Aujourd'hui sur Chomsky.info/whatsnew.htm

WorkingForChange.com interview, 'There Is No War on Terror', with Geov Parrish (December 23, 2005). An excerpt:

[Y]ou can measure the number of terrorist attacks. Well, that's gone up sharply under the Bush administration, very sharply after the Iraq war. As expected -- it was anticipated by intelligence agencies that the Iraq war would increase the likelihood of terror. And the post-invasion estimates by the CIA, National Intelligence Council, and other intelligence agencies are exactly that. Yes, it increased terror. In fact, it even created something which never existed -- a new training ground for terrorists, much more sophisticated than Afghanistan, where they were training professional terrorists to go out to their own countries. So, yeah, that's a way to deal with the War on Terror, namely, increase terror.

- posted by Pablo @ 11:05 AM

Voici un extrait de l'introduction d'un article multivitaminé sur le cas spécifique de la performance de l'administration Cheney dans le dossier de la sécurité interne des U.S. au sens précis de cette administration. Cet article est un bon exemple de ce qu'un journaliste ou éditorialiste correctement éduqué, e.g. Michel C. Auger et Mario Roy, ne peut littéralement pas comprendre, comme le dit merveilleusement la phrase sous le titre de ce blogue. L'introduction porte sur le non-travail fait par les médias U.S. sur le sujet, ce qui permet d'évacuer en partie du corps du texte cet angle d'analyse, certes essentiel, mais qui aurait allongé l'article s'il y avait été densément intégré, comme il l'est naturellement chez Herman et Chomsky. Faut lire des livres des fois.

Bush has gotten away with this image of security-savior by stoking fears, stirring up patriotic ardor, manufacturing wars—or rather invasions of small and virtually defenseless countries

[...]

But he couldn’t have done this without an ultra-compliant media that followed his agenda, featured virtually without comment his photo-ops, serial misrepresentations of fact, promoted scares, and refused to challenge their leader, serving him much in the manner of the media of a totalitarian state. Professor Lance Bennett refers to this media performance as a “near-perfect journalistic participation in government propaganda operations.” The large right-wing segment of the media have functioned as literal press agents and cheerleaders for the Bush administration, setting the tone and helping cow the “liberal” sector of the corporate media into similar, if less vocal, subservience to the government (although most of them didn’t need to be cowed).

George Bush Versus US National Security, Edward S. Herman, octobre 2003

Edward Herman est un analyste des médias important, qu'il faut visiter, ne serait-ce par exemple que sur la campagne de propagande menée dans les médias, U.S. principalement, mais son travail s'applique en tout point aux médias québécois, campagne résultant en la fabrique du consentement de la population étatsunienne (et québécoise donc) à l'aggression du Kosovo par l'OTAN sous la férule de Clinton. Le chef recommande cet article. Avouez que le monsieur a du style et qu'il sait rhétorer:

If one argues that the policy makers decided to attack Yugoslavia for geopolitical reasons, that is apparently a conspiracy theory; the war managers “conspire” to this cynical end. On the other hand, the belief that they do it because of Clinton’s and Blair’s “exasperation” at Milosevic’s evil, as Rieff would have it, is not conspiracy theory—you can’t conspire to do something of which Rieff approves. We are clearly dealing here with comic book level analysis, but acceptable in the mainstream.

Nuggets From A Nuthouse, Edward S. Herman, novembre 2003