{"id":77366,"date":"2017-07-13T08:55:45","date_gmt":"2017-07-13T08:55:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2017\/07\/13\/russiagate-le-barbare-jubilant-est-de-retour\/"},"modified":"2017-07-13T08:55:45","modified_gmt":"2017-07-13T08:55:45","slug":"russiagate-le-barbare-jubilant-est-de-retour","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2017\/07\/13\/russiagate-le-barbare-jubilant-est-de-retour\/","title":{"rendered":"<em>Russiagate\u00a0<\/em>: le \u201cBarbare jubilant\u201d est de retour"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><h2 class=\"titleset_b.deepblue\" style=\"color:#0f3955; font-size:1.65em; font-variant:small-caps\"><em>Russiagate <\/em>: le \u00ab\u00a0Barbare jubilant\u00a0\u00bb est de retour<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>C&rsquo;est un signe qui nous montre, sans le moindre doute, que la folie continue \u00e0 grandir irr\u00e9sistiblement \u00e0 Washington D.C. : le \u00ab\u00a0barbare jubilant\u00a0\u00bb, l&rsquo;ancien colonel de l&rsquo;U.S. Army Ralph Peters est de retour sur les grands r\u00e9seaux, vitup\u00e9rant et plus furieux que jamais. Le \u00ab\u00a0retour\u00a0\u00bb de Peters (il continuait \u00e0 \u00e9crire) sur le circuit m\u00e9diatique le plus visible et le plus sonore est un symbole : cette affaire du <em>Russiagate<\/em> et tout le reste \u00e0 Washington D.C. est d\u00e9finitivement install\u00e9 hors du monde sensible courant.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Ceux de nos lecteurs qui s&rsquo;aventurent (notamment) dans la rubrique <em>Glossaire.dde<\/em> doivent conna&icirc;tre le colonel Peters qui est certainement l&rsquo;un des esprits les plus volubiles, les plus \u00e9nerv\u00e9s, les plus furieux \u00e0 Washington D.C. depuis quasiment vingt ans puisque le premier article \u00e0 faire sa r\u00e9putation (<em>Constant Conflicts<\/em>, dans <em>Parameters<\/em>,) date du printemps 1997. Nous avons longuement d\u00e9taill\u00e9 la carri\u00e8re et le travail de Ralph Peters dans deux sujets du m\u00eame jour du <em>Glossaire.dde<\/em>, le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article\/glossairedde-situation-i-du-barbare-jubilant\">22 f\u00e9vrier 2016<\/a> et le <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article\/glossairedde-situation-ii-du-barbare-jubilant\">22 f\u00e9vrier 2016<\/a>, le second se contentant de reproduire l&rsquo;article dont il est question pour les d\u00e9buts officiels et tonitruants de Peters. (On a pu ainsi remarquer que Peters, malgr\u00e9 son exacerbation intellectuelle et ses certitudes paroxystiques, savait op\u00e9rer des volte-face tactiques pour enrober ses erreurs sous le couvert de trouvailles nouvelles, comme dans l&rsquo;analyse \u00ab\u00a0<em>Le barbare qui ne jubilait plus du tout<\/em>\u00ab\u00a0, dans le texte r\u00e9f\u00e9renc\u00e9 du <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article\/glossairedde-situation-i-du-barbare-jubilant\">22 f\u00e9vrier 2016<\/a>. Mais dans le cas signal\u00e9 ici, il est retomb\u00e9 avec d\u00e9lice dans le paroxysme qui est le fond de son caract\u00e8re.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Ici, il est re\u00e7u par Tucker Carlson, de Fox.<em>News<\/em>, l&rsquo;un des pr\u00e9sentateurs US les plus fameux, et notamment et heureuse surprise, parce que l&rsquo;un des rarissimes \u00e0 se d\u00e9marquer des conceptions dominantes de la presseSyst\u00e8me. On peut voir et entendre l&rsquo;\u00e9change entre Peters et Carlson sur cette vid\u00e9o que pr\u00e9sente <em>TheDuran.Com<\/em> le <a href=\"http:\/\/theduran.com\/us-lt-col-says-russians-are-terrorists-putin-is-pure-evil-and-us-not-russia-killed-al-baghdadi-video\/\">12 juillet 2017<\/a>. L'\u00a0\u00bbaccrochage\u00a0\u00bb, &ndash; c&rsquo;en est bien un, &ndash; entre Carlson et Peters, exceptionnellement long, se situe entre les 09&rsquo;30\u00a0\u00bb et les 21&rsquo;30\u00a0\u00bb de la vid\u00e9o et il donne une bonne id\u00e9e de l&rsquo;atmosph\u00e8re exacerb\u00e9e qui r\u00e8gne aujourd&rsquo;hui \u00e0 Washington D.C. dans une affaire <em>Russiagate<\/em> qui est dans un domaine o&ugrave; l&rsquo;id\u00e9e m\u00eame du contr\u00f4le des choses par les \u00eatres et des \u00eatres par eux-m\u00eames est sans la moindre signification.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&laquo; <em>This unhinged retired US Lt Col Ralph Peters, who is most likely now employed by the US military industrial complex as a \u00ab\u00a0consultant\u00a0\u00bb, believes Russia did not kill ISIS leader Baghdadi but the US did it. <\/em><em>The US Lt Col believes Russia is not fighting ISIS, but bombing the democracy loving US backed \u00ab\u00a0moderate rebels\u00a0\u00bb (aka AL Qaeda and Al Nusra) in Syria<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0Russians are terrorists.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0Vladimir Putin hates us<\/em> [<em>the US<\/em>].\u00a0\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0He<\/em> [Putin] <em>is malevolent. <\/em><em>He is as close to pure evil as I can find. <\/em><em>He is also brilliant<\/em>.\u00a0\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0He<\/em> [Putin] <em>is a killer<\/em>.\u00a0\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0Putin is Hitler.\u00a0\u00bb Tucker Carlson \u00ab\u00a0is Charles Lindberg in 1938.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes \u00ab\u00a0Putin is as bad as Hitler\u00a0\u00bb and \u00ab\u00a0he hates America.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes Syria is better off broken apart<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The US Lt Col believes believes Iraq should have been broken apart<\/em>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>Tucker Carlson pushes back on many of Lt Col Ralph Peters outrageous claims&hellip;and while Tucker throws in the occasional &lsquo;I also think Putin is a bad guy&rsquo; rhetoric (in order to placate Fox News executives), Carlson nonetheless makes the retired US Lt Col look completely stupid and unhinged<\/em>. &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Comme l&rsquo;on sait, une nouvelle \u00ab\u00a0r\u00e9v\u00e9lation\u00a0\u00bb \u00e0 relanc\u00e9, ou plut\u00f4t fait passer \u00e0 un niveau d&rsquo;intensit\u00e9 encore plus fort l&#8217;emportement extraordinaire que le <em>Russiagate<\/em> fait r\u00e9gner \u00e0 Washington D.C. avec la r\u00e9v\u00e9lation de contacts du fils de Trump avec une avocate d&rsquo;abord signal\u00e9e comme \u00ab\u00a0proche du Kremlin\u00a0\u00bb, Natalia Vaselnitskaya. (Depuis, comble de mauvais esprit, il s&rsquo;est av\u00e9r\u00e9 que Vaselnitskaya a \u00e9t\u00e9 vue en compagnie de <a href=\"http:\/\/theduran.com\/breaking-russian-lawyer-pictured-with-obamas-ambassador-to-russia-days-after-meeting-trump-jr\/\">l&rsquo;ambassadeur McFaul<\/a> et du s\u00e9nateur <a href=\"http:\/\/theduran.com\/russian-lawyer-natalia-veselnitskaya-connected-to-john-mccain-in-stunning-photo-exposure\/\">John McCain<\/a>, de la cabale anti-Trump, <strong>ce qui laisse \u00e0 penser au niveau de l&rsquo;art subtil mais \u00e0 gros sabots du montage<\/strong>.) Quoi qu&rsquo;il en soit, \u00e0 nouveau d\u00e9sordre et hyst\u00e9rie d\u00e9cha&icirc;n\u00e9e, on imagine dans quel sens.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Il est \u00e9vident que, dans ces conditions, toutes les retomb\u00e9es positives de la rencontre entre Trump et Poutine en marge du G20 sont <strong>remises en question et plus rien d&rsquo;assur\u00e9 ne peut, une fois de plus, \u00eatre avanc\u00e9.<\/strong> D&rsquo;une fa\u00e7on g\u00e9n\u00e9rale et quoiqu&rsquo;il en soit des indices aussit\u00f4t apparus d&rsquo;un montage, la question d&rsquo;une rencontre entre le fils de Trump et Vaselnitskaya \u00e0 l&rsquo;\u00e9t\u00e9 2016 est devenue une affaire de plus de la m\u00eame haute trahison \u00e0-la-Trump dans la plupart des organes de la presseSyst\u00e8me. Pour le reste, on peut consulter <a href=\"http:\/\/www.zerohedge.com\/news\/2017-07-11\/donald-trump-jr-releases-email-chain-about-russian-lawyer-meeting\">tel ou tel texte<\/a> pour se faire son id\u00e9e \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><p>En effet, \u00e0 c\u00f4t\u00e9 des incroyables \u00e9ructations d&rsquo;un Ralph Peters qui semble emport\u00e9 par un torrent de haine qu&rsquo;il est difficile d&rsquo;appr\u00e9cier avec la simple raison, <strong>on trouve des appr\u00e9ciations semblant venir d&rsquo;un autre monde<\/strong> d&rsquo;o&ugrave; des observateurs exp\u00e9riment\u00e9s pourraient poser leurs lunettes grossissantes, leurs longues-vues d&rsquo;observation. On lira donc avec un certain int\u00e9r\u00eat celle de Ray McGovern, cet ancien officier de la CIA devenu un des dissidents les plus notoires et les mieux inform\u00e9s parmi cet ensemble d&rsquo;anciens officiers du gouvernement qui ont d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de retourner contre le Monstre qu&rsquo;ils ont servi les capacit\u00e9s et l&rsquo;exp\u00e9rience qu&rsquo;ils ont pu acqu\u00e9rir dans cet exercice. On trouve une rapide interview de RT o&ugrave; McGovern <strong>fait ressortir pour nous deux \u00e9l\u00e9ments fondamentaux<\/strong> : d&rsquo;une part, l<strong>a dur\u00e9e inarr\u00eatable de cette pathologie qu&rsquo;est le <em>Russiagate <\/em><\/strong>(dur\u00e9e qui pourrait, qui devrait \u00eatre interrompue par un \u00e9v\u00e9nement majeur affectant la structure m\u00eame du pouvoir et du pays) ; <strong>d&rsquo;autre part, la peur<\/strong> qui r\u00f4de et r\u00e8gne \u00e0 Washington, \u00e9pargnant les seuls hyst\u00e9riques qui s&rsquo;en font ses complices, qui est la peur du fameux <em>Deep State<\/em>, <strong>insaisissable, inconnaissable, formidable, incompr\u00e9hensible, implacable&#8230; <\/strong><strong>&laquo; <em>They are afraid of the Deep State &ndash; that is the big problem here<\/em><\/strong>. &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p><p><strong><em>RT<\/em><\/strong>:  &laquo; <em>When will solid, incontrovertible evidence be provided to back up these hacking allegations? <\/em><em>Will we be able to finally hear or see any evidence? <\/em>&raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p><strong><em>Ray McGovern<\/em><\/strong>:  &laquo; <em>When former President <\/em>[Barack] <em>Obama told Putin to \u00ab\u00a0cut it out.\u00a0\u00bb Putin said: \u00ab\u00a0Cut what out? Can you give me some evidence?\u00a0\u00bb <\/em><em>According to Putin, as he explained to the <\/em>[US]<em> President what was going on, the President himself had increased doubts. The President <\/em>[Obama] <em>himself two days before he left office said this at a press conference: \u00ab\u00a0It remains to be seen how the Russian hack got to WikiLeaks.\u00a0\u00bb Well, hello! The reason it remains to be seen is because what got to WikiLeaks was not a hack; it was a leak. A leak is when you put a little thumb drive in a computer, you download it, and it doesn&rsquo;t go over the network. Once it goes over the network NSA has it always; that is hard to believe, but it is true. What happened was someone within the Democratic National Committee<\/em> [DNC]<em> saw how Bernie Sanders had been cheated out of the nomination and decided: &lsquo;You know, I really need to tell somebody about this&rsquo; &ndash; this is my speculation. And they put in a thumb drive, gave it to Julian Assange, and he released it &ndash; immediately.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>What happened? Well, nobody paid attention to what was in the e-mails &ndash; namely, that the DNC fixed the nomination so that Sanders wouldn&rsquo;t win. <\/em><em>Nobody paid attention to that. The whole thing was a magnificent distraction: &lsquo;the Russians hacked, the Russians hacked, the Russians&hellip;&rsquo; <\/em><em>There is still no evidence. There were about five investigations in search of a crime. That is really unique in my experience in Washington<\/em>. &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p><strong><em>RT<\/em><\/strong>:  &laquo; <em>The story just runs and runs, doesn&rsquo;t it? Will it ever end? <\/em>&raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p><strong><em>Ray McGovern<\/em><\/strong>:  &laquo; <em>It has the prospect of lasting for the next three years. I think the Democrats are being very foolish. Unless they have the CIA create some evidence, they are going to fall flat on their faces. Now, the whole thing has to do with: who got the e-mails from the DNC to Julian Assange? I have a very good speculation here. It&rsquo;s based on what the New York Times does not publish. The original CIA documents published by WikiLeaks on March 28 revealed something called \u00ab\u00a0Vault 7, Part 3\u00a0\u00bb, which allowed the CIA to obfuscate &ndash; that is, confuse &ndash; who hacks into these systems and leave little tell-tale signs, like oh, maybe Cyrillic<\/em>&hellip;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>If we can work with Russia on nuclear arms treaties; if we can work with Russia on peace treaties in Syria, we can certainly work with them on technological issues, and I think we can without having to give away our own secrets &#8211; Patrick Flanagan, attorney, former US congressman.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>&raquo; <em>The CIA used that capability last year, 2016. It doesn&rsquo;t take a rocket scientist to put these dots together: &lsquo;Oh, Cyrillic left in the DNC<\/em> [<em>computer?<\/em>]&hellip;<em>&lsquo; Or maybe, I&rsquo;ll just say right out that if I had to judge between whether it was a &lsquo;Russian hack,&rsquo; or a CIA penetration or a CIA use of this incredible capability, I would go with CIA using this incredible capability right off the bat. The problem is &ndash; we have a president who has to look around at the CIA, and the military, and what we call the Deep State. He could ideally call his CIA Director and say: &lsquo;Mike Pompeo, enough of this foolishness, I want to find out chapter and verse. I don&rsquo;t believe that concocted memo of January 6. You find out what really happened.&rsquo; Now, would Pompeo, the head of the CIA, be able to find out? I don&rsquo;t know. If he found out, will he tell the president? I don&rsquo;t know. They are afraid of the Deep State &ndash; that is the big problem here<\/em>. &raquo;<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Le <em>Deep State<\/em>, cela existe-t-il vraiment ? Pourquoi ne pas dire La B\u00eate, 666, le Diable, <strong>ainsi pourrait-on justement estimer que cela serait aller plus vite droit au but<\/strong> ? Une mal\u00e9diction, on peut employer ce mot, semble d\u00e9sormais attach\u00e9e au sort de Washington D.C. avec l&rsquo;impossibilit\u00e9 absolument verrouill\u00e9e de parvenir \u00e0 la moindre possibilit\u00e9 de r\u00e9tablir un semblant de fonctionnement normal d&rsquo;un gouvernement et d&rsquo;un pouvoir compl\u00e8tement \u00e0 la d\u00e9rive.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Un autre aspect extraordinaire de cette situation, sur lequel nous ne cessons d&rsquo;insister chaque fois que l&rsquo;occasion se pr\u00e9sente, &mdash; c&rsquo;est que le reste du monde, sauf peut-\u00eatre les gens avertis comme les Russes (les Chinois ce n&rsquo;est pas s&ucirc;r), semblent consid\u00e9rer que Washington fonctionne \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s bien malgr\u00e9 quelques remous ici et l\u00e0. On saluera donc Donald Trump avec la d\u00e9f\u00e9rence qu&rsquo;il faut pour la revue du 14 juillet en c\u00e9l\u00e9brant l&rsquo;amiti\u00e9 de plus tr\u00e8s loin de deux si\u00e8cles et demie de la France et des &Eacute;tats-Unis.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>Mis en ligne le 13 juillet 2017 \u00e0 08H40<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Russiagate : le \u00ab\u00a0Barbare jubilant\u00a0\u00bb est de retour C&rsquo;est un signe qui nous montre, sans le moindre doute, que la folie continue \u00e0 grandir irr\u00e9sistiblement \u00e0 Washington D.C. : le \u00ab\u00a0barbare jubilant\u00a0\u00bb, l&rsquo;ancien colonel de l&rsquo;U.S. Army Ralph Peters est de retour sur les grands r\u00e9seaux, vitup\u00e9rant et plus furieux que jamais. Le \u00ab\u00a0retour\u00a0\u00bb de&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":[2],"tags":[11626,7153,2651,1132,3250,5030,3249,13022,3973,2639,3248],"class_list":["post-77366","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-d-c","tag-deep","tag-du","tag-mcgovern","tag-peters","tag-peur","tag-ralph","tag-russiagate","tag-state","tag-trump","tag-washington"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77366","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=77366"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77366\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77366"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77366"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}