position:taxi driver

  • Noam Chomsky at 90 : On Orwell, Taxi Drivers, and Rejecting Indoctrination | The Nation
    https://www.thenation.com/article/noam-chomsky-90th-birthday

    Chomsky recalled a preface that George Orwell wrote for Animal Farm, which was not included in the original editions of the book.

    “It was discovered about 30 years later in his unpublished papers. Today, if you get a new edition of Animal Farm, you might find it there,” he recalled. “The introduction is kind of interesting—he basically says what you all know: that the book is a critical, satiric analysis of the totalitarian enemy. But then he addresses himself to the people of free England; he says: You shouldn’t feel too self-righteous. He said in England, a free country—I’m virtually quoting—unpopular ideas can be suppressed without the use of force. And he goes on to give some examples, and, really, just a couple of common-sense explanations, which are to the point. One reason, he says, is: The press is owned by wealthy men who have every reason not to want certain ideas to be expressed. And the other, he says, essentially, is: It’s a ‘good’ education.”

    Chomsky explained: “If you have a ‘good’ education, you’ve gone to the best schools, you have internalized the understanding that there’s certain things it just wouldn’t do to say—and I think we can add to that, it wouldn’t do to think. And that’s a powerful mechanism. So, there are things you just don’t think, and you don’t say. That’s the result of effective education, effective indoctrination.

    If people—many people—don’t succumb to it, what happens to them? Well, I’ll tell you a story: I was in Sweden a couple years ago, and I noticed that taxi drivers were being very friendly, much more than I expected. And finally I asked one of them, ‘Why’s everyone being so nice?’ He pulled out a T-shirt he said every taxi driver has, and the T-shirt had a picture of me and a quote in Swedish of something I’d said once when I was asked, ‘What happens to people of independent mind?’ And I said, ‘They become taxi drivers.’”

    Danke, sehr geehrter Herr Chomsky.

     » Noam Chomsky, 90 ans : A propos d’Orwell, des chauffeurs de taxi, et du rejet de l’endoctrinement. Par John Nichols
    https://www.les-crises.fr/noam-chomsky-90-ans-a-propos-dorwell-des-chauffeurs-de-taxi-et-du-rejet-d

    Il dit qu’en Angleterre, un pays libre – je cite presque littéralement – les idées impopulaires peuvent être réprimées sans avoir recours à la force. Et il poursuit en donnant quelques exemples, et, en fait, seulement deux explications rationnelles, qui vont droit au but. La première raison, dit-il, c’est que : la presse appartient à des hommes riches qui ont toutes les raisons de ne pas vouloir que certaines idées soient exprimées. Et l’autre, dit-il, est essentiellement : une “bonne” éducation. »

    Chomsky explique : « Si vous avez une “bonne” éducation, vous avez fréquenté les meilleures écoles, vous avez intériorisé le concept qu’il y a certaines choses qu’il ne serait pas bien de dire – et je pense que nous pouvons ajouter, qu’il ne faudrait pas penser. Et c’est un mécanisme puissant. Donc, il y a des choses qu’on ne pense même pas et qu’on ne dit pas. C’est le résultat d’une éducation efficace, d’un endoctrinement efficace.

    Si les gens – beaucoup de gens – ne s’y laissent pas engluer, que leur arrive-t-il ? Et bien, je vais vous raconter une histoire : j’étais en Suède il y a quelques années, et j’ai remarqué que les chauffeurs de taxi étaient très sympathiques, bien plus que ce à quoi je m’attendais. Et finalement, j’ai demandé à l’un d’eux : “Pourquoi tout le monde est-il si gentil ?” Il a sorti un t-shirt que, d’après lui, tous les chauffeurs de taxi possèdent, et sur le t-shirt était imprimée une photo de moi avec une citation, en suédois, de quelque chose que j’avais dit une fois quand on m’avait demandé : “Qu’arrive-t-il aux gens qui ont un esprit indépendant ?” Et j’avais répondu : “Ils deviennent chauffeurs de taxi.”

    #Taxi #Kultur #Politik

  • Israeli forces shoot, kill Palestinian attacker
    Dec. 13, 2018 10:49 A.M. (Updated : Dec. 13, 2018 12:23 P.M.)
    http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?ID=782061

    RAMALLAH (Ma’an) — A 29-year-old Palestinian was shot and killed by Israeli forces, on late Wednesday, near Surda village, north of the central occupied West Bank district of Ramallah.

    The Israeli army announced that Saleh Amer Saleh al-Barghouth i, 29, a resident from Kobar village, in Ramallah district, was shot and killed by Israeli special forces.

    Earlier this week, al-Barghouthi carried out a drive-by shooting attack near the illegal Israeli settlement of Ofra, injuring seven Israeli settlers, including a 21-year-old pregnant woman, who was in critical condition and delivered the baby prematurely in an emergency procedure.

    #Palestine_assassinée

    • Undercover Israeli Forces Kill A Palestinian Taxi Driver Near Ramallah
      December 13, 2018 2:33 AM
      http://imemc.org/article/undercover-israeli-forces-kill-a-palestinian-taxi-driver-near-ramallah

      Undercover Israeli soldiers assassinated, on Wednesday evening, a Palestinian Taxi driver, near Surda village, north of the central West Bank city of Ramallah; the army claimed the Palestinian was allegedly “involved” in the shooting targeting colonialist settlers, last Sunday.

      The slain Palestinian has been identified as Saleh Omar Saleh Barghouthi , 29; eyewitnesses said he was driving his taxi when the undercover Israeli soldiers, driving an old commercial Mercedes, ambushed him, and opened fire at him, before abducting him while he was still alive, but severely injured and bleeding.

      The army later said the Palestinian died from his wounds in a hospital in occupied Jerusalem.

      Eyewitnesses said that the taxi remained in the middle of the road, after the soldiers shot Saleh, and added that a young man, identified as Wa’ad Barghouthi, tried to remove it from the road, but the undercover forces attacked and abducted him too.

      Eyewitnesses said the undercover soldiers instantly opened fire at the car after ambushing it, in what appeared to be a clear assassination, not an attempt to abduct and imprison him.

      The soldiers also abducted Ala’ Tarifi, who owns the Taxi company, when he tried to ask about Saleh’s condition.

    • B’Tselem investigation: al-Barghouthi was shot point-blank
      Jan. 31, 2019 12:01 P.M. (Updated: Jan. 31, 2019 12:01 P.M.)
      http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=782396

      JERUSALEM (Ma’an) — An investigation by B’Tselem found that, contrary to official Israeli statements, Saleh al-Barghouthi did not try to flee or run anyone over, nor could he have tried: two security vehicles were blocking the taxi he was driving at either end, and he was surrounded by some 10 security personnel who shot him point-blank – an operation resembling an extrajudicial killing. Official attempts to sanction the killing in retrospect ensure no one will be held accountable.

      A statement on the investigation said that “On 12 December 2018, at around 6:30 P.M., two Israeli security vehicles blocked the path of a taxi driving along the main road of Surda, a Palestinian village in Ramallah District. Driving the taxi was Saleh al-Barghouthi, 28, husband and father of a 5-year-old boy from the village of Kobar, which lies north of Ramallah. About ten personnel, including Special Police Unit officers, got out of the vehicles, surrounded the taxi and shot al-Barghouthi point-blank. They then pulled the wounded al-Barghouthi out of the taxi, handcuffed him and drove away with him. The IDF notified the family that al-Barghouthi had been critically injured in the incident and died in hospital. According to the Shin Bet (ISA), al-Barghouthi, who was an operative with Hamas’ military wing, was suspected of involvement in the drive-by shooting that took place on 9 December 2018 at the hitch-hiking post near the settlement of Ofra, north of Ramallah. Seven Israelis were injured in the attack, including Shira Ish-Ran, who was seven months pregnant and delivered of her baby in hospital. The baby boy, Amiad Israel Ish-Ran, died three days later.” (...)

  • WATCH | “There is a minefield sign and the migrants will go into this area because they know the police won’t be there”. Hans von der Brelie (@euronewsreport) is reporting from the Bosnia-Herzegovina border.

    https://twitter.com/euronews/status/1058409250043633671

    #Bonsie_Herzégovine #Bosnie #migrations #asile #réfugiés #mines_anti-personnel #frontières #Croatie

    Ici le reportage:
    On the ground at the Bosnian-Croatian border where migrant tensions are rising

    Tensions are rising on the Bosnian-Croatian border, where scores of migrants are demanding entry to the European Union, amid reports this week of fresh police clashes, plummeting temperatures and inadequate living conditions.

    Thousands of migrants and refugees fleeing wars and poverty in North Africa and Asia are sleeping rough near the border, which they hope to cross to gain access to the EU.

    Several people were injured on Wednesday in clashes with Croatian police, with migrants accusing officers of beating them and smashing their phones.

    Meanwhile, Doctors Without Borders warned that “as temperatures drop the situation becomes more difficult and tensions are rising.”

    Euronews correspondent Hans von der Brelie is at the scene. Take a look at his pictures and videos below to find out what is really happening on the ground:
    https://twitter.com/euronews/status/1058409250043633671
    Matiola and Nazir want to enter the European Union without visas. However, they can’t cross the well-protected Bosnian border with Croatia.

    They are stuck in the northwestern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Bihac, sleeping rough — protected against rain by plastic sheets.

    Tensions are rising on the Bosnian-Croatian border, where scores of migrants are demanding entry to the European Union, amid reports this week of fresh police clashes, plummeting temperatures and inadequate living conditions.

    Thousands of migrants and refugees fleeing wars and poverty in North Africa and Asia are sleeping rough near the border, which they hope to cross to gain access to the EU.

    Several people were injured on Wednesday in clashes with Croatian police, with migrants accusing officers of beating them and smashing their phones.

    Meanwhile, Doctors Without Borders warned that “as temperatures drop the situation becomes more difficult and tensions are rising.”

    Euronews correspondent Hans von der Brelie is at the scene. Take a look at his pictures and videos below to find out what is really happening on the ground:

    Matiola and Nazir want to enter the European Union without visas. However, they can’t cross the well-protected Bosnian border with Croatia.

    They are stuck in the northwestern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Bihac, sleeping rough — protected against rain by plastic sheets.

    A torn EU umbrella lays on top of destroyed tents and garbage in a public park of #Bihac.

    Hundreds of migrants had put their tents here, but they are no longer tolerated and the camp was dismantled.


    Migrants rebuild a shelter in Bihac park.

    These friends from the Kurdish part of Iraq have stayed together throughout the difficult journey. They dream of building a future in Germany or France.

    This is 24-year-old Muhamed Suliman. He worked as a taxi driver in Dubai before heading towards Europe. It was "too hot to stay there. Not enough pay. Too many fines,” he said.

    Suliman said his dream is to reach Italy, but there is no way to cross into Croatia.

    “I will try again. Again and again,” he said.

    Wearing plastic sandals, he said Croatian police took his shoes.


    The remains of a dismantled tent camp in Bihac park.

    Kurdish Iraqi migrants discuss their broken smartphone. “The Croatian police smashed it,” they said.

    Ageed, Muhemed, Jalal, Karwan, Lawin, Ahmad, Tahiro are from Iraq. They speak Kurdish.

    They have been staying for many weeks in the public park of Bihac, the starting point to cross illegally over the external EU border.

    They have tried several times to enter Croatia but were always caught by border guards.

    Muhamed claims he was surrounded by seven Croatian policemen and beaten up.

    This is a former students dormitory building in Bihac park, where almost 1,000 migrants and refugees sleep rough. They mainly come from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Northern Africa, Bangladesh, Iran and Iraq.

    People cook on an open fire in front of a former students’ dormitory in Bihac.

    The migrants from Pakistan are aiming to cross the nearby external EU border illegally into Croatia and travel further towards Italy, Germany, France and Spain.

    This official tries to detect migrants crossing into Croatia illegally every day and night.

    Ivana and Josip are two of 6,300 police officers controlling the Croatian border with Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    As it prepares to join the EU’s Schengen zone soon, Croatia has invested heavily in human resources.

    “We have really a lot of colleagues around here at the external border of the EU”, Ivana and Josip told Euronews.

    This is just one out of many watchtowers and observation posts on the Croatian side of the external EU border with Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    “No need to build a border fence here,” says Damir Butina, head of the border police unit in Cetingrad.

    This is the famous “#green_border” between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The tiny creek marks the exact borderline.

    The left side of the picture is Croatia, the right is Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    Dozens of migrants try to cross the border every day and every night. While there is no fence, there is hidden high tech surveillance all around. You move — and you will be detected.

    https://www.euronews.com/2018/11/02/on-the-ground-at-the-bosnian-croatian-border-where-migrant-tensions-are-ri
    #frontière_verte #militarisation_des_frontières

  • How Egyptians’ attitude toward voting has changed over 7 years | MadaMasr

    https://www.madamasr.com/en/2018/03/31/feature/politics/how-egyptians-attitude-toward-voting-has-changed-over-7-years

    Mohamed*, a 53-year-old taxi driver, roams the streets of Dokki on the second day of Egypt’s presidential election, cringing every time a pick-up truck drives by blasting songs produced especially to support current President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as he runs for a second term in office. The excitement with which Egyptians took to polling stations after the 2011 revolution seems a distant memory to Mohamed as he weighs his options: to participate in an election he considers a farce in order to express his disapproval, or to abstain from voting and lose his chance at voicing his opinion.

    Mohamed insisted on voting even before the revolution, in former President Hosni Mubarak’s rigged elections, in hopes that change would come. However, he now struggles to find the motivation to head to the polling stations.

    “I feel that it won’t make a difference whether I vote or not,” he says.

    As the polls opened on March 26, the atmosphere in Egypt was a far cry from the festive scene apparent during the constitutional referendum of March 2011, the first vote after the 18-day revolt in January of that year that toppled Mubarak. At the time, the excitement was not about the constitutional amendments as much as it was about voters celebrating their right to finally participate in a poll they believed would make a difference.

  • They were sold a fantasy of middle-class life. Now Ola and Uber drivers face a brutal reality
    https://qz.com/1230993/the-reality-of-driving-for-ola-and-uber-in-india-debt-slashed-pay-multiple-jobs

    Tanveer Pasha, a 33-year-old taxi driver in Bengaluru, is in a dilemma. As president of the OTU (Ola, Taxiforsure, and Uber) Drivers and Owners Association, he’s keen on joining his colleagues in Mumbai and New Delhi in their March 19 strike against mobile app-based cab aggregators over dwindling earnings. Yet, he just can’t afford to. “Every Rs100 is important to drivers today and we need to earn it by driving,” Pasha told Quartz. “Today, we are not able to meet our needs from Ola and Uber.” (...)

    #Uber #travail #Ola #Taxiforsure

  • I cite : This Changes Some Things
    http://jdeanicite.typepad.com/i_cite/2015/03/this-changes-some-things.html
    Jodi Dean : pourquoi l’approche de Naomi Klein ne va pas assez loin.

    How do we imagine the climate changing?

    Some scenarios involve techno-fixes like cloud-seeding or new kinds of carbon sinks. Cool tech, usually backed by even cooler entrepreneurs, saves the day — Iron Man plus Al Gore plus Steve Jobs. In green.

    Other scenarios are apocalyptic: blizzards, floods, tsunamis, and droughts; crashing planes; millions of migrants moving from south to north only to be shot at armed borders. The poor fight and starve; the rich enclave themselves in shining domed cities as they document the extinction of charismatic species and convince themselves they aren’t next.

    And there is climate change as unconscious: the stuff of stress, inconvenience, anxiety, and repression; the relief at not having to manage anymore; the enjoyment of change, destruction, and punishment. There will be a last judgment after all. Here those of us who follow the reports of emissions, temperature increases, and political failure get to enjoy being in the know, being those with access to the truth. We can’t do anything about it, but we can judge everyone else for their blind, consumerist pleasures. We can name our new era, marking our impact as the Anthropocene (hey, we have changed the world after all.) Anticipatory Cassandras, we can watch from within our melancholic “pre-loss,” to use Naomi Klein’s term, comforted at least by the fantasy of our future capacity to say we knew it all along. We told you so.

    The hardest thing is doing something about it. Coming together. Fighting against the multiple centrifugal forces that have produced us as individuals preoccupied with our particular freedoms, preferences, conveniences, and choices. It’s no wonder in this setting that market approaches to climate change have appeared as popular options. They affirm the selves we’ve become and promise to solve the problems all in one new light-bulb or electronic car.

    Some of our present difficulty comes from the challenge of imagining a better future. Does it involve a kind of re-peasantization? The elimination of all industry, of all the advantages accrued to some of us under late capitalism? Or is it closer to what we have now, but with windmills and bicycles, the Dutchification of everything? Or is it really not that big a deal at all, a few tweaks here and there so that society looks pretty much like it did in the 70s (Taxi Driver? New York told to drop dead?).

    Naomi Klein’s bold attempt in This Changes Everything is to take up the challenge of creating an alternative to the grim inequalities of our present trajectory by using climate change as a frame for galvanizing left politics. What the economic crises of the seventies and eighties were for the right (opportunities to deepen and extend neoliberalism), climate change can be for the left (an opportunity to “pull huge swaths of humanity out of poverty”). If the left fails to take this opportunity, that is, if we don’t take advantage of the “existential urgency” that climate change provides to develop a more focused left strategy, we are doomed to “climate-change-fueled disaster capitalism—profiteering disguised as emission reduction, privatized hyper-militarized borders” etc (154). What we need, she tells us, is a People’s Shock.

    Rejecting narrow market-based approaches like cap and trade, Klein argues that climate change

    could be the best argument progressives have ever had to demand the rebuilding and reviving of local economies; to reclaim our democracies from corrosive corporate influence; to block harmful new free trade deal and rewrite old ones; to invest in starving public infrastructure like mass transit and affordable housing; to take back ownership of essential services like energy and water; to remake our sick agricultural system into something much healthier; to open borders to migrants whose displacement is linked to climate impacts; to finally respect Indigenous land rights — all of which would help to end grotesque levels of inequality within our nations and between them. (7)

    Just as Marx and Engels linked communism to the workers movement, making communism the mission of the working class, so does Klein link a vision of a progressive future to the climate movement. If the only way to eliminate the exploitation of the workers is the abolition of capitalism, the only to eliminate the exploitation of the planet is .... multiple, dispersed activities combined within a diffuse policy framework oriented toward long-term planning and inspired by an essentialist, overly romantic vision of locality, indigeneity, and democracy (that is to say, populism).

    Klein’s attempt to make climate change the basis for a stronger left politics is a crucial political move. But she weakens it. She fails to see it through. At the site of this failure is a red hole, a missing communism that distorts her vision. She invokes radical politics, but ultimately pulls back into the formula of the alter-globalization movement: in a movement of movements, multiple communities can solve their problems democratically.

    Klein presents the “core problem” preventing adequate response to climate change as “the stranglehold of market logic” and “unfettered corporate power.” She says that “our economy is at war with many forms of life on earth, including human life.” (21) We are in the midst of a battle between capitalism and the planet. If capitalism wins, and at this point it is winning, extremely dangerous warming will lock-in, threatening the habitability of the planet. What is to be done? We have to change everything.

    Everything rides on how we understand “everything.” Klein seems to understand it in terms of neoliberalism, where neoliberalism involves privatization, deregulation of the corporate sphere, lowering of taxes within a broader setting of global trade. By rendering the problem in terms of neoliberalism, she doesn’t have to advocate the abolition of capitalism, even when her arguments tend in that direction. So her solution is a kind of global Green Keynesianism, a step back into the time before neoliberalism dismantled the welfare state. It is hard to say exactly what Klein has in mind, though, since she offers so many options in a giant menu of change. It’s like she thinks “everything” should be on the table and we (each “community”) should be able to pick what we want (perhaps in a truer, more democratic market).

    Klein’s sense of “everything” is limited by the absence of a communist alternative. For example, even as she criticizes market fundamentalism, she sometimes seems fully ensconced in it. She wants to “buy time for clean energy sources to increase their market share and to be seen as more viable alternatives, weakening the power of the fossil fuel lobby” (349). But if we have to change everything, why not just nationalize the fossil fuel industries and undertake a 5-10 year process of dismantling them? Or why not nationally fund clean energy and inject so many taxes and regulations into the carbon economy that it withers away? It’s like Klein feels so fully trapped within the economic system we have that she can’t break free even as she insists we must break free. There has been and still is a name for this break — communism.

    Some of the components of Klein’s new Green Keynesianism would likely include: a carefully planned economy; basic annual income; big public sector expenditures; higher taxes on the rich; and tougher business regulations. The Green justification for the higher taxes on the rich is that they are the ones who need to curb their consumption. The big expenditures would include better public transit, energy efficient housing, and changes in land use to encourage local agriculture. Klein also favors doing a lot with taxes, following the “polluter pays” principle applied to corporations and the rich. It was never clear to me who or what was engaged in the long-term planning she advocates and what sort of force these plans would have. I expect that planning would occur on multiple levels. Given Klein’s insistence on local, decentralized communities, it also isn’t clear to me how the plans would be integrated.

    Klein opposes the nationalization of energy. She advocates instead the model of democratically run, community-based utilities — let a thousand renewable energy providers bloom! She treats this as a project of the commons (her models are Germany and Denmark). Governments provide a national framework within which decentralized, small-scale, local providers supply renewable energy.

    Accompanying the core problem of market fundamentalism is a cultural narrative regarding human domination of the earth. This narrative, Klein argues, underlies much of the left as well as the capitalist right. The former Soviet Union, Mao’s China, and contemporary extractivist left-wing governments in Latin America are clear examples, but so are trade unions fighting for “dirty” jobs instead of clean ones, and so are any left Keynesians who continue to think in developmentalist terms. In place of this narrative of domination, Klein’s Green Keynesianism would emphasize regeneration, “relationships of reciprocity and interconnection with the natural world” (182).

    How, then, can we make the change we want to see? Not with big Green: “the ’market-based’ climate solutions favored by so many foundations and adopted by many greens have provided an invaluable service to the fossil fuel sector as a whole” (199). These include consumer-based solutions (buy Green!) as well as carbon trading schemes, and fracking as a clean energy bridge to renewables. In addition to having done little to nothing to lower emissions over the last twenty years, these approaches, she argues, make the problem worse by failing to challenge the hegemony of the market.

    Klein has more confidence in the “movement of many movements” that she calls “Blockadia.” These include anti-fracking, anti-extractive industry, and pipeline protests all over the world. Klein rightly emphasizes how the contemporary resistance movement is more than a NIMBY struggle. Across multiple sites, activists share the conviction that fossil fuels must remain in the ground. They use local issues (health, safety, livelihood) as instruments for getting at the global problem of climate change.

    The struggles of Blockadia are the flip side of the extreme energy boom going on for the last decade (the one with Sarah Palin’s tagline, “drill, baby, drill!”). In the US and Canada, this boom has made more visible the war that the fossil fuel industry has long tried to hide, namely, that the carbon economy—and the capitalist economy more generally—relies on sacrifice zones. Klein writes:

    for a very long time, sacrifice zones all shared a few elements in common. They were poor places. Out-of-the-way places. Places where residents lacks political power, usually having to do with some combination of race, language, and class (310).

    With the “extreme energy frenzy,” the sacrifice zone has expanded. More people—and more people in the north and west, in areas formerly privileged enough to think they were entitled to turn their heads—are now in the zone of allowable sacrifice. From the vast reach of the Bakken, Marcellus, and Utica shale plays, to the Alberta tar sands, to the continent crossing pipelines, to deep-water oil rigs, to the exploding bomb trains, the intensification of the carbon economy has extended the range of expendable people and places.

    Although Klein doesn’t use these terms, climate change makes clear the scale of expropriation underpinning the carbon economy. The surplus value captured by the top— by the owners, shareholders, and executives of the fossil fuel industry — is expropriated not just from the workers in the industry (which it is), and not just from those living nearby (which it is), but from those living hundreds and thousands of miles away (which is a characteristic also of nuclear power). “Sacrifice zone” has the capacity to be a key concept for knitting together anti-capitalist and climate struggles.

    It’s correlative concept could then be the “commons.” For example, we would want to eliminate sacrifice zones and treat the entire planet as a commons. Having disallowed communism, Klein can’t get us to this point. More specifically, in the place in her argument where Klein could — and should — point to an internationalist egalitarian vision such as that championed by communists she appeals to a vague notion of democracy understood as multiplicity combined with a romantic vision of indigenous people. This combination embeds unresolved tensions in her argument.

    The first problem is the equation of the Blockadia movements with a struggle for democracy. Klein writes: this emergent network of resistance is “driven by a desire for a deeper form of democracy, one that provides communities with real control over those resources that are most critical to collective survival—the health of the water, air, and soil” (295) and “the fight against violent resource extraction and the fight for greater community control, democracy, and sovereignty are two sides of the same coin” (309). Klein displaces particular struggles (pipeline, fracking, climate) into the political field rather than seeing how the struggles themselves change the field by contesting its terms. Most of the time, activist groups aren’t majorities. They are small groups trying to force a position and bring more people over to their side — as well they should!

    Additionally, Klein implies that communities are somehow unified and that they encounter an external force (state or corporation) that is violently extracting resources from them. But division goes all the way through communities. The communities themselves are divided. The deadlocked political system that we have is both a cause and an effect of this division. Marxists refer to this division as class conflict (which works well enough if we have a loose understanding of ’class’). By omitting the constitutive place of division, Klein can suggest that community sovereignty is a goal, again, as if the community were united against fossil fuels — but the fact that we are not united is precisely the problem the book, and the movement, encounters.

    To use a local example, in the battle against the expansion of methane gas storage and LPG storage in the fragile salt caverns adjacent to Seneca Lake, the Town of Reading — where the facility is located — endorses the gas storage plan. Schuyler County — where the facility is located — also supports the plan, although the vote came down to 1 person in their local board and the community is clearly divided. All the other counties surrounding the lake oppose the plan, but most of this opposition came from votes by city or county boards after petitions from activists. The state is considering the issues, and will make a decision. The federal government has already agreed to let the methane storage proceed, but might reconsider. Which level counts as the community? Why? And what sense does this make in a global setting? No one involved has said that the process has not been democratic. This is what democracy looks like. We just don’t think it has yielded the right outcome.

    The second problem is Klein’s association of communities with indigeneity and land. Klein writes, “communities with strong ties to the land have always, and will always, defend themselves against businesses that threaten their ways of life” (309). Here again she denies division, as if everyone in a community agreed on what constituted a threat, as if they were all similarly situated against a threat, as if they were never too deluded, tired, or exploited to defend themselves, as if they could never themselves constitute a threat to themselves. Cities, towns, states, and regions make bad decisions all the time; they stimulate industries that destroy them. Klein, though, has something else in mind, “a ferocious love” that “no amount of money can extinguish.” She associates this love “with an identity, a culture, a beloved place that people are determined to pass on to their grandchildren, and that their ancestors may have paid for with great sacrifice.” She continues, “And though this kind of connection to place is surely strongest in Indigenous communities where the ties to the land go back thousands of years, it is in fact Blockadia’s defining feature” (342).

    Participants in my seminar found this description racist or fascist. Even though this is not Klein’s intent, her rhetoric deploys a set of myths regarding nature, and some people’s relation to nature, that make some people closer to nature (and further from civilization) than others. It also justifies an intense defense of blood and soil on the part of one group’s attachment to a place such that others become foreign, invaders, rightly excluded as threats to our way of life, our cultural identity. Given that climate change is already leading to increased migration and immigration and that the US and Europe are already responding by militarizing borders, a language of cultural defense and ties to the land is exactly what we don’t need in a global movement for climate justice.

    Klein’s argument, though, gets worse as it juxtaposes indigenous people’s love of place with the “extreme rootlessness” of the fossil fuel workforce. These “highly mobile” pipefitters, miners, engineers, and big rig drivers produce a culture of transience, even when they “may stay for decades and raise their kids” in a place. The language of rootless echoes with descriptions of cosmopolitan Jews, intellectuals, and communists. Some are always foreign elements threatening our way of life.

    In contrast, I imagine climate politics as breaking the link between place and identity. To address climate change, we have to treat the world itself as a commons and build institutions adequate to the task of managing it. I don’t have a clear idea as to what these institutions would look like. But the idea that no one is entitled to any place seems better to me as an ethos for a red-green coalition. It requires us to be accountable to every place.

    I should wrap this up. The final tension I want to address comes in Klein’s conclusion, as she emphasizes mass social movements. Invoking the abolition movement, Klein is inspiring, properly crediting Chris Hayes for his influential Nation article linking climate change and the emancipation of the slaves in the US. Nonetheless, her argument is strange. She calls for societal transformation but refuses the term “revolution.” Throughout the book, she has said that we are running out of time to stop a warming trend so severe as to destroy civilization as we know it if not eliminate the human species altogether. She invokes Brad Werner’s famous paper announcing that earth is basically fucked. But she writes:

    And let’s take it for granted that we want to do these radical things democratically and without a bloodbath, so violent, vanguardist revolutions don’t have much to offer in the way of roadmaps (450).

    This lets her completely discount the revolutionary movements of the 19th and 20th centuries, as if there is nothing to learn from any of the large scale organizing undertaken by communists, socialists, wobblies, and unionists. Her model for the left thus relies on extracting from the left a central component of our history. Frankly, at the level of tactics alone, this is a bad call: why sign on to a political project premised on the rejection of working class achievements (a move which repeats a ubiquitous gesture of erasure since 1989). Wouldn’t incorporating these achievements be fundamental to any effort to reinvent “the very idea of the collective, the communal, the commons, the civil, and the civic after so many decades of attack and neglect” (460)? Klein is trying to open up a collective desire for collectivity, but without communism.

    It is also without revolution, which Klein dismisses as vanguardist, as if her Blockadians weren’t themselves at the vanguard of climate struggle. But what does it mean to reject revolution? If the movements are mobilized as she suggests, what will stop them? What would block or hinder the people after they are moving? Perhaps the state, since Klein hasn’t said anything about seizing it. Perhaps each other, since she thinks of us as divided into local communities. Perhaps the capitalist system, since she hasn’t called for its abolition. Or perhaps this isn’t the worry, since we are unlikely to be mobilized enough in time at all — and for enough of us in the north, that will be okay, at least for a while.

    #climat #écologie #capitalisme #politique

  • New York City Moves to Require Uber to Provide a Tipping Option in Its App - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/17/nyregion/new-york-city-uber-tipping-app.html

    New Yorkers have been able to tip a taxi driver by adding a few dollars to their bill before swiping a credit card for years. But they cannot add a tip when they use the popular ride-hailing app Uber.

    Now officials are moving to require Uber to provide a tipping option in the app.

    The city’s Taxi and Limousine Commission announced a proposal on Monday requiring car services that accept only credit cards to allow passengers to tip the driver using their card.

    “This rule proposal will be an important first step to improve earning potential in the for-hire vehicle industry, but it is just one piece of a more comprehensive effort to improve the economic well-being of drivers,” Meera Joshi, the city’s taxi commissioner, said in a statement.

    The decision was prompted by a petition from the Independent Drivers Guild, a group representing Uber drivers in New York. The petition, which collected more than 11,000 signatures, argued that drivers were losing thousands of dollars without an easy tipping option.

    Passengers can tip an Uber driver using cash, but there has long been confusion over whether it was expected. Uber’s website says tipping is voluntary and that riders are not obligated to offer a cash tip.

    The lack of a tipping option in Uber’s app has been a sore point for drivers. If new rules are approved in New York, it would be a major change in how Uber runs its business in its largest United States market. Other cities could demand to have the same choice.

    A spokeswoman for Uber, Alix Anfang, said the company would review the proposal.

    “Uber is always striving to offer the best earning opportunity for drivers and we are constantly working to improve the driver experience,” Ms. Anfang said in a statement, noting that the company had worked with the drivers guild to make sure drivers had a voice.

    Lyft, Uber’s largest competitor in the United States, has long offered in-app tipping as an option for riders. But Travis Kalanick, Uber’s chief executive, has been one of the largest impediments to adding tipping to the Uber app, according to two people familiar with his thinking who did not want to be identified publicly discussing the company’s internal discussions.

    Mr. Kalanick believes the feature — which has already been built, but has yet to be deployed — could add “friction” to the in-app experience, and could potentially make Uber less appealing. It could also bring a sense of guilt to those who do not tip drivers. Some inside the company have lobbied Mr. Kalanick to change his stance, but he has long resisted.

    New York’s proposal will be formally introduced by July and requires approval by the taxi commission’s board. Before that vote, drivers and passengers will have a chance to speak on the measure at a public hearing.

    In New York, about 16 million passengers used Uber and other ride-hailing services in October, soaring from about 5 million in June 2015, according to a recent study. But Uber has faced a series of scandals over its corporate culture, including allegations of sexual harassment, leading to a backlash among consumers.

    In March, Lyft said its drivers had earned more than $200 million in tips nationwide since the company started allowing tips in 2012. Adrian Durbin, a spokesman for Lyft, said its tipping policy was a major reason drivers prefer Lyft over Uber.

    New York Today
    Each morning, get the latest on New York businesses, arts, sports, dining, style and more.

    “We’ve always known that offering in-app tipping is the right thing to do, which is why we’ve offered it since our earliest days,” Mr. Durbin said in a statement.

    James Conigliaro Jr., the founder of the Independent Drivers Guild, said that allowing drivers to earn tips would help them make a decent living after Uber had in recent years reduced driver rates in New York.

    “It has become harder for drivers to make a living wage,” he said. “They have to work much harder and longer hours to earn the same amount of money they did when Uber came on the scene.”

    Uber’s reaction to the proposal on Monday was muted compared to the company’s aggressive response when Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration tried to cap the number of Uber vehicles, suggesting the company might not fight the new rules. After Uber ran an advertising campaign in 2015 attacking the mayor over the cap, Mr. de Blasio ultimately dropped the idea.

    This month, Uber won a major victory in Albany when state lawmakers approved new rules allowing Uber and other ride-hailing apps to expand to upstate New York. Uber could begin operating in cities like Buffalo and Syracuse as soon as July.

    Some Uber users said the shift to tipping drivers in New York City was long overdue.

    “This is something Uber should have been doing from the beginning,” said Hebah Khan, 22, a junior at Barnard College.

    But Ms. Khan also wondered if the new tipping policy could turn away people who use Uber’s low-cost car-pooling feature. “They’re looking for a cheap luxury,” she said. “They’re probably not trying to tip.”

    Olivia Kenwell, a 25-year-old bartender at Broadway Dive on the Upper West Side, said she usually tips Uber’s drivers if she is the only one in the car during a car-pooling trip.

    “As a good-will gesture,” she said. “I might tip 5 dollars on my 2-dollar ride.”

    But she admitted she had an ulterior motive as well: a good rating as an Uber passenger.

    “I’m obsessed with my Uber rating,” she said. “It’s the only place in the world where you can find out exactly how well you’re liked.”

    Mike Isaac and Emily Palmer contributed reporting.

    A version of this article appears in print on April 18, 2017, on Page A16 of the New York edition with the headline: Taxi Officials Call on Uber To Provide Tipping in Its App.

    #Uber #USA

  • ’Israeli Police Help Palestinian Girls Commit Suicide’

    An 18-year-old Palestinian who may have wanted to put an end to her life approached a checkpoint with a knife. The Border Police fulfilled her wish quickly, although it’s clear she could have been stopped by other means. Her family is shattered.
    Gideon Levy and Alex Levac Jun 03, 2016
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.722869

    Sawsan Mansour’s father. Reproduction by Alex Levac

    The two appalled parents stood on either side of the checkpoint, a body lying between them on the road, without being able to see or know for certain that the body was in fact that of their daughter.

    Sawsan Mansour bled to death. In a harrowing coincidence, her father, Ali, had arrived at the Israeli side of the checkpoint on his way home from work as a gardener in a Jerusalem suburb, just minutes after Sawsan was shot. Her mother, Najah, hurried to the Palestinian side of the checkpoint after hearing that there had been a lethal incident there and that the victim might be Sawsan. No playwright could conceive of a grimmer, more dramatic scene: parents on the two sides of a barrier, their child’s body strewn between them.

    The parents were not allowed to approach. The corpse was placed in a black body bag and removed from the scene. Only a bloodstain remained on the road when the father was finally allowed to enter the area. A member of the Israeli security forces showed him a photograph of the dead girl’s face on his cellphone. Now all doubt was dispelled: It was Sawsan. Ali lost consciousness, he recalls later. Najah was then allowed in, too.

    The incident occurred shortly after 2:30 P.M. on May 23, at the Beit Iksa checkpoint, which controls access to an enclave of 12 villages trapped behind the separation barrier near Ramallah. Use of this checkpoint is restricted to residents of Beit Iksa and Palestinians over 50, so the traffic here is very sparse. The Border Policemen there spend most of their time behind bullet-proof glass or a wire fence, as we saw this week during a visit to site. The checkpoint barrier is raised and lowered for each vehicle, after it is checked.

    At the time of the incident involving Sawsan, the Israeli forces were about 10 meters from her, based on the bloodstain her father saw. The only witnesses were the Border Policemen.

    Sawsan Mansour.Reproduction by Alex Levac

    It is possible that Sawsan wanted to commit suicide. In the midst of her high school matriculation exams, she was in a state of great tension. Maybe there had also been a quarrel at home, maybe some other problem. According to her uncle, Mohammed Badwan, who came from the United States for her funeral together with his mother, Sawsan’s grandmother, Sawsan had planned to move to Syracuse, New York, where he and his mother have lived for years, to continue her schooling. The paperwork was almost complete. Sawsan wanted to study law.

    The truth is that no one knows for certain why a smiling 18-year-old, a gifted student, the daughter of a law-abiding family that has nothing to do with politics or terrorism, with a father who is a retired teacher, who has been working in Mevasseret Zion for 15 years and has many Israeli friends – why this young woman approached a checkpoint with a knife. Perhaps she was driven to put an end to her life, like many other adolescent girls, by a fleeting mood. Maybe she was out to perpetrate a terrorist attack, though that’s very unlikely, given her background.

    Her parents say they have no idea why she acted as she did. In any event, they see her killing as an act of cold-blooded murder, as she could have been stopped without being shot to death.

    “When someone goes to a rooftop and threatens to kill himself, security people everywhere do all they can to save him,” says Iyad Hadad, the local field researcher for the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem. “But here the Border Policemen are doing the opposite: They are assisting these girls to commit suicide instead of saving them.”

    Indeed, the killing of Sawsan Mansour has all the trappings of an execution. It is extremely unlikely that she posed a mortal danger to the policemen, who fired at her, pumping three bullets into a teenager waving a knife at them. It hardly stands to reason that there was no other way to stop her. But there is no doubt that no one will stand trial for this act. It’s all part of the routine, you know.

    A pall of deep mourning hangs over her home in the village of Biddu, northeast of Jerusalem. Her father speaks broken Hebrew, his words punctuated by tears that he quickly wipes away with a paper towel. Occasionally, he also mumbles something to himself before replying to a question. Najah, the mother, seems to be stronger. The couple has four sons and two daughters. Sawsan was the youngest, a high-school senior.

    She was still sleeping on May 23 when Ali left for his job in Mevasseret Zion. He passed through the Beit Iksa checkpoint, as usual. When he returned, in the afternoon, a passerby told him the checkpoint was closed. Ali waited in a shared taxi with his brother, Razi, who also works in Israel. That same day Israel had returned the bodies of a sister and brother from the nearby village of Katana, and Ali was sure that disturbances had erupted ahead of their funeral. The taxi waited about 300 meters from the checkpoint. People started to mill about, but no one knew what was going on.

    “Suddenly I had a feeling,” Ali says now, closing his eyes and again mumbling to himself.

    The taxi driver then showed him an Internet photo of a girl who had been shot at the checkpoint. Her face was covered, but he recognized the dress. He remembered that Sawsan had worn it the evening before, when she’d gone to visit her sister. Fear seized him. He called his wife: “Is Sawsan home?”

    Najah told him that not long before, she had seen the teen on the balcony, studying, before going off to make sandwiches for her nephews, who were visiting. Maybe she went to her grandfather’s place, Najah suggested, to study in quiet.

    But now Sawsan’s mother became worried, too, and she went outside with two of her sons. When their search proved fruitless, they headed for the checkpoint, about three kilometers from the house.

    At the checkpoint, Najah’s wrenching screams, after she was assaulted by the bitter truth, were heard by Ali on the other side. The security man who showed Ali the cellphone image of his dead daughter tried to comfort him.

    Ali was told to go to Ofer military base to identify the body, and was stunned by the thorough body search he was forced to undergo before being allowed to see Sawsan. He was then questioned about her possible motives. He told the interrogator he had no idea.

    “An 18-year-old girl who weighs 45 kilos [99 pounds] is not a danger to soldiers’ lives,” he told the interrogator, adding, “They could have arrested her instead of killing her.” Ali knows the procedures at the checkpoint, which he passes through every day, and he is certain there was no way his daughter could have posed a threat to the forces there.

    Sawsan’s parents only saw a photograph of the knife – they say it is not from their house. They also have no idea how she got to the checkpoint, apparently in a car.

    The body was returned to the family four days later, and the burial took place that same day.

    The road between the checkpoint and the village is now scorched from the tires that were set ablaze here after the funeral. Sawsan’s parents objected to an autopsy being performed on the body, so the physicians at the hospital in Ramallah, where the body was taken, made do with X-rays. Najah tries to say something about Sawsan’s death being a result of the oppression, and Ali hushes her. “She’s dead and there is nothing more to add.”

    A Border Police spokesman stated, in response to a query from Haaretz: “In complete contrast to the allegations that were raised, during the incident in question a terrorist who was walking toward a Border Police post aroused the fighters’ suspicions. They called to her to stop, and when she did not, they implemented the arrest-of-suspect procedure. The terrorist ignored the calls, which included warnings in Arabic and in Hebrew, and continued to approach the fighters, who refrained throughout from opening fire as long as there was no clear and present danger to their lives.

    “When the terrorist drew near, she took out a knife and brandished it with the aim of stabbing one of the fighters. The fighters, who felt concrete and immediate mortal danger, fired with precision and neutralized the terrorist. It should be emphasized that an investigation of the incident shows that the fighters acted according to proper procedures, and that their vigilance apparently saved lives.”

    And Ali says, in his workman’s Hebrew, “These are not human beings. What they did to her like that – not human beings.” He informed his employers in Mevasseret Zion that he had problems at home and would not be able to come to work the following week.

  • Israel Must Return the Bodies of the Palestinians Killed at Qalandiyah -

    Israel’s refusal to return the bodies of killed assailants is another depressing stage in the methodical dehumanization of the Palestinians, aimed at continuing the control over them.

    Gideon Levy May 05, 2016 9:17 AM

    http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.717922

    Maram Abu Ismayil, 23, and brother Ibrahim Salah Tahah, 16, shot after attempted stabbing at Qalandia checkpoint in West Bank. April 28, 2016Reuters, Mohamad Torokman

    Fatmah and Salah Taha lost two children last week. Maram and Ibrahim were shot dead at the Qalandiyah checkpoint in another execution of suspected stabbers. Salah, a taxi driver from Qatannah, who for years drove ritual slaughterers and kashrut inspectors from Bnei Brak, was made a doubly bereaved father.

    But for Israel this grief doesn’t suffice. The government is determined to maltreat him further. His suffering and that of his wife isn’t enough to satisfy its lust for abuse. There is no explanation for its stubborn refusal to return the bodies of their children to these poor parents, other than pure evil. There’s no other explanation for this nauseating necrophilia apart from the desire of a few cynical politicians to satisfy their voters’ desire for revenge.

    The competition between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon and Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan is being conducted on the bodies of Palestinians, and it has reached a macabre stage. Erdan, in the name of the police, patriotism and his supporters in Likud, refuses to return bodies. Ya’alon, in the name of a semblance of humanity, will return them, while Netanyahu instructs his ministers not to return them, but this week restored their authority over the morgue refrigerators.

    The body of the ramming attacker near Dolev was returned on Tuesday; he was lucky that soldiers killed him and not policemen. MK Oren Hazan has already protested.

    Where does this wickedness come from? Why this demonic attitude toward bereaved families whose whole world has been destroyed? At times their loved ones were killed as if they were stray animals; they weren’t given medical attention and were left strewn on the road. And then officials can’t even restore to the families their last vestige of dignity and comfort by returning the bodies so they can have a grave to visit.

    Hamas also does this and it’s equally vile, but it does it to try to get its prisoners released. Israel does it with the excuse that it doesn’t want mass funerals and the dead to be glorified; not only does it appropriate the right to decide who lives and who dies, it also gets to decide who will be a hero. As if having their houses demolished and work permits cancelled isn’t enough, family members must also cope with this.

    Meanwhile, the bodies are piling up. They are laid out in refrigerator drawer after refrigerator drawer. Bodies of stabbers and rammers along with those who were only suspected of being such; many were executed for no reason. They were women, men and teenagers who decided to oppose the occupation in the most desperate and pathetic fashion. Confiscating their bodies – lest we say snatching them – doesn’t only increase the families’ pain, it intensifies the anger, frustration and desire for revenge in the territories. The posters are already hanging in the city streets: Give us back the bodies.

    This is another depressing stage in the methodical dehumanization of the Palestinians, aimed at continuing the control over them. Before their lives were worth nothing; now their bodies aren’t, either. Their lives belong to us and now their bodies do as well.

    People without rights, who were born to kill, have no feelings either. They can be abused during their lifetimes, in their deaths and afterward as well. They aren’t worthy of the title “bereaved parents.” What do they know of bereavement? Only we can be bereaved parents, only we can feel grief, alongside the pain and the rights. A society in which not a day goes by without fawning over and wallowing in the memory of its dead is not ashamed to show contempt for the feelings of its victims.

    In the house of mourning in Qatannah, an uncle of the dead told me this week, “They killed them, they killed them, but at least give us the bodies. We can’t go on without a grave.” When he sought to find out what would happen to the bodies of his niece and nephew from the Civil Administration headquarters in Beit El, he was thrown out. What are you even doing here, they asked, before they removed him.

    Indeed, what was he even doing there?

    #Maram_et_Ibrahim

  • Palestine News & Info Agency - WAFA - Update : Israeli Soldiers Release Ex-Hunger Striking Prisoner Khader Adnan
    4-1-2016 - 22:27
    http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=30344

    JENIN, January 4, 2016 (WAFA) – Israeli forces Monday released former hunger striking prisoner, Khader Adnan, 42, from Araba, southwest of Jenin, after being detained for few hours at a flying military checkpoint near the town of Silwad, east of Ramallah.

    Adnan’s family informed WAFA that Israeli soldiers detained him while on his way to offer condolences for Silwad’s Palestinians who were killed under pretext of attacks against Israeli targets, and to participate in a solidarity protest with prisoners at al-Manara Square in Ramallah.

    Witnesses told WAFA Israeli soldiers forcefully stopped all vehicles without any prior warning for about 45 minutes and prevented anyone from advancing or turning around.

    Adnan was ordered to leave the vehicle he was riding with another man and was taken to an unknown destination.

    According to a Palestinian woman who was present during the incident, a taxi driver tried to turn around to avoid being held for a long time, but the soldiers took the taxi’s keys to ensure he waits along.

    Although international human rights law requires Israel to respect the right of Palestinians to move about freely in the occupied Palestinian territory, Israel continues to violate their rights to move freely on a daily basis.

    #Khader_Adnan

  • The bigger the haystack, the harder the terrorist is to find | Coleen Rowley | Comment is free | The Guardian
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/28/bigger-haystack-harder-terrorist-communication-future-attacks

    Un article de Novembre 2014 : d’un point de vue prévention contre le #terrorisme, #métadonnées, mégaerreurs

    ... as an FBI whistleblower and witness for several US official inquiries into 9/11 intelligence failures, I fear that terrorists will succeed in carrying out future attacks – not despite the massive collect-it-all, dragnet approach to intelligence implemented since 9/11, but because of it. This approach has made terrorist activity more difficult to spot and prevent.

    Almost no one now remembers the typical response of counter-terrorism agency officials when asked why, in the spring and summer of 2001 in the lead-up to 9/11, they had failed to read and share intelligence or take action when “the system was blinking red” (the actual title of chapter eight of the US’s 9/11 commission’s report) and when the US director of central intelligence and other counter-terrorism chiefs were said to have had “their hair on fire”.

    The common refrain back then was that, pre 9/11, intelligence had been flowing so fast and furiously, it was like a fire hose, “and you can’t get a sip from a fire hose”. Intelligence such as the Phoenix memo – which warned in July 2001 that terrorist suspects had been in flight schools and urgently requested further investigation – went unread.

    Although “can’t get a sip” was a somewhat honest excuse, it was undercut when the Bush administration, days after the attacks, secretly turned on their illegal “Presidential Surveillance Program” to collect more, by a factor of thousands, of the communications of innocent American citizens, as well as those of billions of people around the globe.

    So the “fire hose” turned into a tsunami of non-relevant data, flooding databases and watch lists. The CIA had only about 16 names on its terrorist watch list back in September 2001 and probably most were justified, but there’s no way the million names reportedly now on the “terrorist identities datamart environment” list can be very accurate. The decision to elevate quantity over quality did nothing to increase accuracy, unblock intelligence stovepipes or prevent terrorist attacks.

    In fact, years ago a study commissioned by Homeland Security and conducted by the National Academy of Sciences found that no existing computer program was able to distinguish the real terrorists – those who would go on to commit violent acts – from all the “false positives” .

    This was corroborated when NSA director Keith Alexander and others, under great pressure to justify their (illegal) “bulk” collection of metadata, pressed underlings to produce 54 examples to prove that “total information awareness” type collection “worked” to identify and stop real terrorism, only to have the proffered NSA examples fall apart under scrutiny, leaving only one flimsy case of a taxi driver in San Diego who had donated a few thousand dollars to al-Shabab-connected Somalians.

    Governments rely on costly “security theatre” – the practice of investing in countermeasures to provide the feeling of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it. But it seems to do more to dupe fearful taxpayers into believing that massive, unwieldy “intelligence” systems will protect them, than to intimidate would-be attackers or reduce terrorist organisation recruitment.

    After Edward Snowden described just how massive and irrelevant the US and UK monitoring had become, people started to grasp the significance of the saying: “If you’re looking for a needle in a haystack, how does it help to add hay?”

    The fearful citizen may not realise how difficult it is to search and analyse content due to sheer volume. They want to believe in the magic of data-mining to somehow predict future criminal behaviour. If only more contractors are hired and more money is spent to increase monitoring, if only laws can be passed forcing internet companies to constantly surveil every post and kitten image, coded and uncoded, in a multitude of languages, for signs of danger, the Orwellian argument goes, we will find the enemies.

    But the real purpose in the egregiously stupid push to assign Facebook the fool’s errand of monitoring everything seems to be to spread the blame. Leaving aside the privacy implications, what people need to grasp is that this is the kind of security thinking that doesn’t just fail to protect us, it makes us less safe.

  • Roger Waters sets the record straight: I hate apartheid, not Israel - Gideon Levy spent 24 hours with the former Pink Floyd singer, who has become one of the leading lights in the BDS movement. A conversation on political views, tragic family history – and when the rock star-turned-activist will be happy to play in Israel again.
    By Gideon Levy | Jul. 30, 2015 | Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/.premium-1.668705

    The tires of the taxicab crunch softly along the gravel driveway leading up to the house. The gray building, hidden from the street like all the houses here, isn’t so large for Southampton, this very affluent suburb on Long Island, New York. A tiny house-number sign, by the side of the entrance to the driveway, is the only way you know you’ve reached your destination. The taxi driver who picked me up at the local bus station tells me Paris Hilton has a house nearby. He doesn’t know who lives in the gray house.

    I ring the doorbell at the appointed time, and hear a dog barking. Roger Waters opens the door, barefoot, in shorts and a faded polo shirt. His cheeks are covered with white stubble, his blue-gray eyes seem a little weary and his gray hair is disheveled. He shuffles a little as he walks, but his body is youthful and his smile endearing. Hours of wavering over whether to greet this idol of my youth with a handshake or a hug are dispensed with instantly: He embraces me. We’ve never met before.

    I follow him back into the two-story house. An American home with paintings on the walls and broad carpets on the floors, a grand piano in the living room. Outside is a heated swimming pool, whose water is kept surprisingly warm, even early on a chilly morning. Next to the pool is a small gym. There are a number of bedrooms, some just for guests. And, of course, a recording studio.

    The garden is impeccably maintained, and vases of freshly cut blue flowers can be found throughout the house. Every window looks out on a gorgeous view: a big pond with wide green marshes behind it and, beyond that, the ocean, whose waves can be heard clearly. The closest house is a good distance away, and the tennis court of the Swedish neighbor lies in between. On the two-hour bus ride from Manhattan, people were talking about the new helicopter service to the town: just $400 each way, a real bargain.

  • Immigration au #Qatar : la #kafala toujours en place malgré les promesses

    L’ONG Amnesty International publie ce jeudi un rapport pour rappeler au Qatar qu’il n’a pas tenu ses promesses en matière d’amélioration des droits des ouvriers, et notamment la réforme de la Kafala, ce système qui met tout employé à la merci de son employeur pour changer de travail, sortir du territoire…Une réforme annoncée il y a un an et qui n’a pas eu lieu.

    http://www.rfi.fr/moyen-orient/20150521-immigration-qatar-kafala-rapport-amnesty-travailleurs-migrants
    #migration #travail #exploitation

    • Will Migrant Domestic Workers in the Gulf Ever Be Safe From Abuse?

      Jahanara* had had enough. For a year, the Bangladeshi cook had been working 12 to 16 hours a day, eating only leftovers and sleeping on the kitchen floor of her employer’s Abu Dhabi home – all for half the salary she had been promised. She had to prepare four fresh meals a day for the eight-member family, who gave her little rest. She was tired, she had no phone and she was alone. So, in the summer of 2014, in the middle of the night after a long day’s work, she snuck out into the driveway, scaled the front gate and escaped.

      Jahanara ran along the road in the dark. She did not know where she was going. Eventually, a Pakistani taxi driver pulled over, and asked her if she had run away from her employer, and whether she needed help. She admitted she had no money, and no clue where she wanted to go. The driver gave her a ride, dropping her off in the neighboring emirate of Dubai, in the Deira neighborhood. There, he introduced her to Vijaya, an Indian woman in her late fifties who had been working in the Gulf for more than two decades.

      “It’s like I found family here in this strange land.”

      Vijaya gave the nervous young woman a meal of rice, dal and, as Jahanara still recalls, “a beautiful fish fry.” She arranged for Jahanara to rent half a room in her apartment and, within a week, had found her part-time housekeeping work in the homes of two expat families.

      Jahanara is a 31-year-old single woman from north Bangladesh, and Vijaya, 60, is a grandmother of eight from Mumbai, India. Jahanara speaks Bengali, while Vijaya speaks Telugu. Despite the differences in age and background, the two women have become close friends. They communicate in gestures and broken Urdu.

      “It’s like I found family here in this strange land,” Jahanara says.

      The younger woman now cleans four houses a day, and cooks dinner for a fifth, while the older woman works as a masseuse, giving traditional oil massages to mothers and babies.

      Jahanara’s experience in #Abu_Dhabi was not the first time she had been exploited as a domestic worker in the Gulf. She originally left Bangladesh six years ago, and has been home only once since then, when she ran away from abusive employers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and the police deported her. She had no choice – under the much-criticized kafala system for legally employing migrant workers, a domestic worker is attached to a particular household that sponsors their visa. Employers often keep the worker’s passport to prevent their leaving, although this is illegal in most Gulf countries today.

      Under kafala, quitting a bad boss means losing your passport and vital work visa, and potentially being arrested or deported. This is why, the second time, Jahanara escaped in the dead of night. Now, she works outside official channels.

      “You earn at least three times more if you’re ‘khalli walli,’” Vijaya says, using a colloquial Arabic term for undocumented or freelance migrant workers. The name loosely translates as “take it or leave it.”

      “You get to sleep in your own house, you get paid on time and if your employer misbehaves, you can find a new one,” she says.

      “The Gulf needs us, but like a bad husband, it also exploits us.”

      Ever year, driven by poverty, family pressure, conflict or natural disasters back home, millions of women, mainly from developing countries, get on flights to the Gulf with their fingers crossed that they won’t be abused when they get there.

      It’s a dangerous trade-off, but one that can work out for some. When Jahanara and Vijaya describe their lives, the two women repeatedly weigh the possibility of financial empowerment against inadequate wages, routine abuse and vulnerability.

      By working for 23 years in Dubai and Muscat in Oman, Vijaya has funded the education of her three children, the construction of a house for her son in a Mumbai slum and the weddings of two daughters. She is overworked and underpaid, but she says that’s “normal.” As she sees it, it’s all part of working on the margins of one of the world’s most successful economies.

      “The Gulf needs us,” Vijaya says. “But like a bad husband, it also exploits us.”

      The International Labour Organization (ILO) reports that there are 11.5 million migrant domestic workers around the world – 73 percent of them are women. In 2016, there were 3.77 million domestic workers in Oman, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

      In a single household in these states, it’s common to find several domestic workers employed to do everything from cleaning and cooking, to guarding the home and tutoring the children.

      Unlike other sectors, the demand for domestic workers has been resilient to economic downturns. Estimated to be one of the world’s largest employers of domestic workers, Saudi Arabia hosts around 2.42 million. The majority of these workers (733,000) entered the country between 2016 and 2017, during its fiscal deficit. In 2017, domestic workers comprised a full 22 percent of Kuwait’s working age population. Oman has seen a threefold explosion in its domestic work sector since 2008. Overall, the GCC’s migrant domestic work sector has been growing at an annual average of 8.7 percent for the past decade.

      That growth is partly fueled by the increasing numbers of women entering the workforce. The percentage of Saudi Arabia’s adult female population in the formal labor force has risen from 18 percent to 22 percent over the past decade. In Qatar, the figure has jumped from 49 percent to 58 percent. And as more women go to work, there’s a growing need for others to take over the child and elderly care in their households. Experts call this transfer of care work from unpaid family members to paid workers from other countries the “global care chain.”

      A 2017 report, which examined the effect of changing demographics in the Gulf, found that dramatically decreased fertility – thanks to improved female education and later marriages – and greater numbers of the dependent elderly have resulted in an “increased trend for labour participation of ‘traditional’ informal care givers (usually women).”

      The enduring use of migrant domestic workers in the region is also a result of local traditions. For example, while Saudi Arabia was still the only country in the world that banned women from driving, there was a consistent need for male personal drivers, many coming from abroad. The ban was lifted in June 2018, but the demand for drivers is still high because many women don’t yet have licenses.

      “Without domestic workers, societies could not function here,” says Mohammed Abu Baker, a lawyer in Abu Dhabi and a UAE national. “I was brought up by many Indian nannies, at a time when Indians were our primary migrants. Now, I have a Pakistani driver, an Indonesian cook, an Indian cleaner, a Filipino home nurse and a Sri Lankan nanny. None of them speak Arabic, and they can hardly speak to each other, but they run my household like a well-oiled machine.”

      There is also demand from expatriate families, with dual wage earners looking for professional cleaning services, part-time cooks and full-time childcare workers.

      “When I came from Seattle with my husband, we were determined not to hire servants,” says Laura, a 35-year-old teacher in an American primary school in Abu Dhabi. “But after we got pregnant, and I got my teaching job, we had to get full-time help.”

      “My American guilt about hiring house help disappeared in months!” she says, as her Sri Lankan cook Frida quietly passes around home-baked cookies. “It is impossible to imagine these conveniences back home, at this price.”

      Laura says she pays minimum wage, and funds Frida’s medical insurance – “all as per law.” But she also knows that conveniences for women like her often come at a cost paid by women like Frida. As part of her local church’s “good Samaritan group” – as social workers must call themselves to avoid government scrutiny – Laura has helped fundraise medical and legal expenses for at least 40 abused migrant workers over the past two years.

      Living isolated in a house with limited mobility and no community, many domestic workers, especially women, are vulnerable to abuse. Afraid to lose their right to work, employees can endure a lot before running away, including serious sexual assault. Legal provisions do exist – in many countries, workers can file a criminal complaint against their employers, or approach labor courts for help. But often they are unaware of, or unable to access, the existing labor protections and resources.

      “I never believed the horror stories before, but when you meet woman after woman with bruises or unpaid wages, you start understanding that the same system that makes my life easier is actually broken,” Laura says.

      In 2007, Jayatri* made one of the hardest decisions of her life. She left her two young children at home in Sri Lanka, while the country was at war, to be with another family in Saudi Arabia.

      It was near the end of Sri Lanka’s protracted civil war and 22-year-old Jayatri had been struggling to support her family since her husband’s death in the war two years earlier. The 26-year conflict claimed the lives of tens of thousands of fathers, husbands, sons and brothers, forcing many Tamil women to take on the role of sole breadwinner for their families. But there are few job opportunities for women in a culture that still largely believes their place is in the home. Women who are single or widowed already face stigma, which only gets worse if they also try to find paying work in Sri Lanka.

      S. Senthurajah, executive director of SOND, an organization that raises awareness about safe migration, says that as a result, an increasing number of women are migrating from Sri Lanka to the Gulf. More than 160,000 Sri Lankan women leave home annually to work in other countries, including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Malaysia, according to the International Organization for Migration.

      Senthurajah says recruitment agencies specifically target vulnerable female heads of households: widows, single and divorced women and women whose husbands are disabled or otherwise unable to work to support the family. Women like Jayatri.

      When a local recruitment agency approached her and offered her a job as a domestic worker in the Gulf, it was an opportunity she felt she couldn’t turn down. She traveled from Vavuniya, a town in the island’s north – which was then under the control of Tamil Tiger rebels – to Colombo, to undergo a few weeks of housekeeping training.

      She left her young children, a boy and a girl, with her mother. When she eventually arrived in Saudi Arabia, her passport was taken by the local recruitment agency and she was driven to her new home where there were 15 children to look after. From the start, she was abused.

      “I spent five months in that house being tortured, hit and with no proper food and no salary. I worked from 5 a.m. to midnight every day,” she says, not wanting to divulge any more details about how she was treated.

      “I just wanted to go home.”

      Jayatri complained repeatedly to the recruitment agency, who insisted that she’d signed a contract for two years and that there was no way out. She was eventually transferred to another home, but the situation there was just as bad: She worked 18 hours a day and was abused, again.

      “It was like jail,” she says.

      “I spent five months in that house being tortured, hit and with no proper food and no salary. I worked from 5 a.m. to midnight every day.”

      In 2009, Jayatri arrived back in northern Sri Lanka with nothing to show for what she had endured in Saudi Arabia. She was never paid for either job. She now works as a housemaid in Vavuniya earning $60 per month. It’s not enough.

      “This is the only opportunity I have,” she says. “There’s no support. There are so many difficulties here.”

      Jayatri’s traumatic time in Saudi Arabia is one of many stories of abuse that have come out of the country in recent years. While there are no reliable statistics on the number of migrant domestic workers who suffer abuse at the hands of their employers, Human Rights Watch says that each year the Saudi Ministry of Social Affairs and the embassies of source countries shelter thousands of domestic workers with complaints against their employers or recruiters.

      Excessive workload and unpaid wages are the most common complaints. But employers largely act with impunity, Senthurajah says.

      “It’s like a human slave sale,” Ravindra De Silva, cofounder of AFRIEL, an organization that works with returnee migrant workers in northern Sri Lanka, tells News Deeply.

      “Recruitment agencies have agents in different regions of the country and through those agents, they collect women as a group and send them. The agents know which families [to] pick easily – widows and those with financial difficulties,” he says.

      In 2016, a man turned up at Meera’s* mud-brick home on the outskirts of Jaffna, the capital of Sri Lanka’s Northern Province, offering her a job in the Gulf.

      “They told me I could earn well if I went abroad and that they could help me to look after my family,” she says.

      Within a few months of arriving in Saudi Arabia, Meera, 42, couldn’t keep up with the long hours and strenuous housework. She cooked and cleaned for 12 family members and rarely got a break.

      Her employer then became abusive.

      “He started beating me and put acid in my eyes,” she says. He also sexually assaulted her.

      But she endured the attacks and mistreatment, holding on to the hope of making enough money to secure her family’s future. After eight months, she went back home. She was never paid.

      Now Meera makes ends meet by working as a day laborer. “The agency keeps coming back, telling me how poor we are and that I should go back [to Saudi Arabia] for my children,” she says.

      “I’ll never go back again. I got nothing from it, [except] now I can’t see properly because of the acid in my eyes.”

      While thousands of women travel to a foreign country for work and end up exploited and abused, there are also those who make the journey and find what they were looking for: opportunity and self-reliance. Every day, more than 1,500 Nepalis leave the country for employment abroad, primarily in Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, India and Malaysia. Of the estimated 2.5 million Nepalis working overseas, about 11 percent are female.

      Many women from South Asian countries who work in the Gulf send remittances home that are used to improve their family’s socio-economic status, covering the cost of education, health care, food and housing. In addition to financial remittances, the social remittances of female migrants in terms of skills, attitudes, ideas and knowledge can also have wide-ranging benefits, including contributing to economic development and gender equality back home.

      Kunan Gurung, project coordinator at Pourakhi Nepal, an organization focused on supporting female returnee migrants, says those who have “successful” migration journeys are often able to use their experiences abroad to challenge gender norms.

      “Our society is patriarchal and male-dominated, but the boundaries expand for women who return from the Gulf successfully because they have money and thus some power,” he says.

      “The women have left their village, taken a plane and have lived in the developed world. Such experiences leave them feeling empowered.”

      Gurung says many returning migrant workers invest their savings in their own businesses, from tailoring to chicken farms. But it can be difficult, because women often find that the skills they earned while working abroad can’t help them make money back home. To counter this, Pourakhi trains women in entrepreneurship to not only try to limit re-migration and keep families together but also to ensure women are equipped with tangible skills in the context of life in Nepal.

      But for the women in Nepal who, like Jayatri in Sri Lanka, return without having earned any money, deep-rooted stigma can block their chances to work and separate them from their families. Women who come home with nothing are looked at with suspicion and accused of being sexually active, Gurung says.

      “The reality is that women are not looked after in the Gulf, in most cases,” he says.

      In Kathmandu, Pourakhi runs an emergency shelter for returning female migrants. Every evening, staff wait at Kathmandu airport for flights landing from the Gulf. They approach returning migrants – women who stand out because of their conservative clothes and “the look on their faces” – and offer shelter, food and support.

      Of the 2,000 women they have housed over the last nine years, 42 have returned pregnant and 21 with children.

      “There are so many problems returnee migrants face. Most women don’t have contact with their families because their employer didn’t pay, or they have health issues or they’re pregnant,” says Krishna Gurung (no relation to Kunan), Pourakhi’s shelter manager.

      “They don’t reintegrate with their families. Their families don’t accept them.” Which could be the biggest tragedy of all. Because the chance to make life better for their families is what drives so many women to leave home in the first place.

      Realizing how crucial their workers are to the Gulf economies, major labor-sending countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh, India and the Philippines have been using both pressure and dialogue to improve conditions for their citizens.

      Over recent years, they have instituted a wide array of bans and restrictions, often linked to particularly horrifying cases of abuse. Nepal has banned women from working in the Gulf in 2016; the same year, India disallowed women under 30 from migrating to the Gulf. In 2013, Sri Lanka temporarily banned women from leaving the country for domestic work, citing abuse abroad and neglected families at home, and now requires a family background report before women can travel.

      The most high-profile diplomatic dispute over domestic workers unfolded between the Philippines and Kuwait this year. In January, the Philippines banned workers from going to Kuwait, and made the ban “permanent” in February after a 29-year-old Filipino maid, Joanna Demafelis, was found dead in a freezer in her employers’ abandoned apartment in Kuwait City.

      “Bans provide some political leverage for the sending country.”

      At the time, the Philippines’ firebrand president, Rodrigo Duterte, said he would “sell my soul to the devil” to get his citizens home from Kuwait to live comfortably back home. Thousands of Filipino citizens were repatriated through a voluntary return scheme in the first half of 2018, while Kuwait made overtures to Ethiopia to recruit more maids to replace the lost labor force. Duterte’s ban was eventually lifted in May, after Kuwait agreed to reform its migrant work sector, ending the seizure of passports and phones, and instituting a 24-hour hotline for abused workers.

      It’s well established that bans do not stop women from traveling to the Gulf to become domestic workers. Bandana Pattanaik, the international coordinator of the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women, has criticized bans as being “patriarchal, limiting to female agency and also ending up encouraging illegal human smuggling.”

      But others point out that the international pressure generated by travel bans has had some effect, as in the case with the Philippines and Kuwait. “Bans provide some political leverage for the sending country,” says Kathmandu-based researcher Upasana Khadka. “But bans do not work as permanent solutions.”
      ATTEMPTS AT REFORM

      Today, after decades of criticism and campaigning around labor rights violations, the Gulf is seeing a slow shift toward building better policies for domestic workers.

      “In the past five years, five of the six GCC countries have started to adopt laws for the protection of migrant domestic workers for the very first time,” says Rothna Begum, women’s rights researcher for Middle East and North Africa at Human Rights Watch.

      “The GCC countries have long cultivated the image of being luxurious economies meant for the good life,” Begum says. “This image is hard to maintain as labor exploitation comes to light. So, while they try to shut the reporting down, they have also been forced to address some of the issues raised by their critics.”

      Legal and institutional reforms have been announced in the domestic work sector in all GCC countries except Oman. These regulate and standardize contracts, mandate better living conditions, formalize recruitment, and plan rehabilitation and legal redress for abused workers.

      This gradual reform is due to international pressure and monitoring by human rights groups and international worker unions. After the 2014 crash in the oil economy, the sudden need for foreign investment exposed the GCC and the multinational companies doing business there to more global scrutiny.

      Countries in the Gulf are also hoping that the new national policies will attract more professional and skilled home workers. “Domestic work is a corrupt, messy sector. The host countries are trying to make it more professional,” says M. Bheem Reddy, vice president of the Hyderabad-based Migrant Rights Council, which engages with women workers from the southern districts of India.

      Many of the Gulf states are moving toward nationalization – creating more space for their own citizens in the private sector – this means they also want to regulate one of the fastest growing job sectors in the region. “This starts with dignity and proper pay for the existing migrant workers,” Reddy says.

      There have been attempts to develop a regional standard for domestic labor rights, with little success. In 2011, the ILO set standards on decent work and minimum protection through the landmark Domestic Workers Convention. All the GCC countries adopted the Convention, but none have ratified it, which means the rules are not binding.

      Instead, each Gulf country has taken its own steps to try to protect household workers who come from abroad.

      After reports of forced labor in the lead-up to the 2022 FIFA World Cup, Qatar faced a formal inquiry by the ILO if it didn’t put in place migrant labor protections. Under that pressure, in 2017, the country passed a law on domestic work. The law stipulates free health care, a regular monthly salary, maximum 10-hour work days, and three weeks’ severance pay. Later, it set a temporary minimum wage for migrant workers, at $200 a month.

      The UAE’s new reforms are motivated by the Gulf crisis – which has seen Qatar blockaded by its neighbors – as well as a desire to be seen as one of the more progressive GCC countries. The UAE had a draft law on domestic work since 2012, but only passed it in 2017, after Kuwait published its own law. The royal decree gives household workers a regular weekly day off, daily rest of at least 12 hours, access to a mobile phone, 30 days paid annual leave and the right to retain personal documents like passports. Most importantly, it has moved domestic work from the purview of the interior ministry to the labor ministry – a long-standing demand from rights advocates.

      The UAE has also become the first Gulf country to allow inspectors access to a household after securing a warrant from the prosecutor. This process would be triggered by a worker’s distress call or complaint, but it’s unclear if regular state inspections will also occur. Before this law, says Begum, the biggest obstacle to enforcing labor protection in domestic work was the inability for authorities to monitor the workspace of a cleaner or cook, because it is a private home, unlike a hotel or a construction site.

      The UAE has not followed Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia in stipulating a minimum wage for domestic workers. But it has issued licenses for 40 Tadbeer Service Centers, which will replace recruitment agencies by the end of the year. Employers in the UAE will have to submit their requests for workers through these centers, which are run by private licensed agents but supervised by the Ministry of Human Resources. Each of the centers has accommodation for workers and can also sponsor their visas, freeing them up to take on part-time jobs while also catering to growing demand from UAE nationals and expats for legal part-timers.

      “You focus on the success stories you hear, and hope you’ll have that luck.”

      B. L. Surendranath, general secretary of the Immigration Protection Center in Hyderabad, India, visited some of these centers in Dubai earlier this year, on the invitation of the UAE human resources ministry. “I was pleasantly surprised at the well-thought-out ideas at the model Tadbeer Center,” he says. “Half the conflicts [between employer and worker] are because of miscommunication, which the center will sort out through conflict resolution counselors.”

      Saudi Arabia passed a labor law in 2015, but it didn’t extend to domestic work. Now, as unemployment among its nationals touches a high of 12.8 percent, its efforts to create more jobs include regulating the migrant workforce. The Saudi government has launched an electronic platform called Musaned to directly hire migrant domestic workers, cutting out recruitment agencies altogether. Women migrant workers will soon live in dormitories and hostels run by labor supply agencies, not the homes of their employers. The labor ministry has also launched a multi-language hotline for domestic workers to lodge complaints.

      Dhaka-based migrant rights activist Shakirul Islam, from Ovibashi Karmi Unnayan Programme, welcomes these changes, but remains circumspect. “Most women who return to Bangladesh from Saudi [Arabia] say that the revised laws have no impact on their lives,” he says. “My understanding is that the employers are not aware of the law on the one hand, and on the other, do not care about it.”

      Migrant rights activists, ILO officials, the governments of source countries and workers themselves are cautiously optimistic about the progressive direction of reforms in the Gulf. “But it is clear that none of the laws penalize employers of domestic workers for labor rights violations,” says Islam.

      Rights activists and reports from the ILO, U.N. and migrants’ rights forums have for decades repeated that full protection of domestic workers is impossible as long as GCC countries continue to have some form of the kafala sponsorship system.

      Saudi Arabia continues to require workers to secure an exit permit from their employers if they want to leave the country, while Qatar’s 2015 law to replace the kafala sponsorship system does not extend to domestic workers. Reddy of the Migrant Rights Council says the UAE’s attempt to tackle kafala by allowing Tadbeer Center agents to sponsor visas does not make agents accountable if they repeatedly send different workers to the same abusive employer.

      For now, it seems the women working on the margins of some of the richest economies in the world will remain vulnerable to abuse and exploitation from their employers. And as long as opportunities exist for them in the Gulf that they can’t find at home, thousands will come to fulfil the demand for domestic and care work, knowing they could be risking everything for little or no return.

      Jahanara says the only thing for women in her position to do is to take the chance and hope for the best.

      “You focus on the success stories you hear, and hope you’ll have that luck.”


      https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2018/08/31/will-migrant-domestic-workers-in-the-gulf-ever-be-safe-from-abuse-2

      #travail_domestique #migrations #pays_du_golfe

  • Food and fuel trump graft for Turkey’s local elections

    http://todayszaman.com/news-342749-food-and-fuel-trump-graft-for-turkeys-local-elections.html

    Taxi driver Ramazan Aktay is quick to shrug off the corruption scandal swirling around Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan, at least as long as the ruling party keeps delivering free food and coal to his working class suburb of Ankara.

    Allegations of government graft, which Erdoğan has cast as a campaign to destroy him by political enemies at home and abroad, have spiraled into the biggest challenge of his 11-year rule, unnerved foreign investors and raised questions about Turkey’s commitment to democratic reforms. In other countries, his opponents complain, a scandal of such proportions, with voice recordings purportedly detailing corruption among his inner circle appearing on social media on a daily basis, would bring a prime minister down, or at least force him to publicly confront the allegations head on. Yet few in Turkey doubt Erdoğan’s AK Party will emerge triumphant, if weakened, from local elections on March 30, carried on a wave of support from a conservative and pious segment of society that sees him as a hero for raising living standards and breaking the hold of a secular, urban elite. “This is a poor neighborhood. We got 50 bags of coal and then another 20 as the elections near. They distribute everything; food, clothing, detergent,” Aktay, 33, said of the Islamist-rooted AK Party, standing among dilapidated homes in Ankara’s Mamak district.

    #élection
    #Turquie
    #Clientélisme

  • Five taxi drivers attack competitor taxi with government officials in it

    Last Saturday five taxi drivers attacked taxi driver’s car from competitor company while in it were sitting some government officials, including Vjačeslavs Dombrovskis, the minister of education and science.
    Today ministry of internal affairs started to work on legislation changes to improve situation with taxi drivers’ services.
    The cause of attack was that competitor taxi took these persons in not his area. As taxi driver explained later - there are cartel alike system in Riga, capital city of Latvia among taxi drivers.

    TVNET :: Kriminālziņas - Pieci taksisti uzbrūk taksometram, kurā brauc Dombrovskis
    http://www.tvnet.lv/zinas/kriminalzinas/471448-pieci_taksisti_uzbruk_taksometram_kura_brauc_dombrovskis

    Ņemot vērā pagājušās sestdienas notikumu, Iekšlietu ministrija savas kompetences robežās plāno ar kolēģiem un citām iesaistītajām institūcijām strādāt pie likumdošanas izmaiņām, lai pilnveidotu taksometru pakalpojumu jomu. Šajā procesā būtu jāiesaista Rīgas dome, Valsts un pašvaldību policijas, Konkurences padome un Vides aizsardzības un reģionālas attīstības ministrija, uzskata Siliņa.

    « Mums ir plāns, lai uzlabotu situāciju ar taksometru pakalpojumu sniegšanu. Izskatās, ka pastāv nerakstīta tirgus sadale.

    #Riga #hooliganism #taxi_service