{"id":66199,"date":"2005-01-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-01-20T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/01\/20\/hersh-et-les-annees-de-plomb\/"},"modified":"2005-01-20T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-01-20T00:00:00","slug":"hersh-et-les-annees-de-plomb","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/01\/20\/hersh-et-les-annees-de-plomb\/","title":{"rendered":"Hersh et les \u201cann\u00e9es de plomb\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"titleset_a.deepblue\" style=\"color:#0f3955;font-size:2em;\">Hersh et les \u00ab\u00a0ann\u00e9es de plomb\u00a0\u00bb<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>20 janvier 2005 &mdash; Dans une interview donn\u00e9e \u00e0 <em>Democracy Now !<\/em>, et notamment retranscrite sur <a class=\"gen\" href=\"http:\/\/www.alternet.org\/waroniraq\/21021\/\">Alternet.org le 19 janvier<\/a>, Seymour Hersh s&rsquo;explique plus avant sur son article qui a eu <a class=\"gen\" href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1339\">l&rsquo;\u00e9cho extraordinaire qu&rsquo;on sait<\/a>. Hersh se dit surpris par cette r\u00e9action. (On peut l&rsquo;\u00eatre aussi et constater que cet \u00e9cho extraordinaire est une indication int\u00e9ressante sur l&rsquo;\u00e9tat d&rsquo;esprit g\u00e9n\u00e9ral r\u00e9gnant, qui conduit \u00e0 <strong>attendre<\/strong> des informations sur les entreprises guerri\u00e8res de l&rsquo;\u00e9quipe GW-Cheney-Rumsfeld.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Mais Hersh nous dit autre chose, qui nous para&icirc;t \u00e9galement int\u00e9ressant, lorsqu&rsquo;il r\u00e9pond \u00e0 la question &laquo; <em>Can you explain where the CIA and the Pentagon fit into this picture?<\/em> &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"normal\" style=\"font-size:1.05em;\">\n<p><p>&laquo; <em>Well, that&rsquo;s actually to me the most interesting part to the story that I wrote &mdash; not about Iran, because you can almost argue that, of course, we&rsquo;re doing surveillance. I&rsquo;m sort of amazed that it became such a big story in the last 24 hours or 36 hours. The real issue &mdash; what the story is about, is the fact that the diminution of the CIA is unbelievable. The president has really gone after the agency with (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of Defense Donald) Rumsfeld, and at this point, as I say, there&rsquo;s never been more significant or more intellectual or more intelligence capability for not only operations, but for analysis. More is totally centralized in the White House and the Pentagon than since the rise of the national security state after World War II in the Cold War. We now have the White House and a Pentagon that basically dominates the process. The C.I.A. has been marginalized.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>All of the noise that you heard about the new CIA Director (Porter) Goss, going after people in the operations division &mdash; the so-called dirty tricks division &mdash; really has masked what&rsquo;s going on. His real mission, his real agenda &mdash; and it wasn&rsquo;t his, he was carrying out a White House agenda &mdash; was to get rid of a number of analysts, senior analysts, who work for the intelligence side of the CIA, old-timers who have been skeptical of many of the White House&rsquo;s and Pentagon&rsquo;s operations, and so, as somebody said to me, they really went after the apostates, and they want only true believers in there. That&rsquo;s what the mission has been.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>I think the president&rsquo;s got a lot of legal power here. The way the world shakes down is this, when it comes to covert secret operations abroad. If the CIA does it, under the law now they must tell the President. The President has to issue a finding approving it, and the Congress has to be told. The House and Senate intelligence committees have to be briefed. If the military does a covert operation, their interpretation of the law is simply that the president&rsquo;s rights as commander in chief trump any other requirement. That is, the military is there to prepare the battlefield with these operations. This is a military deal, totally. Nothing to do with intelligence. No need to inform anybody.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>So, now Rumsfeld has won a major bureaucratic fight. He is now operating, as you said in the intro, in up to ten countries. He is sending in covert teams, that is, the word they use inside is \u00ab\u00a0wiped clean.\u00a0\u00bb The soldiers are wiped clean. Their IDs are totally non-American and non-military. They&rsquo;re going in to make contact with groups inside various countries, set up operations, trying to do some war games, some terrorism themselves. You run with the bad boys to find the bad boys is the way somebody said to me. In other words, look like bad boys to attract other bad boys so we find out who they are. We can&rsquo;t find the terrorists too often. This is one way of getting at them. And we&rsquo;re going to be doing that with military people. We&rsquo;re not going to be telling the American ambassador in the country. We&rsquo;re not going to be telling the CIA station chief. It&rsquo;s going to be done by Rummy and his people. That&rsquo;s a huge shift, an unprecedented shift, in the last 60 years.<\/em> &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><p>Cette description de l&rsquo;\u00e9volution en cours du syst\u00e8me de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 US &mdash; effacement radical de la CIA au profit du Pentagone et de la Maison-Blanche et des trois hommes qui les contr\u00f4lent (Bush, Cheney et Rumsfeld) &mdash; est tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressante et doit \u00eatre appr\u00e9ci\u00e9e selon deux axes, &mdash; le premier \u00e9tant le rappel des \u00ab\u00a0ann\u00e9es de plomb\u00a0\u00bb, le second \u00e9tant la \u00ab\u00a0pinochisation\u00a0\u00bb de GW Bush. L&rsquo;aspect le plus important de l&rsquo;\u00e9volution d\u00e9crite par Hersh est que le syst\u00e8me de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 \u00e9chappe ainsi \u00e0 tout contr\u00f4le ext\u00e9rieur, puisqu&rsquo;il n&rsquo;y a plus de processus l\u00e9gislatif comme celui qui existe avec la CIA (la CIA est comptable de son action devant les commissions <em>ad hoc<\/em> du Congr\u00e8s). Si cette \u00e9volution se confirme, les quatre ann\u00e9es qui viennent seront pleines de surprises.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; Un souvenir troublant et pr\u00e9occupant doit nous venir \u00e0 la m\u00e9moire : celui de la p\u00e9riode que les Italiens nomment \u00ab\u00a0les ann\u00e9es de plomb\u00a0\u00bb (approximativement les ann\u00e9es 1970 pour ce qui est du terrorisme en Italie, mais avec l&rsquo;id\u00e9e, lorsqu&rsquo;il s&rsquo;agit d&rsquo;une subversion plus g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, que la p\u00e9riode est beaucoup plus longue, en amont et en aval pour divers pays europ\u00e9ens). Cette p\u00e9riode tr\u00e8s approximativement correspondante \u00e0 la p\u00e9riode historique de la d\u00e9tente (1963-1976) additionn\u00e9e de celle de la \u00ab\u00a0seconde Guerre froide\u00a0\u00bb (1977-1985) vit, au-del\u00e0 de (ou derri\u00e8re) la fa\u00e7ade du terrorisme, une activit\u00e9 clandestine extr\u00eamement forte de la part des services de renseignement (ou services clandestins) am\u00e9ricains. De forts soup\u00e7ons de manipulation des activit\u00e9s terroristes en Italie par les Am\u00e9ricains ont \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9velopp\u00e9s.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; Cet ensemble doit notamment \u00eatre consid\u00e9r\u00e9 dans le cadre de ce qu&rsquo;on nomma \u00ab\u00a0l&rsquo;affaire <em>Gladio<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0, qui fut r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9e en 1990 apr\u00e8s une dur\u00e9e, elle, de plus de quarante ans. Ce qui apparut dans les ann\u00e9es 1990, au travers d&rsquo;enqu\u00eates diverses, ce sont \u00e0 la fois l&rsquo;activisme clandestin des groupes anti-communistes manipul\u00e9s par les Am\u00e9ricains, et l&rsquo;activisme clandestin des Am\u00e9ricains eux-m\u00eames. Pour ces derniers, les hypoth\u00e8ses concernent notamment, pour les ann\u00e9es 1978-1985, des affaires telles que l&rsquo;enl\u00e8vement et l&rsquo;ex\u00e9cution d&rsquo;Aldo Moro, l&rsquo;activisme de banditisme \u00e9ventuellement \u00ab\u00a0politique\u00a0\u00bb en Belgique, dans les ann\u00e9es 1981-85, avec \u00ab\u00a0les tueries du Brabant\u00a0\u00bb. On soup\u00e7onna l&rsquo;implication de certains services militaires am\u00e9ricains cherchant \u00e0 d\u00e9stabiliser des r\u00e9gimes d\u00e9mocratiques occidentaux pour susciter l&rsquo;arriv\u00e9e de pouvoirs forts anti-communistes. (Ces initiatives \u00e9taient suscit\u00e9es par les craintes de succ\u00e8s \u00e9lectoraux des \u00ab\u00a0eurocommunistes\u00a0\u00bb ou des \u00e9volutions politiques comme au Portugal en 1974-75, avec \u00ab\u00a0la r\u00e9volution des oeillets\u00a0\u00bb.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; L&rsquo;important ici est le sch\u00e9ma qui se d\u00e9gageait des hypoth\u00e8ses ainsi soulev\u00e9es: une action des militaires am\u00e9ricains hors de tout contr\u00f4le des services (et, <em>a fortiori<\/em>, des organes l\u00e9gaux am\u00e9ricains) habituellement concern\u00e9s par ce type d&rsquo;action, notamment la CIA. Il y eut notamment le t\u00e9moignage film\u00e9, dans un document de la BBC sur \u00ab\u00a0l&rsquo;affaire <em>Gladio<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0, de l&rsquo;ancien chef de station de la CIA \u00e0 Rome, affirmant que les manipulations de terroristes en Italie \u00e9taient le fait des SR de l&rsquo;U.S. Navy (Naval Intelligence) \u00e0 partir de leur antenne de Naples (QG de AFSouth dont d\u00e9pend la VIe Flotte). Le t\u00e9moin affirmait tr\u00e8s clairement que les militaires avaient compl\u00e8tement \u00ab\u00a0doubl\u00e9\u00a0\u00bb la CIA et le pouvoir civil. De m\u00eame, certaines actions en Belgique furent mises au cr\u00e9dit de la DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) militaire et des Special Forces, l\u00e0 aussi \u00e0 l&rsquo;insu de la CIA.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; On voit combien ces actions pr\u00e9sum\u00e9es pourraient constituer une pr\u00e9figuration, \u00e0 petite \u00e9chelle certes, de ce qui est en train de se dessiner d&rsquo;une fa\u00e7on globale. Le syst\u00e8me que d\u00e9crit Hersh ne fera plus l&rsquo;objet d&rsquo;aucun contr\u00f4le, notamment du Congr\u00e8s. Toutes les actions entreprises dans ce cadre seront totalement hors du circuit l\u00e9gal de contr\u00f4le et ne seront soumises \u00e0 aucune r\u00e8gle, aucune loi, aucun trait\u00e9. Les actions des \u00ab\u00a0ann\u00e9es de plomb\u00a0\u00bb appara&icirc;tront comme des exercices de style, des balbutiements d&rsquo;amateur \u00e0 c\u00f4t\u00e9 de ce qui est envisag\u00e9. &Eacute;videmment, aucune consid\u00e9ration d&rsquo;alliance, d'\u00a0\u00bbamiti\u00e9\u00a0\u00bb (?), etc, ne sera prise en consid\u00e9ration, et ces actions pourront \u00eatre effectu\u00e9es dans n&rsquo;importe quel pays.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&bull; Cette \u00e9volution renforce d&rsquo;autre part la th\u00e8se de la \u00ab\u00a0pinochisation\u00a0\u00bb de GW Bush, qui est d\u00e9velopp\u00e9e par Robert Parry <a class=\"gen\" href=\"http:\/\/www.consortiumnews.com\/Print\/2005\/011105.html\">dans un article du 11 janvier<\/a>. Parry se r\u00e9f\u00e8re dans son article \u00e0 la <em>Salvador option<\/em> dont il a \u00e9t\u00e9 fait \u00e9tat il y a une dizaine de jours, mais sa r\u00e9flexion est encore mieux adapt\u00e9e au cadre que d\u00e9crit Hersh.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"normal\" style=\"font-size:1.05em;\">\n<p><p>&laquo; <em>There&rsquo;s a personal risk, too, for Bush if he picks the \u00ab\u00a0Salvador option.\u00a0\u00bb He could become an American version of Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet or Guatemala&rsquo;s Efrain Rios Montt, leaders who turned loose their security forces to commit assassinations, \u00ab\u00a0disappear\u00a0\u00bb opponents and torture captives.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>Like the policy that George W. Bush is now considering, Pinochet even sponsored his own international \u00ab\u00a0death squad\u00a0\u00bb &ndash; known as Operation Condor &ndash; that hunted down political opponents around the world. One of those attacks in September 1976 blew up a car carrying Chilean dissident Orlando Letelier as he drove through Washington D.C. with two American associates. Letelier and co-worker Ronni Moffitt were killed.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>With the help of American friends in high places, the two former dictators have fended off prison until now. However, Pinochet and Rios Montt have become pariahs who are facing legal proceedings aimed at finally holding them accountable for their atrocities. [For more on George H.W. Bush&rsquo;s protection of Pinochet, see Parry&rsquo;s Secrecy &#038; Privilege.]<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>One way for George W. Bush to avert that kind of trouble is to make sure his political allies remain in power even after his second term ends in January 2009. In his case, that might be achievable by promoting his brother Jeb for president in 2008, thus guaranteeing that any incriminating documents stay under wraps.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>President George W. Bush&rsquo;s dispatching Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to inspect the tsunami damage in Asia started political speculation that one of the reasons was to burnish Jeb&rsquo;s international credentials in a setting where his personal empathy would be on display.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>Though Jeb Bush has insisted that he won&rsquo;t run for president in 2008, the Bush family might find strong reason to encourage Jeb to change his mind, especially if the Iraq War is lingering and George W. has too many file cabinets filled with damaging secrets.<\/em> &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Hersh et les \u00ab\u00a0ann\u00e9es de plomb\u00a0\u00bb 20 janvier 2005 &mdash; Dans une interview donn\u00e9e \u00e0 Democracy Now !, et notamment retranscrite sur Alternet.org le 19 janvier, Seymour Hersh s&rsquo;explique plus avant sur son article qui a eu l&rsquo;\u00e9cho extraordinaire qu&rsquo;on sait. Hersh se dit surpris par cette r\u00e9action. (On peut l&rsquo;\u00eatre aussi et constater que&hellip;&nbsp;<\/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":[3484,2631,4413,4180,4412,4415,4414],"class_list":["post-66199","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-annees","tag-de","tag-gladio","tag-hersh","tag-moro","tag-plomb","tag-seymour"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66199","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=66199"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66199\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66199"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66199"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66199"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}