Ah, là-dessus, un attentat terroriste aux USA arrangerait bien des choses

Joseph P. Diaferia, développe sur le site “OnLine Journal” la thèse de la possibilité d’un attentat de type “terrorisme synthétique” (terrorisme fabriqué, ou encore : provocation, manipulation, etc). Il faut dire que, vu les ennuis de GW et à l’occasion du quatrième anniversaire du 11 septembre, cela ferait assez bien dans le paysage.

Gratuite et un peu parano, la thèse de Diaferia? A propos de paranoïa, à laquelle la “presse sérieuse” est prompte à se référer dès qu’un journaliste semi-dissident évoque la possibilité de montages, il faudrait mesurer son usage par les dirigeants “sérieux” du monde occidental, américanistes pour commencer, dans les quatre dernières années. Cela s’empile autant que les promesses de trouver des ADM chez Saddam. Alors, écoutons un peu plus les soi-disant paranos.

Diaferia évoque le cas du général Kevin P. Byrnes, qui vient d’être relevé (en août) de son commandement pour adultère, faute épouvantable dans le contexte des réussites morales des aventures militaires US en Irak et partout dans le monde, et de la sauvegarde de La Nouvelle Orléans. Diaferia poursuit : « ...General Byrnes, it should be noted, headed the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, which was conducting a “nuclear incident exercise” in the area of Charleston, South Carolina. Investigative journalists have provided evidence that the intent of this exercise was to “go live” with an actual detonation of a nuclear device as a means of staging a false flag terrorist act. Such a terrorist attack would most certainly have resulted in a dramatic escalation of the war in the Middle East, and quite possibly a tactical nuclear strike against Iran (not to mention, martial law here in the U.S.).

» General Byrnes reportedly was preparing to expose the conspirators in the hopes of preventing the “war on terror” from heightening into a broader global conflict. If such is the case, it would not take much to conclude that his firing is intended to silence him, and that he is probably still under the threat of criminal prosecution, or even death.

» Since the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Americans have been repeatedly warned of the inevitability of a second terrorist attack on American soil. Another terrorist attack “is not a matter of if, but when” we keep hearing. We should also recall that during the summer of 2004, official inquiries were made into the constitutionality of postponing the 2004 presidential elections in the event of a terrorist attack—fueling suspicion that the Bush administration was not about to accept an unfavorable electoral outcome.

(...)

» Presently, the threat of synthetic terrorism should be addressed with the utmost gravity and immediacy for two reasons. First, the firing of General Kevin P. Byrnes suggests that such a terrorist act might have been — and might even still be imminent. Secondly, most Americans are focused on the aftermath of the devastating Hurricane Katrina.

» With the mass deployment of relief and military personnel to the areas affected by Katrina, is it entirely inconceivable that the administration might choose this occasion to stage a terrorist attack? Bush could certainly argue that the diversion of such personnel to the southern states resulted in an unavoidable relaxation of the nation's security networks, thus enabling an attack to occur unhindered. Moreover, what could be more infuriating to Americans than to believe that terrorists exploited the occasion of a horrendous natural disaster to deliver a disaster of their making upon an already grieving American population? A wave of unprecedented patriotic indignation would most certainly follow. »

Mis en ligne le 8 septembre 2005 à 06H35