{"id":65981,"date":"2004-05-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-05-26T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/05\/26\/on-insiste-une-attaque-terroriste-a-toute-sa-place-dans-la-campagne-electorale\/"},"modified":"2004-05-26T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-05-26T00:00:00","slug":"on-insiste-une-attaque-terroriste-a-toute-sa-place-dans-la-campagne-electorale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/05\/26\/on-insiste-une-attaque-terroriste-a-toute-sa-place-dans-la-campagne-electorale\/","title":{"rendered":"On insiste : une attaque terroriste a toute sa place dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

On insiste : une attaque terroriste a toute sa place dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t26 mai 2004 Depuis quelques jours, \u00e0 nouveau beaucoup de rumeurs sur une possible attaque terroriste aux USA, \u00e0 Washington si possible, avant l’\u00e9lection pr\u00e9sidentielle. Le site WSWS.org fait une recollection<\/a> de quelques signes r\u00e9cents de cette tendance, dans la presse am\u00e9ricaine. Son d\u00e9compte n’est pas complet, ce qui t\u00e9moigne de la richesse du domaine.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tQuelques extraits de WSWS.org :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Two more pieces published in the press in recent days point to a continuing discussion within the political elite in the US about the electoral consequences of a pre-election terrorist attack. Top officials and analysts speak as if an attack were probable if not certain, and indicate the major concern in Washington is how such an attack would affect the outcome of the elections.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In the Washington Whispers section of this week’s US News & World Report, columnist Paul Bedard reports: White House officials say they’ve got a working premise’ about terrorism and the presidential election: It’s going to happen. Bedard quotes a top administration official as asserting, We assume an attack will happen leading up to the election, and that it will happen in Washington, D.C.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Bedard continues by noting, Unclear is the political impact, though most Bushies think the nation would rally around the president. He quotes another official who has been involved in recent terrorism response drills: I can tell you one thing, we won’t be like Spain. Earlier this year, Spain’s conservative government was ousted by voters after the deadly train bombings in Madrid on the eve of a national election.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The US government has been carrying out terrorism response drills involving the first tests of the revised continuity of government plans developed by the administration after the September 11 attacks.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In a piece published May 20 entitled Beware of any stretch-run surprises, Wall Street Journal columnist Albert Hunt writes that the November elections could hinge on unanticipated events. First on the list of such events is a terrorist attack. Hunt notes: The Bush administration and outside terrorist experts repeatedly have cautioned that another attack on the homeland is likely. The White House, politically, has it both ways: taking credit for avoiding any assault since 9\/11, while at the same time warning that another is likely.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb There is a more sinister subtext to Hunt’s column in the suggestion that the Bush administration would like to have it both ways in another manner: it would like to benefit politically by presenting itself as the strongest force against terrorism, while preparing to politically exploit any future terrorist attack. He quotes Charles Blacka Republican strategist and close confidante of President George W. Bushas stating that my instinct is there likely will be a rally around [the incumbent] effect in the event of another attack.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLes autres signes tr\u00e8s r\u00e9cents que WSWS.org ne signale pas sont, au moins, au nombre de deux.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Time.com<\/em> publie le 20 mai une information sur une alerte du FBI \u00e0 l’attaque terroriste<\/a>. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The FBI is warning law enforcement agencies to be on the alert for the possibility that suicide bombers may attempt to strike inside the United States. A lightly classified intelligence bulletin circulated Thursday to 18,000 U.S. law enforcement bodies is headlined Possible suicide bomber indicators, and was distributed via the Bureau’s secure Law Enforcement Online (LEO) Intranet. It warns local badge-carriers to look for obvious signs of trouble people wearing heavy, bulky jackets on warm days, smelling of chemicals, trailing wires from their jackets as well, more subtle ones, such as tightly clenched fists. Someone who never shows his palms could be gripping a detonator rigged to go off when a button is released. If you shoot him, you ‘ re still not safe because his hands relax and the bomb explodes, says a counter-terrorism official.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t() <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In fact, U.S. analysts are at a loss to explain why the homeland has thus far escaped such attacks, since a number of extremist groups, particularly Hamas, have a sizeable presence here. One factor, officials say, is that terror leaders still regard America as a cash cow, and don’t want to antagonize moderate Muslim donors. Another reason, says one specialist, may simply be that while there seems to be an endless supply of fanatical youths willing to die for the cause in the Middle East, most of them simply can’t get visas to the U.S.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t• L’information de Time.com<\/em> est renforc\u00e9e et confirm\u00e9e par une analyse du Washington Post<\/a>, en date d’aujourd’hui (et que nous rajoutons in extremis<\/em> dans cette analyse).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t• Le brave Thomas Friedman qui n’en rate pas une nous offre le 24 mai une chronique paniquarde<\/a> o\u00f9 il analyse avec terreur la technique et la psychologie des attaques-suicide. Friedman d\u00e9sesp\u00e8re de la pr\u00e9sence US en Irak, dont il juge qu’elle ne fait qu’accro\u00eetre l’incitation pour les terroristes-suicide \u00e0 frapper tout ce qui se rapproche des Am\u00e9ricains. Il cite l’information de Time.com<\/em> (\u00ab Time.com reported last week that the FBI had alerted law enforcement offices around America to be on the lookout for possible suicide bombers<\/em> \u00bb), exhorte Washington \u00e0 se retirer d’Irak le plus vite possible, termine enfin en agitant ce spectre d’une attaque proche des USA ou aux USA m\u00eames : \u00ab We must shut this play down before it comes to a theater near us.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’hypoth\u00e8se d’une attaque terroriste avant les \u00e9lections est d\u00e9sormais devenue un facteur admis de la campagne \u00e9lectorale, une sorte de chronique, si l’on veut, avec des alertes m\u00e9diatiques r\u00e9p\u00e9titives<\/a> ramenant l’int\u00e9r\u00eat sur le sujet. Il y a en plus l’\u00e9vidence d’un establishment<\/em> d’experts fonctionnant selon une logique interne bas\u00e9e sur une analyse catastrophique de la situation. (D’o\u00f9 l’esp\u00e8ce d’incongruit\u00e9 qu’il n’y ait pas eu encore d’attaque aux USA depuis le 11 septembre 2001 : \u00ab In fact, U.S. analysts are at a loss to explain why the homeland has thus far escaped such attacks<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCette situation est d’autant plus mise en \u00e9vidence que la position g\u00e9n\u00e9rale de GW Bush est mauvaise, que les \u00e9v\u00e9nements en Irak sont extr\u00eamement d\u00e9stabilisants et pr\u00e9occupants, ceci et cela poussant \u00e0 rechercher un \u00e9v\u00e9nement ext\u00e9rieur, un deus ex machina<\/em> amenant un changement de fond en comble. (Il n’est m\u00eame pas assur\u00e9 que la population am\u00e9ricaine elle-m\u00eame ne souhaite pas, au fond d’elle-m\u00eame, un \u00e9v\u00e9nement qui, en la mettant \u00e0 nouveau en position de victime, lui permettrait d’oublier tout ce qui, aujourd’hui, fait para\u00eetre les \u00c9tats-Unis comme coupables d’actes extr\u00eamement dommageables.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tWSWS.org \u00e0 nouveau :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab It is also an administration that confronts an intractable crisis. The revelations of torture of Iraqi prisoners have been met with worldwide revulsion. The administration’s Iraq policy is in shambles as the US occupation confronts the opposition of the vast majority of the Iraqi people. Support within the United States for the Bush administration is at an all-time low, even according to opinion polls that generally overestimate Bush’s popularity.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb On the economic front, the government faces the prospect of rising inflation spurred by escalating gasoline prices over the coming months. There is nothing more dangerous for the ruling elite than a political debacle combined with an economic crisis. And there is nothing more dangerous for the American people than a ruling class in panic.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t()<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb How will the Bush administration and the section of the ruling class that it representsthe most criminal and ruthless sectionrespond? A terrorist attackengineered or allowed by the governmentcan by no means be ruled out.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The quoted Washington official’s statement warning that the US won’t be like Spain <\/em>[in the eventuality of a terrorist attack] can be interpreted in two ways. Either the Bush administration is determined to manipulate a terror attack to benefit the Republican Party in the elections, or it may use such an attack to call off the elections altogether.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On insiste : une attaque terroriste a toute sa place dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale 26 mai 2004 Depuis quelques jours, \u00e0 nouveau beaucoup de rumeurs sur une possible attaque terroriste aux USA, \u00e0 Washington si possible, avant l’\u00e9lection pr\u00e9sidentielle. Le site WSWS.org fait une recollection de quelques signes r\u00e9cents de cette tendance, dans la presse… <\/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-65981","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\/65981","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=65981"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65981\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65981"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65981"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65981"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}