• How owning an Instagram-famous pet changes your politics.

    Ici on apprend que...
    – l’acquisition de followers instagram est big business
    – il faut une équipe composé de la star, du talent pour dessiner, photogrphier, écrire, entretenir des relations, gérer les finances ...
    – une mission et un message clair qui touchent un naximum d’intéressés
    – ne pas souffrir d’une allergie contre toute forme de commercialisation.

    –> les petits enfants et les animaux domestiques ou vivant en groupes familiales constituent le contenu de base idéal.
    #fcknstgrm #seenthis-pour-les-nuls

    Owners of social media–famous animals say the experience has shaped their politics and beliefs

    Matthew Rozsa, June 23, 2019 11:30PM (UTC)

    I must begin this article with a confession: If it weren’t for my fiancee, I never would have gotten so deep into the world of Instagram-famous pets.

    To say that they give her joy is an understatement. Many restful slumbers have been disrupted by her random exclamations of unbridled happiness, followed by her pressing an iPhone against my face while cooing, “Look at the adorable dog!” or “Isn’t this the most beautiful pig in the world?”

    At first I affectionately teased her for her obsession, but then I began to dig a little deeper. What I soon learned — first from a trip to Canada last year to visit the famous Esther the Wonder Pig and then from my own research — is that animal social media stars are more than just cute pets. They are at the vanguard of a new way of viewing humanity’s relationship with other species — one that has left a positive impact on the larger world.

    “We raise awareness for the Toronto Humane Society and the Basset Hound Rescue of Ontario on our social media platforms through posts and live broadcasts,” Nathan Sidon, who along with Carly Bright co-owns Dean the Basset, told Salon by email. Incidentally, Dean the Basset has over 400,000 followers across social media platforms.

    “We also donate a significant portion of the account’s profits to these charities (over $5,000 in the last 12 months),” Sidon adds. “It’s hard to follow Dean’s account and not see how much love, attention and care he’s showered with daily.... It’s my hope that our greatest contribution to this cause is by setting an example to all pet owners and anyone considering getting a pet of how to be the best pet-owner you can be.”

    According to Sidon, he and Bright believe that “pets are a privilege and that animals in your care should be made a top priority.” He added, though, that “in our case we’ve gone so far that whether or not we’ve become Dean’s slaves is a legitimate question. I think this really shines through on Dean’s account. He’s calling the shots!”

    Salon also emailed Gemma Gené, whose social media presence includes not only pictures of her beloved pug Mochi, but also a comic series that colorfully depicts his ebullient personality.

    “I was working as an architect in my first big job in New York,” Gené recalled when asked about how she met Mochi. “It was my dream job at the time but unfortunately the hours were crazy. I used to finish work at night every day and I had to work most weekends. I missed my dog Mochi so much during work. I always liked comics and used comic as a journal. I started drawing little stories about Mochi on my subway commutes. I posted them on Instagram and eventually they become big enough that I was able to focus on my art work.”

    Now she says that she has 250,000 followers on Instagram, over 50,000 on Facebook and over a 100,000 visits every day.

    “We have participated in several campaigns,” Gené told Salon when asked about her animal rights work. “We were part of Susie’s Senior Dogs and Foster dogs NYC #famousfosters campaign where they pair people who have big audiences with a senior dog to foster. This is a great way to show how important fostering is. We fostered a little senior that we renamed Dorito and was adopted after a very few days.”

    Gené says that she donates her artwork to raise money for dog rescues — including pug rescues.

    “A cause that is very dear to our hearts is the ’Animals are not property’ petition the Animal Legal Defense Fund is working on,” Gené explained. “We try to use our influence to share this message to help change the laws on animals so they stop being considered an object and start having rights.”

    “A big part of our work presents Mochi as a little character with a big personality, much closer to a human than what most people think of dogs. We are trying to show the world that animals are much more than objects and that have many more similarities to us than what we think,” she adds.

    Salon also reached out to Steve Jenkins, who, along with Derek Walter, co-owns Esther the Wonder Pig. They told Salon that their various social media pages have roughly 2,000,000 followers and garner around 450,000 interactions every week.

    “Esther was supposed to be a mini-pig, we never had any intention of anything else,” Jenkins wrote to Salon. “By the time we realized Esther wasn’t what we thought she was, and that she would in fact be many hundreds of pounds, we had fallen in love with her and weren’t willing to give up. Technically having a family member like Esther was illegal where we lived, so we kept it quiet and opted to make a ’little Facebook page’ to show our more removed friends and family what was happening. The page went viral somehow, and all of a sudden we had thousands of people checking in every day to see what she was up to.”

    Their ownership of Esther soon caused them to become full-time animal rights activists, eventually purchasing a farm where they keep pigs, dogs, turkeys, horses and at least one (literally) strutting peacock.

    “We have been able to establish the Happily Ever Esther Farm Sanctuary, where we rescue abused and abandoned farm animals,” Jenkins explained. “We donated the largest CT scanner in the world to our local veterinary hospital. Until then, the didn’t have equipment large enough to properly get proper diagnostic images for an animal Esther’s size. We also established a fund called ’Esther Shares’ that we use to pay the medical bills for other sanctuaries and rescue organization. Last but not least, we use our pages to help people build a relationship with Esther, something that can have a deep and lasting impact on the person’s life because of their newfound love and respect for pigs.”

    Jenkins, like Gené and Sidon, also told Salon that he began to reevaluate how human beings view their relationship with animals.

    “We think everybody has a connection with animals, but we learn over time to love some animals differently than others,” Jenkins explained. “Esther really leveled that playing field in our mind, and elevated farm animals to the position we previously reserved for companion animals like cats and dogs. She ignited a passion within us that we didn’t know we had. It became a mission of our to help others see Esther the way did, and to bring her larger than life personality across in a way that people could relate to.”

    These arguments are what makes the social media movements so powerful — and why, I suspect, my fiancee is so enamored with them. It is easy to objectify animals, to view them as vessels for whatever immediate function they can provide human beings (food, clothing, recreation). Yet by presenting their animals online as hilarious personalities, with quirks and stories of their own worth following, these sites help us see animals as more than just tools of human beings. They become individuals — and, like all individuals, worthy of not just affection, but respect.

    Gené, Jenkins and Sidon also had heartwarming stories about how their social media work had improved the lives of the two-legged animals who visit them.

    “Through photos and videos requested by fans, Dean has helped a teenager ask a girl to prom, surprised a bride on her wedding day, been the theme of a 90 year old woman’s [birthday] party, and the list goes on,” Sidon told Salon. “We’ve also received hundreds of very personal messages from fans around the world telling us that Dean’s account has provided them with a much needed daily dose of positivity that’s helped them when they’re going through difficult times in their life. Suffice to say that Dean gets a lot of love from around the world and he hopes to give the love back!”

    Jenkins had a similar story about Esther.

    “My favorite message ever came from a young mother in the southern United States,” Jenkins recalled. “She was having a rough time emotionally, and found Esther’s page was becoming a bit of a crutch for her. She would check every day to see what we were up to, and engage with our posts as a way to take her mind off stuff. One day she sent a message to let us know that we had been the source of most of her smiles lately. She wanted to thank us for helping keep a positive attitude, and for helping her show her two small boys that it was ok to have two dads [Jenkins is in a same-sex relationship with Walter] and a turkey for a brother. A family is a family no matter what it looks like, and I still well up when I think about her message.”

    Gené discussed how lucky she is to “have a very loving audience,” telling Salon that “we get hundreds of messages a day telling us the impact our comic has on people and they really fuel us to keep going. Some of them particularly warm my heart like when people say that our comics make them smile when they are going through a difficult time, or when they bring back sweet memories of an animal they loved that passed away.”

    She added, “If one day we don’t post anything, we get messages of people checking up on us. That made us realize we have a community that look forward to our posts daily.”

    I should add, on a final personal note, that I do not write this article from a position of presumed moral superiority. Despite vowing to eliminate my meat consumption since I visited the Esther farm last year, I have only been able to somewhat reduce it, and aside from writing pieces like this I can’t claim to have done very much to advance the cause of animal rights in my own life. Sometimes I suspect the plaque which clogs my arteries is karmic, a punishment for sustaining my own life at the expense of those animals who have given theirs, and one that will likely shorten my own time in this world.

    The goal here is not to shame those who eat meat, or search for a firm distinction between companion animals and farm animals. The point is that social media’s animals stars have made more people think of animals as individuals — to start to see them as living souls. That isn’t enough to solve the problems facing our world today, but it’s the only place where we can start.

    #animaux #business #politique #morale #affaires #instagram #médias

  • Next online battle will play on fear of bots, says Facebook official

    New ‘influence operations’ will openly advertise participation in debate instead of hiding it The next wave of “influence operations” like those that Russia used to target the 2016 US election will aim to destabilise debate by making voters think bots are everywhere, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy has said. Nathaniel Gleicher, who runs the company’s response to politically motivated malfeasance on its platform, said groups such as Russia’s Internet Research Agency (IRA) were (...)

    #IRA #bot #manipulation #élections #publicité


  • US Navy says mine pieces suggest Iranian origin

    The United States sought on Wednesday to bolster its case for isolating Iran over its nuclear and regional activities by displaying limpet mine fragments it said came from a damaged oil tanker and saying the ordnance looked Iranian in origin. Nathan Frandino reports.

  • Losing Earth : The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change - The New York Times

    This narrative by Nathaniel Rich is a work of history, addressing the 10-year period from 1979 to 1989: the decisive decade when humankind first came to a broad understanding of the causes and dangers of climate change. Complementing the text is a series of aerial photographs and videos, all shot over the past year by George Steinmetz. With support from the Pulitzer Center, this two-part article is based on 18 months of reporting and well over a hundred interviews. It tracks the efforts of a small group of American scientists, activists and politicians to raise the alarm and stave off catastrophe. It will come as a revelation to many readers — an agonizing revelation — to understand how thoroughly they grasped the problem and how close they came to solving it. Jake Silverstein.

    The first suggestion to Rafe Pomerance that humankind was destroying the conditions necessary for its own survival came on Page 66 of the government publication EPA-600/7-78-019. It was a technical report about coal, bound in a coal-black cover with beige lettering — one of many such reports that lay in uneven piles around Pomerance’s windowless office on the first floor of the Capitol Hill townhouse that, in the late 1970s, served as the Washington headquarters of Friends of the Earth. In the final paragraph of a chapter on environmental regulation, the coal report’s authors noted that the continued use of fossil fuels might, within two or three decades, bring about “significant and damaging” changes to the global atmosphere.

  • Citrus Farmers Facing Deadly Bacteria Turn to Antibiotics, Alarming Health Officials - The New York Times

    Since 2016, the Environmental Protection Agency has allowed Florida citrus farmers to use the drugs, streptomycin and oxytetracycline, on an emergency basis, but the agency is now significantly expanding their permitted use across 764,000 acres in California, Texas and other citrus-producing states. The agency approved the expanded use despite strenuous objections from the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which warn that the heavy use of antimicrobial drugs in agriculture could spur germs to mutate so they become resistant to the drugs, threatening the lives of millions of people.

    The E.P.A. has proposed allowing as much as 650,000 pounds of streptomycin to be sprayed on citrus crops each year. By comparison, Americans annually use 14,000 pounds of aminoglycosides, the class of antibiotics that includes streptomycin.

    The European Union has banned the agricultural use of both streptomycin and oxytetracycline. So, too, has Brazil, where orange growers are battling the same bacterial scourge, called huanglongbing, also commonly known as citrus greening disease.

    “To allow such a massive increase of these drugs in agriculture is a recipe for disaster,” said Steven Roach, a senior analyst for the advocacy group Keep Antibiotics Working. “It’s putting the needs of the citrus industry ahead of human health.”

    But for Florida’s struggling orange and grapefruit growers, the approvals could not come soon enough. The desperation is palpable across the state’s sandy midsection, a flat expanse once lushly blanketed with citrus trees, most of them the juice oranges that underpin a $7.2 billion industry employing 50,000 people, about 40,000 fewer than it did two decades ago. These days, the landscape is flecked with abandoned groves and scraggly trees whose elongated yellow leaves are a telltale sign of the disease.

    The decision paves the way for the largest use of medically important antibiotics in cash crops, and it runs counter to other efforts by the federal government to reduce the use of lifesaving antimicrobial drugs. Since 2017, the F.D.A. has banned the use of antibiotics to promote growth in farm animals, a shift that has led to a 33 percent drop in sales of antibiotics for livestock.

    The use of antibiotics on citrus adds a wrinkle to an intensifying debate about whether the heavy use of antimicrobials in agriculture endangers human health by neutering the drugs’ germ-slaying abilities. Much of that debate has focused on livestock farmers, who use 80 percent of antibiotics sold in the United States.

    Although the research on antibiotic use in crops is not as extensive, scientists say the same dynamic is already playing out with the fungicides that are liberally sprayed on vegetables and flowers across the world. Researchers believe the surge in a drug-resistant lung infection called aspergillosis is associated with agricultural fungicides, and many suspect the drugs are behind the rise of Candida auris, a deadly fungal infection.

    Créer du doute là où il n’y en a pas, au nom de la science évidemment... une science « complète » qui est impossible avec le vivant, donc un argument qui pourra toujours servir.

    In its evaluation for the expanded use of streptomycin, the E.P.A., which largely relied on data from pesticide makers, said the drug quickly dissipated in the environment. Still, the agency noted that there was a “medium” risk from extending the use of such drugs to citrus crops, and it acknowledged the lack of research on whether a massive increase in spraying would affect the bacteria that infect humans.

    “The science of resistance is evolving and there is a high level of uncertainty in how and when resistance occurs,” the agency wrote.

    Since its arrival in Florida was first confirmed in 2005, citrus greening has infected more than 90 percent of the state’s grapefruit and orange trees. The pathogen is spread by a tiny insect, the Asian citrus psyllid, that infects trees as it feeds on young leaves and stems, but the evidence of disease can take months to emerge. Infected trees prematurely drop their fruit, most of it too bitter for commercial use.

    Taw Richardson, the chief executive of ArgoSource, which makes the antibiotics used by farmers, said the company has yet to see any resistance in the 14 years since it began selling bactericides. “We don’t take antibiotic resistance lightly,” he said. “The key is to target the things that contribute to resistance and not get distracted by things that don’t.”

    Many scientists disagree with such assessments, noting the mounting resistance to both drugs in humans. They also cite studies suggesting that low concentrations of antibiotics that slowly seep into the environment over an extended period of time can significantly accelerate resistance.

    Scientists at the C.D.C. were especially concerned about streptomycin, which can remain in the soil for weeks and is allowed to be sprayed several times a season. As part of its consultation with the F.D.A., the C.D.C. conducted experiments with the two drugs and found widespread resistance to them.

    Although the Trump administration has been pressing the E.P.A. to loosen regulations, Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, said the agency’s pesticides office had a long track record of favoring the interests of chemical and pesticide companies. “What’s in the industry’s best interest will win out over public safety nine times out of 10,” he said.

    A spokesman for the E.P.A. said the agency had sought to address the C.D.C.’s and F.D.A.’s concerns about antibiotic resistance by ordering additional monitoring and by limiting its approvals to seven years.

    #Antibiotiques #Citrons #Agrumes #Pesticides #Conflits_intérêt #Pseudo-science

  • #Facebook busts Israeli campaign to disrupt #elections in African, Asian and Latin American nations - Israel News -

    Dozens of accounts, pages and groups operated by private firm peddling #fake_news were deleted, tech giant says


    Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy, told reporters that the tech giant had purged 65 Israeli accounts, 161 pages, dozens of groups and four Instagram accounts. Many were linked to the Archimedes Group, a Tel Aviv-based political consulting and #lobbying firm that boasts of its social media skills and ability to “change reality.”

  • Who Was Shakespeare? Could the Author Have Been a Woman? - The Atlantic

    On a spring night in 2018, I stood on a Manhattan sidewalk with friends, reading Shakespeare aloud. We were in line to see an adaptation of Macbeth and had decided to pass the time refreshing our memories of the play’s best lines. I pulled up Lady Macbeth’s soliloquy on my iPhone. “Come, you spirits / That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,” I read, thrilled once again by the incantatory power of the verse. I remembered where I was when I first heard those lines: in my 10th-grade English class, startled out of my adolescent stupor by this woman rebelling magnificently and malevolently against her submissive status. “Make thick my blood, / Stop up th’ access and passage to remorse.” Six months into the #MeToo movement, her fury and frustration felt newly resonant.

    To hear more feature stories, see our full list or get the Audm iPhone app.

    Pulled back into plays I’d studied in college and graduate school, I found myself mesmerized by Lady Macbeth and her sisters in the Shakespeare canon. Beatrice, in Much Ado About Nothing, raging at the limitations of her sex (“O God, that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the marketplace”). Rosalind, in As You Like It, affecting the swagger of masculine confidence to escape those limitations (“We’ll have a swashing and a martial outside, / As many other mannish cowards have / That do outface it with their semblances”). Isabella, in Measure for Measure, fearing no one will believe her word against Angelo’s, rapist though he is (“To whom should I complain? Did I tell this, / Who would believe me?”). Kate, in The Taming of the Shrew, refusing to be silenced by her husband (“My tongue will tell the anger of my heart, / Or else my heart concealing it will break”). Emilia, in one of her last speeches in Othello before Iago kills her, arguing for women’s equality (“Let husbands know / Their wives have sense like them”).
    I was reminded of all the remarkable female friendships, too: Beatrice and Hero’s allegiance; Emilia’s devotion to her mistress, Desdemona; Paulina’s brave loyalty to Hermione in The Winter’s Tale; and plenty more. (“Let’s consult together against this greasy knight,” resolve the merry wives of Windsor, revenging themselves on Falstaff.) These intimate female alliances are fresh inventions—they don’t exist in the literary sources from which many of the plays are drawn. And when the plays lean on historical sources (Plutarch, for instance), they feminize them, portraying legendary male figures through the eyes of mothers, wives, and lovers. “Why was Shakespeare able to see the woman’s position, write entirely as if he were a woman, in a way that none of the other playwrights of the age were able to?” In her book about the plays’ female characters, Tina Packer, the founding artistic director of Shakespeare & Company, asked the question very much on my mind.

    Doubts about whether William Shakespeare (who was born in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1564 and died in 1616) really wrote the works attributed to him are almost as old as the writing itself. Alternative contenders—Francis Bacon; Christopher Marlowe; and Edward de Vere, the 17th earl of Oxford, prominent among them—continue to have champions, whose fervor can sometimes border on fanaticism. In response, orthodox Shakespeare scholars have settled into dogmatism of their own. Even to dabble in authorship questions is considered a sign of bad faith, a blinkered failure to countenance genius in a glover’s son. The time had come, I felt, to tug at the blinkers of both camps and reconsider the authorship debate: Had anyone ever proposed that the creator of those extraordinary women might be a woman? Each of the male possibilities requires an elaborate theory to explain his use of another’s name. None of the candidates has succeeded in dethroning the man from Stratford. Yet a simple reason would explain a playwright’s need for a pseudonym in Elizabethan England: being female.
    Who was this woman writing “immortal work” in the same year that Shakespeare’s name first appeared in print?

    Long before Tina Packer marveled at the bard’s uncanny insight, others were no less awed by the empathy that pervades the work. “One would think that he had been Metamorphosed from a Man to a Woman,” wrote Margaret Cavendish, the 17th-century philosopher and playwright. The critic John Ruskin said, “Shakespeare has no heroes—he has only heroines.” A striking number of those heroines refuse to obey rules. At least 10 defy their fathers, bucking betrothals they don’t like to find their own paths to love. Eight disguise themselves as men, outwitting patriarchal controls—more gender-swapping than can be found in the work of any previous English playwright. Six lead armies.

    The prevailing view, however, has been that no women in Renaissance England wrote for the theater, because that was against the rules. Religious verse and translation were deemed suitable female literary pursuits; “closet dramas,” meant only for private reading, were acceptable. The stage was off-limits. Yet scholars have lately established that women were involved in the business of acting companies as patrons, shareholders, suppliers of costumes, and gatherers of entrance fees. What’s more, 80 percent of the plays printed in the 1580s were written anonymously, and that number didn’t fall below 50 percent until the early 1600s. At least one eminent Shakespeare scholar, Phyllis Rackin, of the University of Pennsylvania, challenges the blanket assumption that the commercial drama pouring forth in the period bore no trace of a female hand. So did Virginia Woolf, even as she sighed over the obstacles that would have confronted a female Shakespeare: “Undoubtedly, I thought, looking at the shelf where there are no plays by women, her work would have gone unsigned.”

    A tantalizing nudge lies buried in the writings of Gabriel Harvey, a well-known Elizabethan literary critic. In 1593, he referred cryptically to an “excellent Gentlewoman” who had written three sonnets and a comedy. “I dare not Particularise her Description,” he wrote, even as he heaped praise on her.

    All her conceits are illuminate with the light of Reason; all her speeches beautified with the grace of Affability … In her mind there appeareth a certain heavenly Logic; in her tongue & pen a divine Rhetoric … I dare undertake with warrant, whatsoever she writeth must needs remain an immortal work, and will leave, in the activest world, an eternal memory of the silliest vermin that she should vouchsafe to grace with her beautiful and allective style, as ingenious as elegant.

    Who was this woman writing “immortal work” in the same year that Shakespeare’s name first appeared in print, on the poem “Venus and Adonis,” a scandalous parody of masculine seduction tales (in which the woman forces herself on the man)? Harvey’s tribute is extraordinary, yet orthodox Shakespeareans and anti-Stratfordians alike have almost entirely ignored it.

    Until recently, that is, when a few bold outliers began to advance the case that Shakespeare might well have been a woman. One candidate is Mary Sidney, the countess of Pembroke (and beloved sister of the celebrated poet Philip Sidney)—one of the most educated women of her time, a translator and poet, and the doyenne of the Wilton Circle, a literary salon dedicated to galvanizing an English cultural renaissance. Clues beckon, not least that Sidney and her husband were the patrons of one of the first theater companies to perform Shakespeare’s plays. Was Shakespeare’s name useful camouflage, allowing her to publish what she otherwise couldn’t?
    Shakespeare’s life is remarkably well documented—yet no records from his lifetime identify him unequivocally as a writer.

    But the candidate who intrigued me more was a woman as exotic and peripheral as Sidney was pedigreed and prominent. Not long after my Macbeth outing, I learned that Shakespeare’s Globe, in London, had set out to explore this figure’s input to the canon. The theater’s summer 2018 season concluded with a new play, Emilia, about a contemporary of Shakespeare’s named Emilia Bassano. Born in London in 1569 to a family of Venetian immigrants—musicians and instrument-makers who were likely Jewish—she was one of the first women in England to publish a volume of poetry (suitably religious yet startlingly feminist, arguing for women’s “Libertie” and against male oppression). Her existence was unearthed in 1973 by the Oxford historian A. L. Rowse, who speculated that she was Shakespeare’s mistress, the “dark lady” described in the sonnets. In Emilia, the playwright Morgan Lloyd Malcolm goes a step further: Her Shakespeare is a plagiarist who uses Bassano’s words for Emilia’s famous defense of women in Othello.

    Could Bassano have contributed even more widely and directly? The idea felt like a feminist fantasy about the past—but then, stories about women’s lost and obscured achievements so often have a dreamlike quality, unveiling a history different from the one we’ve learned. Was I getting carried away, reinventing Shakespeare in the image of our age? Or was I seeing past gendered assumptions to the woman who—like Shakespeare’s heroines—had fashioned herself a clever disguise? Perhaps the time was finally ripe for us to see her.

    The ranks of Shakespeare skeptics comprise a kind of literary underworld—a cross-disciplinary array of academics, actors (Derek Jacobi and Mark Rylance are perhaps the best known), writers, teachers, lawyers, a few Supreme Court justices (Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens). Look further back and you’ll find such illustrious names as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, Henry James, Sigmund Freud, Helen Keller, and Charlie Chaplin. Their ideas about the authorship of the plays and poems differ, but they concur that Shakespeare is not the man who wrote them.

    Their doubt is rooted in an empirical conundrum. Shakespeare’s life is remarkably well documented, by the standards of the period—yet no records from his lifetime identify him unequivocally as a writer. The more than 70 documents that exist show him as an actor, a shareholder in a theater company, a moneylender, and a property investor. They show that he dodged taxes, was fined for hoarding grain during a shortage, pursued petty lawsuits, and was subject to a restraining order. The profile is remarkably coherent, adding up to a mercenary impresario of the Renaissance entertainment industry. What’s missing is any sign that he wrote.

    From January 1863: Nathaniel Hawthorne considers authorship while visiting Stratford-upon-Avon

    No such void exists for other major writers of the period, as a meticulous scholar named Diana Price has demonstrated. Many left fewer documents than Shakespeare did, but among them are manuscripts, letters, and payment records proving that writing was their profession. For example, court records show payment to Ben Jonson for “those services of his wit & pen.” Desperate to come up with comparable material to round out Shakespeare, scholars in the 18th and 19th centuries forged evidence—later debunked—of a writerly life.

    To be sure, Shakespeare’s name can be found linked, during his lifetime, to written works. With Love’s Labour’s Lost, in 1598, it started appearing on the title pages of one-play editions called “quartos.” (Several of the plays attributed to Shakespeare were first published anonymously.) Commentators at the time saluted him by name, praising “Shakespeare’s fine filed phrase” and “honey-tongued Shakespeare.” But such evidence proves attribution, not actual authorship—as even some orthodox Shakespeare scholars grant. “I would love to find a contemporary document that said William Shakespeare was the dramatist of Stratford-upon-Avon written during his lifetime,” Stanley Wells, a professor emeritus at the University of Birmingham’s Shakespeare Institute, has said. “That would shut the buggers up!”
    October 1991 Atlantic cover

    In 1991, The Atlantic commissioned two pieces from admittedly partisan authors, Irving Matus and Tom Bethell, to examine and debate the argument:
    In Defense of Shakespeare
    The Case for Oxford

    By contrast, more than a few of Shakespeare’s contemporaries are on record suggesting that his name got affixed to work that wasn’t his. In 1591, the dramatist Robert Greene wrote of the practice of “underhand brokery”—of poets who “get some other Batillus to set his name to their verses.” (Batillus was a mediocre Roman poet who claimed some of Virgil’s verses as his own.) The following year, he warned fellow playwrights about an “upstart Crow, beautified with our feathers,” who thinks he is the “onely Shake-scene in a countrey.” Most scholars agree that the “Crow” is Shakespeare, then an actor in his late 20s, and conclude that the new-hatched playwright was starting to irk established figures. Anti-Stratfordians see something else: In Aesop’s fables, the crow was a proud strutter who stole the feathers of others; Horace’s crow, in his epistles, was a plagiarist. Shakespeare was being attacked, they say, not as a budding dramatist, but as a paymaster taking credit for others’ work. “Seeke you better Maisters,” Greene advised, urging his colleagues to cease writing for the Crow.

    Ben Jonson, among others, got in his digs, too. Scholars agree that the character of Sogliardo in Every Man Out of His Humour—a country bumpkin “without brain, wit, anything, indeed, ramping to gentility”—is a parody of Shakespeare, a social climber whose pursuit of a coat of arms was common lore among his circle of actors. In a satirical poem called “On Poet-Ape,” Jonson was likely taking aim at Shakespeare the theater-world wheeler-dealer. This poet-ape, Jonson wrote, “from brokage is become so bold a thief,”

    At first he made low shifts, would pick and glean,
    Buy the reversion of old plays; now grown
    To a little wealth, and credit in the scene,
    He takes up all, makes each man’s wit his own

    What to make of the fact that Jonson changed his tune in the prefatory material that he contributed to the First Folio of plays when it appeared seven years after Shakespeare’s death? Jonson’s praise there did more than attribute the work to Shakespeare. It declared his art unmatched: “He was not of an age, but for all time!” The anti-Stratfordian response is to note the shameless hype at the heart of the Folio project. “Whatever you do, Buy,” the compilers urged in their dedication, intent on a hard sell for a dramatist who, doubters emphasize, was curiously unsung at his death. The Folio’s introductory effusions, they argue, contain double meanings. Jonson tells readers, for example, to find Shakespeare not in his portrait “but his Booke,” seeming to undercut the relation between the man and the work. And near the start of his over-the-top tribute, Jonson riffs on the unreliability of extravagant praise, “which doth ne’er advance / The truth.”

    From September 1904: Ralph Waldo Emerson celebrates Shakespeare

    The authorship puzzles don’t end there. How did the man born in Stratford acquire the wide-ranging knowledge on display in the plays—of the Elizabethan court, as well as of multiple languages, the law, astronomy, music, the military, and foreign lands, especially northern Italian cities? The author’s linguistic brilliance shines in words and sayings imported from foreign vocabularies, but Shakespeare wasn’t educated past the age of 13. Perhaps he traveled, joined the army, worked as a tutor, or all three, scholars have proposed. Yet no proof exists of any of those experiences, despite, as the Oxford historian Hugh Trevor-Roper pointed out in an essay, “the greatest battery of organized research that has ever been directed upon a single person.”
    Emilia Bassano’s life encompassed the breadth of the Shakespeare canon: its low-class references and knowledge of the court; its Italian sources and Jewish allusions; its music and feminism.

    In fact, a document that does exist—Shakespeare’s will—would seem to undercut such hypotheses. A wealthy man when he retired to Stratford, he was meticulous about bequeathing his properties and possessions (his silver, his second-best bed). Yet he left behind not a single book, though the plays draw on hundreds of texts, including some—in Italian and French—that hadn’t yet been translated into English. Nor did he leave any musical instruments, though the plays use at least 300 musical terms and refer to 26 instruments. He remembered three actor-owners in his company, but no one in the literary profession. Strangest of all, he made no mention of manuscripts or writing. Perhaps as startling as the gaps in his will, Shakespeare appears to have neglected his daughters’ education—an incongruity, given the erudition of so many of the playwright’s female characters. One signed with her mark, the other with a signature a scholar has called “painfully formed.”

    “Weak and unconvincing” was Trevor-Roper’s verdict on the case for Shakespeare. My delving left me in agreement, not that the briefs for the male alternatives struck me as compelling either. Steeped in the plays, I felt their author would surely join me in bridling at the Stratfordians’ unquestioning worship at the shrine—their arrogant dismissal of skeptics as mere deluded “buggers,” or worse. (“Is there any more fanatic zealot than the priest-like defender of a challenged creed?” asked Richmond Crinkley, a former director of programs at the Folger Shakespeare Library who was nonetheless sympathetic to the anti-Stratfordian view.) To appreciate how belief blossoms into fact—how readily myths about someone get disseminated as truth—one can’t do better than to read Shakespeare. Just think of how obsessed the work is with mistaken identities, concealed women, forged and anonymous documents—with the error of trusting in outward appearances. What if searchers for the real Shakespeare simply haven’t set their sights on the right pool of candidates?

    Read: An interview with the author of ‘The Shakespeare Wars’

    I met Emilia Bassano’s most ardent champion at Alice’s Tea Cup, which seemed unexpectedly apt: A teahouse on Manhattan’s Upper West Side, it has quotes from Alice in Wonderland scrawled across the walls. (“off with their heads!”) John Hudson, an Englishman in his 60s who pursued a degree at the Shakespeare Institute in a mid-career swerve, had been on the Bassano case for years, he told me. In 2014, he published Shakespeare’s Dark Lady: Amelia Bassano Lanier, the Woman Behind Shakespeare’s Plays? His zeal can sometimes get the better of him, yet he emphasizes that his methods and findings are laid out “for anyone … to refute if they wish.” Like Alice’s rabbit hole, Bassano’s case opened up new and richly disorienting perspectives—on the plays, on the ways we think about genius and gender, and on a fascinating life.

    Hudson first learned of Bassano from A. L. Rowse, who discovered mention of her in the notebooks of an Elizabethan physician and astrologer named Simon Forman. In her teens, she became the mistress of Henry Carey, Lord Hunsdon, the master of court entertainment and patron of Shakespeare’s acting company. And that is only the start. Whether or not Bassano was Shakespeare’s lover (scholars now dismiss Rowse’s claim), the discernible contours of her biography supply what the available material about Shakespeare’s life doesn’t: circumstantial evidence of opportunities to acquire an impressive expanse of knowledge.

    Bassano lived, Hudson points out, “an existence on the boundaries of many different social worlds,” encompassing the breadth of the Shakespeare canon: its coarse, low-class references and its intimate knowledge of the court; its Italian sources and its Jewish allusions; its music and its feminism. And her imprint, as Hudson reads the plays, extends over a long period. He notes the many uses of her name, citing several early on—for instance, an Emilia in The Comedy of Errors. (Emilia, the most common female name in the plays alongside Katherine, wasn’t used in the 16th century by any other English playwright.) Titus Andronicus features a character named Bassianus, which was the original Roman name of Bassano del Grappa, her family’s hometown before their move to Venice. Later, in The Merchant of Venice, the romantic hero is a Venetian named Bassanio, an indication that the author perhaps knew of the Bassanos’ connection to Venice. (Bassanio is a spelling of their name in some records.)

    Further on, in Othello, another Emilia appears—Iago’s wife. Her famous speech against abusive husbands, Hudson notes, doesn’t show up until 1623, in the First Folio, included among lines that hadn’t appeared in an earlier version (lines that Stratfordians assume—without any proof—were written before Shakespeare’s death). Bassano was still alive, and by then had known her share of hardship at the hands of men. More to the point, she had already spoken out, in her 1611 book of poetry, against men who “do like vipers deface the wombs wherein they were bred.”

    Prodded by Hudson, you can discern traces of Bassano’s own life trajectory in particular works across the canon. In All’s Well That Ends Well, a lowborn girl lives with a dowager countess and a general named Bertram. When Bassano’s father, Baptista, died in 1576, Emilia, then 7, was taken in by Susan Bertie, the dowager countess of Kent. The countess’s brother, Peregrine Bertie, was—like the fictional Bertram—a celebrated general. In the play, the countess tells how a father “famous … in his profession” left “his sole child … bequeathed to my overlooking. I have those hopes of her good that her education promises.” Bassano received a remarkable humanist education with the countess. In her book of poetry, she praised her guardian as “the Mistris of my youth, / The noble guide of my ungovern’d dayes.”
    Bassano’s life sheds possible light on the plays’ preoccupation with women caught in forced or loveless marriages.

    As for the celebrated general, Hudson seizes on the possibility that Bassano’s ears, and perhaps eyes, were opened by Peregrine Bertie as well. In 1582, Bertie was named ambassador to Denmark by the queen and sent to the court at Elsinore—the setting of Hamlet. Records show that the trip included state dinners with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, whose names appear in the play. Because emissaries from the same two families later visited the English court, the trip isn’t decisive, but another encounter is telling: Bertie met with the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, whose astronomical theories influenced the play. Was Bassano (then just entering her teens) on the trip? Bertie was accompanied by a “whole traine,” but only the names of important gentlemen are recorded. In any case, Hudson argues, she would have heard tales on his return.

    Later, as the mistress of Henry Carey (43 years her senior), Bassano gained access to more than the theater world. Carey, the queen’s cousin, held various legal and military positions. Bassano was “favoured much of her Majesty and of many noblemen,” the physician Forman noted, indicating the kind of extensive aristocratic associations that only vague guesswork can accord to Shakespeare. His company didn’t perform at court until Christmas of 1594, after several of the plays informed by courtly life had already been written. Shakespeare’s history plays, concerned as they are with the interactions of the governing class, presume an insider perspective on aristocratic life. Yet mere court performances wouldn’t have enabled such familiarity, and no trace exists of Shakespeare’s presence in any upper-class household.

    And then, in late 1592, Bassano (now 23) was expelled from court. She was pregnant. Carey gave her money and jewels and, for appearance’s sake, married her off to Alphonso Lanier, a court musician. A few months later, she had a son. Despite the glittering dowry, Lanier must not have been pleased. “Her husband hath dealt hardly with her,” Forman wrote, “and spent and consumed her goods.”

    Bassano was later employed in a noble household, probably as a music tutor, and roughly a decade after that opened a school. Whether she accompanied her male relatives—whose consort of recorder players at the English court lasted 90 years—on their trips back to northern Italy isn’t known. But the family link to the home country offers support for the fine-grained familiarity with the region that (along with in-depth musical knowledge) any plausible candidate for authorship would seem to need—just what scholars have had to strain to establish for Shakespeare. (Perhaps, theories go, he chatted with travelers or consulted books.) In Othello, for example, Iago gives a speech that precisely describes a fresco in Bassano del Grappa—also the location of a shop owned by Giovanni Otello, a likely source of the title character’s name.

    Her Bassano lineage—scholars suggest the family were conversos, converted or hidden Jews presenting as Christians—also helps account for the Jewish references that scholars of the plays have noted. The plea in The Merchant of Venice for the equality and humanity of Jews, a radical departure from typical anti-Semitic portrayals of the period, is well known. “Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?” Shylock asks. “If you prick us, do we not bleed?” A Midsummer Night’s Dream draws from a passage in the Talmud about marriage vows; spoken Hebrew is mixed into the nonsense language of All’s Well That Ends Well.
    Stephen Doyle

    What’s more, the Bassano family’s background suggests a source close to home for the particular interest in dark figures in the sonnets, Othello, and elsewhere. A 1584 document about the arrest of two Bassano men records them as “black”—among Elizabethans, the term could apply to anyone darker than the fair-skinned English, including those with a Mediterranean complexion. (The fellows uttered lines that could come straight from a comic interlude in the plays: “We have as good friends in the court as thou hast and better too … Send us to ward? Thou wert as good kiss our arse.”) In Love’s Labour’s Lost, the noblemen derisively compare Rosaline, the princess’s attendant, to “chimney-sweepers” and “colliers” (coal miners). The king joins in, telling Berowne, who is infatuated with her, “Thy love is black as ebony,” to which the young lord responds, “O wood divine!”

    Bassano’s life sheds possible light, too, on another outsider theme: the plays’ preoccupation with women caught in forced or loveless marriages. Hudson sees her misery reflected in the sonnets, thought to have been written from the early 1590s to the early 1600s. “When, in disgrace with fortune and men’s eyes, / I all alone beweep my outcast state, /And trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries, /And look upon myself and curse my fate,” reads sonnet 29. (When Maya Angelou first encountered the poem as a child, she thought Shakespeare must have been a black girl who had been sexually abused: “How else could he know what I know?”) For Shakespeare, those years brought a rise in status: In 1596, he was granted a coat of arms, and by 1597, he was rich enough to buy the second-largest house in Stratford.

    Read: What Maya Angelou meant when she said ‘Shakespeare must be a black girl’

    In what is considered an early or muddled version of The Taming of the Shrew, a man named Alphonso (as was Bassano’s husband) tries to marry off his three daughters, Emilia, Kate, and Philema. Emilia drops out in the later version, and the father is now called Baptista (the name of Bassano’s father). As a portrait of a husband dealing “hardly” with a wife, the play is horrifying. Yet Kate’s speech of submission, with its allusions to the Letters of Paul, is slippery: Even as she exaggeratedly parrots the Christian doctrine of womanly subjection, she is anything but dutifully silent.

    Shakespeare’s women repeatedly subvert such teachings, perhaps most radically in The Winter’s Tale, another drama of male cruelty. There the noblewoman Paulina, scorned by King Leontes as “a most intelligencing bawd” with a “boundless tongue,” bears fierce witness against him (no man dares to) when he wrongly accuses Queen Hermione of adultery and imprisons her. As in so many of the comedies, a more enlightened society emerges in the end because the women’s values triumph.

    I was stunned to realize that the year The Winter’s Tale was likely completed, 1611, was the same year Bassano published her book of poetry, Salve Deus Rex Judæorum. Her writing style bears no obvious resemblance to Shakespeare’s in his plays, though Hudson strains to suggest similarities. The overlap lies in the feminist content. Bassano’s poetry registers as more than conventional religious verse designed to win patronage (she dedicates it to nine women, Mary Sidney included, fashioning a female literary community). Scholars have observed that it reads as a “transgressive” defense of Eve and womankind. Like a cross-dressing Shakespearean heroine, Bassano refuses to play by the rules, heretically reinterpreting scripture. “If Eve did err, it was for knowledge sake,” she writes. Arguing that the crucifixion, a crime committed by men, was a greater crime than Eve’s, she challenges the basis of men’s “tyranny” over women.

    “I always feel something Italian, something Jewish about Shakespeare,” Jorge Luis Borges told The Paris Review in 1966. “Perhaps Englishmen admire him because of that, because it’s so unlike them.” Borges didn’t mention feeling “something female” about the bard, yet that response has never ceased to be part of Shakespeare’s allure—embodiment though he is of the patriarchal authority of the Western canon. What would the revelation of a woman’s hand at work mean, aside from the loss of a prime tourist attraction in Stratford-upon-Avon? Would the effect be a blow to the cultural patriarchy, or the erosion of the canon’s status? Would (male) myths of inexplicable genius take a hit? Would women at last claim their rightful authority as historical and intellectual forces?

    I was curious to take the temperature of the combative authorship debate as women edge their way into it. Over more tea, I tested Hudson’s room for flexibility. Could the plays’ many connections to Bassano be explained by simply assuming the playwright knew her well? “Shakespeare would have had to run to her every few minutes for a musical reference or an Italian pun,” he said. I caught up with Mark Rylance, the actor and former artistic director of the Globe, in the midst of rehearsals for Othello (whose plot, he noted, comes from an Italian text that didn’t exist in English). A latitudinarian doubter—embracing the inquiry, not any single candidate—Rylance has lately observed that the once heretical notion of collaboration between Shakespeare and other writers “is now accepted, pursued and published by leading orthodox scholars.” He told me that “Emilia should be studied by anyone interested in the creation of the plays.” David Scott Kastan, a well-known Shakespeare scholar at Yale, urged further exploration too, though he wasn’t ready to anoint her bard. “What’s clear is that it’s important to know more about her,” he said, and even got playful with pronouns: “The more we know about her and the world she lived in, the more we’ll know about Shakespeare, whoever she was.”
    Related Stories

    Such Ado: The Fight for Shakespeare’s Puns
    Shakespeare in Love, or in Context

    In the fall, I joined the annual meeting of the Shakespeare Authorship Trust—a gathering of skeptics at the Globe—feeling excited that gender would be at the top of the agenda. Some eyebrows were raised even in this company, but enthusiasm ran high. “People have been totally frustrated with authorship debates that go nowhere, but that’s because there have been 200 years of bad candidates,” one participant from the University of Toronto exclaimed. “They didn’t want to see women in this,” he reflected. “It’s a tragedy of history.”

    He favored Sidney. Others were eager to learn about Bassano, and with collaboration in mind, I wondered whether the two women had perhaps worked together, or as part of a group. I thought of Bassano’s Salve Deus, in which she writes that men have wrongly taken credit for knowledge: “Yet Men will boast of Knowledge, which he tooke / From Eve’s faire hand, as from a learned Booke.”

    The night after the meeting, I went to a performance of Antony and Cleopatra at the National Theatre. I sat enthralled, still listening for the poet in her words, trying to catch her reflection in some forgotten bit of verse. “Give me my robe, put on my crown,” cried the queen, “I have / Immortal longings in me.” There she was, kissing her ladies goodbye, raising the serpent to her breast. “I am fire and air.”

    • Invisibilisées dans les maladies non reconnues mais sur-visibilisées dans les maladies imaginaires qu’on leur impute pour leur détruire la vie.

      Le désarroi des familles d’enfants autistes face aux soupçons des services sociaux

      Des parents dénoncent des enquêtes menées à leur encontre par la protection de l’enfance, en raison de la méconnaissance du handicap de leur enfant.

      « Mère fusionnelle », « nomadisme médical », « syndrome de Münchhausen par procuration »… Les mêmes termes se retrouvent, de dossier en dossier, pour caractériser les comportements des parents d’enfants autistes qui se retrouvent dans le viseur de l’aide sociale à l’enfance (ASE). De nombreuses familles dénoncent depuis des années, sans rencontrer grand écho, l’acharnement dont elles s’estiment victimes et qu’elles attribuent à la méconnaissance, en France, des manifestations des troubles du spectre autistique (TSA).

      Pour elles comme pour les autres, bien souvent, tout commence avec un courrier, envoyé par les services sociaux du département. La famille destinataire apprend à sa lecture qu’une « information préoccupante », concernant un ou plusieurs de ses enfants, a été émise à son encontre, sans qu’elle sache nécessairement par qui, ni pourquoi. Ces procédures d’alerte, qui permettent de signaler un enfant en danger ou en risque de danger, peuvent être faites par les institutions en contact avec les enfants – l’éducation nationale étant un gros pourvoyeur – ou par des particuliers. Elles déclenchent une enquête administrative qui a pour objectif, justement, d’évaluer le danger supposé, et peut à terme conduire à une saisie du parquet.
      « Faillite collective »

      C’est le début de la « spirale infernale », résume Marion Aubry, vice-présidente de TouPi, une association d’entraide. Les comportements des autistes (tri alimentaire, hypersensibilité sensorielle) peuvent être confondus, pour un œil non averti, avec des signes de maltraitance ou de défaillance éducative.
      Lire aussi De nouvelles recommandations pour dépister l’autisme chez l’enfant

      Pour Julie (elle a requis l’anonymat), mère de trois enfants issus de deux unions, l’engrenage a débuté fin 2011. Alertée par le médecin de la crèche d’un possible autisme concernant son fils, elle se rend au centre d’action médico-sociale précoce le plus proche. « A l’époque, mon plus jeune fils avait 3 ans et demi, 4 ans. Il ne me regardait jamais, il pleurait énormément, avait une façon de jouer très spécifique, en alignant les objets. Il pouvait rester des heures à la même place sans bouger. Tout le tableau clinique de l’autisme, comme je l’ai appris plus tard. » Mais la pédopsychiatre balaie d’un revers de main ses soupçons, évoque une « dysharmonie évolutive ». Elle accuse Julie de projeter des angoisses sur ses enfants et de vouloir à tout prix qu’ils soient malades. Le fameux syndrome de Münchhausen par procuration.

      L’article sous #paywall parle de familles dans le désarroi alors qu’il s’agit de mères. Ici c’est encore une nouvelle forme d’invisibilisation puisqu’on parle des femmes en les nommant « familles »

    • Il y a aussi des recommandations pour un prétendue meilleur dépistage mais sans un mot au sujet d’un meilleur dépistage de l’autisme chez les filles

      De nouvelles recommandations pour dépister l’autisme chez l’enfant

      La Haute Autorité de santé a émis lundi 19 férier de nouvelles recommandations sur le dépistage de l’autisme, afin de permettre un diagnostic plus précoce chez les enfants, crucial pour leur avenir.

      Le Monde avec AFP Publié le 19 février 2018 à 05h42 - Mis à jour le 19 février 2018 à 06h37

      Temps de Lecture 1 min.

      Les troubles du spectre de l’autisme (TSA) touchent un Français sur 100, soit 100 000 jeunes de moins de 20 ans et près de 600 000 adultes, selon des estimations des pouvoirs publics.

      La Haute Autorité de santé (HAS) a établi lundi 19 février des « recommandations de bonnes pratiques », a fléché le « parcours de l’enfant et de sa famille », « de l’identification des signes d’alerte jusqu’à la consultation dédiée » de l’autisme. « Plus le diagnostic est posé tôt, plus les interventions pourront être mises en place précocement et aideront l’enfant dans son développement », a expliqué la HAS dans un communiqué. « Malheureusement le diagnostic est encore trop tardif en France et les parents inquiets ne savent pas vers qui se tourner », a-t-elle déploré.

      Alors que « l’autisme est un trouble qui peut se manifester entre 1 et 2 ans », le diagnostic tombe souvent à un âge bien plus avancé, « en moyenne entre 3 et 5 ans ». Or les connaissances ont progressé depuis les précédentes recommandations de la HAS, qui dataient de 2005.
      Article réservé à nos abonnés Lire aussi Raisons d’autistes
      Rôle crucial des personnels de crèches

      Dès l’âge d’un an et demi, voire avant, certaines difficultés doivent éveiller l’attention, si par exemple un enfant ne réagit pas à son prénom, ne pointe pas du doigt à distance, ne partage pas de sourire, ne prononce pas un mot, etc.

      « Aucun de ces signes pris de façon isolée n’a de valeur prédictive, mais l’association d’au moins deux signes nécessite un examen clinique approfondi du développement de l’enfant », a souligné la Haute Autorité.

      Jouent un rôle crucial dans ce dépistage « les personnels des crèches et des écoles » qui doivent « porter une attention particulière et continue au développement de la communication sociale de chaque enfant », et « le médecin traitant, l’acteur-clé pour établir un premier bilan ».

      Surtout, a affirmé la HAS, « l’inquiétude que peuvent manifester les parents concernant le développement de leur enfant ne doit jamais être minimisée ».


      Avec 88% des femmes autistes victimes de violences sexuelles c’est vraiment pas urgent du tout de dépister les filles autistes !

    • Il y a eu une audition au Sénat le Jeudi 14 février 2019 sur Violences envers les femmes autistes mais manifestement l’HAS ne s’y est pas intéressé.
      ici le compte rendu complet :

      Mme Marie Rabatel. - J’aimerais vous donner un exemple concret de ce qui se passe sur le terrain. Onze enfants ont été victimes d’agressions sexuelles, et notamment de viol par sodomie, commis par des éducateurs dans une institution. Les parents ont porté plainte contre celle-ci, mais on leur a fait comprendre qu’ils risquaient de se retrouver avec leur enfant à charge. L’institution les a également menacés de faire un signalement à l’ASE pour refus de scolarisation. Lorsque l’enquête a été lancée, elle a été classée sans suite, car les enfants ne verbalisent pas, malgré tout ce qui peut être fait au niveau de l’écoute. Les dires des enfants, mais aussi la communication non verbale, n’ont pas été véritablement pris en compte par la gendarmerie. Tout a été interprété de manière décousue.

      Au final, trois parents ont fait appel et ont retiré leurs enfants de l’institution. Les autres enfants y sont toujours et restent exposés à l’environnement où ils ont vécu des tortures. Cela ne peut qu’entraver leur parcours vers l’autonomie. Les trois parents ont reçu un signalement de l’ASE pour maltraitance, au motif qu’ils priveraient leur enfant de scolarité.


      Mme Marie Rabatel. - Pour revenir sur la situation que j’ai évoquée, onze enfants ont été victimes d’agression sexuelle et de viol. Les parents ont signalé leur inquiétude à l’établissement. Les enfants avaient des réactions étranges et se plaignaient de douleurs constamment. Une mère a retrouvé une culotte avec du sperme et du sang. Il était tellement inconcevable pour elle d’imaginer une agression sexuelle ou un viol qu’elle l’a jetée à la poubelle. La preuve a donc disparu, malheureusement. Les onze parents ont porté plainte à la gendarmerie contre les éducateurs. L’un d’entre eux avait déjà été condamné plusieurs années auparavant pour détention d’images pédopornographiques et avait été emprisonné pour ce motif. Malgré cela, il a pu être embauché dans une institution. C’est terrible !

      La parole des enfants n’a pas été retenue. Les parents ont refusé de laisser faire. Devant la souffrance de leurs enfants et le besoin d’accompagnement, trois familles sont parties. Les parents des sept enfants restants ont fait appel avec l’association Innocence en danger. À ce stade, l’institution a menacé de faire un signalement auprès de l’ASE pour retirer les enfants de leur famille. Quatre familles ont donc abandonné et laissé leurs enfants dans l’institution. Les trois dernières familles ont retiré leurs enfants de l’institution et continué le combat.

      Ces faits datent de 2012 et les procédures sont toujours en cours. Parmi les trois agresseurs, l’un a vu son contrat se terminer tandis qu’un autre est resté en arrêt maladie pendant trois ans. Le troisième, qui avait déjà été condamné, a été condamné à nouveau, non pas pour l’affaire en question, mais pour possession d’images pédopornographiques.

      Les parents des trois enfants ayant quitté l’institution ont reçu des signalements et ont eu des difficultés avec l’ASE. Ils doivent prouver en permanence que l’éducation de leurs enfants se poursuit. C’est le monde à l’envers !

      Mme Joëlle Garriaud-Maylam. - Avez-vous essayé de mobiliser des responsables politiques ?

      Mme Marie Rabatel. - L’association l’a fait, mais sans succès.

      Dr Muriel Salmona. - Je ne comprends pas que la justice ne prenne pas en compte que le fait de posséder des images pédopornographiques signifie obligatoirement d’avoir fait des échanges d’images sur les réseaux du darknet. Tout le monde sait que, pour détenir des images pédopornographiques, il faut en donner. Or pour disposer de telles images, il faut les faire, et pour cela, il faut agresser et violer des enfants. Il y a là aussi une forme de crédulité et de naïveté. Il ne s’agit pas d’un phénomène virtuel, mais bien réel. Il faut monter au créneau, car il existe plus d’un million de sites pédopornographiques ! Mais tout le monde ne veut pas voir cette réalité.

      Par ailleurs, les agresseurs hors institution sont principalement des membres de la famille. En cas d’inceste, des femmes portent plainte au nom de leurs enfants et se voient ensuite privées de leur garde. Cela arrive fréquemment. L’enfant est confié au prédateur. Mais plus nous montons au créneau, plus la situation empire. Je délivre des certificats, ce faisant je prends des risques, mais rien n’y fait. Cela donne envie de pleurer, car ces cas sont légion. Récemment, deux petites filles ont été enlevées à leur mère alors qu’elle les protégeait. L’ASE les a placées en prétextant le syndrome d’aliénation parentale. L’une des fillettes a parlé de se suicider si elle devait revoir son père...

      Mme Maryvonne Blondin. - Où se trouve votre lieu de consultation ?

      Dr Muriel Salmona. - À Bourg-la-Reine, dans les Hauts-de-Seine. Je peux citer tellement de cas similaires ! Ces deux fillettes n’ont plus le droit d’être en contact avec leur mère. C’est absurde !

      Je vous ai apporté l’enquête que nous avons faite, qui vous donnera plus de précisions, notamment sur les prédateurs. En outre, j’aimerais souligner la nécessité que des condamnations soient prononcées pour non-signalement. Il faut que les non-signalements coûtent cher aux institutions pour qu’elles soient obligées de signaler au lieu de penser avant tout à protéger leur réputation. De plus, l’obligation d’affichage pour le 119 doit être respectée dans tout lieu qui reçoit des enfants.

      Concernant les moyens dont nous disposons, nous n’avons presque jamais reçu de subvention en dix ans d’existence. Je réalise les enquêtes grâce à des dons et grâce à mon travail. J’assure près de 90 journées de formation par an dans le cadre de mon travail. Ces formations rémunérées financent l’association.

      Par ailleurs, j’ai formé de nombreux psychiatres. Nous avons organisé des groupes de réflexion professionnels, entre autres initiatives. Mais je reste très isolée. Pourquoi ? Parce que ce travail nécessite un engagement de chaque instant. Je consacre beaucoup de temps à chaque patient et je ne peux dire que mon travail m’enrichit...

      Un article dans Le Monde sortira prochainement sur la disparition des cent centres de psycho-traumatologie que nous souhaitions. Or il est indispensable d’ouvrir de tels centres. Dans certains pays, il existe des centres ouverts vingt-quatre heures sur vingt-quatre où les victimes sont prises en charge. Il est indispensable que les professionnels puissent être soutenus. Personne ne peut me suivre, et je le comprends. Nous avons besoin de plus de moyens.

      Mme Marie Rabatel. - J’aimerais revenir sur la question de la prise en charge. En tant que victime, je trouve inhumain que notre vie soit un combat, alors que cela peut être pris en charge pour l’agresseur. Il faut savoir qu’une victime a des difficultés à travailler. Par exemple, je touche 650 euros par mois de pension d’invalidité, sur lesquels je paie 200 euros de mutuelle. En effet, la prise en charge de ces traumatismes suppose de souscrire une mutuelle très coûteuse permettant le choix de ces soins, faute de quoi le risque est d’être adressé à des structures non spécialisées dans la psycho-traumatologie.

      Il est inhumain que les victimes peinent à financer des soins leur permettant simplement de rester en vie, contrairement à l’agresseur.

      Mme Dominique Vérien, co-rapporteure. - Cela n’est pas le cas partout. Dans l’Yonne par exemple, les traitements sont à la charge des agresseurs.

      A la charge des agresseurs alors que 0,3% des viols sont l’objet de condamnations en France selon ce rapport du Sénat...

    • @monolecte Ah désolé. Quand c’est dans le corps du texte, ou pire, dans le titre, mes armes de défense de léger dyslexique bloquent les mots-dièse en tant que tels (sinon ma lecture deviendrait tellement syncopée que je ne percevrais plus le sens de ce que je lis).

      Julie Dachez dit souvent des choses qui sont sidérantes d’intelligence sur le sujet. Elle me rappelle une autre personnalité brillante dont je suivais beaucoup les parutions il y a une dizaine d’années et qui m’a apporté de nombreuses clefs de compréhension, je viens de me reconnecter à mon Netvibes (pour la première fois depuis, je ne sais même plus quand) pour retrouver le nom de cette personne Michelle Dawson, absolument géniale.

      Désormais je peine un peu avec les témoignages, ils viennent me chercher sur mon côté le plus faible, je n’y arrive plus, alors l’audition, comment te dire... je crois que je vais passer mon tour. J’ai pris un sacré coup de vieux sur le sujet.

    • et on sent encore en sous-main certains délires issus de la psychanalyse, cette pseudo-science qui a toujours détesté les femmes et qui a toujours accusé les mères d’êtres responsables de l’autisme de leurs enfants.

      Oui @alexcorp et à cela on peu ajouter le lobbyisme des masculinistes type Sos-papa et le #sap (syndrome d’aliénation parentale).

      Dans la foulée je suis tombée hier sur cette tribune désépérante :

      « Les voies de renouvellement de la psychanalyse sont nombreuses »
      qui montre que dans les université on enseigne encore les escroqueries intellectuelles de Lacan.

      Sophie Marret-Maleval

      Psychanalyste, professeur et directrice du département de psychanalyse de l’université Paris 8 Saint-Denis

      Aurélie Pfauwadel

      Psychanalyste, maître de conférences au département de psychanalyse de l’université Paris 8 Saint-Denis

      écrivent que :

      Là où Mme Roudinesco s’empresse de sonner l’hallali, nous voudrions présenter ces voies prometteuses du côté de la psychanalyse lacanienne.

    • Chère @mad_meg je me demandais s’il existait une sorte de post fondateur sur Seenthis dans lequel je pourrais lire ton argumentation apparemment très opposée à la psychanalyse, quelque chose qui serait plus développé que les tags ou les commentaires rapides et qui ne m’aident pas du tout à comprendre, alors que cela m’intéresse. Et si un tel billet ou commentaire n’existe pas encore, est-ce que tu pourrais tenter de le faire par exemple ici, mais je t’en supplie vu que c’est moi qui te le demandes, je veux bien que tu n’aies pas trop recours aux tags dans le corps du texte qui sont autant obstacles à ma lecture dyslexique, de même j’ai déjà compris qu’à peu de choses près tu reprochais, sans doute à raison, aux psychanalystes d’être sexistes et je ne veux ni ne peux pas nécessairement te donner tort, en revanche je veux bien que ce soit argumenté, histoire que je comprenne. Ca m’intéresse vraiment.

      Par ailleurs sur la question de la psychanalyse qui serait en échec ou, pire, maltraitante vis-à-vis des autistes et de leur entourage, je ne peux pas te dire que cela n’existe pas qu’il n’y a jamais eu de cas où de telles choses ne se soient produites, en revanche je te mets en garde sur le fait que ce soit finalement le seul argument, et c’est un argument d’exception, de l’argumentaire d’un tout autre bord, le comportementalisme dont je pourrais tout à loisir, si tu le souhaites, expliquer à quel point il est maltraitant vis-à-vis des personnes autistes de façon systémique, j’ai même écrit des articles sur le sujet.

      En revanche, il arrive, de temps en temps, que la psychanalyse vienne en aide à des personnes autistes et leur permette, au long cours, c’est vrai, voire au très long cours, de poser quelques baumes réparateurs sur des sources d’angoisse autrement inextinguibles ou encore de les extraire sans violence de leur autisme dans ce qu’il a d’incapacitant, parfois même en allant jusqu’à respecter leur altérité. Mais je t’accorde que ce soit rare et fragile.

      Du côté comportementaliste en revanche ce qui est présenté comme des victoires voire des guérisons est au contraire souvent acquis dans une certaine forme de violence (notamment psychologique) et a seulement l’apparence d’une victoire : dit plus simplement que l’obsession autistique d’un enfant autiste devienne de se présenter formellement à tout bout de champ, « bonjour je m’appelle Nathan et toi comment t’appelles-tu, aimerais tu que nous jouions ensemble ? », plutôt que de rester isolé au calme à aligner ses jouets de façon non moins obsessionnelle, j’ai un peu du mal à considérer cela comme une victoire.

      Enfin sur la question des violences sexuelles sur les femmes autistes, les chiffres font froid dans le dos et sans doute les pourcentages sont moindres chez les autistes hommes, il reste que ce pourcentage est plus élevé chez les homme autistes que chez les hommes neurotypiques, l’autisme des personnes ne les aidant précisément pas à anticiper le danger quand l’autisme n’est pas en fait la source même de ce danger. Les violeurs sont toujours très intéressés par l’impunité potentielle (ce n’est pas à toi que je vais l’apprendre, c’est plutôt dans l’autre sens que cet apprentissage se produit, j’en ai pleinement conscience). Les violences sexuelles, et parfois le viol, sont fréquentes chez les jeunes autistes, même masculins. Et quand la chose se produit, quand en tant que parent, tu tentes de demander des explications, voire justice, on a vite fait de t’opposer que ton entêtement à vouloir scolariser ton enfant est la cause de ces violences. Et c’est là qu’à ta plus grande surprise, je te remercie car par le passé il m’est arrivé de lire certaines de tes contributions sur la culture du viol qui m’auront permis de retourner de tels arguments.

      Donc oui, un peu d’argumentation à propos de ta détestation de la psychanalyse, je veux bien, même si tu l’as compris, je ne serais pas nécessairement d’accord. Mais est-ce grave ?

    • @philippe_de_jonckheere nous avons déjà eu des échanges assez houleux sur le sujet au point que tu m’a bloqué depuis 2016, ( ) ce qui fait que tu n’as probablement pas vu passé toute la documentation que j’ai mise sur ce sujet depuis plusieurs années. Je vais aller fouiller et te sortir quelques unes de mes sources que tu disqualifira d’office comme tu le fait à chaque fois puisque c’est des « compormentalistes » tes fameux psy pour chiens.

      au sujet de ceci

      En revanche, il arrive, de temps en temps, que la psychanalyse vienne en aide à des personnes autistes et leur permette, au long cours, c’est vrai, voire au très long cours, de poser quelques baumes réparateurs sur des sources d’angoisse autrement inextinguibles ou encore de les extraire sans violence de leur autisme dans ce qu’il a d’incapacitant, parfois même en allant jusqu’à respecter leur altérité. Mais je t’accorde que ce soit rare et fragile.

      Il arrive effectivement de temps en temps que la psychanalyse vienne en aide à des personnes, comme peuvent le faire de temps en temps l’homéopathie, la prière, le systhème galien, la médecine traditionnelle chinoise et des tas de choses farfelues. La psychothérapie c’est aussi une relation interpersonnelle et il arrive que certaines personnes psychanalyste fassent du bien à certaines personnes, malgré la psychanalyse. Tout comme des religieux·se peuvent faire du bien à certaines personnes, malgré la religion. A mon avis la psychanalyse a des facilité à faire du bien aux hommes puisque cette discipline est conçu pour les libérés de leur culpabilité en imaginant des mères castratrices, des complexes d’œdipe, des filles qui aguichent leurs pères agresseurs...

      La psychanalyse ca fait du bien à certaines personnes qui en ont les moyens car c’est toujours sympas de pouvoir se payer un·e confident·e qui s’intéresse à ce qu’on ressent, ce qu’on pense, ce qu’on vie.

      Pour les garçons et hommes autistes victimes de violences sexuelles je sais qu’ils sont aussi plus touchés que les garçons et hommes non autistes mais ici le sujet c’est les femmes autistes et les injustices qui leurs sont faites à elles. Si tu veux parler des violences sexuelles subit par les garçons et hommes autistes, sujet qui est tout à fait légitime et qui mérite d’être documenté, ca serait plus sympa d’en faire un sujet à part pour ne pas invisibiliser les violences spécifiques faites aux femmes autistes.

      Pour les sources voici ce que j’ai retrouvé :


    • @philippe_de_jonckheere vous voulez croire à la psychanalyse, coûte que coûte, sans doute d’ailleurs parce qu’il vous en coûterait trop d’abandonner ces théories, mais ça j’ai envie de dire que c’est votre problème. Ce ne sont pas les comportementalistes qui ont inventé la culpabilisation des parents (et surtout des mères donc) au sujet de l’autisme. C’est facile de trouver de la documentation sur le sujet, à moins de ne pas vouloir savoir :
      On trouvera aussi quelques témoignages intéressants sur le site de Martin Winckler dont celui-ci :
      Toutes ces théories seraient risibles si seulement autant de soignants en France ne continuaient pas d’y croire et de les enseigner.
      Sur le sexisme de la psychanalyse, voir cet article édifiant qui mentionne même l’existence d’un annuaire de psychanalystes « safe », sous entendant que les autres sont des sexistes invétérés. Quand on en est là, c’est qu’il y a un problème intrinsèque dans les théories qui sous-tendent ces pratiques.

    • Merci à toutes les deux. De la lecture pour le train demain, chouette !

      @mad_meg précision importante, déjà expliquée ailleurs, tu n’es pas bloquée par moi pour d’autres raisons que celle que je me sers de mon fil seenthis comme cahier de brouillon pour d’autres trucs et qu’il est arrivé par le passé que certaines de tes interventions ne soient pas exactement aimables et après cela me gêne dans mon travail, mais tu sais déjà tout ça.

      En revanche je suis souvent ce que tu postes ici, je suis souvent contrarié dans ma lecture par une tonalité et ses tags qui à mon avis nuisent (pour moi) à ton propos, je ne cherche évidemment pas à te dissuader à procéder comme tu l’entends, manquerait plus que ça, en revanche de mon côté pour bénéficier de tes lumières en somme cela demande un sérieux travail de décryptage (comme par exemple de copier coller dans un traitement de texte, virer les dièses et les barres de soulignement et tenter d’atténuer la charge, tout en gardant le sens général.

      Enfin, et je crois que c’est une difficulté sur ce sujet et d’autres, je me méfie des témoignages, un peu comme Raul Hilberg qui leur reproche de l’empêcher de réfléchir. Mais c’est une autre histoire. Et pour moi les témoignages ne font pas une argumentation. Dans ma petite recherche sur le sujet, j’ai eu des témoignages de première main à propos des agissements des comportementalistes qui font un peu froid dans le dos (juste une histoire la route, des parents algériens se plaignant du peu de résultats apportés par la méthode A.B.A. et auxquels on a fait comprendre que s’ils n’étaient pas contents on pouvait aussi les dénoncer à la police parce qu’on les savait dans une situation irrégulière, et d’autres qui sont un peu de la même farine pas très ragoutante) mais je préfère m’en tenir à une critique des méthodes et de ce qu’elles impliquent intellectuellement et qui est très sérieusement dextrogène, pour le moins.

    • Je suis d’accord que les témoignages ont leur limite pour analyser un phénomène, une théorie ou des pratiques. Cela étant dit, c’est aussi très pénible que dès qu’on aborde des pratiques qui posent problème (en l’occurrence des pratiques issues de théories psychanalytiques) il y a toujours quelqu’un qui ne veut pas en parler et attaque d’autres praticiens (les comportementalistes) pour faire dévier le sujet sur autre chose. Cette stratégie d’évitement est assez grossière. Je me souviens d’ailleurs de l’anti-livre noir de la psychanalyse qui en fait ne parlait pas de psychanalyse et ne répondait pas au livre initial mais était juste une suite d’anathèmes sans intérêt contre les comportementalistes (présentés comme des scientifiques obtus qui se seraient arrêtés à Pavlof). Bref, j’arrête là ce plus ou moins hors sujet, sans doute qu’un post dédié serait plus opportun.

    • Autisme, quand la secrétaire d’Etat déclare illégale la psychiatrie

      La phrase est passée presque inaperçue. Interrogée par Jean-Jacques Bourdin, sur RMC, lundi, veille de la « journée mondiale de l’autisme », la secrétaire d’Etat aux Personnes handicapées, Sophie Cluzel, a eu ces mots qui se voulaient explicatifs sur la stratégie du gouvernement : « Avec notre plan, il s’agit de ne plus placer des enfants autistes devant des psychiatres. » Et encore : « Face à un spectre de l’autisme très large, il faut que l’on arrête de parler de psychiatrie. » Mettre « l’accent sur la détection et la prise en charge précoce des enfants autistes » et en finir avec « des prises en charge inadéquates dans des hôpitaux psychiatriques où ils n’ont rien à faire ».

    • On sent que le gouv veux faire des économies sur le dos des autistes en profitant de la notion de spectre. Exit les prises en charge hospitalières puisque le spectre de l’autisme est si large. Alors que seuls les psychiatres sont habilités à établir le diagnostique, comment est-ce possible de ne pas faire passer ces personnes devant un psychiatre ?
      Le gouv entretins aussi intentionnellement le confusionnisme entre psychiatres, psychologues et psychanalystes. Ces 30 années de culpabilisation des mères qui sont ici imputé aux psychiatres sont en fait les méfaits des psychanalystes en particulier les lacanien·nes.

  • #031 Strange Fruits reçoit #Nathan_Daems

    Nathan Daems a commencé à jouer du violon à 3 ans, du saxophone à 10 ans, de la guitare à 12 ans, de la percussion à 19 ans, etc. Avec ces premiers pas, il est devenu un voyage permanent de découverte musicale, apprenant et jouant partout dans le monde avec des tonnes de projets, en tant que leader. Il a partagé la scène ou le studio avec Bojan Z, David Shire, Brussels Philharmonic, le contrebassiste de Paco de Lucia, Alain Perez, Marko Markovic et Kocani Orkestar. En plus de cela, Daems est actuellement actif dans #Black_Flower, #Ragini_Trio et #Karsilama_Quintet et joue avec #Myrddin_De_Cauter (flamenco contemporain), #Dijf_Sanders (Transe indo jazz), #Tcha_Limberger (Balkan et swing gipsy) et le #Quatuor_Soolmaan (jazz turc). Il compose également de la musique pour des documentaires et des longs (...)


  • Et zut alors, en voulant répondre à @philippe_de_jonckheere au sujet de ma grande et belle propriété en bord de mer, et comme c’est pas la « Côte d’Azur », j’ai dû googliser pas mal pour savoir comment se nomme la côte à #Montpellier-plages.

    Je te le donne Émile, parce que je suis sûr que tu le savais pas non plus : c’est la Côte d’améthysteôte_d%27Améthyste

    Moins populaire, du coup, que la côte d’Azur, parce que personne ne se souvient comment ça s’écrit, et la plupart d’entre nous ne sait pas trop comment ça se prononce.

    #sérendipité, parce que sinon y’a aucun moyen que je sache une chose pareille. Et #merci_arno, parce qu’il est bon que tu le sachiasses.

  • Une affaire relativement petite et technique, mais qui démontre le recul des anti-BDS aux États-Unis, pourtant pays leader en la matière :

    Les sénateurs américains rejettent la loi anti-BDS et pro-Israël
    Maannews, le 10 janvier 2019

    Traduction de :

    US Senators vote down anti-BDS, pro-Israeli bill
    Maannews, le 10 janvier 2019

    A regrouper avec un autre recul aux Etats-Unis :

    Former legislator in Maryland sues state over anti-BDS law
    Middle East Eye, le 9 janvier 2019

    #BDS #USA #Palestine

  • The Story of a Public, Cooperative Mathathon

    A hexagonal-centered toroidal 1.053-bounded regular tetrahedral simplex chain, discovered at the Mathathon by Nathan Gilbert.Two weekends ago, something rare happened. Thirteen people, sharing only a common interest in math, joined together from India, the Middle-East, England, Canada and the United States to solve real math problems. As might be expected, most of them dropped out before the end of the first-ever Mathathon weekend. Nonetheless, the four active participants, aided by two or three less active observers, solved some very real problems.Perhaps there has never been an all-virtual math hackathon devoted to solving problems carefully prepared ahead of time not to be exercises but to be “real” problems, whose solutions were only dreamt of by their authors. It was, in fact, a (...)

    #javascript #mathematics #open-source #hackathons #public-invention

  • A vivid, surreal Kodachrome love poem to 1980s Florida

    Florida has long been one of the most intriguing of the 50 states. From election drama to news of the weird, the state has been the source of a rich variety of stories going back over the years. Photographer Nathan Benn’s new book, “A Peculiar Paradise: Florida Photographs” (Powerhouse, 2018), brings together images he shot as a National Geographic photographer. The book is a rich source of the kinds of things that make the state such an interesting place, and a look back at one of the most fertile times in its history, the 1980s.

    Charles Tipton and family of Panama City harvesting oysters at dawn in Apalachicola Bay. (From “A Peculiar Paradise” by Nathan Benn, published by powerHouse Books)
    #photographie #floride

  • Python-Like enumerate() In C++17—Nathan Reed

    Handy little piece of code.

    Python-Like enumerate() In C++17 by Nathan Reed

    From the article:

    Python has a handy built-in function called enumerate(), which lets you iterate over an object (e.g. a list) and have access to both the index and the item in each iteration. You use it in a for loop, like this: for i, thing in enumerate(listOfThings):
    print("The %dth thing is %s" % (i, thing)) Iterating over listOfThings directly would give you thing, but not i, and there are plenty of situations where you’d want both (looking up the index in another data structure, progress reports, error messages, generating output filenames, etc). C++ range-based for loops work a lot like Python’s for loops. Can we implement an analogue of Python’s enumerate() in C++? We (...)


  • Le mouvement BDS rebat les cartes du débat israélo-palestinien | Nathan Thrall,2730

    Le 19 novembre Airbnb Inc. a retiré de ses offres de location les logements situés dans les colonies de Cisjordanie « qui sont au cœur du conflit entre Israéliens et Palestiniens ». En réaction, le ministre israélien du tourisme Yariv Levin a demandé à son administration de réduire l’activité de Airbnb Inc. en Israël même. Cette décision, parmi d’autres, confirme l’importance prise par la campagne Boycott-désinvestissement-sanctions (BDS). Source : Orient XXI

  • The Smookes Speak at University of Colorado’s Disruptive #entrepreneurship Class

    Hacker Noon Podcast: Live from BoulderPhoto Credit, of Boulder Live Edition: Linh & David Smooke Speak at Disruptive Entrepreneurship ClassHacker Noon CEO David Smooke & COO Linh Dao Smooke recently spoke at University of Colorado Boulder’s Disruptive Entrepreneurship class taught by Professor & Hacker Noon contributing writer Nathan Schneider. notable quotes:“On the internet right now, there is a massive battle going on between centralization and decentralization.” — David“It’s what drives us everyday: we know that people want to read more, write more and that people rally behind us when we are threatened by an external source.” — Linh“Know that the obstacles are only a day, and (...)

    #university-of-colorado #smookes-speak #live-tech-podcast #hackernoon-podcast

  • Libres d’être captifs

    Libres d’être captifs, une causerie militante sur les données privées A l’occasion de la Semaine du Numérique l’Espace Public Numérique des Biblio&ludothèques organise une causerie militante sur les données privées. Venez discuter avec

    AGnez Bewer, Abelli asbl, co-fondatrice de Nubo,

    Nathan Meurrens, consultant en stratégie numérique,

    Nicolas Marion, chargé de recherches chez Action et Recherches Culturelles,

    Vincent Brobald, consultant en informatique, Cassiopea asbl, Free Software Foundation, (...)


  • L’article du Monde est sous #paywall :

    Réchauffement climatique : en 1979, tout le monde savait déjà

    Celui du Temps est en accès libre :
    Comment nous avons perdu le combat contre le changement climatique

    I – 1979-1982
    Printemps 1979 : un militant inquiet
    Automne 1979 : une mobilisation cahin-caha
    1980-1981 : malgré la blitzkrieg de Ronald Reagan, la mobilisation grandit

    II – 1983-1989
    1983-1984 : l’exceptionnalisme américain contre le changement climatique
    1985 : le trou d’ozone contre le réchauffement
    1987-1988 : la censure de la science, et le brûlant été 1988
    Eté 1988 : la conférence de Toronto, le « Woodstock du climat »
    1989 : la Maison-Blanche se rebiffe
    Novembre 1989 : l’enterrement définitif à Noordwijk

    • Réchauffement climatique : en 1979, tout le monde savait déjà

      Une étude révèle que l’humanité a été très proche, il y a quarante ans, de prendre les bonnes décisions pour arrêter le réchauffement !

      Rapport d’étonnement. Cet été, toute l’Europe cuisait sous la canicule. Le 1er août, la National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration expliquait que l’année 2017 a été la troisième année la plus chaude de l’histoire moderne après 2016 et 2015. Le 6 août, une équipe scientifique internationale publiait une inquiétante étude dans la revue PNAS prévenant que l’actuelle combinaison de la fonte de l’Antarctique de l’ouest – une perte de 2 720 milliards de tonnes de glace depuis 1992 d’après Nature du 13 juin –, de la déforestation et des émissions de gaz à effet de serre aggrave le risque de l’« effet domino » à partir d’un réchauffement à 2° Celsius – qui pourrait être atteint avant 2100. Ces « rétroactions auto-renforçantes », estime l’étude, pourraient pousser « le système terrestre vers un seuil planétaire » et « provoquer un réchauffement continu ».

      La Terre deviendrait alors, « dans quelques décennies », une étuve avec « des températures de 4° à 5° supérieures à la période préindustrielle », tandis que le niveau des mers s’élèverait « de 10 à 60 mètres ». Des régions côtières, des villes entières seraient submergées, des îles disparaîtraient, le Sahara s’étendrait vers le sud, la pénurie d’eau deviendrait fatale, le régime de la mousson serait gravement perturbé, des milliers d’espèces disparaîtraient, les phénomènes climatiques extrêmes se multiplieraient. Quant à la civilisation humaine, je vous laisse imaginer…

      « Enjeu “non partisan” »

      Le plus dramatique peut-être dans notre impuissance actuelle face à cette catastrophe annoncée est que l’humanité a été très proche, il y a quarante ans, de prendre les bonnes décisions pour arrêter le réchauffement ! C’est ce que révèle une investigation de l’essayiste américain Nathaniel Rich, « Perdre la Terre », publiée le 1er août dans le New York Times, appuyée sur dix-huit mois d’enquêtes et plus de cent interviews de scientifiques, de politiciens et d’écologistes.

      Dans les années 1970, rappelle Rich, « l’effet de serre » est déjà bien connu des scientifiques, et décrit dans n’importe quel « manuel d’introduction à la biologie ». Il est alors clair que plus l’atmosphère contient de dioxyde de carbone, plus elle se réchauffe, et qu’il faut réagir au fait que nous en produisons des quantités astronomiques en brûlant du charbon, du pétrole et du gaz. En 1979, un rapport de la National Academy of Sciences américaine prévient que « la question du dioxyde de carbone devrait figurer à l’ordre du jour international dans un contexte qui maximisera la coopération ». Quant aux démocrates et aux républicains, ils jugent que le problème du réchauffement est grave et doit devenir un enjeu « non partisan ».

      Ils sont entendus ! A Genève, lors de la première Conférence mondiale sur le climat de 1979, les scientifiques de 50 pays conviennent qu’il est « urgent » de réduire les émissions. Quatre mois plus tard, à Tokyo, le groupe des sept pays les plus riches s’engage à prendre des mesures. Dans les années qui suivent, grâce au militantisme du consultant indépendant Rafe Pomerance, des Amis de la Terre et du climatologue James E. Hansen, les risques d’un changement climatique rapide font les couvertures des journaux…

      Premières campagnes « climatosceptiques »

      Et puis en 1985, la découverte par le grand public du « trou » de la couche d’ozone, qui nous protège des rayons ultraviolets, dramatise la question climatique. L’ONU s’en empare, la Convention de Vienne sur la protection de la couche d’ozone est signée, Etats-Unis en tête, en dépit d’une opposition virulente des entreprises de réfrigération ou chimiques. Elle est confirmée par la signature du protocole de Montréal en 1987, qui entraîne une mobilisation internationale contre les chlorofluorocarbones – en 2016, une étude parue dans Science indique que le « trou » a diminué de 4 millions de km2, évitant « deux millions de cancers de la peau ».

      Fort de ce succès, les scientifiques et les écologistes mobilisés pensent qu’ils vont pouvoir obtenir gain de cause pour contenir les émissions de gaz à effet de serre. En 1988, le Groupe d’experts intergouvernemental sur l’évolution du climat (GIEC), placé sous l’égide de l’ONU, est créé. En 1989, à La Haye, 149 pays conviennent qu’un traité international contraignant doit être rapidement signé, préparant le Sommet de la Terre à Rio en 1992…

      Hélas, en 1990, le consensus s’effondre aux Etats-Unis. Les premières grandes campagnes « climatosceptiques » démarrent, menées par l’American Petroleum Institute et l’organisation de lobbying Global Climate Coalition financée par les entreprises opposées à toute mesure de restriction. Dépensant des millions de dollars, ils vont réussir à retourner des politiciens et des scientifiques proches des industriels, jusqu’à paralyser la ratification du protocole de Kyoto par les Etats-Unis.

      Pourtant, dès les années 1970, « tout le monde savait, rappelle Nathaniel Rich. Et nous le savons tous encore ».

  • « Sur les réseaux sociaux, le contenu n’existe que pour maximiser des chiffres : likes, coeurs, retweets »

    Embauché par Snapchat mais indépendant éditorialement, critique mais de son propre aveu « partial », Nathan Jurgenson est un théoricien des réseaux sociaux au statut intriguant. Rédacteur en chef du magazine « Real Life », lancé par Snapchat en 2016, ex-rédacteur du magazine The New Inquiry, Nathan Jurgenson est aussi connu pour sa critique du digital dualism, terme qu’il propose en 2011, et qui décrit la façon dont sont généralement scindés l’univers d’Internet, considéré comme « virtuel », et la « vraie (...)

    #Facebook #Instagram #Like #Snapchat #Twitter #algorithme #manipulation #marketing

  • 15 personnes poursuivies pour avoir tenté d’empêcher le décollage d’un charter de 57 expulsés (Ghana et Nigeria) en se couchant sur le tarmac (voir End Deportation latest newsletter :
    –-> reçu via la mailing-list Migreurop par Claire Rodier.

    #Stansted_15 : Amnesty to observe trial amid concerns for anti-deportation activists

    Amnesty considers the 15 to be human rights defenders

    ‘We’re concerned the authorities are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut with this case’ - Kate Allen

    Amnesty International will be observing the trial of 15 human rights defenders set to go on trial at Chelmsford Crown Court next week (Monday 1 October) relating to their attempt to prevent what they believed was the unlawful deportation of a group of people at Stansted airport.

    The protesters - known as the “#Stansted 15” - are facing lengthy jail sentences for their non-violent intervention in March last year.

    Amnesty is concerned that the serious charge of “endangering safety at aerodromes” may have been brought to discourage other activists from taking non-violent direct action in defence of human rights. The organisation has written to the Director of the Crown Prosecution Service and the Attorney General calling for this disproportionate charge to be dropped.

    The trial is currently expected to last for approximately six weeks.

    Kate Allen, Amnesty International UK’s Director, said:

    “We’re concerned the authorities are using a sledgehammer to crack a nut with this case.

    “Public protest and non-violent direct action can often be a key means of defending human rights, particularly when victims have no way to make their voices heard and have been denied access to justice.

    “Human rights defenders are currently coming under attack in many countries around the world, with those in power doing all they can to discourage people from taking injustice personally. The UK must not go down that path.”

    #avion #déportation #renvois #expulsions #UK #Angleterre #résistance #procès #migrations #asile #réfugiés #frontières


    voir aussi la métaliste sur la #résistance de #passagers (mais aussi de #pilotes) aux #renvois_forcés :

    • The Stansted protesters saved me from wrongful deportation. They are heroes

      The ‘Stansted 15’ face jail for stopping my flight from taking off. They helped me see justice – and the birth of my daughter

      I’ll never forget the moment I found out that a group of people had blocked a charter deportation flight leaving Stansted airport on 28 March 2017, because I was one of the people that had a seat on the plane and was about to be removed from Britain against my will. While most of those sitting with me were whooping with joy when they heard the news, I was angry. After months in detention, the thought of facing even just one more day in that purgatory filled me with terror. And, crucially, I had no idea then of what I know now: that the actions of those activists, who became known as the Stansted 15, would help me see justice, and save my life in Britain.
      Stansted 15 convictions a ‘crushing blow for human rights in UK’
      Read more

      I first arrived in Britain in 2004 and, like so many people who come here from abroad, built a life here. As I sat in that plane in Stansted last year I was set to be taken “back” to a country that I had no links to. Indeed there is no doubt in my mind that had I been deported I would have been destitute and homeless in Nigeria – I was terrified.

      Imagine it. You’ve lived somewhere for 13 years. Your mum, suffering with mobility issues, lives there. Your partner lives there. Two of your children already live there, and the memory of your first-born, who died at just seven years old, resides there too. Your next child is about to be born there. That was my situation as we waited on the asphalt – imagining my daughter being born in a country where I’d built a life, while I was exiled to Nigeria and destined to meeting my newborn for the first time through a screen on a phone.

      My story was harsh, but it’s no anomaly. Like many people facing deportation from the United Kingdom, my experience with the immigration authorities had lasted many years – and for the last seven years of living here I had been in a constant state of mental detention. A cycle of Home Office appeals and its refusal to accept my claims or make a fair decision based on the facts of my case saw me in and out of detention and permanently waiting for my status to be settled. Though the threat of deportation haunted me, it was the utter instability and racial discrimination that made me feel like I was going mad. That’s why the actions of the Stansted 15 first caused me to be angry. I simply didn’t believe that their actions would be anything more than a postponement of further pain.

      My view isn’t just shaped by my own experience. My life in Britain has seen me rub along with countless people who find themselves the victims of the government’s “hostile environment” for migrants and families who aren’t white. Migration and deportation targets suck humanity from a system whose currency is the lives of people who happen to be born outside the UK. Such is the determination to look “tough” on the issue that people are rounded up in the night and put on to brutal, secretive and barely legal charter flights. Most take off away from the public eye – 60 human beings shackled and violently restrained on each flight, with barely a thought about the life they are dragged away from, nor the one they face upon arrival.
      Stansted 15 activists vow to overcome ‘dark, dark day for the right to protest’
      Read more

      I was one of the lucky few. My removal from the plane gave me two life-changing gifts. The first was a chance to appeal to the authorities over my deportation – a case that I won on two separate occasions, following a Home Office counter-appeal. But more importantly the brave actions of the Stansted 15 gave me something even more special: the chance to be by my partner’s side as she gave birth to our daughter, and to be there for them as they both needed extensive treatment after a complicated and premature birth. Without the Stansted 15 I wouldn’t have been playing football with my three-year-old in the park this week. It’s that simple. We now have a chance to live together as a family in Britain – and that is thanks to the people who lay down in front of the plane.

      On Monday the Stansted 15 were found guilty of breaching a barely used terror law. Though the jury were convinced that their actions breached this legislation, there’s no doubt in my mind that these 15 brave people are heroes, not criminals. For me a crime is doing something that is evil, shameful or just wrong – and it’s clear that it is the actions of the Home Office that tick all of these boxes; the Stansted 15 were trying to stop the real crime being committed. As the Stansted 15 face their own purgatory – awaiting sentences in the following weeks – I will be praying that they are shown leniency. Without their actions I would have missed my daughter’s birth, and faced the utter injustice of being deported from this country without having my (now successful) appeal heard. My message to them today is to fight on. Your cause is just, and history will absolve you of the guilt that the system has marked you with.

    • Regno Unito, quindici attivisti rischiano l’ergastolo per aver bloccato la deportazione di migranti

      La criminalizzazione della solidarietà non riguarda solo l’Italia, con la martellante campagna contro le Ong che salvano vite nel Mediterraneo. In Francia sette attivisti rischiano 10 anni di carcere e 750mila euro di multa per “associazione a delinquere finalizzata all’immigrazione clandestina”. Nel Regno Unito altri quindici rischiano addirittura l’ergastolo per aver bloccato nella notte del 28 marzo 2017 nell’aeroporto di Stansted la deportazione di un gruppo di migranti caricati in segreto su un aereo diretto in Nigeria.

      Attivisti appartenenti ai gruppi End Deportations, Plane Stupid e Lesbian and Gays Support the Migrants hanno circondato l’aereo, impedendone il decollo. Come risultato della loro azione undici persone sono rimaste nel Regno Unito mentre la loro domanda di asilo veniva esaminata e due hanno potuto restare nel paese. Nonostante il carattere nonviolento dell’azione, il gruppo che ha bloccato l’aereo è finito sotto processo con accuse basate sulla legge anti-terrorismo e se giudicato colpevole rischia addirittura l’ergastolo. Il verdetto è atteso la settimana prossima.

      Membri dei movimenti pacifisti, antirazzisti e ambientalisti si sono uniti per protestare contro l’iniquità delle accuse. Amnesty International ha espresso la preoccupazione che siano state formulate per scoraggiare altri attivisti dall’intraprendere azioni dirette nonviolente in difesa dei diritti umani. Il vescovo di Chelmsford, la cittadina dove si tiene il processo, si è presentato in tribunale per esprimere il suo appoggio agli imputati. La primavera scorsa oltre 50 personalità, tra cui la leader dei Verdi Caroline Lucas, la scrittrice e giornalista Naomi Klein, il regista Ken Loach e l’attrice Emma Thompson hanno firmato una lettera in cui chiedono il ritiro delle accuse contro i “Quindici di Stansted” e la fine dei voli segreti di deportazione.

      Nel Regno Unito questa pratica è iniziata nel 2001. Molte delle persone deportate hanno vissuto per anni nel paese; vengono portate via dai posti di lavoro, in strada o dalle loro case, rinchiuse in centri di detenzione, caricate in segreto su voli charter notturni e inviate in paesi che spesso non conoscono e dove rischiano persecuzioni e morte. Alcuni non vengono preavvisati in tempo per ricorrere in appello contro la deportazione. “Il nostro è stato un atto di solidarietà umana, di difesa e resistenza contro un regime sempre più brutale” ha dichiarato un’attivista.
      #UK #Angleterre #solidarité #délit_de_solidarité #criminalisation #asile #migrations #réfugiés #expulsions

    • Activists convicted of terrorism offence for blocking Stansted deportation flight

      Fifteen activists who blocked the takeoff of an immigration removal charter flight have been convicted of endangering the safety of Stansted airport, a terrorism offence for which they could be jailed for life.

      After nearly three days of deliberations, following a nine-week trial, a jury at Chelmsford crown court found the defendants guilty of intentional disruption of services at an aerodrome under the 1990 Aviation and Maritime Security Act, a law passed in response to the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.

      The court had heard how members of the campaign group End Deportations used lock-on devices to secure themselves around a Titan Airways Boeing 767 chartered by the Home Office, as the aircraft waited on the asphalt at the airport in Essex to remove undocumented immigrants to Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone.

      The prosecution argued that their actions, which led to a temporary shutdown of Stansted, had posed a grave risk to the safety of the airport and its passengers.

      The verdict came after the judge Christopher Morgan told the jury to disregard all evidence put forward by the defendants to support the defence that they acted to stop human rights abuses, instructing jurors to only consider whether there was a “real and material” risk to the airport.

      In legal arguments made without the jury present, which can now be reported, defence barristers had called for the jury to be discharged after Morgan gave a summing up which they said amounted to a direction to convict. The judge had suggested the defendants’ entry to a restricted area could be considered inherently risky.

      Human rights organisations and observers had already expressed concerns over the choice of charge, which Kate Allen, the UK director of Amnesty International, likened to “using a sledgehammer to crack a nut”. Responding to the verdict on Monday, Gracie Bradley, policy and campaigns manager at Liberty, called the verdict a “grave injustice” and a “malicious attack” on the right to peaceful protest.

      Dr Graeme Hayes, reader in political sociology at Aston University, was one of a team of academics who observed the trial throughout. The only previous use of the 1990 law he and colleagues were able to find was in 2002 when a pilot was jailed for three years after flying his helicopter straight at a control tower.

      “This is a law that’s been brought in concerning international terrorism,” he said. “But for the last 10 weeks [of the trial], we’ve heard what amounts to an extended discussion of health and safety, in which the prosecution has not said at any point what the consequences of their actions might have been.”

      In a statement released by End Deportations after the verdict, the defendants said: “We are guilty of nothing more than intervening to prevent harm. The real crime is the government’s cowardly, inhumane and barely legal deportation flights and the unprecedented use of terror law to crack down on peaceful protest.

      The protest took place on the night of 28 March 2017. The activists cut a hole in the airport’s perimeter fence, the court heard. Jurors were shown footage from CCTV cameras and a police helicopter of four protesters arranging themselves around the front landing gear of the aircraft and locking their arms together inside double-layered pipes filled with expanding foam.

      Further back, a second group of protesters erected a two-metre tripod from scaffolding poles behind the engine on the left wing on which one of them perched while others locked themselves to the base to prevent it from being moved, the videos showed. In the moments before police arrived, they were able to display their banners, one of which said: “No one is illegal.”

      Helen Brewer, Lyndsay Burtonshaw, Nathan Clack, Laura Clayson, Mel Evans, Joseph McGahan, Benjamin Smoke, Jyotsna Ram, Nicholas Sigsworth, Alistair Temlit, Edward Thacker, Emma Hughes, May McKeith, Ruth Potts and Melanie Stickland, aged 27 to 44, had all pleaded not guilty.

      They will be sentenced at a later date.

    • Stansted 15: no jail for activists convicted of terror-related offences

      Judge says group ‘didn’t have a grievous intent as some may who commit this type of crime’.

      Fifteen activists convicted of a terrorism-related offence for chaining themselves around an immigration removal flight at Stansted airport have received suspended sentences or community orders.

      The judge decided not to imprison them after he accepted they were motivated by “genuine reasons”.

      Amid an outcry over what human rights defenders branded a heavy-handed prosecution, the group, who have become known as the Stansted 15, were convicted last December of endangering the safety of an aerodrome.

      They had broken into Stansted airport’s “airside” area in March 2017 and chained themselves together around a Boeing 767 chartered by the Home Office to deport 60 people to Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone. After a 10-week trial a jury found them guilty of the charge – an offence that carries a potential life sentence.
      We in the Stansted 15 have been treated like terrorists
      Emma Hughes
      Read more

      At Chelmsford crown court on Wednesday, Judge Christopher Morgan QC, dismissed submissions in mitigation that the group should receive conditional discharges for the direct action protest, which briefly paralysed the airport, saying they did not reflect the danger that had been presented by their actions.

      He said such action would “ordinarily result in custodial sentences”, but that they “didn’t have a grievous intent as some may do who commit this type of crime”. The mood in the court had lightened considerably at the start of the hearing when Morgan said that he did not consider the culpability of any of the defendants passed the threshold of an immediate custodial sentence.

      The heaviest sentences were reserved for three of the group who had been previously convicted of aggravated trespass at Heathrow airport in 2016.

      Alistair Tamlit and Edward Thacker were sentenced on Wednesday to nine months in jail suspended for 18 months, along with 250 hours of unpaid work. Melanie Strickland was sentenced to nine months suspended for 18 months, with 100 hours of unpaid work.

      Benjamin Smoke, Helen Brewer, Lyndsay Burtonshaw, Nathan Clack, Laura Clayson, Mel Evans, Joseph McGahan, Jyotsna Ram, Nicholas Sigsworth, Emma Hughes and Ruth Potts were each given 12-month community orders with 100 hours of unpaid work, while May McKeith received a 12-month community order with 20 days of rehabilitation.

      In mitigation, Dexter Dias QC said it should be taken into account that all acted to try to help individuals they perceived to be in danger. “The reason they wanted to prevent [the flight’s] departure is that they believed the welfare and safety of some of the people on that flight was at risk,” he said.
      Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
      Read more

      “In those circumstances the court historically in this country have considered that conscientious motivations offer quite significant mitigation.”

      Dias pointed out that 11 of those who had been due to be deported to west Africa that night remain in the country, including two of whom there were reasons to believe were victims of human trafficking, and two who were subsequently found to have been victims of human trafficking. “One of them had been raped and forced into sex work in several European cities,” he said.

      Kirsty Brimelow QC, who appeared to have been specially recruited for the mitigation after not acting for any defendant during the trial, told Morgan he must balance the defendants’ rights to protest and free association against the harm their actions caused the airport.

      Brimelow last year acted for three fracking protesters whose sentences were overturned by the court of appeal as “manifestly excessive”. She continually referred to that case as she told Morgan that he must consider the “proportionality” of the sentences.

      The defendants emerged from the court to a rousing reception from hundreds of supporters who had spent the day protesting outside. Tamlit said he was “relieved that’s over”.

      “It’s been a gruelling process,” he said. “The flight that went this morning [to Jamaica] put things in perspective. We might have been in jail tonight but people could have visited us and we would have eventually been released.

      “Not going to jail is a partial victory but we are going to keep campaigning to end charter flights, immigration detention and the hostile environment.”

      McKeith’s mother, Ag, said she was pleased at the relatively lenient sentence. But, she said she felt they ought not to have been convicted at all. “Despite the judge’s stern account, it’s simply not true that they endangered anybody at the airport,” she said. “The only people who were in danger were the people on the plane. I watched the trial all the way through and watched the prosecution trying to spin straw into gold, and they didn’t convince me.”

      Graeme Hayes, reader in political sociology at Aston University, who observed the entire trial, said: “Although the defendants have not got the custodial sentence, the bringing of a terrorism-related charge against non-violent protesters is a very worrying phenomenon. It’s so far the only case [of its type] in the UK, and points to a chilling of legitimate public dissent.”

      The defendants have already filed an appeal against their convictions. Raj Chada, of Hodge, Jones & Allen, represented most of them. “We will be studying the judgment carefully to review whether there are any issues that need to be brought up in the appeal,” he said.

      “It’s striking that nowhere was there any endangerment of individuals identified.”

    • Stansted deportation flight protesters have convictions quashed

      Group of 15 activists were prosecuted under anti-terror laws for blocking immigration removal flight in 2017

      Fifteen anti-deportation activists who were prosecuted under counter-terror legislation for blocking the takeoff of an immigration removal flight from Stansted airport have had their convictions quashed.

      In a judgment handed down by the court of appeal on Friday afternoon, the lord chief justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, said: “The appellants should not have been prosecuted for the extremely serious offence under section 1(2)(b) of the 1990 Act because their conduct did not satisfy the various elements of the offence.

      “There was, in truth, no case to answer.”

      The ruling came more than two years after the 15 protesters were convicted following a nine-week trial of endangering the safety of an aerodrome, an offence under the 1990 Aviation and Maritime Security Act that carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.

      It was the first time the terror-related offence, passed in 1990 in response to the Lockerbie bombing, had been used against peaceful protesters.

      The defendants said they were relieved by the decision. May MacKeith, 35, said that the time from their arrest in 2017 to Friday’s ruling put into perspective the experiences of people caught in the UK’s hostile environment immigration system.

      “It was frightening,” she said. “But all along, despite the draconian charge, we knew that our actions were justified. We’ve never doubted that the people on that plane should never have been treated that way by our government.” Of those due to be deported on the flight, 11 were still in the UK, with three granted leave to remain.

      In their appeal, lawyers for the defence argued the legislation used to convict the group was not only rarely used but also was not intended for the kinds of peaceful actions undertaken by their clients. They said the prosecution stretched the meaning of the law by characterising the lock-on equipment they used to blockade the runway as devices used to endanger life.

      Weighing the argument, Burnett said in his judgment: “The closure of the runway was undoubtedly disruptive and expensive, but there was no evidence that it resulted in likely endangerment to the safety of the aerodrome or of persons there.

      “The [deployment] of an unspecified number of police officers when the terrorist threat was severe may have increased the risks within the terminal, but there was no evidence to enable an inference to be drawn that endangerment was likely.

      “There may have been a slightly enhanced risk of a police officer slipping en route to the aircraft, but it would stretch both language and common sense to say that there was likely endangerment, both in terms of the probability of this happening and the seriousness of the consequences if it did happen.”

      Burnett added: “Both the crown’s case and the summing-up collapsed the distinction between risk and likely danger and treated the offence as if it were akin to a health and safety provision.”

      The defendants, all members of the group Stop Deportations, had taken part in a peaceful action that stopped a chartered deportation flight to Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone from taking off on 28 March 2017. Members of the group cut a hole in the airport’s perimeter fence before rushing on to the apron at Stansted.

      Four protesters arranged themselves around the front landing gear of the aircraft, locking their arms together inside double-layered pipes filled with expanding foam. Further back, a second group of protesters erected a 2-metre tripod from scaffolding poles behind the engine on the left wing. One of them perched on top of the makeshift structure, while others locked themselves to the base to prevent it from being moved.

      In the moments before police arrived they were able to display banners, including one that said: “No one is illegal.”

      Although members of the group received suspended sentences or community orders, UN human rights experts wrote to the UK government expressing concern over the application of “security and terrorism-related legislation to prosecute peaceful political protesters and critics of state policy”.

      On Friday, rights groups including Amnesty International and Liberty welcomed the ruling. But Raj Chada of Hodge Jones & Allen, who represented the defendants, said questions remained as to why the then attorney general, Jeremy Wright, had authorised the use of the charge in the first place.

      He said: “It does make me uncomfortable that a British cabinet minister has authorised a terror charge against political opponents, that the lord chief justice has decided is completely inappropriate. The appellants should be told, why was this charge used in this way? What information did the attorney general have?”

    • Stansted 15: Activists who stopped migrant deportation flight have convictions overturned

      Lord Chief Justice says demonstrators have ‘no case to answer’ for offences they were charged with

      A group of activists who stopped a deportation flight leaving Stansted airport have had their convictions overturned by the Court of Appeal.

      They had been prosecuted following a protest in March 2017, where they ultimately prevented a charter flight that was due to deport 60 individuals to Africa.

      The group, known as the Stansted 15, were initially charged with aggravated trespass but the charge was changed to endangering safety at a public airport.

      All defendants denied the offence at trial, and said they were “guilty of nothing more than intervening to prevent harm” to migrants on board the plane.

      On Friday, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett, sitting with Mr Justice Jay and Ms Justice Whipple, overturned all 15 demonstrators’ convictions.

      Lord Burnett said the protesters “should not have been prosecuted for the extremely serious offence ... because their conduct did not satisfy the various elements of the offence. There was, in truth, no case to answer.”

      The judgment said the offence they were charged with was intended for “conduct of a different nature” after the campaigners’ lawyers told the Court of Appeal the offence used was related to terrorism and had been created in the wake of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing.

      May MacKeith, a member of the Stansted 15, said almost four years of legal proceedings “should never have happened”.

      “But for many people caught up in the UK immigration system the ordeal lasts much, much longer,” she added.

      “The nightmare of this bogus charge, a 10 week trial and the threat of prison has dominated our lives for four years. Despite the draconian response we know our actions were justified.”

      Raj Chada of Hodge Jones and Allen Solicitors, who represented the Stansted 15, said the case should be a matter of “great shame” to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and attorney general.

      “Both have questions to answer as to why they authorised such an unprecedented charge,” he added.

      “Amnesty International adopted the 15 as human rights defenders, Liberty intervened in the case and even the UN, through their special rapporteurs, expressed concern, yet the case went forward.”

      In March 2017, the defendants cut through the perimeter fence of Stansted airport in Essex and used pipes to lock themselves together around a plane.

      The Boeing 767 had been chartered by the Home Office to remove 60 people to Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone, and was stationary on the airport’s apron.

      The trial heard the defendants believed the deportees were at risk of death, persecution and torture if they were removed from Britain, and many were asylum seekers.

      Campaigners said that 11 of the 60 passengers remain in the UK, and included victims of human trafficking.

      The protesters, who all pleaded not guilty, were convicted in December 2018 of the intentional disruption of services at an aerodrome under the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990.

      A judge at Chelmsford Crown Court handed three defendants, who had previous convictions for aggravated trespass at airports, suspended prison terms and gave 12 defendants community sentences.

      Judge Christopher Morgan said alleged human rights abuses, immigration policy and proportionality did not have “any relevance” to whether a criminal offence had been committed.

      “In normal circumstances only a custodial sentence would have been justified in this case, but I accept that your intentions were to demonstrate.”

      United Nations human rights experts raised concern over the case and warned the British government against using security-related laws against protesters and critics.

      “We are concerned about the application of disproportional charges for what appears to be the exercise of the rights to peaceful and non-violent protest and freedom of expression,” a statement said in February 2019.

      “It appears that such charges were brought to deter others from taking similar peaceful direct action to defend human rights, and in particular the protection of asylum seekers.”

      The group received high-profile support from MPs and public figures, including the Bishop of Chelmsford.

      An open letter signed by dozens of politicians and academics in September condemned the practice of “secret deportation flights”, which came into renewed focus following the Windrush scandal.

      Amnesty International said the case was part of a Europe-wide trend of volunteers and activists being criminalised for helping migrants.

      Kate Allen, Amnesty International UK’s director, said the Court of Appeal ruling was a “good day for justice”.

      “The Stansted 15 will take their place in the history books as human rights defenders who bravely brought injustices perpetrated by the state into the light,” she added.

      “This case should never have been brought and there must be lessons learnt for how we treat human rights defenders in this country.”

      Lana Adamou, a lawyer for the Liberty human rights group, called the charges “an attack on our right to express dissent”.

      “All too often it is the most marginalised in society, and those acting in solidarity with them, who bear the brunt of over-zealous policing and crackdowns on protest, making it even more important for the government to take steps to facilitate protest and ensure these voices are heard, rather than find ways to suppress them,” she added.

      At November’s Court of Appeal hearing, lawyers for the activists told the court the legislation used to convict the 15 is rarely used and not intended for a protest case.

      In documents before the court, the Stansted 15’s barristers argued it was intended to deal with violence of the “utmost seriousness”, such as terrorism, rather than risks of “a health and safety-type nature” posed by those who have trespassed at an airport.

      Lawyers for the group also argued that the attorney general – who is required to sign off on the use of the legislation – should not have granted consent for the law to be used in this case, that the crown court judge made errors in summing up the case and in directions given to the jury.

      Barristers representing the CPS had said the convictions are safe and that the trial judge was correct.

      Tony Badenoch QC told the court: “We don’t accept that the act is constrained to terrorism and nothing else.”

      A CPS spokesperson said: “We will consider the judgment carefully in the next 28 days.”

      The 15 are: #Helen_Brewer, 31; #Lyndsay_Burtonshaw, 30; #Nathan_Clack, 32; #Laura_Clayson, 30; #Melanie_Evans, 37; #Joseph_McGahan, 37; #Benjamin_Smoke, 21; #Jyotsna_Ram, 35; #Nicholas_Sigsworth, 31; #Melanie_Strickland, 37; #Alistair_Tamlit, 32; #Edward_Thacker, 31; #Emma_Hughes, 40; #May_McKeith, 35; and #Ruth_Potts, 46.