{"id":71038,"date":"2009-09-04T11:07:15","date_gmt":"2009-09-04T11:07:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/09\/04\/le-freedom-of-speech-de-lex-major-reconverti-dans-lestablishment\/"},"modified":"2009-09-04T11:07:15","modified_gmt":"2009-09-04T11:07:15","slug":"le-freedom-of-speech-de-lex-major-reconverti-dans-lestablishment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2009\/09\/04\/le-freedom-of-speech-de-lex-major-reconverti-dans-lestablishment\/","title":{"rendered":"Le freedom of speech<\/em> de l’ex-major reconverti dans l’establishment<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rude coup pour Gordon Brown qui doit nous faire un beau discours aujourd’hui sur les fastes et l’h\u00e9ro\u00efsme de l’engagement britannique en Afghanistan. Un parlementaire travailliste, ancien major de l’arm\u00e9e britannique, d\u00e9missionne de son poste de conseiller du secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la D\u00e9fense en faisant une critique \u00e9tourdissante de l’engagement britannique dans ce m\u00eame Afghanistan, ridiculisant la raison officielle de cet engagement, la narrative<\/em> pompeuse et grotesque h\u00e9rit\u00e9e de l’\u00e9quip\u00e9e Blair-Bush (lutte contre le terrorisme et autres sornettes). Il demande qu’une strat\u00e9gie de sortie, avec calendrier, soit mise en place le plus rapidement possible. Dans sa lettre de d\u00e9mission, Eric Joyce \u00e9crit:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abI do not think the public will accept for much longer that our losses can be justified by simply referring to the risk of greater terrorism on our streets. Nor do I think we can continue with the present level of uncertainty about the future of our deployment in Afghanistan<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTous les quotidiens britanniques font leur titre sur ce d\u00e9part, qui rend le discours de Brown, pr\u00e9vu pour relever le moral du pays dans cette stupide aventure, particuli\u00e8rement inop\u00e9rant. The Independent<\/em> \u00e9crit, ce 4 septembre 2009<\/a>:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe British Government’s strategy in Afghanistan was thrown into crisis last night after the Defence Secretary’s right-hand man resigned in protest about the handling of the war. Eric Joyce, a former major in the Black Watch, announced that he was standing down as the parliamentary private secretary to Bob Ainsworth. He attacked the treatment of UK forces and protested that Nato allies were doing far too little, leaving British troops to shoulder more of the strain of combat.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMr Joyce did not doubt Mr Brown’s commitment to Britain’s armed forces, but said that there seem to me to be some problems which need fixing with the greatest urgency. He said: I think we must be much more direct about the reality that we do punch a long way above our weight, that many of our allies do far too little, and that leaving the field to the United States would mean the end of Nato as a meaningful proposition.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbMinisters faced a critical time for Labour and Defence. Mr Joyce stated: It should be possible now to say that we will move off our present war-footing and reduce our forces there substantially during our next term in government.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl y a de tout dans ces observations de Eric Joyce, comme par exemple le fait d’affirmer d’un c\u00f4t\u00e9 que le comportement des alli\u00e9s laissant l’essentiel de l’engagement aux USA signifierait la fin de l’OTAN comme organisation ayant la moindre signification, et de l’autre qu’il faut tr\u00e8s rapidement abandonner la guerre, donc abandonner la chose aux seuls USA l’une et l’autre propositions confront\u00e9es signifiant qu’effectivement l’OTAN n’existe plus et que les relations sp\u00e9ciales sont \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s dans le m\u00eame \u00e9tat. Ou encore mais ceci poursuit cela, en un sens lorsque Joyce \u00e9crit ces remarques, que nous devons savourer: \u00abWe also need a greater geopolitical return from the United States for our efforts. For many, Britain fights; Germany pays; France calculates; Italy avoids<\/em>\u00bb Car voici un Britannique qui se plaint que le Royaume-Uni assume un engagement important au prix du sang sans \u00eatre pay\u00e9 de retour en quoi que ce soit (par les USA), tandis qu’il juge que les Fran\u00e7ais calculent, ce qui signifie qu’il les juge objectivement, selon un point de vue britannique, comme les plus malins, ou, dans tous les cas, comme les plus calculateurs en l’occurrence; une observation \u00e0 fronts renvers\u00e9s, nous qui avons tant l’habitude de la r\u00e9putation des Fran\u00e7ais d’agir pour les autres sans \u00eatre pay\u00e9s de retour, et de celle des Britanniques de tout calculer avant d’agir, pour \u00eatre pay\u00e9s de retour (Renversement de la fameuse remarque selon laquelle les Anglais sont pr\u00eats \u00e0 se battre jusqu’au dernier Fran\u00e7ais.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t Un autre aspect int\u00e9ressant du d\u00e9part de Joyce est celui que d\u00e9veloppe le m\u00eame Independent<\/em>, en fin d’article. Cet officier de l’arm\u00e9 britannique \u00e9tait une forte t\u00eate, qui avait d\u00e9missionn\u00e9 \u00e0 cause de son caract\u00e8re indisciplin\u00e9 et son sens critique; qui s’\u00e9tait reconverti dans la politique, pour devenir une parfaite potiche conforme de l’establishment<\/em>, en plus touchant des gros sous<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abBut after 12 years of distinguished service, including promotion to Major in 1992, his service was terminated after he described the Armed Forces as racist, sexist and discriminatory. His commanding officer described him as uncommandable by me or anyone else.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThis was not a characteristic he brought with him to Westminster however, after he narrowly defeated the Scottish National Party candidate in the 2000 Falkirk West by-election. So extreme was his loyalty to the Labour cause, particularly after the Iraq invasion, that it often drew ridicule.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbOn Channel 4 News in 2004, Jon Snow asked him: Is there anything that the Government has done with which you disagree?\u00a0\u00bb Roy Hattersley referred to him as an embarrassing sycophant and suggested his loyalty might see him rise to the giddy heights of parliamentary secretary, which indeed it did. He first became parliamentary private secretary to Mike O’Brien at the Department of Trade and Industry in 2004 and later served as an aide to Margaret Hodge and John Hutton in the same department. When Hutton moved to the Ministry of Defence, he moved with him and remained there when Bob Ainsworth took over in June this year.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbAs well as the Armed Forces, Joyce lists among his interests poverty reduction, which caused some mirth when the expenses scandal shed light on his efforts to reduce his own. In the 2005-06 parliamentary session, he claimed \u00a3174,811 in expenses, the highest of all MPs, and had the dubious distinction of becoming the first MP to claim cumulatively more than \u00a31m. When one newspaper asked him what he would do if he were asked to repay any of the \u00a340,000 of unpaid capital gains tax on the sale of his second home, he said he would suck it and see.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tVoil\u00e0 donc une chose bien int\u00e9ressante. Cet homme, cette t\u00eate br\u00fbl\u00e9e, s’\u00e9tait compl\u00e8tement rang\u00e9, comme on dit d’un noceur qu’il fait un beau mariage avec la fille, assez laide, du riche notaire du coin. Apr\u00e8s s’\u00eatre align\u00e9 sur les travaillistes, il \u00e9tait devenu le parfait fonctionnaire du syst\u00e8me, sans dire un mot plus haut que l’autre, r\u00e9pandant les mensonges virtualistes du blairisme avec z\u00e8le, se la fermant haut et fort et touchant les dividendes de la corruption courante qui vont avec. Soudain, il se r\u00e9volte, il n’y tient plus. (Ou bien, s’agit-il encore d’un complot? On verra.) Il leur dit quelques v\u00e9rit\u00e9s bien senties, dont le poids tient simplement en ceci qu’elles d\u00e9crivent une r\u00e9alit\u00e9 dont chacun a de plus en plus de mal \u00e0 supporter la dissimulation derri\u00e8re les discours absurdes des experts en communication nourris au petit lait agressif du n\u00e9o-conservatisme.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCe n’est pas seulement une int\u00e9ressante le\u00e7on de choses sur les limites du caract\u00e8re supportable (inventera-t-on le n\u00e9ologisme supportabilit\u00e9 pour la cause?) du mensonge en pratique quotidienne par la psychologie humaine, c’est une indication de plus que le syst\u00e8me a de plus en plus de mal \u00e0 aller faire pa\u00eetre tranquillement ses moutons malgr\u00e9 que l’herbe soit grasse et succulente. Il faut suivre les petits signes de la sorte, lorsqu’ils nous font signe dans des temps aussi agit\u00e9s.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tS’il est habile, l’ex-major Joyce, et s’il tombe \u00e0 pic, il pourrait former au Parlement un parti multipartisan (encore mieux que le bipartisan US) regroupant des parlementaires qui oseraient enfin dire tout haut, comme il l’a fait, ce que nombre d’entre eux pensent tout bas \u00e0 propos de l’Afghanistan. Cela lui assurerait une belle fortune politique. L’ex-major Joyce appliquerait ainsi cette maxime que nous ne cessons de m\u00e9diter, et qu’il nous est d\u00e9j\u00e0 arriv\u00e9 de citer: \u00abTout peut, un jour, arriver, m\u00eame ceci qu’un acte conforme \u00e0 l’honneur et \u00e0 l’honn\u00eatet\u00e9 apparaisse, en fin de compte, comme un bon placement politique.<\/em>\u00bb (Charles de Gaulle, M\u00e9moires de guerre, Le Salut<\/em>, p.659, La Pl\u00e9iade.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 4 septembre 2009 \u00e0 11H09<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rude coup pour Gordon Brown qui doit nous faire un beau discours aujourd’hui sur les fastes et l’h\u00e9ro\u00efsme de l’engagement britannique en Afghanistan. Un parlementaire travailliste, ancien major de l’arm\u00e9e britannique, d\u00e9missionne de son poste de conseiller du secr\u00e9taire \u00e0 la D\u00e9fense en faisant une critique \u00e9tourdissante de l’engagement britannique dans ce m\u00eame Afghanistan, ridiculisant… <\/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":[2],"tags":[3236,6611,4038,4118,8637,2702,3099,610],"class_list":["post-71038","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-afghanistan","tag-blairisme","tag-brown","tag-establishment","tag-joyce","tag-mensonge","tag-psychologie","tag-virtualisme"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71038","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=71038"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71038\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71038"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71038"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71038"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}