Le paradis qui se perd et qui ne se retrouve plus, c’est l’enfance. C’est une époque de la vie où tout est joie, tout est amour, tout est viril et tout nous est favorable. L’enfance, une époque de la vie où le cœur n’a pas encore commencé a enregistré les mauvaises actes des malveillants qui tentent toujours de rendre noire la page très claire que Dieu a attribué à chaque individu à la naissance : le cerveau, le cœur, la pensée.
L’enfance, c’est la joie, c’est le rire accompagné de petites courses entre les portes, les bras sans distinction entre les gens qui nous entourent et qui ont tous l’air gentil avec nous.
Là, on reçoit des sourires, là-bas on reçoit des cadeaux et on est source de joie de l’entourage qui parle toujours de nos rires, de nos pas de danse et de nos petites expressions apprenant à parler, à chanter, et à danser.
Enfance, un moment où on déclenche la douceur dans le cœur de l’assistance qui nous entoure partout où on est par nos imitations de mariage, de cuisine, de fabrication de petits objets, des activités à partir desquels nous amusons nos parents et dirigeons leur pensée vers demain, un demain dans lequel, ils nous voient déjà grandit ignorant le sort que ce demain nous réserve, quel souci permanent dans les cœurs de nos parents dont le combat quotidien est engagé pour notre bonheur !
L’enfance, une époque de la vie où nous sommes capables de déclencher des rires même pendant des jours de malheur par nos geste insensés au milieu de nos parents, de nos tantes, de nos cousins et cousines, de tout l’entourage en laissant des traces de souvenir partout où nous passons, des traces qui nous rappellent toujours de ces moments de merveille de notre vie. Par là, un objet nous dit que pendant l’enfance, tu t’amusait ici avec les filles et les garçons de même âge que toi, en visite chez un oncle, le salon nous dit que pendant l’enfance, tu as brisé ici des vers et nos tantes, pour nous taquiner, ne cessent pas de rappeler aux oriels un de nos faits et nous baissons la tête et souris un peu.
Ces souvenirs de joie et d’innocence nous accompagnent pendant le reste de la vie, et cela constitue un paradis perdu qu’on ne retrouve plus !
L’enfance, le paradis perdu, un moment de la vie pendant lequel la collaboration entre fille et garçon comme ces deux jeunes n’est prise que dans le sens de simple camaraderie.
Longue et heureuse vie à tous les enfants, à tous les jeunes du monde entier.

In the months leading up to the ICANN meeting in Nairobi, majority of discussions and conference calls were dominated by security concerns and emergency meetings with some people wondering whether the meeting will take place or not.
Eventually some people decided to stay away. Yes, security is a concern but for everyone and no one can blame anyone for choosing safety over risk. Well, I had my opinions about the security debate, which have been expressed in blog posts scattered online.
However, it was nice to hear an admnission from Rod Beckstrom, ICANN president and CEO that perhaps the whole security debate was not handled well.
At a meeting with the Government Advisory Committee, Rod said that ICANN is striving to balance transparency and diplomacy and in this case, that balance may not have been well struck.
He was responding to the statement by Alice Munyua, CCK board, who alluded to the fact that the whole security saga may not have demonstrated respect to the local organizing committee and that the debate was dominated by security and not by serious issues.
Here is the verbatim GAC speech by Alice:
We thank the ICANN board and the ICANN community for resolving to get on with the meeting in Kenya despite the challenges and note that the geographic rotation of meeting locations is an important feature unique and special to ICANN.
However, we need to ask ourselves “what do these ICANN meetings leave behind in the various regions and/or countries?”
Kenya had ideals regarding the possible domino effect/impact that this meeting would have had in the EA region in terms of understanding ICANN, increased participation in ICANN and understanding of Internet policy and Internet governance generally (as you probably know, Kenya has offered to host the 2011 IGF). But we spent most of the months leading up to the meeting occupied and dealing with the meetings security issues due to the badly handled communication around it.
And this is not to deny that there were credible fears around the meeting security, particularly when it touches on the world’s common terrorism incidents, but communicating these same fears and efforts being made to ensure everyone's safety could have been handled more diplomatically and respectfully for Kenya as host country, as a recognition the hard work by the local organisers and ICANN staff.
We note that nearly all of the contracted parties (registries, registrars) are missing (physically) and have chosen to have parallel meetings in NY and Washington. What does this say about the ICANN processes? Has ICANN's foundation commitment to the introduction of competition and diversity in the DNS on the decline? If all of the registries and significant majority of registrars are based in North America what does this say? Is there a competition framework? Is it time to begin to explore the possibilities of a global one perhaps? What will happen to the new gTLD's with registration costs that are prohibitive for most developing countries’?
Finally, we congratulate ICANN commitment to the principle of transparency, with the very active use of society networking tools, like twitter but we do believe that issues that affect a country's prospects should be handled more sensitively and respectively because they do tend to have an impact on not only general effectiveness and efficiency of organising these kind of meetings but the impact is broader than the
internet and includes issues of investment, tourism among others.
If the intentions, with the various processes including the AOC are to work towards internationalising ICANN, then ICANN must respect diversity and work more towards understanding other perspectives and interests.
Salut. Le barcamp m' ouvert les yeux et m'a permis de tester mon niveau intelectuel et de connaissances.Pendant ce barcamp j'ai realisé que j'ai encore beaucoup à apprendre et le chemain que j'ai encore à pacourir. Aussi la valeur et le role de l'homme dans la société actuelle où nous vivons.j'ai compris qu'une nouvelle elite de jeunes unis est né et prete à à s'investir pour l'avencement et le progrès d'une Afrique sans commentaires et sans failles dans une union parfaite et solide. Merci beaucoup et que Dieu nous soutiennent.

Salut. Suis de retour pour le barcamp. J'ai passé un bon moment avec les barcampeurs qui ont été tous formidables vraiment rien n'a leur rapprocher sur le caractaire;J'ai adoré. ce qui m'a beaucoup plus, s'etais la simplicité des receleurs et de tous ceux qui etaient venus pour participer au barcamp puisqu'il n'y avait de d'assistants tous etaient conçernés en un domaine donné.ils etaient accueillants et respectueux .
Pas de clans formés, pas de murmures dans les coulisses comme on le sait ,pas distinctions de classes sociales ou de niveaux intelectuels, pas de préférances et aussi à souligner les hotesses bien souriantes et accueillantes qui répondaient à toutes nos préoccupations et renseignements qui à la vue d'une quelconque personne s'approchaient d'elle avec un sourir aussi eclatant et brillant que de l'or au feu:
Je les felicite tous mais surtout Me. Ehouman Jean Patrick , Me. Paul Sika l'équipe de google qui avait en tete meTidian , de Frederic, d'Edith et du groupe de techniciens qui ont assurés la sonorisatione et de tous ceux qui j'ai homi le nom.Les studiots ou tout s'ai deroulé etaient propres.J'encourage toute l'equipe d'Akendewa qui a organisé cet évenement et on espère que la prochaine fois il aura plus de temps pour que les intervenants puissent repondre et ecouter plus de questions et de propositions des barcampeurs que cette annee . Et j'espere que ce qu"il nous resèrve l'annéé prochaine sera plus grand encore que celui-ci. Pas de retard s'il vous plait. Merci.
Je voudrais partager quelques images que j'ai selectionner parmis tant d'autres avec vous:
Un des barcampeurs posant une question
Le president de akedewa en tee-shirt blanc avec le logo
Paul Sika en pleine demonstration face aux questions des barcampeurs
An tɛ ban an fakan kunkanko kuma na ani u jɔyɔrɔ jamana ka ɲɛtaa siratigɛw la.
Kunnafoni dɔ filɛ nin ye k’o sɛmɛntiya
On ne finit pas de parler des langues nationales et d’évoquer tout ce qu’elles peuvent jouer comme rôle dans les processus de développement d’un pays, d’un continent.
Voici un article qui en témoigne
As noted last week, Zuma's visit to the UK gave plenty of things for the media to talk about: from his sex habits, marriage arrangements and the British's empire mentality. But there was much more. Zuma used his visit to ask Gordon Brown to support the lifting of Zimbabwe sanctions; this is, the "travel bans and asset freezes imposed by the EU and the US on Robert Mugabe and his allies" and still in place, and which serve, he argued, "only to divide the already fragile power-sharing government in Zimbabwe". This generated an interesting debate on The Guardian, regarding the usefulness of sanctions in the Zimbabwean case. Thus, last Wednesday Blessing Miles-Tendi wrote an article titled "Zuma's right on Zimbabwe", in which he supported the lifting of sanctions and argued that these "are not only internally divisive but iniquitous and obstructive to democracy". You can read the full article here.
South African president Jacob Zuma. Photograph: Ben Stansall/AFP (via The Guardian)
This article prompted Tom Porteous, London director of Human Rights Watch, to response, witing a letter in which he argued: “Blessing-Miles Tendi blames the EU targeted sanctions against Mugabe and his cronies for the failure of last year's power-sharing deal to bring about the hoped-for political transformation in Zimbabwe. That is absurd. The evidence that Zanu-PF continues to violate the agreement is overwhelming. In the past year MDC activists have been killed and abducted. Legislators and journalists have been arrested on spurious charges. Repressive media laws remain in place. Illegal invasions of commercial farms continue. Zanu-PF continues to use its control of the army, police and security sector to persecute its opponents. Just this week journalist Andrison Shadreck Manyere was arrested for filming political detainees outside a courthouse and union leader Gertrude Hambira fled the country fearing for her life after her offices were ransacked by police. Easing EU sanctions now will simply reinforce the repression in Zimbabwe.”
Continuing the debate, yesterday Miles-Tandi responded, with what I consider to be and extremely insightful criticism of the limitations of how human rights discourse is applied in political crisis, and especially, regarding Zimbabwe. Here are some excerpts:“Porteous either failed to comprehend my article or he is in the habit of making kneejerk responses, because nowhere do I make the assertion that sanctions are the sole reason for the failure of the "power-sharing deal to bring about the hoped-for political transformation"… My argument is that sanctions must be lifted in order to rob Zanu PF of a key propaganda and negotiating plank, which it has used to weaken internal opposition and as a pretext for the non-implementation of democratic reforms… However, the most disconcerting aspect of Porteous's response is not its misrepresentation of my views but that it shows how, for four reasons, the human rights movement remains intellectually ill-equipped to deal with Zanu PF…
First, Porteous… does not stop to ask whether targeted sanctions have had any effect in deterring Zanu PF's human rights violations. Sanctions have been in place since 2002, but Robert Mugabe still stole the 2002 and 2008 presidential elections. Sanctions did not dissuade the Zanu PF government from violently seizing white-owned commercial farms... carrying out Operation Murambatsvina…Journalists, the opposition and civil society have faced untold repression under the EU sanctions' watch…
Second, Porteous' insistence on the maintenance of sanctions that clearly do not have the desired effect reflects how the human rights movement lacks ingenuity in confronting Zanu PF's human rights violations...For a decade, we have isolated the Zanu PF government, attacked its excesses and applied targeted sanctions. Zanu PF has only become more belligerent and its human rights abuses have worsened…
Third, the human rights movement has struggled to deal with the problem that the very same actors, such as the EU, that it has urged to maintain sanctions on Zimbabwe do not apply the same human rights standards everywhere and are themselves gross human rights violators. This is a very important shortcoming because external attempts at protecting the human rights of a given populace are undermined if they are accompanied by selectivity and hypocrisy. ...
Fourth, the human rights movement has not fully appreciated the sophisticated nature of Mugabe and Zanu PF. Zanu PF has invested sustained intellectual labour in attacking the idea of human rights…The human rights movement in Zimbabwe and internationally has failed to articulate a compelling defence of the validity of human rights in the country. As a result, intellectual space has been ceded to Zanu PF's public intellectuals.
In my opinion this constitues an excellent summary of the shorcomings of the current approach to the Zimbabwean crisis - shortcoming that only reinforce Mugabe's position. This situation in Zimbabwe continued to be tense, with a fragile national unity government, harrasment of activists and politicians, and continued power-abuses from ZANU-PF. But sanctions, in place since 2002 do not appear to have made the situation better, rather the opposite, as Miles-Tandi argues, giving ideological ammunition to Mugabe's camp. What Human Rights activist sometimes forget - something that directly results from the very nature of the Human Rights discourse - is that politics is often a messy affais, that calls for compromises, and that in order to exert any change you need to have leverage of some sort. Undoubtedly, complying with the international Human Rights framework gives you a certain degree of leverage, and wins you international support from Western powers. But in many cases - such as Zimbabwe - this is not enough because on the national sphere this discourse is confronted and over-powered by Mugabe's interested use of anti-imperialist rhetoric.
A more fruitful approach then will be, as Miles-Tandi suggests and I agree, to adopt a more flexible political position - instead of a manichean "you-either-fully-comply-with-human-rights-requirements-or you-will-be-considered-a-pariah" approach, which highlights the double standards existing in the international sphere (see Afghanistan). Following this, the international community's best chance may be to rely on Zuma to act as intermediate in making ZANU-PF comply with the powersharing agreement. Understandably, there is a reticiency to do this, given the failure of Mbeki's "constructive engagement" policy. Nevertheless, there appears to be a certain, albeit slight, change in South Africa's foreign policy towards Zimbabwe as this SAIIA article notes:"Zimbabwe remains South Africa’s most immediate foreign policy challenge. Zuma’s more cordial relations with Morgan Tsvangirai, his tougher stance at the November 2009 Maputo SADC Summit and his replacement of Mbeki as mediator by Charles Nqakula, Mac Maharaj and Lindiwe Zulu later that month heralds, for some, a definite break with the past, although it is early days."
Photograph: Desmond Kwande/AFP/Getty Images (via The Guardian)
Furthermore, as the "Blue Lines" section signals in the latest Africa-Confidential (here, no suscription required), Zuma's team "has made some headway in negotiations on political and security issues" and "is searching for leverage with Mugabe, suggesting that sanctions could be quickly reimposed if pledges are not kept" (a much more interesting dynamic than keeping the sanctions). Sanctions on Zimbabwe, this article continues, are in fact "under review: its voting rights at the IMF have been restored. The IMF and the World Bank are working on a plan to tackle its arrears and speed up disbursement for the short term recovery programme – despite the United States’ and Britain’s veto on loans. That too may change after some diplomatic clodhopping. Last year, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said that it was up to the MDC to decide when sanctions were lifted. Since then, Premier Morgan Tsvangirai has written to EU leaders calling for a general review of sanctions and Finance Minister Tendai Biti has asked the EU to lift sanctions on eight specific companies; it quickly complied. However, the last set of sanctions – the targeting of ZANU-PF officials and their business friends – is likely to stand for many months yet."
It is therefore clear that the stand-off in Zimbabwe has been paralysing for the country's situation, and that a new something needs to be done. And that the sanctions, in place since 2002 have not worked. It does not therefore seem such a crazy idea then, to give it a go at trying new ideas, like lifting the sanctions...
I headed out to Rubona, some 35km outside Kigali, a couple of weeks ago to observe a pilot project to bring live football to rural Rwanda. If the project goes well, the team behind the pilot plan to bring live World Cup football on large, inflatable screens to rural parts of Rwanda, Ghana, Kenya and Uganda for the whole month of June.
See how the team got on in my photojournalism essay at Kigali Wire.
L'Académie Africaine des Langues (abréviation : ACALAN) sise à Bamako (Mali) organise à Dakar le 11 et le 12 mars prochains un atelier de planification linguistique de sa Commission Fulfulde-Pulaar (FULCOM) au Centre Ahmadou Malick Guèye. Précisons que l'ACALAN a été mise sur pied en 2001 par l'Union Africaine sur initiative de l'ancien président malien Alpha Oumar Konaré. En vue de promouvoir l'intégration régionale par les langues autochtones, elle a créé entre autres des commissions pour les langues dites "transfrontalières". En Afrique de l'Ouest le haussa, le mandingue (avec ses variantes bambara, malinké, dioula) et le fulfulde (ou pulaar) ont été retenus comme telles par l'ACALAN. Rappelons que le fulfulde concerne plus d'une quinzaine de pays.
L'atelier FULCOM, dirigée par Dr. Fary Silate Kâ, a retenu les points suivants pour cet atelier :
- L’uniformisation universelle de l’orthographe de la langue ;
- L’harmonisation et la numérisation de la terminologie
scientifique et technique moderne ;
- L’état des lieux sur les ressources dans les différents pays où la langue est parlée ;
- La problématique de la standardisation dialectale.
Pour tous renseignements, les intéressés peuvent contacter Mr. Kâ sous ces coordonnées : Portable: (221) 77 510 97 58
E-mail: ka_fary2000@yahoo.fr
L'ACALAN a un site Internet qui ne semble malheureusement pas être mis régulièrement à jour : http://www.acalan.org/
In the debate about the challenges of domains in Africa, the issue of cost becomes a major talking point.
I have been accused of ripping Kenic and their policies on .ke; I pay Ksh 3000 about $ 40 for my domain, which I consider high. Yes. maybe I may be harping on the cost issue a bit but that has been the feeling of many people who have contributed via twitter and other forums.
So I decided it would be nice to look at the issue from a different lens; that of the administrators, just to understand why they charge the figure.
I spoke to Michuki Mwangi, the guy who set up Kenic and the first person who I heard saying that cost is not an issue a while a go. Michuki made very compelling arguments.
Sample this; the mama who sells vegetables at the local kiosk has a mobile phone that cost Ksh 2,500 and spend about Ksh. 500 on credit every month. Why? Because the mama finds value in the mobile phone and the credit spent brings returns.
Michuki's argument is very clear that if we grow the value added services, then the cost of the domain is not the issue; make it worth the while and people will spend. If local electronic commerce is developed, just like the way mobile phones have grown, people will find it easy and effective to conduct business online and so long as returns are guaranteed, then cost will not be an issue per se.
Then there is the other side of the coin. Here is a response I got from Francis hook, who was commenting on the topic:
Lets examine the numbers...according the a recent economic survey, there are about 50,000 businesses in Kenya - all the way from KQ, KCB....to the small scale SMMEs....that's 50,000...assume 5% of internet users (i.e. abt 5 million) want a .co.ke for whatever reason....and 5% is really stretching it...given a good chunk (say 50%) are students/young people/job seekers/etc doing FB, SN, IM, email, etc.... ...anyway, thats 250,000 users. Lets say its 2.5% that is 125,000 plus 50,000 (and again we are assuming even that small chips shop on Ronald Ngala gets a domain...) - 175,000 x US$2 = US$ 350,000 @ ROE 75 = 26.2 million...
I am sure the debate on domains will go on, Lets hear different scenarios!
Bookmark and Share this page