Il n'y a pas de commentaires associés a cet article. Vous pouvez réagir.
2301Puisqu’effectivement la comparaison faite par Diana Johnstone du rôle du New York Times et de Mr/Mme Anonymous renvoie à Shakespeare, nous renvoyons, nous, toute cette entreprise et le NYT lui-même à cette si fameuse péroraison qui semble idéale pour qualifier l’époque telle qu’ils nous l’ont faite, si l’on s’en tient, disons aux faits, – ou aux apparences de faits...
« La vie n’est qu’une ombre errante ; un pauvre acteur
Qui se pavane et s’agite une heure sur la scène
Et qu’ensuite on n’entend plus ; c’est une histoire
Racontée par un idiot, pleine de bruit et de fureur,
Et qui ne signifie rien. »
Ces mots, ces phrases, définissent aussi bien l’épisode qui vient d’avoir lieu à Washington/New York, que les réactions des élites-Système qui ont suivi, que le “journal de référence” lui-même, etc., – l’ensemble s’étant effectivement “pavané et agité une heure sur la scène” sans autre résultat. S’il s’agit d’un coup d’État, d’un début de “Coup”, ou bien d’une fin de “Coup”, ou bien d’un “Coup” dans l’eau qui sait, – alors qu’il y a un an et demi et bientôt deux ans que l’on nous parle du “Coup” imminent sinon en cours à Washington, – le moins qu’on doive en juger est que sa médiocrité, son inefficacité, son impuissance sinon sa paralysie sont avérées.
Diana Johnstone décrit donc le NYT en “Iago”, le traître autour d’Othello, et décortique son comportement, son style, son art de la manigance, pour aboutir à une sorte de prescription de néantisation, puisque sa prescription après tout est que le dialogue nécessaire entre les USA et la Russie se résume à la violence pure qui ne peut-être que nucléaire au terme du voyage sur le USS Iago : « ...Et quand tout cela [les diverses entreprises de déstabilisation de la Russie] aura échoué, comme cela a toujours échoué et continuera toujours à échouer, il restera aux États-Unis leur vaste panoplie de systèmes nucléaires de première frappe stationnés dans les pays européens de l’OTAN, dirigés vers le Kremlin. Et les militaires russes ne se contenteront pas de rester assis sur leurs propres armes nucléaires, attendant d’être pulvérisés. Quand personne, pas même le président des États-Unis, n’a le droit de rencontrer les dirigeants russes, il ne reste qu’une seul forme possible d’échange. Quand le dialogue est impossible, tout ce qu’il reste est la force et la violence. Voilà ce qui constitue l’essentiel de la recommandation faite par le journal le plus influent des États-Unis. »
Mais certes, l’article de Diana Johnstone est aussi consacré à l’événement de la semaine, – comme on dirait “l’événement du siècle”, – l’article de Mr/Mme Anonymous qu’elle trouve si bien écrit qu’il pourrait l’avoir été, observe-t-elle, par quelqu’un de la rédaction, citant jusqu’à un des plus prestigieux, l’inimitable Thomas F. (« La lettre de Mr. ou Mme Anonymous est très bien écrite. Par quelqu’un comme, par exemple, Thomas Friedman. C’est-à-dire, quelqu’un de la rédaction du NYT... »), – ou par quelqu’un de la CIA, ce qui revient au même... Il apparaît très vite que l’article de Mr/Mme Anonymous est finalement bien plus révélateur de ce fourmillement de vanité, de déraison et de simulacre informe qui caractérise le siège de l’establishment/DeepState autour de l'étrange président Trump qu’il ne nous donne des nouvelles de la Résistance au cœur de la citadelle ennemie. Ainsi pourrait-on dire que cette attaque contre Trump nous dit plus sur les adversaires de Trump que sur Trump lui-même.
L’article est incisif, mené à un rythme endiablé. La critique à laquelle invitent le Système et tous ses serviteurs zélés, du fait de la grossièreté et de la sottise de leurs actions, donne à ceux qui y sont attentifs l’occasion d’exercer un talent libérateur. L’audacieux pamphlet de Mr/Mme Anonymous qui a fait éclater de fureur démente et de satisfaction paroxystique “D.C.-la-folle” et le monde avec elle, pendant au moins 24 heures où l’on crut à un grand événement, est réduit ici à ce qu’il mérite d’être. Ce qui fut un grand événement de quelques heures se révèle naturellement comme un spasme de plus du Système dans son entreprise de néantisation, où le NYT, fleuron de la démocratie du monde, trône à la place qui lui revient, proche du sommet dans cette poubelle. Si Trump ne ressort pas plus grandi de l’aventure, – il reste ce qu’il est, – il n’en est certainement pas le plus ridicule.
Voyez l’article de Diana Johnstone, le 7 septembre 2018 sur le site UNZ.com.
__________________________
The New York Times continues to outdo itself in the production of fake news. There is no more reliable source of fake news than the intelligence services, which regularly provide their pet outlets (NYT and WaPo) with sensational stories that are as unverifiable as their sources are anonymous. A prize example was the August 24 report that US intelligence agencies don’t know anything about Russia’s plans to mess up our November elections because “informants close to …Putin and in the Kremlin” aren’t saying anything. Not knowing anything about something for which there is no evidence is a rare scoop.
A story like that is not designed to “inform the public” since there is no information in it. It has other purposes: to keep the “Russia is undermining our democracy” story on front pages, with the extra twist in this case of trying to make Putin distrustful of his entourage. The Russian president is supposed to wonder, who are those informants in my entourage?
But that was nothing compared to the whopper produced by the “newpaper of record” on September 5. (By the way, the “record” is stuck in the same groove: Trump bad, Putin bad – bad bad bad.) This was the sensational oped headlined “I am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration”, signed by nobody.
The letter by Mister or Ms Anonymous is very well written. By someone like, say, Thomas Friedman. That is, someone on the NYT staff. It is very cleverly composed to achieve quite obvious calculated aims. It is a masterpiece of treacherous deception.
The fictional author presents itself as a right-wing conservative shocked by Trump’s “amorality” – a category that outside the Washington swamp might include betraying the trust of one’s superior.
This anonymous enemy of amorality claims to approve of all the most extreme right-wing measures of the Trump administration as “bright spots”: deregulation, tax reform, a more robust military, “and more” – cleverly omitting mention of Trump’s immigration policy which could unduly shock the New York Times’ liberal readers. The late Senator John McCain, the model of bipartisan bellicosity, is cited as the example to follow.
The “resistance” proclaimed is solely against the facets of Trump’s foreign policy which White House insiders are said to be working diligently to undermine: peaceful relations with Russian and North Korea. Trump’s desire to avoid war is transformed into “a preference for autocrats and dictators”. (Trump gets no credit for his warlike rhetoric against Iran and close relations with Netanyahu, even though they must please Anonymous.)
The purpose of this is stunningly obvious. The New York Times has already done yeoman service in rounding up liberal Democrats and left-leaning independents in the anti-Trump lynch mob. But now the ploy is to rally conservative Republicans to the same cause of overthrowing the elected President. The letter amounts to an endorsement of future President Pence. Just get rid of Trump and you’ll have a nice, neat, ultra-right-wing Republican as President.
The Democrats may not like Pence, but they are so demented by hatred of Trump that they are visibly ready to accept the Devil himself to get rid of the sinister clown who dared defeat Hillary Clinton. Down with democracy; the votes of deplorables shouldn’t count.
That is treacherous enough, but even more despicable is the insidious design to destabilize the presidency by sowing distrust. Speaking of Trump, Mr and/or Ms Anonymous declare: “The dilemma – which he does not fully grasp – is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations” (meaning peace with Russia).
This is the Iago ploy. Shakespeare’s villain destroyed Othello by causing him to distrust those closest to him, his wife and closest associates. Like Trump in Washington, Othello, the “Moor” of Venice, was an outsider, that much easier to deceive and betray.
The New York Times is playing Iago, whispering that Putin in the Kremlin is surrounded by secret “informants”, and that Trump in the White House is surrounded by people systematically undermining his presidency. Putin is not likely to be impressed, but the trick might work with Trump, who is truly the target of open and covert enemies and whose position is much more insecure. There is certainly some undermining going on.
Was the New York Times oped written by the paper’s own writers or by the CIA? It hardly matters since they are so closely entwined.
No trick is too low for those who consider Trump an intolerable intruder on THEIR power territory. The New York Times “news” that Trump is surrounded by traitors is taken up by other media who indirectly confirm the story by speculating on “who is it?” The Boston Globe (among others) eagerly rushed in, asking:
“So who’s the author of the op-ed? It’s a question that has many people poking through the text, looking for clues. Meanwhile, the denials have come thick and fast. Here’s a brief look at some of the highest-level officials in the administration who might have a motive to write the letter.”
Isn’t it obvious that all this is designed to make Trump distrust everyone around him? Isn’t that a way to drive him toward that “crazy” where they say he already is, and which is fallback grounds for impeachment when the Mueller investigation fails to come up with anything more serious than the fact that Russian intelligent agents are intelligent agents?
The White House insider (or insiders, or whatever) use terms like “erratic behavior” and “instability” to contribute to the “Trump is insane” narrative. Insanity is the alternative pretext to the Mueller wild goose chase for divesting Trump of the powers of the presidency. If Trump responds by accusing the traitors of being traitors, that will be final proof of his mental instability. The oped claims to provide evidence that Trump is being betrayed, but if he says so, that will be taken as a sign of mental derangement. To save our exemplary democracy from itself, the elected president must be thrown out.
The military-industrial-congressional-deep state-media complex is holding its breath to breathe that great sigh of relief. The intruder is gone. Hurrah! Now we can go right on teaching the public to hate and fear the Russian enemy, so that arms contracts continue to blossom and NATO builds up its aggressive forces around Russia in hopes that this may frighten the Russians into dumping Putin in favor of a new Boris Yeltsin, ready to let the United States pursue the Clintonian plan of breaking up the Russian Federation into pieces, like the former Yugoslavia, in order to take them over one by one, with all their great natural resources.
And when this fails, as it has been failing, and will continue to fail, the United States has all those brand new first strike nuclear weapons being stationed in European NATO countries, aimed at the Kremlin. And the Russian military are not just sitting there with their own nuclear weapons, waiting to be wiped out. When nobody, not even the President of the United States, has the right to meet and talk with Russian leaders, there is only one remaining form of exchange. When dialogue is impossible, all that is left is force and violence. That is what is being promoted by the most influential media in the United States.
-
