• Inside the Elementary School Where Drug Addiction Sets the Curriculum - The New York Times

    Encore des descriptions terribles et lacrymales. Quand on sait que cette crise a été causée de prime abord par la cupidité et le cynisme des groupes pharmaceutiques...

    MINFORD, Ohio — Inside an elementary school classroom decorated with colorful floor mats, art supplies and building blocks, a little boy named Riley talked quietly with a teacher about how he had watched his mother take “knockout pills” and had seen his father shoot up “a thousand times.”

    Riley, who is 9 years old, described how he had often been left alone to care for his baby brother while his parents were somewhere else getting high. Beginning when he was about 5, he would heat up meals of fries, chicken nuggets and spaghetti rings in the microwave for himself and his brother, he said. “That was all I knew how to make,” Riley said.

    Riley — who is in foster care and who officials asked not be fully identified because of his age — is among hundreds of students enrolled in the local school district who have witnessed drug use at home. Like many of his classmates at Minford Elementary School, Riley struggles with behavioral and psychological problems that make it difficult to focus, school officials said, let alone absorb lessons.

    “If you’re worried about your parents getting arrested last night, you can’t retain information,” said Kendra Rase Cram, a teacher at Minford Elementary who was hired this past academic year to teach students how to cope with trauma. Over the past nine months, she led several classes a day, and met every week in one-on-one sessions with up to 20 students who have experienced significant trauma.

    “We have all these kids who are in survival mode,” Ms. Cram said.

    Minford Elementary is not like typical schools. At this small campus in rural southern Ohio, there is a dedicated sensory room stocked with weighted blankets, chewable toys and exercise balls. Children who were born dependent on drugs, as well as others with special needs, can take time to jump on a trampoline or calm down in a play tunnel, sometimes several times each day. In class, students role-play in lessons on self-control, such as blowing bubbles and then waiting to pop them, and anger management, while also learning calming strategies like deep breathing techniques.

    But the pastoral landscape belies a devastated community. In this county, long considered ground zero in Ohio’s opioid epidemic, nearly 9.7 million pills were prescribed in 2010 — enough to give 123 to each resident, the highest rate in the state, according to official statistics. Over the years, as opioid prescriptions have fallen, many drug users have moved on to heroin and fentanyl .

    #Opioides #Addiction #Enfants #Ohio #Ecole

  • Call immigrant detention centers what they really are: concentration camps

    If you were paying close attention last week, you might have spotted a pattern in the news. Peeking out from behind the breathless coverage of the Trump family’s tuxedoed trip to London was a spate of deaths of immigrants in U.S. custody: Johana Medina Léon, a 25-year-old transgender asylum seeker; an unnamed 33-year-old Salvadoran man; and a 40-year-old woman from Honduras.

    Photos from a Border Patrol processing center in El Paso showed people herded so tightly into cells that they had to stand on toilets to breathe. Memos surfaced by journalist Ken Klippenstein revealed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s failure to provide medical care was responsible for suicides and other deaths of detainees. These followed another report that showed that thousands of detainees are being brutally held in isolation cells just for being transgender or mentally ill.

    Also last week, the Trump administration cut funding for classes, recreation and legal aid at detention centers holding minors — which were likened to “summer camps” by a senior ICE official last year. And there was the revelation that months after being torn from their parents’ arms, 37 children were locked in vans for up to 39 hours in the parking lot of a detention center outside Port Isabel, Texas. In the last year, at least seven migrant children have died in federal custody.

    Preventing mass outrage at a system like this takes work. Certainly it helps that the news media covers these horrors intermittently rather than as snowballing proof of a racist, lawless administration. But most of all, authorities prevail when the places where people are being tortured and left to die stay hidden, misleadingly named and far from prying eyes.

    There’s a name for that kind of system. They’re called concentration camps. You might balk at my use of the term. That’s good — it’s something to be balked at.

    The goal of concentration camps has always been to be ignored. The German-Jewish political theorist Hannah Arendt, who was imprisoned by the Gestapo and interned in a French camp, wrote a few years afterward about the different levels of concentration camps. Extermination camps were the most extreme; others were just about getting “undesirable elements … out of the way.” All had one thing in common: “The human masses sealed off in them are treated as if they no longer existed, as if what happened to them were no longer of interest to anybody, as if they were already dead.”

    Euphemisms play a big role in that forgetting. The term “concentration camp” is itself a euphemism. It was invented by a Spanish official to paper over his relocation of millions of rural families into squalid garrison towns where they would starve during Cuba’s 1895 independence war. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered Japanese Americans into prisons during World War II, he initially called them concentration camps. Americans ended up using more benign names, like “Manzanar Relocation Center.”

    Even the Nazis’ camps started out small, housing criminals, Communists and opponents of the regime. It took five years to begin the mass detention of Jews. It took eight, and the outbreak of a world war, for the first extermination camps to open. Even then, the Nazis had to keep lying to distract attention, claiming Jews were merely being resettled to remote work sites. That’s what the famous signs — Arbeit Macht Frei, or “Work Sets You Free” — were about.

    Subterfuge doesn’t always work. A year ago, Americans accidentally became aware that the Trump administration had adopted (and lied about) a policy of ripping families apart at the border. The flurry of attention was thanks to the viral conflation of two separate but related stories: the family-separation order and bureaucrats’ admission that they’d been unable to locate thousands of migrant children who’d been placed with sponsors after crossing the border alone.

    Trump shoved that easily down the memory hole. He dragged his heels a bit, then agreed to a new policy: throwing whole families into camps together. Political reporters posed irrelevant questions, like whether President Obama had been just as bad, and what it meant for the midterms. Then they moved on.

    It is important to note that Trump’s aides have built this system of racist terror on something that has existed for a long time. Several camps opened under Obama, and as president he deported millions of people.

    But Trump’s game is different. It certainly isn’t about negotiating immigration reform with Congress. Trump has made it clear that he wants to stifle all non-white immigration, period. His mass arrests, iceboxes and dog cages are part of an explicitly nationalist project to put the country under the control of the right kind of white people.

    As a Republican National Committee report noted in 2013: “The nation’s demographic changes add to the urgency of recognizing how precarious our position has become.” The Trump administration’s attempt to put a citizenship question on the 2020 census was also just revealed to have been a plot to disadvantage political opponents and boost “Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites” all along.

    That’s why this isn’t just a crisis facing immigrants. When a leader puts people in camps to stay in power, history shows that he doesn’t usually stop with the first group he detains.

    There are now at least 48,000 people detained in ICE facilities, which a former official told BuzzFeed News “could swell indefinitely.” Customs and Border Protection officials apprehended more than 144,000 people on the Southwest border last month. (The New York Times dutifully reported this as evidence of a “dramatic surge in border crossings,” rather than what it was: The administration using its own surge of arrests to justify the rest of its policies.)

    If we call them what they are — a growing system of American concentration camps — we will be more likely to give them the attention they deserve. We need to know their names: Port Isabel, Dilley, Adelanto, Hutto and on and on. With constant, unrelenting attention, it is possible we might alleviate the plight of the people inside, and stop the crisis from getting worse. Maybe people won’t be able to disappear so easily into the iceboxes. Maybe it will be harder for authorities to lie about children’s deaths.

    Maybe Trump’s concentration camps will be the first thing we think of when we see him scowling on TV.

    The only other option is to leave it up to those in power to decide what’s next. That’s a calculated risk. As Andrea Pitzer, author of “One Long Night,” one of the most comprehensive books on the history of concentration camps, recently noted: “Every country has said their camps are humane and will be different. Trump is instinctively an authoritarian. He’ll take them as far as he’s allowed to.”
    #terminologie #vocabulaire #mots #camps #camps_de_concentration #centres_de_détention #détention_administrative #rétention #USA #Etats-Unis

    • ‘Some Suburb of Hell’: America’s New Concentration Camp System

      On Monday, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez referred to US border detention facilities as “concentration camps,” spurring a backlash in which critics accused her of demeaning the memory of those who died in the Holocaust. Debates raged over a label for what is happening along the southern border and grew louder as the week rolled on. But even this back-and-forth over naming the camps has been a recurrent feature in the mass detention of civilians ever since its inception, a history that long predates the Holocaust.

      At the heart of such policy is a question: What does a country owe desperate people whom it does not consider to be its citizens? The twentieth century posed this question to the world just as the shadow of global conflict threatened for the second time in less than three decades. The dominant response was silence, and the doctrine of absolute national sovereignty meant that what a state did to people under its control, within its borders, was nobody else’s business. After the harrowing toll of the Holocaust with the murder of millions, the world revisited its answer, deciding that perhaps something was owed to those in mortal danger. From the Fourth Geneva Convention protecting civilians in 1949 to the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, the international community established humanitarian obligations toward the most vulnerable that apply, at least in theory, to all nations.

      The twenty-first century is unraveling that response. Countries are rejecting existing obligations and meeting asylum seekers with walls and fences, from detainees fleeing persecution who were sent by Australia to third-party detention in the brutal offshore camps of Manus and Nauru to razor-wire barriers blocking Syrian refugees from entering Hungary. While some nations, such as Germany, wrestle with how to integrate refugees into their labor force—more and more have become resistant to letting them in at all. The latest location of this unwinding is along the southern border of the United States.

      So far, American citizens have gotten only glimpses of the conditions in the border camps that have been opened in their name. In the month of May, Customs and Border Protection reported a total of 132,887 migrants who were apprehended or turned themselves in between ports of entry along the southwest border, an increase of 34 percent from April alone. Upon apprehension, these migrants are temporarily detained by Border Patrol, and once their claims are processed, they are either released or handed over to ICE for longer-term detention. Yet Border Patrol itself is currently holding about 15,000 people, nearly four times what government officials consider to be this enforcement arm’s detention capacity.

      On June 12, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Fort Sill, an Army post that hosted a World War II internment camp for detainees of Japanese descent, will now be repurposed to detain migrant children. In total, HHS reports that it is currently holding some 12,000 minors. Current law limits detention of minors to twenty days, though Senator Lindsey Graham has proposed expanding the court-ordered limit to 100 days. Since the post is on federal land, it will be exempt from state child welfare inspections.

      In addition to the total of detainees held by Border Patrol, an even higher number is detained at centers around the country by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency: on a typical day at the beginning of this month, ICE was detaining more than 52,500 migrants. The family separation policy outraged the public in the 2018, but despite legal challenges, it never fully ended. Less publicized have been the deaths of twenty-four adults in ICE custody since the beginning of the Trump administration; in addition, six children between the ages of two and sixteen have died in federal custody over the last several months. It’s not clear whether there have been other deaths that have gone unreported.

      Conditions for detainees have not been improving. At the end of May, a Department of Homeland Security inspector general found nearly 900 migrants at a Texas shelter built for a capacity of 125 people. On June 11, a university professor spotted at least 100 men behind chain-link fences near the Paso del Norte Bridge in El Paso, Texas. Those detainees reported sitting outside for weeks in temperatures that soared above 100 degrees. Taylor Levy, an El Paso immigration lawyer, described going into one facility and finding “a suicidal four-year-old whose face was covered in bloody, self-inflicted scratches… Another young child had to be restrained by his mother because he kept running full-speed into metal lockers. He was covered in bruises.”

      If deciding what to do about the growing numbers of adults and children seeking refuge in the US relies on complex humanitarian policies and international laws, in which most Americans don’t take a deep interest, a simpler question also presents itself: What exactly are these camps that the Trump administration has opened, and where is this program of mass detention headed?

      Even with incomplete information about what’s happening along the border today and what the government plans for these camps, history points to some conclusions about their future. Mass detention without trial earned a new name and a specific identity at the end of the nineteenth century. The labels then adopted for the practice were “reconcentración” and “concentration camps”—places of forced relocation of civilians into detention on the basis of group identity.

      Other kinds of group detention had appeared much earlier in North American history. The US government drove Native Americans from their homelands into prescribed exile, with death and detention in transit camps along the way. Some Spanish mission systems in the Americas had accomplished similar ends by seizing land and pressing indigenous people into forced labor. During the 245 years when slavery was legal in the US, detention was one of its essential features.

      Concentration camps, however, don’t typically result from the theft of land, as happened with Native Americans, or owning human beings in a system of forced labor, as in the slave trade. Exile, theft, and forced labor can come later, but in the beginning, detention itself is usually the point of concentration camps. By the end of the nineteenth century, the mass production of barbed wire and machines guns made this kind of detention possible and practical in ways it never had been before.

      Under Spanish rule in 1896, the governor-general of Cuba instituted camps in order to clear rebel-held regions during an uprising, despite his predecessor’s written refusal “as the representative of a civilized nation, to be the first to give the example of cruelty and intransigence” that such detention would represent. After women and children began dying in vast numbers behind barbed wire because there had been little planning for shelter and even less for food, US President William McKinley made his call to war before Congress. He spoke against the policy of reconcentración, calling it warfare by uncivilized means. “It was extermination,” McKinley said. “The only peace it could beget was that of the wilderness and the grave.” Without full records, the Cuban death toll can only be estimated, but a consensus puts it in the neighborhood of 150,000, more than 10 percent of the island’s prewar population.

      Today, we remember the sinking of the USS Maine as the spark that ignited the Spanish-American War. But war correspondent George Kennan (cousin of the more famous diplomat) believed that “it was the suffering of the reconcentrados, more, perhaps, than any other one thing that brought about the intervention of the United States.” On April 25, 1898, Congress declared war. Two weeks later, US Marines landed at Fisherman’s Point on the windward side of the entrance to Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. After a grim, week-long fight, the Marines took the hill. It became a naval base, and the United States has never left that patch of land.

      As part of the larger victory, the US inherited the Philippines. The world’s newest imperial power also inherited a rebellion. Following a massacre of American troops at Balangiga in September 1901, during the third year of the conflict, the US established its own concentration camp system. Detainees, mostly women and children, were forced into squalid conditions that one American soldier described in a letter to a US senator as “some suburb of hell.” In the space of only four months, more than 11,000 Filipinos are believed to have died in these noxious camps.

      Meanwhile, in southern Africa in 1900, the British had opened their own camps during their battle with descendants of Dutch settlers in the second Boer War. British soldiers filled tent cities with Boer women and children, and the military authorities called them refugee camps. Future Prime Minister David Lloyd George took offense at that name, noting in Parliament: “There is no greater delusion in the mind of any man than to apply the term ‘refugee’ to these camps. They are not refugee camps. They are camps of concentration.” Contemporary observers compared them to the Cuban camps, and criticized their deliberate cruelty. The Bishop of Hereford wrote to The Times of London in 1901, asking: “Are we reduced to such a depth of impotence that our Government can do nothing to stop such a holocaust of child-life?”

      Maggoty meat rations and polluted water supplies joined outbreaks of contagious diseases amid crowded and unhealthy conditions in the Boer camps. More than 27,000 detainees are thought to have died there, nearly 80 percent of them children. The British had opened camps for black Africans as well, in which at least 14,000 detainees died—the real number is probably much higher. Aside from protests made by some missionaries, the deaths of indigenous black Africans did not inspire much public outrage. Much of the history of the suffering in these camps has been lost.

      These early experiments with concentration camps took place on the periphery of imperial power, but accounts of them nevertheless made their way into newspapers and reports in many nations. As a result, the very idea of them came to be seen as barbaric. By the end of the first decade of the twentieth century, the first camp systems had all been closed, and concentration camps had nearly vanished as an institution. Within months of the outbreak of World War I, though, they would be resurrected—this time rising not at the margins but in the centers of power. Between 1914 and 1918, camps were constructed on an unprecedented scale across six continents. In their time, these camps were commonly called concentration camps, though today they are often referred to by the more anodyne term “internment.”

      Those World War I detainees were, for the most part, foreigners—or, in legalese, aliens—and recent anti-immigration legislation in several countries had deliberately limited their rights. The Daily Mail denounced aliens left at liberty once they had registered with their local police department, demanding, “Does signing his name take the malice out of a man?” The Scottish Field was more direct, asking, “Do Germans have souls?” That these civilian detainees were no threat to Britain did not keep them from being demonized, shouted at, and spat upon as they were paraded past hostile crowds in cities like London.

      Though a small number of people were shot in riots in these camps, and hunger became a serious issue as the conflict dragged on, World War I internment would present a new, non-lethal face for the camps, normalizing detention. Even after the war, new camps sprang up from Spain to Hungary and Cuba, providing an improvised “solution” for everything from vagrancy to anxieties over the presence of Jewish foreigners.

      Some of these camps were clearly not safe for those interned. Local camps appeared in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1921, after a white mob burned down a black neighborhood and detained African-American survivors. In Bolshevik Russia, the first concentration camps preceded the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922 and planted seeds for the brutal Gulag system that became official near the end of the USSR’s first decade. While some kinds of camps were understood to be harsher, after World War I their proliferation did not initially disturb public opinion. They had yet to take on their worst incarnations.

      In 1933, barely more than a month after Hitler was appointed chancellor, the Nazis’ first, impromptu camp opened in the town of Nohra in central Germany to hold political opponents. Detainees at Nohra were allowed to vote at a local precinct in the elections of March 5, 1933, resulting in a surge of Communist ballots in the tiny town. Locking up groups of civilians without trial had become accepted. Only the later realization of the horrors of the Nazi death camps would break the default assumption by governments and the public that concentration camps could and should be a simple way to manage populations seen as a threat.

      However, the staggering death toll of the Nazi extermination camp system—which was created mid-war and stood almost entirely separate from the concentration camps in existence since 1933—led to another result: a strange kind of erasure. In the decades that followed World War II, the term “concentration camp” came to stand only for Auschwitz and other extermination camps. It was no longer applied to the kind of extrajudicial detention it had denoted for generations. The many earlier camps that had made the rise of Auschwitz possible largely vanished from public memory.

      It is not necessary, however, to step back a full century in American history to find camps with links to what is happening on the US border today. Detention at Guantánamo began in the 1990s, when Haitian and Cuban immigrants whom the government wanted to keep out of the United States were housed there in waves over a four-year period—years before the “war on terror” and the US policy of rendition of suspected “enemy combatants” made Camps Delta, X-Ray, and Echo notorious. Tens of thousands of Haitians fleeing instability at home were picked up at sea and diverted to the Cuban base, to limit their legal right to apply for asylum. The court cases and battles over the suffering of those detainees ended up setting the stage for what Guantánamo would become after September 11, 2001.

      In one case, a federal court ruled that it did have jurisdiction over the base, but the government agreed to release the Haitians who were part of the lawsuit in exchange for keeping that ruling off the books. A ruling in a second case would assert that the courts did not have jurisdiction. Absent the prior case, the latter stood on its own as precedent. Leaving Guantánamo in this gray area made it an ideal site for extrajudicial detention and torture after the twin towers fell.

      This process of normalization, when a bad camp becomes much more dangerous, is not unusual. Today’s border camps are a crueler reflection of long-term policies—some challenged in court—that earlier presidents had enacted. Prior administrations own a share of the responsibility for today’s harsh practices, but the policies in place today are also accompanied by a shameless willingness to publicly target a vulnerable population in increasingly dangerous ways.

      I visited Guantánamo twice in 2015, sitting in the courtroom for pretrial hearings and touring the medical facility, the library, and all the old abandoned detention sites, as well as newly built ones, open to the media—from the kennel-style cages of Camp X-Ray rotting to ruin in the damp heat to the modern jailhouse facilities of Camp 6. Seeing all this in person made clear to me how vast the architecture of detention had become, how entrenched it was, and how hard it would be to close.

      Without a significant government effort to reverse direction, conditions in every camp system tend to deteriorate over time. Governments rarely make that kind of effort on behalf of people they are willing to lock up without trial in the first place. And history shows that legislatures do not close camps against the will of an executive.

      Just a few years ago there might have been more potential for change spurred by the judicial branch of our democracy, but this Supreme Court is inclined toward deference to executive power, even, it appears, if that power is abused. It seems unlikely this Court will intervene to end the new border camp system; indeed, the justices are far more likely to institutionalize it by half-measures, as happened with Guantánamo. The Korematsu case, in which the Supreme Court upheld Japanese-American internment (a ruling only rescinded last year), relied on the suppression of evidence by the solicitor general. Americans today can have little confidence that this administration would behave any more scrupulously when defending its detention policy.

      What kind of conditions can we expect to develop in these border camps? The longer a camp system stays open, the more likely it is that vital things will go wrong: detainees will contract contagious diseases and suffer from malnutrition and mental illness. We have already seen that current detention practices have resulted in children and adults succumbing to influenza, staph infections, and sepsis. The US is now poised to inflict harm on tens of thousands more, perhaps hundreds of thousands more.

      Along with such inevitable consequences, every significant camp system has introduced new horrors of its own, crises that were unforeseen when that system was opened. We have yet to discover what those will be for these American border camps. But they will happen. Every country thinks it can do detention better when it starts these projects. But no good way to conduct mass indefinite detention has yet been devised; the system always degrades.

      When, in 1940, Margarete Buber-Neumann was transferred from the Soviet Gulag at Karaganda to the camp for women at Ravensbrück (in an exchange enabled by the Nazi–Soviet Pact), she came from near-starvation conditions in the USSR and was amazed at the cleanliness and order of the Nazi camp. New arrivals were issued clothing, bedding, and silverware, and given fresh porridge, fruit, sausage, and jam to eat. Although the Nazi camps were already punitive, order-obsessed monstrosities, the wartime overcrowding that would soon overtake them had not yet made daily life a thing of constant suffering and squalor. The death camps were still two years away.

      The United States now has a vast and growing camp system. It is starting out with gruesome overcrowding and inadequate healthcare, and because of budget restrictions, has already taken steps to cut services to juvenile detainees. The US Office of Refugee Resettlement says that the mounting number of children arriving unaccompanied is forcing it to use military bases and other sites that it prefers to avoid, and that establishing these camps is a temporary measure. But without oversight from state child welfare inspectors, the possibilities for neglect and abuse are alarming. And without any knowledge of how many asylum-seekers are coming in the future, federal administrators are likely to find themselves boxed in to managing detention on military sites permanently.

      President Trump and senior White House adviser Stephen Miller appear to have purged the Department of Homeland Security of most internal opposition to their anti-immigrant policies. In doing so, that have removed even those sympathetic to the general approach taken by the White House, such as former Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, in order to escalate the militarization of the border and expand irregular detention in more systematic and punitive ways. This kind of power struggle or purge in the early years of a camp system is typical.

      The disbanding of the Cheka, the Soviet secret police, in February 1922 and the transfer of its commander, Felix Dzerzhinsky, to head up an agency with control over only two prisons offered a hint of an alternate future in which extrajudicial detention would not play a central role in the fledgling Soviet republic. But Dzerzhinsky managed to keep control over the “special camps” in his new position, paving the way for the emergence of a camp-centered police state. In pre-war Germany in the mid-1930s, Himmler’s struggle to consolidate power from rivals eventually led him to make camps central to Nazi strategy. When the hardliners win, as they appear to have in the US, conditions tend to worsen significantly.

      Is it possible this growth in the camp system will be temporary and the improvised border camps will soon close? In theory, yes. But the longer they remain open, the less likely they are to vanish. When I visited the camps for Rohingya Muslims a year before the large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing began, many observers appeared to be confusing the possible and the probable. It was possible that the party of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi would sweep into office in free elections and begin making changes. It was possible that full democracy would come to all the residents of Myanmar, even though the government had stripped the Rohingya of the last vestiges of their citizenship. These hopes proved to be misplaced. Once there are concentration camps, it is always probable that things will get worse.

      The Philippines, Japanese-American internment, Guantánamo… we can consider the fine points of how the current border camps evoke past US systems, and we can see how the arc of camp history reveals the likelihood that the suffering we’re currently inflicting will be multiplied exponentially. But we can also simply look at what we’re doing right now, shoving bodies into “dog pound”-style detention pens, “iceboxes,” and standing room-only spaces. We can look at young children in custody who have become suicidal. How much more historical awareness do we really need?

    • #Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez engage le bras de fer avec la politique migratoire de Donald Trump

      L’élue de New York a qualifié les camps de rétention pour migrants érigés à la frontière sud des Etats-Unis de « camps de concentration ».

  • Vive éclosion des langues de révolte | Entre les lignes entre les mots

    Arabat réunit un ensemble de textes, photographies et dessins et un film en deux parties sur DVD, le tout né de la résidence, en 2018, d’Élodie Claeys et de Caroline Cranskens à Plounéour‐Ménez, en plein cœur des monts d’Arrée.

    Le titre, signifiant en breton « ne pas » (aussi bien : « interdit », « défense de »  – « ça suffit »), est inspiré d’un poème d’Anjela Duval (1905−1981), paysanne et poétesse bretonne dont les artistes auteures se sont nourries tout au long de leur séjour entre deux hivers.


    • Arabat
      Va hiraezh. Va c’hwervoni
      — N’anavezan ket an enoe —
      Arabat o lakaat em gwerzennoù.
      E teñvalañ kombod va c’halon
      E fell din o derc’hel kuzh.
      Arabat ‘ouezfe den va c’halvar
      Nemet an Hini en deus merket deomp an Hent.
      Arabat sammañ seurt sammoù
      War divskoaz ar re yaouank.
      ‘Pad ma c’hell ar c’hozhiad
      O dougen e-unan.
      Ret mousc’hoarzhin d’o mousc’hoarzh,
      Zoken pa vroud ar boan grisañ.
      Ret eo magañ dezho o spi
      En un Dazont a vo o hini
      Hag a baeo kantvedoù mezh…

      2 a viz Kerzu 1972

      E galleg

      Mon mal d’’être. Mon amertume
      — Je ne connais pas l’’ennui —
      Je n’’ai pas le droit de les mettre dans mes vers.
      Dans le coin le plus sombre de mon cœœur
      Il faut que je les garde au secret.
      Personne ne doit savoir mon calvaire
      Si ce n’’est Celui qui nous a montré le Chemin.
      Défense de déposer ces fardeaux
      Sur les épaules des jeunes.
      Tant que la vieille peut
      Les porter par elle-même.
      Il faut grimacer un sourire
      Même quand perce la douleur la plus vive.
      Il faut leur donner l’’espoir
      En un Avenir qui sera à eux
      Et qui effacera des siècles de honte…

      2 décembre 1972

      (Traduction Paol Keineg)

    • Arabat - Éditions isabelle sauvage

      Arabat réunit un ensemble de textes, photo­gra­phies et dessins et un film en deux parties sur DVD, le tout né de la rési­dence, en 2018, d’Élodie Claeys et de Caro­line Crans­kens à Plounéour‐​Ménez, en plein cœur des monts d’Arrée.

      Le titre, signi­fiant en breton « ne pas » (aussi bien : « inter­dit », « défense de » — « ça suffit »), est inspiré d’un poème d’Anjela Duval (1905−1981), paysanne et poétesse bretonne dont les artistes auteures se sont nour­ries tout au long de leur séjour entre deux hivers.

      Versant livre sont réunis les regards de Caro­line Crans­kens et d’Élodie Claeys, à travers textes et photo­gra­phies, et celui d’Agnès Dubart, qui lors d’un séjour de quelques semaines auprès d’elles a dessiné à l’encre noire les yeux de diffé­rentes personnes rencon­trées en concluant chaque séance de pose par cette même ques­tion : « qu’est-ce que vos yeux aiment voir ? », avant de traduire ces regards inté­rieurs par la couleur et l’aquarelle.

      Versant film, deux parties donc, indé­pen­dantes et complé­men­taires, « à valeur d’ici et d’ailleurs », l’une, Prises de terre, se passant dans les monts d’Arrée, l’autre, Au‐​Delà de Nous, à travers la France, là où il est ques­tion de collec­tifs, de résis­tance et de révolte (de Notre‐​Dame‐​des‐​Landes aux ronds‐​points des gilets jaunes). Caro­line Crans­kens et Élodie Claeys ont suivi le fil des rencontres pour explo­rer quelques cellules vivantes parmi une profu­sion infi­nie. Au rythme du vent, des clairs‐​obscurs, du chant du cour­lis cendré ou des slogans de mani­fes­ta­tions, cadrées sur les pieds, les visages ou les mains, les histoires de vies entrent en réso­nance et en contra­dic­tion avec les aspi­ra­tions et les colères du présent. Comment faire le pont entre les actes et les paroles, les indi­vi­dus et les foules, la nature et la nature humaine ? Arabat est avant tout une vision du collec­tif en mouve­ment, de l’entraide possible entre lieux, enra­ci­ne­ments, luttes, géné­ra­tions, corps et langages. Parce qu’il est l’heure de se bran­cher à la terre et à la fois de se relier aux autres, plus que jamais.

    • Merci pour toute cette documentation @simplicissimus.

      Et sinon, question plus personnelle : parles-tu breton ou as-tu approché cette langue de quelqu’autre façon ?
      Parce que en lisant les pages que tu références, je me suis laissé dériver de liens en liens et je suis (fatalement) arrivé ici :

      Aurais-tu quelques conseils à me donner pour entrer en apprentissage de cette langue ?

    • Ah ! le breton,…

      Non, je ne le parle pas, mais l’ai cotoyé de très très près. Un peu moins maintenant, mais encore.

      Je fais partie de la génération Stivell puis Tri Yann et Servat. À l’époque, et compte tenu de mon goût pour les langues, j’avais évidemment essayé de plonger dedans, de la grammaire de Roparz Hémon à la méthode Assimil. Mon principal problème étant que je manquais d’occasion de le pratiquer. Dans mon patelin du littoral, les derniers locuteurs disparaissaient dans l’indifférence générale. À l’époque, il en subsistait un accent à couper au couteau en français, mais cet accent à aujourd’hui totalement disparu. Reste encore les très abondants #bretonnismes, qui viennent d’ailleurs de faire un retour remarqué par le biais de l’opuscule d’Hervé Lossec qui a connu, et connait toujours, un succès de librairie ahurissant.

      À Paris, bien qu’habitant non loin, voire dans le quartier, je ne fréquentais pas les milieux actifs. Bref, pas de breton.

      Quelques années (!) passent et il se trouve, à peu près par hasard, que ma fille à l’occasion de démarrer sa scolarité en breton. Elle y a accompli tout le trajet de la maternelle à la fin du primaire. Pour les mêmes raisons que moi à peu près, elle en est sortie en comprenant mais, étant en milieu bilingue, sans volonté affirmée de le parler. Sur les trois grandes copines, une seule - qui n’est pas ma fille – est restée dans le réseau bilingue (en fait, deux successifs), va passer son bac en breton et défile pour que les épreuves de maths soient en breton.

      Étant donné le mode de fonctionnement de ses écoles auquel les parents d’élèves sont fortement associés, j’ai pas mal entendu parler et j’ai fini par comprendre à peu près de quoi on parlait, mais je ne parle toujours pas. On me dit grand bien des stages d’immersion, mais je n’ai pas essayé. J’ai accompagné l’apprentissage de ma fille, lu les livres d’enfants et passé les CDs de comptine et autres. Il en reste quand même quelques choses, mais l’occasion manque toujours.

      Pour l’apprentissage, je ne saurais pas trop quoi te recommander. Surtout vu mon propre résultat… L’imprégnation et la pratique.

      D’ailleurs, coïncidence, aujourd’hui est passé, je crois bien pour la première fois, l’excellente émission de France 3 Bretagne #Bali_Breizh que je regarde assez souvent (quand c’est des copains ou des connaissances qui passent). Pointée par @vanderling, en réponse à billet de @philippe_de_jonckheere à propos du clarinettiste Dominique Jouve (le documentaire est vraiment remarquable). L’émission est en breton, mais sous-titrée.

      Sinon, tu as (avais…) la série de sketches djeunz’ Ken tuch’

      avec divers personnages récurrents, dont un Roumain apprenant le breton à Rennes (l’acteur était un des profs de ma fille et le personnage très fortement inspiré d’un assistant maternel…)
      (sous-titres également)

      Y a aussi une autre mini série, genre Un gars, une fille qui tourne en ce moment et passe de temps en temps sur FB, mais je n’arrive pas à mettre la main dessus.

    • D’après ce que tu dis au premier billet de tes réponses, nous devons être de la même génération (Stivell, Dan Ar Braz, Servat, Ar Sonerien Du, Planxty, etc...) J’ai eu l’occasion de côtoyer quelques Bretons à Lyon pendant mes études. Un d’entre eux m’a même appris à jouer du « tin whistle » irlandais et on se faisait des guinches terribles avec quelques autres « folkeux » de toute origine dans nos piaules. Étant originaire de l’Est (Franche-Comté), j’ai donc eu la chance par ce biais d’être initié à la culture musicale « celtique » et ça ne m’a jamais lâché. Au cours d’un long périple en Bretagne en 1980 (ou 81 ?) j’ai repris un bon bain de culture musicale chouchenn-compatible et j’ai même trouvé un bouquin d’apprentissage du ... breton vannetais. Mais vu que le contenu de cet ouvrage était imprégné de catholicisme pur et dur, j’ai pas vraiment eu l’envie de décoller. Je sais bien que la Bretagne est une terre où la tradition religieuse est restée très prégnante, toussa, mais bon, faut quand même pas déconner ... Donc je papillonne au gré de mes navigations internautesques. Le mieux serait d’aller s’installer dans cette région mais après, il faudrait retrouver des anciens qui parle le « vrai » breton et là ... Car apparemment, le breton enseigné institutionnellement est empreint d’un certain académisme. On va y réfléchir et peut-être songer à organiser un déménagement avant toute chose. En attendant, merci pour toutes ces références.

  • How New York could respond to the taxi medallion lending crisis | CSNY

    Experts and lawmakers weigh in on easing the pain of burdened medallion owners and preventing predatory lending in the future.
    MAY 22, 2019

    After a two-part New York Times investigation into predatory lending practices for taxi medallions delineated how industry leaders and government agencies participated in, encouraged or ignored risky lending, calls for action sprang forth – sometimes from the very same officials or agencies that had been asleep at the switch.

    Various deceptive or exploitative lending practices contributed to the rise and precipitous fall of taxi medallions in New York City. Medallions worth $200,000 in 2002 rose to more than $1 million in 2014, before crashing to less than $200,000. The bubble was inflated by loans made without down payments, requirements that loans had to be paid back in three years or extended with inflated interest rates, and interest-only loans that required borrowers to forfeit legal rights and give up much of their income. Borrowers – typically low-income, immigrant drivers – were left in the lurch when the bubble burst, an event that the taxi industry has long blamed primarily on the rise of app-based ride hail services like Uber and Lyft. While the rise of app-based ride hail did contribute to the now-ailing taxi industry, the revelations in the Times show government officials – including the Taxi and Limousine Commission which acted as a “cheerleader” for medallion sales – ignored the warning signs.

    Since Sunday, when the first Times story was published, New York Attorney General Letitia James has announced an inquiry into the business and lending practices that “may have created” the crisis, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a joint probe by the TLC, Department of Finance and Department of Consumer Affairs into the brokers who helped arrange the loans, Sen. Chuck Schumer called for an investigation into the credit unions involved in the lending, and members of the New York City Council and state Legislature, and New York City Comptroller Scott Stringer, have called for hearings and legislation to resolve the issue.

    The various proposals raised thus far are unlikely to fully address the damage caused to many medallion owners, some experts say. The Times investigation found that since 2016, more than 950 taxi drivers have filed for bankruptcy, with thousands more still suffering under the crippling loans. This is combined with a string of taxi and other professional drivers who have committed suicide in the past year and a half.

    Some of the solutions offered have focused on preventing the kind of reckless lending practices exhibited for taxi medallions. Stringer called on state lawmakers to close a loophole that allows lenders to classify their loans as business deals – as opposed to consumer loans, which have more protections for borrowers. A bill introduced last week by state Sen. Jessica Ramos would also establish a program to assist medallion owners who are unable to obtain financing, refinancing or restructuring of an existing loan through a loan loss reserve. State Sen. James Sanders and Assemblyman Kenneth Zebrowski, who chair the state Legislature’s committees on banks, declined to comment.

    But classifying loans for medallions as consumer loans might not be appropriate, said Bruce Schaller, a transportation expert and former deputy commissioner at the New York City Department of Transportation. “I think the difficult question with the individual drivers is that they are in business, they are planning to make money off of their increase in medallion prices. Should they have the same protections as someone who is taking out a mortgage on a house, who is presumed to be very vulnerable?” he asked. “That may well be the case, but (drivers) are also in a business in a way that the prospective homeowner isn’t.”

    The TLC told the Times that it is the responsibility of bank examiners to control lending practices, while the state Department of Financial Services said that it supervised some of the banks involved, but often deferred to federal inspectors. “The TLC is gravely concerned that unsound lending practices have hurt taxi drivers and has raised these concerns publicly,” Acting Commissioner Bill Heinzen said in an emailed statement. “Banks and credit unions are regulated by federal agencies that have substantial oversight powers that the TLC does not have. The TLC has taken steps within our regulatory power to help owners and drivers by easing regulatory burdens and working with City Council to limit the number of for-hire vehicles on the road. We have pushed banks to restructure loan balances and payment amounts to reflect actual trip revenue.”

    Seth Stein, a spokesman for de Blasio, also mentioned interest in preventing risky lending practices. “We are deeply concerned about predatory lending in the medallion business,” Stein wrote in an email. “While TLC has no direct regulatory oversight over lenders – that is squarely under the purview of federal regulators – we continue to look for every means of helping owners and drivers make ends meet. We’ve discontinued medallion sales, secured a cap on app-based for-hire-vehicles, and we strongly urge federal regulators to do more as well.”

    But remedies at the federal level may not be realistic, according to David King, a professor of urban planning at Arizona State University, with a speciality in transportation and land use planning. “There doesn’t seem to be any appetite for what would be reasonable lending standards. Reasonable standards that would include verifiable collateral or values that were based on something other than made-up dollar amounts,” King said, adding that he doesn’t see those changes being made under the current administration. “The housing bubble of 11 years ago, I think that was a sufficiently national concern that has inspired some movement from Washington. Whereas I think something like an asset bubble in New York, just like an asset bubble in one region, isn’t going to be enough to spur federal legislation.”

    Schaller said that while lending regulation fixes could be beneficial for preventing this kind of crisis in other industries, there’s action that can be taken now by the city to alleviate some pain. “The real question is, if the city now decides that they were part of the fraud, then they should refund the money,” he said. “It’s one thing to close a loophole, it’s another thing to decide that you need to make restitution.”

    City Councilman Mark Levine, who has been working on legislation along those lines for nearly a year, agreed that the city needs to take responsibility. “There has been a lot of attention to the whole industry of lenders and brokers who push these loans on the drivers in ways that were not transparent and really deceived them, and may very well constitute some sort of legal fraud,” he said. “But the city itself also bears responsibility for this, because we were selling medallions with the goal of bringing in revenue to the city and we were promoting them and pumping them up in ways that I think masks the true risks that drivers were taking on. And, most egregiously, we had a round of sales in 2014 when it was abundantly clear that we were headed for a price drop, because by that point app-based competitors had emerged and there were other challenges.”

    Levine’s vision for immediately helping those drivers still suffering under unsustainable loans would involve the city acquiring the loans from lenders who either cannot or will not be flexible with borrowers, and then forgiving the debts. Though the bill hasn’t been introduced yet, the idea is to partially finance the buy-back by placing a surcharge on app-based ride-hail companies like Uber and Lyft. Levine’s office is still working on confirming that the City Council would have the authority to levy that kind of surcharge. If it doesn’t, they would encourage that action be taken in Albany.

    But, as the Times’ investigation into the issue has revealed, much of the damage to drivers and medallion owners has already been done – including to the hundreds of medallion owners who have declared bankruptcy. “If someone paid $800,000 for a medallion loan and paid part of that off, and has had their house repossessed, now Mark Levine is saying, ‘well, we’ll just refund whatever’s left dangling out there,’” Schaller said. “If I were on the losing end of that bargain, I’d say I want my $800,000 back.”

    The idea of a buy-back, Levine admitted, is not a perfect solution, but it’s one he said can help the thousands of medallion owners stuck right now. “It would not address that kind of horrible, horrible hardship,” he said, referring to those owners who have forfeited assets and sustained other losses.

    If there’s any upside to the stories relayed in the Times about medallion owners financially devastated by bad loans and the failing taxi industry, it may be that it’s a call to action – even if it’s coming too late for some. “It’s had a dramatic impact on the interest in the Council about finding solutions,” Levine said of the heavy punch packed by the Times’ investigation. “It gives new impetus to this effort, which is good, because it’s complicated, and it’s going to require a political push to make it happen. The revelations in this article made that more likely.”

    Annie McDonough is a tech and policy reporter at City & State.

    #USA #New_York #Taxi #Betrug #Ausbeutung

  • Inquiries Into Reckless Loans to Taxi Drivers Ordered by State Attorney General and Mayor - The New York Times

    May 20, 2019 - The investigations come after The New York Times found that thousands of drivers were crushed under debt they could not repay.

    The New York attorney general’s office said Monday it had opened an inquiry into more than a decade of lending practices that left thousands of immigrant taxi drivers in crushing debt, while Mayor Bill de Blasio ordered a separate investigation into the brokers who helped arrange the loans.

    The efforts marked the government’s first steps toward addressing a crisis that has engulfed the city’s yellow cab industry. They came a day after The New York Times published a two-part investigation revealing that a handful of taxi industry leaders artificially inflated the price of a medallion — the coveted permit that allows a driver to own and operate a cab — and made hundreds of millions of dollars by issuing reckless loans to low-income buyers.

    The investigation also found that regulators at every level of government ignored warning signs, and the city fed the frenzy by selling medallions and promoting them in ads as being “better than the stock market.”

    The price of a medallion rose to more than $1 million before crashing in late 2014, which left borrowers with debt they had little hope of repaying. More than 950 medallion owners have filed for bankruptcy, and thousands more are struggling to stay afloat.

    The findings also drew a quick response from other elected officials. The chairman of the Assembly’s banking committee, Kenneth Zebrowski, a Democrat, said his committee would hold a hearing on the issue; the City Council speaker, Corey Johnson, said he was drafting legislation; and several other officials in New York and Albany called for the government to pressure lenders to soften loan terms.

    The biggest threat to the industry leaders appeared to be the inquiry by the attorney general, Letitia James, which will aim to determine if the lenders engaged in any illegal activity.

    “Our office is beginning an inquiry into the disturbing reports regarding the lending and business practices that may have created the taxi medallion crisis,” an office spokeswoman said in a statement. “These allegations are serious and must be thoroughly scrutinized.”

    Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo said through a spokesman that he supported the inquiry. “If any of these businesses or lenders did something wrong, they deserve to be held fully accountable,” the spokesman said in a statement.

    Lenders did not respond to requests for comment. Previously, they denied wrongdoing, saying regulators had approved all of their practices and some borrowers had made poor decisions and assumed too much debt. Lenders blamed the crisis on the city for allowing ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft to enter without regulation, which they said led medallion values to plummet.

    Mr. de Blasio said the city’s investigation will focus on the brokers who arranged the loans for drivers and sometimes lent money themselves.

    “The 45-day review will identify and penalize brokers who have taken advantage of buyers and misled city authorities,” the mayor said in a statement. “The review will set down strict new rules that prevent broker practices that hurt hard-working drivers.”

    Four of the city’s biggest taxi brokers did not respond to requests for comment.

    Bhairavi Desai, founder of the Taxi Workers Alliance, which represents drivers and independent owners, said the city should not get to investigate the business practices because it was complicit in many of them.

    The government has already closed or merged all of the nonprofit credit unions that were involved in the industry, saying they participated in “unsafe and unsound banking practices.” At least one credit union leader, Alan Kaufman, the former chief executive of Melrose Credit Union, a major medallion lender, is facing civil charges.

    The other lenders in the industry include Medallion Financial, a specialty finance company; some major banks, including Capital One and Signature Bank; and several loosely regulated taxi fleet owners and brokers who entered the lending business.

    At City Hall, officials said Monday they were focused on how to help the roughly 4,000 drivers who bought medallions during the bubble, as well as thousands of longtime owners who were encouraged to refinance their loans to take out more money during that period.

    One city councilman, Mark Levine, said he was drafting a bill that would allow the city to buy medallion loans from lenders and then forgive much of the debt owed by the borrowers. He said lenders likely would agree because they are eager to exit the business. But he added that his bill would force lenders to sell at discounted prices.

    “The city made hundreds of millions by pumping up sales of wildly overpriced medallions — as late as 2014 when it was clear that these assets were poised to decline,” said Mr. Levine, a Democrat. “We have an obligation now to find some way to offer relief to the driver-owners whose lives have been ruined.”

    Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, proposed a similar solution in a letter to the mayor. He said the city should convene the lenders and pressure them to partially forgive loans.

    “These lenders too often dealt in bad faith with a group of hard-working, unsuspecting workers who deserved much better and have yet to receive any measure of justice,” wrote Mr. Stringer, who added that the state should close a loophole that allowed the lenders to classify their loans as business deals, which have looser regulations.

    Last November, amid a spate of suicides by taxi drivers, including three medallion owners with overwhelming debt, the Council created a task force to study the taxi industry.

    On Monday, a spokesman for the speaker, Mr. Johnson, said that members of the task force would be appointed very soon. He also criticized the Taxi and Limousine Commission, the city agency that sold the medallions.

    “We will explore every tool we have to ensure that moving forward, the T.L.C. protects medallion owners and drivers from predatory actors including lenders, medallion brokers, and fleet managers,” Mr. Johnson said in a statement.

    Another councilman, Ritchie Torres, who heads the Council’s oversight committee, disclosed Monday for the first time that he had been trying to launch his own probe since last year, but had been stymied by the taxi commission. “The T.L.C. hasn’t just been asleep at the wheel, they have been actively stonewalling,” he said.

    A T.L.C. spokesman declined to comment.

    In Albany, several lawmakers also said they were researching potential bills.

    One of them, Assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou of Manhattan, a member of the committee on banks, said she hoped to pass legislation before the end of the year. She said the state agencies involved in the crisis, including the Department of Financial Services, should be examined.

    “My world has been shaken right now, to be honest,” Ms. Niou said.

    Brian M. Rosenthal is an investigative reporter on the Metro Desk. Previously, he covered state government for the Houston Chronicle and for The Seattle Times. @brianmrosenthal

    #USA #New_York #Taxi #Betrug #Ausbeutung

  • Les 15 et 16 juin, à La Générale (Paris), le THC Circus (@arno on y retrouvera la Fabrique de Fanzines). Stands de bandes dessinées dites indés, expositions, concerts, cantine pop, rencontres assurées avec des gens chouettes

    comme THC n’a rien branlé pour la promo jusqu’ici, hé bé faut bien s’y coller. La présentation par la Générale même, c’est ça :

    STANDS, 17 EXPOSANTS : The Hoochie Coochie, Adverse, Serendip Livres, 3oeil, Flûtiste, Bien Monsieur, J’apprends Magazine, Novland, PCCBA, Factotum, La Hyène, Une Autre Image, Le Trainailleur, Cacahuète, L’Insolante, Les Machines, Hécatombe.
    ATELIER – La Fabrique de fanzines (sans inscription et tout le w.e en continu)
    La Fabrique de Fanzines fabrique des fanzines de A à Z. Tous ceux qui veulent bien participer, dessinent, écrivent, photocopient, plient, agrafent, coupent et lisent des fanzines. Il y a une photocopieuse, un massicot, une agrafeuse, des stylos, du papier, des tables, des chaises, un coin pour lire avec un tapis, des coussins, de la musique. Les originaux sont scotchés au mur, un exemplaire de chaque pend à la corde à linge, des exemplaires gratuits sont offerts dans un boîte.
    2 CONCERTS : Samedi 15 — Prix libre — ouverture des portes à 20h30, début des concerts à 21h
    -- Jenny Abouav (performance solo — modulation granulaire électro-acoustique via capteurs de lumière)
    -- One Lick Less (duo batterie / chant – guitare et double pedal steel home-made : folk-rock avancé / Blues mutant)
    4 EXPO :
    -- Gautier Ducatez La traque de Kenny Martins (The Hoochie Coochie)
    48h, c’est le temps que se donnent Armand et Idrissou pour retrouver l’identité du meurtrier
    de Moussa Kango. Un épisode supplémentaire d’Armand, le polar de Gautier Ducatez, qui
    s’écrit en pastiche de pochettes iconiques de rap. Du 113 à MF Doom, des Gravediggaz à
    -- L.L. de Mars Hapax (The Hoochie Coochie)
    Hapax est un livre consacré à une seule question, aussi simple que propre à vous perdre infiniment : qu’est-ce que que « prendre forme » ?
    Des formes rencontrées au cours d’une vie, des œuvres et des idées qu’on intériorise pas à pas, qu’est-ce qui peut prendre corps dans des formes nouvelles sans les subordonner ? Qu’est-ce qui, des formes, et dans les formes, ouvre ou réduit ? Qu’est-ce qui crée, déplie, radote, anéantit ? Le dispositif proposé met en scène le désordre des lignes invisibles qui structurent un travail artistique, dans la forme la plus visiblement subordonnée aux significations, celle de la médiation culturelle et muséale.
    -- Guillaume Chailleux (Adverse)
    En une douzaine de travaux réalisés au format A3, Guillaume Chailleux s’attaque à la question délicate de la « plasticité » de la planche de bande dessinée, particulièrement prégnante dans le cadre d’une exposition dédiée à un art privilégiant l’imprimé.
    Soit un essai critique sous la forme d’une série d’interventions convoquant les avant-gardes picturales du XXe siècle, jouant des problématiques de couleurs, de cadre, d’agencements et de sérialisme.
    Cette exposition accompagne la sortie de Filer, deuxième livre de Guillaume Chailleux qui tente l’épuisement d’une des formes les plus minimales de la bande dessinée, le gaufrier en 4 cases.
    -- Raphaële Enjary, Olivier Philipponneau et ALIS Amimots (3œil – Albin Michel Jeunesse)
    À l’occasion de la sortie d’AMIMOTS dans la collection Trapèze des éditions Albin Michel Jeunesse, l’atelier 3œil présentera une série de 8 sérigraphies grand format et 10 risographies petit format.
    Le mot de l’éditeur : Amimots est à la fois un livre joueur et minutieux. Il met en pratique la malicieuse police de caractères inventée par ALIS : la « police coupable », spécialement dessinée pour permettre des mariages formels entre les mots de la langue française, comme un pêle-mêle aux possibilités infinies. Amimots met à la portée des enfants cette combinatoire typographique amusante : par la magie des similitudes entre les mots, un grillon devient un sphinx, un loir devient un yéti en soulevant le rabat. Cette ambiguïté féconde entre les mots est redoublée par des illustrations en deux tons directs, dans un style minimaliste proche du pochoir. Ces correspondances entre les mots et les images, absolument inédites dans leur double implication, procurent à la fois un vrai divertissement et une méditation sur l’identité des êtres. À partir de 4 ans

  • Sur les pas de George Orwell, par Gwenaëlle Lenoir (Le Monde diplomatique, janvier 2019)

    À Wigan, dans l’Angleterre de l’austérité
    Sur les pas de George Orwell

    Présenté comme une simplification par la fusion d’allocations diverses, le « crédit universel » britannique plonge de nombreux foyers vulnérables dans le désarroi. Sur les quais de Wigan, dans le Lancashire, ce fiasco s’ajoute à la décomposition sociale due à quatre décennies de libéralisme. Comme au temps où George Orwell arpentait ces lieux, nombreux sont aujourd’hui les Anglais emmurés dans la pauvreté.

    En rapport avec ceci :

    Ken Loach : sur les pas de George Orwell ?

  • L’enfer du guichet - La Vie des idées

    L’inventivité formelle n’est pas la marque la plus évidente du dernier film de Ken Loach, I, Daniel Blake, ce qui a pu laisser penser que la Palme d’or qui l’a récompensé visait autant l’auteur et son œuvre, habituée des sélections cannoises (13 en tout) que cet opus en particulier. Ce film porte indéniablement la marque, singulière, de son auteur et constitue à nos yeux un bon cru dans sa production. L’apparente économie de moyens dont Loach fait preuve sert ici un propos d’une grande simplicité et d’une très forte charge émotionnelle sur les ravages de la pauvreté et la cruauté institutionnelle dans le Royaume-Uni néolibéral. Il jette un éclairage incarné, mais peut-être aussi idéalisé, sur le rejet que les classes populaires ont opposé à l’intégration européenne, accusée d’être à la source de la crise de l’État social (le National Health Service) et d’une immigration déstabilisante pour les ouvriers, anciens ouvriers et employés du pays.

    • J’ai vu ce film pour la première fois avant hier-soir car diffusé sur France 2. Alors, « pardonnez-moi si j’mexcuse », mais vu comme ce film fut encensé par la critique, ce que je vais dire n’est pas vraiment « politiquement correct ». Tout simplement parce que le fait politique (justement) me semble cruellement absent de ce récit. A quoi assiste-t-on dans cette histoire ? A la longue descente aux enfers d’un gars qui tombe malade et qui peut plus aller au taf. S’en suit alors une longue pérégrination faite d’humiliations à répétition du gars en question balloté de recherche d’emploi (sur fond d’empêchement majeur car, malheureusement, médicalement parlant, Daniel Blake ne peut plus bosser car il est malade) en requête d’indemnités par l’assurance maladie pour faire valoir ses droits à une (modeste) pension d’invalidité. On assiste à la mise en scène de toute la chiennerie du « système » (que l’on ne nomme jamais au demeurant, mais il ne faut pas effrayer le bourgeois, peut-être, ouais, ça doit être la raison) dans toute son absurdité, son mépris son arrogance, son manque d’empathie et son immense efficacité à broyer des destinées. Très bien. Survient alors LA rencontre avec Kathy à l’agence d’administration des chômeurs justement, sur fond de prise de tête avec la crevure de service qui administre les destinées. Mais tiens ? On n’a pas son nom de famille à Kathy (ou alors, j’ai la mémoire qui déconne, c’est fort possible d’ailleurs), c’est p’têt pas une vraie personne après tout ... Et elle Kathy, et bien elle est même obligée de se prostituer pour mettre du carburant dans la machine (des thunes sur son compte en banque si on préfère) afin de pouvoir se loger et faire crouter ses mômes mais elle, elle est obligée de se priver sévère, car c’est bien connu, une « mère », se sacrifie toujours... pour toutes sortes de choses et en première intention pour ses mouflets.
      Je saute sans tarder à la chute si l’on peut dire : après un entretien en mode « broyage par la machinerie administrative » le Daniel, il se met à taguer le mur de son « Pôle-Emploi » et provoque un « trouble à l’ordre public ». Ce doit être le seul acte à portée un tant soit peu politique du film vu que les keufs se sont même déplacés pour l’occasion. Et puis hop ! Arrive le moment où doit être prise la décision du recours intenté pour obtenir la pension du Daniel, en présence de son avocate (qui prétend que ça va l’faire, hein, ouf ! y a du « happy end » dans l’air) et des administrateurs « encostumés » qui auraient bien pu en dernier ressort la lui faire à l’envers (si ça s’trouve). Mais là, même pas besoin de rallonger le scénario car voici qu’advient le raccourci de la mort qui tue : et bien le Daniel il clamse dans les chiottes, tout seul, à l’abri des regards. Bon, il avait pris soin d’écrire une petite lettre (manuscrite) pour sa plaidoirie auprès de ces messieurs de l’assurance maladie (ou autres dégâts de la vie) pour faire valoir ses droits de « citoyen » (s’il vous plaît) mais aussi pour leur faire part de son « indignation ».
      C’est bizarre, mais de la part de Ken Loach, je m’attendais à mieux que ça. Il faut quand même que j’avoue m’être efforcé de regarder ce film sans me faire prendre aux pièges de l’affect (et c’est un exercice plutôt difficile dans ce cas précis) et par ce subterfuge, c’est là que je me suis aperçu que,"politiquement", cette histoire ne tenait pas la route. (THE END)

  • Ken Loach : « Les riches n’iront probablement pas voir "Sorry We Missed You" »

    Le réalisateur de 81 ans présentait ce vendredi en compétition au Festival de Cannes un brulôt bouleversant sur le monde du travail, « Sorry We Missed …

  • #Elite gathering reveals anxiety over ‘class war’ and ‘#revolution’
    Financial Times 2 mai 2019

    The Milken Institute’s annual gathering of the investment, business and political elites this week featured big names from US Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin to David Solomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs.


    Despite widespread optimism about the outlook for the US economy and financial markets, some of the biggest names on Wall Street and in corporate America revealed their anxiety about the health of the economic model that made them millionaires and billionaires.

    Mr Milken himself, whose conference was known as the predators’ ball when he ruled over the booming junk bond market of the 1980s, was among those fretfully revisiting a debate that has not loomed so large since before the fall of the Berlin Wall: whether capitalism’s supremacy is threatened by creeping socialism.

    Mr Milken played a video of Thatcher from two years before she became UK prime minister. “Capitalism has a moral basis,” she declared, and “to be free, you have to be capitalist”. Applause rippled through the ballroom.

    In the run-up to the conference, essays by Ray Dalio of Bridgewater Associates and Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase about the case for reforming capitalism to sustain it have been widely shared. Executives are paying close attention to what one investment company CEO called “the shift left of the Democratic party”, personified by 2020 presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and the social media success of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the democratic socialist elected to Congress last year.

    Former Alphabet chairman Eric Schmidt issued his own rallying cry as he sat beside Ivanka Trump to discuss the conference theme of “driving shared prosperity”.

    “I’m concerned with this notion that somehow socialism’s going to creep back in, because capitalism is the source of our collective wealth as a country,” Mr Schmidt said, urging his fellow capitalists to get the message out that “it’s working”.

    Mr Milken asked Ken Griffin, the billionaire founder of the hedge fund Citadel, why young Americans seemed to have lost faith in the free market, flashing up a poll on the screen behind them which showed 44 per cent of millennials saying they would prefer to live in a socialist country.

    “You and I grew up in a different era, where the cold war was waking up and there was a great debate in America about the strengths and weaknesses of socialism as compared to the economic freedom that we enjoy in our country,” Mr Griffin replied, saying that they had “seen that question answered” with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    The younger generation that support socialism are “people who don’t know history”, he said.

    Guggenheim Partners’ Alan Schwartz put the risks of rising income inequality more starkly. “You take the average person . . . they’re just basically saying something that used to be 50:50 is now 60:40; it’s not working for me,” he told another conference session, pointing to the gap between wage growth and the growth of corporate profits.

    “If you look at the rightwing and the leftwing, what’s really coming is class warfare,” he warned. “Throughout centuries what we’ve seen when the masses think the elites have too much, one of two things happens: legislation to redistribute the wealth . . . or revolution to redistribute poverty. Those are the two choices historically and debating it back and forth, saying ‘no, it’s capitalism; no, it’s socialism’ is what creates revolution.”

    There was less discussion of the prospect of higher taxes on America’s wealthiest, which some Democrats have proposed to finance an agenda many executives support, such as investing in education, infrastructure and retraining a workforce threatened by technological disruption and globalisation.

    One top investment company executive echoed the common view among the conference’s wealthy speakers: “ Punitive #redistribution won’t work.”

    But another financial services executive, who donated to Hillary Clinton’s US presidential campaign in 2016, told the Financial Times: “ I’d pay 5 per cent more in tax to make the world a slightly less scary place .”

    #capitalisme #anxiété #capitalistes

  • Enfants volés d’Angleterre

    Au #Royaume-Uni, les #services_sociaux sont financièrement encouragés à retirer leurs enfants à des parents soupçonnés de #maltraitance ou jugés à l’avance incapables d’assumer leur rôle, à l’instar des mères célibataires ou des couples désargentés.

    Chaque année en Angleterre, les services sociaux retirent à leurs parents des dizaines de milliers d’enfants. Non que ces parents soient violents, maltraitants ou abusifs mais au motif qu’ils sont potentiellement dangereux pour leur progéniture. Ce sont le plus souvent des parents économiquement fragiles, précaires, des familles monoparentales. Autant de situations qui induisent, selon les services sociaux britanniques, un risque potentiel.

    Un tiers de ces enfants au moins serait retiré de manière totalement abusive. Dénoncé par #Ken_Loach dans son film #Lady_Bird, le scandale commence en 1989 lorsque #Margaret_Thatcher fait voter le Children Act qui introduit la notion de « #probabilité_de_faire_du_mal ». Pour enlever des enfants à leur famille, une simple #suspicion de #maltraitance_future, non avérée, suffit à enclencher une procédure à laquelle il est très difficile de se soustraire. La procédure est confiée aux autorités locales qui sont encouragées financièrement à retirer le plus d’enfants possible. Chaque comté reçoit des #quotas d’#adoption et si le quota n’est pas atteint, le #budget d’aide à l’enfance en est réduit d’autant.

    Ensuite la machine est encore plus infernale puisque parmi les enfants retirés, certains parfois dès leur naissance, des milliers sont confiés à des agences privées, parfois cotées en bourse, qui vont les faire adopter par des couples sans enfants.

    Régis et Gena ont été victimes de ce silencieux scandale. Ils racontent.

    #enfants_volés #enfance #UK #Angleterre #audio #enfants #anticipation #Thatcher

    • Les Enfants volés d’Angleterre

      Au Royaume-Uni, les services sociaux sont financièrement encouragés à priver de leurs enfants des parents soupçonnés de maltraitance. Plus de deux millions d’enfants sont ainsi « fichés » par les services sociaux anglais et leurs parents, pris dans la tourmente d’une machine administrative devenue folle. Confiés dans un premier temps à des familles d’accueil, ces enfants « volés » sont proposés à l’adoption par des agences spécialisées, privatisées par David Cameron. Soumis à une obligation de silence, les parents légitimes, généralement démunis, n’ont ensuite aucune possibilité légale de retrouver un jour leurs enfants.

      #film #documentaire #Pierre_Chassagnieux #Stéphanie_Thomas

    • Et effectivement, à (re)voir, le film de #Ken_Loach, #Ladybird...

      Maggie, sur la scène d’un karaoké, chante tandis que Jorge, un client admiratif, la regarde et l’écoute. Rassurée par la bienveillance de ce réfugié politique latino-américain, Maggie se confie. Elle est la mère célibataire de quatre enfants issus de pères différents, et reste encore cabossée par sa dernière relation avec un homme qui la battait. L’assistance publique, dont elle n’est que trop familière, finit par lui retirer la garde de ses enfants après qu’elle les a laissés seuls un soir où un incendie s’est déclaré. Mais pour une fois, elle a trouvé en Jorge un homme attentionné et qui ne la malmène pas. Lui l’écoute, ce que se refusent à faire les services sociaux. Maggie, qui semble avoir réussi à enrayer le cercle vicieux de la violence conjugale, reste enfermée dans une image négative aux yeux de l’assistance sociale qui refuse de lui rendre ses enfants. Ensemble Jorge et Maggie vont se battre pour récupérer leur dignité et le droit à fonder une famille…

      Notes : Ladybird est issu d’un fait divers découvert par Ken Loach grâce une correspondance avec une admiratrice inconnue. Cette dernière lui a confié son histoire, comment les services sociaux suite à un incendie lui ont retiré tour à tour ses six enfants. Le titre, lui, provient d’une comptine anglaise « Ladybird, Ladybird, va-t’en vite de chez toi, ta maison est en feu, et tes enfants s’en sont allés, tous sauf une, c’est la petite Ann, et elle s’est cachée sous, la poêle . »

    • Le film de ken Loach Ladybird a été réalisé il y a 25 ans. Mais il semble que l’Angleterre ne s’intéresse toujours pas au sort des enfants sauf à organiser leur trafic sexuel.

      #pédophilie #services_sociaux

      je signalais il y a quelques jours le dyptique documentaire de Pierre Chassagnieux et Stéphanie Thomas sur ce sujet
      « Les enfants perdus d’Angleterre »
      « Les enfants volés d’Angleterre »

      Le fait que ce #trafic_d'enfants soit étouffé avec interdiction aux journalistes d’évoquer ces #enlèvements est tout à fait hallucinant.

      La loi impose le silence aux parents et aux journalistes qui ne peuvent raconter leur drame sous peine de condamnations judiciaires.

      #tabou #censure

      « C’est le business n°1 en Angleterre : voler les enfants. » rediffusion 15/nov/2016

      Un enfant kidnappé par les services sociaux se vend 40.000€ sur internet

    • Pour te dire que tout est bien verrouillé le documentaire télévisé est interdit de visionnement en Angleterre (testé sur #TOR). Faut espérer que l’émission de France Culture traverse la manche.

    • Remarque qu’en tant que #mère_célibataire à deux reprises et en France j’ai été menacé de me faire retirer ma fille. Une fois par des policiers qui ont forcé ma porte en pleine nuit et une autre par le service hygiène et sécurité de la ville de Clichy auquel j’avais fait appel pour habitat indigne. A chaque fois, ces menaces ont été faites pour que je garde le silence sur leurs agissements illégaux.

  • Anas, le héros masqué du journalisme africain

    Sa popularité dépasse le Ghana, pourtant personne ne connaît le visage du journaliste Anas Aremeyaw Anas. Cet anonymat lui permet de protéger sa vie et d’enquêter en caméra cachée sur les affaires de corruption.

    Le chauffeur connaît manifestement le chemin. Sur les avenues fluides, les immeubles de bureaux défilent, comme les enfants des rues qui, aux carrefours, mendient une pièce ou un morceau de pain. Accra, capitale du Ghana, fait sa pause dominicale. Même le marché central, le plus grand d’Afrique de l’Ouest, qui perturbe le centre-ville les jours de semaine, en provoquant des embouteillages monstres, est presque calme avec ses femmes en tenue de fête négociant le kilo de légumes.
    La ville retient son souffle, chargée des derniers échos des cantiques évangéliques, véritable tempo du dimanche matin. Sur les murs, quelques graffs accrochent le regard au passage, comme ce visage en noir et blanc, masqué par un drôle de rideau de perle.
    On le retrouve, en faisant route vers l’aéroport, sur une immense fresque signée Nicholas Tettey Wayo, un des street-artistes les plus en vogue du pays, accompagnée de cette devise en gros caractères : « Anas te surveille. Agis bien. »

    Un superhéros

    Anas ? C’est Anas Aremeyaw Anas, une vedette sans visage, mais à double face. Côté pile, c’est le journaliste le plus connu du continent africain ; côté face, un véritable James Bond, qui met sa vie en jeu pour tourner les images de ses documentaires chocs : des films pour la BBC, CNN ou la chaîne qatarie Al-Jazira.
    Peu connu en France, il apparaît comme un superhéros en Afrique et dans le monde anglo-saxon. Un journaliste espion, bardé d’une cinquantaine de prix, qui travaille caméra cachée sous la chemise, déguisé pour infiltrer les milieux les plus opaques.

    Son dernier reportage, Number 12, est sorti mi-2018. Il raconte la face obscure du football africain, où « le 12e joueur, c’est la corruption ». Le documentaire, fruit de deux ans d’enquête, dénonce cette gangrène.
    Trois jours après sa diffusion par la BBC, le 9 juin 2018, lors d’une séance publique dans la ville d’Accra, le patron ghanéen de ce sport hyperpopulaire a été forcé de démissionner. Puis, pendant plusieurs semaines, toute la planète du ballon rond africain a vécu à l’heure des évictions prononcées par la Fédération internationale (FIFA). Jusqu’à celle d’un arbitre kényan pourtant prêt à officier durant la Coupe du monde en Russie, à l’été 2018. Anas et son équipe ont piégé 97 des 100 leaders du championnat ghanéen ou des grands championnats du continent, leur proposant de l’argent pour influer sur la sélection d’arbitres ou pour truquer des matchs.

    L’anonymat, une assurance-vie

    Aucun milieu ne fait peur à Anas Aremeyaw Anas. En 2015, il a fait tomber sept des douze juges des plus hautes juridictions de son pays. Au total, une trentaine de magistrats et 170 huissiers de justice s’étaient laissés acheter par des journalistes infiltrés, acceptant des liasses de billets en échange d’une décision de justice, comme l’a montré Ghana in the Eyes of God (« le Ghana vu par Dieu »).
    Ce film a été construit à partir de 500 heures de tournage ; il a été vu par 6 500 personnes en quatre projections seulement, au Centre international de conférences d’Accra. Car dans ce petit Etat anglophone d’Afrique de l’Ouest, entre Burkina Faso et Côte d’Ivoire, les sorties des enquêtes du journaliste sont de véritables événements nationaux, aussi courus que le concert d’une rock star.

    « Si je décide d’arrêter, quelqu’un d’autre peut devenir le nouvel Anas. » Anas

    Anas Aremeyaw Anas est une célébrité sans visage car l’anonymat est son assurance-vie. Si de très rares personnes ont déjà vu ses traits, la plupart ne connaissent de lui que le rideau de perles qui tombe de son bob noir, assorti, dans une coquetterie inattendue, à la couleur de sa tunique. Il a choisi de longue date ce masque « produit de l’artisanat local », d’abord parce qu’il « est représentatif du continent africain », mais aussi parce que d’autres que lui peuvent le porter facilement.
    « Si je décide d’arrêter, quelqu’un d’autre peut devenir le nouvel Anas », répète-t-il volontiers. Aujourd’hui, ils sont parfois trois à l’arborer en même temps dans les grands rendez-vous internationaux où Anas est invité. Si, officiellement, il s’agit de tromper ceux qui voudraient l’agresser ou le tuer, c’est aussi par souci de mise en scène. Anas est conscient de la force symbolique du personnage qu’il s’est créé et en joue désormais, écrivant chaque jour un chapitre supplémentaire de cette histoire.

    Pour nous recevoir, le rendez-vous a été donné sans adresse. A l’heure dite, ce 17 février, le pick-up annoncé s’est arrêté devant un hôtel international d’Accra. Prénoms échangés en guise de code et le voilà reparti, stoppant une demi-heure plus tard devant un immeuble à l’air inhabité, dans une banlieue sans charme. Entre une épicerie fermée et une de ces mini-pharmacies où, hormis la gamme d’antipaludéens, les étagères font plus de place aux sodas qu’aux médicaments, un responsable de la sécurité entrebâille un portillon et joue les guides vers le troisième étage, où attend une clé, sésame pour accéder au toit-terrasse, puis à un studio aveugle, camouflé derrière de lourds volets de bois. L’air de la pièce poussiéreuse est encore irrespirable quand le garde du corps y installe trois chaises. Sorti de nulle part, Anas se glisse en silence sur l’une d’elles.

    « Dénoncer, faire honte, emprisonner »

    Après des salutations rapides, ses premiers mots sont pour demander la climatisation. On imagine la chaleur sous son bob enfoncé, derrière ses perles dont le jaune doré répond à sa tunique aux plis parfaits, sur laquelle il porte un petit gilet écossais où le jaune se marie à l’ocre roux. L’homme est théâtral sur sa chaise. Une voix douce très assurée qui s’emballe de temps à autre quand on pointe des contradictions. Des mains qui parlent seules, gesticulant sans cesse. On les fixe d’instinct, gêné face à cet interlocuteur sans visage. Ces mains aux longs doigts fins, graciles, ne trahissent rien de son âge, une quarantaine d’années.

    Anas n’a jamais cessé d’infiltrer des milieux fermés « au nom de l’intérêt général et des droits de l’homme ».

    Né dans le nord du pays, élevé par un père militaire et une mère infirmière, Anas a grandi dans une caserne d’Accra, ville où il étudie le droit à l’université et le journalisme au Ghana Institute of Journalism. Lors de son stage de fin de cursus au tabloïd Crusading Guide, il passe son temps avec les petits vendeurs de rue, ceux qui alpaguent les automobilistes pour quelques cacahuètes ou une bouteille d’eau, et prouve, images à l’appui, que les policiers prélèvent leur obole pour fermer les yeux sur ce commerce illicite.
    Depuis cette première, en 1998, Anas n’a jamais cessé d’infiltrer des milieux fermés « au nom de l’intérêt général et des droits de l’homme », explique celui qui change d’apparence et de personnage pour prélever les preuves de ce qu’il dénonce.

    Pour lutter contre la prostitution enfantine, il devient concierge et homme de ménage dans une maison close en 2007 ; pour démanteler un réseau de proxénètes chinois, il joue les garçons d’étage dans un hôtel chic. Pour raconter le scandale des hôpitaux psychiatriques, il se fait interner, en 2009, sous le nom de Musa Akolgo, une caméra cachée dans sa chemise, essayant de conserver toute sa lucidité en dépit des drogues avalées. En Tanzanie, il dénonce les assassinats d’albinos, dont on broie les os pour en faire des potions, et livre les criminels aux policiers.

    Si Anas Aremeyaw Anas est le cerveau de ces enquêtes, il ne travaille plus seul. Il est le patron emblématique d’une équipe de journalistes d’investigation qui dénoncent la corruption et défendent les droits de l’homme au Ghana et ailleurs sur le continent. Il est copropriétaire du journal de ses débuts, devenu le New Crusading Guide, et a ouvert son agence vidéo. A l’écrit comme à l’écran, sa méthode tient dans le triptyque : Naming, Shaming, Jailing (« dénoncer, faire honte, emprisonner »).

    « Nous voyons cet esprit dans des journalistes courageux comme Anas Aremeyaw Anas, qui risque sa vie pour la vérité. » Barack Obama, lors d’un voyage au Ghana

    Parce qu’il n’hésite pas à s’attaquer aux puissants, Anas est devenu celui qui protège le peuple contre des pouvoirs corrompus. Une sorte de Robin des bois moderne, qui dit choisir ses enquêtes « en fonction de l’intérêt général », ce qui explique son immense popularité.
    Au Ghana, se présenter comme journaliste, c’est immédiatement s’entendre répondre « comme Anas ! », que ce soit dans les taxis ou à la réception de l’Hôtel Golden Tulip, où Linda, la vingtaine, étudiante en tourisme, a cette réaction spontanée, avant d’expliquer avoir vu « le film sur le football et celui sur les juges ».


    La population connaît d’autant mieux Anas qu’il offre des projections gratuites en plein air de tous ses documentaires, estimant que « les gens doivent savoir », que « les informations doivent circuler en Afrique » pour faire naître une société civile plus exigeante et afin que la presse passe enfin du rôle de faire-valoir à celui de quatrième pouvoir. Anas a aussi choisi ce mode de diffusion en parallèle à la BBC, CNN ou Al-Jazira pour protéger les télévisions de son pays qui pourraient être poursuivies si elles diffusaient ses documentaires.
    Le journaliste estime sa popularité « symptomatique d’une société où les gens sont désenchantés ». « Tout à coup, quelqu’un leur redonne espoir en poussant la démocratie plus loin, réveillant leurs aspirations. C’est un phénomène naturel, qui est la conséquence de notre travail – si vous faisiez la même chose, vous seriez aussi populaire », minimise celui qui reste modeste en dépit des fresques sur les murs, des tee-shirts à son effigie, de sa présence dans le dessin animé Tales of Nazir (« les contes de Nazir »), un symbole de la production ghanéenne dont les saisons successives sont diffusées depuis 2014.

    Cette popularité dépasse même largement les frontières nationales, comme le prouvent ses invitations multiples dans les grands festivals, mais aussi ses 276 000 abonnés sur Facebook et ses 212 000 followers sur Twitter, où le mouvement #jesuisanas se répand.
    En plus des trois conférences TED qu’il a faites (à visage caché, bien sûr), Anas s’est vu consacrer un film de 78 minutes, Chameleon (« caméléon »), réalisé par le Québécois Ryan Mullins, et a été cité dans le grand discours de Barack Obama au Ghana, en 2009. Le président américain avait alors rappelé qu’une « presse indépendante » est l’une des choses qui « donne vie à la démocratie » et ajouté : « Nous voyons cet esprit dans des journalistes courageux comme Anas Aremeyaw Anas, qui risque sa vie pour la vérité. »

    Campagne de dénigrement

    Malgré cette célébrité sans frontière, le journaliste est aussi une cible. Un de ses plus proches collaborateurs, Ahmed Hussein-Suale, qui avait travaillé avec lui sur le football et sur les juges, a été abattu le 16 janvier aux abords de son domicile d’Accra par deux hommes à moto. Depuis cet assassinat, Anas a dispersé son équipe et chacun travaille dans son coin.
    Deux jours avant la sortie du film Number 12, Anas a été publiquement accusé de ne pas payer ses impôts par un député du parti au pouvoir, Kennedy Agyapong. L’élu estimait qu’il faisait du mal au peuple ghanéen, ce à quoi Anas a répondu : « Fake news », ajoutant, serein : « Plus vous vous attaquez aux gros poissons, plus vous êtes attaqué. » C’est le même homme politique qui avait appelé à la télévision à « frapper » Ahmed Hussein-Suale, diffusant sa photo (alors que lui aussi jouait l’anonymat) et proposant de « payer » pour corriger cet enquêteur dont il dénonçait les méthodes.

    Cet assassinat a créé l’émoi dans le pays et au-delà. « Lorsque des dirigeants politiques qualifient les journalistes de “diaboliques” ou de “dangereux”, ils incitent à l’hostilité à leur égard et dénigrent leur travail aux yeux du public. De telles déclarations ont un impact direct sur la sécurité des journalistes et créent un environnement de travail dangereux pour eux », a déclaré David Kaye, le rapporteur spécial de l’ONU sur la liberté d’opinion et d’expression.
    « On travaille depuis vingt ans et personne n’avait encore été tué jusque-là, parce que personne n’avait été “outé”, observe simplement aujourd’hui Anas. Si le visage d’Ahmed Hussein-Suale n’avait pas été montré, il ne serait peut-être pas mort. Il y a les gens qui parlent et ceux qui agissent et tuent. Mais quand vous êtes à cette position, vous créez une opportunité en montrant cette photo. »

    « Etre infiltré permet d’apporter des preuves tangibles, que les puissants ne peuvent pas contester devant les tribunaux. Mon objectif est l’efficacité. » Anas

    Interrogé sur ce sujet le 15 février, pour l’émission « Internationales » de TV5Monde, le chef de l’Etat, Nana Akufo-Addo, qui avait officiellement dénoncé le crime sur Twitter, avouait en marge de l’entretien qu’il aimerait « connaître les raisons de cet assassinat », laissant entendre que la victime n’était peut-être pas tout à fait irréprochable. La rumeur court en effet qu’Ahmed Hussein-Suale aurait lui-même touché de l’argent – rumeur que l’entourage d’Anas balaie d’un revers de main, expliquant que la campagne de dénigrement fait partie de la riposte de ceux qui protègent leurs intérêts en refusant de voir le pays changer.

    « A la limite de l’éthique »

    L’ONU comme le Comité pour la protection des journalistes ont demandé qu’une enquête soit sérieusement menée sur cette mort. Le député a reconnu, le 16 mars, dans la presse ghanéenne, avoir été mandaté par le parti au pouvoir pour mener une croisade anti-Anas et jeudi 11 avril, un suspect a été arrêté.
    Reste que la méthode d’Anas interroge et interrogeait bien avant le meurtre d’Ahmed Hussein-Suale. Un journaliste peut-il verser de l’argent pour piéger son interlocuteur ? Peut-il travailler sans révéler son identité professionnelle ? « Mon journalisme est adapté à la société dans laquelle je vis, explique l’intéressé. Au Ghana, et plus largement en Afrique, on ne peut pas se contenter de raconter une histoire pour faire bouger les choses. Etre infiltré permet d’apporter des preuves tangibles, que les puissants ne peuvent pas contester devant les tribunaux. Mon objectif est l’efficacité », poursuit celui qui collabore avec la police. Dépasse-t-il les limites de la déontologie journalistique ? « Je vends bon nombre de sujets à Al-Jazira, CNN et surtout à la BBC. Or, les standards de la BBC sont les meilleurs au monde », rétorque-t-il.

    Pour avoir passé un an auprès de lui et l’avoir vu fonctionner, Ryan Mullins, le réalisateur de Chameleon, journaliste lui-même, reconnaissait, dans un entretien au site Voir, à la sortie du film, en 2015, que les méthodes d’Anas sont « à la limite de l’éthique pour un journaliste occidental » mais qu’elles « sont issues du contexte de travail ghanéen, où les institutions et le système juridique fonctionnent souvent au ralenti et sont aussi très corrompus ».
    Plus important, il ajoute croire que « les motivations d’Anas sont sincères ». « Il veut vraiment que la justice dans son pays soit meilleure et plus développée. Après plus d’une dizaine de séjours en compagnie d’Anas et de son équipe, j’ai pu constater son intégrité. Il a une véritable foi en sa mission », conclut le réalisateur.

    Entreprise privée d’investigation

    Une intégrité qui n’empêche pas le sens des affaires, même si cela contribue à brouiller encore un peu son image… En effet, le savoir-faire développé par les enquêteurs qui entourent Anas Aremeyaw Anas, à mi-chemin entre le journalisme d’infiltration à la Günter Wallraff, le travail de détective et celui d’espion, a fait affluer les commandes. Et le journaliste a monté une entreprise privée d’investigation, Tiger Eye, qui se consacre aussi à des enquêtes ne relevant pas du journalisme. Interpol, la troisième société minière au monde (AngloGold Ashanti), l’une des plus grosses entreprises britanniques de sécurité (Securicor) sont ses clients, au même titre que le gouvernement ghanéen.
    L’entreprise propose tout type d’enquête, de la filature à l’infiltration, la surveillance fine, l’analyse de données. Pour cela, Tiger Eye met à disposition « des agents de haut niveau » qui peuvent avoir été « formés par les services de renseignement israéliens, maîtrisent les sciences de la sécurité et de la surveillance », rappelle le site commercial, qui propose des tarifs variant entre 300 et 500 dollars (jusqu’à 450 euros) la journée – le revenu national moyen au Ghana est d’à peine 2 000 euros annuels.
    Là encore, la pratique pose des questions déontologiques et fait surgir le risque de conflits d’intérêts, qu’Anas met de côté, pragmatique. « La BBC fonctionne avec de l’argent public ! Ici, ce n’est pas possible. Je suis réaliste. Je collabore avec de nombreuses institutions et je le mentionne dans les enquêtes. Et la postérité ne nous pardonnerait pas si nous décidions de simplement se croiser les bras et de laisser place à la criminalité », ajoute celui qui rêve que le journalisme réveille la société africaine.

    « D’autres très bons journalistes d’investigation font leur métier au Ghana et dans la région avec une tout autre approche. » Will Fitzgibbon, ICIJ
    « Nous avons reçu une aide pour reproduire ce nouveau type de journalisme à travers le continent africain. Nous travaillons actuellement sur un projet baptisé “Investigations nigérianes”, qui suscite beaucoup d’intérêt et d’enthousiasme chez les journalistes nigérians. Je suis censé aller au Malawi, en Tanzanie, en Afrique du Sud pour bâtir une nouvelle génération d’“Anas”, capables de repousser les limites de notre démocratie. On n’est plus dans l’histoire d’un individu mais dans un mouvement », insiste-t-il.


    Un mouvement qui n’est pas le seul sur le continent. Will Fitzgibbon, du Consortium international de journalistes d’investigation (ICIJ), qui reste réservé sur les méthodes d’Anas Aremeyaw Anas, rappelle que « d’autres très bons journalistes d’investigation font leur métier au Ghana et dans la région avec une tout autre approche ». M. Fitzgibbon a notamment travaillé avec la Cellule Norbert Zongo (du nom d’un reporter burkinabé assassiné en 1998) pour le journalisme d’investigation en Afrique de l’Ouest (Cenozo) sur les « West AfricaLeaks », qui ont permis de dénoncer quelques scandales financiers.

    Anas ne prétend d’ailleurs pas que sa démarche est la seule valable et se veut plutôt optimiste : « Je vois la société ghanéenne bouger, avancer. Une société civile est en train de naître dans ce pays et le journalisme d’investigation y est pour quelque chose, observe-t-il. Le monde a toujours été en lutte, nous ne sommes pas arrivés ici sans nous battre. Nos ancêtres, que ce soit en Amérique ou ailleurs, ont lutté pour que nous arrivions où nous en sommes aujourd’hui. Dans dix ans, la société sera plus ouverte, il y aura beaucoup moins de corruption. On ne volera plus impunément. Des gens ne demanderont plus qu’on frappe des journalistes parce qu’ils ont de l’argent. On aura davantage conscience que l’argent n’achète pas tout. »
    En attendant, le Ghana occupait, en 2018, la 78e place sur les 180 pays qu’observe l’association de lutte contre la corruption Transparency International. Et l’Afrique est le continent le plus mal classé.

  • An Inspiring Story of Mobile-First Approach as a Winning Game Plan

    A 2018 study in Ireland found that local consumers checked their phones 55 times per day on average (Mobile Consumer Survey, Deloitte). Photo credit: Shutterstock“There are no experts of tomorrow, only of yesterday,” says Jack Ma, founder of Alibaba and China’s wealthiest person.When Kenny Kline and a friend founded their marketing agency in 2014, the entrepreneurs brought laptops to coffee shops and routinely burned the midnight oil in a cramped New York apartment.Digital marketing is notoriously competitive, and the bootstrapped duo’s prospects looked middling, at best.A Mobile-First Game PlanFueled by late-night lattes, JAKK Media’s founders stuck with their convictions: The future belongs to marketers who could communicate and entertain via iPhones, Samsung devices, and small screens. (...)

    #digital-marketing #mobile-strategy #user-engagement #mobile-engagement #smartphones

  • Y’a comme un bémol

    Ce mois-ci, le Gant de Toilette vous propose un tour d’horizon des erreurs, fautes, coquilles, cocasseries et autres bourdes en chanson.

    La Playlist

    Kina – You’re mine Véronique Sanson – Chanson pour ma drôle de Eddy Mitchell – Boogie Woogie BabX – Silicone Baby Angèle Lombard – Sur le Mireille (extrait) Pandrezz – Takin’ you for a ride Gilbert Montagné – Sous les sunlight des tropiques Michel Sardou – Afrique Adieu (extrait) Michel Sardou – Le temps des colonies Alister – qu’est-ce qu’on va faire de toi ? Kenny Arkana – Clouée au sol Rook1e - forever’s a long time Johnny Hallyday - Les chiens de paille (extrait) Claude François – Cette année-là Renaud & Axelle Red – Manhattan Khaboul Youssou N’dour & Neneh Cherry – Seven Seconds David Bowie – Space Oddity Florent Pagny - (...)

  • #radio Mulambo

    CD of the week: K.O.G & The Zongo Brigade – Wahala Wahala


    1. K.O.G & The Zongo Brigade – Suro Nipa

    2. Calypso Rose – Calypso Blues

    3. Minyeshu – Yikerta

    4. The Fontanas – Fuel To My Fire

    5. K.O.G & The Zongo Brigade – For My People

    6. Inna De Yard feat. Ken Boothe – Everything I Own

    7. Soraia Drummond – You Don’t Know

    8. The Bongo Hop – Sonora

    9. Taiwan MC – Mojo Rydim (Rafael Aragon Cumbia remix)

    10. K.O.G & The Zongo Brigade – Medowo

    11. Nubiyan Twist feat. K.O.G – They Talk

    12. Poetic Pilgrimage feat. Aziza Brahim – Regresso

    13. Borchi y Su Doble Redoble feat. Charlot – Ven al baile

    14. Ifriqiyya Électrique – He Eh (...)

    #mukambo #radio,mukambo

  • A Tableau of Talent at the 2019 #sxsw Hackathon — Where Collaboration & Artistry Meet

    A Tableau of Talent at the 2019 SXSW Hackathon — Where Collaboration & Artistry MeetSXSW’s annual Hackathon has crowned its championsThe Notable Winners of SXSW’s 7th Annual Hackathon — Credit: Kenneth EkeReaching new heights has never been a problem during SXSW®’s #hackathons, especially after hosting it for the sixth time in a row. The event, which ran for 24 hours from March 12 to the 13, brought in a multitude of creative and innovative ideas on stage with no project being short of impressive.Hosted by facilitators Travis Laurendine of and Luann Williams of SXSW, and presented by root9B (R9B), the competition brought 29 submissions to life. With hacker projects spanning from interactive phone apps to engaging software, sponsors like Universal #music Group (UMG), Native (...)

    #sxsw-hackathon #technology

  • Behind China’s Corruption Crackdown: Whistleblowers

    By Kent D. Kedl

    SHANGHAI – A top concern for most multinational companies doing business in China the last year has been the Chinese government’s dogged crackdown against corruption. Ask CEOs in China what wakes them at 2 a.m. in a cold sweat and their answer is simple: the dreaded “dawn raid.” What is less widely known is the outsized role that whistleblowers have played. Almost every major fraud or corruption crisis faced by multinational companies in the past year kicked off because of a whistleblower allegation. According to Chinese officials, four out of every five anti-corruption investigations are initiated by whistleblowers. Often these are former and disgruntled employees, suppliers, distributors, consumers, scammers and competitors—some complaints are legitimate, others not.

    Whistleblower complaints in China have historically been an internal matter; any reports were logged with senior management and subject to internal investigations. But there has been a significant trend toward reporting—or threatening to report—directly to Chinese regulators. Whistleblowers are discovering the power of involving regulatory authorities in China to help them achieve their objectives, which range from reporting and rectifying a genuine integrity and governance issue, to extortive attempts to extract monetary or other concessions from management, or simply to take revenge following disputes. In the new, turbo-charged China environment for regulatory oversight, such whistleblowers represent a significant source of risk for multinational corporations.

    Several market dynamics have converged to create this perfect storm of opportunity for whistleblowers in China. They include an uptick in regulatory enforcement, a slowing economy and new pressures on investigators.

    Regulatory oversight and enforcement began to increase in 2013 and shows no sign of down. Regulators that were quite passive in the past will maintain their more active and aggressive stance, and multinationals are on their collective radars. China’s political leadership has provided a mandate for regulator activity and we will continue to see high levels of enforcement, particularly in the key sectors of healthcare, automotive and consumer products, with likely increasing enforcement in energy, telecoms, infrastructure and real estate.

    The slowdown in the Chinese economy means two things. First, companies are not hiring aggressively and employees find it harder to seek alternative employment. Second, companies are restructuring commercial agreements with distributors and suppliers who are feeling the squeeze on their own business. The combined effect is that both employees and third parties have additional incentive to leverage information of potentially unethical or illegal activity. Threatening to blow the whistle to regulatory authorities is an often-successful way for them to retain their positions, even if they are themselves complicit in the activity they are threatening to report.

    Meanwhile, Chinese regulators are under pressure to deliver results. Pressure to resolve a case with a finding against a foreign company may come from the whistleblower, the media or their own peers; regardless of the legitimacy or accuracy of the claims being made. Within agencies, investigators have additional pressure and targets from their bosses. They will often confront the company with allegations taken verbatim from a whistleblower letter, typically without performing much (if any) due diligence on an allegation’s veracity.

    It often unfolds like this. A company is approached by a mid-level regulator with vague allegations of “impropriety.” The company might be told that “we have information that one of your distributors is taking bribes” and will be asked to investigate itself and report back to the authorities on the findings. The company will not be shown any specific evidence nor will it be given any legal basis for the regulator’s suspicion – but will often be threatened with legal or administrative action if it doesn’t cooperate (fines, loss of license, employee detentions, etc.). In many cases, regulators return the results of a company’s own investigation with additional “guidance” on other areas to examine, until the company presents the desired investigative findings and evidence: this is often what is meant by “cooperating with the authorities.”

    So what can companies do to limit their own risk of a regulatory investigation? It starts with thinking through the processes they use to accept and process whistleblower allegations. Getting ahead of any allegations and proactively correcting any perceived wrongdoing can help to stave off a visit from the regulators. Best practice in China includes four items:

    Understanding the regulators: Nearly every company’s stakeholder map in China has changed drastically in the past two years, so it is critical to take a fresh look at the broad spectrum of regulators against a given business and identify which regulators would be legitimately interested in what parts of the business. For example, a company that relies heavily on third-party distributors to sell to customers will be vulnerable to allegations of bribery and corruption, which would be investigated by local Administration of Industry and Commerce (AIC) offices to investigate. Companies with a fragmented business structure and many sales offices in China may get called out on not paying the proper amount in local taxes, resulting in a State Administration of Tax (SAT) visit. For each type of allegation, a company can identify which regulator might be interested and how active they are in each province where the company operates. From there, a company can begin to understand what the regulators look for and how they operate, and get ahead of any allegations of wrongdoing.
    Create a feedback loop to in-country management: Whistleblower allegations should be handled by a neutral party, not by the operation against whom the allegations are leveled. However, this does not mean a multinational company should keep its China management team in the dark about allegations of wrongdoing in China. In-country managers need basic information in order to monitor the risk of whistleblowers reporting to local regulators. Too often, an office in China will be dealing with a regulator but have no idea that an allegation along similar lines was made to their head office whistleblower hotline a few weeks earlier. Tracking allegations over geography and time is also essential. Companies who log and track the details of whistleblower complaints often see patterns that can be dealt with; ahead of any regulator getting involved.
    Investigate outside the four walls: All whistleblower allegations should be thoroughly investigated; a simple “audit” will not suffice. Looking outside of their own books and records allows companies to trace allegations back to activities of third-parties and other outsiders. Any confirmatory evidence of conflicts of interest or collusion will not be found within a company’s four walls.
    Don’t give in to extortion: Companies that receive an extortive threat to report information to a regulator must resist the temptation to immediately concede to any demands. It may seem like an effective short term solution, but there is a very high risk that it comes back to cause bigger problems in future. It is critical that multinational companies cooperate with Chinese regulators and one’s “attitude” will be important to reaching a conclusion; however, there are many ways to be “cooperative” and companies should consider all scenarios before responding.

    Kent Kedl is the Shanghai-based Managing Director for Greater China and North Asia at Control Risks, the global risk consultancy.

    #Chine #politique #corruption #tireurs_d_alarme

  • Vintage Shaded #Relief Basemap

    As a follow-up to this experiment , I’ve tried it out on a global retro shaded relief plate beautifully hand-painted by Kenneth Townsend, so it could be tiled up as a basemap at large scales (the zoomed-out ones).

    You can play with it here:
    And see how it was made here:

    La version tuilée est un peu moins belle que la version statique ci-dessous, mais c’est un plaisir de pouvoir se déplacer en suivant la cordillère des Andes !


  • Google Hedges on Promise to End Controversial Involvement in Military Drone Contract

    Following months of protests from its employees, Google announced last summer that it would not renew its contract with the military on Project Maven, an initiative to use artificial intelligence to improve the targeting and surveillance capabilities of drones on the battlefield. In an email sent this week by Kent Walker, Google’s senior vice president for global affairs, the Silicon Valley giant appeared to hedge on its commitment to fully cut ties with the drone initiative. The email, (...)

    #Google #algorithme #drone #militarisation #reconnaissance #vidéo-surveillance #surveillance #aérien (...)


  • La guerre nucléaire qui vient | AOC media - Analyse Opinion Critique

    par Jean-Pierre Dupuy

    Chacun des deux partenaires accuse l’autre d’être de mauvaise foi et d’avoir violé le traité INF depuis longtemps. L’un et l’autre ont de bonnes raisons pour le faire. Ensemble, ils se comportent comme des garçons de onze ans se querellant dans une cour de récréation et répondant au maître : « M’sieu, c’est pas moi qui ai commencé ». À ceci près que l’enjeu n’est pas moins que la paix du monde. L’opinion internationale – « le maître » – craint une nouvelle course aux armements. Si ce n’était qu’une question de moyens ! La fin, c’est les centaines de millions de morts que j’annonçais en commençant.

    On a accusé Donald Trump de n’avoir en tout domaine d’autre politique que celle qui consiste à détricoter tout ce que son prédécesseur Barack Obama a fait, mais sur ce point il est son digne successeur. C’est dès 2014 que l’administration américaine s’est inquiétée du déploiement par les Russes d’un missile de croisière conforme en tous points aux systèmes bannis par le traité INF. Les Russes ont mis ce missile à l’essai dès 2008, sans s’en cacher puisque Poutine se plaignait en 2013 que la Russie, contrainte par le traité, se trouvait entourée en Asie par des pays, la Chine en premier lieu, qui eux étaient libres de se doter d’armes nucléaires de moyenne portée. Après pas mal d’hésitations sur la riposte adéquate, l’Amérique a tranché : le traité est mort.

    De son côté, la Russie accuse l’Amérique de tricher, par exemple en se croyant libre d’installer en Europe de l’Est des systèmes de défense faits de missiles antimissiles. Outre qu’ils violent le traité dit ABM (Anti Ballistic Missile) par lequel les présidents Nixon et Brejnev se sont engagés en 1972 à limiter drastiquement le recours aux technologies de défense contre des attaques nucléaires portées par des missiles balistiques intercontinentaux, ils peuvent se transformer aisément en armes offensives. De plus, il n’y avait pas en 1987 de drones armés, et ceux-ci peuvent avoir le même office que des missiles.

    D’abord, on ne peut pas gagner une guerre nucléaire. La question de la parité des forces en présence est donc non pertinente. La France de Mitterrand aurait dû le savoir, puisque sa doctrine s’appelait « dissuasion du faible au fort ». L’instinct de Jimmy Carter aurait dû l’emporter sur la panique de l’Europe. L’Amérique elle-même n’avait cependant pas à donner de leçon : en 1961, les dirigeants américains s’affolaient d’avoir moins de missiles nucléaires stratégiques que les Soviétiques alors qu’ils en avaient dix fois plus [1]. Avec des armes conventionnelles, c’est la force relative des armements en présence qui dissuade. Rien de tel avec l’arme nucléaire.

    Ensuite, les armes à portée intermédiaire aux côtés de celles à courte portée étaient envisagées pendant la crise comme des armes d’emploi sur le « théâtre » européen plutôt que comme des armes dissuadant l’ennemi de frapper en premier. Cela présupposait que l’on puisse envisager une guerre nucléaire limitée avec un gagnant et un perdant, où la dissuasion faisait partie de la bataille elle-même (point précédent). Or dans le domaine nucléaire, on ne dissuade pas une attaque limitée en rendant hautement crédible une menace de riposte limitée. On la dissuade en maintenant à un niveau modique la probabilité de l’anéantissement mutuel.

    Il faut noter aussi que la défense contre une attaque nucléaire surprise est impossible. Le bouclier antimissile rêvé par Reagan ne pourrait être efficace que s’il l’était à 100%. Le premier missile qui passerait au travers serait le missile de trop. Aucune technique connue à ce jour n’est à la hauteur de cette exigence de perfection absolue.

    La dissuasion nucléaire prend acte de cette impuissance de la défense. Elle la remplace par la menace de représailles « incommensurables » si l’ennemi attaque vos « intérêts vitaux ». Il est essentiel de comprendre que la défense est non seulement mise hors circuit mais qu’elle est interdite. C’est le sens du traité ABM : on ne se défend pas. C’est en effet la meilleure garantie que l’on donne à l’ennemi qu’on ne l’attaquera pas en premier. Si on le faisait, sous l’hypothèse qu’il conserve une capacité de seconde frappe, on se suiciderait. Inversement, si l’on installe des systèmes de défense par missiles antimissiles, comme les États-Unis l’ont fait autour de la Russie en violant le traité ABM, on envoie à l’ennemi le signal qu’on est prêt à l’attaquer. Celui-ci peut alors décider qu’il lui faut prendre l’autre de vitesse et l’attaquer en premier. C’est ce qu’on appelle la préemption.

    Enfin, en langage militaire américain, le petit nom de la préemption, expression d’un paradoxe révélateur, est « striking second first », qu’on peut traduire par : être le premier à frapper en second, riposter avant l’attaque, exercer des représailles avant même que l’ennemi lance ses missiles, punir le criminel en l’éliminant avant qu’il commette son crime, c’est par le second que le premier est premier, etc. Dans son dernier livre déjà cité, The Doomsday Machine (la machine du jugement dernier) Daniel Ellsberg défend la thèse que les États-Unis n’ont jamais pris la dissuasion au sérieux et qu’ils se sont toujours préparés à frapper en premier.

    L’Amérique d’abord, bientôt suivie par la Russie, a trouvé une solution à ce problème sous le nom de « launch on warning » (« lancement déclenché par une alerte »). Si un système défensif détecte le lancement de missiles nucléaires ennemis, il déclenche immédiatement ses propres missiles sans attendre que les premiers atteignent leurs cibles. On s’assure ainsi contre le risque de se retrouver sans force défensive une fois celle-ci détruite par les missiles ennemis. Le problème est que les systèmes d’alerte sont connus pour fonctionner de manière très approximative. On ne compte plus les erreurs d’interprétation, les mauvais calculs, les fausses alertes.

    Ce qui risque de déclencher la guerre nucléaire à venir, ce ne sont donc pas les mauvaises intentions des acteurs. L’incrédulité générale par rapport à cette éventualité vient de la question que l’on pose immédiatement et par laquelle nous avons commencé : qui pourrait bien vouloir une telle abomination ? Ni Kim ni Trump ne veulent la guerre vers laquelle peut-être ils entraînent le monde tels des somnambules, pas plus que ne la voulaient Kennedy et Khrouchtchev pendant la crise des missiles de Cuba. Le tragique, c’est que cela n’a aucune importance. Comme dans les mythes les plus antiques, la tragédie s’accomplira par le truchement d’un accident, la nécessité par celui d’une contingence.

    #Guerre #Nucléaire

  • MUTATION 001 [ FÉVRIER 2019 ]

    MUTATION 001 [ FÉVRIER 2019 ]Parution du premier numéro de Mutation, le nouveau format d’affiches à lire de La Spirale. Distribution prochaine et une nouvelle aventure qui démarre, en route vers un autre futur !

    Avec une interview de Norman Spinrad par Laurent Courau, un dossier sur l’opération Mindfuck par Ira Benfatto, la participation de John Higgs, de RU Sirius alias Ken Goffman (Mondo 2000), de Rémi Sussan, de Douglas Rushkoff et de Jack Sargeant. William S. Burroughs, la manipulation médiatique et les fake news, les photographies afro-futuristes du kenyan Osborne Macharia, etc.

    Publication prochaine des informations pour commander des numéros à l’unité, s’abonner, adhérer à l’association Mutation ou choisir une formule d’adhésion de soutien à la publication.

    Fondateur : Laurent Courau - (...)


  • China Uses DNA to Track Its People, With the Help of American Expertise - The New York Times

    Collecting genetic material is a key part of China’s campaign, according to human rights groups and Uighur activists. They say a comprehensive DNA database could be used to chase down any Uighurs who resist conforming to the campaign.

    Police forces in the United States and elsewhere use genetic material from family members to find suspects and solve crimes. Chinese officials, who are building a broad nationwide database of DNA samples, have cited the crime-fighting benefits of China’s own genetic studies.

    To bolster their DNA capabilities, scientists affiliated with China’s police used equipment made by Thermo Fisher, a Massachusetts company. For comparison with Uighur DNA, they also relied on genetic material from people around the world that was provided by Kenneth Kidd, a prominent Yale University geneticist.

    On Wednesday, Thermo Fisher said it would no longer sell its equipment in Xinjiang, the part of China where the campaign to track Uighurs is mostly taking place. The company said separately in an earlier statement to The New York Times that it was working with American officials to figure out how its technology was being used.

    Dr. Kidd said he had been unaware of how his material and know-how were being used. He said he believed Chinese scientists were acting within scientific norms that require informed consent by DNA donors.

    China’s campaign poses a direct challenge to the scientific community and the way it makes cutting-edge knowledge publicly available. The campaign relies in part on public DNA databases and commercial technology, much of it made or managed in the United States. In turn, Chinese scientists have contributed Uighur DNA samples to a global database, potentially violating scientific norms of consent.

    Cooperation from the global scientific community “legitimizes this type of genetic surveillance,” said Mark Munsterhjelm, an assistant professor at the University of Windsor in Ontario who has closely tracked the use of American technology in Xinjiang.

    #Génomique #DNA_database #Chine #Surveillance #Consentement

  • New report exposes global reach of powerful governments who equip, finance and train other countries to spy on their populations

    Privacy International has today released a report that looks at how powerful governments are financing, training and equipping countries — including authoritarian regimes — with surveillance capabilities. The report warns that rather than increasing security, this is entrenching authoritarianism.

    Countries with powerful security agencies are spending literally billions to equip, finance, and train security and surveillance agencies around the world — including authoritarian regimes. This is resulting in entrenched authoritarianism, further facilitation of abuse against people, and diversion of resources from long-term development programmes.

    The report, titled ‘Teach ’em to Phish: State Sponsors of Surveillance’ is available to download here.

    Examples from the report include:

    In 2001, the US spent $5.7 billion in security aid. In 2017 it spent over $20 billion [1]. In 2015, military and non-military security assistance in the US amounted to an estimated 35% of its entire foreign aid expenditure [2]. The report provides examples of how US Departments of State, Defense, and Justice all facilitate foreign countries’ surveillance capabilities, as well as an overview of how large arms companies have embedded themselves into such programmes, including at surveillance training bases in the US. Examples provided include how these agencies have provided communications intercept and other surveillance technology, how they fund wiretapping programmes, and how they train foreign spy agencies in surveillance techniques around the world.

    The EU and individual European countries are sponsoring surveillance globally. The EU is already spending billions developing border control and surveillance capabilities in foreign countries to deter migration to Europe. For example, the EU is supporting Sudan’s leader with tens of millions of Euros aimed at capacity building for border management. The EU is now looking to massively increase its expenditure aimed at building border control and surveillance capabilities globally under the forthcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, which will determine its budget for 2021–2027. Other EU projects include developing the surveillance capabilities of security agencies in Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Somalia, Iraq and elsewhere. European countries such as France, Germany, and the UK are sponsoring surveillance worldwide, for example, providing training and equipment to “Cyber Police Officers” in Ukraine, as well as to agencies in Saudi Arabia, and across Africa.

    Surveillance capabilities are also being supported by China’s government under the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ and other efforts to expand into international markets. Chinese companies have reportedly supplied surveillance capabilities to Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador [3]. In Ecuador, China Electronics Corporation supplied a network of cameras — including some fitted with facial recognition capabilities — to the country’s 24 provinces, as well as a system to locate and identify mobile phones.

    Edin Omanovic, Privacy International’s Surveillance Programme Lead, said

    “The global rush to make sure that surveillance is as universal and pervasive as possible is as astonishing as it is disturbing. The breadth of institutions, countries, agencies, and arms companies that are involved shows how there is no real long-term policy or strategic thinking driving any of this. It’s a free-for-all, where capabilities developed by some of the world’s most powerful spy agencies are being thrown at anyone willing to serve their interests, including dictators and killers whose only goal is to cling to power.

    “If these ‘benefactor’ countries truly want to assist other countries to be secure and stable, they should build schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure, and promote democracy and human rights. This is what communities need for safety, security, and prosperity. What we don’t need is powerful and wealthy countries giving money to arms companies to build border control and surveillance infrastructure. This only serves the interests of those powerful, wealthy countries. As our report shows, instead of putting resources into long-term development solutions, such programmes further entrench authoritarianism and spur abuses around the world — the very things which cause insecurity in the first place.”

    #surveillance #surveillance_de_masse #rapport

    Pour télécharger le rapport “Teach ’em to Phish: State Sponsors of Surveillance”:

    ping @fil

    • China Uses DNA to Track Its People, With the Help of American Expertise

      The Chinese authorities turned to a Massachusetts company and a prominent Yale researcher as they built an enormous system of surveillance and control.

      The authorities called it a free health check. Tahir Imin had his doubts.

      They drew blood from the 38-year-old Muslim, scanned his face, recorded his voice and took his fingerprints. They didn’t bother to check his heart or kidneys, and they rebuffed his request to see the results.

      “They said, ‘You don’t have the right to ask about this,’” Mr. Imin said. “‘If you want to ask more,’ they said, ‘you can go to the police.’”

      Mr. Imin was one of millions of people caught up in a vast Chinese campaign of surveillance and oppression. To give it teeth, the Chinese authorities are collecting DNA — and they got unlikely corporate and academic help from the United States to do it.

      China wants to make the country’s Uighurs, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group, more subservient to the Communist Party. It has detained up to a million people in what China calls “re-education” camps, drawing condemnation from human rights groups and a threat of sanctions from the Trump administration.

      Collecting genetic material is a key part of China’s campaign, according to human rights groups and Uighur activists. They say a comprehensive DNA database could be used to chase down any Uighurs who resist conforming to the campaign.

      Police forces in the United States and elsewhere use genetic material from family members to find suspects and solve crimes. Chinese officials, who are building a broad nationwide database of DNA samples, have cited the crime-fighting benefits of China’s own genetic studies.

      To bolster their DNA capabilities, scientists affiliated with China’s police used equipment made by Thermo Fisher, a Massachusetts company. For comparison with Uighur DNA, they also relied on genetic material from people around the world that was provided by #Kenneth_Kidd, a prominent #Yale_University geneticist.

      On Wednesday, #Thermo_Fisher said it would no longer sell its equipment in Xinjiang, the part of China where the campaign to track Uighurs is mostly taking place. The company said separately in an earlier statement to The New York Times that it was working with American officials to figure out how its technology was being used.

      Dr. Kidd said he had been unaware of how his material and know-how were being used. He said he believed Chinese scientists were acting within scientific norms that require informed consent by DNA donors.

      China’s campaign poses a direct challenge to the scientific community and the way it makes cutting-edge knowledge publicly available. The campaign relies in part on public DNA databases and commercial technology, much of it made or managed in the United States. In turn, Chinese scientists have contributed Uighur DNA samples to a global database, potentially violating scientific norms of consent.

      Cooperation from the global scientific community “legitimizes this type of genetic surveillance,” said Mark Munsterhjelm, an assistant professor at the University of Windsor in Ontario who has closely tracked the use of American technology in Xinjiang.

      Swabbing Millions

      In Xinjiang, in northwestern China, the program was known as “#Physicals_for_All.”

      From 2016 to 2017, nearly 36 million people took part in it, according to Xinhua, China’s official news agency. The authorities collected DNA samples, images of irises and other personal data, according to Uighurs and human rights groups. It is unclear whether some residents participated more than once — Xinjiang has a population of about 24.5 million.

      In a statement, the Xinjiang government denied that it collects DNA samples as part of the free medical checkups. It said the DNA machines that were bought by the Xinjiang authorities were for “internal use.”

      China has for decades maintained an iron grip in Xinjiang. In recent years, it has blamed Uighurs for a series of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China, including a 2013 incident in which a driver struck two people in Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

      In late 2016, the Communist Party embarked on a campaign to turn the Uighurs and other largely Muslim minority groups into loyal supporters. The government locked up hundreds of thousands of them in what it called job training camps, touted as a way to escape poverty, backwardness and radical Islam. It also began to take DNA samples.

      In at least some of the cases, people didn’t give up their genetic material voluntarily. To mobilize Uighurs for the free medical checkups, police and local cadres called or sent them text messages, telling them the checkups were required, according to Uighurs interviewed by The Times.

      “There was a pretty strong coercive element to it,” said Darren Byler, an anthropologist at the University of Washington who studies the plight of the Uighurs. “They had no choice.”

      Calling Dr. Kidd

      Kenneth Kidd first visited China in 1981 and remained curious about the country. So when he received an invitation in 2010 for an expenses-paid trip to visit Beijing, he said yes.

      Dr. Kidd is a major figure in the genetics field. The 77-year-old Yale professor has helped to make DNA evidence more acceptable in American courts.

      His Chinese hosts had their own background in law enforcement. They were scientists from the Ministry of Public Security — essentially, China’s police.

      During that trip, Dr. Kidd met Li Caixia, the chief forensic physician of the ministry’s Institute of Forensic Science. The relationship deepened. In December 2014, Dr. Li arrived at Dr. Kidd’s lab for an 11-month stint. She took some DNA samples back to China.

      “I had thought we were sharing samples for collaborative research,” said Dr. Kidd.

      Dr. Kidd is not the only prominent foreign geneticist to have worked with the Chinese authorities. Bruce Budowle, a professor at the University of North Texas, says in his online biography that he “has served or is serving” as a member of an academic committee at the ministry’s Institute of Forensic Science.

      Jeff Carlton, a university spokesman, said in a statement that Professor Budowle’s role with the ministry was “only symbolic in nature” and that he had “done no work on its behalf.”

      “Dr. Budowle and his team abhor the use of DNA technology to persecute ethnic or religious groups,” Mr. Carlton said in the statement. “Their work focuses on criminal investigations and combating human trafficking to serve humanity.”

      Dr. Kidd’s data became part of China’s DNA drive.

      In 2014, ministry researchers published a paper describing a way for scientists to tell one ethnic group from another. It cited, as an example, the ability to distinguish Uighurs from Indians. The authors said they used 40 DNA samples taken from Uighurs in China and samples from other ethnic groups from Dr. Kidd’s Yale lab.

      In patent applications filed in China in 2013 and 2017, ministry researchers described ways to sort people by ethnicity by screening their genetic makeup. They took genetic material from Uighurs and compared it with DNA from other ethnic groups. In the 2017 filing, researchers explained that their system would help in “inferring the geographical origin from the DNA of suspects at crime scenes.”

      For outside comparisons, they used DNA samples provided by Dr. Kidd’s lab, the 2017 filing said. They also used samples from the 1000 Genomes Project, a public catalog of genes from around the world.

      Paul Flicek, member of the steering committee of the 1000 Genomes Project, said that its data was unrestricted and that “there is no obvious problem” if it was being used as a way to determine where a DNA sample came from.

      The data flow also went the other way.

      Chinese government researchers contributed the data of 2,143 Uighurs to the Allele Frequency Database, an online search platform run by Dr. Kidd that was partly funded by the United States Department of Justice until last year. The database, known as Alfred, contains DNA data from more than 700 populations around the world.

      This sharing of data could violate scientific norms of informed consent because it is not clear whether the Uighurs volunteered their DNA samples to the Chinese authorities, said Arthur Caplan, the founding head of the division of medical ethics at New York University’s School of Medicine. He said that “no one should be in a database without express consent.”

      “Honestly, there’s been a kind of naïveté on the part of American scientists presuming that other people will follow the same rules and standards wherever they come from,” Dr. Caplan said.

      Dr. Kidd said he was “not particularly happy” that the ministry had cited him in its patents, saying his data shouldn’t be used in ways that could allow people or institutions to potentially profit from it. If the Chinese authorities used data they got from their earlier collaborations with him, he added, there is little he can do to stop them.

      He said he was unaware of the filings until he was contacted by The Times.

      Dr. Kidd also said he considered his collaboration with the ministry to be no different from his work with police and forensics labs elsewhere. He said governments should have access to data about minorities, not just the dominant ethnic group, in order to have an accurate picture of the whole population.

      As for the consent issue, he said the burden of meeting that standard lay with the Chinese researchers, though he said reports about what Uighurs are subjected to in China raised some difficult questions.

      “I would assume they had appropriate informed consent on the samples,” he said, “though I must say what I’ve been hearing in the news recently about the treatment of the Uighurs raises concerns.”
      Machine Learning

      In 2015, Dr. Kidd and Dr. Budowle spoke at a genomics conference in the Chinese city of Xi’an. It was underwritten in part by Thermo Fisher, a company that has come under intense criticism for its equipment sales in China, and Illumina, a San Diego company that makes gene sequencing instruments. Illumina did not respond to requests for comment.

      China is ramping up spending on health care and research. The Chinese market for gene-sequencing equipment and other technologies was worth $1 billion in 2017 and could more than double in five years, according to CCID Consulting, a research firm. But the Chinese market is loosely regulated, and it isn’t always clear where the equipment goes or to what uses it is put.

      Thermo Fisher sells everything from lab instruments to forensic DNA testing kits to DNA mapping machines, which help scientists decipher a person’s ethnicity and identify diseases to which he or she is particularly vulnerable. China accounted for 10 percent of Thermo Fisher’s $20.9 billion in revenue, according to the company’s 2017 annual report, and it employs nearly 5,000 people there.

      “Our greatest success story in emerging markets continues to be China,” it said in the report.

      China used Thermo Fisher’s equipment to map the genes of its people, according to five Ministry of Public Security patent filings.

      The company has also sold equipment directly to the authorities in Xinjiang, where the campaign to control the Uighurs has been most intense. At least some of the equipment was intended for use by the police, according to procurement documents. The authorities there said in the documents that the machines were important for DNA inspections in criminal cases and had “no substitutes in China.”

      In February 2013, six ministry researchers credited Thermo Fisher’s Applied Biosystems brand, as well as other companies, with helping to analyze the DNA samples of Han, Uighur and Tibetan people in China, according to a patent filing. The researchers said understanding how to differentiate between such DNA samples was necessary for fighting terrorism “because these cases were becoming more difficult to crack.”

      The researchers said they had obtained 95 Uighur DNA samples, some of which were given to them by the police. Other samples were provided by Uighurs voluntarily, they said.

      Thermo Fisher was criticized by Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, and others who asked the Commerce Department to prohibit American companies from selling technology to China that could be used for purposes of surveillance and tracking.

      On Wednesday, Thermo Fisher said it would stop selling its equipment in Xinjiang, a decision it said was “consistent with Thermo Fisher’s values, ethics code and policies.”

      “As the world leader in serving science, we recognize the importance of considering how our products and services are used — or may be used — by our customers,” it said.

      Human rights groups praised Thermo Fisher’s move. Still, they said, equipment and information flows into China should be better monitored, to make sure the authorities elsewhere don’t send them to Xinjiang.

      “It’s an important step, and one hopes that they apply the language in their own statement to commercial activity across China, and that other companies are assessing their sales and operations, especially in Xinjiang,” said Sophie Richardson, the China director of Human Rights Watch.

      American lawmakers and officials are taking a hard look at the situation in Xinjiang. The Trump administration is considering sanctions against Chinese officials and companies over China’s treatment of the Uighurs.

      China’s tracking campaign unnerved people like Tahir Hamut. In May 2017, the police in the city of Urumqi in Xinjiang drew the 49-year-old Uighur’s blood, took his fingerprints, recorded his voice and took a scan of his face. He was called back a month later for what he was told was a free health check at a local clinic.

      Mr. Hamut, a filmmaker who is now living in Virginia, said he saw between 20 to 40 Uighurs in line. He said it was absurd to think that such frightened people had consented to submit their DNA.

      “No one in this situation, not under this much pressure and facing such personal danger, would agree to give their blood samples for research,” Mr. Hamut said. “It’s just inconceivable.”
      #USA #Etats-Unis #ADN #DNA #Ouïghours #université #science #génétique #base_de_données

  • Pétition de personnalités britanniques (Vivienne Westwood, Peter Gabriel, Mike Leigh, Julie Christie, Maxine Peake, Wolf Alice, Roger Waters, Caryl Churchill, Al Kennedy) contre la tenue de l’Eurovision en israel et sa diffusion par la BBC.

    (un article en parlait déjà là: )

    The BBC should press for Eurovision to be moved from Israel
    The Guardian, le 29 janvier 2019

    Traduction en français:

    La BBC devrait faire pression pour que l’Eurovision n’ait pas lieu en Israël
    The Guardian, le 29 janvier 2019

    Peter Ahrends, architect
    Amir Amirani, filmmaker
    Jonathan Arndell, architect, artist
    Roy Battersby, director
    Bloody Knees, band
    brave timbers, band
    Jen Brister, comedian
    Carmen Callil, publisher, writer
    Taghrid Choucair-Vizoso, performer
    Julie Christie, actor
    Ian Christie, film historian, broadcaster
    Chipo Chung, actor
    Caryl Churchill, playwright
    Michael Darlow, tv writer and director
    Paula Darwish, musician
    April De Angelis, playwright
    Tam Dean Burn, actor
    Drones Club, band
    Nancy Elan, violin
    Gareth Evans, producer, curator
    Peter Gabriel, musician, founder WOMAD festival
    Lots Holloway, singer, songwriter
    Rachel Holmes, writer
    Brigid Keenan, author
    Patrick Keiller, artist, filmmaker
    Reem Kelani, musician, broadcaster
    AL Kennedy, writer
    Desmond Lambert, musician
    Mike Leigh, writer, director
    Ken Loach, director
    Sabrina Mahfouz, writer
    Miriam Margolyes, actor
    Yann Martel, writer
    Declan McKenna, singer, songwriter
    JD Meatyard, musician
    Pauline Melville, writer
    Giuliano Modarelli, musician, composer
    Object Blue, DJ
    Maxine Peake, actor
    Jocelyn Pook, composer
    TJ Rehmi, composer, producer
    Reverend & the Makers, band
    Leon Rosselson, songwriter
    Rrose, DJ
    Alexei Sayle, comedian, author
    David Scott, music producer
    Nick Seymour, musician
    Sarah Streatfeild, violin
    Roger Waters, musician
    Vivienne Westwood, fashion designer
    Wolf Alice, band

    #Palestine #Eurovision #BDS #Boycott #BBC #Grande-Bretagne