provinceorstate:texas

  • Antisocial communitarianism: The communitarian defense of tariffs (...
    https://diasp.eu/p/6970626

    Antisocial communitarianism: The communitarian defense of tariffs

    Source: Bleeding Heart Libertarians by Jason Brennan

    “Suppose Bob wants to buy a car made in Munich. Tom, who makes cars in Dearborn, says, ‘I have a more spiritual view of humanity. I don’t just build mediocre trucks; I produce pride and dignity! [Unlike Bavarian workers, I guess.] So, therefore, I propose that we use violence and threats of violence to make you pay an extra 25% to the government if you insist on getting that new 340i. We’ll use that money to blow up some brown people, build some walls in Texas, pay off ADM, and, oh, maybe I’ll get a cut too. You know, ’cause I’m spiritual.’ In this case, Tom sure doesn’t seem like a spiritual person with a strong love of community. He seems like, oh, … what’s the word? … a (...)

  • Encore du nouveau en ce qui concerne le peuplement de l’Amérique du Nord.

    L’étude des pointes de lance donne une nouvelle explication de la façon dont les premiers humains se sont installés en Amérique du Nord.

    Spear point study offers new explanation of how early humans settled North America

    https://today.tamu.edu/2018/04/02/spear-point-study-offers-new-explanation-of-how-early-humans-settled-nor
    Heather Smith and Ted Goebel, Center for the Study of the First Americans, part of the Department of Anthropology at Texas A&M.

    Après la route de la côte, les premiers colons auraient exploré la route de l’intérieur mais du sud vers le nord et non l’inverse comme on le pensait précédemment.

    Although during the late Ice Age there were two possible routes for the first Americans to follow on their migration from the Bering Land Bridge area southward to temperate North America, it now looks like only the Pacific coastal route was used, while the interior Canadian route may not have been fully explored until millennia later, and when it was, primarily from the south

    This is tangible evidence of a connection between people in the Arctic and the Mid-continent 12,000 years ago, a connection which may be either genetic or social, but ultimately, speaks volumes of the capability and adaptability of early cultures in North America

    #Préhistoire #Clovis #12000BP #technique #Peuplement #Amérique_du_Nord #Smith #Goebel #Texas_A&M

  • Au Texas, une femme condamnée à 5 ans de prison pour avoir voté illégalement

    http://www.slate.fr/story/159772/au-texas-une-femme-condamnee-5-ans-de-prison-pour-avoir-vote-illegalement

    Crystal Mason a voté au Texas lors de la présidentielle de 2016 alors qu’elle était en liberté conditionnelle après avoir purgé une peine de trois ans pour fraude fiscale. Or au Texas, les personnes qui ont commis un crime ne réobtiennent le droit de vote qu’à la fin de leur période probatoire.

    Pour avoir voté illégalement, Mason, qui a 43 ans et plusieurs enfants, vient d’être condamnée à cinq ans de prison par un tribunal fédéral. Elle dit ne pas avoir été au courant qu’elle ne pouvait pas voter.

    Le 8 novembre 2016, elle est allée dans son bureau de vote et comme son nom n’était pas sur la liste, elle a rempli un formulaire pour un bulletin de vote provisoire. Le bulletin a été signalé comme invalide et Mason a été informée que son vote n’avait pas pu être pris en compte. Trois mois plus tard, elle a été arrêtée lors d’un entretien avec son conseiller pénitentiaire de probation.

  • Affaire Facebook/Cambridge Analytica : le lanceur d’alerte s’explique

    http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2018/03/26/affaire-facebook-cambridge-analytica-le-lanceur-d-alerte-s-explique_5276659_

    Christopher Wylie accuse l’entreprise britannique d’avoir utilisé les données de millions d’individus pour manipuler les élections et construire « l’alt-right » aux Etats-Unis.

    Un mois après avoir été embauché en juin 2013 par l’entreprise qui allait devenir Cambridge Analytica, Christopher Wylie a pour la première fois compris qu’il ne s’agissait peut-être pas d’une société comme les autres. « Mon poste de directeur de la recherche était vacant parce que mon prédécesseur était mort dans des conditions inexpliquées dans sa chambre d’hôtel à Nairobi, alors qu’il travaillait pour Uhuru Kenyatta [actuel président du Kenya] », explique-t-il.

    Le Canadien, petit génie de l’informatique, qui a appris tout seul à coder, alors âgé de 24 ans, a progressivement découvert qu’il travaillait pour une firme qui siphonnait les données personnelles de millions de personnes sur Facebook, avait comme vrai patron un certain Steve Bannon, cherchait à manipuler les élections à travers le monde et poussait sur Internet les théories du complot pour développer « l’alt-right », les mouvements d’extrême droite américaines.

    Cambridge Analytica a ensuite aidé Donald Trump lors de la campagne présidentielle américaine et à influer au Royaume -Uni en faveur du Brexit. Ayant quitté l’entreprise fin 2014, mais ayant longtemps gardé d’étroits contacts, M. Wylie a désormais décidé de révéler tout ce qu’il savait. « On ne peut pas défaire ce qui a été fait, mais il faut alerter. »

    Surveillance de masse

    Désormais, il ne fait plus que ça, dénonçant une société qui met en danger la démocratie, selon lui. Une semaine après avoir parlé pour la toute première fois au New York Times et au Guardian, le lanceur d’alerte a longuement rencontré dimanche 25 mars un groupe de huit journalistes européens, dont Le Monde. Depuis plusieurs mois, il travaille aussi avec les autorités britanniques, qui enquêtent contre Cambridge Analytica. Mardi 27 mars, il témoignera devant un comité parlementaire britannique, et a accepté de faire de même devant le Congrès américain.

    A écouter M. Wylie, le scandale qu’il dénonce présente un parallèle à celui qu’Edward Snowden a mis à jour en 2013. L’Américain avait montré comment les agences d’espionnages, notamment la NSA (National Security Agency) ou son équivalent britannique Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), utilisaient Internet pour mettre en place une surveillance de masse de leurs citoyens. « Mais la NSA ou GCHQ sont encadrés, alors que les entreprises privées peuvent collecter des données sur les citoyens comme elles le veulent. [Cambridge Analytica] a fait disparaître la frontière entre espionnage et recherche marketing traditionnelle. »

    Il faut réguler

    Pour lui, les données personnelles, qui s’accumulent à vitesse exponentielle, sont « la nouvelle électricité » du XXIe siècle, quelque chose indispensable à la vie quotidienne mais qu’il faut réguler. « Les données sont un outil, comme un couteau qui peut être utilisé pour préparer un repas trois étoiles au Michelin ou pour commettre un meurtre. En tant que telles, elles ne sont pas un problème. Mais ce que Cambridge Analytica met au jour est l’échec des législateurs et de la société à mettre des limites à leur utilisation. »

    Retour à mi-2013. M. Wylie est arrivé à Londres depuis trois ans, pour étudier le droit à la London School of Economics. Techniquement, Cambridge Analytica n’existe pas. L’entreprise qui l’embauche s’appelle SCL. Sa création remonte aux années 1960, et l’entreprise est spécialisée dans le secteur de la défense, travaillant particulièrement dans les pays émergents. Sa spécialité : mener des campagnes de désinformation à l’ancienne. Envoyer une prostituée chez un opposant politique et filmer la scène à son insu est une technique favorite. Mais SCL perçoit qu’Internet est le nouveau champ de bataille et veut s’y développer.

    M. Wylie aide à créer Cambridge Analytica, pour en faire une filiale de l’entreprise. Il fait pour cela appel à un professeur de l’université de Cambridge, Aleksandr Kogan, un neuroscientifique, qui met au point un petit quiz sur Facebook qui permet d’évaluer le profil psychologique de ceux qui le remplissent. L’application est très populaire et 270 000 personnes l’utilisent. Ce qu’elles ne savent pas est que leurs données ne sont pas utilisées par des raisons de recherche, comme promis, mais par Cambridge Analytica, qui va les utiliser à des fins commerciales. Pire encore, le quizz donne l’autorisation de télécharger les données de tous les amis sur Facebook de ceux qui ont rempli le questionnaire. Cambridge Analytica siphonne ainsi les données détaillées de plus de 50 millions de personnes, essentiellement aux Etats-Unis.

    « Une autre façon d’approcher les choses »

    Ce trésor est la base de l’entreprise. Cela lui permet de cibler de façon extrêmement précise des sous-groupes sur Facebook. La pratique de ciblage est courante, utilisée de tous les publicitaires. Mais cette fois-ci, en plus des données démographiques (âge, sexe, etc.), l’entreprise a le profil psychologique des individus.

    De ce côté-là, la recherche sur Facebook impressionne. Des scientifiques ont démontré qu’avec une dizaine de « likes », un ordinateur peut comprendre le profil psychologique d’une personne mieux que son propre collègue de bureau ; à 70 « likes », la machine le comprend mieux qu’un ami ; à 150 « likes », elle dépasse la perception d’un membre de sa famille ; à 300 « likes », elle excède la compréhension de son propre époux ou épouse.

    C’est alors qu’arrive Robert Mercer et Steve Bannon. Le premier est un milliardaire américain, qui a fait fortune grâce aux algorithmes utilisés sur les marchés financiers. Le second veut mener une « révolution culturelle » dans la politique et il s’est fait connaître avec Breitbart News, un site d’information proche de l’extrême droite. Il deviendra ensuite l’éminence grise de Donald Trump, avant la rupture entre les deux hommes.

    En 2013, M. Mercer investit dans l’entreprise et met M. Bannon aux commandes du conseil d’administration. « Bannon venait au moins une fois par mois à Londres, raconte M. Wylie. Et tous les lundis matins, on avait une conférence téléphonique avec lui et Bekkah Mercer [la fille du milliardaire]. »

    Leur objectif ? « Développer l’alt-right », explique M. Wylie. « Steve Bannon pense que pour changer la politique, il faut changer la culture. Mais Breitbart était resté un site relativement petit. Il cherchait d’autres outils pour mener sa guerre culturelle. Pour lui, SCL, qui faisait de la propagande militaire, était une autre façon d’approcher les choses. »

    Théories du complot

    A l’époque, il n’est pas question d’élections ni de Donald Trump. Les deux Américains utilisent Cambridge Analytica pour travailler en profondeur. Ils surveillent les théories du complot qui circulent, pour les amplifier. Ainsi, fin 2014, des rumeurs circulent : Barack Obama, aurait commencé à amasser des troupes au Texas pour ne pas partir de la présidence américaine. L’entreprise britannique vise les gens qu’elle sait intéressés par les théories du complot et pousse ce message vers eux. « Ensuite, ces gens voyaient ce genre d’information sur Facebook, mais rien de tout cela en regardant CNN ou les médias traditionnels. Et ils se disaient : pourquoi CNN me cache-t-elle des choses ? »

    Bien plus tard, Donald Trump a embauché Cambridge Analytica pour mener à bien sa campagne numérique. Et du côté du Brexit, la société a travaillé gratuitement et pendant quelques semaines auprès de Leave.eu, l’un des organismes faisant campagne pour le Brexit. Une société canadienne qui lui est proche, AggregateIQ, que M. Wylie a aidé à créer, aurait aussi travaillé indirectement pour Vote Leave, un autre organisme pro-Brexit, contournant ainsi le plafond des dépenses de la campagne électorale.

    Pour M. Wylie, les agissements de Cambridge Analytica ont pipé les dés de la démocratie. Mais beaucoup d’experts mettent en doute cette idée. Après tout, l’influence d’une chaîne d’information comme Fox News aux Etats-Unis, ou la campagne anti-européenne menée par le Daily Mail et le Sun depuis trente ans au Royaume-Uni, ont certainement eu une influence profonde dans ces élections. Facebook n’est pas le seul facteur.

    « Il faut réparer Facebook, pas effacer Facebook »

    Dominic Cummings, qui dirigeait Vote Leave, estime que l’argument de M. Wylie, repris initialement par le Guardian, est une sorte de théorie du complot des anti-Brexiters. « Leur fantasme est que le référendum a été perdu parce que (…) les “fake news” et Facebook auraient pris en traître des millions d’ignorants qui ne comprennent pas la réalité. (…) Ce fantasme est plus pratique que de reconnaître que leur campagne a perdu alors que presque toutes les forces du pouvoir et de l’argent au monde étaient de leur côté. »

    M. Wylie reste convaincu que l’influence de Cambridge Analytica a été déterminante. Mais il ajoute un argument plus large. « C’est comme le dopage. Si un athlète gagne les Jeux Olympique en se dopant, on peut toujours dire qu’il aurait gagné même sans se doper. Reste qu’on lui enlève quand même sa médaille, parce que ça remet en cause l’intégrité de tout le processus démocratique. »

    Le lanceur d’alerte canadien ne demande pas pour autant la fin des réseaux sociaux ou l’interdiction de l’utilisation des données privées. « Il faut réparer Facebook, pas effacer Facebook. » Pour lui, les plates-formes sur Internet doivent être régulées comme des entreprises d’utilité publique, par exemple comme les fournisseurs d’électricité ou d’eau. « Il est devenu impossible de vivre sans ces plates-formes, mais il faut les encadrer. » Impossible, trop complexe ? « Pas du tout. Facebook et Google sont plein de gens intelligents, qui savent comment repérer si du micro-ciblage a lieu. Elles pourraient dire par exemple : attention, ceci est une publicité, vous avez été visé et voilà qui paie pour ça. » En sortant de l’ombre et en parlant, il espère que le débat sur la régulation des réseaux sociaux est désormais ouvert.

  • Nerds Converge At 2018 #sxsw 24 Hour Hackathon Photo Feature
    https://hackernoon.com/nerds-converge-at-2018-sxsw-24-hour-hackathon-photo-feature-37441c136de7

    120 top hacker nerds converged upon Austin, Texas for the SXSW 2018 24 hour Hackathon held at the Omni Hotel.The SXSW 24 Hour Hackathon ExperienceDavid Smooke, founder of HackerNoon.com, invited me down to check out the Hackathon this year. I have always been too busy to attend this kind of stuff, but decided to make it happen. I am very happy I did as it was a really cool experience. I showed up on the last day for the presentations and watched each team do their thing. I was thoroughly impressed with the caliber of competition and the fact that people traveled from all over the world to attend.My main take away from this event is to encourage more people to step out of their comfort zone and attend something like this. You will not only increase your dev skills, but you will also meet (...)

    #mentoring #hackathons #sxsw-hackathon #sxsw-2018

  • [Nantes - 10 mars] Société générale, t’es en retard sur le climat !
    https://nantes.indymedia.org/articles/40425

    Nantes, ce samedi 10 mars 2018. Une trentaine de lapins ont rendu visite à deux agences de la Société générale. Leur message : la banque doit stopper ses investissements dans les énergies fossiles, en particulier le terminal d’exportation de gaz de schiste Rio Grande LNG et le gazoduc Rio Bravo au Texas.

    #Economie #Resistances #Nantes #Economie,Resistances

  • Black Children Will Be the Victims of Armed Teachers | Time
    http://time.com/5186040/sherrilyn-ifill-black-children-classroom
    https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/gun-in-classroom.jpg?quality=85

    The #school-to-prison_pipeline has been, without question, built on the foundation of racially discriminatory school discipline practices. Every study that has examined harsh school disciplinary policies has revealed that such policies are visited with greater frequency on children of color. In 2013, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund filed a complaint challenging the practice of the Bryan Independent School District in Brazos County, Texas, of issuing Class C misdemeanor tickets to high school students for disrupting class or swearing; although black students constituted only 21% of the school population, 46% of the misdemeanor tickets were issued to African-American students. Similarly, the Department of Justice challenged the school discipline practices in Meridian, Mississippi, where the majority African-American high school sent its own kids to a juvenile detention facility over minor disciplinary incidents.

    #Etats-Unis #armes #discrimination #éducation

  • Et comme ça met en cause la «  sécurité nationale  », les 14 Mds $ pour protéger l’industrie chimique (privée) doivent nécessairement être publics…

    Gulf Coast Needs $14 Billion Storm Barrier, Chemical Makers Say - Bloomberg
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-05/gulf-coast-needs-14-billion-storm-barrier-chemical-makers-say

    Chemical companies are pressing federal officials to spend billions of dollars on a coastal flood control system near Houston to protect petrochemical plants, oil refineries and shipping infrastructure from the next hurricane.

    The coastal spine, as the project is called, is among the most important infrastructure investments needed to mitigate damage from major storms, Bob Patel, chief executive officer of LyondellBasell Industries NV, said Monday at an industry conference to discuss lessons learned from Hurricane Harvey.

    The proposed system of seawalls, levies and flood gates in the Galveston, Texas, area would cost an estimated $14 billion, and would be designed to reduce flood damage similar to that seen by Hurricane Ike’s storm surge in 2008.

  • A Southwest water dispute reaches the Supreme Court

    Southern New Mexico’s #Mesilla_Valley is like an island: a fertile patchwork of farm fields and groves of pecan trees surrounded by the brown #Chihuahuan Desert.

    For Mesilla Valley farmers, the metaphor rings true in other ways as well. Though they live in New Mexico, the residents of the roughly 90,000-acre-area are caught between their own state and Texas. The Rio Grande water they depend on is not technically New Mexico’s water, but rather part of the water that goes to Texas under the #Rio_Grande_Compact, a treaty ensuring that Texas, New Mexico and #Colorado get their fair share of the river. New Mexico’s delivery obligation to Texas hinges on collecting enough water in #Elephant_Butte_Reservoir, 90 miles from the Texas border and the neighboring Mesilla Valley. Unfortunately, that leaves the farmers downriver in a complicated no-man’s-land of interstate water management.


    https://www.hcn.org/articles/water-a-southwest-water-dispute-between-new-mexico-and-texas-reaches-the-suprem
    #eau #conflit #USA #Etats-Unis #désert_de_Chihuahua #Rio_Grande #barrage_hydroélectrique #Elephant_Butte_Dam #agriculture #Texas #traité #répartition_de_l'eau

  • Separating children and parents at the border is cruel and unnecessary

    The Trump administration has shown that it’s willing — eager, actually — to go to great lengths to limit illegal immigration into the United States, from building a multi-billion-dollar border wall with Mexico to escalated roundups that grab those living here without permission even if they have no criminal record and are longtime, productive members of their communities. Now the administration’s cold-hearted approach to enforcement has crossed the line into abject inhumanity: the forced separation of children from parents as they fight for legal permission to remain in the country.

    How widespread is the practice? That’s unclear. The Department of Homeland Security declined comment because it is being sued over the practice. It ignored a request for statistics on how many children it has separated from their parents, an unsurprising lack of transparency from an administration that faces an unprecedented number of lawsuits over its failure to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests for government — read: public — records. But immigrant rights activists say they have noticed a jump, and in December, a coalition of groups filed a complaint with Homeland Security over the practice.
    When parents and children cross the border and tell border patrol agents they would like to apply for asylum, they often are taken into custody while their request is considered. Under the Obama administration, the families were usually released to the care of a relative or organization, or held in a family detention center. But under President Trump, the parents — usually mothers traveling without their spouses — who sneak across the border then turn themselves in are increasing being charged with the misdemeanor crime of entering the country illegally, advocates say. And since that is a criminal charge, not a civil violation of immigration codes, the children are spirited away to a youth detention center with no explanation. Sometimes, parents and children are inexplicably separated even when no charges are lodged. Activists believe the government is splitting families to send a message of deterrence: Dare to seek asylum at the border and we’ll take your child.

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-immigrants-border-asylum-ice-201802305-story.html
    #frontières #unité_familiale #séparation #enfants #enfance #parents #asile #migrations #réfugiés #USA #Etats-Unis #détention_administrative #rétention #dissuasion

    • Familias rotas, familias vaciadas

      Es delgada y pequeña. No rebasa el 1.60. La habitación en la que duerme —en el segundo piso del albergue para veteranos deportados que creó Héctor Barajas— tiene una cama con un oso de peluche que ella misma confeccionó y una mesa para cuatro personas. La sonrisa que a veces asoma en su rostro nunca llega a sus ojos, oscuros y con marcadas ojeras. Se llama Yolanda Varona y tiene prohibido, de por vida, entrar a Estados Unidos, el país donde trabajó 16 años y donde viven sus dos hijos y tres nietos.


      https://www.revistadelauniversidad.mx/articles/d2c0ac01-e2e8-464f-9d4e-266920f634fc/familias-rotas-familias-vaciadas

    • Taking Migrant Children From Parents Is Illegal, U.N. Tells U.S.

      The Trump administration’s practice of separating children from migrant families entering the United States violates their rights and international law, the United Nations human rights office said on Tuesday, urging an immediate halt to the practice.

      The administration angrily rejected what it called an ignorant attack by the United Nations human rights office and accused the global organization of hypocrisy.

      The human rights office said it appeared that, as The New York Times revealed in April, United States authorities had separated several hundred children, including toddlers, from their parents or others claiming to be their family members, under a policy of criminally prosecuting undocumented people crossing the border.

      That practice “amounts to arbitrary and unlawful interference in family life, and is a serious violation of the rights of the child,” Ravina Shamdasani, a spokeswoman for the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, based in Geneva, told reporters.

      Last month, the Trump administration announced a “zero tolerance” policy for illegal border crossings, saying that it would significantly increase criminal prosecutions of migrants. Officials acknowledged that putting more adults in jail would mean separating more children from their families.

      “The U.S. should immediately halt this practice of separating families and stop criminalizing what should at most be an administrative offense — that of irregular entry or stay in the U.S.,” Ms. Shamdasani said.

      You have 4 free articles remaining.
      Subscribe to The Times

      The United States ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki R. Haley, clearly showed American irritation with the accusation in a statement released a few hours later.

      “Once again, the United Nations shows its hypocrisy by calling out the United States while it ignores the reprehensible human rights records of several members of its own Human Rights Council,” Ms. Haley said. “While the High Commissioner’s office ignorantly attacks the United States with words, the United States leads the world with its actions, like providing more humanitarian assistance to global conflicts than any other nation.”

      Without addressing the specifics of the accusation, Ms. Haley said: “Neither the United Nations nor anyone else will dictate how the United States upholds its borders.”
      EDITORS’ PICKS
      The Last Days of Time Inc.
      Overlooked No More: She Followed a Trail to Wyoming. Then She Blazed One.
      In Britain, Austerity Is Changing Everything

      The administration has characterized its policy as being about illegal immigration, though many of the detained migrants — including those in families that are split apart — enter at official border crossings and request asylum, which is not an illegal entry. It has also said that some adults falsely claim to be the parents of accompanying children, a genuine problem, and that it has to sort out their claims.

      On Twitter, President Trump has appeared to agree that breaking up families was wrong, but blamed Democrats for the approach, saying that their “bad legislation” had caused it. In fact, no law requires separating children from families, and the practice was put in place by his administration just months ago.

      The Times found in April that over six months, about 700 children had been taken from people claiming to be their parents.

      The American Civil Liberties Union says that since then, the pace of separations has accelerated sharply. Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the group’s immigrant rights project, said that in the past five weeks, close to 1,000 children may have been taken from their families.

      Last year, as Homeland Security secretary, John F. Kelly raised the idea of separating children from their families when they entered the country as a way to deter movement across the Mexican border.

      Homeland Security officials have since denied that they separate families as part of a policy of deterrence, but have also faced sharp criticism from President Trump for failing to do more to curb the numbers of migrants crossing the border.

      For the United Nations, it was a matter of great concern that in the United States “migration control appears to have been prioritized over the effective care and protection of migrant children,” Ms. Shamdasani said.

      The United States is the only country in the world that has not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, she noted, but the practice of separating and detaining children breached its obligations under other international human rights conventions it has joined.

      “Children should never be detained for reasons related to their own or their parents’ migration status. Detention is never in the best interests of the child and always constitutes a child rights violation,” she said, calling on the authorities to adopt noncustodial alternatives.

      The A.C.L.U. has filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in San Diego, calling for a halt to the practice and for reunification of families.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/world/americas/us-un-migrant-children-families.html

    • U.S. policy of separating refugees from children is illegal, horrific

      Somewhere in #Texas, a 3-year-old is crying into her pillow. She left all her toys behind when she fled Guatemala. And on this day the U.S. government took her mother away.

      When we read about the U.S. administration’s new policy of trying to stop people from crossing its borders by taking away their children, we too had trouble sleeping.


      https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2018/06/05/us-policy-of-separating-refugees-from-children-is-illegal-horrific.html

    • What’s Really Happening When Asylum-Seeking Families Are Separated ?

      An expert on helping parents navigate the asylum process describes what she’s seeing on the ground.

      Everyone involved in U.S. immigration along the border has a unique perspective on the new “zero tolerance” policies—most notably, the increasing number of migrant parents who are separated from their children. Some workers are charged with taking the children away from their parents and sending them into the care of Health and Human Services. Some are contracted to find housing for the children and get them food. Some volunteers try to help the kids navigate the system. Some, like Anne Chandler, assist the parents. As executive director of the Houston office of the nonprofit Tahirih Justice Center, which focuses on helping immigrant women and children, she has been traveling to the border and to detention centers, listening to the parents’ stories. We asked her to talk with us about what she has been hearing in recent weeks.

      This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

      Texas Monthly: First, can you give us an overview of your organization?

      Anne Chandler: We run the Children’s Border Project, and we work with hundreds of kids that have been released from ORR [Office of Refugee Resettlement] care. We are not a legal service provider that does work when they’re in the shelters. To date, most of our work with that issue of family separation has been working with the parents in the days when they are being separated: when they’re in the federal courthouse being convicted; partnering with the federal public defenders; and then in the adult detention center, as they have no idea how to communicate or speak to their children or get them back before being deported.

      TM: Can you take me through what you’ve been seeing?

      AC: The short of it is, we will take sample sizes of numbers and individuals we’re seeing that are being prosecuted for criminal entry. The majority of those are free to return to the home country. Vast majority. We can’t quite know exactly because our sample size is between one hundred and two hundred individuals. But 90 percent of those who are being convicted are having their children separated from them. The 10 percent that aren’t are some mothers who are going with their children to the detention centers in Karnes and Dilley. But, for the most part, the ones that I’ve been working with are the ones that are actually being prosecuted for criminal entry, which is a pretty new thing for our country—to take first-time asylum seekers who are here seeking safe refuge, to turn around and charge them with a criminal offense. Those parents are finding themselves in adult detention centers and in a process known as expedited removal, where many are being deported. And their children, on the other hand, are put in a completely different legal structure. They are categorized as unaccompanied children and thus are being put in place in a federal agency not with the Department of Homeland Security but with Health and Human Services. And Health and Human Services has this complicated structure in place where they’re not viewed as a long-term foster care system—that’s for very limited numbers—but their general mandate is to safeguard these children in temporary shelters and then find family members with whom they can be placed. So they start with parents, and then they go to grandparents, and then they go to other immediate family members, and then they go to acquaintances, people who’ve known the children, and they’re in that system, but they can’t be released to their parents because their parents are behind bars. And we may see more parents that get out of jail because they pass a “credible fear” interview, which is the screening done by the asylum office to see who should be deported quickly, within days or weeks of arrival, and who should stay here and have an opportunity to present their asylum case before an immigration judge of the Department of Justice. So we have a lot of individuals who are in that credible fear process right now, but in Houston, once you have a credible fear interview (which will sometimes take two to three weeks to even set up), those results aren’t coming out for four to six weeks. Meanwhile, these parents are just kind of languishing in these detention centers because of the zero-tolerance policy. There’s no individual adjudication of whether the parents should be put on some form of alternative detention program so that they can be in a position to be reunited with their kid.

      TM: So, just so I make sure I understand: the parents come in and say, “We’re persecuted” or give some reason for asylum. They come in. And then their child or children are taken away and they’re in lockup for at least six weeks away from the kids and often don’t know where the kids are. Is that what’s happening under zero tolerance?

      AC: So the idea of zero tolerance under the stated policy is that we don’t care why you’re afraid. We don’t care if it’s religion, political, gangs, anything. For all asylum seekers, you are going to be put in jail, in a detention center, and you’re going to have your children taken away from you. That’s the policy. They’re not 100 percent able to implement that because of a lot of reasons, including just having enough judges on the border. And bed space. There’s a big logistical problem because this is a new policy. So the way they get to that policy of taking the kids away and keeping the adults in detention centers and the kids in a different federal facility is based on the legal rationale that we’re going to convict you, and since we’re going to convict you, you’re going to be in the custody of the U.S. Marshals, and when that happens, we’re taking your kid away. So they’re not able to convict everybody of illegal entry right now just because there aren’t enough judges on the border right now to hear the number of cases that come over, and then they say if you have religious persecution or political persecution or persecution on something that our asylum definition recognizes, you can fight that case behind bars at an immigration detention center. And those cases take two, three, four, five, six months. And what happens to your child isn’t really our concern. That is, you have made the choice to bring your child over illegally. And this is what’s going to happen.

      TM: Even if they crossed at a legal entry point?

      AC: Very few people come to the bridge. Border Patrol is saying the bridge is closed. When I was last out in McAllen, people were stacked on the bridge, sleeping there for three, four, ten nights. They’ve now cleared those individuals from sleeping on the bridge, but there are hundreds of accounts of asylum seekers, when they go to the bridge, who are told, “I’m sorry, we’re full today. We can’t process your case.” So the families go illegally on a raft—I don’t want to say illegally; they cross without a visa on a raft. Many of them then look for Border Patrol to turn themselves in, because they know they’re going to ask for asylum. And under this government theory—you know, in the past, we’ve had international treaties, right? Statutes which codified the right of asylum seekers to ask for asylum. Right? Article 31 of the Refugee Convention clearly says that it is improper for any state to use criminal laws that could deter asylum seekers as long as that asylum seeker is asking for asylum within a reasonable amount of time. But our administration is kind of ignoring this longstanding international and national jurisprudence of basic beliefs to make this distinction that, if you come to a bridge, we’re not going to prosecute you, but if you come over the river and then find immigration or are caught by immigration, we’re prosecuting you.

      TM: So if you cross any other way besides the bridge, we’re prosecuting you. But . . . you can’t cross the bridge.

      AC: That’s right. I’ve talked to tons of people. There are organizations like Al Otro Lado that document border turn-backs. And there’s an effort to accompany asylum seekers so that Customs and Border Patrol can’t say, “We’re closed.” Everybody we’ve talked to who’s been prosecuted or separated has crossed the river without a visa.

      TM: You said you were down there recently?

      AC: Monday, June 4.

      TM: What was happening on the bridge at that point?

      AC: I talked to a lot of people who were there Saturdays and Sundays, a lot of church groups that are going, bringing those individuals umbrellas because they were in the sun. It’s morning shade, and then the sun—you know, it’s like 100 degrees on the cement. It’s really, really hot. So there were groups bringing diapers and water bottles and umbrellas and electric fans, and now everyone’s freaked out because they’re gone! What did they do with them? Did they process them all? Yet we know they’re saying you’re turned back. When I was in McAllen, the individuals that day who visited people on the bridge had been there four days. We’re talking infants; there were people breastfeeding on the bridge.

      TM: Are the infants taken as well?

      AC: Every border zone is different. We definitely saw a pattern in McAllen. We talked to 63 parents who had lost their children that day in the court. Of those, the children seemed to be all five and older. What we know from the shelters and working with people is that, yes, there are kids that are very young, that are breastfeeding babies and under three in the shelters, separated from their parents. But I’m just saying, in my experience, all those kids and all the parents’ stories were five and up.

      TM: Can you talk about how you’ve seen the process change over the past few months?

      AC: The zero-tolerance policy really started with Jeff Sessions’s announcement in May. One could argue that this was the original policy that we started seeing in the executive orders. One was called “border security and immigration enforcement.” And a lot of the principles underlying zero tolerance are found here. The idea is that we’re going to prosecute people.

      TM: And the policy of separating kids from parents went into effect when?

      AC: They would articulate it in various ways with different officials, but as immigration attorneys, starting in October, were like, “Oh my goodness. They are telling us these are all criminal lawbreakers and they’re going to have their children taken away.” We didn’t know what it would mean. And so we saw about six hundred children who were taken away from October to May, then we saw an explosion of the numbers in May. It ramped up. The Office of Refugee Resettlement taking in all these kids says that they are our children, that they are unaccompanied. It’s a fabrication. They’re not unaccompanied children. They are children that came with their parents, and the idea that we’re creating this crisis—it’s a manufactured crisis where we’re going to let children suffer to somehow allow this draconian approach with families seeking shelter and safe refuge.

      TM: So what is the process for separation?

      AC: There is no one process. Judging from the mothers and fathers I’ve spoken to and those my staff has spoken to, there are several different processes. Sometimes they will tell the parent, “We’re taking your child away.” And when the parent asks, “When will we get them back?” they say, “We can’t tell you that.” Sometimes the officers will say, “because you’re going to be prosecuted” or “because you’re not welcome in this country” or “because we’re separating them,” without giving them a clear justification. In other cases, we see no communication that the parent knows that their child is to be taken away. Instead, the officers say, “I’m going to take your child to get bathed.” That’s one we see again and again. “Your child needs to come with me for a bath.” The child goes off, and in a half an hour, twenty minutes, the parent inquires, “Where is my five-year-old?” “Where’s my seven-year-old?” “This is a long bath.” And they say, “You won’t be seeing your child again.” Sometimes mothers—I was talking to one mother, and she said, “Don’t take my child away,” and the child started screaming and vomiting and crying hysterically, and she asked the officers, “Can I at least have five minutes to console her?” They said no. In another case, the father said, “Can I comfort my child? Can I hold him for a few minutes?” The officer said, “You must let them go, and if you don’t let them go, I will write you up for an altercation, which will mean that you are the one that had the additional charges charged against you.” So, threats. So the father just let the child go. So it’s a lot of variations. But sometimes deceit and sometimes direct, just “I’m taking your child away.” Parents are not getting any information on what their rights are to communicate to get their child before they are deported, what reunification may look like. We spoke to nine parents on this Monday, which was the 11th, and these were adults in detention centers outside of Houston. They had been separated from their child between May 23 and May 25, and as of June 11, not one of them had been able to talk to their child or knew a phone number that functioned from the detention center director. None of them had direct information from immigration on where their child was located. The one number they were given by some government official from the Department of Homeland Security was a 1-800 number. But from the phones inside the detention center, they can’t make those calls. We know there are more parents who are being deported without their child, without any process or information on how to get their child back.

      TM: And so it’s entirely possible that children will be left in the country without any relatives?

      AC: Could be, yeah.

      TM: And if the child is, say, five years old . . .?

      AC: The child is going through deportation proceedings, so the likelihood that that child is going to be deported is pretty high.

      TM: How do they know where to deport the child to, or who the parents are?

      AC: How does that child navigate their deportation case without their parent around?

      TM: Because a five-year-old doesn’t necessarily know his parents’ information.

      AC: In the shelters, they can’t even find the parents because the kids are just crying inconsolably. They often don’t know the full legal name of their parents or their date of birth. They’re not in a position to share a trauma story like what caused the migration. These kids and parents had no idea. None of the parents I talked to were expecting to be separated as they faced the process of asking for asylum.

      TM: I would think that there would be something in place where, when the child is taken, they’d be given a wristband or something with their information on it?

      AC: I think the Department of Homeland Security gives the kids an alien number. They also give the parents an alien number and probably have that information. The issue is that the Department of Homeland Security is not the one caring for the children. Jurisdiction of that child has moved over to Health and Human Services, and the Health and Human Services staff has to figure out, where is this parent? And that’s not easy. Sometimes the parents are deported. Kids are in New York and Miami, and we’ve got parents being sent to Tacoma, Washington, and California. Talk about a mess. And nobody has a right to an attorney here. These kids don’t get a paid advocate or an ad litem or a friend of the court. They don’t get a paid attorney to represent them. Some find that, because there are programs. But it’s not a right. It’s not universal.

      TM: What agency is in charge of physically separating the children and the adults?

      AC: The Department of Homeland Security. We saw the separation take place while they were in the care and custody of Customs and Border Protection. That’s where it was happening, at a center called the Ursula, which the immigrants called La Perrera, because it looked like a dog pound, a dog cage. It’s a chain-link fence area, long running areas that remind Central Americans of the way people treat dogs.

      TM: So the Department of Homeland Security does the separation and then they immediately pass the kids to HHS?

      AC: I don’t have a bird’s-eye view of this, besides interviewing parents. Parents don’t know. All they know is that the kid hasn’t come back to their little room in CBP. Right? We know from talking to advocates and attorneys who have access to the shelters that they think that these kids leave in buses to shelters run by the Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement Department of Unaccompanied Children Services—which, on any given day there’s like three thousand kids in the Harlingen-Brownsville area. We know there are eight, soon to be nine, facilities in Houston. And they’re going to open up this place in Tornillo, along the border by El Paso. And they’re opening up places in Miami. They’re past capacity. This is a cyclical time, where rates of migration increase. So now you’re creating two populations. One is your traditional unaccompanied kids who are just coming because their life is at risk right now in El Salvador and Honduras and parts of Guatemala, and they come with incredible trauma, complex stories, and need a lot of resources, and so they navigate this immigration system. And now we have this new population, which is totally different: the young kids who don’t hold their stories and aren’t here to self-navigate the system and are crying out for their parents. There are attorneys that get money to go in and give rights presentations to let the teenagers know what they can ask for in court, what’s happening with their cases, and now the attorneys are having a hard time doing that because right next to them, in the other room, they’ve got kids crying and wailing, asking for their mom and dad. The attorneys can’t give these kids information. They’re just trying to learn grounding exercises.

      TM: Do you know if siblings are allowed to stay together?

      AC: We don’t know. I dealt with one father who knew that siblings were not at the same location from talking to his family member. He believes they’re separated. But I have no idea. Can’t answer that question.

      TM: Is there another nonprofit similar to yours that handles kids more than adults?

      AC: Yes: in Houston it’s Catholic Charities. We know in Houston they are going to open up shelters specific for the tender-age kids, which is defined as kids under twelve. And that’s going to be by Minute Maid Stadium. And that facility is also going to have some traditional demographic of pregnant teenagers. But it’s going to be a young kid—and young kids are, almost by definition, separated. Kids usually do not migrate on their own at that age.

      TM: That’s usually teens?

      AC: Teens. Population is thirteen to seventeen, with many more fifteen-, sixteen-, and seventeen-year-olds than thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds. They’re riding on top of trains. You know, the journey is very dangerous. Usually that’s the age where the gangs start taking the girls and saying “you’re going to be my sex slave”–type of stuff. I’ve heard that it’s going to be run by a nonprofit. ORR does not hold the shelters directly. They contract with nonprofits whose job it is to provide essential food, mental health care, caseworkers to try to figure out who they’re going to be released to, and all those functions to nonprofits, and I think the nonprofit in charge of this one is Southwest Key.

      TM: So how long do the kids stay in the facility?

      AC: It used to be, on average, thirty days. But that’s going up now. There are many reasons for that: one, these facilities and ORR are not used to working with this demographic of young children. Two, DHS is sharing information with ORR on the background of those families that are taking these children, and we’ve seen raids where they’re going to where the children are and looking for individuals in those households who are undocumented. So there is reticence and fear of getting these children if there’s someone in the household who is not a citizen.

      TM: So if I’m understanding correctly, a relative can say, “Well, I can pick that kid up; that’s my niece.” She comes and picks up the child. And then DHS will follow them home? Is that what you’re saying?

      AC: No. The kid would go to the aunt’s house, but let’s just imagine that she is here on a visa, a student visa, but the aunt falls out of visa status and is undocumented and her information, her address, is at the top of DHS’s files. So we’ve seen this happen a lot: a month or two weeks after kids have been released, DHS goes to those foster homes and arrests people and puts people in jail and deports them.

      TM: And then I guess they start all over again trying to find a home for those kids?

      AC: Right.

      TM: What is explained to the kids about the proceedings, and who explains it to them?

      AC: The Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement goes through an organization called the Vera Institute of Justice that then contracts with nonprofit organizations who hire attorneys and other specialized bilingual staff to go into these shelters and give what they call legal orientation programs for children, and they do group orientation. Sometimes they speak to the kids individually and try to explain to them, “This is the process here; and you’re going to have to go see an immigration judge; and these are your rights before a judge; you won’t have an attorney for your case, but you can hire one. If you’re afraid to go back to your country, you have to tell the judge.” That type of stuff.

      TM: And if the child is five, and alone, doesn’t have older siblings or cousins—

      AC: Or three or four. They’re young in our Houston detention centers. And that’s where these attorneys are frustrated—they can’t be attorneys. How do they talk and try to console and communicate with a five-year-old who is just focused on “I want my mom or dad,” right?

      TM: Are the kids whose parents are applying for asylum processed differently from kids whose parents are not applying for asylum?

      AC: I don’t know. These are questions we ask DHS, but we don’t know the answers.

      TM: Why don’t you get an answer?

      AC: I don’t know. To me, if you’re going to justify this in some way under the law, the idea that these parents don’t have the ability to obtain very simple answers—what are my rights and when can I be reunited with my kid before I’m deported without them?—is horrible. And has to go far below anything we, as a civil society of law, should find acceptable. The fact that I, as an attorney specializing in this area, cannot go to a detention center and tell a mother or father what the legal procedure is for them to get their child or to reunite with their child, even if they want to go home?

      And my answer is, “I don’t think you can.” In my experience, they’re not releasing these children to the parents as they’re deported. To put a structure like that in place and the chaos in the system for “deterrence” and then carry out so much pain on the backs of some already incredibly traumatized mothers and fathers who have already experienced sometimes just horrific violence is unacceptable.

      https://www.texasmonthly.com/news/whats-really-happening-asylum-seeking-families-separated

      Mise en exergue d’un passage :

      The child goes off, and in a half an hour, twenty minutes, the parent inquires, “Where is my five-year-old?” “Where’s my seven-year-old?” “This is a long bath.” And they say, “You won’t be seeing your child again.”

    • Why the US is separating migrant children from their parents

      US Attorney General Jeff Sessions has defended the separation of migrant children from their parents at the border with Mexico, a measure that has faced increasing criticism.

      The “zero-tolerance” policy he announced last month sees adults who try to cross the border, many planning to seek asylum, being placed in custody and facing criminal prosecution for illegal entry.

      As a result, hundreds of minors are now being housed in detention centres, and kept away from their parents.
      What is happening?

      Over a recent six-week period, nearly 2,000 children were separated from their parents after illegally crossing the border, figures released on Friday said.

      Mr Sessions said those entering the US irregularly would be criminally prosecuted, a change to a long-standing policy of charging most of those crossing for the first time with a misdemeanour offence.

      As the adults are being charged with a crime, the children that come with them are being separated and deemed unaccompanied minors.

      Advocates of separations point out that hundreds of children are taken from parents who commit crimes in the US on a daily basis.

      As such, they are placed in custody of the Department of Health and Human Services and sent to a relative, foster home or a shelter - officials at those places are said to be already running out of space to house them.

      In recent days, a former Walmart in Texas has been converted into a detention centre for immigrant children.

      Officials have also announced plans to erect tent cities to hold hundreds more children in the Texas desert where temperatures regularly reach 40C (105F).

      Local lawmaker Jose Rodriguez described the plan as “totally inhumane” and “outrageous”, adding: “It should be condemned by anyone who has a moral sense of responsibility.”

      US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials estimate that around 1,500 people are arrested each day for illegally crossing the border.

      In the first two weeks of the “zero-tolerance” new approach, 658 minors - including many babies and toddlers - were separated from the adults that came with them, according to the CBP.

      The practice, however, was apparently happening way before that, with reports saying more than 700 families had been affected between October and April.

      Not only the families crossing irregularly are being targeted, activists who work at the border say, but also those presenting themselves at a port of entry.

      “This is really extreme, it’s nothing like we have seen before,” said Michelle Brané, director of Migrant Rights and Justice at the Women’s Refugee Commission, a New York-based non-governmental organisation that is helping some of these people.

      In many of the cases, the families have already been reunited, after the parent was released from detention. However, there are reports of people being kept apart for weeks and even months.

      Family separations had been reported in previous administrations but campaigners say the numbers then were very small.
      Whose fault is it?

      Mr Trump has blamed Democrats for the policy, saying “we have to break up the families” because of a law that “Democrats gave us”.

      It is unclear what law he is referring to, but no law has been passed by the US Congress that mandates that migrant families be separated.

      Fact-checkers say that the only thing that has changed is the Justice Department’s decision to criminally prosecute parents for a first-time border crossing offence. Because their children are not charged with a crime, they are not permitted to be jailed together.

      Under a 1997 court decision known as the Flores settlement, children who come to the US alone are required to be released to their parents, an adult relative, or other caretaker.

      If those options are all exhausted, then the government must find the “least restrictive” setting for the child “without unnecessary delay”.

      The case initially applied to unaccompanied child arrivals, but a 2016 court decision expanded it to include children brought with their parents.

      According to the New York Times, the government has three options under the Flores settlement - release whole families together, pass a law to allow for families to be detained together, or break up families.

      It is worth noting that Mr Trump’s chief of staff John Kelly - who previously served as the head of Homeland Security - said in 2017 that the White House was considering separating families as a means of deterring parents from trying to cross the border.
      What do the figures show?

      The number of families trying to enter the US overland without documentation is on the rise. For the fourth consecutive month in May, there was an increase in the number of people caught crossing the border irregularly - in comparison with the same month of 2017, the rise was of 160%.

      “The trends are clear: this must end,” Mr Sessions said last month.

      It is not clear, though, if the tougher measures will stop the migrants. Most are fleeing violence and poverty in Central American countries like El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras and staying, for many, could mean a death sentence.

      Human rights groups, campaigners and Democrats have sharply criticised the separations, warning of the long-term trauma on the children. Meanwhile the UN Human Rights Office called on the US to “immediately halt” them.

      But Mr Sessions has defended the measure, saying the separations were “not our goal” but it was not always possible to keep parents and children together.
      What is the policy in other countries?

      No other country has a policy of separating families who intend to seek asylum, activists say.

      In the European Union, which faced its worst migrant crisis in decades three years ago, most asylum seekers are held in reception centres while their requests are processed - under the bloc’s Dublin Regulation, people must be registered in their first country of arrival.

      Measures may vary in different member states but families are mostly kept together.

      Even in Australia, which has some of the world’s most restrictive policies, including the detention of asylum seekers who arrive by boat in controversial offshore centres, there is no policy to separate parents from their children upon arrival.

      Meanwhile, Canada has a deal with the US that allows it to deny asylum requests from those going north. It has tried to stem the number of migrants crossing outside border posts after a surge of Haitians and Nigerians coming from its neighbour. However, there were no reports of families being forcibly separated.

      “What the US is doing now, there is no equivalent,” said Michael Flynn, executive director of the Geneva-based Global Detention Project, a non-profit group focused on the rights of detained immigrants. “There’s nothing like this anywhere”.

      Republicans in the House of Representatives have unveiled legislation to keep families together but it is unlikely to win the support of its own party or the White House.

      https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44503514?platform=hootsuite

    • Les récits de la détresse d’enfants de migrants créent l’émoi aux Etats-Unis

      Plus de 2000 enfants ont été séparés de leurs parents depuis l’entrée en vigueur en avril de la politique de « tolérance zéro » en matière d’immigration illégale aux Etats-Unis. Ces jours, plusieurs témoignages ont ému dans le pays.

      http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/9658887-les-recits-de-la-detresse-d-enfants-de-migrants-creent-l-emoi-aux-etats-

    • Etats-Unis : quand la sécurité des frontières rime avec torture d’enfants mineurs

      Au Texas, dans un centre de détention, un enregistrement audio d’enfants migrants âgés entre 4 à 10 ans pleurant et appelant leurs parents alors qu’ils viennent d’être séparés d’eux, vient de faire surface.

      Cet enregistrement a fuité de l’intérieur, remis à l’avocate Jennifer Harbury qui l’a transféré au média d’investigation américain ProPublica. L’enregistrement a été placé sur les images filmées dans ce centre. Il soulève l’indignation des américains et du monde entier. Elles sont une torture pour nous, spectateurs impuissants de la barbarie d’un homme, Donald Trump et de son administration.

      Le rythme des séparations s’est beaucoup accéléré depuis début mai, lorsque le ministre de la Justice Jeff Sessions a annoncé que tous les migrants passant illégalement la frontière seraient arrêtés, qu’ils soient accompagnés de mineurs ou pas. Du 5 mai au 9 juin 2018 quelque 2’342 enfants ont été séparés de leurs parents placés en détention, accusés d’avoir traversé illégalement la frontière. C’est le résultat d’une politique sécuritaire dite de “tolérance zéro” qui criminalise ces entrées même lorsqu’elles sont justifiées par le dépôt d’une demande d’asile aux Etats-Unis. Un protocol empêche la détention d’enfants avec leurs parents. Ils sont alors placés dans des centres fermés qui ressemblent tout autant à des prisons adaptées.

      https://blogs.letemps.ch/jasmine-caye/2018/06/19/etats-unis-quand-la-securite-des-frontieres-rime-avec-torture-denfants

    • Aux États-Unis, le traumatisme durable des enfants migrants

      Trump a beau avoir mis fin à la séparation forcée des familles à la frontière, plus de 2 000 enfants migrants seraient encore éparpillés dans le pays. Le processus de regroupement des familles s’annonce long et douloureux.


      https://www.courrierinternational.com/article/aux-etats-unis-le-traumatisme-durable-des-enfants-migrants
      #caricature #dessin_de_presse

    • The Government Has Taken At Least 1,100 Children From Their Parents Since Family Separations Officially Ended

      “You can’t imagine the pain,” Dennis said. “If you’re not a dad, you don’t know what it’s like.” I reached Dennis by phone in a small town in the Copán Department of Honduras, where he lives with his wife and three children. For five months this year, the family was fractured across borders. Sonia, age 11, had been separated from Dennis after they crossed into the United States and turned themselves in to the Border Patrol to ask for asylum. Dennis was deported from Texas, and Sonia sent to a shelter in New York.

      The U.S. government is still taking children from their parents after they cross the border. Since the supposed end of family separation — in the summer of 2018, after a federal judge’s injunction and President Donald Trump’s executive order reversing the deeply controversial policy — more than 1,100 children have been taken from their parents, according to the government’s own data. There may be more, since that data has been plagued by bad record keeping and inconsistencies. The government alleges that separations now only happen when a parent has a criminal history or is unfit to care for a child, but an ongoing lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union argues that the current policy still violates the rights of children and families. Border Patrol agents, untrained in child welfare, make decisions that some parents are unfit to stay with their children based solely on brief interactions with them while they are held in custody.

      Dennis picks coffee during the harvest season and works other basic jobs when he can, but he struggles to put food on the table and pay for his kids’ school supplies. In April, unable to find steady work in the coffee fields and receiving regular threats from a creditor, he headed north, hoping to find safety and opportunity in the United States. “We were barely eating. I couldn’t give my kids a life,” Dennis told me. (He preferred that I only use first names for him and his family due to safety concerns.) Thinking that his two boys — ages 2 1/2 and 7 — were too young to travel, Dennis took Sonia and together they left Honduras. They trekked through Guatemala and Mexico by bus, train, and on foot. They were robbed once, terrified the whole way, and had to beg for food. They slept wherever they could — sometimes in the woods, along the tracks, or, when they could scrounge enough money together, in migrant flophouses.

      After about a month of travel, Dennis and Sonia crossed the Rio Grande in a small raft outside of McAllen, Texas, on the morning of May 17. They walked for hours before they turned themselves in to a Border Patrol agent and were taken to a processing center, where they were locked up in one of the freezing-cold temporary holding centers known as hieleras, or iceboxes. Only a few hours later, a Border Patrol agent took Dennis and Sonia and locked them in separate rooms. It was the last time he would see his daughter for five months.

      For the next 11 days, Dennis remained in the hielera, asking repeatedly to see his daughter. Border Patrol officers tried to get him to sign papers that were in English, which he couldn’t read. He refused. “You can’t see her,” a Border Patrol agent told him about his daughter. The agent said that she was fine, but wouldn’t tell him where she was. Border Patrol transferred Dennis to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Port Isabel, Texas. They told him that because of a previous deportation and a felony — a 10-year-old charge for using false work authorization papers — he was ineligible for asylum. For the next 30 days of his detention, he knew nothing of his daughter or her whereabouts. Finally, an agent called him over and told him that she was on the phone. The call was brief. They both cried. He told her to be strong. He told her that they were going to send him away. Two weeks later, without talking to his daughter again, he was deported back to Honduras. “I’m a man, but I cried. I cried,” he told me. “Oh, it was so hard.”

      Sonia was in New York in an Office of Refugee Resettlement, or ORR, shelter, where she was living with a number of other children. In Honduras, after Dennis’s deportation, the rest of the family waited in agony for nearly 5 months, until October 9, when Sonia was released and then flown home. “My wife,” Dennis said, “she didn’t eat, didn’t sleep. You can’t imagine the suffering. And, don’t forget,” he reminded me, “she had two other kids to raise.”

      In 2018, much of the world looked on aghast as U.S. immigration agents separated thousands of children from their parents in an unprecedented anti-immigrant crackdown. In one notorious instance captured on audio, Border Patrol agents laughed and joked at desperate children crying for their parents. The separations, part of a series of policy changes to limit total immigration and effectively shutter refugee and asylum programs, stemmed from the so-called zero-tolerance policy that began in El Paso in 2017 and was rolled out border-wide in the spring of 2018. The administration had announced that it would seek to prosecute all people who illegally crossed the border (despite the fact that, according to U.S. law, it is not illegal for an asylum-seeker to cross the border), but it later emerged that the government had specifically targeted families. A strict zero tolerance policy — prosecuting every individual who was apprehended — was always beyond capacity. The focus on families was part of a distinct effort by the Department of Homeland Security and the White House to try and dissuade — by subjecting parents and children to the terror of separation — more people from coming to the United States.

      After widespread uproar and international condemnation, Trump issued an executive order to halt the separations on June 20, 2018. Six days later, U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw issued an injunction, demanding the reunification of parents with their children within 30 days. For children under the age of 5, the deadline was 14 days. For some, however, it was too late. Parents had already lost custody, been deported, or even lost track of their children. Even for those who were reunified, trauma had set in. In 2018, the number of publicly known separations was 2,800. In fact, as the government revealed this October after pressure from the ACLU lawsuit, that original count was over 1,500 children short. Furthermore, the government has admitted that more than 1,100 additional families have been separated since the executive order and injunction — bringing the total number of children impacted to at least 5,446. That number may still be an undercount and will continue to rise if immigration officials’ current practices continue.

      The grounds for the ongoing separations — the 1,100 new cases — stem from a carve-out in Sabraw’s injunction: that children should not be separated “absent a determination that the parent is unfit or presents a danger to the child.” That language, the ACLU and others allege in an ongoing lawsuit, is being interpreted too broadly by the government, resulting in unwarranted separations. ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who has been litigating against the government on behalf of a class of separated families, called the ongoing separation policy “as shocking as it is unlawful.”

      The reason that Dennis and Sonia were separated, for example, goes back to 2008, when Dennis’s wife was pregnant with Sonia, and Dennis came to the U.S. to find work and support his family. He made it to Minnesota and was loaned false papers to get a job, but he was quickly picked up and charged with forgery. He spent three months in a federal prison before being deported. Eleven years later, that conviction led to Sonia being taken from him. “You could call any child expert from anywhere in the country, and they would tell you that these parents are not a danger to the child,” Gelernt said in a September 20 hearing. “The government is simply saying, ‘We are going to take away children because the court said we could.’”

      In a brief filed to the court in July, ACLU attorneys pointed out cases in which children were taken from their parents for “the most minor or nonviolent criminal history.” The reasons for separation cited in those cases included marijuana possession convictions, a 27-year-old drug possession charge, and a charge of “malicious destruction of property value” over a total of $5. An 8-month-old was separated from his father for a “fictitious or fraudulent statement.” A mother who broke her leg at the border had her 5-year-old taken from her while she was in emergency surgery, and ORR did not release the child for 79 days.

      In an example of a dubious determination made by the Border Patrol of a father being “unfit” to care for his 1-year-old daughter, an agent separated the two because the father left his daughter in a wet diaper while she was sleeping. She had been sick and, after caring for her and taking her to the hospital on two separate occasions for a high fever, the father “wanted to let her sleep instead of waking her to change her diaper,” according to the ACLU brief. Nonetheless, a female guard took his daughter from his arms, criticized him for not changing the diaper, and even called him a bad father. The government’s own documents show that the father has no other criminal history.

      In another instance, a 3-year-old girl was separated from her father due to Customs and Border Protection’s allegation that he was not actually her parent. Although the father’s name does not appear on the child’s birth certificate, he presented other documentation showing parentage and requested a DNA test as proof. Officials ignored his request and separated the family. After an attorney intervened, the family took a DNA test and confirmed paternity. Meanwhile, the daughter was sexually abused while in ORR care and, according to the brief, “appears to be severely regressing in development.”

      CBP did not respond to a request for comment.

      The ACLU’s brief received some coverage this summer, but many of the most egregious stories it collected went unmentioned. Overall, even as the separations have continued, media attention has flagged. From a high of 2,000 stories a month in the summer of 2018, this fall has seen an average of only 50 to 100 stories a month that mention family separation, according to an analysis by Pamela Mejia, head of research at Berkeley Media Studies Group. Mejia told me that the issue had “reached a saturation point” for many people: “The overwhelming number of stories that generate outrage has made it harder to keep anything in the headlines.”

      At first, the child victims of the government’s actions were easy to empathize with. There was no “crime frame,” as Mejia put it, to explain away the children’s suffering, in contrast to the way that immigration is often covered. Whether denominating migrants as “illegals,” seeing them as “hordes” or “invaders,” or using a broad brush to associate them with crime or terrorism, politicians and the media alike often wield anti-immigrant or dehumanizing language when discussing immigration. Young children, however, are something different. The broad consensus in 2018 was that the family separation policy was an outrageous and unnecessary cruelty.

      But, despite the outrage, the policy continued and now there’s a sense of “futility that this is going to keep happening,” Mejia said. Gelernt likewise attributed the lack of ongoing coverage to “media burnout,” noting especially that there are more than 200 kids under the age of 5 who have been separated from their families. It’s hard to cover so many heartrending stories, Gelernt said. And now, simply, “People think it’s over.”

      But it’s not. Sabraw, the southern California judge who issued the injunction in 2018, is expected to rule soon on the ACLU’s challenge to the continued separations. But even if he again orders the government to reunify families, or narrows immigration officials’ latitude in carrying out separations, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the government can, or will, comply. CBP, the Border Patrol’s parent agency, has already proven negligent in keeping track of the separated children — calling families who had undergone separation, for example, “deleted family units.” Some children still remain unaccounted for.

      “At this point, no government official can plausibly claim that they are unaware of the damage these separations are doing to the children,” Gelernt told me, “yet they continue to do it.”

      In late November, back in Copán, Sonia graduated from sixth grade. One of her favorite things to do, Dennis told me, is to draw with her younger brothers. She is also teaching the older of the two boys to read, practicing his letters with him. She’ll go into seventh grade soon, but her father worries about her growing up in what he described as a gang-ridden town. Honduras has one of the highest incidence rates of violence against women in the world. He also doesn’t know how he’ll be able to pay for her high school. “I know it’s desperate,” he said, “but I’m thinking of heading north again. I can’t see how else to do it.”

      Sonia doesn’t talk much about her time separated from her family, but Dennis notices that she’s changed, and he and his wife are worried: “She told me she didn’t feel good. She was just crying at first [while in the ORR facility]; that’s all she did.” Now when she goes quiet sometimes, her parents wonder if she’s still affected by the trauma. As Dennis contemplated aloud another potential trip north in search of personal and financial security, he reflected, “I just ask that we have enough food to eat every day. I just want my family to be safe.”

      https://theintercept.com/2019/12/09/family-separation-policy-lawsuit

  • #Pollution & #poissons


    Islande : 30.000 tonnes de poissons morts dans un lac
    (lien modifié car issu de la fachosphère par mégarde de ma part et qui n’a pas échappé à la vigilance de @colporteur - Merci à toi)


    https://img.20mn.fr/1ITG9GbsRBep6gB9bvMHzQ/1200x768_tonnes-poissons-morts-ete-ramasses-lagoa-rodrigo-freitas-a-rio-jan
    Les poissons du lac Rodrigo de Freitas, en plein cœur de Rio de Janeiro, ont été victimes d’une désoxygénation…
    https://www.20minutes.fr/planete/1118961-20130315-20130315-jo-2016-dizaines-tonnes-poissons-morts-lac-desti


    Mexique : 50 tonnes de poissons morts extraits d’un lac
    http://www.linfo.re/monde/amerique/650702-mexique-50-tonnes-de-poissons-morts-extraits-d-un-lac


    Morts massives de poissons à travers l’Europe ! (2013)
    http://enattendant-2012.blogspot.fr/2013/07/morts-massives-de-poissons-travers.html

    Mort massive de poisson en 2016
    http://etat-du-monde-etat-d-etre.net/de-la-terre/hecatombes-animales/morts-massives-danimaux-en-2016-plus-de-60-cas-entre-en-s

    16 Février 2016 – 445 tortues retrouvés mortes échouées le long des plages de Guerrero au MEXIQUE Lien
    16 Février 2016 – Grande mortalité de poissons le long des voies d’eau de Karatay en TURQUIE Lien
    15 Février 2016 – Des milliers de poissons meurent le long de la rivière Porce en COLOMBIE Lien
    poissons-morts-colombie-2016
    11 Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons morts s’échouent sur les plages de l’ÎLE MAURICE Lien
    poissons-morts-plage-maurice
    11 Février 2016 – Des milliers de poissons continuent de mourir le long du delta du Nil en EGYPTE Lien
    11 Février 2016 – Des dizaines de singes sont en train de mourir « un mystère » dans les forêts du NICARAGUA Lien
    11 Février 2016 – Des milliers de poissons morts retrouvés sur les plages des FIDJI Lien
    11 Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons morts dans les eaux de Oosterhout aux PAYS-BAS Lien
    11 Février 2016 – Des masses de poissons morts s’échouent sur les plages de Montevideo en URUGUAY Lien
    peces-montevideo1
    10 Février 2016 – Des milliers de poissons morts retrouvés dans les eaux de NOUVELLE-CALÉDONIE Lien
    10 Février 2016 – Des centaines d’anguilles mortes retrouvés dans un ruisseau de Marlborough en NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE Lien
    10 Février 2016 – Des dizaines d’oiseaux de mer ainsi que d’autres créatures marines retrouvés morts sur une plage de Malibu en AMÉRIQUE lien
    7 février 2016 – +630 tonnes de poissons sont morts dans les fermes piscicoles le long du delta du Mékong au VIETNAM Lien
    6 Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons retrouvés morts « à cause d’une marée rouge » en FLORIDE, Amérique lien
    5 Février 2016 – Des millions d’huîtres sont mortes à cause d’une maladie dans le sud de la Tasmanie en AUSTRALIE Lien
    4 Février 2016 – Des dizaines d’oiseaux meurent subitement à Wichita au KANSAS, Etats-Unis Lien
    Capture d’écran 2016-04-15 à 15.38.02
    4 Février 2016 – Des dizaines de pélicans morts d’une cause inconnue sur Grand Isle en LOUISIANE, Amérique Lien
    4 Février 2016 – 6 baleines mortes se sont échouées le long de la côte de l’Est de l’ANGLETERRE Lien
    4 Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons retrouvés morts « suscitent la peur » à La Brea, TRINITÉ-ET-TOBAGO Lien
    4 Février 2016 – Mortalité massive de poissons dans une lagune de Marica au BRÉSIL Lien
    3 février 2016 – 8 autres baleines mortes retrouvés le long de la côte de Friedrichskoog en ALLEMAGNE Lien
    3 Février 2016 – 41.000 poulets sont morts d’une maladie de Newcastle à Luzon aux PHILIPPINES Lien
    3 février 2016 – 36 tonnes de poissons sont morts dans les exploitations agricoles, « à cause d’une marée » à HONG KONG Lien
    3 Février 2016 – Des dizaines de tortues mortes retrouvées le long des plages de Tecpan de Galeana au MEXIQUE Lien
    3 Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons retrouvés morts dans les étangs du Queensland en AUSTRALIE Lien
    1er Février 2016 – Des centaines de poissons retrouvés morts dans un lac du TEXAS en Amérique lien
    1er Février 2016 – Mortalité massive de poissons dans la rivière Shing Mun à HONG KONG Lien
    1er Février 2016 – Des masses de poissons morts découverts le long d’1 km de rivière dans la province de Hubei en CHINE Lien
    31 Janvier 2016 – Grande mortalité de poissons « du jamais vu » dans la rivière Snake à WASHINGTON aux États-Unis Lien
    30 Janvier 2016 – +500 chameaux sont morts d’une « maladie mystérieuse » à Marsabit au KENYA Lien
    30 Janvier 2016 – +19 tonnes de poissons morts retrouvés dans un lac de Goias au BRÉSIL Lien
    28 janvier 2016 – +22,000 oiseaux marins retrouvés morts « la plus grande mortalité jamais enregistrée » le long des plages de l’ALASKA en AmériqueLien
    Common Murre on beach 3
    28 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines d’oiseaux de mer retrouvés morts sur une plage de la mer de Galilée en ISRAËL Lien
    28 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de tonnes de poissons sont morts dans les exploitations agricoles de la province de Ha Tinh au VIETNAM Lien
    27 Janvier 2016 – 400 tonnes de poissons sont morts à cause du froid à Ubon Ratchathani en THAÏLANDE Lien
    27 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poissons sont morts dans une réserve du NEVADA aux Etats-Unis Lien
    26 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poissons retrouvés morts échoués à Martha Vineyard dans le MASSACHUSETTS aux États-Unis. Lien
    25 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poulets morts d’une « maladie mystérieuse » à Kampong Thom au CAMBODGE Lien
    25 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers d’étoiles de mer retrouvées mortes échouées à Port St. Joe en FLORIDE, Amérique. Lien
    25 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de milliers de poissons retrouvés morts dans un lac de Samut Prakan en THAÏLANDE Lien
    21 Janvier 2016 – 300 tortues retrouvées mortes sur une plage de Odisha en INDE Lien
    18 Janvier 2016 – Hécatombe massive de poissons dans la rivière Eloor en INDE Lien
    17 Janvier 2016 – 12 cachalots retrouvés morts sur des îles des PAYS-BAS et d’ALLEMAGNE Lien
    17 Janvier 2016 – Grande mortalité de poissons repérés le long du Nil à Rosetta en l’EGYPTE Lien
    the_nile_river_distributary_of_rosetta_littered_with_dead_fish_near_kafr_al-sheikh
    15 Janvier 2016 – +10.000 calmars morts retrouvés échoués « cause inconnue » à Arauco au CHILI Lien
    15 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de poissons morts flottant dans une rivière de Kuala Lumpur en MALAISIE. Lien
    13 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poissons retrouvés morts dans la baie de Guanabara au BRÉSIL Lien
    13 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de milliers de poissons retrouvés morts ou mourants dans la rivière Hunter, NSW en AUSTRALIE Lien
    12 janvier 2016 – plus de 100 baleines échouées dont 45 mortes sur la côte de Tamil Nadu en INDE Lien
    10 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de poissons et d’anguilles morts dans un lac de la baie de Hawke en NOUVELLE-ZÉLANDE Lien
    8 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poissons morts retrouvés à Gulfport en FLORIDE aux États-Unis. Lien
    1452695255643
    8 Janvier 2016 – Des dizaines de milliers d’étoiles de mer et méduses retrouvées mortes le long du Sussex et du Hampshire en ANGLETERRE Lien
    7 Janvier 2016 – 2000 poissons retrouvés morts sur les rives d’une rivière d’Amalfi en COLOMBIE Lien
    6 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers d’oiseaux retrouvés morts au bord de la mer le long d’une plage de Prince William Sound en ALASKA, Amérique Lien
    6 Janvier 2016 – +100 tonnes de poissons retrouvés morts dans une rivière de la province de Dong Nai au VIETNAM Lien
    6 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines d’oiseaux retrouvés morts à Cuerámaro au MEXIQUE Lien
    6 janvier 2016 – 25.000 oiseaux tués à cause de la grippe aviaire à Accra au GHANA Lien
    5 Janvier 2016 – Mortalité massive de poissons dans un lac de Marica au BRÉSIL Lien
    5 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines de poissons retrouvés morts le long d’une rivière de Gebeng en MALAISIE Lien
    2 Janvier 2016 – Des milliers de poissons morts dans une rivière « à cause de la pollution » à Pelalawan Regency en INDONÉSIE Lien
    2 Janvier 2016 – Des centaines d’étoiles de mer mortes retrouvées échouées sur une plage de Portsmouth en ANGLETERRE Lien

    #nos_ennemis_les_bêtes #mots_massive #animaux

  • The road to building a border wall will be long and difficult, and go through the courts
    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-texas-border-wall-20180211-story.html
    http://www.latimes.com/resizer/YuBkhlAmZ6JkjRMa93SIwtbkmoI=/1200x0/www.trbimg.com/img-5a80326b/turbine/la-na-texas-border-wall-20180211

    It’s not long — just two pages — but a notice recently issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a reminder of the challenges, legal and otherwise, facing President Trump’s promised border wall.

    The corps issued a notice to contractors Friday saying it might soon accept bids to construct a 3-mile section of border wall in south Texas, with an estimated cost of anywhere from $25 million to $100 million — if the corps gets the money.

    #mur #états-unis #mexique #trump

  • Aux avant-postes du «  mur  » trumpien

    http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2018/02/10/aux-avant-postes-du-mur-trumpien_5254797_3234.html

    Le président républicain entend bâtir une «  barrière physique  » à la frontière avec le Mexique. Pour l’heure, celle-ci se résume à huit monolithes, symboles de la division entre pro- et anti-immigration.


    Les huit prototypes du « mur » voulu par le président Donald Trump à la frontière entre les Etats-Unis et le Mexique, en octobre 2017.

    Le « grand et beau mur » promis par Donald Trump à ses concitoyens tient pour l’instant en huit panneaux géants installés à la frontière entre les Etats-Unis et le Mexique, au sud de San Diego, en Californie. Huit monolithes de neuf mètres de haut et autant de large, postes avancés de la forteresse America First prônée par le président républicain.

    Du côté américain, il est impossible d’approcher. Les prototypes sont situés sur un terrain appartenant au gouvernement. La Border Police (police des frontières) a suspendu ses visites guidées, dans l’attente de celle de Donald Trump. Le président a promis de se déplacer pour inspecter lui-même les éléments précurseurs de « l’imposante barrière physique » qu’il espère laisser au pays. Mais sa venue, plusieurs fois annoncée, n’est toujours pas confirmée.

    Du côté mexicain, il faut franchir la frontière au poste d’Otay Mesa, à 20 km à l’est de Tijuana, puis prendre le boulevard Garita et la calle 12. On traverse les maquiladoras, ces vastes ateliers d’assemblage menacés par la renégociation de l’Accord de libre-échange nord-américain (Alena) entré en vigueur en 1994. Près de 700 multinationales, dont Sony, Samsung et General Motors, y sont installées. Les pièces arrivent d’Asie, débarquent au port de Los Angeles, traversent la frontière en duty free (sans taxe) et sont montées à Tijuana. Les produits finis sont réexportés vers les Etats-Unis.

    Des projets pilotes

    Depuis vingt ans, les soutiers de la mondialisation viennent s’entasser pour des salaires de misère (deux dollars par heure, soit cinq fois moins qu’aux Etats-Unis) dans ce faubourg poussiéreux de Las Torres, traversé par les semi-remorques rutilants, les poules et les chiens errants. Beaucoup ont fait le mur, et les narcotrafiquants ont construit des tunnels à la faveur de la prolifération des maquiladoras. Depuis 2006, une quinzaine de ces tunnels ont été mis au jour à Tijuana, certains longs de plus de 500 mètres.

    Les huit prototypes dépassent de six mètres la barrière de tôle couleur rouille héritée de Bill Clinton, qui sert de ligne de démarcation. La police des frontières leur a attribué des numéros. A la suite d’un appel d’offres lancé par le département de la sécurité intérieure, six compagnies ont été retenues pour construire des projets pilotes.

    W.G. Yates & Sons, du Mississippi, a érigé un mur de métal de couleur sable pour 458 000 dollars (payés par le contribuable américain), soit environ 375 000 euros ; Fisher Sand & Gravel, de l’Arizona, un pan de béton minimaliste (365 000 dollars). KWR, également de l’Arizona, a ajouté un tube métallique au sommet afin d’empêcher les échelles de s’accrocher. Le numéro 3 se distingue par sa couleur bleue : c’est le projet de l’ELTA, un sous-traitant des forces armées israéliennes.

    Prouesses de l’armée américaine

    De la fenêtre sans vitre de son abri, à l’ombre d’un demi-palmier, Alexis Franco Santana, 22 ans, a vue sur le prototype numéro 6, celui est surmonté d’un grillage de barbelés. Devant la masure s’empilent les déchets de plastique livrés par les camionnettes de recyclage. Le jeune homme est chargé du triage, moyennant 50 dollars par semaine. Casquette retournée, short extra-large de basketteur, il a tout d’un jeune Américain, jusqu’à l’accent, mais il se plaint de son peu de vocabulaire.

    Les prototypes n’ont pas eu raison de sa bonne humeur. « C’est comme un jeu, s’esclaffe-t-il. On dirait que Trump est allé à Toys’R’Us et qu’il s’est acheté des Lego. » Pour cinq dollars, le jeune homme loue aux touristes une échelle que lui a laissée un visiteur de passage. Au cas où Donald Trump confirmerait son arrivée, une télévision américaine a pris une option sur le gruyère de planches qui lui sert de toit.

    Le jeune Mexicain a assisté tout le mois de janvier aux prouesses de l’armée américaine. Pendant trois semaines, des éléments des forces spéciales venus de Floride et les unités paramilitaires de la police des frontières ont pris d’assaut les prototypes hauts de trois étages, à coups de « pioche », de « marteau-piqueur », de « burin », de « cric de voiture » et de « chalumeau », selon la liste dressée par la Border Police. Un seul des militaires est parvenu à se hisser au sommet. Fin janvier, les Américains ont été informés que les prototypes avaient passé avec succès le test de résistance aux envahisseurs. Alexis hausse les épaules. « Il faut qu’on traverse de toute façon. Que ça soit avec des cordes ou des tunnels. Pour nous, c’est une nécessité. »

    Craintes de manifestations et d’incidents

    Un mirador a dû être construit pour surveiller les prototypes. Coût pour le comté de San Diego : près d’un million de dollars, ce qui fait grimacer jusqu’aux républicains. Les autorités locales craignaient les manifestations et les incidents. Du côté de l’extrême droite, un groupe se réclamant de « l’identité européenne » est venu faire des selfies. Et le cercle des bordertown patriots y a relancé son bon vieux slogan de campagne : « Build the wall ! » (« construisez le mur ! »). « C’est dissuasif, explique Tom, un militant de ce groupe anti-immigration, qui préfère conserver l’anonymat. On sait bien que ça ne va pas totalement arrêter les clandestins. » Il garde toute confiance en Trump. « En un an, il a déjà réussi à construire les prototypes. Il suffit que chaque foyer paie 200 dollars et, en huit ans, le mur pourra être fini. » Sinon, prévoit-il, « les Etats-Unis ne seront plus les Etats-Unis ».

    Les défenseurs des immigrants, eux, ne se sont pas dérangés. « Pour Trump, c’est un outil de propagande. Nous n’avons pas de temps à perdre à aller crier devant ces prototypes », déclare Christian Ramirez, de l’ONG Alliance San Diego. Ce militant a été arrêté le 11 décembre à Washington, au cours d’un sit-in au Congrès. « Notre combat, ce n’est pas le mur, souligne-t-il. C’est la régularisation des “Dreamers” » (les jeunes amenés aux Etats-Unis par leurs parents avant l’âge de 16 ans). Donald Trump a mis leur sort dans la balance dans son épreuve de force avec les démocrates : 800 000 « Dreamers » – il a même poussé jusqu’à 1,6 million de bénéficiaires –, contre 25 milliards de dollars pour le mur. Les responsables latinos sont opposés à un tel marchandage. Pas question que les « Dreamers » soient « utilisés comme monnaie d’échange pour faire adopter des mesures anti-immigrants », s’insurge Christian Ramirez.

    Le « mur » a une longue histoire mais, jusqu’ici, il n’a pas survécu aux aléas politiques. En 2006, grâce à la loi votée au Congrès – y compris par Barack Obama et Hillary Clinton –, George W. Bush a lancé les travaux. Quand Barack Obama a été élu à la Maison Blanche, ils ont été suspendus, « hormis quelques routes et travaux de consolidation ici ou là », précise M. Ramirez. Janet Napolitano, ex-secrétaire à la sécurité intérieure et ancienne gouverneure de l’Arizona, a remplacé le projet de béton par un « mur électronique » : des capteurs, des drones et des patrouilles renforcées. Aujourd’hui, après plus de deux milliards d’investissement, 560 km de parois empêchent le passage des piétons et 480 km d’obstacles antivéhicule, celui des voitures. Soit 1 040 km de frontière marqués par une barrière, sur un parcours total de 3 218 km entre les deux pays.

    « Plus aucun recours légal »

    Jusqu’à présent, les ONG ont réussi à retarder la construction du mur, en exploitant les dispositions réglementaires : l’obligation de procéder à des études d’impact sur l’environnement et les espèces menacées, par exemple, mais aussi la consultation des tribus indiennes ou celle des ranchers qui, au Texas, ont porté plainte contre le gouvernement qui les a expropriés, en l’accusant de minorer leurs indemnités. Cette fois, elles redoutent que Trump ne passe outre, comme une loi de 2005 – validée par la Cour suprême – l’y autorise si la sécurité nationale est en jeu.

    Ses prédécesseurs n’avaient pas abusé des dérogations (cinq tout de même pour l’administration Bush). Mais le 45e président des Etats-Unis n’a pas l’intention de s’embarrasser de délicatesses. Fin janvier, les premières dérogations ont été publiées. Elles concernent un tronçon de 20 km près de Santa Teresa, dans le désert de Chihuahua, au Nouveau-Mexique. Les bulldozers ne sont pas loin. « Nous n’avons plus aucun recours légal. Nous sommes à la merci de l’administration Trump », déplore Christian Ramirez, qui est spécialiste des droits humains dans les communautés frontalières.

    Une fois les projets sélectionnés, les entreprises devront soumettre un nouvel appel d’offres. Lequel devra être suivi d’une période de commentaires publics. Les prototypes n’ont pas fini d’attirer la curiosité et la créativité. Les artistes de la Light Brigade de San Diego sont venus projeter une échelle lumineuse sur les monolithes, comme pour souligner l’illusion du mur tant que les déséquilibres économiques n’auront pas été corrigés. A l’instigation du plasticien helvéto-islandais Christoph Büchel, un collectif a aussi lancé une pétition pour faire des huit prototypes un « monument national ». Une « sorte de Stonehenge [site mégalithique de Grande-Bretagne] », avance Michael Diers, historien de l’art versé dans l’iconographie politique et porte-parole de l’initiative. Un monument qui témoignerait pour la postérité de la tentation de repli de l’Amérique au temps de Donald Trump.

  • Where Donald Trump’s Border Wall Would Start - WSJ
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/where-donald-trumps-border-wall-would-start-1518085801

    ALAMO, Texas—Set on the winding Rio Grande, the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge is home to 400 species of birds, an endangered wildcat and, if President Donald Trump gets his way, a towering border wall.

    The refuge has been identified by federal officials as the first construction site for Mr. Trump’s wall, if it gains funding from Congress. That’s not because the nature reserve is a particular hot spot of illegal crossing of either migrants or drugs, but because the federal government already owns the land.

    “It’s an easier starting point,” said Manuel Padilla Jr., the Border Patrol chief for the sector.

    #mur #mexique #états-unis #trump

  • Rereading: The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs | Books | The Guardian

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/oct/14/jane-jacobs-death-and-life-rereading

    In Donald Barthelme’s 1974 short story “I Bought a Little City”, the narrator decides one day to purchase Galveston, Texas, where he then tears down some houses, shoots 6,000 dogs, and rearranges what remains into the shape of a giant Mona Lisa jigsaw puzzle visible only from the air. As with much of Barthelme’s work, the premise seems so absurd that one can’t help but shake it until a metaphor falls out, and here one might well assume that, in the words of the novelist Donald Antrim, “I Bought a Little City” is “a take on the role that a writer has in writing a story – playing god, in a certain way”. But Barthelme first arrived in Greenwich Village, where he would live for most of the rest of his life, in the winter of 1962, just as local campaigners were narrowly defeating an attempt by the despotic city planner Robert Moses to run a 10-lane elevated highway through the middle of Washington Square Park. For decades, Moses really did play god with New York, and for anyone who ever lived within his kingdom, "I Bought a Little City’, which was first published in the New Yorker, might not have seemed so absurd after all.

    Le livre en pdf : https://www.dropbox.com/s/s7fa8mwpeblk568/jane_jacobs_the_death_and_life_of_great_american.pdf?dl=0
    #urban_matter

  • Nouveau projet multimedia The Marshall project.
    A fascinating dive into the history of “Cops” and how it shapes/reflects perspectives on policing.
    Bad Boys- How “Cops” became the most polarizing reality TV show in America.
    https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/01/22/bad-boys

    To Stephen Chao, the former Fox executive who helped launch the show, its unvarnished simplicity remains one of the most radical things he’s ever seen on television. To Steve Dye, the police chief of the Grand Prairie Police Department in Texas, where the show was recently filmed, “Cops” is a powerful marketing and recruitment tool amid historically challenging times for law enforcement.

    “Cops,” of course, is no longer the Fox behemoth it was in the ’90s, when it topped more than 8 million viewers an episode and was often the most watched reality show. Robinson proudly attributes this to Color of Change: In May 2013, a few months after the group launched a campaign to oust “Cops" from Fox, the show moved to Spike. There, it flourished, becoming one of the channel’s most watched shows with an average of 1.1 million viewers per episode last year. This season featured its 1,000th episode, while a Hollywood adaptation, possibly directed by Ruben Fleischer, of “Zombieland” and “Gangster Squad,” is expected to be released this year.

    And yet, “Cops” almost never happened. This is the story of how it did—and the polarizing, influential thing it became.

  • La triste histoire de Topsy, une éléphante exécutée pour meurtre par électrocution en 1903

    Topsy a été amenée aux États-Unis vers 1875 par le Cirque Forepaugh qui la donna en représentation dans tout le pays. En 1903 elle était âgée de 36 ans (28 selon d’autres sources mais improbale puisque que dans ce cas elle serait née en 1875...), pesait 6 tonnes, mesurait 3 mètres de hauteur et 6 mètres de longueur1. En 1900 elle tue deux hommes au Texas et elle passe ses dernières années au Luna Park de Coney Island. Seul son dernier gardien Frédéric Ault était capable de la gérer ; mais le 6 décembre 1902, ivre, il parcourt la ville sur le dos de l’éléphant2.

    En 1903, elle tue l’un de ses dresseurs qui aurait tenté de lui faire manger une cigarette allumée, signant ainsi sa condamnation a mort.

    À la suite de l’incident, les propriétaires du parc — Frederick Thompson et Elmer Dundy — décident d’exécuter l’animal en raison du passé violent de Topsy et du manque de fiabilité de son dresseur.

    Ils avaient d’abord l’intention de la tuer par pendaison mais la Société américaine pour la prévention de la cruauté envers les animaux protesta contre cette idée.

    Pour rendre l’exécution plus efficace, on fit manger à Topsy des carottes mélangées à 460 grains de cyanure de potassium avant que la tension de 6 600 V ne soit envoyé à travers son corps. Topsy mourut en quelques secondes.

    En 1999 la mort de Topsy est commémorée lors du Défilé des sirènes de Coney Island par l’artiste Gavin Heck.

    Le 20 juillet 2003, un bâtiment a été construit en mémoire de Topsy dans le musée de Coney Island.

    https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topsy
    Sur la page wikipédia il y a la video de cette execution filmé par Edison.

  • What Happens When We Let Tech Care For Our Aging Parents | WIRED
    https://www.wired.com/story/digital-puppy-seniors-nursing-homes

    Arlyn Anderson grasped her father’s hand and presented him with the choice. “A nursing home would be safer, Dad,” she told him, relaying the doctors’ advice. “It’s risky to live here alone—”

    “No way,” Jim interjected. He frowned at his daughter, his brow furrowed under a lop of white hair. At 91, he wanted to remain in the woodsy Minnesota cottage he and his wife had built on the shore of Lake Minnetonka, where she had died in his arms just a year before. His pontoon—which he insisted he could still navigate just fine—bobbed out front.

    Arlyn had moved from California back to Minnesota two decades earlier to be near her aging parents. Now, in 2013, she was fiftysomething, working as a personal coach, and finding that her father’s decline was all-consuming.

    Her father—an inventor, pilot, sailor, and general Mr. Fix-It; “a genius,” Arlyn says—started experiencing bouts of paranoia in his mid-eighties, a sign of Alzheimer’s. The disease had progressed, often causing his thoughts to vanish mid-sentence. But Jim would rather risk living alone than be cloistered in an institution, he told Arlyn and her older sister, Layney. A nursing home certainly wasn’t what Arlyn wanted for him either. But the daily churn of diapers and cleanups, the carousel of in-home aides, and the compounding financial strain (she had already taken out a reverse mortgage on Jim’s cottage to pay the caretakers) forced her to consider the possibility.

    Jim, slouched in his recliner, was determined to stay at home. “No way,” he repeated to his daughter, defiant. Her eyes welled up and she hugged him. “OK, Dad.” Arlyn’s house was a 40-minute drive from the cottage, and for months she had been relying on a patchwork of technology to keep tabs on her dad. She set an open laptop on the counter so she could chat with him on Skype. She installed two cameras, one in his kitchen and another in his bedroom, so she could check whether the caregiver had arrived, or God forbid, if her dad had fallen. So when she read in the newspaper about a new digi­tal eldercare service called CareCoach a few weeks after broaching the subject of the nursing home, it piqued her interest. For about $200 a month, a human-powered avatar would be available to watch over a homebound person 24 hours a day; Arlyn paid that same amount for just nine hours of in-home help. She signed up immediately.

    More From the Magazine
    Mara Hvistendahl

    Inside China’s Vast New Experiment in Social Ranking
    Nathan Hill

    The Overwatch Videogame League Aims to Become the New NFL
    Brian Castner

    Exclusive: Tracing ISIS’ Weapons Supply Chain—Back to the US

    A Google Nexus tablet arrived in the mail a week later. When Arlyn plugged it in, an animated German shepherd appeared onscreen, standing at attention on a digitized lawn. The brown dog looked cutesy and cartoonish, with a bubblegum-pink tongue and round, blue eyes.

    She and Layney visited their dad later that week, tablet in hand. Following the instructions, Arlyn uploaded dozens of pictures to the service’s online portal: images of family members, Jim’s boat, and some of his inventions, like a computer terminal known as the Teleray and a seismic surveillance system used to detect footsteps during the Vietnam War. The setup complete, Arlyn clutched the tablet, summoning the nerve to introduce her dad to the dog. Her initial instinct that the service could be the perfect companion for a former technologist had splintered into needling doubts. Was she tricking him? Infantilizing him?

    Tired of her sister’s waffling, Layney finally snatched the tablet and presented it to their dad, who was sitting in his armchair. “Here, Dad, we got you this.” The dog blinked its saucer eyes and then, in Google’s female text-to-speech voice, started to talk. Before Alzheimer’s had taken hold, Jim would have wanted to know exactly how the service worked. But in recent months he’d come to believe that TV characters were interacting with him: A show’s villain had shot a gun at him, he said; Katie Couric was his friend. When faced with an onscreen character that actually was talking to him, Jim readily chatted back.

    Jim named his dog Pony. Arlyn perched the tablet upright on a table in Jim’s living room, where he could see it from the couch or his recliner. Within a week Jim and Pony had settled into a routine, exchanging pleasantries several times a day. Every 15 minutes or so Pony would wake up and look for Jim, calling his name if he was out of view. Sometimes Jim would “pet” the sleeping dog onscreen with his finger to rustle her awake. His touch would send an instantaneous alert to the human caretaker behind the avatar, prompting the CareCoach worker to launch the tablet’s audio and video stream. “How are you, Jim?” Pony would chirp. The dog reminded him which of his daughters or in-person caretakers would be visiting that day to do the tasks that an onscreen dog couldn’t: prepare meals, change Jim’s sheets, drive him to a senior center. “We’ll wait together,” Pony would say. Often she’d read poetry aloud, discuss the news, or watch TV with him. “You look handsome, Jim!” Pony remarked after watching him shave with his electric razor. “You look pretty,” he replied. Sometimes Pony would hold up a photo of Jim’s daughters or his inventions between her paws, prompting him to talk about his past. The dog complimented Jim’s red sweater and cheered him on when he struggled to buckle his watch in the morning. He reciprocated by petting the screen with his index finger, sending hearts floating up from the dog’s head. “I love you, Jim!” Pony told him a month after they first met—something CareCoach operators often tell the people they are monitoring. Jim turned to Arlyn and gloated, “She does! She thinks I’m real good!”

    About 1,500 miles south of Lake Minnetonka, in Monterrey, Mexico, Rodrigo Rochin opens his laptop in his home office and logs in to the CareCoach dashboard to make his rounds. He talks baseball with a New Jersey man watching the Yankees; chats with a woman in South Carolina who calls him Peanut (she places a cookie in front of her tablet for him to “eat”); and greets Jim, one of his regulars, who sips coffee while looking out over a lake.

    Rodrigo is 35 years old, the son of a surgeon. He’s a fan of the Spurs and the Cowboys, a former international business student, and a bit of an introvert, happy to retreat into his sparsely decorated home office each morning. He grew up crossing the border to attend school in McAllen, Texas, honing the English that he now uses to chat with elderly people in the United States. Rodrigo found CareCoach on an online freelancing platform and was hired in December 2012 as one of the company’s earliest contractors, role-playing 36 hours a week as one of the service’s avatars.

    After watching her dad interact with Pony, Arlyn’s reservations about outsourcing her father’s companionship vanished.

    In person, Rodrigo is soft-spoken, with wire spectacles and a beard. He lives with his wife and two basset hounds, Bob and Cleo, in Nuevo León’s capital city. But the people on the other side of the screen don’t know that. They don’t know his name—or, in the case of those like Jim who have dementia, that he even exists. It’s his job to be invisible. If Rodrigo’s clients ask where he’s from, he might say MIT (the CareCoach software was created by two graduates of the school), but if anyone asks where their pet actually is, he replies in character: “Here with you.”

    Rodrigo is one of a dozen CareCoach employees in Latin America and the Philippines. The contractors check on the service’s seniors through the tablet’s camera a few times an hour. (When they do, the dog or cat avatar they embody appears to wake up.) To talk, they type into the dashboard and their words are voiced robotically through the tablet, designed to give their charges the impression that they’re chatting with a friendly pet. Like all the CareCoach workers, Rodrigo keeps meticulous notes on the people he watches over so he can coordinate their care with other workers and deepen his relationship with them over time—this person likes to listen to Adele, this one prefers Elvis, this woman likes to hear Bible verses while she cooks. In one client’s file, he wrote a note explaining that the correct response to “See you later, alligator” is “After a while, crocodile.” These logs are all available to the customer’s social workers or adult children, wherever they may live. Arlyn started checking Pony’s log between visits with her dad several times a week. “Jim says I’m a really nice person,” reads one early entry made during the Minnesota winter. “I told Jim that he was my best friend. I am so happy.”

    After watching her dad interact with Pony, Arlyn’s reservations about outsourcing her father’s companionship vanished. Having Pony there eased her anxiety about leaving Jim alone, and the virtual dog’s small talk lightened the mood.

    Pony was not only assisting Jim’s human caretakers but also inadvertently keeping an eye on them. Months before, in broken sentences, Jim had complained to Arlyn that his in-home aide had called him a bastard. Arlyn, desperate for help and unsure of her father’s recollection, gave her a second chance. Three weeks after arriving in the house, Pony woke up to see the same caretaker, impatient. “Come on, Jim!” the aide yelled. “Hurry up!” Alarmed, Pony asked why she was screaming and checked to see if Jim was OK. The pet—actually, Rodrigo—later reported the aide’s behavior to CareCoach’s CEO, Victor Wang, who emailed Arlyn about the incident. (The caretaker knew there was a human watching her through the tablet, Arlyn says, but may not have known the extent of the person’s contact with Jim’s family behind the scenes.) Arlyn fired the short-tempered aide and started searching for a replacement. Pony watched as she and Jim conducted the interviews and approved of the person Arlyn hired. “I got to meet her,” the pet wrote. “She seems really nice.”

    Pony—friend and guard dog—would stay.
    Grant Cornett

    Victor Wang grew up feeding his Tama­got­chis and coding choose-your-own-­adventure games in QBasic on the family PC. His parents moved from Taiwan to suburban Vancouver, British Columbia, when Wang was a year old, and his grandmother, whom he called Lao Lao in Mandarin, would frequently call from Taiwan. After her husband died, Lao Lao would often tell Wang’s mom that she was lonely, pleading with her daughter to come to Taiwan to live with her. As she grew older, she threatened suicide. When Wang was 11, his mother moved back home for two years to care for her. He thinks of that time as the honey-­sandwich years, the food his overwhelmed father packed him each day for lunch. Wang missed his mother, he says, but adds, “I was never raised to be particularly expressive of my emotions.”

    At 17, Wang left home to study mechanical engineering at the University of British Columbia. He joined the Canadian Army Reserve, serving as an engineer on a maintenance platoon while working on his undergraduate degree. But he scrapped his military future when, at 22, he was admitted to MIT’s master’s program in mechanical engineering. Wang wrote his dissertation on human-machine interaction, studying a robotic arm maneuvered by astronauts on the International Space Station. He was particularly intrigued by the prospect of harnessing tech to perform tasks from a distance: At an MIT entrepreneurship competition, he pitched the idea of training workers in India to remotely operate the buffers that sweep US factory floors.

    In 2011, when he was 24, his grandmother was diagnosed with Lewy body dementia, a disease that affects the areas of the brain associated with memory and movement. On Skype calls from his MIT apartment, Wang watched as his grandmother grew increasingly debilitated. After one call, a thought struck him: If he could tap remote labor to sweep far-off floors, why not use it to comfort Lao Lao and others like her?

    Wang started researching the looming caretaker shortage in the US—between 2010 and 2030, the population of those older than 80 is projected to rise 79 percent, but the number of family caregivers available is expected to increase just 1 percent.

    In 2012 Wang recruited his cofounder, a fellow MIT student working on her computer science doctorate named Shuo Deng, to build CareCoach’s technology. They agreed that AI speech technology was too rudimentary for an avatar capable of spontaneous conversation tailored to subtle mood and behavioral cues. For that, they would need humans.

    Older people like Jim often don’t speak clearly or linearly, and those with dementia can’t be expected to troubleshoot a machine that misunderstands. “When you match someone not fully coherent with a device that’s not fully coherent, it’s a recipe for disaster,” Wang says. Pony, on the other hand, was an expert at deciphering Jim’s needs. Once, Pony noticed that Jim was holding onto furniture for support, as if he were dizzy. The pet persuaded him to sit down, then called Arlyn. Deng figures it’ll take about 20 years for AI to be able to master that kind of personal interaction and recognition. That said, the CareCoach system is already deploying some automated abilities. Five years ago, when Jim was introduced to Pony, the offshore workers behind the camera had to type every response; today CareCoach’s software creates roughly one out of every five sentences the pet speaks. Wang aims to standardize care by having the software manage more of the patients’ regular reminders—prodding them to take their medicine, urging them to eat well and stay hydrated. CareCoach workers are part free­wheeling raconteurs, part human natural-­language processors, listening to and deciphering their charges’ speech patterns or nudging the person back on track if they veer off topic. The company recently began recording conversations to better train its software in senior speech recognition.

    CareCoach found its first customer in December 2012, and in 2014 Wang moved from Massachusetts to Silicon Valley, renting a tiny office space on a lusterless stretch of Millbrae near the San Francisco airport. Four employees congregate in one room with a view of the parking lot, while Wang and his wife, Brittany, a program manager he met at a gerontology conference, work in the foyer. Eight tablets with sleeping pets onscreen are lined up for testing before being shipped to their respective seniors. The avatars inhale and exhale, lending an eerie sense of life to their digital kennel.

    CareCoach conveys the perceptiveness and emotional intelligence of the humans powering it but masquerades as an animated app.

    Wang spends much of his time on the road, touting his product’s health benefits at medical conferences and in hospital executive suites. Onstage at a gerontology summit in San Francisco last summer, he deftly impersonated the strained, raspy voice of an elderly man talking to a CareCoach pet while Brittany stealthily cued the replies from her laptop in the audience. The company’s tablets are used by hospitals and health plans across Massachusetts, California, New York, South Carolina, Florida, and Washington state. Between corporate and individual customers, CareCoach’s avatars have interacted with hundreds of users in the US. “The goal,” Wang says, “is not to have a little family business that just breaks even.”

    The fastest growth would come through hospital units and health plans specializing in high-need and elderly patients, and he makes the argument that his avatars cut health care costs. (A private room in a nursing home can run more than $7,500 a month.) Preliminary research has been promising, though limited. In a study conducted by Pace University at a Manhattan housing project and a Queens hospital, CareCoach’s avatars were found to reduce subjects’ loneliness, delirium, and falls. A health provider in Massachusetts was able to replace a man’s 11 weekly in-home nurse visits with a CareCoach tablet, which diligently reminded him to take his medications. (The man told nurses that the pet’s nagging reminded him of having his wife back in the house. “It’s kind of like a complaint, but he loves it at the same time,” the project’s lead says.) Still, the feelings aren’t always so cordial: In the Pace University study, some aggravated seniors with dementia lashed out and hit the tablet. In response, the onscreen pet sheds tears and tries to calm the person.

    More troubling, perhaps, were the people who grew too fiercely attached to their digi­tal pets. At the conclusion of a University of Washington CareCoach pilot study, one woman became so distraught at the thought of parting with her avatar that she signed up for the service, paying the fee herself. (The company gave her a reduced rate.) A user in Massachusetts told her caretakers she’d cancel an upcoming vacation to Maine unless her digital cat could come along.

    We’re still in the infancy of understanding the complexities of aging humans’ relationship with technology. Sherry Turkle, a professor of social studies, science, and technology at MIT and a frequent critic of tech that replaces human communication, described interactions between elderly people and robotic babies, dogs, and seals in her 2011 book, Alone Together. She came to view roboticized eldercare as a cop-out, one that would ultimately degrade human connection. “This kind of app—in all of its slickness and all its ‘what could possibly be wrong with it?’ mentality—is making us forget what we really know about what makes older people feel sustained,” she says: caring, interpersonal relationships. The question is whether an attentive avatar makes a comparable substitute. Turkle sees it as a last resort. “The assumption is that it’s always cheaper and easier to build an app than to have a conversation,” she says. “We allow technologists to propose the unthinkable and convince us the unthinkable is actually the inevitable.”

    But for many families, providing long-term in-person care is simply unsustainable. The average family caregiver has a job outside the home and spends about 20 hours a week caring for a parent, according to AARP. Nearly two-thirds of such caregivers are women. Among eldercare experts, there’s a resignation that the demographics of an aging America will make technological solutions unavoidable. The number of those older than 65 with a disability is projected to rise from 11 million to 18 million from 2010 to 2030. Given the option, having a digital companion may be preferable to being alone. Early research shows that lonely and vulnerable elders like Jim seem content to communicate with robots. Joseph Coughlin, director of MIT’s AgeLab, is pragmatic. “I would always prefer the human touch over a robot,” he says. “But if there’s no human available, I would take high tech in lieu of high touch.”

    CareCoach is a disorienting amalgam of both. The service conveys the perceptiveness and emotional intelligence of the humans powering it but masquerades as an animated app. If a person is incapable of consenting to CareCoach’s monitoring, then someone must do so on their behalf. But the more disconcerting issue is how cognizant these seniors are of being watched over by strangers. Wang considers his product “a trade-off between utility and privacy.” His workers are trained to duck out during baths and clothing changes.

    Some CareCoach users insist on greater control. A woman in Washington state, for example, put a piece of tape over her CareCoach tablet’s camera to dictate when she could be viewed. Other customers like Jim, who are suffering from Alzheimer’s or other diseases, might not realize they are being watched. Once, when he was temporarily placed in a rehabilitation clinic after a fall, a nurse tending to him asked Arlyn what made the avatar work. “You mean there’s someone overseas looking at us?” she yelped, within earshot of Jim. (Arlyn isn’t sure whether her dad remembered the incident later.) By default, the app explains to patients that someone is surveilling them when it’s first introduced. But the family members of personal users, like Arlyn, can make their own call.

    Arlyn quickly stopped worrying about whether she was deceiving her dad. Telling Jim about the human on the other side of the screen “would have blown the whole charm of it,” she says. Her mother had Alzheimer’s as well, and Arlyn had learned how to navigate the disease: Make her mom feel safe; don’t confuse her with details she’d have trouble understanding. The same went for her dad. “Once they stop asking,” Arlyn says, “I don’t think they need to know anymore.” At the time, Youa Vang, one of Jim’s regular in-­person caretakers, didn’t comprehend the truth about Pony either. “I thought it was like Siri,” she said when told later that it was a human in Mexico who had watched Jim and typed in the words Pony spoke. She chuckled. “If I knew someone was there, I may have been a little more creeped out.”

    Even CareCoach users like Arlyn who are completely aware of the person on the other end of the dashboard tend to experience the avatar as something between human, pet, and machine—what some roboticists call a third ontological category. The care­takers seem to blur that line too: One day Pony told Jim that she dreamed she could turn into a real health aide, almost like Pinoc­chio wishing to be a real boy.

    Most of CareCoach’s 12 contractors reside in the Philippines, Venezuela, or Mexico. To undercut the cost of in-person help, Wang posts English-language ads on freelancing job sites where foreign workers advertise rates as low as $2 an hour. Though he won’t disclose his workers’ hourly wages, Wang claims the company bases its salaries on factors such as what a registered nurse would make in the CareCoach employee’s home country, their language proficiencies, and the cost of their internet connection.

    The growing network includes people like Jill Paragas, a CareCoach worker who lives in a subdivision on Luzon island in the Philippines. Paragas is 35 years old and a college graduate. She earns about the same being an avatar as she did in her former call center job, where she consoled Americans irate about credit card charges. (“They wanted to, like, burn the company down or kill me,” she says with a mirthful laugh.) She works nights to coincide with the US daytime, typing messages to seniors while her 6-year-old son sleeps nearby.

    Even when Jim grew stubborn or paranoid with his daughters, he always viewed Pony as a friend.

    Before hiring her, Wang interviewed Paragas via video, then vetted her with an international criminal background check. He gives all applicants a personality test for certain traits: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. As part of the CareCoach training program, Paragas earned certifications in delirium and dementia care from the Alzheimer’s Association, trained in US health care ethics and privacy, and learned strategies for counseling those with addictions. All this, Wang says, “so we don’t get anyone who’s, like, crazy.” CareCoach hires only about 1 percent of its applicants.

    Paragas understands that this is a complicated business. She’s befuddled by the absence of family members around her aging clients. “In my culture, we really love to take care of our parents,” she says. “That’s why I’m like, ‘She is already old, why is she alone?’ ” Paragas has no doubt that, for some people, she’s their most significant daily relationship. Some of her charges tell her that they couldn’t live without her. Even when Jim grew stubborn or paranoid with his daughters, he always viewed Pony as a friend. Arlyn quickly realized that she had gained a valuable ally.
    Related Galleries

    These Abandoned Theme Parks Are Guaranteed To Make You Nostalgic

    The Best WIRED Photo Stories of 2017

    Space Photos of the Week: When Billions of Worlds Collide
    1/7Jim Anderson and his wife, Dorothy, in the living room of their home in St. Louis Park, Minnesota in the ’70s. Their house was modeled after an early American Pennsylvania farmhouse.Courtesy Arlyn Anderson
    2/7Jim became a private pilot after returning home from World War II.Courtesy Arlyn Anderson
    6/7A tennis match between Jim and his middle daughter, Layney, on his 80th birthday. (The score was tied at 6-6, she recalls; her dad won the tiebreaker.)Courtesy Arlyn Anderson
    Related Galleries

    These Abandoned Theme Parks Are Guaranteed To Make You Nostalgic

    The Best WIRED Photo Stories of 2017

    Space Photos of the Week: When Billions of Worlds Collide
    1/7Jim Anderson and his wife, Dorothy, in the living room of their home in St. Louis Park, Minnesota in the ’70s. Their house was modeled after an early American Pennsylvania farmhouse.Courtesy Arlyn Anderson

    As time went on, the father, daughter, and family pet grew closer. When the snow finally melted, Arlyn carried the tablet to the picnic table on the patio so they could eat lunch overlooking the lake. Even as Jim’s speech became increasingly stunted, Pony could coax him to talk about his past, recounting fishing trips or how he built the house to face the sun so it would be warmer in winter. When Arlyn took her dad around the lake in her sailboat, Jim brought Pony along. (“I saw mostly sky,” Rodrigo recalls.)

    One day, while Jim and Arlyn were sitting on the cottage’s paisley couch, Pony held up a photograph of Jim’s wife, Dorothy, between her paws. It had been more than a year since his wife’s death, and Jim hardly mentioned her anymore; he struggled to form coherent sentences. That day, though, he gazed at the photo fondly. “I still love her,” he declared. Arlyn rubbed his shoulder, clasping her hand over her mouth to stifle tears. “I am getting emotional too,” Pony said. Then Jim leaned toward the picture of his deceased wife and petted her face with his finger, the same way he would to awaken a sleeping Pony.

    When Arlyn first signed up for the service, she hadn’t anticipated that she would end up loving—yes, loving, she says, in the sincerest sense of the word—the avatar as well. She taught Pony to say “Yeah, sure, you betcha” and “don’t-cha know” like a Minnesotan, which made her laugh even more than her dad. When Arlyn collapsed onto the couch after a long day of caretaking, Pony piped up from her perch on the table:

    “Arnie, how are you?”

    Alone, Arlyn petted the screen—the way Pony nuzzled her finger was weirdly therapeutic—and told the pet how hard it was to watch her dad lose his identity.

    “I’m here for you,” Pony said. “I love you, Arnie.”

    When she recalls her own attachment to the dog, Arlyn insists her connection wouldn’t have developed if Pony was simply high-functioning AI. “You could feel Pony’s heart,” she says. But she preferred to think of Pony as her father did—a friendly pet—rather than a person on the other end of a webcam. “Even though that person probably had a relationship to me,” she says, “I had a relationship with the avatar.”

    Still, she sometimes wonders about the person on the other side of the screen. She sits up straight and rests her hand over her heart. “This is completely vulnerable, but my thought is: Did Pony really care about me and my dad?” She tears up, then laughs ruefully at herself, knowing how weird it all sounds. “Did this really happen? Was it really a relationship, or were they just playing solitaire and typing cute things?” She sighs. “But it seemed like they cared.”

    When Jim turned 92 that August, as friends belted out “Happy Birthday” around the dinner table, Pony spoke the lyrics along with them. Jim blew out the single candle on his cake. “I wish you good health, Jim,” Pony said, “and many more birthdays to come.”

    In Monterrey, Mexico, when Rodrigo talks about his unusual job, his friends ask if he’s ever lost a client. His reply: Yes.

    In early March 2014, Jim fell and hit his head on his way to the bathroom. A caretaker sleeping over that night found him and called an ambulance, and Pony woke up when the paramedics arrived. The dog told them Jim’s date of birth and offered to call his daughters as they carried him out on a stretcher.

    Jim was checked into a hospital, then into the nursing home he’d so wanted to avoid. The Wi-Fi there was spotty, which made it difficult for Jim and Pony to connect. Nurses would often turn Jim’s tablet to face the wall. The CareCoach logs from those months chronicle a series of communication misfires. “I miss Jim a lot,” Pony wrote. “I hope he is doing good all the time.” One day, in a rare moment of connectivity, Pony suggested he and Jim go sailing that summer, just like the good old days. “That sounds good,” Jim said.
    Related Stories

    James Vlahos

    A Son’s Race to Give His Dying Father Artificial Immortality
    Alex Mar

    Are We Ready for Intimacy With Robots?
    Karen Wickre

    Surviving as an Old in the Tech World

    That July, in an email from Wang, Rodrigo learned that Jim had died in his sleep. Sitting before his laptop, Rodrigo bowed his head and recited a silent Lord’s Prayer for Jim, in Spanish. He prayed that his friend would be accepted into heaven. “I know it’s going to sound weird, but I had a certain friendship with him,” he says. “I felt like I actually met him. I feel like I’ve met them.” In the year and a half that he had known them, Arlyn and Jim talked to him regularly. Jim had taken Rodrigo on a sailboat ride. Rodrigo had read him poetry and learned about his rich past. They had celebrated birthdays and holidays together as family. As Pony, Rodrigo had said “Yeah, sure, you betcha” countless times.

    That day, for weeks afterward, and even now when a senior will do something that reminds him of Jim, Rodrigo says he feels a pang. “I still care about them,” he says. After her dad’s death, Arlyn emailed Victor Wang to say she wanted to honor the workers for their care. Wang forwarded her email to Rodrigo and the rest of Pony’s team. On July 29, 2014, Arlyn carried Pony to Jim’s funeral, placing the tablet facing forward on the pew beside her. She invited any workers behind Pony who wanted to attend to log in.

    A year later, Arlyn finally deleted the CareCoach service from the tablet—it felt like a kind of second burial. She still sighs, “Pony!” when the voice of her old friend gives her directions as she drives around Minneapolis, reincarnated in Google Maps.

    After saying his prayer for Jim, Rodrigo heaved a sigh and logged in to the CareCoach dashboard to make his rounds. He ducked into living rooms, kitchens, and hospital rooms around the United States—seeing if all was well, seeing if anybody needed to talk.

  • US fire death toll in 2017 reaches 2,152 - World Socialist Web Site

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/12/23/fire-d23.html

    As the holidays approach there has been a heart wrenching increase in fire deaths of children, highlighting the deplorable housing conditions and systemic poverty within the US. The US Fire Administration (USFA) collects information on civilian casualties due to fire and reports that as of this writing, 2152 people have lost their lives in fires. The prior year’s total was 2,290.

    The three states most impacted in November were Texas, with 21 lives lost, Illinois with 16, and California losing 14. Texas had the most fatalities for all of 2016 - 132. The state’s toll stands at 126 thus far in 2017.

    The house fire crisis disproportionately impacts the working class, which faces substandard housing conditions, as well as declining living standards.

    #états-unis #inégalités #incendies #désastres_domestiques

  • Cartographie sioniste :

    Georges Bush survolant la Ligne verte et constatant l’étroitesse du territoire Israélien au nord de la Cisjordanie : 

    « Vous savez, nous avons des entrées de garages plus larges que ça au Texas »

    Ce texte a d’abord été publié dans le Quotidien d’Oran en octobre 2006, ce n’est donc pas très jeune, mais ça reste d’une brûlante actualité.

    http://www.huffpostmaghreb.com/larbi-zouaimia/s_2_b_18262248.html

    Par Larbi Zouaimia

    Dans la droite religieuse américaine ... on soupire incontestablement d’aise lorsqu’on se rappelle d’une anecdote « évangéliquement » originale née dans les séries de hautes connivences américano-israéliennes.

    Alors qu’il assumait les charges de gouverneur du Texas, George Bush fut invité en 1998 par le gouvernement d’Israël pour découvrir la Terre Sainte.

    A vrai dire, il s’agissait d’une randonnée religieuse hautement planifiée car les ténors ultra-nationalistes de l’Etat hébreu savaient déjà que le chef texan allait devenir le candidat du caucus républicain, mais encore, futur président des Etats-Unis d’Amérique...

    Bref. Ariel Sharon alors ministre des Affaires étrangères prit le soin de faire le guide touristique de Bush lors de son pèlerinage aérien par hélicoptère.

    D’ailleurs, le ministre israélien s’attela à énumérer au gouverneur tous les endroits historiques du foyer biblique en se lamentant parfois sur le sort d’Hébron et Bethlehem restés entre les mains des Palestiniens.

    Mais en survolant l’endroit où le territoire israélien se rétrécissait au profit de la Cisjordanie (dans cette zone elle n’est distante que de 21 km des côtes), c’est George Bush lui-même qui commence à se lamenter à son tour, et ce en se montrant très agacé par la configuration du tracé de la ligne dite verte (séparant les territoires occupés d’Israël), comme s’il voulait dénoncer une injustice faite à l’égard des Israéliens. Il dira donc à Ariel Sharon : « Vous savez, nous avons des entrées de garages plus larges que ça au Texas ».

    #israël #palestine #territoires #ligne_verte #frontières #murs #colonisation #accaparement

  • Inciter à lire en #prison : surveiller sans censurer
    https://www.franceculture.fr/litterature/livres-interdits-en-prison

    Au Texas, 10 000 livres sont interdits en prison, parmi lesquels les albums Où est Charlie ? , ou encore Freakonomics , un manuel de vulgarisation économique. Pour Shakespeare, tout est question d’édition : à cause de certaines gravures reproduites sur des exemplaires un peu anciens, les sonnets peuvent être retoqués. “A l’inverse, rapporte le site ActuaLitté, Mein Kampf d’Adolf Hitler ou des livres signés par un ex-leader du Ku Klux Klan sont autorisés".

    En France, il n’existe aucune liste noire d’ouvrages interdits en milieu pénitentiaire au niveau national. Ni l’administration centrale, ni les parlementaires, n’ont le pouvoir de statuer sur des #livres qui n’auraient le droit de citer dans aucune prison française. En revanche, tous les livres ne franchissent pas le portail d’une prison, et encore moins la porte d’une cellule. C’est le directeur d’établissement, localement, qui peut décider d’accepter ou de refuser certains titres. L’interdiction peut donc varier selon l’aire géographique, puisqu’elle est soumise à l’appréciation humaine, et dans le passé, des détenus ont pu se plaindre, après avoir changé de prison, de n’avoir plus accès tout à fait aux mêmes lectures.

    #culture #réinsertion #lecture

  • Artists attack Trump over Jerusalem move
    Tunde Adebimpe Musician
    Nick Broomfiel Film director
    Caryl Churchill Playwright
    Julie Christie Actor
    Molly Crabapple Writer and artist
    Angela Davis Writer
    Brian Eno Musician
    Eve Ensler Playwright
    Peter Gabriel Musician
    Mona Hatoum Visual artist
    Aki Kaurismaki Film director
    AL Kennedy Writer
    Hari Kunzru Writer
    Mike Leigh Writer, director
    Ken Loach Film director
    Liz Lochhead Poet, playwright
    Emel Mathlouthi Musician
    Thurston Moore Musician
    Maxine Peake Actor
    Michael Rosen Poet
    Mark Ruffalo Actor
    James Schamus Screenwriter, producer, director
    Gillian Slovo Writer
    Ahdaf Soueif Writer
    Juliet Stevenson Actor
    Tilda Swinton Actor
    Marina Warner Writer
    Roger Waters Musician
    Vivienne Westwood Fashion designer
    Robert Wyatt Musician
    The Guardian, le 11 décembre 2017
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/11/artists-attack-trump-over-jerusalem-move

    Autres signatures ici:
    https://artistsletterontrumpandjerusalem.tumblr.com

    #Palestine #Jérusalem #Artistes

  • Uber fined $8.9 million by Colorado for allowing drivers with felony convictions, other drivers license issues
    http://www.denverpost.com/2017/11/20/uber-colorado-fine

    Colorado regulators slapped Uber with an $8.9 million penalty for allowing 57 people with past criminal or motor vehicle offenses to drive for the company, the state’s Public Utilities Commission announced Monday.

    The PUC said the drivers should have been disqualified. They had issues ranging from felony convictions to driving under the influence and reckless driving. In some cases, drivers were working with revoked, suspended or canceled licenses, the state said. A similar investigation of smaller competitor Lyft found no violations.

    “We have determined that Uber had background-check information that should have disqualified these drivers under the law, but they were allowed to drive anyway,” PUC director Doug Dean said in a statement. “These actions put the safety of passengers in extreme jeopardy.”

    Uber spokeswoman Stephanie Sedlak provided this statement on Monday:

    “We recently discovered a process error that was inconsistent with Colorado’s ridesharing regulations and proactively notified the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). This error affected a small number of drivers and we immediately took corrective action. Per Uber safety policies and Colorado state regulations, drivers with access to the Uber app must undergo a nationally accredited third-party background screening. We will continue to work closely with the CPUC to enable access to safe, reliable transportation options for all Coloradans.”

    The PUC’s investigation began after Vail police referred a case to the agency. In that case, which occurred in March, an Uber driver dragged a passenger out of the car and kicked him in the face, according the Vail police report.

    In August, the PUC asked Uber and Lyft for records of all drivers who were accused, arrested or convicted of crimes that would disqualify them from driving for a transportation network company, the term given to ridesharing services under state law.

    “Lyft gave us 15 to 20 (records), but we didn’t find any problems with Lyft,” Dean said.

    Uber handed over 107 records and told the PUC that it had removed those people from its system.

    The PUC cross-checked the Uber drivers with state crime and court databases, finding that many had aliases and other violations. While 63 were found to have issues with their driver’s licenses, the PUC focused on 57 who had additional violations, because of the impact on public safety.

    “What they (Uber) calls proactively reaching out to us was after we had to threaten them with daily civil penalties to get them to provide us with the (records),” said Dean, adding that his prime investigator just told him that some penalized drivers were still on the Uber system. “This is not a data processing error. This is a public safety issue.”

    Uber was welcomed to Colorado in June 2014, when Gov. John Hickenlooper signed Senate Bill 125 to authorize ridesharing services such as Uber and Lyft. The PUC was then charged with creating rules to regulate the services, which went into effect on Jan. 30, 2016.

    The rules gave the companies the choice of either fingerprinting drivers or running a private background check on the potential driver’s criminal history and driving history. Drivers also must have a valid driver’s license.

    Drivers are disqualified if they’ve been convicted of a felony in the past five years. But they can never be a driver if they’ve been convicted of serious felonies including felony assault, fraud, unlawful sexual behavior and violent crimes, according to the statute.

    Taxi drivers, by comparison, are subject to fingerprint background checks by the FBI and Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

    Elsewhere in the U.S., Uber and Lyft have threatened to leave places that force them to fingerprint drivers — including in Chicago, Maryland and Houston.

    Both companies pulled out of Austin last year after the city added rules to fingerprint drivers. But the Texas house passed a bill in April removing such requirements, and Uber and Lyft returned to the city.

    While Maryland caved in its requirements after Uber threatened to leave, the state banned 4,000 ridesharing drivers in April who did not meet state screening requirements despite passing Uber or Lyft’s background checks.That also happened in Massachusetts, which kicked out 8,200 drivers who had passed company checks. Among them were 51 registered sex offenders.

    Uber and Lyft have pushed for private background checks because they say that fingerprints don’t provide the complete source of criminal history that some expect. In a post about its security process, Uber said that when it comes to fingerprints, there are gaps between FBI and state arrest records, which can result in an incomplete background check. Uber, instead, uses state and local criminal history checks plus court records and the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s National Sex Offender site.

    Last month, California regulators nixed any fingerprinting requirement as long as Uber and Lyft conduct their own background checks.

    But the Colorado PUC says that by fingerprinting drivers, the ride service would be able to identify drivers with aliases and other identities with felony convictions. The lack of fingerprinting never sat well with Dean, who mentioned his concern in 2014 before Colorado passed the law.

    “They said their private background checks were superior to anything out there,” Dean said. “We can tell you their private background checks were not superior. In some cases, we could not say they even provided a background check.”

    Vail police said that altercations between passengers and drivers are not uncommon. They’re not limited to Uber drivers but include taxi and limo drivers and passengers, said Vail police Detective Sgt. Luke Causey.

    “We’ve had more than one,” Causey said. “Unfortunately, in our winter environment with guests and around bar closing times, we’ve had the driver go after passengers who don’t pay their tab. Sometimes it can go both ways.”

    Uber drivers have made local headlines for bad behavior. In July, a Denver Uber driver pleaded guilty to disturbing the peace after rolling his car on the leg of a city parking attendant at Denver International Airport. Two years ago, a Denver UberX driver was arrested for trying to break into the home of a passenger he’d just dropped off at the airport.

    Monday’s fine is a civil penalty assessment and based on a citation of $2,500 per day for each disqualified driver found to have worked. Among the findings, 12 drivers had felony convictions, 17 had major moving violations, 63 had driver’s license issues and three had interlock driver’s licenses, which is required after a recent drunken driving conviction.

    Uber has 10 days to pay 50 percent of the $8.9 million penalty or request a hearing to contest the violation before an administrative law judge. Afterwards, the PUC will continue making audits to check for compliance. If more violations are found, Uber’s penalty could rise.

    “Uber can fix this tomorrow. The law allows them to have fingerprint background checks. We had found a number of a.k.a.’s and aliases that these drivers were using. That’s the problem with name-based background checks,” Dean said. “We’re very concerned and we hope the company will take steps to correct this.”

    #Uber #USA #Recht