Au cas où vous ne seriez pas au courant, Kerry, le candidat démocrate en tête dans les primaires est donné gagnant face à Bush par les deux derniers sondages, 54% contre 46%.
Le chômage croissant et le déficit abracadabrantesque, ainsi que l'enlisement en Irak, détournent de plus en plus d'états-uniens de Bush.
Bush lui-même vient de déclarer dans son discours de l'Etat de l'Union que les américains avaient tort d'être rassurés par l'absence d'attentat depuis le 11 septembre: "That hope is understandable, comforting - and false," he said. "The terrorists continue to plot against America and the civilized world. And by our will and courage, this danger will be defeated."
Le plus célèbre journaliste du New York Times, William Safire, a prédit le 31 décembre pour 2004 une attaque majeure sur le sol US; "October surprise". Cela a beaucoup fait parler aux USA: les médias ont dit que dans un tel cas Bush gagnerait les élections ou qu'elles seraient annulées. Safire écrivait les discours de Nixon et fréquente depuis des décennies l'élite politico-militaire à Washington. Sa prédiction est l'écho de ce qui se dit au plus haut niveau à Washington. Est-ce fait dans l'intention de préparer les américains au pire, mais aussi à l'annulation de la prochaine élection présidentielle? Bush y ferait-il allusion ici? => Borrowing a page from Abraham Lincoln, who urged voters during the Civil War to avoid "changing horses in midstream," Bush called on Americans to stick with him as he confronts terrorism, Iraq and economic problems.
Que penser de cette réunion au sommet pour préparer avec les big boss des médias la prochaine attaque terroriste? =>
http://www.nypost.com/gossip/44885.htm
Steven Brill had a summit meeting of TV anchormen and their bosses over dinner at his Fifth Avenue apartment on Tuesday night with Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to discuss how they'll cover the next terrorist attack. Brill, whose book "After" detailed the response to 9/11, spearheads the America Prepared Campaign to educate the public. Joining Brill, his wife Cynthia and two of their three kids for dinner were Fox News Channel boss Roger Ailes, ABC News prexie David Westin, CBS News chief Andrew Heyward, CNN anchor Aaron Brown, plus Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw.
Un récent discours du vice-président va dans le même sens:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article. [...] 4AC301.DTL
Cheney affirme que le nouvel ennemi des USA est bien pire que n'importe quel ennemi jamais affronté, que des changements gigantesques sont nécessaires au sein de la défense US, et que pire que le 11 septembre est en préparation:
"And as our intelligence shows, the terrorists continue plotting to kill on an ever-larger scale, including here in the United States."
Le général Tommy Franks, qui a mené l'invasion de l'Irak, a lui aussi fait une déclaration fracassante qui a elle aussi beaucoup fait parler aux USA: selon lui, si les USA sont victimes d'une arme de destruction massive, la Constitution des Etats-Unis devra être suspendue. Alors que ça n'a pas été le cas pendant la 2nde Guerre Mondiale, durant laquelle les élections continuaient à être organisés aux USA.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/EDW311A.html
Bush est déjà un dictateur de fait grâce aux actions illégales organisées par son frère, son père et ses amis de la CIA en 2000.
On sait depuis lors qu'ils sont prêts à tout.
Bush a besoin d'une attaque d'autant plus rapidement que cinq procès vont avoir lieu contre l'administration Bush et ses lois d'urgence:
<< Michael Ruppert and John Dean have commented on the importance of and, how crucial these court decisions are, in testing the powers of the Bush Administration.
The point is that I would suggest that instead of an 'October Surprise', this 'surprise' will come much earlier, perhaps to thwart or delay these court decisions that may and, certainly should go against the Bush juanta.
FYI
The cases are:
John Dean writes:
"Sealed Case. A case so secret it does not appear on the Court's docket, and the Solicitor General simply refers to it as "this matter ? that is required to be kept under seal." In fact, it is not all that secret. It involves Mohamed Kamel Baellahouel, who wants the Court to rule on whether he was improperly secretly jailed. The government want to argue its case in secret. But some twenty news organizations are opposing this extreme secrecy.
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld. This case raises the rights of an American citizen -- Yaser Hamdi -- who was captured overseas and held in the United States as an "enemy combatant." Hamdi was arrested in Afghanistan.
Rasul v. Bush, and Al Odah v. United States. These cases address the habeas corpus rights of aliens detained at the U.S. base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The government is maintaining that these aliens do not have the right to file habeas corpus petitions in U.S. federal courts.
Padilla v. Rumsfeld. This case involves Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen who is being held indefinitely, in a military prison, as an "enemy combatant." He was arrested when deplaning in Chicago. (Thus, his case may be treated differently from that of Hamdi, who was arrested abroad, in Afghanistan.) The Second Circuit, in a 2-1 ruling, held that Padilla's detention violated the Non-Detention Act of 1971, which asserts that no citizens may be held by the federal government "except pursuant to an act of Congress." The Government is appealing, claiming that the President has power to unilaterally cause such detentions to occur.
Cheney v. Judicial Watch and Sierra Club. This case involves the right of the vice president (and, by implication, of the president) to refuse to turn over documents in a civil lawsuit. The suit seeks to determine if Cheney violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (the law that forced First Lady Hillary Clinton to open up her sessions on health care).
Given the importance of all of these cases (with their implications), I've got them on my docket, and" plan to follow them in the coming weeks and months. >>
Last but not least: les autorités chercheraient activement une bombe nucléaire à New-York, d'après des médias italien et US.
<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>.<>
<> LA VOZ DE AZTLAN NEWS BULLETIN <>
<>.<>.<> Los Angeles, Alta California <>.<>.<>
January 7, 2004
New York to be "Nuked" on Feb. 2
http://www.aztlan.net/nynuked.htm
George Noory, host of the national radio program Coast to Coast, spoke last night of a terrorist nuclear bomb attack on New York City to take place next month on Tuesday February 2. Radio talk host Noory obtained his information from the respected Italian newspaper Il Giornale based in Milan.
The Il Giornale devoted a large part of the front page to the report and prefaced it with the headline, "Al Qaeda Threatens to Nuke New York on February 2". According to Il Giornale, the threat was stated through a video shown on a web site associated with al Qaeda.
This threat may explain the unprecedented security measures that have been undertaken by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg during the past two weeks. Callers from New York City to the radio program Coast to Coast said that Manhattan and surrounding neighborhoods are being monitored by a large number of helicopters designed to detect "radiation emissions" on the ground. A nuclear device hidden in a truck or building can be detected by sensitive radiological equipment aboard helicopters that fly relatively close to the ground. Also, the US Department of Homeland Security has sent large fixed radiation detectors and hundreds of pager-size radiation monitors for use by the New York City Police Department.
Under the present political environment, it is very difficult to ascertain whether the threat is credible, however, this is not the first time that reliable journalists have reported on the imminent nuking of New York City. On November 14, 2002, the Brazilian journalist Pepe Escobar who writes for the Hong Kong based Asian Times reported in an article titled "Apocalypse Now, or Alottanukes Soon" that "Seven nuclear heads have already been positioned in seven of America's major cities and they are ready to be detonated." On August 30, 2001 Escobar predicted the World Trade Center terrorist attack in an article titled, "Get Osama! Now! Or else " in which he reported for the Asian Times on a meeting between the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Get Osama! Now! Or else
http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/CH30Df01.html
Also, it is now very difficult to determine who may actually be behind the terrorist attacks and threats. If a nuclear bomb is detonated in New York City on February 2, most likely it will be blamed on Osama Bin Laden, however, many Americans are now wondering if Osama Bin Laden was actually behind the strike on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. One of these is political scientist Joel Skousen who was Coast to Coast's guest last night. Skousen said, "No verifiable evidence has been produced that shows that Arabs were in charge of the strike." He also suggested that the last few presidents have been "script readers" who take their orders from a controlling set of individuals above them.
George Noory, Coast to Coast radio host, seconded Mr. Skousen's beliefs when he expressed that there is something about the current terrorist attacks and threats that he "just can't put his finger on." He said that the situation is like a "jigsaw puzzle", that we have just a few pieces of the entire puzzle in place.