{"id":65697,"date":"2003-07-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-07-31T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/07\/31\/pam-la-derniere-du-pentagone-et-de-pointdexter\/"},"modified":"2003-07-31T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2003-07-31T00:00:00","slug":"pam-la-derniere-du-pentagone-et-de-pointdexter","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2003\/07\/31\/pam-la-derniere-du-pentagone-et-de-pointdexter\/","title":{"rendered":"PAM, la \u201cderni\u00e8re\u201d du Pentagone (et de Pointdexter)<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

PAM, la derni\u00e8re du Pentagone (et de Pointdexter)<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t31 juillet 2003 La derni\u00e8re du Pentagone, c’est l’\u00e9tonnante, et tr\u00e8s courte aventure du Policy Analysis Market (PAM), dont l’existence sit\u00f4t d\u00e9couverte a conduit \u00e0 une intervention ultra-rapide de plusieurs s\u00e9nateurs, d\u00e9mocrates et r\u00e9publicains, pour faire comprendre au Pentagone qu’il \u00e9tait temps d’abandonner cette \u00e9trange initiative. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tUn texte du site WSWS.org analyse le fonctionnement du PAM et les circonstances dans lesquelles son existence a \u00e9t\u00e9 mise \u00e0 jour<\/a>. On peut ainsi mieux mesurer l’\u00e9tranget\u00e9 sans limite de cette initiative.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Under the scheme, dubbed Policy Analysis Market, or PAM, the Defense Department planned to launch a futures market in which wealthy and anonymous insiders would bet on the likelihood of such occurrences as the assassination of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, the overthrow of the Jordanian monarchy, or a North Korean missile strike. Those whose speculative investments panned outin the form of terrorist violence and warwould stand to reap a handsome return. As the web site of the Pentagon project promised: Involvement in this group prediction process should prove engaging and may prove profitable.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The web site further guaranteed the anonymity of speculators and their immunity from government oversight, declaring that government agencies would not be allowed to participate and would not have access to the identities or funds of traders. The initiative was set to begin registering up to 1,000 traders on Friday, August 1.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The Bush administration had requested $8 million to fund the PAM futures market through 2005. According to a July 29 article in the New York Times, The overview of the plan said the market would focus on the economic, civil and military futures of Egypt, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey and the consequences of United States involvement with those nations. The creators of the market envision other trappings of existing markets like derivatives.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The plan was scotched after two Democratic senators, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota and Ron Wyden of Oregon, called a press conference on Monday to denounce it. Can you imagine, Dorgan asked, if another country set up a betting parlor so that people could go inand is sponsored by the government itselfpeople could go in and bet on the assassination of an American political figure?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Wyden explained the operation of the scheme as follows: For instance, you may think early on that prime minister X is going to be assassinated. So you buy the futures contracts for 5 cents each. As more people begin to think the person’s going to be assassinated, the cost of the contract could go up, to 50 cents. The payoff if he’s assassinated is $1 per future. So if it comes to pass, those who bought at 5 cents make 95 cents. Those who bought at 50 cents make 50 cents.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The senators pointed out that those with vested interests, including terrorists and big investors seeking to profit off of terrorist atrocities, could utilize the government-run market to manipulate events. The Pentagon initially defended the program, issuing a statement that said, Research indicates that markets are extremely efficient, effective and timely aggregators of dispersed and even hidden information. Futures markets have proven themselves to be good at predicting such things as election results…<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tTout est \u00e9tonnant dans cette affaire. Ainsi, il ne semble pas qu’on ait \u00e9t\u00e9 beaucoup au courant de l’existence du PAM au Pentagone, puisque Paul Wolfowitz, qui est tout de m\u00eame n\u00b02 du d\u00e9partement, a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 hier aux s\u00e9nateurs qui l’interrogeaient, au S\u00e9nat, qu’il jugeait cette initiative d\u00e9sastreuse. Cette prise de position laisse \u00e0 penser que Wolfowitz n’\u00e9tait pas inform\u00e9 du PAM, et qu’il le d\u00e9couvrait en m\u00eame temps que les s\u00e9nateurs eux-m\u00eames.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’ordonnateur et le coordinateur de PAM, c’est une vieille connaissance, l’amiral John Pointdexter. Anciennement n\u00b02 puis n\u00b01 du NSC avec Reagan (en 1985-86), instigateur de l’Irangate \u00e0 la m\u00eame \u00e9poque, avec trafic d’armes, transferts ill\u00e9gaux de fonds, etc, inculp\u00e9 dans cette affaire et condamn\u00e9 puis \u00e9vitant une confirmation de cette peine et son ex\u00e9cution pour vice de proc\u00e9dure, enfin reclass\u00e9 dans les gros coups high tech. Avant PAM, Pointdexter avait lanc\u00e9, toujours au Pentagone, le programme dit Total Information Awareness (TIA), qui proposait de mettre en carte \u00e9lectroniquement des millions d’Am\u00e9ricains. (Selon le New York Times, dans un \u00e9ditorial furieux<\/a> demandant la mise \u00e0 pied de Pointdexter : \u00ab His first big brainstorm post-9\/11 was a program known as Total Information Awareness, designed to identify potential terrorists by compiling a detailed electronic dossier on millions of Americans<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe caract\u00e8re le plus extraordinaire de PAM, c’est ce que rel\u00e8ve le commentateur Steven Pearlstein, du Washington Post<\/a>, sur la croyance absolue des vertus du march\u00e9 qu’implique ce syst\u00e8me : son principe revient en effet \u00e0 penser que les r\u00e9sultats de la sp\u00e9culation, avec succ\u00e8s de la cote de telle ou telle action terroriste, auraient \u00e9t\u00e9 une pr\u00e9cieuse indication pour la probabilit\u00e9 de telle ou telle action terroriste. (Ce que dit bien le communiqu\u00e9 du Pentagone : \u00ab Research indicates that markets are extremely efficient, effective and timely aggregators of dispersed and even hidden information. Futures markets have proven themselves to be good at predicting such things as election results…<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPour autant, il n’est peut-\u00eatre pas utile de s’\u00e9tonner. Nombre d’actions de l’administration GW sont ainsi marqu\u00e9es par une croyance aveugle dans les vertus quasiment divines du march\u00e9 libre. C’est pour cette raison principalement que rien n’a \u00e9t\u00e9 pr\u00e9par\u00e9 pour l’apr\u00e8s-guerre en Irak, le r\u00e9tablissement du march\u00e9 libre \u00e9tant jug\u00e9 comme la mesure n\u00e9cessaire et suffisante pour que le pays se transforme en oasis d\u00e9mocratique. Tout, dans l’administration GW, y compris les combines, sont \u00e0 consid\u00e9rer \u00e0 cette lumi\u00e8re. Un point suppl\u00e9mentaire pour mesurer le degr\u00e9 d’endoctrinement des esprits dans d’autres milieux, notamment britanniques pour ce cas, se trouve dans le fait que le groupe du magazine The Economist<\/em> \u00e9tait impliqu\u00e9 dans cette affaire PAM. On laisse \u00e0 d’autres le soin de trouver qualificatifs et exclamations pour saluer une telle situation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tReste que cela n’a pas march\u00e9, que la trouvaille TIA de Pointdexter non plus n’a pas march\u00e9, que le march\u00e9 libre en Irak ne marche pas et ainsi de suite. Mais qu’importe, puisque ces esprits ne trouvent aucun int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e0 consulter la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 pour juger de la justesse de leurs actes et de la bizarrerie de leurs th\u00e8ses. En attendant, le r\u00e9sultat est un d\u00e9sordre complet, derri\u00e8re les pompeuses rh\u00e9toriques des id\u00e9ologues, et, effectivement, le d\u00e9sordre semble bien \u00eatre la caract\u00e9ristique de l’administration GW. Ah, une derni\u00e8re chose : il faudrait, pour satisfaire le New York Times<\/em>, songer \u00e0 mettre Pointdexter \u00e0 pied ; reste \u00e0 le trouver pour l’en aviser, car on imagine bien que, dans le d\u00e9dale de d\u00e9sordre qu’est aujourd’hui le Pentagone, on ignore \u00e9videmment dans quel bureau il se trouve.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

PAM, la derni\u00e8re du Pentagone (et de Pointdexter) 31 juillet 2003 La derni\u00e8re du Pentagone, c’est l’\u00e9tonnante, et tr\u00e8s courte aventure du Policy Analysis Market (PAM), dont l’existence sit\u00f4t d\u00e9couverte a conduit \u00e0 une intervention ultra-rapide de plusieurs s\u00e9nateurs, d\u00e9mocrates et r\u00e9publicains, pour faire comprendre au Pentagone qu’il \u00e9tait temps d’abandonner cette \u00e9trange initiative. Un… <\/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":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65697","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65697","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=65697"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65697\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65697"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65697"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65697"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}