{"id":65027,"date":"2001-11-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-11-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2001\/11\/25\/les-intrigues-dormantes-de-la-guerre-contre-le-terrorisme-les-bush-les-ben-laden-la-cia-et-le-fbi\/"},"modified":"2001-11-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2001-11-25T00:00:00","slug":"les-intrigues-dormantes-de-la-guerre-contre-le-terrorisme-les-bush-les-ben-laden-la-cia-et-le-fbi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2001\/11\/25\/les-intrigues-dormantes-de-la-guerre-contre-le-terrorisme-les-bush-les-ben-laden-la-cia-et-le-fbi\/","title":{"rendered":"Les intrigues dormantes de la guerre contre le terrorisme : les Bush, les Ben Laden, la CIA et le FBI<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Les intrigues dormantes de la guerre contre le terrorisme : les Bush, les Ben Laden, la CIA et le FBI<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tL’un des domaines les plus int\u00e9ressants de l’actuelle crise, et le moins connu, ou, dans tous les cas, le plus sujet \u00e0 des rumeurs, des intrigues, etc, c’est bien celui des liens secrets ou semi-secrets entre l’establishment<\/em> am\u00e9ricain et les familles royales saoudiennes, dont on sait qu’elles approchent les 20.000 princes et peut-\u00eatre bien autant de milliards de dollars. On sait aussi qu’il existe de s\u00e9rieux liens d’affaires entre la famille Bush et la famille Ben Laden, par l’interm\u00e9diaire du holding de production et de transfert d’armement The Carlysle Group (CA de $14-$15 milliards). A la t\u00eate du Carlysle Group se trouve Frank Carlucci, ancien secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la d\u00e9fense, ancien n<198>2 de la CIA, officier de la CIA depuis des ann\u00e9es (il \u00e9tait chef d’antenne de la CIA \u00e0 L\u00e9opoldville, lors de l’ind\u00e9pendance du Congo, c’est lui qui \u00e9tait en poste lors de la liquidation de Lumumba o\u00f9 nombre de sources indiqu\u00e8rent qu’il \u00e9tait fortement impliqu\u00e9, c’est encore lui qui contr\u00f4la plus tard les r\u00e9seaux d’influence pro-am\u00e9ricains de Belgique, largement aliment\u00e9s par des Belges \u00e9tant pass\u00e9s par le Congo \u00e0 l’\u00e9poque de l’ind\u00e9pendance). Tout cela est \u00e9videmment du m\u00eame monde, puisque George Bush le-p\u00e8re eut bien Frank Carlucci sous ses ordres en 1976-77, quand il dirigea la CIA.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tSur cette toile de fond se greffe une circonstance troublante qui semble voir un certain affrontement entre diff\u00e9rentes agences de s\u00e9curit\u00e9\/de renseignement am\u00e9ricaines. Divers cas de fuites ont \u00e9t\u00e9 constat\u00e9es, o\u00f9 la position du FBI est expos\u00e9e comme \u00e9tant en butte \u00e0 des entraves, notamment de la part de la Maison-Blanche, lorsqu’il s’est agi d’enqu\u00eates \u00e0effectuer sur des citoyens saoudiens, voire des citoyens proches du cercle Ben Laden.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCi-dessous, nous donnons une transcription d’une \u00e9mission de la BBC, Newsnight<\/em>, o\u00f9 plusieurs sp\u00e9cialistes de la question sont interrog\u00e9s sur ce sujet. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(La transcription a \u00e9t\u00e9 mise sur le r\u00e9seau Internet par le site emperorclothes.com<\/em>, avec cette mention d’accompagnement : \u00ab This transcript is produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors. \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Has someone been sitting on the FBI? <\/h3>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tGreg Palast : The CIA and Saudi Arabia, the Bushes and the Bin Ladens. Did their connections cause America to turn a blind eye to terrorism? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tUnnamed man : There is a hidden agenda at the very highest levels of our government. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tJoe Trento, (Author, \u00a0\u00bbSecret History of The CIA\u00a0\u00bb) : The sad thing is that thousands of Americans had to die needlessly. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPeter Elsner : How can it be that the former President of the US and the current President of the US have business dealings with characters that need to be investigated?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : In the eight weeks since the attacks, over 1,000 suspects and potential witnesses have been detained. Yet, just days after the hijackers took off from Boston aiming for the Twin Towers, a special charter flight out of the same airport whisked 11 members of Osama Bin Laden’s family off to Saudi Arabia. That did not concern the White House. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTheir official line is that the Bin Ladens are above suspicion – apart from Osama, the black sheep, who they say hijacked the family name. That’s fortunate for the Bush family and the Saudi royal household, whose links with the Bin Ladens could otherwise prove embarrassing. But Newsnight has obtained evidence that the FBI was on the trail of other members of the] Bin Laden family for links to terrorist organisations before and after September 11th.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThis document is marked \u00a0\u00bbSecret\u00a0\u00bb. Case ID – 199-Eye WF 213 589. 199 is FBI code for case type. 9 would be murder. 65 would be espionage. 199 means national security. WF indicates Washington field office special agents were investigating ABL – because of it’s relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, WAMY – a suspected terrorist organisation. ABL is Abdullah Bin Laden, president and treasurer of WAMY.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThis is the sleepy Washington suburb of Falls Church, Virginia where almost every home displays the Stars and Stripes. On this unremarkable street, at 3411 Silver Maple Place, we located the former home of Abdullah and another brother, Omar, also an FBI suspect. It’s conveniently close to WAMY. The World Assembly of Muslim Youth is in this building, in a little room in the basement at 5613 Leesburg Pike. And here, just a couple blocks down the road at 5913 Leesburg, is where four of the hijackers that attacked New York and Washington are listed as having lived.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThe US Treasury has not frozen WAMY’s assets, and when we talked to them, they insisted they are a charity. Yet, just weeks ago, Pakistan expelled WAMY operatives. And India claimed that WAMY was funding an organisation linked to bombings in Kashmir. And the Philippines military has accused WAMY of funding Muslim insurgency. The FBI did look into WAMY, but, for some reason, agents were pulled off the trail. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTrento : The FBI wanted to investigate these guys. This is not something that they didn’t want to do – they wanted to, they weren’t permitted to.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : The secret file fell into the hands of national security expert, Joe Trento. The Washington spook-tracker has been looking into the FBI’s allegations about WAMY. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTrento : They’ve had connections to Osama Bin Laden’s people. They’ve had connections to Muslim cultural and financial aid groups that have terrorist connections. They fit the pattern of groups that the Saudi royal family and Saudi community of princes – the 20,000 princes -have funded who’ve engaged in terrorist activity. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tNow, do I know that WAMY has done anything that’s illegal? No, I don’t know that. Do I know that as far back as 1996 the FBI was very concerned about this organisation? I do.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : Newsnight has uncovered a long history of shadowy connections between the State Department, the CIA and the Saudis. The former head of the American visa bureau in Jeddah is Michael Springman.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tMichael Springman : In Saudi Arabia I was repeatedly ordered by high level State Dept officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants. These were, essentially, people who had no ties either to Saudi Arabia or to their own country. I complained bitterly at the time there. I returned to the US, I complained to the State Dept here, to the General Accounting Office, to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security and to the Inspector General’s office. I was met with silence. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : By now, Bush Sr, once CIA director, was in the White House. Springman was shocked to find this wasn’t visa fraud. Rather, State and CIA were playing \u00a0\u00bbthe Great Game\u00a0\u00bb. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tSpringman : What I was protesting was, in reality, an effort to bring recruits, rounded up by Osama Bin Laden, to the US for terrorist training by the CIA. They would then be returned to Afghanistan to fight against the then-Soviets.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tThe attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 did not shake the State Department’s faith in the Saudis, nor did the attack on American barracks at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia three years later, in which 19 Americans died. FBI agents began to feel their investigation was being obstructed. Would you be surprised to find out that FBI agents are a bit frustrated that they can’t be looking into some Saudi connections?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tMichael Wildes, (lawyer) : I would never be surprised with that. They’re cut off at the hip sometimes by supervisors or given shots that are being called from Washington at the highest levels.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : I showed lawyer Michael Wildes our FBI documents. One of the Khobar Towers bombers was represented by Wildes, who thought he had useful intelligence for the US. He also represents a Saudi diplomat who defected to the USA with 14,000 documents which Wildes claims implicates Saudi citizens in financing terrorism and more. Wildes met with FBI men who told him they were not permitted to read all the documents. Nevertheless, he tried to give them to the agents.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tWildes : \u00a0\u00bbTake these with you. We’re not going to charge for the copies. Keep them. Do something with them. Get some bad guys with them.\u00a0\u00bb They refused.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : In the hall of mirrors that is the US intelligence community, Wildes, a former US federal attorney, said the FBI field agents wanted the documents, but they were told to \u00a0\u00bbsee no evil.\u00a0\u00bb <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tWildes : You see a difference between the rank-and-file counter-intelligence agents, who are regarded by some as the motor pool of the FBI, who drive following diplomats, and the people who are getting the shots called at the highest level of our government, who have a different agenda – it’s unconscionable. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : State wanted to keep the pro-American Saudi royal family in control of the world’s biggest oil spigot, even at the price of turning a blind eye to any terrorist connection so long as America was safe. In recent years, CIA operatives had other reasons for not exposing Saudi-backed suspects.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTrento : If you recruited somebody who is a member of a terrorist organisation, who happens to make his way here to the US, and even though you’re not in touch with that person anymore but you have used him in the past, it would be unseemly if he were arrested by the FBI and word got back that he’d once been on the payroll of the CIA. What we’re talking about is blow-back. What we’re talking about is embarrassing, career-destroying blow-back for intelligence officials.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : Does the Bush family also have to worry about political blow-back? The younger Bush made his first million 20 years ago with an oil company partly funded by Salem Bin Laden’s chief US representative. Young George also received fees as director of a subsidiary of Carlyle Corporation, a little known private company which has, in just a few years of its founding, become one of Americas biggest defence contractors. His father, Bush Senior, is also a paid advisor. And what became embarrassing was the revelation that the Bin Ladens held a stake in Carlyle, sold just after September 11.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tElsner : You have a key relationship between the Saudis and the former President of the US who happens to be the father of the current President of the US. And you have all sorts of questions about where does policy begin and where does good business and good profits for the company, Carlyle, end? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPalast : I received a phone call from a high-placed member of a US intelligence agency. He tells me that while there’s always been constraints on investigating Saudis, under George Bush it’s gotten much worse. After the elections, the agencies were told to \u00a0\u00bbback off\u00a0\u00bb investigating the Bin Ladens and Saudi royals, and that angered agents. I’m told that since September 11th the policy has been reversed. FBI headquarters told us they could not comment on our findings. A spokesman said: \u00a0\u00bbThere are lots of things that only the intelligence community knows and that no-one else ought to know.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(C) BBC 2001 * Posted for Fiar Use Only<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Remarques sur la situation d’affrontement entre agences, services et pr\u00e9sidence aux USA<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tNous pensons que cette transcription, autant que d’autres sources ouvertes et largement diffus\u00e9es (par exemple, le livre Ben Laden, la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 interdite<\/em>), ainsi que des articles de commentaires de ces sources (notamment sur ce livre)<\/a> qui les diffusent largement, donnent assez d’indications sur les dessous des questions ainsi abord\u00e9es. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tNous voudrions envisager un autre aspect du m\u00eame probl\u00e8me, en mettant \u00e0 part la question des probl\u00e8mes strat\u00e9giques du p\u00e9trole impliquant du c\u00f4t\u00e9 US le State department, tels qu’ils sont notamment d\u00e9taill\u00e9s dans le livre Ben Laden, la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 interdite<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tComme on commence \u00e0 l’appr\u00e9cier pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment sur ces questions impliquant l’administration Bush, les Talibans et Ben Laden avant le 11 septembre, on retrouve l’administration (plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment la pr\u00e9sidence) proche de la CIA, avec la CIA servant souvent de courroie de transmission, tandis que le FBI se trouve plut\u00f4t dans le camp oppos\u00e9. Il ne s’agit aucunement d’engagements bas\u00e9s sur le jugement \u00e9thique ou autre, ni m\u00eame le jugement politico-strat\u00e9gique, mais bien d’un jeu de pouvoir, et c’est lui qui nous int\u00e9resse.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCe sch\u00e9ma (pr\u00e9sidence + CIA versus<\/em> FBI) est celui du Watergate. Dans ce scandale qui secoua le cadre institutionnel des USA en 1972-75, le pr\u00e9sident Nixon employait une \u00e9quipe de \u00ab\u00a0plombiers\u00a0\u00bb pour diverses basses besognes (effractions, enqu\u00eates ill\u00e9gales, etc). L’\u00e9quipe avait \u00e9t\u00e9 recrut\u00e9e notamment chez d’anciens officiers de la CIA (comme Gordon Liddy) et gardait des liens avec l’agence. Le roman \u00e0 clef publi\u00e9 en 1978 The Company<\/em>, de John Ehrlichman (qui fut, avec Bob Haldeman, l’un des deux proches conseillers de Nixon pour les affaires int\u00e9rieures), sugg\u00e8re de consid\u00e9rables imbrications entre le pr\u00e9sident et la CIA dans cette affaire du Watergate, — avec des ramifications remontant jusqu’\u00e0 l’affaire de la Baie des Cochons (l’attaque de Cuba par des anti-castristes soutenus par la CIA), en avril 1961. Cela ne signifie bien entendu pas que pr\u00e9sidence et CIA jouaient le m\u00eame jeu en toute loyaut\u00e9. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’autre conseiller de Nixon, Bob Haldeman, a clairement indiqu\u00e9 dans ses m\u00e9moires (the Ends of Power<\/em>) qu’il existait un soup\u00e7on tr\u00e8s s\u00e9rieux selon lequel la CIA avait une \u00ab\u00a0taupe\u00a0\u00bb dans l’entourage le plus direct du pr\u00e9sident Nixon, pour espionner la pr\u00e9sidence.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tOn comprend qu’on ne peut dire que la CIA fut constamment au service de la pr\u00e9sidence (dans le cas Nixon, mais aussi dans d’autres cas d’autres pr\u00e9sidents), comme une vision classique et europ\u00e9enne du pouvoir, avec la hi\u00e9rarchisation qu’elle implique, le laisserait penser ; on doit plut\u00f4t dire que les int\u00e9r\u00eats de la pr\u00e9sidence et ceux de la CIA avaient entre eux des connections, des proximit\u00e9s, et que ces deux centres de pouvoir devaient donc \u00ab\u00a0jouer ensemble\u00a0\u00bb (pour se soutenir ou s’opposer, c’est selon) dans cette affaire du Watergate, comme dans diverses autres occasions. [S’agissant des USA, il faut admettre que le pouvoir n’est pas du type classique europ\u00e9en, avec une autorit\u00e9 politique centrale repr\u00e9sentant la seule l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9, et le reste officiellement soumis, avec des al\u00e9as divers ; le pouvoir est r\u00e9parti entre diff\u00e9rents centres, souvent autonomes les uns des autres malgr\u00e9 l’apparence, et aucun n’ayant la l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9 qui le met \u00e0 part, puisque cette l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9 va \u00e0 la Loi, c’est-\u00e0-dire, \u00e0 la Cour Supr\u00eame principalement pour le dernier ressort.] La relation pr\u00e9sidence-CIA du temps du Watergate, et cela subsiste aujourd’hui, tenait au fait que les affaires secr\u00e8tes et souvent scabreuses que traitaient les deux centres avaient n\u00e9cessairement, sinon principalement, de vastes ramifications ext\u00e9rieures, hors-USA ; m\u00eame si la question du Watergate \u00e9tait surtout int\u00e9rieure (mais avec des ramifications ext\u00e9rieures), les liens pr\u00e9sidence-CIA subsistaient, conduisant d’ailleurs la CIA \u00e0 op\u00e9rer de fa\u00e7on ill\u00e9gale par instants, puisque dans des affaires int\u00e9rieures. Au contraire, dans ce sch\u00e9ma du Watergate comme pour d’autres occasions, le FBI avait une position autonome \u00e0 cause de sa mission qui est uniquement cantonn\u00e9e au domaine int\u00e9rieur. (D\u00e8s l’origine, ce sch\u00e9ma est \u00e9vident. D\u00e8s l’arriv\u00e9e de Hoover \u00e0 la t\u00eate du FBI, en 1924, le FBI est ind\u00e9pendant de la pr\u00e9sidence. Au contraire, les premiers services de renseignement f\u00e9d\u00e9raux ont \u00e9t\u00e9 organis\u00e9s avec une tr\u00e8s grande proximit\u00e9 du pr\u00e9sident. Le colonel Wild<\/em> Bill Donovan fut un proche de Roosevelt, envoy\u00e9 personnel du pr\u00e9sident aupr\u00e8s des Britanniques en 1939-40, avant de devenir le chef de l’Office of Strategic Services [OSS] pendant la Deuxi\u00e8me Guerre mondiale. L’OSS, premier service de renseignement central, fut dissoute apr\u00e8s la guerre pour laisser la place \u00e0 la CIA, qui r\u00e9cup\u00e9ra nombre de ses cadres et de ses structures, et certaines de ses habitudes. Dans la hi\u00e9rarchie, on retrouve cette diff\u00e9rence : le FBI d\u00e9pend du d\u00e9partement de la Justice, le directeur de la CIA rend compte directement au pr\u00e9sident, notamment au sein du National Security Council.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCette diff\u00e9rence des rapports entre la pr\u00e9sidence et les deux agences, CIA et FBI, est par ailleurs compr\u00e9hensible par leurs activit\u00e9s m\u00eame. Dans le domaine int\u00e9rieur, le pr\u00e9sident, lorsqu’il traite d’affaires d\u00e9licates, qu’elles soient de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale ou pour ses propres int\u00e9r\u00eats, dispose d’un tr\u00e8s grand nombre de relais puissants, que ce soit les forces politiques comme les structures de son parti, les structures financi\u00e8res et industrielles, les relais au Congr\u00e8s, etc. Au contraire du domaine ext\u00e9rieur o\u00f9 le pr\u00e9sident n’a pas ces facilit\u00e9s et doit rechercher la collaboration de la CIA, il n’a pas besoin du FBI pour le front int\u00e9rieur. Enfin, il faut noter que, dans les carri\u00e8res des divers pr\u00e9sidents (Roosevelt, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton notamment), l’activit\u00e9 ext\u00e9rieure a toujours \u00e9t\u00e9 une fa\u00e7on de tenter de r\u00e9affirmer un pouvoir pr\u00e9sidentiel constamment d\u00e9fi\u00e9 et diminu\u00e9 au niveau des affaires int\u00e9rieures par les autres pouvoirs. Les affaires ext\u00e9rieures sont un privil\u00e8ge du pr\u00e9sident et, souvent, une bou\u00e9e de sauvetage pour une pr\u00e9sidence en perdition sur le front int\u00e9rieur. Aux \u00c9tats-Unis, la pr\u00e9sidence est une bataille permanente.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTout cela ne fait pas du FBI un parangon de vertu, comme si le vice des affaires politiques \u00e9tait r\u00e9serv\u00e9 \u00e0 la pr\u00e9sidence et \u00e0 la CIA. Le FBI de J. Edgar Hoover a montr\u00e9 au contraire une prodigieuse corruption intellectuelle, Hoover ayant r\u00e9gn\u00e9 comme un dictateur pour la police int\u00e9rieure et le contre-espionnage pendant un demi-si\u00e8cle (de 1924 \u00e0 1972 \u00e0 la t\u00eate du FBI, notamment gr\u00e2ce aux moyens de pression, les informations compromettantes dont il disposait, utilis\u00e9s \u00e0 l’encontre des pr\u00e9sidents successifs pour conserver ce poste). Il n’emp\u00eache que, pour ce qui concerne les activit\u00e9s secr\u00e8tes et souvent ill\u00e9gales du pr\u00e9sident, le FBI se tient \u00e0 l’\u00e9cart, notamment parce qu’il s’agit souvent d’affaires ext\u00e9rieures. Ainsi le retrouve-t-on conduisant une enqu\u00eate assez ind\u00e9pendante dans l’affaire du Watergate, comme il le fait aujourd’hui (ou, dans tous les cas, comme il l’a fait) dans les affaires Ben Laden et consorts. Cette ind\u00e9pendance, l\u00e0 encore, ne signifie ni vertu ni civisme, elle signifie qu’en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral le FBI voit ses int\u00e9r\u00eats diff\u00e9remment de ce qu’en voit l’administration et\/ou le pr\u00e9sident. Il s’agit d’un \u00e9l\u00e9ment important : face aux \u00e9v\u00e9nements \u00e0 venir, en Am\u00e9rique mais aussi en-dehors (le FBI m\u00e8ne d\u00e9sormais des enqu\u00eates hors des fronti\u00e8res des USA), le FBI pourrait suivre une politique diff\u00e9rente de celle de l’administration.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Les intrigues dormantes de la guerre contre le terrorisme : les Bush, les Ben Laden, la CIA et le FBI L’un des domaines les plus int\u00e9ressants de l’actuelle crise, et le moins connu, ou, dans tous les cas, le plus sujet \u00e0 des rumeurs, des intrigues, etc, c’est bien celui des liens secrets ou semi-secrets… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[3265,868,3104,2838,3266,2804],"class_list":["post-65027","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-analyse","tag-ben","tag-bush","tag-cia","tag-fbi","tag-laden","tag-usa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65027","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65027"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65027\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65027"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65027"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65027"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}