jeudi, août 25, 2005
samedi, août 20, 2005
Une idole Hawaienne vieille de 4000 ans retrouvée à Bobigny !
Dans Le Parisien du 21 août - C’est au domicile balbynien de l’ex danseuse de caractère Patricia Fiala qu’a été retrouvée une idole hawaiienne vieille de 4000 ans. La statue, volée au Musée de L’Homme en 1972, a servi pendant des années de décor à des soirées très privées organisées par l’ancienne égérie des boîtes de nuit de la rue Frochot qui n’hésitait pas à organiser avec son frère cadet de véritables bacchanales – photo ci-dessus - au cours desquelles des poissons de grande taille étaient sacrifiés après que les participants, à l’instar de la maîtresse des lieux, se fussent auparavant accouplés violemment avec des insectes.
Outre 300.000 anciens francs en petites coupures démonétisées, plusieurs objets ayant appartenus à Teddy Vrignault auraient été découverts dans un faux plafond par la P.J de Bobigny dont un étrange portrait en pied de Marceau-Pivert portant un pourpoint.
En fin d’après-midi, les services scientifiques du laboratoire de la préfecture de Police de Paris étaient encore à pied d’œuvre puisque après que des sondages ont été effectués dans les vastes caves de la Villa Fiala, une grande bâtisse construite à l’extrême fin du Front Populaire, plusieurs caches ont été mises à jour.
jeudi, août 18, 2005
The Shame of It All
The Shame of It All
JENNIFER LOEWENSTEIN
A great charade is taking place in front of the world media in the Gaza Strip. It is the staged evacuation of 8000 Jewish settlers from their illegal settlement homes, and it has been carefully designed to create imagery to support Israel's US-backed takeover of the West Bank and cantonization of the Palestinians.
There was never the slightest reason for Israel to send in the army to remove these settlers. The entire operation could have been managed, without the melodrama necessary for a media frenzy, by providing them with a fixed date on which the IDF would withdraw from inside the Gaza Strip. A week before, all the settlers will quietly have left with no TV cameras, no weeping girls, no anguished soldiers, no commentators asking cloying questions of how Jews could remove other Jews from their homes, and no more trauma about their terrible suffering, the world's victims, who therefore have to be helped to kick the Palestinians out of the West Bank.
The settlers will relocate to other parts of Israel and in some cases to other illegal settlements in the West Bank handsomely compensated for their inconvenience. Indeed, each Jewish family leaving the Gaza Strip will receive between $140,000 and $400,000 just for the cost of the home they leave behind. But these details are rarely mentioned in the tempest of reporting on the "great confrontation" and "historical moment" brought to us by Sharon and the thieving, murderous settler-culture he helped create.
On ABC's Nightline Monday night, a reporter interviewed a young, sympathetic Israeli woman from the largest Gaza settlement, Neve Dekalim - a girl with sincerity in her voice, holding back tears. She doesn't view the soldiers as her enemy, she says, and doesn't want violence. She will leave even though to do so is causing her great pain. She talked about the tree she planted in front of her home with her brother when she was three; about growing up in the house they were now leaving, the memories, and knowing she could never return; that even if she did, everything she knew would be gone from the scene. The camera then panned to her elderly parents sitting somberly amid boxed-up goods, surveying the scene, looking forlorn and resigned. Her mother was a kindergarten teacher, we are told. She knew just about all of the children who grew up here near the sea.
In the 5 years of Israel's brutal suppression of the Palestinian uprising against the occupation, I never once saw or heard a segment as long and with as much sentimental, human detail as I did here; never once remember a reporter allowing a sympathetic young Palestinian woman, whose home was just bulldozed and who lost everything she owned, tell of her pain and sorrow, of her memories and her family's memories; never got to listen to her reflect on where she would go now and how she would live. And yet in Gaza alone more than 23,000 people have lost their homes to Israeli bulldozers and bombs since September 2000 -- often at a moment's notice on the grounds that they "threatened Israel's security." The vast majority of the destroyed homes were located too close to an IDF military outpost or illegal settlement to be allowed to continue standing. The victims received no compensation for their losses and had no place waiting for them to relocate. Most ended up in temporary UNRWA tent-cities until they could find shelter elsewhere in the densely overcrowded Strip, a quarter of whose best land was inhabited by the 1% of the population that was Jewish and occupying the land at their expense.
Where were the cameramen in May 2004 in Rafah when refugees twice over lost their homes again in a single night's raid, able to retrieve nothing of what they owned? Where were they when bulldozers and tanks tore up paved streets with steel blades, wrecked the sewage and water pipes, cut electricity lines, and demolished a park and a zoo; when snipers shot two children, a brother and sister, feeding their pigeons on the roof of their home? When the occupying army fired a tank shell into a group of peaceful demonstrators killing 14 of them including two children? Where have they been for the past five years when the summer heat of Rafah makes life so unbearable it is all one can do to sit quietly in the shade of one's corrugated tin roof -- because s/he is forbidden to go to the sea, ten minutes' walking distance from the city center? Or because if they ventured to the more open spaces they became walking human targets? And when their citizens resisted, where were the accolades and the admiring media to comment on the "pluck," the "will" and "audacity" of these "young people"?
On Tuesday, 16 August, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that more than 900 journalists from Israel and around the world are covering the events in Gaza, and that hundreds of others are in cities and towns in Israel to cover local reactions. Were there ever that many journalists in one place during the past 5 years to cover the Palestinian Intifada?
Where were the 900 international journalists in April 2002 after the Jenin refugee camp was laid to waste in the matter of a week in a show of pure Israeli hubris and sadism? Where were the 900 international journalists last fall when the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza lay under an Israeli siege and more than 100 civilians were killed? Where were they for five years while the entire physical infrastructure of the Gaza Strip was being destroyed? Which one of them reported that every crime of the Israeli occupation from home demolitions, targeted assassinations and total closures to the murder of civilians and the wanton destruction of commercial and public property- increased significantly in Gaza after Sharon's "Disengagement" Plan - that great step toward peace - was announced?
Where are the hundreds of journalists who should be covering the many non-violent protests by Palestinians and Israelis against the Apartheid Wall? Non-violent protesters met with violence and humiliation by Israeli armed forces? Where are the hundreds of journalists who should be reporting on the economic and geographic encirclement of Palestinian East Jerusalem and of the bisection of the West Bank and the subdivision of each region into dozens of isolated mini-prisons? Why aren't we being barraged by outraged reports about the Jewish-only bypass roads? About the hundreds of pointless internal checkpoints? About the countless untried executions and maimings? About the torture and abuse of Palestinians in Israeli prisons?
Where were these hundreds of journalists when each of the 680 Palestinian children shot to death by Israeli soldiers over the last 5 years was laid to rest by grief-stricken family members? The shame of it all defies words.
Now instead report after report announces the "end to the 38 year old occupation" of the Gaza Strip, a "turning point for peace" and the news that "it is now illegal for Israelis to live in Gaza." Is this some kind of joke?
Yes, it is "illegal for Israelis to live in the Gaza Strip" as colonizers from another land. It has been illegal for 38 years. (If they wish to move there and live as equals with the Palestinians and not as Israeli citizens they may do so.)
Sharon's unilateral "Disengagement" plan is not ending the occupation of Gaza. The Israelis are not relinquishing control over the Strip. They are retaining control of all land, air and sea borders including the Philadelphi corridor along the Gaza/Egypt border where the Egyptians may be allowed to patrol under Israel's watchful eye and according to Israel's strictest terms. The 1.4 million inhabitants of Gaza remain prisoners in a giant penal colony, despite what their partisan leaders are attempting to claim. The IDF is merely redeploying outside the Gaza Strip, which is surrounded by electrical and concrete fences, barbed wire, watchtowers, armed guards and motion censors, and it will retain the authority to invade Gaza on a whim. Eight thousand Palestinian workers working in Israel for slave wages will soon be banned from returning to work. Another 3,200 Palestinians who worked in the settlements for a sub-minimum-wage have been summarily dismissed without recourse to severance pay or other forms of compensation. Still others will lose their livelihoods when the Israelis move the Gaza Industrial Zone from Erez to somewhere in the Negev desert.
The World Bank reported in December 2004 that both poverty and unemployment will rise following the "Disengagement" even under the best of circumstances because Israel will retain full control over the movement of goods in and out of Gaza, will maintain an enforced separation of the West Bank and Gaza preventing the residents of each from visiting one another, and will draw up separate customs agreements with each zone severing their already shattered economies-- and yet we are forced to listen day in and day out to news about this historic peace initiative, this great turning point in the career of Ariel Sharon, this story of national trauma for the brothers and sisters who have had to carry out the painful orders of their wise and besieged leader.
What will it take to get the truth across to people? To the young woman of Neve Dekalim who can speak her words without batting an eyelash of embarrassment or shame? As the cameras zoom in on angry settlers poignantly clashing with their "brothers and sisters" in the Israeli army, who will be concerned about their other brothers and sisters in Gaza? When will the Palestinian history of 1948 and 1967, and of each passing day under the violence of dispossession and dehumanization, get a headline in our papers?
I am reminded of an interview I had this summer in Beirut with Hussein Nabulsi of Hizbullah an organization that has had nothing to do with the movement for Palestinian national liberation whatsoever, but one that has become allied with those it sees as the real victims of US and Israeli policies and lies. I remember his tightly shut eyes and his clenched fists as he asked how long Arabs and Muslims were supposed to accept the accusations that they are the victimizers and the terrorists. "It hurts," he said in a whispered ardor. "It hurts so much to watch this injustice every day." And he went on to explain to me why the Americans and the Israelis with their monstrous military arsenals will never be victorious.
jeudi, août 11, 2005
Le cacique déchu mis en examen
mardi, août 09, 2005
Bossa-Nova and Death (5)
"THE Bombers Are Among Us!" the hoardings across London screamed. It's the kind of headline that generates heat but not light. And it's typical of the obstacles Londoners have to negotiate as they struggle to make sense of recent events. The rapid sequence of fearful happenings has bewildered many, as has the ceaseless concatenation of speculation and misinformation. We've been inundated by the non-sequitors of guilt by stereotype.
First, we were told that a man had been shot dead by police at Stockwell tube station because he was linked to the bombers. Then it emerged that he had no such link. We were told that he was suspect because he was wearing a bulky jacket and had leapt over the ticket barrier, which also turned out to be untrue.
Jean-Charles De Menezes, a young electrician from Brazil, was entirely innocent, but dead all the same. The Home Office hastened to inform the public that he had overstayed his visa and may have had a false stamp in his passport. What point were they trying to make? That De Menezes was a foreigner out to take advantage of us? That he belonged to a class of people whose human rights need not be respected?
After the deaths of more than 50 Londoners on July 7, those in the anti-war movement who insisted on placing this atrocity in the context of Britain's role in Iraq were accused of making excuses for the bombers. But who's making excuses now? Not only the right-wing press, long adept at marketing lynch-mob mentality, but even The Guardian, a by-word for British liberalism. In an astonishing editorial, the newspaper argued:
"The biggest mistake the police made was not the most obvious one of shooting the wrong man ... The biggest mistake was not to properly prepare the public for the sustained campaign of violence facing the country ... More should have been done to prepare the public for the forceful response needed to protect them."
Of course, British liberalism has long been characterised by a tendency to ring-fence its liberal principles, especially in times of crisis. In the past, it remained largely unmoved by the barbarisms of colonial rule, and today it asks us to accept the summary public execution of an innocent man as a sad, but unavoidable, by-product of the need to combat terrorism.
`The price we have to pay'
We're told that ghastly events like the De Menezes killing are a "price we have to pay." As usual, the people preaching the doctrine are not the ones actually called upon to pay that price. Their own access to due process and freedom of expression will not be hindered. Most importantly, in the end, in this bargain you never get what you pay for. What you get is the cycle of terror and counter-terror that has chewed through so many societies.
Eerily, there's an object lesson close at hand. Even as the London police besieged council flats and knocked down doors in search of the bombers, the Irish Republican Army (IRA) declared the end of its 35-year war against the British state. In response, the heavily fortified British military watch-posts along the Irish border were dismantled. It should have been a reminder of all the tactics that had failed or backfired in this bitter conflict: detentions, military crackdowns, media restrictions, shoot-to-kill. What didn't work in Ireland was the suspension of due process, the licensed rush to judgment by the security services. Those tactics destroyed and damaged thousands of innocent lives (including 189 unarmed civilians killed by army or police). What did work was a long and arduous grass-roots political process.
In the pubs as well as in the leader columns, there has been a depressing tendency to treat the De Menezes killing as an abstract ethical conundrum. Are there times when it is necessary to take lives in order to save other lives? Are there times when the police have no choice but to shoot first and ask questions later? These questions are always worth discussing, but in this case they are an evasion. All the evidence indicates that the grounds for suspecting that the young Brazilian was about to detonate an explosion were flimsy, certainly too flimsy to warrant eight shots pumped directly into the man's head and neck.
A line was crossed
Unlike the apologists for State terror, many Londoners are acutely aware that with the killing of De Menezes a line was crossed. The huge weight that should encumber the use of police violence, especially lethal violence, against members of the public has been lessened. The shoot to kill policy, we are now told, was agreed in secret two years ago. Thus capital punishment without benefit of trial or appeal has been smuggled in by the backdoor. Another pyrrhic victory in the war on terror.
Two hundred years ago, writing in a house in Lambeth not far from where De Menezes met his fate, the poet William Blake described London as "human awful wonder of God." For this lifelong Londoner and intransigent radical, the city was always two-fold. He saw in it the seed of a multi-national democracy: "In the Exchanges of London every Nation walk'd, And London walk'd in every Nation, mutual in love & harmony." But he also saw in it creatures easily manipulated by phantom fears: "They are obedient, they resist not, they obey the scourge: Their daughters worship terrors and obey the violent." In the midst of a wave of domestic repression justified by England's crusade against France, he pleaded: "Look up! look up! O citizen of London. Enlarge thy countenance!"
This essay originally appeared in the The Hindu.
Mike Marqusee is the author of Chains of Freedom: the Politics of Bob Dylan's Art and Redemption Song: Muhammed Ali and the Sixties. He can be reach through his website: www.mikemarqusee.com
Le dernier descendant des rois hawaiens arrêté à Bobigny
lundi, août 08, 2005
Le cadavre travesti d'un hamster retrouvé au domicile parisien d'Olivier Besançenot
(AFP/8/08/05/) Le cadavre d'un hamster travesti vient d'être retrouvé au domicile parisien d'Olivier Besançenot, jeune et brillant porte parole de la Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire. Le petit animal, dénommé Myriam et entièrement rasé à l'exception du pubis, était coiffé d'une perruque de fortune - réalisée avec les cheveux synthétiques d'une poupée, achetée il y a 15 jours chez un commercant du centre de la capitale - et portait des traces de strangulation. Le dirigeant politique, interrogé par la P-J depuis ce matin n'aurait toujours pas quitté les locaux du Quai d'Orsay.
dimanche, août 07, 2005
La Mouche ne rentre pas dans la Bouche quand elle est fermée.
Evidemment, si vous lui passez Cement Mixer de Slim Gaillard tout de suite après, il retombe dans le noir de la nuit, mais dans ce cas là, vous aussi, n'est-ce pas?
samedi, août 06, 2005
Stéphane Just vainqueur du Trophé Pernod à Sanary sur Mer : 55 ans déja!
S.J - Des descriptions de femmes, tu comprends, des descriptions de Carole Landis par exemple. Tu sais que je collectionne ses photos ?
L.P - Mais Carole Landis est morte...
S.J - Se retournant vers un groupe de buveurs accolés au comptoir - Mais il va se taire celui-là! Carole est vivante, tu comprends, VIVANTE! Tu veux que je le dise dans un porte-voix? Tu veux VRAIMENT me briser le coeur?
L.P - Mais...
S.J - Ecoute, je t'interdis dorénavant d'évoquer des femmes. Tiens, par exemple, si tu me parles d'une fille que tu n'as entrevue qu'une demi-seconde dans un wagon de métro, ou bien, euh...là, sur le port, eh bien je te dis immédiatement stop! Tu n'évoques pas de femmes, tu comprends ? Je ne veux pas voir le mot femme dans ta bouche ! Je te dis ca parcequ'à mon avis, tu n'y connais rien. Tu sais ce qu'on faisait en Allemagne, quand on était au STO, qu'on avait pas vu une paire de jambes depuis des années?
L.P - Oui?
S.J - Viens avec moi, je vais te montrer ce que je fais des artefacts produits par les fossoyeurs de la classe ouvrière - S.J se dirige vers le fond de la salle et ouvre la porte des latrines. La petite pièce, dépourvue de fenêtre, sent l'Ajax et la merde. Au mur, un rouleau de papier jaune-brun lance de legers reflets dans la torpeur humide. Stéphane se penche et, après avoir leché le ticket pour l'humecter de salive, le colle soigneusement sur l'extrémité du rouleau. Le portrait de Léonide Brejnev se balance doucement au gré de la brise méphitique produite par l'extracteur d'air. S.J me jette un regard plein de fièvre et hurle je ne m'appelle pas Raymond Mercader!
jeudi, août 04, 2005
Come Rain or Come Shine
De la pure musique de chambre en trio. Si les dernières sonates pour clarinette de Brahms déroulaient leurs volutes morbides dans un paysage brossé par Caspar David Friedrich, c'est dans les mondes désolés et crépusculaires de l'Amérique Hooperienne qu'il faut entendre cette frugale fanfare existentielle. Monteverdi n'avait-il pas, lui aussi, trouvé une forme de scansion étirant comme sans fin son chant, du néant de l'âme à la réalité insignifiante - qui les entendrait? - des lamentations d'Arianne, abandonnée sur le rivage d'une île.
Ceux qui ont été subjugués par les arrangements de Giuffre pour le disque enregistré avec Anita O' Day chez Verve entendront ici - Come rain or Come Shine - la manière intimiste de l'ex-brother du herd de Woody Hermann.
Comme dit - aussi bien qu'Arianne - Gordon Jenkins : Goodbye.