home is not an option, said Alzuri. “The violence is the same in every state,” she said. And crossing the desert, “that’s a big danger.”

      She and her family don’t have a back-up plan. “Let’s hope that I do get [asylum], because I really do need it,” she said. “You don’t live comfortably in your own country anymore. You live in fear that something will happen to you. You can’t walk around on the streets because you feel that you’re being followed.”

      https://www.irinnews.org/news-feature/2018/10/29/latin-american-asylum-seekers-hit-us-policy-wall
      #USA #Etats-Unis #fermeture_des_frontières #Mexique

      Commentaire Emmanuel Blanchar via la mailing-list Migreurop:

      Un article intéressant car il rappelle opportunément que la « caravane des migrants » en route vers les Etats-Unis est également composée de nombreuses personnes qui souhaiteraient pouvoir déposer des demandes d’asile. Or, si la frontières Mexique-USA est loin d’être encore mûrées, un mur administratif empêche déjà que les demandes d’asile puisse être déposées et traitées dans le respect des droits des requérant.e.s.

      #mur_administratif #asile

    • No es una caravana, es un dolor que camina

      La caravana de migrantes es sólo la primera manifestación pública y masiva de la crisis humanitaria en la que vive la mayoría de la población; negada por el gobierno, por la oligarquía, embajadas, organizaciones de la sociedad civil y por algunas agencias de cooperación que le hacen comparsa a la dictadura.

      Esta crisis humanitaria es provocada por el modelo económico neoliberal impuesto a sangre y fuego, que sólo pobreza y violencia ha llevado a las comunidades, que ante la ausencia de oportunidades y ante el acoso de los grupos criminales no tienen otra alternativa que la peligrosa e incierta ruta migratoria; prefieren morir en el camino que en sus barrios y colonias.

      El infierno en que se ha convertido Honduras tiene varios responsables. En primer el lugar el imperialismo, que a través de su embajada promueve la inestabilidad política en el país con el apoyo directo al dictador, que para granjearse ese apoyo les ha entregado el país, hasta el grado del despojo y de la ignominia, como puede observarse en los foros internacionales.

      Otro responsable es el dictador, que además de la incertidumbre que genera en lo económico, en lo político y en lo social, ha profundizado y llevado al extremo las políticas neoliberales, despojando de sus recursos a comunidades enteras, para dárselas a las transnacionales, principalmente norteamericanas y canadienses.

      La oligarquía corrupta, mediocre, salvaje, inepta y rapaz también es responsable de esta crisis humanitaria, quien se ha acostumbrado a vivir del presupuesto nacional a tal grado de convertir al Estado en su patrimonio, por medio de un ejército de ocupación, de diputados y presidentes serviles y títeres, que toman las decisiones no para el pueblo, sino que para sus insaciables intereses.

      Hay otro actor importante en esta crisis y es el Ejército Nacional, fiel sirviente de los intereses imperiales y de la oligarquía, que sólo sirve para consumir una gran tajada del presupuesto nacional y más que un ejército defensor y garante de la soberanía nacional es una fuerza de ocupación; listo para asesinar, torturar y matar aquellos que se oponen al dictador, al imperio y la oligarquía.

      Desgraciadamente esta caravana la conforman los miserables, los desheredados de la tierra, los parias: “los que crían querubes para el presidio y serafines para el burdel” como dijo en su poema, Los Parias, el poeta mexicano Salvador Díaz Mirón.

      Estos miserables y desheredados no huyen de la patria, la aman, la adoran y la llevan convertida en un dolor sobre sus hombros, huyen de los verdugos y carniceros que nos gobiernan y de los otros responsables de esta crisis humanitaria. Los que huyen aman a esta tierra más que los que nos quedamos.

      https://criterio.hn/2018/10/29/no-es-una-caravana-es-un-dolor-que-camina
      #douleur


  • Trump’s Absurd New Conspiracy Theory: Sexual Assault Survivors Protesting Kavanaugh Are ’Paid Professionals’ Working for Soros | Alternet
    https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/donald-trump-brett-kavanaugh-protestors-george-soros?src=newsletter1096830

    As if the treatment of the protestors could be any less dignified, President Donald Trump attacked them on Friday with a bizarre conspiracy theory:

    The very rude elevator screamers are paid professionals only looking to make Senators look bad. Don’t fall for it! Also, look at all of the professionally made identical signs. Paid for by Soros and others. These are not signs made in the basement from love!

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 5, 2018

    Trump is claiming, with zero evidence, that because the protests had some professional organization, like mass-produced signs, the protestors are “paid professionals” in the employ of George Soros, the Hungarian-born Jewish billionaire philanthropist and Holocaust survivor who sits at the core of many right-wing conspiracy theories.

    The idea that anti-Trump protestors are paid off by his political enemies is a recurring claim by the president, who previously advocated investigating the 2017 Tax March protestors to determine whether they were paid.

    However, this marks the first time Trump has explicitly mentioned Soros by name on Twitter — a move that could well fan the flames of conspiracy among the far right.

    #Conspirationnisme #Folie #Trump #Soros


  • Changement de régime à Budapest ? Diana JOHNSTONE - 20 Septembre 2018 - LGS
    La Hongrie désobéissante : De l’Union Soviétique à l’Union Européenne

    https://www.legrandsoir.info/changement-de-regime-a-budapest.html

    CNN a récemment découvert un paradoxe. Comment était-il possible, se demandait la chaîne, qu’en 1989, Viktor Orban, alors leader de l’opposition libérale acclamé par l’Occident, appelait les troupes soviétiques à quitter la Hongrie, et maintenant qu’il est Premier ministre, il se rapproche de Vladimir Poutine ?

    Pour la même raison, imbécile.

    Orban voulait que son pays soit indépendant à l’époque, et il veut qu’il le soit maintenant.


    En 1989, la Hongrie était un satellite de l’Union soviétique. Peu importe ce que les Hongrois voulaient, ils devaient suivre les directives de Moscou et adhérer à l’idéologie communiste soviétique.

    Aujourd’hui, la Hongrie doit suivre les directives de Bruxelles et adhérer à l’idéologie de l’UE, c’est-à-dire à "nos valeurs communes".

    Mais quelles sont exactement ces "valeurs communes" ?

    Il n’y a pas si longtemps, "l’Occident", c’est-à-dire les États-Unis et l’Europe, revendiquaient une dévotion aux "valeurs chrétiennes". Ces valeurs étaient évoquées dans la condamnation occidentale de l’Union soviétique. Ce n’est plus le cas. Aujourd’hui, en effet, l’une des raisons pour lesquelles Viktor Orban est considéré comme une menace pour nos valeurs européennes est sa référence à une conception hongroise du "caractère chrétien de l’Europe, le rôle des nations et des cultures" . La renaissance du christianisme en Hongrie, comme en Russie, est considérée en Occident comme profondément suspecte.

    Il est entendu que le christianisme n’est plus une "valeur occidentale". Qu’est-ce qui a pris sa place ? Cela devrait être évident : aujourd’hui, "nos valeurs communes" signifient essentiellement démocratie et élections libres.

    Devinez à nouveau. Orban a récemment été réélu par un raz de marée. Guy Verhofstadt, chef de file des libéraux de l’UE, a qualifié ce mandat de "mandat électoral pour faire reculer la démocratie en Hongrie".

    Puisque les élections peuvent "faire reculer la démocratie", elles ne peuvent être l’essence même de "nos valeurs communes". Il peut arriver que les gens votent mal ; c’est ce qu’on appelle le "populisme" et c’est une mauvaise chose.

    Les valeurs communes réelles et fonctionnelles de l’Union européenne sont énoncées dans ses traités : les quatre libertés. Non, pas la liberté d’expression, car de nombreux États membres ont des lois contre le "discours de haine", qui peut couvrir de nombreux domaines puisque son sens est sujet à une interprétation large. Non, les quatre libertés obligatoires de l’UE sont la libre circulation des biens, des services, des personnes et des capitaux dans l’Union. Ouvrir les frontières. Open Borders . C’est l’essence même de l’Union européenne, le dogme du marché libre.

    Le problème avec la doctrine des Open Borders , c’est qu’elle ne sait pas où s’arrêter. Ou qu’elle ne s’arrête nulle part. Quand Angela Merkel a annoncé que des centaines de milliers de réfugiés étaient les bienvenus en Allemagne, l’annonce a été interprétée comme une invitation ouverte par des immigrants de toutes sortes, qui ont commencé à affluer en Europe. Cette décision unilatérale allemande s’appliquait automatiquement à l’ensemble de l’UE, avec son absence de frontières intérieures. Avec l’influence de l’Allemagne, Open Borders est devenu la "valeur commune européenne" essentielle et l’accueil des immigrés l’essence même des droits de l’homme. 

    Des considérations idéologiques et pratiques très contrastées contribuent à l’idéalisation des frontières ouvertes. Pour n’en nommer que quelques-unes :

    • Les libéraux économiques soutiennent qu’en raison du vieillissement de la population, l’Europe a besoin de jeunes travailleurs immigrés pour payer les pensions des travailleurs retraités.

    • De nombreux militants juifs se sentent menacés par les majorités nationales et se sentent plus en sécurité dans une société composée de minorités ethniques.

    • Plus discrètement, certains patrons favorisent l’immigration massive parce que la concurrence croissante sur le marché du travail fait baisser les salaires.

    • De nombreuses personnes ayant des tendances artistiques considèrent que la diversité ethnique est plus créative et plus amusante.

    • Certaines sectes anarchistes ou trotskystes pensent que les immigrés déracinés sont "les agents" de la révolution que le prolétariat occidental n’a pas su devenir.
    • De nombreux Européens acceptent l’idée que les États-nations sont la cause de la guerre et en concluent que tout moyen de les détruire est le bienvenu.

    • Les investisseurs financiers internationaux veulent naturellement lever tous les obstacles à leurs investissements et promouvoir ainsi Open Borders comme étant l’avenir.

    • Il y a même quelques puissants intrigants qui voient dans la "diversité" la base du "diviser pour régner", en fragmentant la solidarité sur les bases ethniques.

    • Il y a des gens bienveillants qui veulent aider toute l’humanité en détresse. 

    Cette combinaison de motivations contrastées, voire opposées, ne constitue pas une majorité dans tous les pays. Notamment en Hongrie.

    Il convient de noter que la Hongrie est un petit pays d’Europe centrale de moins de dix millions d’habitants, qui n’a jamais eu d’empire colonial et n’a donc aucune relation historique avec les peuples d’Afrique et d’Asie comme en ont la Grande-Bretagne, la France, les Pays-Bas ou la Belgique. Étant l’un des perdants de la Première Guerre mondiale, la Hongrie a perdu une grande partie de son territoire au profit de ses voisins, notamment la Roumanie. La langue hongroise, rare et difficile, serait sérieusement menacée par une immigration massive. On peut probablement dire sans risque de se tromper que la majorité de la population hongroise a tendance à être attachée à son identité nationale et pense qu’elle serait menacée par une immigration massive en provenance de cultures radicalement différentes. Ce n’est peut-être pas gentil de leur part, et comme tout le monde, ils peuvent changer. Mais pour l’instant, c’est ainsi qu’ils votent.

    En particulier, ils ont récemment voté massivement pour réélire Victor Orban, approuvant évidemment son refus de l’immigration incontrôlée. C’est ce qui a provoqué la surveillance étroite d’Orban et la recherche de signes de la mise en place d’une dictature. En conséquence, l’UE prend des mesures pour priver la Hongrie de ses droits politiques. Le 14 septembre, Victor Orban a clairement exposé sa position dans un discours prononcé devant le Parlement européen à Strasbourg :

    "Soyons francs. Ils veulent condamner la Hongrie et les Hongrois qui ont décidé que notre pays ne sera pas un pays d’immigration. Avec tout le respect que je vous dois, mais aussi fermement que possible, je rejette les menaces des forces pro-immigration, leur chantage à la Hongrie et aux Hongrois, toutes basées sur le mensonge. Je vous informe respectueusement que, quelle que soit votre décision, la Hongrie mettra fin à l’immigration illégale et défendra ses frontières contre vous si nécessaire."

    Cela a été accueilli avec indignation.

    L’ancien Premier ministre belge Guy Verhofstadt, actuellement président du groupe Alliance des démocrates et des libéraux pour l’Europe au Parlement européen et ardent fédéraliste européen, a répondu furieusement que « nous ne pouvons laisser des gouvernements populistes d’extrême droite entraîner des États européens démocratiques dans l’orbite de Vladimir Poutine ! »

    Dans un tweet à ses collègues du PE, Verhofstadt a averti : « Nous sommes dans une bataille existentielle pour la survie du projet européen. ... Pour le bien de l’Europe, nous devons l’arrêter ! »

    CNN a publié avec approbation un article d’opinion de Verhofstadt décrivant la Hongrie comme une "menace pour l’ordre international".

    « Dans les semaines et les mois à venir, la communauté internationale – et les États-Unis en particulier – devront tenir compte de notre avertissement et agir : le gouvernement hongrois est une menace pour l’ordre international fondé sur des règles, » a-t-il écrit.

    « Les gouvernements européens et les Etats-Unis ont l’obligation morale d’intervenir », a poursuivi M. Verhofstadt. « Nous ne pouvons laisser des gouvernements populistes d’extrême droite entraîner les États européens démocratiques sur l’orbite de Vladimir Poutine et saper les normes internationales de l’après-guerre. »

    Viennent ensuite les sanctions : « Les coûts politiques et financiers doivent être affectés à la lutte contre les gouvernements qui suivent une voie autoritaire et au soutien aux organisations de la société civile... ».

    Verhofstadt a conclu : « Ce n’est pas dans l’intérêt des peuples d’Amérique ou d’Europe. Nous devons l’arrêter … maintenant. »

    L’appel de Verhofstadt à l’Amérique pour « arrêter » le Premier ministre hongrois ressemble étrangement aux appels lancés à Brejnev par des communistes purs et durs pour envoyer les chars en Tchécoslovaquie réformiste en 1968. 

    Cependant, cet appel à l’intervention ne s’adressait pas au président Trump, qui est aussi impopulaire qu’Orban parmi les atlantistes, mais plutôt à l’état permanent que le fanatique belge suppose être toujours au pouvoir à Washington.

    Au début de son article sur CNN, Verhofstadt a rendu hommage à "feu John McCain, le grand John McCain, celui qui a un jour décrit Orban comme "un fasciste en cheville avec Poutine...". Celui qui a parcouru le monde en tant que chef de la branche républicaine du National Endowment for Democracy (NED), encourageant et finançant des groupes dissidents à se rebeller contre leurs gouvernements respectifs, en préparation de l’intervention américaine. Sénateur McCain, où êtes-vous maintenant qu’il faudrait changer de régime à Budapest ?

    La réputation de dictateur d’Orban en Occident est incontestablement liée à son conflit intense avec le financier d’origine hongroise George Soros, dont la fondation Open Society finance toutes sortes d’initiatives visant à promouvoir son rêve d’une société sans frontières, notamment en Europe orientale. Les activités de Soros pourraient être considérées comme une politique étrangère étasunienne privatisée, innocemment "non gouvernementale". L’une des initiatives de Soros est l’Université privée d’Europe centrale (UEC) basée à Budapest, dont le recteur est Michael Ignatieff, partisan de l’Open Society. La Hongrie a récemment imposé une taxe de 25% sur l’argent dépensé par les organisations non gouvernementales pour des programmes qui " visent directement ou indirectement à promouvoir l’immigration " , ce qui affecte l’UEC. Cela fait partie d’un paquet de mesures anti-immigration récemment adopté, connu sous le nom de projet de loi "Stop Soros". 

    Les mesures hongroises contre l’ingérence de Soros sont bien sûr dénoncées en Occident comme une grave violation des droits de l’homme, tandis qu’aux Etats-Unis, les procureurs recherchent frénétiquement la moindre trace d’ingérence russe ou d’agents russes.

    Dans un autre coup porté à l’ordre international fondé sur des règles, le cabinet du Premier ministre hongrois a récemment annoncé que le gouvernement cesserait de financer des cours universitaires en études de genre au motif qu’ils "ne peuvent être justifiés scientifiquement" et attirent trop peu d’étudiants pour être valables. Bien que financée par le secteur privé et donc capable de poursuivre son propre programme d’études sur le genre, l’UEC s’en est "étonnée" et a qualifié la mesure de "sans aucune justification ou antécédent".

    Comme l’Union soviétique, l’Union européenne n’est pas seulement un cadre institutionnel antidémocratique promouvant un système économique spécifique ; elle est aussi le véhicule d’une idéologie et d’un projet planétaire. Tous deux sont basés sur un dogme quant à ce qui est bon pour le monde : le communisme pour le premier, "l’ouverture" pour le second. Les deux exigent des citoyens des vertus qu’ils ne partagent peut-être pas : une égalité forcée, une générosité forcée. Tout cela peut sembler bien, mais de tels idéaux deviennent des méthodes de manipulation. L’imposition d’idéaux finit par se heurter à une résistance obstinée.

    Il y a différentes raisons d’être contre l’immigration tout comme d’être pour. L’idée de la démocratie était de trier et de choisir entre les idéaux et les intérêts pratiques par une discussion libre et, en fin de compte, à main levée : un vote éclairé. Le Centre autoritaire libéral représenté par Verhofstadt cherche à imposer ses valeurs, ses aspirations, voire sa version des faits aux citoyens qui sont dénoncés comme "populistes" s’ils sont en désaccord. Sous le communisme, les dissidents étaient appelés "ennemis du peuple". Pour les mondialistes libéraux, ce sont des "populistes", c’est-à-dire le peuple. Si l’on dit constamment aux gens que le choix se situe entre une gauche qui prône l’immigration massive et une droite qui la rejette, le virage vers la droite est inéluctable.

    Diana Johnstone

    #Hongrie #UE #union_européenne #union_soviétique #indépendance #viktor_orban #guy_verhofstadt #indépendance #migration #christianisme #john_mccain #NED #soros #open_society #UEC #idéologie #populisme #ennemis_du_peuple

    • Bruxelles : Les fanatiques de l’union européenne ne lisent pas les discours de monsieur Guy Verhofstadt.

      Le premier festival européen de la démocratie au Parc Léopold à Bruxelles RTBF avec Belga - 22 Septembre 2018
      https://www.rtbf.be/info/regions/detail_le-premier-festival-europeen-de-la-democratie-au-parc-leopold-a-bruxelle

      . . . . . .
      Le citoyen y sera invité à s’exprimer et à échanger des opinions avec des responsables politiques européens ainsi que des représentants des institutions européennes et d’organisations de la société civile. Divers groupes politiques européens y seront aussi représentés.

      Le festival, à l’initiative d’individus engagés, comprendra plusieurs scènes, des stands des institutions européennes, des outils interactifs ou encore des expositions sur l’Europe citoyenne et des formats de discussion variés, comme le Pechakucha, qui mêle une présentation orale à la projection de 20 diapositives se succédant toutes les 20 secondes.

      Jubel abordera des questions telles que l’origine de l’euroscepticisme, l’avenir des dialogues citoyens et cherchera des pistes pour transformer les institutions européennes en meilleurs organismes d’écoute.

      « Malgré plusieurs initiatives entreprises par les institutions européennes pour renouer le contact avec ses citoyens, Jubel est convaincu qu’une approche plus haute en couleur, originale et bottom-up est nécessaire pour créer un lien plus fort entre les citoyens européens et leurs élites », soulignent les organisateurs dans un communiqué
      . . . . . .

      http://www.jubelfestival.eu

      The festival wants to contribute, by means of a bottom-up approach, to the idea of citizen consultations launched by French president #Macron and endorsed by his fellow heads of state and government, as well as the consolidated initiative of the European Commission, with the help of a structured output about the future of the European democratic project and the current functioning of the European Union.


  • The State of Israel vs. the Jewish people -
    Israel has aligned itself with one nationalist, even anti-Semitic, regime after another. Where does that leave world Jewry?
    By Eva Illouz Sep 13, 2018
    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-the-state-of-israel-vs-the-jewish-people-1.6470108

    Orban, left, and Netanyahu, in Jerusalem in July 2018. DEBBIE HILL / AFP

    An earthquake is quietly rocking the Jewish world.

    In the 18th century, Jews began playing a decisive role in the promotion of universalism, because universalism promised them redemption from their political subjection. Through universalism, Jews could, in principle, be free and equal to those who had dominated them. This is why, in the centuries that followed, Jews participated in disproportionate numbers in communist and socialist causes. This is also why Jews were model citizens of countries, such as France or the United States, with universalist constitutions.

    The history of Jews as promoters of Enlightenment and universalist values, however, is drawing to a close. We are the stunned witnesses of new alliances between Israel, Orthodox factions of Judaism throughout the world, and the new global populism in which ethnocentrism and even racism hold an undeniable place.

    When Prime Minister Netanyahu chose to align himself politically with Donald Trump before and after the U.S. presidential election of 2016, some people could still give him the benefit of doubt. Admittedly, Trump was surrounded by people like Steve Bannon, the former head of Breitbart News, who reeked of racism and anti-Semitism, but no one was sure of the direction the new presidency would take. Even if Trump refused to condemn the anti-Semitic elements of his electoral base or the Ku Klux Klan, which had enthusiastically backed him, and even if it took him a long time to dissociate himself from David Duke – we were not yet certain of the presence of anti-Semitism in Trump’s discourse and strategies (especially since his daughter Ivanka was a convert to Judaism).

    But the events in Charlottesville in August 2017 no longer allowed for doubt. The neo-Nazi demonstrators committed violent acts against peaceful counter-protesters, killing one woman by plowing through a crowd with a car (an act reminiscent in its technique of terrorist attacks in Europe). Trump reacted to the events by condemning both the neo-Nazis and white supremacists and their opponents. The world was shocked by his conflation of the two groups, but Jerusalem did not object. Once again, the indulgent (or cynical) observer could have interpreted this silence as the reluctant obeisance of a vassal toward his overlord (of all the countries in the world, Israel receives the most military aid from the United States). One was entitled to think that Israel had no choice but to collaborate, despite the American leader’s outward signs of anti-Semitism.

    This interpretation, however, is no longer tenable. Before and since Charlottesville, Netanyahu has courted other leaders who are either unbothered by anti-Semitism or straightforwardly sympathetic to it, and upon whom Israel is not economically dependent. His concessions go as far as participating in a partial form of Holocaust denial.

    Take the case of Hungary. Under the government of Viktor Orban, the country shows troubling signs of legitimizing anti-Semitism. In 2015, for example, the Hungarian government announced its intention to erect a statue to commemorate Balint Homan, a Holocaust-era minister who played a decisive role in the murder or deportation of nearly 600,000 Hungarian Jews. Far from being an isolated incident, just a few months later, in 2016, another statue was erected in tribute to Gyorgy Donáth, one of the architects of anti-Jewish legislation during World War II. It was thus unsurprising to hear Orban employing anti-Semitic tropes during his reelection campaign in 2017, especially against Georges Soros, the Jewish, Hungarian-American billionaire-philanthropist who supports liberal causes, including that of open borders and immigration. Reanimating the anti-Semitic cliché about the power of Jews, Orban accused Soros of harboring intentions to undermine Hungary.

    Whom did Netanyahu choose to support? Not the anxious Hungarian Jewish community that protested bitterly against the anti-Semitic rhetoric of Orban’s government; nor did he choose to support the liberal Jew Soros, who defends humanitarian causes. Instead, the prime minister created new fault lines, preferring political allies to members of the tribe. He backed Orban, the same person who resurrects the memory of dark anti-Semites. When the Israeli ambassador in Budapest protested the erection of the infamous statue, he was publicly contradicted by none other than Netanyahu.

    To my knowledge, the Israeli government has never officially protested Orban’s anti-Semitic inclinations and affinities. In fact, when the Israeli ambassador in Budapest did try to do so, he was quieted down by Jerusalem. Not long before the Hungarian election, Netanyahu went to the trouble of visiting Hungary, thus giving a “kosher certificate” to Orban and exonerating him of the opprobrium attached to anti-Semitism and to an endorsement of figures active in the Shoah. When Netanyahu visited Budapest, he was given a glacial reception by the Federation of the Jewish Communities, while Orban gave him a warm welcome. To further reinforce their touching friendship, Netanyahu invited Orban to pay a reciprocal visit to Israel this past July, receiving him in a way usually reserved for the most devoted national allies.

    The relationship with Poland is just as puzzling. As a reminder, Poland is governed by the nationalist Law and Justice party, which has an uncompromising policy against refugees and appears to want to eliminate the independence of the courts by means of a series of reforms that would allow the government to control the judiciary branch. In 2016 the Law and Justice-led government eliminated the official body whose mission was to deal with problems of racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance, arguing that the organization had become “useless.”

    An illustration depicting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shaking hands with Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki in Auschwitz. Eran Wolkowski

    Encouraged by this and other governmental declarations and policies, signs of nationalism multiplied within Polish society. In February 2018, president Andrzej Duda declared that he would sign a law making it illegal to accuse the Polish nation of having collaborated with the Nazis. Accusing Poland of collusion in the Holocaust and other Nazi atrocities would be from now prosecutable. Israel initially protested the proposed legislation, but then in June, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Polish prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, signed an agreement exonerating Poland of any and all crimes against the Jews during the time of the German occupation. Israel also acceded to Poland’s move to outlaw the expression “Polish concentration camp.” Moreover, Netanyahu even signed a statement stipulating that anti-Semitism is identical to anti-Polonism, and that only a handful of sad Polish individuals were responsible for persecuting Jews – not the nation as a whole.

    A billboard displaying George Soros urges Hungarians to take part in a national consultation about what it calls a plan by the Hungarian-born financier to settle migrants in Europe, in Budapest. ATTILA KISBENEDEK / AFP

    Like the American, Hungarian and Polish alt-right, Israel wants to restore national pride unstained by “self-hating” critics. Like the Poles, for two decades now, Israel has been waging a war over the official narrative of the nation, trying to expunge school textbooks of inconvenient facts (such as the fact that Arabs were actively chased out of Israel in 1948). In order to quash criticism, Israel’s Culture Ministry now predicates funding to creative institutions on loyalty to the state. As in Hungary, the Israeli government persecutes NGOs like Breaking the Silence, a group whose only sin has been to give soldiers a forum for reporting their army experiences and to oppose Israeli settlers’ violence against Palestinians or the expropriation of land, in violation of international law. Purging critics from public life (as expressed in barring the entry into the country of BDS supporters, denying funding to theater companies or films critical of Israel, etc.) is an expression of direct state power.

    When it comes to refugees, Israel, like Hungary and Poland, refuses to comply with international law. For almost a decade now, Israel has not respected international conventions on the rights of refugees even though it is a signatory of said conventions: The state has detained refugees in camps, and imprisoned and deported them. Like Poland, Israel is trying to do away with the independence of its judiciary. Israel feels comfortable with the anti-democratic extreme right of European states in the same way that one feels comfortable with a family member who belches and gossips, losing any sense of self-control or table manners.

    More generally, these countries today share a deep common political core: fear of foreigners at the borders (it must be specified, however, that Israelis’ fears are less imaginary than those of Hungarians or Polish); references to the nation’s pride untainted by a dubious past, casting critics as traitors to the nation; and outlawing human rights organizations and contesting global norms based on moral principles. The Netanyahu-Trump-Putin triumvirate has a definite shared vision and strategy: to create a political bloc that would undermine the current liberal international order and its key players.

    In a recent article about Trump for Project Syndicate, legal scholar Mark S. Weiner suggested that Trump’s political vision and practice follow (albeit, unknowingly) the precepts of Carl Schmitt, the German legal scholar who joined the Nazi Party in 1933.

    “In place of normativity and universalism, Schmitt offers a theory of political identity based on a principle that Trump doubtless appreciates deeply from his pre-political career: land,” wrote Weiner. “For Schmitt, a political community forms when a group of people recognizes that they share some distinctive cultural trait that they believe is worth defending with their lives. This cultural basis of sovereignty is ultimately rooted in the distinctive geography… that a people inhabit. At stake here are opposing positions about the relation between national identity and law. According to Schmitt, the community’s nomos [the Greek word for “law”] or sense of itself that grows from its geography, is the philosophical precondition for its law. For liberals, by contrast, the nation is defined first and foremost by its legal commitments.”

    Netanyahu and his ilk subscribe to this Schmittian vision of the political, making legal commitments subordinate to geography and race. Land and race are the covert and overt motives of Netanyahu’s politics. He and his coalition have, for example, waged a politics of slow annexation in the West Bank, either in the hope of expelling or subjugating the 2.5 million Palestinians living there, or of controlling them.

    They have also radicalized the country’s Jewishness with the highly controversial nation-state law. Playing footsie with anti-Semitic leaders may seem to contradict the nation-state law, but it is motivated by the same statist and Schmittian logic whereby the state no longer views itself as committed to representing all of its citizens, but rather aims to expand territory; increase its power by designating enemies; define who belongs and who doesn’t; narrow the definition of citizenship; harden the boundaries of the body collective; and undermine the international liberal order. The line connecting Orban to the nationality law is the sheer and raw expansion of state power.

    Courting Orban or Morawiecki means having allies in the European Council and Commission, which would help Israel block unwanted votes, weaken Palestinian international strategies and create a political bloc that could impose a new international order. Netanyahu and his buddies have a strategy and are trying to reshape the international order to meet their own domestic goals. They are counting on the ultimate victory of reactionary forces to have a free hand to do what they please inside the state.

    But what is most startling is the fact that in order to promote his illiberal policies, Netanyahu is willing to snub and dismiss the greatest part of the Jewish people, its most accepted rabbis and intellectuals, and the vast number of Jews who have supported, through money or political action, the State of Israel. This suggests a clear and undeniable shift from a politics based on the people to a politics based on the land.

    For the majority of Jews outside Israel, human rights and the struggle against anti-Semitism are core values. Netanyahu’s enthusiastic support for authoritarian, anti-Semitic leaders is an expression of a profound shift in the state’s identity as a representative of the Jewish people to a state that aims to advance its own expansion through seizure of land, violation of international law, exclusion and discrimination. This is not fascism per se, but certainly one of its most distinctive features.

    This state of affairs is worrisome but it is also likely to have two interesting and even positive developments. The first is that in the same way that Israel has freed itself from its “Jewish complex” – abandoning its role as leader and center of the Jewish people as a whole – many or most Jews will now likely free themselves from their Israel complex, finally understanding that Israel’s values and their own are deeply at odds. World Jewish Congress head Ron Lauder’s August 13, 2018, op-ed in The New York Times, which was close to disowning Israel, is a powerful testimony to this. Lauder was very clear: Israel’s loss of moral status means it won’t be able to demand the unconditional loyalty of world Jewry. What was in the past experienced by many Jews as an inner conflict is now slowly being resolved: Many or most members of Jewish communities will give preference to their commitment to the constitutions of their countries – that is to universalist human rights.

    Israel has already stopped being the center of gravity of the Jewish world, and as such, it will be able to count only on the support of a handful of billionaires and the ultra-Orthodox. This means that for the foreseeable future, Israel’s leverage in American politics will be considerably weakened.

    Trumpism is a passing phase in American politics. Latinos and left-wing Democrats will become increasingly involved in the country’s politics, and as they do, these politicians will find it increasingly difficult to justify continued American support of Israeli policies that are abhorrent to liberal democracies. Unlike in the past, however, Jews will no longer pressure them to look the other way.

    The second interesting development concerns Europe. The European Union no longer knows what its mission was. But the Netanyahus, Trumps, Orbans and Morawieckis will help Europe reinvent its vocation: The social-democrat bloc of the EU will be entrusted with the mission of opposing state-sanctioned anti-Semitism and all forms of racism, and above all defending Europe’s liberal values that we, Jews and non-Jews, Zionists and anti-Zionists, have all fought so hard for. Israel, alas, is no longer among those fighting that fight.

    A shorter version of this article has originally appeared in Le Monde.

    • Eva Illouz : « Orban, Trump et Nétanyahou semblent affectionner barrières et murs »
      https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/08/08/eva-illouz-israel-contre-les-juifs_5340351_3232.html?xtor=RSS-3208
      Dans une tribune au « Monde », l’universitaire franco-israélienne estime que l’alliance du gouvernement israélien avec les régimes « illibéraux » d’Europe de l’Est crée une brèche au sein du peuple juif, pour qui la lutte contre l’antisémitisme et la mémoire de la Shoah ne sont pas négociables.

      LE MONDE | 08.08.2018 à 06h39 • Mis à jour le 08.08.2018 à 19h18 | Par Eva Illouz (directrice d’études à l’Ecole des hautes études en sciences sociales)

      Tribune. Un tremblement de terre est tranquillement en train de secouer le monde juif. Lorsque le premier ministre israélien, Benyamin Nétanyahou, choisit de soutenir Donald Trump avant et après l’élection présidentielle américaine de 2016, certains pouvaient encore donner à ce dernier le bénéfice du doute. Certes, Trump s’était entouré de gens comme Steve Bannon dont émanaient des relents antisémites, certes, il refusait aussi de condamner sa base électorale sympathisante du Ku Klux Klan, mais personne n’était encore sûr de la direction que prendrait sa nouvelle présidence.

      Les événements de Charlottesville, en août 2017, n’ont plus permis le doute. Les manifestants néonazis commirent des actes de violence contre des contre-manifestants pacifiques (tuant une personne en fonçant dans la foule avec une voiture), mais Trump condamna de la même façon opposants modérés et manifestants néonazis.

      Le monde entier fut choqué de cette mise en équivalence, mais Jérusalem ne protesta pas. L’observateur indulgent (ou cynique) aurait pu interpréter ce silence comme l’acquiescement forcé du vassal vis-à-vis de son suzerain : de tous les pays du monde, Israël est celui qui reçoit la plus grande aide militaire des Etats-Unis.

      Cette interprétation n’est désormais plus possible. Il est devenu clair que Nétanyahou a de fortes sympathies pour d’autres dirigeants qui, comme Trump, front preuve d’une grande indulgence vis-à-vis de l’antisémitisme et dont il ne dépend ni militairement ni économiquement.
      Une statue à Budapest

      Prenons l’exemple de la Hongrie. En 2015, le gouvernement y annonça son intention de dresser une statue à la mémoire de Balint Homan, ministre qui joua un rôle décisif dans la déportation de 600 000 juifs hongrois. Quelques mois plus tard, en 2016, il fut question d’ériger à Budapest une statue à la mémoire d’un des architectes de la législation antijuive durant la seconde guerre mondiale, György Donáth....


  • Pourquoi George Soros et sa fondation quittent la Hongrie

    https://www.franceinter.fr/monde/pourquoi-george-soros-et-sa-fondation-quittent-la-hongrie

    George Soros, en 2017 à Bruxelles © AFP / Olivier Hoslet / POOL

    Le milliardaire américain d’origine hongroise George Soros a annoncé mardi qu’il suspendait les activités de sa fondation destinée à mener des programmes d’enseignement pour les réfugiés. La fondation déménage également ses locaux de Budapest à Berlin.

    La fondation de #Georges_Soros ne donnera plus de cours aux réfugiés hongrois : mardi, l’Université d’Europe centrale (CEU), implantée à Budapest, a annoncé qu’elle ne reconduisait pas ses modules d’enseignement destinés aux réfugiés, ni ses activités de bourses de recherche financées par l’UE sur les politiques migratoires.

    « Nous suspendons ces programmes dans l’attente d’une clarification de notre situation fiscale et juridique », explique un communiqué de l’organisation. En cause, une taxe de 25% sur les organisations qui « soutiennent l’immigration ». Adoptée en juin dans le cadre d’un ensemble de lois anti-immigration, elle entre en vigueur ce vendredi.

    #hongrie #berlin #réfugiés

    • @aude_v Soros est avant tout un pillard monstrueux à la tête d’un gang de financiers de haut vol, qui pour s’enrichir détruisent les systèmes sociaux de pays entiers (dont 50 % des habitant.e.s sont des femmes), n’oublions pas les enfants.
      .
      Ses ong servent avant tout ses intérêts, qui paye commande.

      On remarquera qu’elles ont réussi à faire élire Victor Orban.
      (Aux USA, Hillary Clinton a bien réussi à faire la courte échelle pour mettre Donald Trump au pouvoir).

      La société hongroise a toujours été tolérante pour ce qui est de l’homosexualité, voir les bains publics de Budapest.

      Dans les campagnes une pauvreté sans nom, pour ce pays qui n’arrive plus à produire lui même ses pommes de terres.

    • André, on est un peu au courant, ici, pour le capitalisme spéculatif et la manière dont le néo-libéralisme, en Europe centrale plus qu’ailleurs, a détruit le tissu social. Et sans illusion sur Soros. Cela n’empêche que la CEU est une institution précieuse. Et d’autant plus pour les réfugié.es qui bénéficiaient de ces cours, dont j’apprends l’existence.

      Je ne comprends pas tes interventions : tu n’as personne à convaincre ici que le capitalisme est un régime inhumain mais tu t’indignes chaque fois qu’on apporte un peu de nuance, de complexité qui dérange ta vision un peu monolithique. Et des fois, tes propos à l’emporte-pièce sont une manière de mépris pour ceux plus sensibles ou nuancés des autres, que tu sembles refuser de prendre en considération comme si tu devais servir la messe au lieu de te joindre à la discussion, quitte à ce que ce soit avec ta manière engagée et emportée, comme d’autres ici que le spectacle de l’abjection en cours débecte et qui n’ont pas plus que toi leur langue dans leur poche.

      La semaine dernière, j’ai fait une interv en classe sur les fake news et donné en exemple de ce qui peut se faire de pire et de mieux sur les réseaux sociaux la tentative ici-même de faire la vérité sur le post spectaculaire sur les activistes saoudiennes. J’ai fait lire du @reka (un peu emmerdée par son choix du mot « putassier », j’ai de chastes oreilles en classe !) mais ton interv sur Brigitte Macron, j’ai dit aux gosses que c’était un troll. Parce que c’est ce que tu fais ici, ou tu pourrais te joindre à la conversation mieux que tu ne fais. Et elle était assez irrespectueuse des personnes qui disaient être touchées par la nouvelle et que tu ignorais avec une vieille blague énigmatique dont je n’ai pu comprendre si elle était misogyne ou si elle en avait seulement l’air. Je t’ai ignoré, comme tout le monde.

      Tout ça fait que tes affirmations décousues sur la Hongrie, je n’y accorde pas trop de crédit, alors que je suis preneuse d’une contre-histoire de la CEU et de Soros en Hongrie. Même si je partage dans les grandes lignes ton engagement, ton propos ne m’apporte rien pour affûter mes analystes anti-capitalistes, écologistes ou féministes.

    • Comment penser que Soros investirai un centime, dans une ONG qui ne lui rapporterai pas beaucoup plus.

      Personnellement, après avoir lu pas mal de choses sur les ONG et leurs résultats, je pense qu’elles remplacent les missionnaires.
      Pour beaucoup, de belles et généreuse promesses, mais quand on regarde ce qu’elles font vraiment, et qui les finance, on y croit plus.
      Il y a de belles paroles, parfois des actes trés généreux, mais dans la réalité . . .

      Exemple d’acte généreux, pour les missionnaires : Ils ont sauvé pas mal d’indiens d’Amérique du Sud au moment de la colonisation espagnoles, Las Casas a fait ce qu’il a pu, pour eux, et l’intérêt de l’église catholique.
      A la même époque, l’Afrique Noire, une mine de bois d’ébène, complètement ignorée des missionnaires.

      WWF :
      https://seenthis.net/messages/718609
      https://seenthis.net/messages/602953
      https://seenthis.net/messages/571110

      Mais pas que : Amnesty International , Journée internationale des disparus.
      https://www.legrandsoir.info/courrier-au-service-de-presse-d-amnesty-international-section-francais
      . . . . .

      S’agissant de l’Amérique latine, on pourrait à juste titre s’étonner de l’absence de la #Colombie, mais, vu la modestie des chiffres, je ne vais pas pinailler ici sur les 45 000 victimes de cette pratique depuis 1985 (d’après la Unidad de Victimas), dont de nombreuses pendant la présence au pouvoir de la faction politique qui vient de revenir à la présidence en la personne de M. Ivan Duque.

      j’ai été très surpris par la prestation, ce matin 1er septembre, au journal de 8 heures de France Culture, présenté par Sophie Delton, de Mme Geneviève Garrigos, qui se présente comme la "porte-parole" d’AI. Sans référence particulière aux communiqués d’AI précédemment cités, elle s’est concentrée sur quatre pays, dont la Corée du Nord et la Syrie, mais a surtout passé la majeure partie de son intervention à dénoncer de façon extravagante « la politique de terreur imposée à l’opposition » à travers les « disparitions » au… Venezuela et au Nicaragua.
      . . . . .

      Par ailleurs, j’ai rencontré des volontaires ayant travaillé pour des ONG en Afrique, elles(ils) sont rentrés démolis par le comportement des dirigeants d’ONG.
      Marqué(e)s à vie.

      La plupart des ONG font un sale travail.

      à part cela Aude, merci pour le ton modéré de ton commentaire

    • Avec un peu de retard : Je voulais parler de mon expérience à la CEU, cette rentrée était chahutée et je n’ai pas eu le temps. Donc rapidement avant de revenir sur le sujet.

      J’ai travaillé sur des projets en coopération très étroite avec les département environnement et géographie de la CEU entre 1995 et 2002, en particulier avec un remarquable prof qui s’appelle Ruben Mnatsakanian. je voulais juste rappeler que la CEU a été un lieu de recherche et de réflexion important sur l’espace post soviétique et les pays ex-socialiste, une formidable opportunité pour des centaines voire des milliers d’étudiantes et d’étudiants d’Asie centrale, du Caucase, des pays de l’Est, d’Ukraine, de Russie, etc... qui sans les programmes de la CEU n’auraient jamais eu les moyens financier d’étudier dans leurs pays. La sélection des dossiers se faisait de manière très sérieuse et transparente. Ruben se déplaçait dans tous les pays pour mener les entretiens, longuement rencontrer les candidats, ensuite les décisions étaient prises de manière collégiales, après de longues discussions, jamais à la légère et surtout sans aucune considération pour les origines sociales ou la « richesse » supposées des candidats... La formation était excellente et je garde encore aujourd’hui - 20 ans après - de très bonnes relations de travail avec certain·es de ces étudiant·es. La nébuleuse des organisations et ong soutenues par Soros, c’est autre chose et je ne préjuge pas ici de ses intentions ou de ses crapuleries, j’ai juste expérimenté en live à quel point cette université a été importante pour toute une génération d’étudiant·es, et plus récemment de réfugiés et migrants qui avaient accès à l’enseignement supérieur.

      Le reste plus tard.

    • Sur les ONG, tague #néo-colonialisme, #charité, #charity_business, etc. si tu as des faits intéressants à documenter. Ça te permet, @bce_106_6, de rejoindre la somme de documentation sur ce sujet et d’autres.

      Mais je crois qu’en parlant des missionnaires blancs en Afrique au sujet de Soros, tu es encore à côté de la plaque, à nous faire une leçon globale d’anti-capitalisme et d’anti-colonialisme. Nous sommes des camarades, pas des ouailles ! (Et tu es un camarade, mais quel camarade...)


  • Soros, suprémaciste & censeur diaboliques
    http://www.dedefensa.org/article/soros-supremaciste-censeur-diaboliques

    Soros, suprémaciste & censeur diaboliques

    L’activisme de George Soros ne connaît ni fatigue, ni limites, ni frontières bien entendu. Il s’avère que les récentes actions de censure des “titans hightech” type-GAFA, d’ailleurs promises à se poursuivre et destinées à limiter sinon à annihiler toutes les poussées qui contiendraient des éléments antiSystème, – conservateurs, populistes, souverainistes, traditionnalistes, prorusses, etc., – peuvent être considérées comme ayant eu leur origine dans une initiative de Soros et de ses diverses organisations, sous la forme d’un mémo de 49 pages datant de janvier 2017. A l’époque, ce document avait été fuité d’une réunion en Floride d’une centaine de donateurs soutenant l’initiative et publié par The Daily Beast. Il resurgit aujourd’hui, notamment dans une publication (...)


  • Les médias émergents font peur aux monopoles
    http://www.dedefensa.org/article/les-medias-emergents-font-peur-aux-monopoles

    Les médias émergents font peur aux monopoles

    Les médias au service de la parole oligarchique dominante ont raison de se faire du mauvais sang. L’immense majorité des lecteurs sains d’esprit boude les chiens de garde d’une rectitude politique qui bat de l’aile et le commun des mortels souhaite qu’on lui présente le monde tel qu’il est, sans cinéma.

    Dénigrer les nouveaux médias alternatifs

    Nous assistons, depuis peu, à une levée de boucliers des grands médias et de leurs patrons, ces derniers étant les commanditaires du Forum économique de Davos. De même, ceux qui s’occupent de régenter l’espace médiatique, à l’instar de l’ancienne responsable de la propagande canadienne, Mélanie Joly, y sont venus rencontrer des oligarques de la trempe de George Soros, le temps (...)


  • Bannon déménage en Europe pour mettre en place The Movement, une fondation populiste pour rivaliser avec George Soros et déclencher une révolte de droite à travers le continent.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-bannons-plan-to-hijack-europe-for-the-far-right
    L’ancien conseiller en chef de la Maison Blanche a déclaré à The Daily Beast qu’il créait en Europe une fondation appelée The Movement, dont il espère qu’elle mènera une révolte populiste de droite à travers le continent à partir des élections du Parlement européen au printemps prochain.

    Au cours de l’année écoulée, Bannon a eu des entretiens avec Nigel Farage et des membres du Front National de Marine Le Pen (récemment rebaptisé Rassemblement National) à l’Ouest, du Hongrois Viktor Orban et des populistes polonais de l’Est.
    Bannon est convaincu que les années à venir marqueront une rupture radicale par rapport aux décennies d’intégration européenne. « Le nationalisme populiste de droite est ce qui arrivera. C’est ce qui gouvernera », a-t-il dit au Daily Beast. « Vous allez avoir des États nations avec leurs propres identités, leurs propres frontières. »
    Les mouvements de base sont déjà en place en attendant que quelqu’un maximise leur potentiel. "Ce sera instantané - dès que nous appuierons sur le bouton, a-t-il dit.

    Faut-il s’en inquiéter ? J’ai bien l’impression. N’oubliez pas que Bannon a été le stratège de Trumps tout au long de la campagne de 2016.

    L’homme n’est PAS stupide, il sait comment jouer le jeu de la politique identitaire.
    #Bannon #Europe


  • Hungary to criminalise migrant helpers in crackdown

    The Hungarian government has drafted new laws to criminalise those who help irregular migrants seeking asylum.

    If passed in its current form, the legislation could make printing leaflets with information for asylum-seekers and offering them food or legal advice a criminal offence.

    The constitution will also be amended to prevent other EU countries from transferring asylum seekers to Hungary.

    Nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban is defying EU policy on migration.


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44288242
    #Hongrie #criminalisation #solidarité #délit_de_solidarité #migrations #asile #réfugiés

    • Ungheria, il reato di solidarietà

      In Ungheria, il governo di Viktor Orban ha presentato in Parlamento un “pacchetto” di misure – che comprendono anche una modifica alla Costituzione – volte a “contrastare l’immigrazione irregolare”.

      La stampa magiara ha ribattezzato le riforme col nome di “Stop Soros”, perché lo scopo dichiarato dal governo è quello di colpire le Ong impegnate in attività di solidarietà e di sostegno ai richiedenti asilo e ai rifugiati: e poiché alcune di queste Ong fanno capo a George Soros, o ricevono finanziamenti dalle sue Fondazioni, tutto viene presentato come una battaglia tra il premier ungherese e lo stesso Soros.

      In realtà, ciò che Orban intende colpire è quella parte della società civile ungherese che si impegna per fornire assistenza ai rifugiati, ma anche per garantire i diritti umani dei migranti e dei transitanti. Così, le riforme proposte dall’esecutivo Orban sono un esempio, sicuramente estremo, di una tendenza che si va diffondendo in Europa: quello di criminalizzare la solidarietà e l’impegno civile, trasformandoli in reati.

      Chi scrive non è esperto di cose ungheresi, né conosce a fondo il dibattito che si è sviluppato nel paese magiaro. Per la vicenda della riforma cosiddetta “Stop Soros” si rimanda, in lingua italiana, agli articoli usciti in questi giorni su Il Manifesto, Il Fatto Quotidiano, o su Il Post. Chi è in grado di leggere in inglese può rivolgersi al Guardian, o può vedere i comunicati dell’Hungarian Helsinki Committee, una delle Ong prese di mira dalla furia di Orban.

      Qui, più semplicemente, si propone la traduzione in italiano di una delle norme più controverse del “pacchetto”, quella che riguarda appunto il reato di solidarietà.

      Il testo che trovate qui sotto è tradotto dalla versione non ufficiale in inglese a cura dello stesso Hungarian Helsinki Committee. È quindi la “traduzione di una traduzione”, con i limiti che questo può comportare, e che si possono facilmente immaginare: ma sembra comunque utile per capire più a fondo le forme e i modi in cui viene articolato il “reato di solidarietà” nel dispositivo della riforma. I fortunati lettori che sono in grado di leggere in lingua ungherese possono trovare la versione originale qui.

      https://www.a-dif.org/2018/06/01/ungheria-il-reato-di-solidarieta

    • La Hongrie criminalise les #ONG qui aident les demandeurs d’asile

      Le parti du Premier ministre hongrois a voté ce mercredi une loi qui pourrait conduire à des peines de prison pour toute personne assistant des migrants en situation illégale ou non.

      Viktor Orbán ne se soucie décidément plus des injonctions européennes sur ses dérives autoritaires. Ce mercredi, le Premier ministre hongrois et son parti ultraconservateur, le Fidesz, qui a une large majorité au Parlement, ont voté la loi dite « Stop Soros », du nom du milliardaire américano-hongrois devenu la bête noire du régime. Cette loi initialement présentée en février a été modifiée après les élections législatives du 8 avril qui ont vu une large victoire pour le parti au gouvernement. Elle prévoit maintenant une criminalisation des personnes qui viendraient en aide aux demandeurs d’asile et aux réfugiés.

      « Un avocat pourrait se trouver condamné à une peine jusqu’à un an d’emprisonnement pour avoir apporté des informations sur la procédure de demande d’asile, par exemple, explique le porte-parole d’Amnesty International Hongrie, Aron Demeter. Le but de cette loi est clairement de viser le personnel des ONG. »

      A lire aussi:Hongrie : soupçons de fraudes électorales autour du clan Orbán

      Le texte prévoit aussi qu’en cas de suspicion d’aide aux demandeurs d’asile, l’Etat pourra interdire à la personne concernée de se rendre dans un rayon de 8 kilomètres autour de la frontière. « La loi est assez vague, dans son état actuel, pour que l’aéroport soit compris dans la définition de frontière, détaille András Lederer du Comité Helsinki hongrois pour la défense des droits de l’Homme, une des ONG visées. Des personnes seulement suspectées de violer cette loi pourraient se trouver interdites de quitter le territoire hongrois. »

      Présenté sous sa nouvelle version le 29 mai, le projet de loi a été soumis à l’étude d’un comité parlementaire, jeudi 14 juin. « C’est incroyable, il n’y a eu absolument aucun débat lancé par l’opposition sur ce texte », reprend András Lederer. Quelques minutes auront suffi pour adopter le texte.
      Acharnement législatif

      Ce dernier texte arrive après un an d’attaques répétées par le Fidesz contre les organisations internationales. Depuis juin 2017, le gouvernement force toutes les organisations qui reçoivent des financements de l’étranger à se déclarer et à inscrire la mention « Financé par une institution étrangère » sur tous leurs documents. Une inscription rendue péjorative par la rhétorique gouvernementale.

      Peu après les élections, en avril, des médias proches de Viktor Orbán ont sorti une liste de soi-disant « mercenaires » de George Soros, qui l’aideraient à mener « son plan pour faire venir des immigrés illégaux en Europe », selon les propos du Premier ministre. Dans cette liste, étaient nommés des universitaires, des journalistes d’opposition et des membres du personnel d’ONG qui aident les demandeurs d’asile et réfugiés.

      Le 12 juin, un ancien parlementaire du parti allié au Fidesz, les Chrétiens-Démocrates, a tenu une conférence de presse devant l’immeuble où se trouvent les locaux d’Amnesty International à Budapest. « Il a collé des affiches sur notre porte, disant que nous promouvons la migration », décrit Aron Demeter. Deux jours plus tard, c’est l’ONG hongroise Menedék d’entraide aux réfugiés qui a fait les frais d’une même action.
      La droite européenne impuissante

      Ces campagnes de discréditations portent leurs fruits. Le 15 mai dernier, la fondation philanthropique Open society de George Soros a annoncé que, sous les pressions du gouvernement, elle quittait ses bureaux européens de Budapest pour déménager à Berlin, en Allemagne. De leur côté, Amnesty International et le Comité Helsinki hongrois assurent qu’ils ne partiront pas du pays, quitte à attaquer cette nouvelle loi devant la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne.

      Aron Demeter comme Andra Lederer appellent la Commission européenne à lancer immédiatement une procédure d’infraction contre cette loi. « Les Etats de l’UE devraient exprimer fortement leur indignation face à cette attaque contre la société civile, l’Etat de droit et le principe de solidarité », déclare le porte-parole d’Amnesty International.

      Jusqu’à présent, les critiques contre le régime de Viktor Orbán ont été mesurées au niveau européen. Le Parti populaire européen (PPE) qui réunit plusieurs partis de centre droit et dont fait partie le Fidesz, a tout de même demandé au Premier ministre hongrois d’attendre les conclusions de la Commission Venise pour la démocratie par le droit du Conseil de l’Europe sur ce projet de loi, qui doivent être publiées vendredi. Le 2 juin, le CDA, parti néerlandais membre du PPE, a adopté une motion pour que le Fidesz soit exclu du groupe européen.

      Ignorant ces menaces, le gouvernement hongrois a voté le texte « Stop Soros » ce mercredi. « Le fait que le projet de loi suive son cours en Hongrie et la publication de l’avis de la Commission de Venise sont des procédures indépendantes, affirme le directeur Presse du groupe PPE au Parlement européen, Pedro Lopez de Pablo. Comme on l’a fait par le passé avec la Hongrie et avec la Pologne, nous allons demander aux gouvernements hongrois de faire tous les changements au projet de loi que la Commission de Venise demande. Si ce n’est pas fait, comme on l’a aussi déjà effectué pour la Pologne, on demandera l’ouverture des procédures prévues dans les traités européens pour atteinte aux principes fondamentaux de l’UE. »

      http://www.liberation.fr/planete/2018/06/20/la-hongrie-criminalise-les-ong-qui-aident-les-demandeurs-d-asile_1659369

    • ‘Hungary is the worst’: Refugees become punching bag under PM Viktor Orban

      A proposed law seeks to criminalise anyone who helps refugees, as atmosphere turns ’toxic’

      Hidden behind an overbearing, protective metal door in the centre of Budapest is the entrance to the Hungarian branch of Amnesty International.

      For Julia Ivan, the director of Amnesty here, the events of recent months have certainly given her reason to feel cautious.

      “The atmosphere towards migrants and those trying to support them has become so toxic here.”

      She pauses, her voice expressing the incredulity she feels.

      A former human rights lawyer, Ms Ivan joined the organisation to advocate for human rights defenders abroad.

      “However, as things in Hungary are changing we are now trying to raise awareness about Hungarian human rights defenders who are being attacked,” Ms Ivan tells The Independent.

      Interns, she says, are too scared to return to the NGO, after a narrative shift when it comes to humanitarian work.

      “The interns that we took on last year to work for us this summer all completed their basic training and orientation.

      “Then we had the “Stop Soros” bill in February and Viktor Orbán’s re-election in April and not one of them will still come to work here this summer.

      “They are all terrified what working for an organisation like Amnesty International will mean for them and their futures – this is in a EU country.”

      In 2018 – despite its rich multicultural history – Hungary has become the most anti-migrant country in Europe.

      Consulting firm Gallup recently devised a Migrant Acceptance Index to measure how accepting populations were on issues such as “an immigrant becoming your neighbour”.

      Hungary recorded the third-worst score in the entire world.

      Hungary’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán of the Fidesz party, was re-elected for a fourth term in April’s landslide election win, and relentlessly campaigned to a drumbeat of xenophobic rhetoric – laying the blame for the entirety of Hungary’s woes, from its collapsing education system to widespread political corruption, at the feet of the migranj.

      Mr Orban, who enjoys near messianic levels of popularity, has been labelled the EU’s answer to Vladimir Putin and has referred to all refugees as “Muslim invaders” and migrants trying to reach Hungary as a “poison” that his country does not need.

      Buoyed by the election outcome, Mr Orbán’s government has submitted a new piece of anti-migrant legislation, informally called the “Stop Soros” bill.

      The proposition is named after the American/Hungarian billionaire and civil society donor, George Soros, who Mr Orbán claims is trying to “settle millions from Africa and the Middle East” to disrupt Hungary’s homogeneity.

      Controversially, the bill declares that any NGOs that “sponsor, organise or support the entry or stay of third-country citizens on Hungarian territory” will be viewed as a “national security risk”.

      NGOs will have to obtain permission from Hungary’s interior minister to continue to operate and those breaking the rules to support migrants of any kind have been told they will be fined and shut down.

      Incredibly, their employees could then also face jail time.

      “The constant stoking of hatred by the current government for political gain has led to this latest shameful development, which is blatantly xenophobic and runs counter to European and international human rights standards and values,” Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights (Unhcr), has said.

      According to the Hungarian Helsinki Committee (HHC), just 1,216 asylum seekers were granted protection in Hungary in 2017.

      In the same year, 325,400 asylum seekers were granted protection in Germany, followed by 40,600 in France, 35,100 in Italy, 34,000 in Austria and 31,200 in Sweden.

      A further 2,880 applications were rejected and recognition rates for those arriving from war zones such as Syria and Iraq even remain low.

      The country also refused to resettle even one refugee from the inundated Italy and Greece as part of the EU’s mandatory quota programme.

      Orbán’s government has implemented a three-pronged strategy to attempt to eradicate the arrival of refugees in Hungary.

      The “keep them out” policy was signposted by the triumphant construction, in June 2015, of a mammoth 175km long, 4m high razor wire fence on the Hungarian-Serbian border.

      This impenetrable barrier was later extended to the Hungarian-Croatian frontier.

      A highly controversial “pushback law” was also introduced, whereby potential refugees caught in the country with no legal documentation could be removed by any means possible to Serbia.

      Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF), which provides medical treatment to refugees on the Serbian side of the frontier, has recorded hundreds of cases of intentional injuries allegedly perpetrated by Hungarian border patrols during “pushbacks” – a claim that the Hungarian government has denied.

      They include beating injuries, dog bites and irritation from tear gas and pepper sprays.

      Between January 2016 and February 2017, MSF also recorded that just over one in five of these alleged attacks were inflicted on children.

      “This pushback law is completely arbitrary and massively contradicts EU law,” says Gabor Gyulai, director of the HHC.

      “Violence is a clear accompanying phenomenon of the pushback policy.”

      To action asylum requests from those fleeing conflict, the government has set up two transit camps outside the Hungarian border towns of Tompa and Roeszke to house applicants.

      In 2016, 60 refugees were allowed to enter the transit zones per day but the HHC believes this has plunged to a mere one person a day, on average, at each site.

      This tactic is designed to split up entire families for an infinite time period.

      Refugees fortunate to be allowed to cross into Hungary then experience the second carefully calculated prong – “detain them all”.

      Living conditions are “absolutely inhumane”, according to the HHC.

      “We know what is going on there, it is like a military camp where you are guarded everywhere, minimal privacy,” Mr Gabor says.

      “Plus you live in a shipping container and we have a continental climate. In the summer, temperatures can easily reach 40 degrees inside.

      “Many of the adults who arrive are already in poor mental health; they have been tortured or witnessed death.

      “Then they are then stuck in a space a few metres squared in size.

      Although NGOs are offering psychological assistance to the asylum-seekers, they are denied the opportunity to take it.

      “We have an NGO here, the Cordelia Foundation, which can provide specialist psycho-therapeutic assistance to these individuals but they are not allowed to do so by the government.”

      “It is totally senseless and completely inadequate for the vulnerable.”

      The third deterrent strategy deployed is the “withdrawal of integration support”, which occurs if a refugee is granted permanent residency in Hungary.

      Individuals are transferred to a reception centre near the remote Austrian border town of Vámosszabadi.

      They are given 30 days free board and food and then left to fend for themselves, provided with no language courses or labour integration – as occurs in many other European countries.

      Abdul, a young man from Afghanistan, currently resides in the run-down and very decrepit facility in Vámosszabadi.

      Granted asylum in Hungary after an arduous journey via Iran, Turkey and Serbia, Abdul received death threats from the Taliban for working as an English translator for American troops stationed in his home country.

      “I want to scream, I am going crazy,” he says.

      Abdul claims that those staying at the centre have been the victim of beatings from both security personnel and local residents, which is why he would like to use a pseudonym.

      When approached by The Independent for comment, the Hungarian government refused to address the accusations.

      “I have travelled through so many different places, I thought I would drown in the sea, but Hungary is the worst.

      “The people here, they hate us and the conditions here and on the border are not fit for animals.

      “I have seen my friends beaten, refused food, we are treated like inmates here, second class humans, not actual people with needs and hopes.”

      Like others granted refugee status in Hungary, Abdul planned to leave as soon as his reception permit expired and head for Western Europe.

      The Unhcr has now taken the unprecedented step of urging EU states to stop returning asylum seekers to Hungary over fears about their security on arrival.

      “There is no future here unless you are Hungarian,” Abdul adds. “Europe has forgotten us.”

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/hungary-refugees-immigration-viktor-orban-racism-border-fence-a844604

    • La Commission européenne forme un #recours contre la Hongrie devant la #CJUE

      19.07.2018 – Commission européenne - Recours en manquement -
      Migration et asile

      (...)

      MIGRATION ET ASILE : LA COMMISSION FRANCHIT DE NOUVELLES ÉTAPES DANS DES
      PROCÉDURES D'INFRACTION OUVERTES CONTRE LA HONGRIE

      La Commission européenne a décidé aujourd’hui de former un recours
      contre la Hongrie devant la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne pour
      non-conformité de sa législation en matière d’asile et de retour avec
      le droit de l’Union. La Commission a également envoyé aujourd’hui une
      lettre de mise en demeure à la Hongrie concernant une nouvelle
      législation hongroise qui érige en infractions pénales les activités
      de soutien aux demandes d’asile et de séjour et restreint davantage
      encore le droit de demander l’asile. Au sujet de la saisine de la Cour
      pour non-respect de la législation de l’Union en matière d’asile et de
      retour : la Commission a lancé pour la première fois une procédure
      d’infraction contre la Hongrie au sujet de sa législation en matière
      d’asile en décembre 2015. À la suite d’une série d’échanges au
      niveau tant administratif que politique et de l’envoi d’une lettre de
      mise en demeure complémentaire, la Commission a adressé un avis
      motivé à la Hongrie en décembre 2017. Après avoir analysé la
      réponse fournie par les autorités hongroises, la Commission considère
      que la plupart des préoccupations soulevées n’ont toujours pas été
      abordées et a donc à présent décidé de former un recours contre la
      Hongrie devant la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne, la dernière
      étape de la procédure d’infraction. Au sujet de la lettre de mise en
      demeure concernant la nouvelle législation hongroise qui érige en
      infractions pénales les activités de soutien aux demandes d’asile :
      cette nouvelle législation – baptisée « Stop Soros » par les
      autorités hongroises – érige en infraction pénale toute assistance
      offerte par des organisations nationales, internationales et non
      gouvernementales ou par toute personne à des personnes qui souhaitent
      introduire une demande d’asile ou de permis de séjour en Hongrie. Cette
      législation comprend également des mesures qui restreignent les
      libertés individuelles, en empêchant toute personne faisant l’objet
      d’une procédure pénale au titre de cette législation d’approcher les
      zones de transit aux frontières hongroises où les demandeurs d’asile
      sont retenus. Les sanctions vont d’une détention temporaire à une
      peine d’emprisonnement pouvant aller jusqu’à un an et à l’expulsion du
      pays. En outre, la nouvelle législation et une modification
      constitutionnelle ont instauré de nouveaux motifs pour déclarer une
      demande d’asile irrecevable, en limitant le droit d’asile aux seules
      personnes qui arrivent en Hongrie directement depuis un lieu où leur
      vie ou leur liberté sont menacées. La Commission est donc parvenue à
      la conclusion que la Hongrie manque aux obligations qui lui incombent en
      vertu des traités de l’Union, de la législation de l’Union et de la
      charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne. Les autorités
      hongroises disposent de deux mois pour répondre aux préoccupations
      exprimées par la Commission. La Commission est prête à soutenir les
      autorités hongroises et à les aider à remédier à ce problème. Pour
      de plus amples informations, voir la version intégrale du communiqué
      de presse.

      Lettres de mise en demeure

      MIGRATION LÉGALE : LA COMMISSION INVITE INSTAMMENT LA HONGRIE À METTRE
      EN ŒUVRE CORRECTEMENT LA DIRECTIVE SUR LES RÉSIDENTS DE LONGUE DURÉE

      La Commission a décidé ce jour d’envoyer une lettre de mise en demeure
      à la Hongrie au motif qu’elle exclut les ressortissants de pays tiers
      ayant le statut de résident de longue durée de l’exercice de la
      profession de vétérinaire et ne met donc pas correctement en œuvre la
      directive sur les résidents de longue durée (directive 2003/109/CE du
      Conseil). La directive exige que les ressortissants de pays tiers qui
      résident légalement dans un État membre de l’UE depuis au moins cinq
      ans bénéficient d’un traitement égal à celui des ressortissants
      nationaux dans certains domaines, y compris l’accès aux activités
      salariées et indépendantes. La législation hongroise n’autorise pas
      les ressortissants de pays tiers ayant la qualité de vétérinaire
      professionnel, y compris ceux ayant obtenu leur diplôme en Hongrie, à
      exercer leur profession dans le pays. La Hongrie dispose à présent de
      deux mois pour répondre aux arguments avancés par la Commission.

      MIGRATION LÉGALE : LA COMMISSION DEMANDE À 17 ÉTATS MEMBRES DE METTRE
      EN ŒUVRE LA DIRECTIVE SUR LES ÉTUDIANTS ET LES CHERCHEURS DE PAYS
      TIERS

      La Commission a décidé aujourd’hui d’envoyer des lettres de mise en
      demeure à 17 États membres (AUTRICHE, BELGIQUE, CROATIE, CHYPRE,
      RÉPUBLIQUETCHÈQUE, FINLANDE, FRANCE, GRÈCE, HONGRIE, LETTONIE,
      LITUANIE, LUXEMBOURG, POLOGNE, ROUMANIE, SLOVÉNIE, ESPAGNEET SUÈDE)
      pour défaut de communication de la législation nationale destinée à
      transposer intégralement la directive relative aux conditions
      d’entrée, de séjour et de mobilité sur le territoire de l’Union des
      ressortissants de pays tiers à des fins de recherche, d’études, de
      formation, de volontariat et de programmes d’échange d’élèves ou de
      projets éducatifs et de travail au pair (directive 2016/801). Les
      États membres avaient jusqu’au 23 mai 2018 pour mettre leur
      législation nationale en conformité avec cette directive et en
      informer la Commission. Ils ont à présent deux mois pour transposer
      intégralement la directive en droit national. À défaut, la Commission
      pourrait envisager de leur adresser des avis motivés.

      Source : Commission européenne - Communiqué de presse

      http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4522_fr.htm


  • « Réprimées » en Hongrie, les fondations du milliardaire George Soros quittent le pays
    http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2018/05/15/reprimees-en-hongrie-les-fondations-du-milliardaire-george-soros-quittent-le

    Les Fondations Open Society, présentes depuis plusieurs décennies en Hongrie, dénoncent les politiques «  répressives  » du gouvernement de Viktor Orban.

    Cibles des critiques depuis plusieurs années du président hongrois Viktor Orban, les fondations du milliardaire américano-hongrois George Soros ont annoncé mardi 15 mai qu’elles allaient quitter la Hongrie. Dans un communiqué, les organisations, présentes depuis plusieurs décennies en Hongrie, précisent qu’elles comptent déménager à Berlin face aux politiques « répressives » du gouvernement de M. Orban.

    « Confrontées à un environnement politique et juridique de plus en plus répressif en Hongrie, les Fondations Open Society déplacent leurs opérations internationales et leur personnel de Budapest vers la capitale allemande. »

    Le seul endroit où il n’y a pas de #guillemets au mot répressif c’est à l’intérieur des guillemets généraux de la citation du communiqué de la Fondation…

    • Un projet de loi examiné au Parlement permettrait au ministre de l’intérieur d’interdire toute organisation non gouvernementale (ONG) active dans le domaine de l’immigration et qui serait considérée comme un « risque à la sûreté nationale ». Il prévoit également d’imposer une taxe de 25 % sur les dons venant de l’étranger destinés aux ONG qui soutiennent les réfugiés. Ce texte a été vivement critiqué par l’Union européenne.


  • What I Learnt In Silicon Valley
    https://hackernoon.com/what-i-learnt-in-silicon-valley-3878a05713f2?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3-

    I spent the last week meeting Entrepreneurs and Venture Capitalists in California.I was trying to figure out what makes people in Silicon Valley and LA special.What do they believe here that we don’t ?I’ve lived in Singapore, New York and London….but there is something different about the West Coast.Here’s what I learnt.1. Believe In Change And InnovationMost fortunes across history are built on change.These days we all confuse technology with change, but if you look at entrepreneurs and billionaires like Henry Ford, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Joseph Safra, Jacob Rothschild and Steve Schwarzmann, they aren’t technology investors, they are change investors.Each one of them saw, understood and invested in change, and benefited from it.All of them understood changes in their economies, (...)

    #startup #entrepreneurship #whatilearnt #wall-street #silicon-valley



  • Les étranges fréquentations antisémites de la droite israélienne

    19 FÉVRIER 2018 PAR THOMAS CANTALOUBE
    Depuis plusieurs années, Benjamin Netanyahou et le Likoud n’hésitent plus à franchir ce qui était autrefois une ligne rouge évidente : la proximité avec des dirigeants et des partis politiques européens et américains flirtant avec la xénophobie et le rejet des juifs.

    C’était sans doute le symbole de trop. Le symbole trop évident d’une collusion qui aurait été jugée encore impensable il y a une quinzaine d’années en Israël : celle de la droite nationaliste israélienne avec la mouvance antisémite. Début septembre 2017, Yair Netanyahou, le fils du premier ministre, désireux de défendre son père contre diverses accusations, postait sur Facebook une caricature qui montrait le milliardaire George Soros en train de manipuler une créature reptilienne dirigeant une figure au nez crochu qui, elle-même, tire les ficelles de l’ancien chef de gouvernement travailliste Ehud Barak et de deux autres citoyens israéliens.

    Si Yair Netanyahou, du haut de ses 26 ans et de ses études en histoire, philosophie et relations internationales à l’université hébraïque de Jérusalem, n’avait pas décodé le caractère profondément antisémite du dessin qu’il promouvait, les experts en la matière ne s’y sont pas trompés. Ainsi l’ancien grand sorcier américain du Ku Klux Klan et négationniste notoire David Duke tweetait : « Bienvenue au club, Yair, c’est extraordinaire, waouh ! » Quant au fondateur du site néonazi Daily Stormer, Andrew Anglin, il écrivait : « Yair Netanyahou est un vrai frangin. Bientôt, il va appeler au gazage. »

    Mais ce faux pas de Yair Netanyahou qui, face au tollé provoqué en Israël et dans la communauté juive à travers le monde, avait retiré sa caricature au bout de quelques heures, ne surgit pas de nulle part. George Soros, d’origine juive hongroise, est un philanthrope qui finance nombre de mouvements et d’associations « libérales » (au sens économique et politique du terme). Il est par ailleurs opposé aux politiques d’annexion des territoires palestiniens par les Israéliens. Mais il est surtout devenu, depuis trois décennies, un des épouvantails favoris des sphères d’extrême droite sur la planète : la figure emblématique du riche juif qui cherche à influencer la marche du monde.

    Attention : dessin antisémite ! Yair Netanyahou ne l’avait visiblement pas décodé, et il s’est attiré les félicitations de néonazis notoires
    Cette caricature antisémite de Soros est un “mème” dans les différentes fachosphères, mais également au-delà, comme on a pu le constater début février 2018 quand le quotidien conservateur britannique le Daily Telegraph a fait sa une sur « L’homme qui a dévalisé la Banque d’Angleterre appuie un plan secret visant à faire dérailler le Brexit ». Ou comment chausser ses gros sabots bourrés de sous-entendus. C’est ce qu’a fait remarquer sur Twitter le rédacteur en chef du Jewish Chronicle et partisan du Brexit Stephen Pollard : « L’article du Telegraph est dégueulasse en raison de l’idée qu’il y a un “plan secret”. Soros est incroyablement transparent dans ce qu’il fait. On peut dire qu’on n’est pas d’accord avec lui, très bien. Mais l’idée d’un plan secret est exactement le thème utilisé en Hongrie et ailleurs précisément parce qu’il est juif. »

    Pollard fait référence à des affiches déployées en juillet 2017 en Hongrie dans laquelle le Fidesz, le parti du premier ministre Viktor Orban, utilisait Soros somme repoussoir avec des slogans du type : « 99 % des gens rejettent l’immigration illégale. Ne laissons pas Soros avoir le dernier mot. » La communauté juive de Hongrie avait immédiatement réagi en dénonçant l’antisémitisme latent d’une telle campagne ; l’ambassadeur d’Israël à Budapest avait exigé le retrait de cet affichage, avant d’être contredit par… son premier ministre, Benjamin Netanyahou qui avait rappelé qu’il était parfaitement légitime de critiquer Soros. Autrement dit, le chef du gouvernement israélien soutenait la liberté d’expression des amis politiques d’Orban (eux-mêmes peu portés sur cette notion) contre le sentiment éprouvé par de nombreux juifs européens.

    Que les idées professées et financées par George Soros déplaisent à Netanyahou est une chose, mais que celui-ci en fasse à son tour un épouvantail et qu’il accoure à la rescousse de ceux qui manient avec plus ou moins de subtilité les antiques métaphores antisémites est significatif. Le premier ministre israélien a d’ailleurs remis le couvert en accusant début février 2018 Soros de se trouver derrière les manifestations lui demandant de renoncer à l’expulsion de migrants et demandeurs d’asile africains. Il n’a apporté aucune preuve de cette affirmation et Soros l’a démenti. Ce qui a conduit le journaliste israélien de Haaretz Chemi Shalev à dénoncer la rhétorique du patron du Likoud : « En se focalisant sur le Soros juif, Netanyahou se positionne avec son parti épaule contre épaule avec les ordures antisémites. Pire, il salit Israël. »

    « Peut-être que les efforts persistants de son gouvernement pour assimiler l’opposition à ses politiques vis-à-vis des Palestiniens à un nouvel antisémitisme a fait oublier à Netanyahou que la figure historique de la détestation des juifs n’est pas le soldat israélien ou le colon juif, mais les juifs riches et cosmopolites comme Soros, qui étaient accusés de fomenter la souillure de la race aryenne ou la contamination du sang chrétien par le biais de l’invasion du pays par des réfugiés inférieurs et malveillants. L’État juif ne peut techniquement pas être accusé d’antisémitisme, mais quand Netanyahou accuse sans cesse Soros, il fait partie de ceux qui applaudissent cet antisémitisme. »


  • Hungary seeks to punish those who aid illegal migration

    A new set of laws would tax and possibly sanction Hungarian groups assisting illegal migration which receive foreign funding, Hungary’s government said Wednesday.

    Such groups would have to register with the courts and, if they get more than half of their funds from foreign sources, pay a 25-percent tax on the funds received from abroad, Interior Minister Sandor Pinter said. Groups failing to register, and which authorities consider to be adding illegal migrants, could be fined.

    Pinter, without mentioning anyone by name, gave an example of someone providing a smartphone containing maps and other information “showing the way to Europe” to a migrant in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia, and part of the “Balkan route” migrants use to try to reach Germany and other destinations in Western Europe.

    Also, restraining orders could be issued against Hungarian citizens considered to be “organizing illegal migration,” preventing them from going within eight kilometers (five miles) of Hungary’s Schengen borders, those with countries outside the European Union, like Serbia and Ukraine. Foreigners found to be aiding illegal migrants could be banned from Hungary, Pinter said.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/hungary-seeks-sanctions-against-helpers-of-illegal-migration/2018/01/17/f94db5e0-fb97-11e7-9b5d-bbf0da31214d_story.html

    #délit_de_solidarité #solidarité #asile #migrations #réfugiés #hongrie #loi #it_has_begun


  • George Soros: Anti -Syria Campaign Impresario. | The Wall Will Fall
    https://thewallwillfall.org/2016/01/23/george-soros-anti-syria-campaign-impresario
    A propos de la guerre d’information

    THE BBC BAMBOOZLE

    The Madaya media circus lumbers on regardless of the multitude of proven anomalies and outright deceit of the mainstream narrative. Deaf to either public opinion or investigation, institutions like the BBC consider they are above accountability to those who pay for their existence, the British public. They consider it perfectly acceptable to release footage from Yarmouk 2014 and represent it as Madaya 2016..and when questioned, to remove the offending footage without explanation or responsibility for their obscurantism and misinformation tactics.

    Thankfully, Robert Stuart, ardent campaigner against the BBC’s long running, hostile, anti Syria propaganda offensive did raise an official complaint and demanded answers that the BBC has, for too long, been allowed to avoid answering.

    Al Mayadeen, Al Manar, Al Masirah TV channels and many others, representing the voices of the oppressed in the Middle East are being systematically excluded from Saudi funded Satellite channels and Israeli biased social media. Press TV, headquarters in Tehran, had its licence revoked by Ofcom in 2012

    RT has come under relentless attack by the BBC since the “Kremlin launched its international media operation”. The BBC lexicon never fails to maintain and celebrate the “cold war” terminology or to keep fear of the Russian “indoctrination” stewing in peoples minds.

    “But it [RT] is also coming under increased scrutiny over its lack of editorial balance and accusations that it is deliberately using disinformation to counter and divide the West.” ~ Russia’s Global Media Operation Under the Spotlight

    This astounding display of projectionism can only be matched by the Zionist ability to turn their own crimes against Humanity into a neatly packaged accusation that those they are oppressing, the Palestinians, on whose broken bones Israel has built its settlements, are the guilty and that Israel is exempt from judgement for its crimes which are committed in “self defence”.

    Is the BBC embellishing the truth in “self-defence” or is it being creative with the truth in defence of our Government’s appalling neo-colonialist foreign policy which is ensuring the fomenting of sectarian divide in the Middle East to facilitate desired “regime change” in Syria & the wholesale slaughter of civilians in Yemen, obliterated by made-in-UK missiles and weapons of mass destruction.

    These are just two examples of the BBC collusion in global de-stabilization and reduction of sovereign nations to perpetual conflict or “failed state” status, ripe for economic and pseudo “humanitarian” NGO complex, stealth invasion and occupation and of course the bolstering of the Military Industrial Complex profitability index.

    WILL THE BBC BE SOROS-IZED

    #Syrie #guerre #propagande #impérialisme #nouveau_médias #Royaume_Uni #BBC #Russie


  • Who’s Afraid of George Soros? – Foreign Policy (10/10/2017) http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/10/whos-afraid-of-george-soros

    BUCHAREST, Romania — Last winter, in the middle of anti-corruption demonstrations, a television broadcaster accused George Soros — the Hungarian-born, Jewish-American billionaire philanthropist — of paying dogs to protest.

    The protests in Bucharest, sparked by dead-of-night legislation aimed at decriminalizing corruption, were the largest the country had seen since the fall of communism in 1989. Romania TV — a channel associated with, if not officially owned by, the government — alleged the protesters were paid.

    “Adults were paid 100 lei [$24], children earned 50 lei [$12.30], and dogs were paid 30 lei [$7.20],” one broadcaster said. 

    Some protesters responded by fitting their dogs with placards; others tucked money into their pets’ coats. One dog stood next to a sign reading, “Can anyone change 30 lei into euro?” Another dog wore one that read: “#George_Soros paid me to be here.”

    “The pro-government television, they lie all the time. In three sentences, they have five lies,” investigative journalist Andrei Astefanesei told Foreign Policy outside a gyro shop in Bucharest. “I told you about that lie, that Soros paid for dogs. ‘If you bring more dogs in the street, you get more money.’” He laughed.

    Romania TV was fined for its false claims about Soros. But the idea — that roughly half a million Romanians, and their dogs, came to the streets because Soros made them do it — struck a responsive chord. It’s similar to the idea that Soros is personally responsible for teaching students about LGBTQ rights in Romanian high schools; that Soros manipulated the teenagers who led this year’s anti-corruption protests in Slovakia; and that civil organizations and what’s left of the independent media in Hungary wouldn’t exist without Soros and his Open Society Foundations.

    The idea that the 87-year-old Soros is single-handedly stirring up discontent isn’t confined to the European side of the Atlantic; Soros conspiracies are a global phenomenon. In March, six U.S. senators signed a letter asking Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s staff to look into U.S. government funding going to Soros-backed organizations.

    “Our skepticism about Soros-funded groups undermining American priorities goes far beyond Eastern Europe,” said a spokesperson for Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who led the initiative, when asked if there was some specific piece of evidence of Soros-funded activity in Eastern Europe that prompted the letter or if concerns were more general.

    Soros has even been linked to former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who knelt during the national anthem to protest police brutality. “Congrats to Colin Kaepernick for popularizing the hatred of America. Good work, bro,” Tomi Lahren, a conservative commentator, tweeted during the controversy. “Your buddy George Soros is so proud. #istand.”

    On Twitter, Soros has also been held responsible for the recent Catalan independence referendum and the mass shooting in Las Vegas.

    But one of the places in which suspicion of Soros is most obvious is Central and Eastern Europe. There, Soros is not unlike the Mirror of Erised in Harry Potter, except that while the fictional mirror shows what the viewer most desires, Soros reflects back onto a country what it most hates.

    In Romania, where the head of the ruling party said Soros wants to do evil, the billionaire is not to be trusted because he’s Hungarian. In Hungary, where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has reportedly declared that Soros will be a main campaign theme in next year’s general election, he’s a traitor. And everywhere, he is Jewish, his very name a nod to the anti-Semitism that runs deep throughout the region.

    Now, Soros’s effectiveness as a bogeyman for conservative governments will be put to the test, literally. This week, Hungary is holding a “national consultation,” essentially a referendum designed to condemn Soros and his views on immigration. The government-funded questionnaire will be open to the country’s adult citizens and is meant to solicit their views on the Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor.

    “George Soros has bought people and organizations, and Brussels is under his influence,” Orban said in a radio interview Friday in the run-up to the consultation. “They want to demolish the fence, allow millions of immigrants into Europe, then distribute them using a mandatory mechanism — and they want to punish those who do not comply.”

    Soros declined an interview for this article, but a spokesperson for the Open Society Foundations, the main conduit for Soros’s philanthropic efforts, chalked up the backlash to his outspokenness. “He’s a man who stands up for his beliefs,” Laura Silber, a spokeswoman for the foundation, told FP. “That’s threatening when you’re speaking out against autocrats and corruption.”

    Blame and hatred of Soros are, to borrow from Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, a specter haunting Central and Eastern Europe. But how did an 87-year-old billionaire thousands of miles away become the region’s most famous ghost?

    #conspirationnisme

    • George Soros lègue 18 milliards de dollars à sa fondation
      http://www.latribune.fr/economie/international/george-soros-legue-18-milliards-de-dollars-a-sa-fondation-754607.html

      Open Society Foundations (OSF) a reçu 18 milliards de dollars (15,2 milliards d’euros) de ce grand donateur du parti démocrate américain, a indiqué à l’AFP une porte-parole. « Cette somme reflète un processus en cours de transfert des actifs » de M. Soros, « qui prévoit de laisser la vaste majorité de sa fortune à Open Society Foundations », a-t-elle souligné.

      Cette donation fait d’Open Society Foundations la deuxième plus riche ONG aux Etats-Unis après la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates, qui dispose de 40 milliards de dollars pour promouvoir les problématiques de santé publique et de développement à travers le monde, d’après la National Philanthropic Trust.

      L’OSF est un réseau de 39 entités aux opérations interconnectées à travers le globe et fait la promotion de ses valeurs dans plus de 120 pays. La première a ouvert ses portes en 1984 en Hongrie, pays d’origine de M. Soros. La dernière a vu le jour en 2016 en Birmanie. George Soros en est le président et ses fils Alexander et Jonathan sont membres du conseil d’administration. D’autres de ses enfants sont également impliqués.

      Le milliardaire américain d’origine hongroise, connu pour ses paris financiers risqués, avait donné jusqu’à ce jour 12 milliards de dollars (10,2 milliards d’euros) de sa fortune à des oeuvres caritatives. Depuis des décennies, il donne environ entre 800 et 900 millions de dollars à des associations chaque année d’après des chiffres mentionnés par le New-York Times. C’est en 1979 que le financier avait fait son premier don en attribuant des bourses d’études à des élèves noirs sud-africains en plein Apartheid, rappelle OSF sur son site internet. Selon le président de la Ford Foundation, Darren Walker interrogé par le quotidien américain :

      "il n’y a aucune organisation caritative dans le monde, y compris la Ford Foundation, qui a plus d’impact que l’Open Society Foundations durant ces deux dernières décennies. [...] Parce qu’il n’y a aucun endroit dans le monde où ils ne sont pas présents. Leur empreinte est plus importante et plus conséquente que n’importe qu’elle organisation de justice sociale dans le monde".

      v/ @hadji

    • Soros turns antisocial: Billionaire says Facebook & Google manipulate users like gambling companies
      https://www.rt.com/news/417065-soros-social-media-blame

      Soros, whose investment fund owned over 300,000 shares in #Facebook until last November, said social media platforms are deliberately engineering “addiction to the services they provide.” Facebook and Google deceive their users by “manipulating their #attention and directing it towards their own commercial purposes,” he said.

      In this respect, online platforms have become similar to gambling companies, Soros asserted. “#Casinos have developed techniques to hook gamblers to the point where they gamble away all their money, even money they don’t have.

      “Something very harmful and maybe irreversible is happening to human attention in our digital age,” he said. Social media companies “are inducing people to give up their autonomy,” while the power to shape the public’s attention “is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few companies.”

      The billionaire financier, whom the Hungarian government has labeled a “political puppet master,” then struck an even gloomier tone by offering a full-on dystopian conspiracy theory.

      In future, there could be “an alliance between authoritarian states and these large, data-rich IT monopolies,” in which tech giants’ corporate surveillance would merge with “an already developed system of state-sponsored surveillance,” he said.

      That “may well result in a web of totalitarian control the likes of which not even Aldous Huxley or George Orwell could have imagined,” he said, referring to the British authors of two famous dystopian novels.

      Last year, some tech corporations fell out of favor with Soros when his investment fund sold 367,262 shares in Facebook, although he chose to keep 109,451 of the network’s shares. Soros’ fund also offloaded 1,700 shares in Apple and 1.55 million in the owners of Snapchat. It also reduced its stake in Twitter by 5,700 shares, while still holding 18,400 shares in the social media service.

      Soros was not the only Davos speaker to launch a verbal attack on Big Tech. American entrepreneur and Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said on Tuesday that Facebook should be regulated just like a tobacco company.

      “I think you’d do it exactly the same way you regulate the cigarette industry. Here’s a product, cigarettes, they are addictive, they are not good for you,” Benioff said. “Maybe there is all kinds of different forces trying to get you to do certain things. There are a lot of parallels.”


  • Le financier George Soros transfère 18 milliards à sa fondation
    https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_le-financier-george-soros-transfere-18-milliards-a-sa-fondation?id=97393

    Le légendaire financier américain George Soros, 87 ans, a transféré une grande partie de sa fortune à sa fondation, créée en 1984 pour promouvoir la démocratie, les droits de l’homme et la liberté de la presse.
    . . . .
    Open Society Foundations (OSF) a reçu 18 milliards de dollars de M. Soros, grand donateur du parti démocrate américain, a indiqué à l’AFP une porte-parole. « Cette somme reflète un processus en cours de transfert des actifs » de M. Soros, « qui prévoit de laisser la vaste majorité de sa fortune à Open Society Foundations », a-t-elle souligné. Cette donation fait d’Open Society Foundations la deuxième plus riche ONG aux Etats-Unis après la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates, qui dispose de 40 milliards de dollars
    . . . . . .

    #ONG #sale_type #souros