{"id":72538,"date":"2010-12-06T05:53:19","date_gmt":"2010-12-06T05:53:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2010\/12\/06\/le-diable-wikileaks-est-sorti-de-sa-bouteille\/"},"modified":"2010-12-06T05:53:19","modified_gmt":"2010-12-06T05:53:19","slug":"le-diable-wikileaks-est-sorti-de-sa-bouteille","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2010\/12\/06\/le-diable-wikileaks-est-sorti-de-sa-bouteille\/","title":{"rendered":"Le diable-Wikileaks<\/em> est sorti de sa bouteille"},"content":{"rendered":"

Du temps o\u00f9 une pouss\u00e9e anti-nucl\u00e9aire, dans les ann\u00e9es 1980, avait men\u00e9 \u00e0 des r\u00e9flexions sur une compl\u00e8te d\u00e9nucl\u00e9arisation, ce dont m\u00eame Reagan et Gorbatchev parl\u00e8rent, les adversaires de ce mouvement avaient leur argument tout pr\u00eat, qui \u00e9tait d’affirmer qu’on ne peut d\u00e9sinventer le nucl\u00e9aire. Cela revenait \u00e0 dire, messieurs, le diable est sorti de sa bouteille, nul ne l’y fera plus rentrer, ou bien, \u00e9voquait-on l’image de la bo\u00eete de Pandorre…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPrenez la m\u00eame phrase, mettez Wikileaks<\/em> \u00e0 la place du diable (du nucl\u00e9aire), et vous y \u00eates Deux extraits d’un texte MSNBC du 4 d\u00e9cembre 2010<\/a> :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abAlthough the future is uncertain for the website<\/em> [Wikileaks<\/em>], it has opened a Pandora’s Box of secret-spilling that some believe could prove difficult to reverse. Whatever happens to the domain name and the actual organization, the idea unleashed by WikiLeaks is going to continue, said Joshua Benton, director of the Nieman Journalism Lab.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbBen Laurie, a data security expert who advised WikiLeaks before it launched in 2006, agreed. The concept is not going to die. It’s really hard to keep things shut down if they want to stay up, he said. Look at everything else people would like not to happen online phishing, spam, porn. It’s all still there.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbAssange said in Friday’s online chat that WikiLeaks had taken steps to make sure it was not silenced, sending the Cablegate3 material and other secret documents in encrypted form to over 100,000 people. If something happens to us, the key parts will be released automatically, he said. History will win.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbWhatever happens to Wikileaks, the anti-secrecy cat may be out of the bag. Schmitt, the former WikiLeaks spokesman, has said he wants to set up a rival secret-spilling site, and others may follow.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tUn aspect essentiel de la crise actuelle, qui s’av\u00e8re effectivement d’une nature diff\u00e9rente des deux premi\u00e8res attaques de Wikileaks<\/em> (sur l’Afghanistan et sur l’Irak), c’est le rythme tr\u00e8s lent de la diffusion des documents jusqu’\u00e0 maintenant (1.100 sur 250.000 !), qui est en train de cr\u00e9er une situation de d\u00e9stabilisation permanente dans les structures d’influence du Syst\u00e8me, si ce n’est d\u00e9j\u00e0 fait. Le r\u00e9sultat est expos\u00e9 par un article de The Independent<\/em> du 6 d\u00e9cembre 2010<\/a>, qui explique que les USA vont \u00eatre oblig\u00e9s de proc\u00e9der \u00e0 une \u00e9norme purge interne pour d\u00e9placer tous leurs diplomates compromis aupr\u00e8s des gouvernements concern\u00e9s par les d\u00e9p\u00eaches diplomatiques qu’ils ont \u00e9crites et sign\u00e9es de leurs noms. (On pourrait ironiquement faire un parall\u00e8le entre cette purge forc\u00e9e qui s’annonce et les vagues de purges staliniennes qui d\u00e9cimaient les bureaucraties en place, emportant les plus exp\u00e9riment\u00e9s et les plus capables, comme la purge de l’Arm\u00e9e Rouge en 1936-1937, et rendaient ces bureaucraties totalement inefficaces pendant des ann\u00e9es. Bien entendu, le respect sans bornes que nous devons \u00e0 la vertu du Syst\u00e8me limite ce parall\u00e8le \u00e0 l’aspect bureaucratique technique puisque ce m\u00eame Syst\u00e8me, avec une conscience aigu\u00eb des droits de l’homme, ne va pas jusqu’\u00e0 la deuxi\u00e8me phase stalinienne, la liquidation apr\u00e8s la purge, et ne r\u00e9pond pas \u00e0 la motivation fondamentale de ces purges, qui \u00e9tait le soup\u00e7on du syst\u00e8me stalinien concernant la fid\u00e9lit\u00e9 de ces structures bureaucratiques)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’alternative reste, en cas d’urgence concernant le sort d’Assange ou de Wikieaks<\/em> une diffusion massive des dizaines de milliers et plus de documents restants, ce que Assange a nomme l’option thermonucl\u00e9aire. L’effet et les cons\u00e9quences des premi\u00e8res diffusions sont tels que m\u00eame ce retour \u00e0 la premi\u00e8re tactique aurait des r\u00e9sultats d\u00e9vastateurs. Il semble bien, en effet, que, malgr\u00e9 les premi\u00e8res r\u00e9actions plut\u00f4t mod\u00e9r\u00e9es, les pays et les gouvernements concern\u00e9s, c’est-\u00e0-dire \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s the Rest Of the World<\/em>, vont demander des mesures individuelles contre les diplomates impliqu\u00e9s, voire, dans certains cas (le Premier ministre turc Erdogan), entamer des actions officielles.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00abThe Obama administration was yesterday facing a crisis in its diplomatic service, amid growing evidence that the ongoing publication of a tranche of supposedly-confidential communiqu\u00e9s will make normal work difficult, if not dangerous, for important State Department employees across the world.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbA mere 1,100 of the roughly 250,000 secret documents obtained by the website have so far been published, leading to fears that the unhelpful revelations will continue for months to come, destabilising US relations with almost all of its key allies and inflaming tensions with already-hostile governments in the Middle East and beyond. In the short run, we’re almost out of business, a senior US diplomat told the Reuters news agency, saying it could take five years to rebuild trust. It is really, really bad. I cannot exaggerate it. In all honesty, nobody wants to talk to us … Some people still have to, particularly (in) government but … they are already asking us things like, Are you going to write about this?’<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bbThe Pentagon, the CIA and the State Department are reported to be identifying which members of staff have been named as the authors of the most unhelpful memos to have been published by WikiLeaks. They will need to be removed from what are among America’s most strategically-important postings.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tOn imagine l’importance de la d\u00e9route que repr\u00e9sente pour les USA, ou le Syst\u00e8me d’une fa\u00e7on g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, une telle perspective. Le Syst\u00e8me g\u00e9n\u00e9ral repose, pour sa coh\u00e9sion globale, sur l’influence qui est diffus\u00e9e par le syst\u00e8me de la communication, et essentiellement le syst\u00e8me d’influence que repr\u00e9sente l’\u00e9norme appareil diplomatique et de pression des USA. Les effets d\u00e9taill\u00e9s par l’article cit\u00e9, qui reprend lui-m\u00eame des confidences de diplomates faites au site The Daily Beast<\/em> (le 4 d\u00e9cembre 2010<\/a>), montre que le pi\u00e8ge qui s’est mis en place spontan\u00e9ment avec la diff\u00e9rence abyssale (voir notre F&C<\/em> du 29 novembre 2010<\/a>) entre la pr\u00e9sentation virtualiste des directions politiques du monde et les r\u00e9alit\u00e9s expos\u00e9es par ces d\u00e9p\u00eaches, est en train d’op\u00e9rer avec une extraordinaire efficacit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMis en ligne le 6 d\u00e9cembre 2010 \u00e0 05H43<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Du temps o\u00f9 une pouss\u00e9e anti-nucl\u00e9aire, dans les ann\u00e9es 1980, avait men\u00e9 \u00e0 des r\u00e9flexions sur une compl\u00e8te d\u00e9nucl\u00e9arisation, ce dont m\u00eame Reagan et Gorbatchev parl\u00e8rent, les adversaires de ce mouvement avaient leur argument tout pr\u00eat, qui \u00e9tait d’affirmer qu’on ne peut d\u00e9sinventer le nucl\u00e9aire. Cela revenait \u00e0 dire, messieurs, le diable est sorti de… <\/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":[9886,3015,10461,2631,10460,10459,2622,10456,7899,10457,3014,9887],"class_list":["post-72538","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-assange","tag-communication","tag-dinfluence","tag-de","tag-deplacements","tag-diplomates","tag-la","tag-purges","tag-reseau","tag-staliennes","tag-systeme","tag-wikileaks"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72538","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=72538"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72538\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72538"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=72538"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=72538"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}