Le 25 juin 2017<\/a> en fin de journ\u00e9e, 26 juin pour nous et \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s 24 heures (en tenant compte du d\u00e9calage horaire) apr\u00e8s la publication du texte de Seymour Hersh sur l’attaque du 6 avril contre la Syrie, mais aussi sur l'\u00a0\u00bbattaque chimique\u00a0\u00bb du 4 avril qui en \u00e9tait la cause selon le pr\u00e9sident Trump, l’ancien analyste de la CIA Ray McGovern publiait sur ConsortiumNews<\/em> un texte sur cette question. (Le texte de Hersh a \u00e9t\u00e9 repris sur notre site le 26 juin 2017<\/a>.) McGovern, sans aucun doute alert\u00e9 par Hersh et disposant de nombreux \u00e9l\u00e9ments \u00e0 l’avance (la connexion est \u00e9vidente), fait une critique acerbe et comme \u00ab\u00a0par avance\u00a0\u00bb (il n’a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9menti en rien) sur la fa\u00e7on dont Hersh a \u00e9t\u00e9 boycott\u00e9 dans la presse anglo-saxonne. (Nous ne parlerons pas du reste de la presseSyst\u00e8me du bloc-BAO, qui est toujours en position de suiveuse de la presseSyst\u00e8me anglo-saxonne dans cette sorte d’occasion.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n McGovern d\u00e9taille longuement les divers aspects soulign\u00e9s ou r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9s par Hersh, notamment le montage autour de l'\u00a0\u00bbattaque chimique\u00a0\u00bb et l’attitude de la presseSyst\u00e8me en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. Nous publions la partie de son article où il pr\u00e9cise les positions de la presseSyst\u00e8me vis-\u00e0-vis de l’article de Hersh, notamment la r\u00e9ponse du London Review of Books<\/em> [LRB] qui avait achet\u00e9 et pay\u00e9 l’article et qui finalement pr\u00e9f\u00e9ra ne pas le publier. (Pour la s\u00e9quence depuis 9\/11, Hersh a publi\u00e9 essentiellement dans le New Yorker<\/em> jusqu’\u00e0 ce que ce journal \u00ab\u00a0lib\u00e9ral\u00a0\u00bb [progressiste] pr\u00e9f\u00e8re abandonner la publication de ces articles trop peu conformes aux canons de la presse-Syst\u00e8me, et cela alors que ou parce que, un pr\u00e9sident d\u00e9mocrate [Obama] venait de remplacer un pr\u00e9sident r\u00e9publicain [GW Bush]. Hersh trouva alors refuge \u00e0 la LRB, depuis 2009-2010. Il semble que cette coop\u00e9ration soit d\u00e9sormais compromise.) Comme raison de son refus de publier, la LRB a expliqu\u00e9 \u00e0 Hersh, arguant ainsi de la vertu professionnelle du journalisme-Syst\u00e8me : « Nous ne voulons pas nous mettre en position de vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 aux critiques parce que nous pourrions sembler accepter les points de vue des gouvernements syrien et russe pour ce qui concerne le bombardement<\/em> [chimique] du 4 avril \u00e0 Khan Sheikhoun<\/em>. » Il est difficile d’\u00eatre plus candidement franc pour d\u00e9finir une position de compl\u00e8te censure vertueuse, de fa\u00e7on \u00e0 se trouver parfaitement en accord avec le simulacre g\u00e9n\u00e9ral<\/strong> ; \u00e0 propos, la LRB, vertueuse jusqu’au bout, n’a pas demand\u00e9 la restitution de son argent…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Une autre remarque faite par McGovern \u00e0 propos de l’\u00e9pisode tel que le d\u00e9crit Hersh, c’est que , dans le concours continuellement en cours au sein de la presseSyst\u00e8me, la haine contre Assad et Poutine s’av\u00e8re plus forte que la haine contre Trump<\/strong>…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n « As of this writing, there is no sign in \u00ab\u00a0mainstream media\u00a0\u00bb of any reporting on Hersh’s groundbreaking piece. It is a commentary on the conformist nature of today’s Western media that an alternative analysis challenging the conventional wisdom – even when produced by a prominent journalist like Sy Hersh – faces such trouble finding a place to publish. The mainstream hatred of Assad and Putin has reached such extraordinary levels that pretty much anything can be said or written about them with few if any politicians or journalists daring to express doubts regardless of how shaky the evidence is<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Even the London Review of Books, which published Hersh’s earlier debunking of the Aug. 21, 2013 sarin-gas incident, wouldn’t go off onto the limb this time despite having paid for his investigation. According to Hersh, the LRB did not want to be \u00ab\u00a0vulnerable to criticism for seeming to take the view of the Syrian and Russia governments when it came to the April 4 bombing in Khan Sheikhoun.\u00a0\u00bb So much for diversity of thought in today’s West.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Yet, what was interesting about the Khan Sheikhoun case is that was a test of whom the mainstream media detested more. The MSM has taken the position that pretty much whatever Trump says is untrue or at least deserving of intense fact-checking. But the MSM also believes whatever attacks on Assad that the Syrian \u00ab\u00a0activists\u00a0\u00bb post on social media are true and disbelieves whatever Putin says. So, this was a tug-of-war on which prejudices were stronger – and it turned out that the antipathy toward Syria and Russia is more powerful than the distrust of Trump.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » The MSM bought into Trump’s narrative to such a degree that any criticism, no matter how credentialed the critic, gets either ignored or ridiculed. For instance, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity produced a memo<\/a> on April 11 questioning Trump’s rush to judgment. Former MIT professor Ted Postol, a specialist in applying science to national security incidents, also poked major holes<\/a> in the narrative of a government sarin attack. But the MSM silence was deafening.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » In remarks to Die Welt, Seymour Hersh, who first became famous for exposing the My Lai massacre story during the Vietnam War and disclosed the Abu Ghraib abuse story during the Iraq War, explained that he still gets upset at government lying and at the reluctance of the media to hold governments accountable: \u00ab\u00a0We have a President in America today who lies repeatedly … but he must learn that he cannot lie about intelligence relied upon before authorizing an act of war. There are those in the Trump administration who understand this, which is why I learned the information I did. If this story creates even a few moments of regret in the White House, it will have served a very high purpose.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Hier matin, 27 juin 2017<\/a>, Alexander Mercouris met en ligne sur son site TheDuran.com<\/em> un texte qui reprend les principaux points de l’enqu\u00eate magistrale de Seymour Hersh sur ces \u00e9v\u00e9nements des 4 avril-6 avril. Mercouris abonde dans le sens de Hersh et d\u00e9fend le travail fait par ce journaliste, en m\u00eame temps qu’il rel\u00e8ve la justesse de la description de l’\u00e9pisode, de la validit\u00e9 du lien entre l’incident chimique et le tir de missiles de croisi\u00e8re.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Dans son texte, Mercouris consacre quelques lignes \u00e0 l’\u00e9cho fait dans la presseSyst\u00e8me anglophone (UK et USA) \u00e0 l’article de Hersh publi\u00e9 sur le site de Die Welt<\/em>. C’est singuli\u00e8rement significatif et cela confirme ce que McGovern pr\u00e9voyait. Cette situation confirme qu’un journaliste du calibre de Hersh, sans aucun doute le meilleur enqu\u00eateur de la presse US et consacr\u00e9 par diverses r\u00e9compenses, est tout simplement l’objet d’une censure extr\u00eamement vigilante toute enti\u00e8re nourrie par la haine extraordinaire de la presseSyst\u00e8me et de l’establishment<\/em> contre Assad, Poutine et la Russie<\/strong> d\u00e9cid\u00e9ment victorieuse de toutes les haines nombreuses que notre Syst\u00e8me cultive avec d\u00e9licatesse et ent\u00eatement :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n « The veteran US investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has produced an excoriating exposure of the alleged Khan Sheikhoun chemical in April, which led to the US cruise missile attack on Syria’s Al-Shayrat air base<\/em>. The exposure has been published by the German publication Welt. So far it has not been published in any US or British publication. The London Review of Books paid for a copy but in the event declined to publish it. So far I have seen no allusions to it in any British newspaper<\/em>. »<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Dans le m\u00eame temps que Hersh publiait son texte, et avec une rapidit\u00e9 qui laisse \u00e0 penser, un bloger<\/em> selon le terme convenu, fameux dans les milieu anti Assad, et pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 selon les vertus habituelles des r\u00e9f\u00e9rences qui fleurissent dans les \u00ab\u00a0r\u00e9seaux sociaux\u00a0\u00bb, souvent arros\u00e9s par tel ou tel service officiel, a publi\u00e9 un article furieux et disposant d’une abondante documentation allant dans le sens qu’il faut, contre Hersh<\/strong>. Il s’agit d’un nomm\u00e9 Eliot Higgins<\/a>, du site Bellingcat<\/em>, dont l’intervention<\/a> que nous signalons est d\u00e9j\u00e0 en bonne place dans l’article<\/a> Wikip\u00e9dia<\/em> consacr\u00e9 \u00e0 Hersh, ce qui montre une v\u00e9locit\u00e9 et un sens de l ‘opportunit\u00e9 hors de pair. Avec cette citation, on trouvera l’essentiel de l’argumentation anti-Hersh de Higgins, avec notamment l’\u00e9trange accusation lanc\u00e9econtre Hersh de ne pas citer ses sources, – alors que l’anonymat des sources est la base de ce m\u00e9tier comme le savent parfaitement les journalistes du Washington Post<\/em> et du New York Times<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Nous avons constat\u00e9 hier 27 juin beaucoup de manipulations dans les divers articles Wikip\u00e9dia <\/em>(Hersh, Higgins, \u00ab\u00a0Khan Shaykhun chemical attack<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0, etc.) li\u00e9s \u00e0 l’article. Mais la chose la plus int\u00e9ressante selon notre point de vue a \u00e9t\u00e9 une riposte venue de notre ami Publius Tacitus<\/em>, qui publie chez SST (Sic Semper Tyrannis<\/em>, le site du colonel Pat Lang dont le nom pourrait changer prochainement). Publius Tacitus<\/em>, nom de plume d’un autre ancien officier US des services de renseignement, prend Higgins violemment \u00e0 partie, impliquant \u00e0 demi-mot qu’il s’agit d’une marionnette type-r\u00e9seaux-sociaux\/humanitaristes, type qui a l’air d’\u00eatre une fabrication sp\u00e9cialis\u00e9e des SR britanniques un peu \u00e0 l’image de ce fameux \u00ab\u00a0Observatoire des droits de l’homme en Syrie\u00a0\u00bb qui, en 2012, apr\u00e8s plusieurs mois de fonctionnement, s’\u00e9tait r\u00e9v\u00e9l\u00e9 \u00eatre constitu\u00e9 d’une seule personne install\u00e9e dans son magasin de v\u00eatement, dans un faubourg de Londres. (Il continue d’ailleurs \u00e0 fonctionner dans cet \u00e9tat qui sugg\u00e8re clairement ses origines, mais seulement aux yeux et aux oreilles int\u00e9ress\u00e9es \u00e0 voir et \u00e0 entendre ; pour la presse antiSyst\u00e8me, il reste la \u00ab\u00a0source ind\u00e9pendante\u00a0\u00bb de r\u00e9f\u00e9rence.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Voici donc Higgins et son Bellingcat<\/em>, croqu\u00e9s par Publius Tacitus<\/em> sur SST le 26 juin 2017<\/a>. Il est effectivement bon, de temps en temps, de laisser un sp\u00e9cialiste de telles questions ramener \u00e0 leur rang, au travers du traitement du cas en suspens, la nu\u00e9e d’imposteurs sans la moindre qualification \u00ab\u00a0plant\u00e9s\u00a0\u00bb en forme de pullulement de \u00ab\u00a0r\u00e9seaux sociaux\u00a0\u00bb par les maîtres de la manipulation du MI6<\/strong> accomplissant ainsi un travail du plus complet nihilisme sans s’inqui\u00e9ter de sa finalit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n « The pushback against Sy Hersh’s latest piece of genuine investigative journalism<\/a> in which he exposes the lie that the Government of Syria hit Khan Sheikyoun with a sarin gas attack on 4 April 2017 is based on ignorance and misinformation. The leader of this effort is Eliot Higgins, who blogs under the handle, Bellingcat. Who is Eliot Higgins? According to Wikipedia<\/a>: \u00ab\u00a0In 2012, when Higgins began blogging the Syrian civil war, he was an unemployed finance and admin worker who spent his days taking care of his child at home; he is married to a Turkish woman.<\/strong>\u00ab\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Higgins has no background or training in weapons and is entirely self-taught, saying that "Before the Arab spring I knew no more about weapons than the average Xbox owner. I had no knowledge beyond what I’d learned from Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rambo." Higgins does not speak or read Arabic. Higgins is credited with being among the first to report on the widespread use of improvised barrel bombs<\/a> by the Syrian government, a phenomenon which has spread to other troubled nations such as Iraq to combat insurgencies and opposition forces. Ah yes, an uneducated, inexperienced guy with an opinion who happens to be married to someone of Turkish descent. Nothing unusual there, right? Of course he’s an expert on sarin (sarcasm fully intended).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » The fact that this gentlemen is treated as a credible source is further proof of the insanity that has taken over the public debate. He knows nothing other than what he has read. He has not been through live agent training at Fort McClellan (I have). He has no scientific background in the subject matter and no experience (other than playing video games) with actual chemical weapons (Ted Postol, who has written extensively on the subject, does have actual scientific and military expertise on the topic). Higgins knows nothing of the military doctrine for employing such weapons. He knows nothing of the process and procedures required for a military unit to safely handle, load, activate and deploy such weapons.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Actual people with such expertise look at the public accounts about what supposedly happened at Khan Sheikyoun and scratch their heads. Why?<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » There is no evidence, not one shred of intelligence, to show that the Syrian Air Force or Army activated their chemical weapons unit anytime prior to the alleged sarin attack at Khan Sheikyoun. If the Syrians were going to launch a chemical weapons attack they would have to go through the process of alerting that unit and issuing it orders to prepare such weapons. That also means that the chemicals (the Syrian sarin was a binary system, which means that two separate chemicals had to be mixed together in order to create an active, viable chemical capable of killing) had to be taken from storage, transported in a secure fashion with men wearing MOPP gear (an acronym for "Mission Oriented Protective Posture<\/strong>"). Think of a space suit. The people handling live agents, such as sarin, do so in order to ensure they do not contaminate themselves and end up dead.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » It is common knowledge within the intelligence and military community that both the United States and Israel put a priority on monitoring and collecting intel on the movements of Syrians Chemical Weapons units. Why? To ensure that Israel would be forewarned and protected against a surprise attack. The nature of military grade sarin is that it requires advance preparation, planning and logistics. One does not simply pick up a hand grenade, pull the pin and launch a chemical attack. That’s only in Hollywood and the X-Box of Eliot Higgins.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » Then we have the so-called evidence from Khan Shiekyoun of the sarin. Ted Postol has provided an extensive and comprehensive analysis of why the conventional wisdom that this was a sarin attack is wrong (one of his articles is at this link<\/a>). Those who insist that there was sarin are relying entirely on second hand evidence collected by individuals with direct ties to radical Islamic groups. Not one single independent outside observer was allowed to the scene to collect forensic evidence or examine victims. The only "victims" examined took place a couple of days later in Turkey.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » But we now have video evidence<\/a> that it was not sarin. Watch as the White Helmets collects samples that they boldly declare as SARIN without having performed a single scientific field test. They collect samples declaring the water, etc as SARIN!! Talk about magic. <\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » This is all about propaganda and media manipulation. You will spot two individuals dressed up in some form of bizarre MOPP gear (they are fully covered). But that is not the case for everyone else running around, especially the knuckle heads carrying the supposed samples of deadly sarin. A simple surgical mask provides absolutely no protection whatsoever against SARIN. This is absurdity worthy of Monty Python.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » So, here is the situation. Sy Hersh, a proven investigative journalist with a solid track record spanning 6 decades, has actual sources with first hand knowledge about what the U.S. military and intelligence community actually know. Hersh’s reporting is attacked by Eliot Higgins, a chubby house husband who has no education nor experience in the field of chemical weapons and has no first hand sources. And who are we supposed to believe when it comes to an alleged Sarin attack? Why, Higgins of course<\/em>. » <\/p>\n<\/p>\n Au moment où s’effectuent ces manœuvres tendant \u00e0 d\u00e9noncer Hersh tout en r\u00e9duisant au maximum la diffusion de son article, retentit une alerte<\/a>, non pas d’une attaque chimique qui a eu lieu, mais d’une attaque chimique qui serait en pr\u00e9paration<\/strong>. Elle vient de la Maison-Blanche, plus ou moins relay\u00e9e par le Pentagone qui se voit dans l’obligation de suivre, tandis que les autres (notamment le d\u00e9partement d’État) sont tr\u00e8s \u00e9tonn\u00e9s de cette nouvelle. Les Russes et les Syriens crient \u00e0 la provocation. Il semblerait qu’on pourrait envisager d\u00e9sormais, pour riposter \u00e0 une attaque chimique \u00e9videmment syrienne et qui ne saurait tarder, une sorte d’univers totalement per\u00e7u sous forme de simulacre ; soit tirer quelques salves de missiles de croisi\u00e8re, soit prendre de nouvelles sanctions antirusses, avant m\u00eame que cette attaque n’ait eu lieu…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Finalement, c’est une occurrence remarquable, et peut-\u00eatre un peu trop remarquable pour \u00eatre une co\u00efncidence, que tout cela ait lieu en m\u00eame temps : l’article de Hersh d\u00e9crivant le montage du 4 avril, les articles diffamatoires anti-Hersh, les ripostes des partisans de Hersh et l\u00e0-dessus cette annonce surr\u00e9aliste d’une attaque \u00e0 venir. Dans Russia Insider<\/em> du 27 juin 2017<\/a>, Tom Luongo lie directement cette intervention de la Maison-Blanche d’un Trump comme d’habitude out of control <\/em>\u00e0 l’article de Hersh : il s’agit de tenter de d\u00e9mentir par une nouvelle \u00ab\u00a0alerte\u00a0\u00bb \u00e0 venir la d\u00e9monstration que l’alerte pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente \u00e9tait une \u00ab\u00a0fausse alerte\u00a0\u00bb, ou mieux dit, une \u00ab\u00a0FakeAlert<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0<\/strong> comme on dit bien entendu FakeNews<\/em>…<\/p>\n<\/p>\n « And Trump is incapable of ‘going home.’<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » These statements come less than 24 hours after Seymour Hersh publishes a damning article<\/a> explaining Trump’s moronic decisions in the wake of the last chemical weapons attack. So, damage control cannot be ruled out. Trump could be deflecting blame for his rash and, frankly, illegal action on April 6th<\/sup>. And this is the kind of cognitive-dissonance-inducing action that fits his supposed deal-making style. And the irony here is that he needs the same U.S. media that he despises to build this argument.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » On the other hand, he may be so distracted by getting minor wins in the Supreme Court, CNN’s admission that the entire RussiaGate<\/a> scenario is nonsense (that’s putting it mildly) and the imminent collapse of Illinois’ government<\/a> to care too much about clear provocations by people within his White House and State Department.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n » I refuse to ascribe any kind of 4-D chess thinking to a man who very obviously acts without much forethought, which Sy Hersh confirmed for us, if nothing else<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Le cas Hersh nous donne une mesure exceptionnelle de l’\u00e9volution de l’esprit de censure totalitaire qui s’est mis en place au travers de la presseSyst\u00e8me, du r\u00e8gne des \u00e9lites postmodernes, des pr\u00eatres de l’humanitarisme et des passions soci\u00e9tales ; une mesure de l’effondrement complet du cadre de \u00ab\u00a0libert\u00e9 de parole\u00a0\u00bb et de la communication structur\u00e9e sur la r\u00e9f\u00e9rence du professionnalisme exceptionnel. Depuis Mi-La\u00ef (1969) jusqu’aux prisons US de torture en Irak, jusqu’\u00e0 ses enqu\u00eates d'\u00a0\u00bbalerte\u00a0\u00bb sur les manigances iraniennes<\/a> des neocons<\/em> de Bush ou sur les Forces Sp\u00e9ciales US consid\u00e9r\u00e9es comme une Garde Pr\u00e9torienne<\/a>, Hersh est rest\u00e9 respect\u00e9 jusqu’il y a quelques ann\u00e9es, en reconnaissance de son formidable travail d’enqu\u00eateur… Puis l’avancement de la suppression de la r\u00e9alit\u00e9 par le Syst\u00e8me dans un simulacre de cloaque a conduit \u00e0 ce qu’il soit brutalement banni, chass\u00e9, des journaux qui avaient l’honneur de le publier<\/strong>, – du New Yorker<\/em> \u00e0 la LRB, – pour trouver des accueils d’occasion ; aujourd’hui, Hersh est un suspect par d\u00e9finition et tout ce qu’il r\u00e9v\u00e8le est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme de la propagande.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Il y a dix-quinze ans encore, malgr\u00e9 qu’on fût d\u00e9j\u00e0 dans l’\u00e8re post-9\/11 et malgr\u00e9 le climat de terreur des neocons<\/em> & Cie, chaque article de Hersh \u00e9tait un coup<\/a> de tonnerre<\/a> qui se r\u00e9percutait partout et que les personnes mises en cause ne pouvaient r\u00e9cuser. Aujourd’hui, tout est \u00e9touff\u00e9 dans ce cloaque inf\u00e2me d’un simulacre affolant de m\u00e9diocrit\u00e9, de distorsion de quelque r\u00e9alit\u00e9 que ce soit d’absence compl\u00e8te de r\u00e9f\u00e9rence \u00e0 quelque v\u00e9rit\u00e9-de-situation que ce soit.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n En m\u00eame temps, il semble qu’un espoir se fait de plus en plus insistant : en dissolvant ainsi le cadre m\u00eame du monde de la communication et de l’information (surpuissance), le Syst\u00e8me se dissout lui-m\u00eame (autodestruction) dans le d\u00e9sordre de ses propres manigances<\/strong>. La crise<\/a> qui frappe de plein fouet CNN<\/a> \u00e0 propos de l’attitude de se r\u00e9seau dans l’affaire Russiagate <\/em>en est un bon exemple et un exemple compl\u00e8tement d’actualit\u00e9, et elle est \u00e0 mettre en regard du traitement qui est fait \u00e0 Seymour Hersh.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/p>\n Mis en ligne le 28 juin 2017 \u00e0 09H36<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Censure et vertu-Syst\u00e8me contre Seymour Hersh Le 25 juin 2017 en fin de journ\u00e9e, 26 juin pour nous et \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s 24 heures (en tenant compte du d\u00e9calage horaire) apr\u00e8s la publication du texte de Seymour Hersh sur l’attaque du 6 avril contre la Syrie, mais aussi sur l’\u00a0\u00bbattaque chimique\u00a0\u00bb du 4 avril qui… <\/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":[2],"tags":[2870,4769,3903,3642,4180,13132,2876,1132,4014,3167,3867,13042],"class_list":["post-77338","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-attaque","tag-book","tag-chimique","tag-cnn","tag-hersh","tag-higgins","tag-london","tag-mcgovern","tag-of","tag-review","tag-syrie","tag-tacitus"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77338","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=77338"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77338\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77338"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77338"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77338"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n