Andre Vltchek, reporteur, auteur et intellectuel US d’origine russe, ami de Noam Chomsky, plut\u00f4t de la gauche dissidente US repr\u00e9sent\u00e9e notamment par le site CounterPunch<\/em>, d\u00e9collait de Duba\u00ef pour Kiev. Il lui vint \u00e0 l’esprit quelques r\u00e9flexions. Il les confia notamment \u00e0 Russia Today<\/em>, le 28 mars 2014<\/a>. (RT est devenu l’un des extr\u00eamement rares m\u00e9dias \u00e0 grande diffusion<\/strong> qui pr\u00e9servent encore quelques libert\u00e9s d’expression, – si l’on veut, l’Aljazeera<\/em> des ann\u00e9es 2002 \u00e0 2007\/2008 avant que l’Emir du Qatar fasse rentrer dans le rang sa station t\u00e9l\u00e9. Où donc la libert\u00e9 va-t-elle se nicher dans notre grande et \u00e9trange \u00e9poque ! L\u00e0 où on l’accueille encore, r\u00e9pondra-t-on simplement.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n «As my plane left Dubai for Kiev, I began browsing through an endless pile of newspapers and magazines: from the New York Times to the Economist, from the Times to several Gulf-based and Turkish periodicals, as well as Spanish and German ones. The consensus on Putin being a villain was absolute. There were no dissident voices, but also, not surprisingly, no Russian intellectual voices. There were absolutely no editorials written by Russians attacking the Western destabilization of Ukraine and the destruction of its democratically elected government. It was also shocking how the Arabic and Turkish press was translating and reprinting all that appeared in the West.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »There were no clear, simple and logical explanations of what actually happened in Ukraine recently…<\/em>»<\/p>\n<\/p>\n A un moment dans son article, Vltchek cite Noam Chomsky, son ami et son mentor, et un extrait de leur livre commun On Western Terrorism – From Hiroshima to Drone Warfare<\/em>. Ce passage de Chomsky est instructif, parce qu’il rend bien compte de la situation qui, organiquement, on dirait presque \u00ab\u00a0objectivement\u00a0\u00bb puisqu’il s’agit de la Loi \u00e0 laquelle nos pi\u00e8tres cerveaux accolent encore le qualificatif \u00ab\u00a0objectif\u00a0\u00bb, exon\u00e8re les USA de toute responsabilit\u00e9, – si l’on veut, l’inculpabilit\u00e9 et l’ind\u00e9fectibilit\u00e9 US inscrites (voir le 26 mars 2014<\/a>) dans les tables de la Loi Internationale… Tous les cerveaux d’intellectuel-BAO, assortis d’un entregent normal pour distinguer leurs int\u00e9r\u00eats et leurs privil\u00e8ges dans les cercles qui comptent, s’en trouvent impressionn\u00e9s quoi qu’ils en veuillent et, presqu’inconsciemment, mais cela venu du subconscient vraiment du dessous, ils consid\u00e8rent les USA et tout ce qui fait office de porte-parole, comme investis de cette vertu objective. Chomsky nous rappelle donc comment le r\u00e8gne de la loi fut instaur\u00e9 en 1946-1947, avec des renforcements r\u00e9guliers depuis, et comment, \u00e0 l’origine et depuis, \u00e0 chaque fois<\/strong>, les USA sont dispens\u00e9s d’\u00eatre soumis \u00e0 la moindre enqu\u00eate qui pourrait d\u00e9boucher sur les foudres de la loi internationale, – exactement, comme si les USA occupaient une place \u00e0 part et un peu au-dessus<\/strong>, disons sur un strapontin \u00e0 la droite de Dieu<\/strong>, par rapport aux autres… Et les autres de s’ex\u00e9cuter, en d\u00e9votions diverses.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n «Take the invasion of Iraq – nothing can be discussed or potentially regarded as criminal. In fact there is a legal reason for that, which is not too well-known. The United States is self-immunized from any prosecution. When the US joined the World Court in 1946, the US basically initiated the modern International Court of Justice, which it joined but with the reservation that the US cannot be judged by any international treaty – meaning the UN charter, the charter of the Organization of American States, the Geneva Conventions. The US is self-immunized from any trial on those issues. And the Court has accepted that. So, for example, when Nicaragua brought a case against the United States at the World Court for the terrorist attacks against Nicaragua, most of the case was thrown out because it invoked the charter of the Organization of American States, which bars interventions strongly, and the US is not subject to that and the Court accepted it.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n »In fact the same happened, interestingly, at the trial where Yugoslavia brought a case against NATO for its being bombed, to the International Court of Justice, I think, and the United States excluded itself from the case and the Tribunal agreed because one of the charges mentioned was that it was a genocide, and when the United States signed the Genocide Convention after 40 years, it had a reservation saying it was ‘inapplicable to the United States’, and so therefore the Court rightly excused the United States from prosecution. There literally are legal barriers established just in case anyone dares to try to bring some charge against the powerful. I am sure you recall when the Rome Treaty was signed, and the International Criminal Court was established, the US refused to participate… but then it was more than that. The Congress passed legislation, which the Bush Administration happily signed, which granted the White House authority to invade The Hague by force, in case any American was brought there. In Europe it is sometimes called the Netherlands Invasion Act. Well, that was passed here enthusiastically, so the self-immunization is at many levels. One is the impossibility to perceive, such as when you deny what happened to the indigenous population in the United States, when you just can’t see it even if it is in front of your eyes. The other is that it’s actually fortified by legislation.<\/em>»<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Cela explique, sans rire, qu’Obama puisse se pr\u00e9senter comme le l\u00e9gislateur universel, strapontin \u00e0 la droite du P\u00e8re, et donner une \u00e9poustouflante le\u00e7on de respect de la loi internationale devant une assembl\u00e9e bouche b\u00e9e de d\u00e9votion, la semaine derni\u00e8re \u00e0 Bruxelles, – at home<\/em> pour ainsi dire puisqu’on est partout chez soi au sein du bloc BAO et donc du Syst\u00e8me. Stipuler que la Crim\u00e9e c’est pire que l’Irak puisque l’Irak est dans le cadre international du respect de la Loi qu’on \u00e9dicte soi-m\u00eame en en \u00e9cartant les foudres pour soi-m\u00eame, et m\u00eame inventer<\/a> presqu’en toute ing\u00e9nuit\u00e9 (certainement aid\u00e9 par l’inculture chronique et l’indiff\u00e9rence \u00e0 la situation vraie du monde de l’\u00e9lite am\u00e9ricaniste) un r\u00e9f\u00e9rendum au Kosovo qui justifie a posteriori<\/em>, en 2014, l’attaque du 23 mars 1999 et les trois mois de bombardements de Belgrade qui ont suivi, t\u00e9moignent de la solidit\u00e9 conceptuelle de la narrative<\/em> qui conduit et justifie cette d\u00e9marche. BHO dit la Loi, comme vous et moi nous disons nos doutes et nos soup\u00e7ons autant que notre conviction de r\u00e9sistance, l’une et l’autre chose faite avec la m\u00eame l\u00e9gitimit\u00e9, – BHO celle du l\u00e9gislateur universel install\u00e9 sur les hauteurs c\u00e9lestes de sa narrative<\/em> qui ignore les tourments profonds du monde, vous et moi celle du sapiens<\/em> plac\u00e9 devant la v\u00e9rit\u00e9 de la \u00ab\u00a0crise haute ultime\u00a0\u00bb et la perspective de l’effondrement du Syst\u00e8me.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n