Le King stone du marae de Taputapuatea …

DESTINATION TERRE

Livre deuxième : Les peuples

3^ème partie : Les tokhariens

Chapitre 30 : Les tokhariens de Polynésie

Les persécutions archéologiques

En Polynésie , mais en réalité dans toute l’Océanie , et plus généralement dans toutes les terres colonisées de par le monde , les lieux archéologiques sont tabous

Ils sont même triplement tabous :

D’abord ils sont tabous , car considérés comme lieux sacrés par les populations autochtones survivantes

Ensuite ils sont doublement tabous , et interdits aux colons , car représentant des religions qui ne sont pas chrétiennement orthodoxes …

Et si par hasard les constructions de ces anciennes religions sont tellement belles ou massives que la technologie soit disant supérieure des chrétiens de l’époque des missionnaires serait bien incapable de reproduire , pas de problème : c’est l’œuvre du diable …

Enfin , ils sont triplement tabous , car le pouvoir colonisateur en place ne veut surtout pas reconnaître que des gens intelligents et civilisés pouvaient vivre ici avant eux …

On aurait peut être à leur reconnaître des droits sur les terres qu’on a volées à leurs ancêtres sous le nom d’annexion …

L’évangélisation de la Polynésie

L’évangélisation de la Polynésie a abouti à la destruction massive des sites sacrés

Elle fut ordonnée par le Roi Pomare II , bras armé des missionnaires , qui a vaincu et trahi ses frères , à la bataille de Fei Pi en 1815

Les fouilles archéologiques récentes ont permis de redécouvrir des lieux sacrés comme les marae , les pétroglyphes et les tiki

Mais que de choses perdues …

Les mégalithes de Polynésie

Comme nous allons le voir , la Polynésie est un territoire mégalithique : menhirs , cercles , temples , murs géants , pétroglyphes , plateformes et pyramides sont présents sur toutes les îles importantes , du moins toutes celles qui étaient émergées il y a 5 mille ans …

La population austronésienne s’y est implantée à cette époque , en provenance de Micronésie

En effet , beaucoup d’îles basses présentes aujourd’hui , sont apparues depuis seulement le tout début de l’ère chrétienne …

Les marae

Les marae sont des plateformes mégalithiques tronquées et pyramidales que l’on trouve dans presque toutes les îles de l’archipel de la Société

Comme ceux de Huahine et de Bora Bora , le marae Taputapuatea est construit en pierres rondes de corail

Les autres marae à Tahiti et Moorea sont en basalte

Marae Tainuu

A Raiatea , l’une des îles sous le vent , en plus d’un magnifique cercle de menhirs , on trouve l’un des plus ancien marae

La plateforme est surélevée de plus de 4 mètres

Dans l’île on trouve aussi deux menhirs en corail sur lesquels on peut voir des pétroglyphes

Les missionnaires ont bâti une église au centre de la plateforme …

Marae Mahaiatea

Le Marae Mahaiatea à Tahiti , est l’une des plus grandes , bien que partiellement détruite aujourd’hui

Il mesurait 21.60 par 81.40m à la base , et s’élevait avec 11 marches jusqu’à plus de 13m de haut

Il était fait de blocs de corail et de pierres volcaniques carrées

Il a été décrit lors de la visite du capitaine Cook en 1769, mais il a été démoli en 1897

Marae Taputapuatea

A Raiatea , une des îles sous le vent , le marae Taputapuatea a été construit au-dessus d’une plateforme plus ancienne

C’est un site sacré qui comprend en son centre un menhir blanc appelé King stone

C’est la plus grande des plateformes de Polynésie en état , car non détruite et restaurée

La demande d’inscription de ce marae au patrimoine mondial de l’Unesco est en cours

Les plateformes des Marquises

Dans toutes îles des Marquises , on y trouve de grandes plateformes en pierres , résidentielles et cérémonielles , des murs , des terrasses , des statues menhirs et bien d’autres constructions mégalithiques

On y trouve de très nombreuses plates formes , plus d’un millier , appelées ici paepae , lorsqu’elles ont été construites pour des habitations et me’ae lorsque leur destination était collective ou religieuse

Ces plateformes font jusqu’à 120m de long et 30m de large , fabriquées avec des blocs de basalte pesant plus de 10 tonnes

La vallée de Taaoa

Sur Hiva Oa , aux Marquises , la totalité de la vallée de Taaoa est mégalithique , surtout des plateformes , mais aussi des pétroglyphes , des menhirs et des tiki

Les plateformes de Vitaria

Vitaria , dans l’île de Rurutu , dans l’archipel des Australes , possède des soubassements de maisons à extrémités arrondies

Ces maisons sont posées sur des plates-formes rectangulaires formant un village composé de ruelles parallèles et perpendiculaires

Les plateformes de Malden

Sur l’Île de Malden , en république du Kiribati , on trouve plus de 40 plateforme pour temples pyramidaux , de 3 à 9m de hauteur , de 6 à 18m de large , et de 27 à 60m de long

Ces temples sont reliés à la mer par des routes pavées

La plateforme de Pulemelei

La plate-forme de Pulemelei , sur l’île de Savai’i à Samoa , est entièrement réalisée en pierres basaltiques

Elle mesure 75m de long sur 60m de large et près de 5m de hauteur

Le Pulemelei se trouve au centre d’un complexe formé de routes , de plates-formes cérémonielles ou résidentielles , qui couvre des centaines d’hectares

La plate-forme de Talietumu

A Uvea on trouve l’ensemble défensif de Kolonui qui comprend la grande plate-forme empierrée de Talietumu

Elle mesure 90m de longueur et 60m de largeur , avec une hauteur qui dépassant les 5m

Cela représente un volume de plus de 10 000 mètres cubes de blocs basaltiques !

Les plateformes de Mu’a

A Tongatapu , il y a beaucoup de plateformes , appelées langi , et notamment à Mu’a , appelée autrefois Lapaha

Elles sont fabriquées avec des dalles , dont certaines dépassent les 20 tonnes

Certains sites ont jusqu’à 50 m de longueur et 8 m de hauteur

La zone de Mu’a , autrefois capitale de l’Empire Tu’i Tonga , a été entourée par un fossé gigantesque , ce qui en permettait l’accès à de très gros navires

On y trouve aussi un trilithe très imposant , formé de deux pierres droites supportant une pierre transversale

La route de Rarotonga

A Rarotonga , une des îles Cook , une route mégalithique pavée , fait le tour complet de l’île

On y trouve aussi de nombreuses plateformes pyramidales

Le trilithon de Ha’amonga

Dans les îles du Tonga , on trouve à l’île de Tongatapu une voûte mégalithique : le trilithon de Ha’amonga

Les piliers de corail mesurent 4.90 m de haut et pèsent plus de 50 tonnes chacun

Le linteau fait 5.80 m de long et pèse environ 9 tonnes

Tiki de Te I’ipona

Sur Hiva Oa , aux Marquises , à Puama’u, on trouve 5 grands tiki , des statues menhirs , dont le plus grand fait 2.43m de haut

Mur de Vahangeku’a Tohua

Sur l’île de Nuku Hiva , à Vahangeku’a Tohua , on trouve un mur mégalithique de plus de 3m de haut

Les pétroglyphes de Ua Huka

Les pétroglyphes de Ua Huka aux îles Marquises ont été protégés par la réalisation de moulages par un professionnel , qui seront bientôt exposés dans un musée

Les pétroglyphes de Foa

Foa , une île des Tonga , abrite un site exceptionnel de pétroglyphes par la variété de ses dessins

L’archéologue canadien , le professeur David Burley , a dénombré plus de 50 types de gravures différentes : des images stylisées d’hommes et de femmes , de tortues , chiens , lézards , et aussi de nombreux dessins abstraits

Collines de Rapa Iti

Photo de Mr Bali Hai : http://www.mrbalihai.com/haideaway/v/aku_aku/plate-27.jpg.html

Sur l’île de Rapa , appelée Rapa Iti : le petit Rapa , pour la distinguer de Rapa Nui : grand Rapa , l’île de Pâques , des collines sont découpées en terrasses pyramidales

Nukuleka

L’archéologue David Burley a découvert un village de plus de 2900 ans , aux Tonga

Cela permet d’affirmer que Nukuleka , juste à l’est de l’actuelle capitale Nuku’alofa , est bien la première ville et capitale des polynésiens de Tonga

Les grottes de Nanumaga

A Nanumaga , aux îles Tuvalu, des plongeurs ont découverts une grotte géante légendaire

La légende disait que les ancêtres vivaient dans une grotte aussi magnifique , qu’énorme

La légende disait vrai

Sous 40 mètres d’eau , les plongeurs ont découvert l’énorme grotte immergée , comportant des traces évidentes d’habitation

Traces de dessins sur les murs , morceaux de pierres de corail travaillés , et surtout des fragments de poteries de style Lapita

La grotte a été habitée dès  – 4000 avant J.C. , ce qui correspond bien à l’arrivée des austronésiens dans la région

L’occupation de la grotte a cessé 2000 ans plus tard , lorsque les eaux sont montées , il y a environ 4000 ans

Les tokhariens de Polynésie

Aucun doute ne subsiste , les austronésiens sont bien des tokhariens

Tous ces points communs : langue , mégalithisme , construction cyclopéennes , technologie , marine , communications , etc … , ne peuvent être que les attributs d’une civilisation évoluée et organisée 
Ils ont colonisé la Polynésie , comme tout le Pacifique et l’Océan Indien , excepté l’Australie des édenistes

Oct 16^th was World Food Day. On this day “The World Summit on Food Security” convened in Rome and will conclude today, November 18th.  Part of a three pronged series of events, these meetings are being held to address the additional burden that the global economic crisis has placed on world hunger.

The Food and Agriculture of the United Nations (FAO) estimates that the number of hungry people worldwide, will pass the one billion mark this year. This means that one sixth of the world is suffering from persistent hunger.

The agenda of these meetings is to provide an action plan on how to boost agricultural productivity. The FAO states:

[The gravity of the current food crisis is the result of 20 years of under-investment in agriculture and neglect of the sector. Directly or indirectly, agriculture provides the livelihood for 70 percent of the world's poor.]

As you can see, global warming is not mentioned. Rather the world’s, and thus our failure, to provide policies, leadership, and economic development is seen as the reason for this current surge of hunger.

(If you want to learn more: at the FAO’s webpage discussing the summit, there is a link to sign a petition to end world hunger, HERE. Ban Ki-moon, the Secretary-General of the United Nations issued a message stressing the need for multilateral commitment, creativity and leadership. On his page HERE, are other links, on how to get involved. There is also a Twitter link.)

As it should be, the emphasis of the events is directed toward poor and developing nations. However, you ever had any doubts, the food crisis is a perfect example of how the United States is part of the global community. Take look at the Washington Post Article, HERE.

We continue to think it is acceptable to starve the brains and stunt the growth of a percentage of our children. It is okay to enfeeble and kill off some of our elderly early and we don’t want to deal with the racial inequities that are still inherent in our domestic economic policies. We still think it is ok to tell women they should get married for money rather than addressing the community practices that allow others avoid responsibility for children.  We still think we should blame women when their children can’t perform in school.

In the USDA’s, 66 page .pdf report, HERE, the US has categories that define levels of food insecurity. The categories of nourishment are defined as: 1) food secure, meaning enough food at all times for a healthy active lifestyle, 2) food insecure, meaning at least some time during the year there was inadequate food in the house, and 3) very low food security, meaning that the food intake of one or more household members was reduced and their eating patterns were disrupted at times during the year because the household lacked money and other resources for food.

We have been running along at a general population of around 12% food insecure people for years. For children with families it’s been 15%. With the economic “recession”, our percentage of food insecure people is now around 14.4% and 21% respectively. This figure does not include indigent or homeless people, so the figure is likely to be higher[1]. By category of selected household statistics, an astonishing 37.2% of “female head of household” with children are food insecure. However, the “male head of household” category is doing pretty badly as well at 27.6%. The third category of other “household with child”, (grandparents, other relative, etc.) is at 29.2%. As might be expected, low-income families are suffering the worst.

As to race, because Black, and Hispanic groups still have proportionally lower incomes and higher poverty levels, as expected, the food insecurity is higher at 25.7% and 26.9%, as opposed to whites at 10.7%. Native Americans are apparently counted in the “other” category at 13.7%. Due to the lack of categorization, this is bound to be a highly deceptive figure.

I think, Pacific John’s recent post over at Alegre’s, elucidates the gap in understanding and potential for turmoil in our current condition.

Although President Obama has stated that “the solution begins with job creation” and is planning increases in food stamps and other feeding programs, these efforts cannot be the end of hunger in this country. Evidence suggests first of all, that many people in this predicament have jobs, but wages do not provide enough income. Secondly, corporate  “big business” agriculture as is suggested by people like Michael Pollan[2], have streamlined, and influenced the USDA as a way to get rid of excess product, rather than toward nutrition. This results in too much corn, wheat and soybean production, at the expense of a national program employing good standards.

Finally, I want to say that during World War II, the US government mobilized the country to feed it’s self, feed the troops, and set standards for good nutrition as part of the effort to win the war. Our country has been at war for eight years now. There has been no such effort. This is much like all the other ways we have tried to pretend that this is war image clean and light of economic impact. As Ban Ki-moon says, we need a coordinated approach to fight this crisis, not the latest political maneuver.

[2] Michael Pollan is the author of “ In Defense of Food”, and “The Omnivores Dilemma”.

Note – I received a call this morning from Keli Hogan, Committee Clerk for  the Senate Committee on Bill C-6. Shawn Buckley will be speaking to the Senate Committee,  Nov 25th

Editor:

I received the information below via email today and decided to make some phone calls.  I spoke with several staff from the  offices listed below. My question to each of them was – Are you aware that Bill C-6 is a precursor to Codex Alimentarius?

Only one person I spoke with had  heard of Codex Alimentarius.  If the staffers never heard of Codex and its implications for Canada, what knowledge do the Senators have?

Do the Senators think  Bill C-6 is benign? Do they understand the implications for Canada and its people if  Bill C-6 passes?

Two things are apparent and need to be answered by the Senators.

1) If they do not understand the implications of Bill C-6 and Codex they are not in a position to make the decision they are being asked to make.

2) If they know,  they are traitors of Canada and its people.

Please contact the Senators below and do two things. Demand the committee accommodate Shawn Buckley and request information from the Senators pertaining to their knowledge of Codex Alimentarius.

Bill C-6 and Codex Alimentarius together are a powerful cocktail which poses a serious threat to the sovereignty of Canada.

Pick up the phone and start making calls.

48 HRS TO GET A CRITICAL MESSAGE TO 12 KEY SENATORS

Here’s the issue: Bill C-6 is now being reviewed by the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs. Their job is to review Bill C-6 in detail, hear from witnesses and make recommendations to the rest of Senators before the 3rd and final reading and vote. This Committee will give the rest of the Senate a final analysis of Bill C-6 based on what they have heard. But they will not have heard from Shawn Buckley.

And by extension, us.

Shawn Buckley, constitutional lawyer and author of the Charter of Health Freedom, has been invited as 1 of the key 14 national witnesses to appear before this Committee. That’s the great news.
To have him admitted to this chamber is an honour. And now, for the bad news. It’s on a day, when he will be in Federal Court. He is in a lock down at this trial for 3 weeks. He has been hired to challenge the validity of a section in the Food and Drug act, and show how the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is being violated. It is an unprecedented case and the Social Affairs Committee apparently, won’t wait.

As of Friday October 30th, the Committee has not given him another option to appear.

NO SUBSTITUTES

It is imperative that he be allowed to give his testimony before this Committee. We all know his perspective is absolutely essential and irreplaceable. There is no alternative. No one has spoken for us, for the Constitution.

The first phase of the Stop Bill C-6 Emailing and Letter Writing Campaign was successful. Many veteran and emerging Health Freedom groups, collectively, created a division in the Senate to force a review in Committee.
We made an impact and had emails quoted in the Senate, so they are hearing us.

THE BIG ASK

YOU DON’T HAVE TO BE AN EXPERT TO TALK TO THE SENATORS, THAT’S WHAT SHAWN IS FOR!

All we have to do is make our voice heard. And that we want Shawn Buckley to have the opportunity to truly represent our interests in detail.

Please take a few minutes to PHONE, EMAIL AND FAX your concerns.

It’s really easy to do and can make a big difference.

There are 12 senators and 1 committee clerk. We must reach them all so please contact as many people from the list below as you can! Our CNHC group is very active. Please GET YOUR ACTIVIST ON today and again tomorrow.

It’s best to send short, strong and constructive written communication by email or fax. This time we have to call because we can’t risk not being heard. Here is a sample letter you can send as is, modify, or simply take some ideas from for your telephone call. You have lots of information on the subject. We know you can make this count.

Dear Senator ____________________ ,

Your Committee is now considering the approval of Bill C-6 which is a bill that I have very serious concerns about.

I am disturbed to learn that the Committee has not re-scheduled to hear from Shawn Buckley. I understand that he was offered a slot during a period of time which he was previously scheduled to be in Federal Court and that he has been denied the opportunity to be heard at a time when it is actually possible for him to attend.

I feel very strongly that Mr. Buckley is a uniquely qualified individual who truly speaks for the interest of Canadians. He is not only a Constitutional lawyer but also the author of the Canadian Charter of Health Freedom, which is a proposed legislation that nearly 40,000 Canadians have signed a petition supporting, with hundreds more signing on every single week.

I strongly believe that to proceed with your final analysis of Bill C-6 without hearing from Mr. Buckley would be a grave omission. One that would have not have heard from the voice of the Canadian public.

I urge you to hear from Shawn Buckley on November 25th, 2009.

Sincerely,

Your Name, City & Province Here

48 HRS TO PHONE, EMAIL & FAX

You can call the toll free line and ask for the Senator 1-800-267-7362 but
if you can afford long distance then call the direct line to each Senator’s office. Call all 13. Email all 13. Fax all 13.

THEN let CNHC know that you did.

Please help get Shawn Buckley to in front of the Senate Committee for the Senators and the Canadian public.

Banks, Tommy L (AB)
gautht@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-995-1889   F: 613-995-1938

Callbeck, Catherine L (PE)callbc@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-943-0686   F: 613-943-0693

Cordy, Jane L (NS)cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-995-8409   F: 613-995-8432

Dyck, Lillian Eva L (SK)dyckli@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-995-4318   F: 613-995-4331

Eaton, Nicole C (ON)eatonn@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-947-4047   F: 613-947-4044

Eggleton, Art L (ON)egglea@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-995-4230   F: 613-995-4237

Fairbairn, Joyce L (AB)fairbj@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-996-4382   F: 613-995-3223

Martin, Yonah C (BC)martin@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-947-4078   F: 613-947-4082

Ogilvie, Kenneth C (NS)ogilvk@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-992-0331   F: 613-992-0334

Pépin, Lucie L (QC)pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-996-1726   F: 613-996-8392

Segal, Hugh C (ON)kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-995-4059   F: 613-995-5259

Keon, Wilbert Joseph C (ON)
keonw@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-943-1415   F: 613-943-1796

Keli Hogan Committee Clerk!
hogank@sen.parl.gc.ca

T: 613-993-9021

“For the first time in Canadian history”, lawyer Shawn Buckley explains, “Bill C-6 not only abolishes the law of trespass, but also allows warrants to be issued to search private homes without evidence of criminal wrongdoing*… in violation of Section 8 of the Charter.”

Watch the video of Shawn Buckley explaining Bill C-6

Dr Rima Laibow explains Codex Alimentarius
Pay attention-this is about your food, who controls it and the ramifications for you and your family.
For the full presentation hit the You Tube logo on the video or watch related videos after you Watch Part 1

Non soltanto da Google dovrebbe guardarsi l’ editoria, ma da se stessa, dalla sua sempre più flebile convinzione nella propria necessità. Innanzitutto nei Paesi anglosassoni, che sono la punta di lancia dell’ editoria, dato il predominio della lingua inglese. Se si entra in una libreria di Londra e di New York, è sempre più difficile riconoscere i singoli editori presenti sul tavolo delle novità. Con alta discrezione il nome della casa editrice è spesso ridotto a una o più iniziali sul dorso del libro. Quanto alle copertine stesse, sono tutte diverse — e in un certo senso troppo simili. Ogni volta offrono un tentativo di impacchettamento, più o meno riuscito, di un testo. E ciascuno vale per sé, in obbedienza al principio dello one shot. Quanto agli autori, i loro libri si incontrano sotto il marchio di una certa casa editrice e non di un’altra innanzitutto in conseguenza delle trattative fra l’agente dell’autore e quel certo editore nonché dei rapporti personali fra l’autore e un certo editor. Mentre la casa editrice in quanto tale diventa l’anello tendenzialmente superfluo della catena. Ovviamente sussistono notevoli differenze di qualità fra le case editrici, ma all’interno di un ventaglio che presenta a un estremo il molto commerciale (associato alla volgarità) e all’altro estremo il molto letterario (associato alla sonnolenza). Ciò che sta in mezzo è una serie di gamme dove si situano i vari marchi. Così Farrar, Straus and Giroux sarà più vicino all’ estremo «letterario» e St. Martin’s all’estremo «commerciale», ma senza che questo implichi qualche considerazione ulteriore — e soprattutto senza che siano escluse invasioni di campo: l’editore letterario potrà occasionalmente essere tentato dal titolo commerciale, nella speranza di far fiorire i suoi conti, e l’editore commerciale potrà sempre essere tentato, poiché l’aspirazione al prestigio è una malerba che cresce ovunque, dal titolo letterario. Ciò che è penoso in questa suddivisione — che poi corrisponde a un certo assetto mentale — è innanzitutto il fatto che è falsa. Nel ventaglio che ho appena descritto è chiaro che Simenon o una sua ipotetica reincarnazione attuale, per dare solo un esempio, dovrebbero essere inclusi nella zona altamente commerciale — e perciò non passibile di valutazione letteraria; ed è chiaro che molti appartenenti alla funesta categoria degli «scrittori per scrittori» dovrebbero essere automaticamente assegnati all’estremo letterario. Questo va a danno sia del divertimento sia della letteratura. Il vero editore — poiché tali strani esseri ancora esistono — non ragiona mai in termini di «letterario» o «commerciale». Se mai, nei vecchi termini di «buono» e «cattivo» (e si sa che molto spesso il «buono» può essere trascurato e non riconosciuto). E soprattutto il vero editore è quello che ha l’insolenza di inventare uno slogan come questo: «I libri Diogenes sono meno noiosi» (lo inventò qualche anno fa Daniel Keel, editore di Diogenes, e queste parole si potevano leggere tutt’intorno al suo stand alla Fiera di Francoforte). Circa un secolo fa nascevano o muovevano i primi passi alcune fra le più importanti case editrici del Novecento: Insel, Gallimard, Mercure de France. Avevano due elementi in comune: erano state costituite da un gruppo di amici, più o meno abbienti — e accomunati da certe inclinazioni letterarie; e, prima di diventare case editrici, erano state riviste letterarie: «Die Insel», «La Nouvelle Revue Française», il «Mercure de France». Poi dai vari gruppi si era distaccata la figura di colui che sarebbe stato l’editore: Anton Kippenberg, Gaston Gallimard, Alfred Vallette. Oggi una simile esperienza sarebbe impensabile, perché sono mutati i presupposti. Fra l’altro, è venuta a mancare — o almeno ha perso la sottile e delicata rilevanza che aveva — la categoria stessa della rivista letteraria. L’unica pubblicazione periodica che abbia oggi una autorevolezza e un’influenza indubitabile è la «New York Review of Books», che si presenta come una rivista di recensioni, perciò non corrispondente a quella forma che forse raggiunge il picco della perfezione intorno al 1930 con i ventinove numeri di «Commerce», sotto le ali invisibili e protettive di Marguerite Caetani. Se ci si chiede che cosa tenesse insieme così fortemente quei piccoli gruppi di amici agli inizi del Novecento, la risposta non è data tanto da ciò che volevano (spesso piuttosto confuso e indeterminato), ma da ciò che respingevano. Ed era una forma del gusto nel senso che Nietzsche dava alla parola, quindi un «istinto di autodifesa» («non vedere, non sentire tante cose, non farsene avvicinare — prima accortezza, prima prova che non siamo un caso, ma una necessità»). Doveva trattarsi di una misura davvero accorta, se ha dato prova di essere tanto efficace. Oggi, a distanza di cento anni e di due generazioni dal fondatore, Gallimard è la prima casa editrice di Francia e si distingue tuttora per un certo «gusto Gallimard», che permette di percepire con buona approssimazione se un libro può o non può essere Gallimard. Quanto al Mercure de France e a Insel, l’una è stata acquisita da Gallimard e l’ altra da Suhrkamp, ma entrambe le case editrici continuano a esistere con un loro profilo netto, che si collega alla loro storia. Anche se tutto è cambiato nel circostante, la fisiologia del gusto che teneva insieme quei piccoli gruppi di amici sarebbe anche oggi un ottimo contravveleno, quando in certe case editrici sopravvengono periodiche angosce circa la propria evanescenza o appannata identità. Ma a quel punto si rivelerebbe anche che è venuto in larga parte a mancare quel tessuto di sensibilità che avvolgeva il gusto — o almeno è diventato una superficie dove gli squarci sono più vasti del tessuto stesso. Questo non dovrebbe però deprimere. Certo, sarebbe più duro e poco praticabile oggi avviare una casa editrice sulla base delle inclinazioni di un piccolo club di amici. Ma al tempo stesso l’editoria — se solo volesse, se solo osasse — avrebbe davanti a sé potenzialità che un tempo non sussistevano. Negli ultimi cento anni si è immensamente allargata l’area del pubblicabile, se appena si pensa alla enorme quantità di materiali antropologici, scientifici, storici, letterari che si sono accumulati nel Novecento e aspettano soltanto di trovare una nuova forma editoriale. Non solo la Biblioteca, ma tutti i libri Adelphi, fin dall’inizio, si fondavano su questo sottinteso. Era il tentativo di far confluire i testi e i materiali più disparati e più remoti in quella ampia, turbinosa corrente che trascina con sé tutto ciò che una mente desta e agile può desiderare di leggere. Di fatto, oggi più che mai l’editoria potrebbe porsi come uno dei suoi primi obiettivi quello di spostare la soglia del pubblicabile, includendo fra le cose fattibili molto di ciò che al momento è escluso. Sarebbe una sfida enorme, avvicinabile a quella degli inizi, quando Manuzio operava a Venezia. E forse sarebbe il momento di ricordare quale fu la carta fondatrice dell’editoria. Era un foglio volante stampato dallo stesso Manuzio e sopravvissuto fortunosamente sino a oggi in una copia incollata alla legatura del dizionario greco della Biblioteca Vaticana. Stampato intorno al 1502, quel foglio conteneva il testo di un patto fra studiosi che preparavano edizioni di testi classici greci per la casa editrice di Aldo. Nelle parole di Anthony Grafton, «essi concordavano di parlare soltanto in greco quando si trovavano fra loro, di pagare multe se venivano meno all’impegno e di usare il denaro (in caso ne accumulassero) per offrire un simposio: una generosa cena che doveva essere molto migliore di quel che usualmente avevano da mangiare i lavoranti di Aldo. Altri “filelleni” avrebbero potuto essere accolti nella cerchia, nel corso del tempo». Non è dato a oggi accertare se le regole di quella Nuova Accademia di Aldo Manuzio siano mai state applicate. Ma si può ricordare che anche le novantacinque tesi di Lutero e la dichiarazione dei diritti dell’ uomo e del cittadino del 26 agosto 1789 furono in origine fogli volanti. Detto questo, è ovvio che la tendenza del mondo e dell’editoria finora sta puntando in direzione opposta. Così continua a restringersi il campo di ciò che si ritiene si possa fare. «Sarebbe bello, ma non si può»: è una frase molto frequente nel mondo editoriale, ovunque. Quanto ad affinità e disaffinità, aggiungo soltanto una glossa: Adelphi non nacque «da una costola di Einaudi», come hanno ripetuto a sazietà gli ignari e i falsi benevoli, ma i suoi presupposti e la sua fisiologia erano antitetici a quelli dell’ideologia einaudiana anni Cinquanta. Bazlen fu consulente di Einaudi dal 1951 al 1962, ma i suoi suggerimenti vennero puntualmente disattesi (con l’eccezione non trascurabile dell’Uomo senza qualità di Musil); Colli pubblicò presso Einaudi due magistrali traduzioni commentate (l’Organon di Aristotele e la Critica della ragion pura di Kant), ma si vide rifiutare il grandioso progetto di una edizione critica di Nietzsche, non già per ragioni di fattibilità ma perché Einaudi (giustamente, nella sua prospettiva) si rese conto che il progetto avrebbe mutato il carattere della casa editrice; Foà fu segretario generale di Einaudi dal 1951 al 1961, ma se ne andò anche perché si accorse che la casa editrice avrebbe definitivamente e irrevocabilmente seguito la linea di Giulio Bollati. Inoltre, pur essendo diversissimi fra loro, Bazlen e Colli erano del tutto refrattari alla visione d’insieme einaudiana, con la quale ben poco avevano da spartire, anche se entrambi ammiravano la qualità e il nitore della casa editrice. Quanto a Foà, che pure partecipò appassionatamente alle vicende di Einaudi e ne trasse un insegnamento decisivo, inclinava senza esitazioni dalla parte di Bazlen e di Colli. Anche se nella forma più illuminata e duttile, Einaudi prosperava sotto la cappa di quel sovietismo ottundente che gravava su tutta la sinistra culturale in Europa. L’asse della casa editrice era contrassegnato dal Lukács della Distruzione della ragione, che additava come nemico primario quanto di meglio la cultura europea aveva prodotto da Schopenhauer in poi; e da Gramsci, del quale veniva apprezzata e assimilata soprattutto la perniciosa teoria dell’intellettuale organico. Con Adelphi ovviamente si respirava altra aria. E questo ci dava anche qualche vantaggio pratico perché, per alcuni anni, i libri che cercavamo noi non li cercava nessun altro (poi, ahimè, i tempi cambiarono e certi autori venivano cercati da altri proprio perché sembravano ovviamente adelphiani). Non ci preoccupavamo di avere alcun asse, ma l’opera di Nietzsche sarebbe bastata a far capire in quali direzioni ci muovevamo. Come la Clarisse di Musil, avremmo voluto avviare un «anno Nietzsche», in contrasto con tutte le Azioni Parallele che altrove si tessevano. Quell’anno per noi dura ancora.

Roberto Calasso, Il Corriere della Sera, 20 giugno 2009

(hat tip Dentro il cerchio, non perdetevi un bel commento di Federico Novaro. Io mi limito a trovare continuità con quel che Calasso diceva ne L’editoria come genere letterario)

In the 1980s, my friend Laura moved to San Francisco and landed a job at Kelly Services (aka Kelly Girl), the iconic temp staffing agency. She applied to be a temp but ended up hired as an in-house typing instructor (despite forfeiting her own typing test twice due to panic attacks—but that’s another story).

“When people applied for work,” Laura told me, “the interviewer would mark their files with special codes if they presented well. If they wore appropriate, stylish clothes and had their hair (and makeup for women) done well, they were WDWG. Well Dressed, Well Groomed.

“If they also had model good looks,” she continued, “they were FOA.”

“FOA?”

“Front Office Appearance.”

All applicants needed clerical and other skills to make the cut. But being WDWG was a plus, while only those with FOA got placed as receptionists, who represent the face of a company. The two codes, jotted by hand on impressive applicants’ files, were eventually purged, due to concern that they might be interpreted as race-based. (In San Francisco, race was not a factor but the company was based in the Midwest.)

Laura’s story amused me to no end. WDWG. FOA. I’d never heard of such abbreviations!

Of course, such standards still apply, even to yoga. To grace the cover of Yoga Journal, for example, one must be FOA. One might or might not be YJ-approved WDWG in real life. (I mean, who would wear a white unitard?) But, whatever a cover model’s personal style, she ends up fresh-scrubbed and smiling, in yummy pastels or brights.

I have a few ideas to shake things up:

• Photograph cover models wearing their own clothes. Or let them pose in their own studios or hometowns. Or vary the composition or color palette. I know this is not Interview magazine, but the covers all look the same: a rainbow-sherbet yoga dreamland.
• Feature more men on the cover. Generally, men have more leeway in the FOA requirement. Maybe the scarcity of male yoga practitioners makes any advanced yogi a star, regardless of startling physiognomy or non-jock body type. In any case, while there are numerous male yogis photographed inside the magazine, there are no male covers. From a marketing perspective, wouldn’t it appeal to the predominantly female subscriber pool to see cover guys?
• Include a wider age range, especially seniors. It’s appealing to see any attractive yoga practitioner. But when I see a senior yogi, there’s an added “wow” element of surprise and inspiration.

I might be exaggerating in my mockery of Yoga Journal’s aesthetic style. I actually feel rather cheery when I see the magazine’s colorful covers. There is something comforting about consistency. Still, Yoga Journal has the clout and leeway to push the envelope in its design. If yoga is about “playing the edge*,” why not create edgier covers?

*Yoga: The Spirit and Practice of Moving Into Stillness, Erich Schiffman

Photo:Ugly Betty characters: Amanda Tanen (Becki Newton), Marc St James (Michael Urie), and Betty Suarez (America Ferrera). Guess who’s the receptionist with FOA?

af Dennis Pedersen, direktør i Wasabi

Hvad adskiller den gode kampagne fra den rigtigt gode? Hos Wasabi er vi ikke i tvivl. Den rigtigt gode kampagne involverer. Uanset om det handler om redaktionel dækning af kampagnen eller mobilisering af befolkningen, så bliver resultatet større.

I det næste afsnit vil vi fokusere på, hvad det kræver før en kampagne får ekstra luft via nyhedsmedierne. Hvis du hellere vil læse om, hvordan man mobiliserer bredt i befolkningen, så se Wasabi’s 6 bud her

Udnyt den redaktionelle dækning

Kampagnen, der er kreativt og effektivt udført, kommunikerer klart og skaber den forventede effekt for de investerede mediekroner, er for mange ensbetydende med en rigtig god kampagne. Hos Wasabi mener vi dog, at det kan blive endnu bedre.

Det handler bla. om at tænke mediedækningen ind i både den strategiske og kreative løsning fra starten. Et eksempel: Under sidste års storkonflikt oplevede vi, at vores kampagne for FOA fik ekstra luft, da den første print-annonce fik mere end 7 minutters TV-avis tid i 4 forskellige nyhedsudsendelser – dagen før den første annonce blev bragt i Politiken. Analyser viste efterfølgende et meget højere kendskab end hvad en enkelt medieindrykning kunne forklare og at FOA løb med mere 50 % af den redaktionelle dækning, som hele fagbevægelsen fik under hele konflikten.

Dækningen i nyhedsmedierne var ingen tilfældighed. Alt lige fra briefing af kommentatorer, over medievalg, egen produktion af journalistisk dækning til kreativ udformning – var konsekvenser af en klar strategi, hvor nyhedsdækningen var et væsentligt element.

Men ikke alle kampagner egner sig til sætte dagsorden. Her er 4 bud på, hvad der skal være opfyldt, før nyhedsmedierne effektivt kan tænkes ind i strategien.

1. bud: Sørg for høj prioritet blandt befolkningen

Medier og specielt nyhedsmedier prioriterer ofte efter, hvad de mener optager befolkningen – dvs. sager, der har betydning for mange, får ofte stor dækning.

Virksomheder og organisationer har dog tit et andet udgangspunkt. De ser på, hvilke budskaber de vil kommunikere og bruger mange ressourcer på at kommunikere så klart og tydeligt som muligt. Men for at kommunikationen skal lykkes kræver det både noget af afsender og modtager. Og her hjælper det meget på effekten, hvis man kan gøre sit budskab relevant i sammenhæng med et emne, som allerede har høj prioritet eller opmærksomhed i befolkningen.

Et eksempel: Elsparefondens kampagne ”Langt Ude I Skoven”, der udover budskaber om, at man kan spare penge ved at spare strøm også har budskaber, der kæder den enkeltes strømforbrug sammen med den klimapolitiske dagsorden og CO2udledning.

2. bud: Skab uenighed/konflikt!

Nogle nyheder bliver enkeltstående korte historier, der kun lever en dag. Andre kan køre over flere uger. Hvorfor? Ofte hænger en nyheds evne til at skabe debat sammen med, om der er uenigheder og konfliktende parter.  Nye forskningsresultater, produkt-innovation eller teknologier vil ofte blive enkeltstående nyheder, da der ikke umiddelbart kan identificeres modstandere eller opstår debat. Det er dog ikke nok at spille op til en modstander eller på en konflikt. Det er helt væsentlig, at modstanderen har lyst og evne til at medvirke.

Et eksempel: Indenfor politik er det lykkes Fogh og Venstre i 2001 at flytte debatten fra klassiske velfærds emner til udlændinge og skat, ved at ”overtage” store dele af socialdemokratiets politik  på velfærds områderne. Debatten i medierne landede på de områder, hvor der var konflikt eller uenighed om løsningerne – og her var analysen, at Venstre havde større opbakning i befolkningen end S og R.

Det handler altså ikke kun om at få sig en modstander – det er også vigtigt at modstanderen har en interesse i at bringe emnet frem i lyset.

3. bud: Prøv at se fordele for begge parter

Hvis man på forhånd kan skabe fordele for begge uenige parter, så har man en godt udgangspunkt. Et klassisk eksempel: Dengang Cult lancerede nye produkter ved at vise yderst afklædte piger. Dette fik straks Dansk Kvinderåd til at anmelde reklamerne for at være sexistiske. Hermed startede en debat som begge parter kunne drage fordel af. Cult fik masser af gratis omtale (og eksponering af deres produkter) og Dansk Kvinderåd kunne bevise deres værd som forkæmper for kvinders rettigheder. Win win.

4. bud: Sørg for at opdatere kampagnen under kampagnen

Hvis en sag skal leve i medierne kræver det at der sker noget nyt løbende – ellers er det kun debatten, der lever – og det skaber ikke forsidestof. Hvad kan så få en sag til at leve? Udover de bidrag en modstander naturligt vil levere og som man skal reagere på – er det vigtigt at have udtænkt en plan for, hvad der løbende kan bidrage til et forsat mediefokus – hvad end det er analyser, events, udspil eller kampagner.  Et eksempel: I forbindelse med S-SF’s nye skatteudspil kunne vi – ved at lække oplægget bid for bid – fastholde medieopmærksomhed hele ugen. Og samtidig gjorde man det svært for modstanderne at skyde på forslaget ned, da alle dele ikke var kendt. Det havde den konsekvens, at det afsluttende lanceringspressemøde kunne handle om overordnede emner og ikke tal-fnidder og detaljer.  Dermed blev skatteudspillet mere interessant for ”almindelige mennesker”.

Der er givetvis andre faktorer, der er væsentlige for at opnå redaktionel dækning. En virksomheds troværdighed, timing og kvaliteten af budskabet er selvfølgelig ligeså væsentligt. Men hvis du er interesseret i at få mere at vide, så kontakt Dennis Pedersen på dp@wasabi.dk eller på tlf. 27 79 01 81

“Architects don’t produce meaning, they produce affects.” And then my head exploded.

MATERIAL – program, AFFECT – aggregated??

Click on this url:

Wow: Treasury says Cap and Trade to cost $100-200 Billion in new taxes on The Patriot Room

Shared via AddThis

Update – Now at 300 Billion per year – Click on this url: Green Hell Blog

haha, oh look, the title’s “love” again (:
wonder whyy q:
well just say today was one of (or THE) happiest day of me life (:

simply indescribable.

Yesterday was my dad’s birthday.
it was so fun! though it wasnt particularly extravagant,
he could sense our love for him (:
& that’s what counts

OH must tell you about friday q:
um, yeah the normal (awesome) Friday school day, with mostly free periods (:
then PIANO.. was amazingly good (:
then DANCE FoA. omg the best concert i ever went for (but didnt attend half of it)
haha we were late for the intermission, so we didnt really enter after it.
But it was soo worth it.
we made two people in this world beyond happy (: what better place could my $10 be spent on?!  just, amazing (:

haha, yep, all revolving around love isn’t it (:
sweet, sweet love.
this weekend was the love weekend (:

-ted!(:

edit:

OH YA!

HAPPY 44th BIRTHDAY S’PORE! (:
haha who said the pledge? i feel so patriotic now q:

all alone in the moonlight

——————————

this foa was a strange one, and its hard to discern if that’s a good or a bad thing. the whole process was a frighteningly short and last minute one, with everything happening much too quickly after the exams. but still, it came off nicely although i personally enjoyed last year’s one more. everything turned out better than expected, in spite of all the h1n1 setbacks. kudos to vincent reuben and gang for all their hardcore work.

—————————–

its an exhilarating feeling to play for a concert. even the practices, when they actually happen, are amazing stuff. and when youre up there on stage, with hundreds of eyes looking at you, with the stage lights making you sweat, something just makes you want to grin. but then again, with guitar, we spend most of our time not grinning but pretending to look intently at the wave of the baton. still, exciting stuff.

—————————–

thanks everyone who came down to support us. i hope you guys enjoyed the concert as much as we did (:

—————————

woke up at 910, after the late night. the horfun there is not bad, and staying out to chat is entertaining too. i did nothing the whole morning, and ate mcdonalds for lunch. im so glad they have double fillet and shaker fries again. yum. and now, i am slacking again till i get forced to do my world lit. fun stuff yes? i think ive sent about 160 messages since foa ended. woohoo for unlimited smses. which i had better have. or else i am so dead it isnt even funny.

—————————-

so the midyear results were pretty good. i must say, i love my subject combination, weird as it is. the right blend of easy subjects to get marks, and interesting subjects to keep you in school. now i just have to add more points for prelims and the real thing, and brush up on current affairs and stuff. i need my scholarship.

i shall start studying for prelims earlier. then maybe i can beat you eh (: 

—————————-

one

i’m _______ emo ):
i really really wanted to perform tonight ):
and seeing how much fun they had and how smooth it went…
makes me damn jealous!
its the final year i can perform with the year 6s.
i wont even see them at guitar no more. what the crap ):
what’s a president who doesnt even turn up for his concert???!
damn sad.

what’s worse?
im not allowed to attend Hillsong concert OR Philharmonic FoA duty tmr ):
WHAT IS THIS LUH?!
why so unfair?!
i missed 3 things i love so much.
3 things! ):
why? cause i WAS sick. (supposedly still am??!)
dammit.

-ted. ):

-edit-
my parents dont let me go for BB tmr.
SHIT, thats the final straw man.
DO I FREAKIN LOOK LIKE I HAVE SARS TO YOU!!!
-.-
gonna like lock myself in some corner or sth and cry.
cry.
cry to sleep.

yo ppl.
gah i’m quarantined for a week! this totally sucks man. I couldnt even go church yesterday.. how did i even think that staying at home would be more fun than going to school? o.O
I’m supposed to be doing some self-study crap, turns out the only thing i have strength to do is type.
Then wherever i go also must wear a stupid mask! please luh, its not even confirmed that i have H1N1 luhh.
Oh ya! must tell you about the doctor who screened me. He was like “i highly recommend that you dont take the test. Firstly, it costs a lot of money, secondly, there’s no point because the only treatment for H1N1 is treating the current symptoms.” Gosh. i almost screamed luh. line up ALL the way in some stuffy room only to be told this type of crap -.- somemore kena quarantined. wtp?
so yeah. what have i done today? nothing actually.. woke up at 5.50 (stupid body clock), had enough energy to type a message then went back to sleep till 8!!! omgg i felt sooo sick then – the faint sensation. Then had to slowly walk down the longg staircase to have my breakfast. the medicine didnt do much good until after i went to sleep again. keep on coughing! my throat so sore already ): cant even laugh on the phone! sucks.
I guess there are some good points luh, i mean staying at home.
Finally get to have some rest, sms more, talk more, sleep more (: awesome stuff
but its so sad i have to miss FoA and choir. So ironic, the Vice-President of guitar also quarantined. that means on Saurabh and Jeremy will be leading the guitar O: wonder how it’ll be. haha.
pray for me ya? got lots of work to catch up with.

-ted! (:

17 June 2009by: Jason Leopold, t r u t h o u t | Report

On January 25, 2002, then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales advised George W. Bush in a memo to deny al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners protections under the Geneva Conventions because doing so would “substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act” and “provide a solid defense to any future prosecution.”

    Two weeks later, Bush signed an action memorandum dated February 7, 2002, addressed to Vice President Dick Cheney, which denied baseline protections to al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners under the Third Geneva Convention. That memo, according to a recently released bipartisan report issued by the Senate Armed Services Committee, opened the door to “considering aggressive techniques,” which were then developed with the complicity of then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Bush’s National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and other senior Bush officials.

    ”The President’s order closed off application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which would have afforded minimum standards for humane treatment, to al-Qaeda or Taliban detainees,” says the committee’s December 11 report.

“While the President’s order stated that, as ‘a matter of policy, the United States Armed Forces shall continue to treat detainees humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of the Geneva Conventions,’ the decision to replace well established military doctrine, i.e., legal compliance with the Geneva Conventions, with a policy subject to interpretation, impacted the treatment of detainees in US custody.”

    The Supreme Court held in 2006, in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, that the prisoners were entitled to protections under the Geneva Conventions.

    Many of the classified policy directives, such as Gonzales’s memo to Bush, are now part of the public record thanks to the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Bush administration, which has so far resulted in the release of more than 100,000 pages of documents that shows how Bush officials twisted the law in order to build a legal framework for torture.

    These documents have been posted on the ACLU’s web site. But several hundred of the most explosive records were republished in the book “Administration of Torture” along with hard-hitting commentary by the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer, who heads the group’s National Security Project, and Amrit Singh, a staff attorney with the organization.

    Rumsfeld Wanted a “Product”

    On February 14, 2002, just one week after Bush signed the action memo, Maj. Gen. Mike Dunlavey was contacted by Rumsfeld, who asked him to attend a Defense Department meeting with Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and others on February 21 or 22. At the meeting, Rumsfeld told Dunlavey he wanted him to oversee interrogations at the Guantanamo Bay naval facility in Cuba. Prisoners captured by US military personnel had first arrived at Guantanamo a month earlier. Dunlavey was a family court judge in Erie County, Pennsylvania, when he got the call from Rumsfeld and was placed in charge of interrogations at Guantanamo.

    Rumsfeld told Dunlavey, according to a witness statement he made on March 17, 2005, to US Air Force Lt. Gen. Randall Schmidt, who was investigating FBI complaints about abuse at Guantanamo, that the Department of Defense had rounded up “a number of bad guys” and the secretary of defense “wanted a product and wanted intelligence now.”

    Rumsfeld “wanted to set up interrogation operations and to identify the senior Taliban and senior operatives and to obtain information on what they were going to do regarding their operations and structure,” Dunlavey said, according to a copy of his witness statement. “Initially, I was told that I would answer to SECDEF (Secretary of Defense) and [US Southern Command]. The directions changed and I got my marching orders from the President of the United States. I was told by the SECDEF that he wanted me back in Washington, DC every week to brief him…. The mission was to get intelligence to prevent another 9/11.”

    Dunlavey did not explain what he meant by “I got my marching orders from the president.” But his comments suggest that Bush may have played a much larger role in the interrogation of prisoners than he has let on. Moreover, Dunlavey’s witness statement indicates that harsh interrogations, such as waterboarding, may have taken place earlier than previously known and may have preceded an August 1, 2002, legal opinion issued by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel authorizing specific interrogation techniques to use against prisoners.

    As early as December 2001, according to the documents obtained by the ACLU, high-ranking military officials began to implement an Army and Air Force survival-training program called Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE), which were meant to prepare US soldiers for abuse they might suffer if captured by an outlaw regime.

    In June 2004, Gen. James Hill of Southern Command, the Defense Department’s command unit responsible for military operations in Central and South America and the Caribbean, held a press briefing and confirmed that interrogation techniques specifically authorized by Rumsfeld for use at Guantanamo were derived from the SERE school. In October 2002, Dunlavey wrote to Hill to seek authorization that interrogators be granted the authority to use methods that strayed from the Army Field Manual in order to extract information from prisoners.

    Dunlavey, in making his case to Hill for authority to use more aggressive techniques, attached a copy of Bush’s then classified February 7, 2002, action memo along with an analysis that said, “since the detainees are not [Enemy Prisoners of War] the Geneva Conventions limitations that ordinarily would govern captured enemy personnel interrogations are not binding on US personnel.”

    Hill sent Dunlavey’s request to Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Myers discussed it with William Haynes II, the Defense Department’s general counsel, who briefed Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith. The request ultimately ended up on Rumsfeld’s desk and he approved it, according to the documents.

    ”The documents establish that senior officials in Washington, including White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, constructed a legal framework that would permit the abuse and torture of prisoners,” the ACLU’s Jaffer and Singh wrote in “Administration of Torture.” “They establish that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, relying on this legal framework, expressly authorized the use of interrogation methods – including SERE methods – that went far beyond those endorsed by the Army Field Manual. They establish that Rumsfeld and Gen. Geoffrey Miller oversaw the implementation of the newly authorized interrogation methods and closely supervised the interrogation of prisoners thought to be especially valuable.”

    FBI Objects

    In early December 2002, FBI officials who had participated in some interrogations at Guantanamo complained to Miller that the methods used against prisoners at Guantanamo were unlawful. But Miller was not receptive. That led FBI officials to conclude that senior Bush administration officials and Rumsfeld were making decisions about interrogations in particular.

    A December 16, 2002, email written by an FBI official expressed frustration that the Defense Department refused to budge from its controversial interrogation methods.

    ”Looks like we are stuck in the mud with the interview approach of the military vs. law enforcement,” the email said.

    In May 2004, Miller told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he briefed Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of Defense Stephen Cambone about his plan to “Gitmo-ize” the Abu Ghraib prison.

    That month, an email written by a senior FBI agent in Iraq in 2004 specifically stated that President George W. Bush had signed an executive order approving the use of military dogs, sleep deprivation, and other tactics to intimidate Iraqi detainees.

    The FBI email, dated May 22, 2004, followed disclosures about abuse of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and sought guidance on whether FBI agents in Iraq were obligated to report the US military’s harsh interrogation of inmates when that treatment violated FBI standards, but fit within the guidelines of a presidential executive order.

    According to the email, Bush’s executive order authorized interrogators to use military dogs, “stress positions,” sleep “management,” loud music and “sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, etc.” to extract information from detainees in Iraq.

    The May 2004, FBI email stated that the FBI interrogation team in Iraq understood that despite revisions in the executive order that occurred after the furor over the Abu Ghraib abuses, the presidential sanctioning of harsh interrogation tactics had not been rescinded.

    ”I have been told that all interrogation techniques previously authorized by the Executive Order are still on the table but that certain techniques can only be used if very high-level authority is granted,” the author of the FBI email said.

    ”We have also instructed our personnel not to participate in interrogations by military personnel which might include techniques authorized by Executive Order but beyond the bounds of FBI practices.”

    The White House had emphatically denied that any such presidential executive order existed, calling the unnamed FBI official who wrote the email “mistaken.” Prior to the May 22, 2004, email several others written by FBI agents that month were sent to Valerie Caproni, the FBI’s general counsel, about detainees being tortured before the unnamed agent sent Caproni the email citing Bush’s alleged executive order.

    On July 9, 2004, the FBI’s Office of Inspections distributed an email asking its agents who were stationed at Guantanamo whether they had witnessed, “Aggressive treatment, interrogations or interview techniques … which were not consistent with FBI interview policy/guidelines.”

    More than two-dozen agents responded that they observed numerous instances of detainee abuse. One FBI agent wrote that, despite Rumsfeld’s public statements to the contrary, the interrogation methods “were approved at high levels w/in DoD.” In addition to Rumsfeld, the FBI emails said Paul Wolfowitz, one Bush administration official who has largely escaped scrutiny in the torture debate, approved the methods at Guantanamo.

    In 2006, Miller received a Distinguished Service Medal for “exceptionally meritorious service.” Dunlavey is an Erie County judge.

»

Quattro album su iTunes per Giuseppe Nova:

“Storie di Tango” con Arnoldo Foà, Rino Vernizzi e Giorgio Costa

“Giuseppe Nova & Rino Vernizzi Jazz Trio”, ”Les flûtes Enchantèes”

con Maxence Larrieu e Bruno Canino e

“Salotto dell’ottocento”

A frase saiu sibilina e carregada de sentido. “Querem impor regras façam o vosso campeonato!” Foi assim que Mas Mosley respondeu à inscrição em bloco e condiciona das equipas que fazem parte da FOTA (Formula One Teams Association). O presidente do órgão máximo do desporto automóvel mundial continua a ser teimoso e depois da faceta vergonhosa de depravação e desrespeito pela memória do holocausto, Mosley revela uma faceta boçal e que prova à evidência a sua incapacidade para se manter à frente da FIA.

Curiosamente, quando aqui escrevemos que a corda tinha partido e que sem Ferrari e sem Mónaco a F1 desaparecia, vozes vociferaram “blasfémia!” e alguns colunistas de vários órgãos de comunicação social vieram a terreiro dizer que “muito bem, deve haver tecto orçamental” e que “a Ferrari não passava de meninos mimados” que queriam gastar o que bem entendiam.

Parece que tínhamos razão, pois alguém no seu perfeito juízo consegue encarar uma F1 sem os carros de Maranello e o “glamour” do Mónaco?

Mosley parece acreditar – e só mesmo ele – que isso não são problemas para a fórmula 1 e do alto da sua arrogante boçalidade lançou aquela verdadeira pérola. Manobras verdadeiramente imorais como forçar as inscrições cerca de 9 meses antes da época 2010 começar e com ferir um prazo apertadíssimo para decidir quem será admitido em 2010, foram combatidas com um simples gesto: nove equipas inscreveram-se juntas condicionando essa inscrição a um novo Pacto da Concórdia.

Entalado como não esperava, Mosley sacudiu a pressão nervosamente com a tirada que acima escrevemos e continua a manter um braço de ferro que não o vai levar a lado nenhum. Se por um lado é verdade que um novo campeonato teria de maturar durante algum tempo para conseguir alcançar a fama do actual, a verdade é que sem equipas, Mosley arrisca-se a ver o seu grande amigo Ecclestone a virar-lhe costas.

Por enquanto ainda continuam amigos, pois duas equipas surgiram inscritas que certamente têm o dedo de ambos: a March já teve a influência de Mosley, a Brabham já esteve nas mãos de Ecclestone. Obviamente que não passam de tigres de papel e até a família Brabham já veio avisar que a utilização indevida do nome Brabham será julgado nos tribunais.

Previsões só depois do jogo como referiu em tempos um ídolo do pontapé na bola, mas cada vez mais parece que vamos ter duas F.1 e um Mosley só, birrento e a refilar com a sua própria sombra…

Querem a minha opinião: amigos da FOTA, estão à espera do quê para começarem já um novo campeonato?

Evolving EA

EOA = Ecology Oriented Architecture
OOA = Outcome Oriented Architecture (Managed Level)
VOA = Value Oriented Architecture
SOA = Service Oriented Architecture
COA = Component Oriented Architecture
OOA = Object Oriented Architecture (Initial/Repeatable Level)
FOA = Functions Oriented Architecture
DOA = Data Oriented Architecture

A inscrição das equipas que fazem parte da FOTA no Campeonato Mundial de Fórmula 1 condicionada a nova Pacto da Concórdia, é um gesto que demonstra como tudo está a ser tratado para que ninguém fique mal na fotografia quando a época de 2010 começar.

Zangaram-se as comadres e quase se descobriram todas as verdades. Pelo menos ficou-se a saber – embora não fosse difícil perceber – que a Ferrari tinha um acordo com a FIA e a FOA para viabilizar as propostas em troca de mais dinheiro. Uma herança de Jean Todt…

Do outro lado está o teimoso Max Mosley que vai acabar por recuar, mas de uma forma que parecerá uma vitória. Ou seja, haverá tecto orçamental – mas superior aos 100 milhões certamente – a F1 a duas velocidades acabara por vingar para dar aos últimos da grelha a possibilidade de dar nas vistas, pelo menos nos treinos graças ao recurso do KERS fornecido pela FIA e as equipas da FOTA acabarão por receber mais dinheiro do avarento Bernie Ecclestone.

Com um pouco de sorte, o velhote acaba apeado e o projecto da F.1 das equips oficiais acabará por ser adoptado, reduzindo custos e encargos nas provas. Pode ser que assim, algumas pistas passem a ter uma prova de fórmula 1, tenhamos mais provas e os promotores e organizadores deixem de ser esvaziado pela sanguessuga FOA.

E que tal um campeonato com 20 ou mais provas? Têm medo do quê? A NASCAR realiza ao longo do ano 36 corridas, mais o fim-de-semana All Star e todos os pilotos ainda encontram espaço para fazerem mais umas 20 corridas em outras disciplinas.

Ora, quanto mais provas existirem, maior é o retorno financeiro, maior é a exposição dos patrocinadores e mais bem rentabilizado é o espaço televisivo.

Já que não há testes ao longo do ano, cumprir 20 a 25 fins-de-semana de corridas não é nenhum bicho-de-sete-cabeças, nem mesmo em termos de logística. Cá por mim, venha lá um campeonato com 25 corridas e 15 equipas; voltem os treinos de qualificação; limitem ainda mais a aerodinâmica e reduzam custos em outros items e verão que teremos uma F.1 verdadeiramente espectacular.

dal film di ettore scola, la scena della trattoria, con il grande arnoldo foà. una lezione di cinema e di vita. e di cucina.

Eva attended a walk-through and talk by FOA’s Farshid Moussavi on Le Corbusier’s exhibition at the Barbican. Moussavi noted that Corbu’s architecture is based on the ideal, on purity, the hylomorphic form, an a-contextual design based on 5-points. In contrast, FOA’s work is based on the real, on innovation, on hybridity and context and an elastic geometry.

Interview for Kultureflash #77, 17 Feb 2004

Things couldn’t be busier at the moment for Foreign Office architects, the London-based practice founded by Farshid Moussavi and Alejandro Zaera-Polo. Having recently won the BBC’s competition to design its Music Box Centre at White City (set to be their first major building in the UK) they’re part of the design consortium that has just submitted London’s Olympic bid. And in the middle of this, they’re moving offices.

As their ICA show, Breeding Architecture, comes to an end this month (29/02), KultureFlash caught up with Farshid Moussavi, amid the packing cases:

Jim Hudson: FOA has a higher profile than ever, and is fast becoming one of the world’s most talked about practices. Has this changed the way you work?

Farshid Moussavi: We now have the chance to pitch for projects where traditionally you would have to wait to be an older, bigger practice. It’s very exciting to work on competitions up against much larger practices, so we think we have been very fortunate, although you have to work incredibly hard when those sort of practices can put in more resources than you. People often dismiss you because of your fame, claiming that there’s no depth to your work, and that you’re just very lucky or fashionable, and often this criticism comes from fellow architects. They often forget that with all this exposure comes an enormous amount of work.

JH: So does this mean you have to be very selective about choosing competitions?

FM: We have to be very serious about what we do. We have to be wary about being included on European or international shortlists where we could be seen as a “wild card” entry — being the younger component, or the foreign component. So we try to be careful. We look at the client, the timing, and even at the list of judges to see if we will be considered seriously; based on that we sometimes decide not to compete. So we are selective, but we’ve never turned down a commission — we don’t have any ideal size of project, or ideal client, or ideal building type. In fact we’d prefer not to become specialised, which helps us stay fresh in our approach to each commission. We think that when you’re too familiar with a problem, you stop experimenting. The Yokohama Terminal is a good example of this; we went through great pain to see it through to the end, but we don’t want to be seen as a practice who only do vastly expensive infrastructure projects.

JH: Breeding Architecture takes a very different approach than other architects’ shows of their own work. How deliberate was this?

FM: When we were asked to do a show about our first ten years we thought it should say something more to visitors than what they’ve been seeing in magazines and the media. Shows like this should be an experience in their own right, and should be something ephemeral that catch the particular moment. Also we wanted to learn something from doing it, so we approached it as a research project in itself. We took the opportunity to reflect on what we have learnt, and on the character of our buildings. The exhibition tries to show how we work; how each project is designed from the bottom up, each one is specific, and each one is designed in a sense from scratch. Of course, you develop expertise and experience over time so it’s also been an attempt to see what we’ve been carrying through with us across the projects. In particular it identifies our interest in surface and topography, the need to blend into the context, and the attempt to remove the distinction between load-bearing structure and the building envelope. It’s been very useful to us — we never impose a solution, and we haven’t created a “Foreign Office” recipe that we can follow for types of buildings, but creating the exhibition has helped us find areas that we haven’t yet explored.

JH: We’re really excited that you’ve won the competition to build the BBC’s Music Box at White City, but shouldn’t the redevelopment of the Jubilee Gardens site on the South Bank have been your first major London (and UK) project?

FM: It’s strange, because they [the South Bank Centre] have never publicly cancelled the competition. We were asked to either work with Rafael Vinoly [named as the joint winner] or to go back in front of the judges, but in the middle of this the client decided to abandon the whole thing. We were told that there were legal ownership problems with the site, and problems with local resident objections, but it’s an absolute embarrassment that an important European city like ours cannot deal with a piece of land. The site is geographically so central, and because of the London Eye it’s now charged with energy, but really it’s still a bit of a dump. I think the real problem is that it doesn’t have a public champion — it needs someone at the highest level to take control.

JH: So has it put you off competitions in the UK?

FM: No, we’re doing more. Competitions are very costly to the practice, but it’s very odd to be a London-based practice and to have so little work here. The BBC competition was very well set up — it had proper advisors and key people from the client involved. But many competitions in the UK don’t have an architectural jury that matches the aspirations of the client and of the public. I think that there’s not enough focus on that.

JH: Do you think public attitudes towards architecture here are changing?

FM: I would say it’s a very good time in the UK for architecture and there seems to be a real public appreciation of new design. The BBC has really helped by screening programmes on architecture, design and art, and events like 100% Design have given people an awareness of design culture, which has started to broaden into the larger scale of architecture. Culture in London now is a result of a kind of combining of multiple cultures — architecture is going to be coming from a multiplicity of different hands, voices and approaches, so I think the future looks very exciting.

JH: And what’s next for FOA?

FM: We’re working incredibly hard right now. We’re in a competition for a new train station in Durango, Bilbao, and a number of projects that you won’t have seen in the show, including an office building and a new harbour, both in Holland, and a major business development in La Rioja. The Torreviaja Theatre has just broken ground, and we feel it’s essential to be absolutely in control of projects through their realisation on site. We do the design here in London, but when projects start on site we dispatch a core team to that site. We currently have a team in Barcelona that’s overseeing our park for instance. There are many outcomes from a design that only come into play on site, and seeing the project right through allows us to constantly feed the experience back into new scheme design.

Link to original article
http://www.kultureflash.net/archive/77/priview.htm

OBITUARY. La signora della fiction italiana scompare a 65 anni. Dagli inizi al cinema sino al “Maresciallo” di Gigi Proietti con ascolti superiori a Sanremo. Col costante pallino dell’innovazione, lanciò Ferilli e Placido. La sua classe intellettual-borghese? «Noiosa, meglio la gente in metro»

Non ci piove: quasi tutta la nostra fiction, troppo spesso bonaria e lessa, scompare nel confronto con i telefilm americani, ben più sperimentali, innovativi, appassionanti, sul fronte dello stile e della scrittura. Ris, per dirne una, non è che una pallida imitazione di Csi, e per cortesia non si parli solo di budget. Tuttavia la morte di Laura Toscano, genovese, 65 anni, giornalista, romanziera, sceneggiatrice per il cinema e soprattutto per la tv, lascia un vuoto forse incolmabile. Nel momento di massimo successo, quando Il maresciallo Rocca totalizzava 16 milioni di spettatori, più del festival di Sanremo, l’avevano ribattezzata “la signora incontrastata della fiction”.

La definizione non le piaceva. Provenendo dal cinema, che fosse il brillante Aragosta a colazione o il più rabbioso Pizza Connection, continuava a spiegare: «Scrivo film per la televisione». Ultimamente lavorava meno, per via della malattia, ma anche del clima che sentiva attorno a sé. «Mi sembra che tutto vada alla rovescia, bisognerebbe avere coraggio di cambiare, solo osando, dando una spallata, a costo di rinunciare ad alti ascolti, saremo in grado di realizzare prodotti innovativi», s’era lamentata in un’intervista. Probabilmente l’amarezza professionale si saldava a una riflessione, anche estetica, sullo stato della nostra fiction, ma nel frattempo lei aveva contribuito a lanciare interpreti come Sabrina Ferilli, Franco Castellano, Veronica Pivetti, Violante Placido.

Chi era Laura Toscano? Basterebbe citare la sua creatura più riuscita, appunto il maresciallo Rocca, cucito sul fisico, la barba e la voce di Gigi Proietti con l’aiuto del regista Giorgio Capitani. Un trionfo senza precedenti, a suo modo un prototipo, poi copiato negli anni, sia pure nel solco dei gloriosi Racconti del maresciallo con Arnoldo Foà. Anticipando le fortune di Montalbano, la saga del carabiniere dal volto umano, bravo padre e amante un po’ maldestro di Stefania Sandrelli, destinata a morire in un attentato, sintetizzava un tipico carattere italiano. Ma, sempre insieme al marito Franco Marotta col quale faceva ditta, aveva scritto La bugiarda, Dalla notte all’alba, Delitti privati, Morte di una strega, soprattutto Commesse, più infiniti altri, da Tre storie di donne a L’avvocato Porta e La caccia, mentre aspetta d’essere trasmesso Le segretarie del settimo piano.

In effetti, praticava un cinema televisivo dove il racconto era tutto: un mix di intreccio, parola e studio dei personaggi. Dai film leggeri, anche farseschi, degli anni Ottanta ereditava il gusto per la battuta comica; ma aveva saputo adeguare il modo di scrivere alle richieste di una televisione esigente, in bilico tra ambizioni educative e impronta popolare.

C’è una sua bella intervista, concessa a Paola Casella per Reset, nella quale questa signora apparentemente snob, perfetta nei suoi golfini di cachemire o camicioni bianchi, sempre fresca di parrucchiera, con le perle al collo, analizzava con rara lucidità il mestiere praticato, tra ombre e luci. State a sentire. Il maresciallo Rocca: «Se invece di lavorare a Viterbo, dove lo abbiamo collocato, avesse vissuto in una metropoli, le sue storie sarebbero state molto diverse. È stata una scelta molto precisa raccontare la provincia italiana attraverso un personaggio di un certo tipo, e di collocarlo all’interno di una piccola stazione dei carabinieri. Non è un caso che Rocca rimandi all’infinito l’esame che gli consentirebbe il trasferimento presso una sede più prestigiosa».

Il tempismo: «Quando si fanno grandi numeri significa che si è arrivati al momento giusto. Il maresciallo Rocca corrispondeva a un bisogno di stabilità e di rassicurazione. Commesse ha risposto al bisogno di parlare di certi problemi femminili attraverso uno scorcio di vita più preciso e normale. Ma il successo non è mai automatico». La borghesia: «Non amo molto la classe sociale alla quale appartengo, che è quella intellettual-borghese. La trovo assai poco interessante. Abbiamo, per educazione o cultura, molti schemi, sappiamo coprire le nostre emozioni. La gente che incontro in metropolitana o al mercato è più immediata, più vera». I generi: «Ci vuole molta tigna e tanto mestiere per riuscire a costruire una storia in maniera convincente. Mai aver paura di sporcarsi le mani entrando nei generi. L’importante è inserire spunti di riflessione, altrimenti non avrebbe senso fare questo lavoro, senza lanciare messaggi. Non siamo predicatori, l’ottica pedagogica sarebbe la morte della fiction».

Laura Toscano era abile anche nella scrittura romanzesca di ispirazione gialla: nel 2007 aveva pubblicato per Mondadori La madre indegna, dove l’indagine poliziesca sulla morte di un albergatore dall’esistenza ambigua, misteriosa, si mutava in una sorta di affresco femminile costruito sulle confessioni spiazzanti dell’ex amante Lucia al commissario Ravasco. Qualcosa dell’autrice si rifletteva in tutti e tre i personaggi, ma specialmente nella domanda chiave: «È davvero così importante giungere alla verità?».