Grippe A : complot financier ?

Le journal comique L'Humanité (très pratique pour emballer vos déchets, la qualité de son papier subventionné ne tâche pas vos mains délicates) s'est demandé hier si l'emballement médiatique sur la grippe A n'était pas un complot pour évincer la crise financière des unes des journaux !!

Au delà de la paranoïa de ceux qui voient du complot partout, ce fait permet de faire plusieurs constatations.

La première c'est qu'en matière de santé publique, le PC n'a pas évolué. On le sait, la situation sanitaire désastreuse dans les ex-pays de l'est, la pollution nucléaire, Tchernobyl et autres n'ont jamais ému les partis d'extrême gauche au pouvoir. A tel point qu'on peut se demander pourquoi les Verts courent tant après l'électorat du PC. Que l'Humanité trouve suspect les volontés des gouvernements de trop en faire sur la grippe A va donc la logique d'une idéologie qui ne se soucie pas de l'individu !!

La deuxième est que les médias ont suivi le chemin classique de l'information à propos de la grippe A. Dans un premier temps, le sujet a été effleuré puis dès le lundi, nous avons eu droit à un catastrophisme prompt à provoquer sinon un affolement , au moins un record de vente. La pandémie était à nos portes, un quart de l'humanité allait être touchée, le spectre de la grippe espagnole surgissait et cette grippe, qui avait fait 20 millions de morts, en 1919 n'aurait été qu'une aimable plaisanterie à côté de celle ci !! Effectivement, la grippe A a écarté tous les sujets, des dizaines de "spécialistes" nous expliquaient, de manière contradictoire le plus souvent, ce qui allait se passer.

Mais comme dans une autre affaire de catastrophisme médiatique (le fumeux Global Warming), les résultats n'ont pas encore été à la hauteur : pas de piles de cadavres, pas de villes rayées de la carte, pas de quarantaine massive, quelques cas par ci par là, et comble de l'horreur, une révision drastique à la baisse du nombre de morts au Mexique.

Il n'en fallait pas moins pour que les médias, se sentant floués, commencent à s'interroger sur un fameux complot qui aurait évincé la crise, les manifs, les revendications des étudiants-chercheurs... Se seraient-ils dont fait manipuler nos médias qui ne se trompent jamais (n'oublions pas que pour eux les Américains auraient mis au moins 6 mois pour atteindre Bagdad ?) et qui nous donnent une telle masse d'information ?

En fait, et comme à chaque fois, les médias ont été trop vite, n'ont rien vérifié , tellement obsédés de louper LE scoop. Le politique lui tentait de suivre, tiraillé entre le fait de trop en faire ou de ne pas assez en faire, d'être trop prudent par excès de précaution ou ne pas affoler bêtement. De toutes façons, le politique aura toujours tort aux yeux de l'opinion et des médias. Qu'il prenne trop de précautions, et le voilà oiseau de mauvais augure, qu'il n'en prenne pas assez, le voilà incapable en chef !!

Nous confondons informations et connaissances !! Plutôt que d'attendre quelques jours pour voir ce qu'il en est vraiment, la force médiatique préfère balancer du brut de décoffrage, sans rien vérifier.

Quitte ensuite à hurler au complot qu'elle a elle même créé !! 

Comments

[Sebaneau]

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31742 Two Weeks Left in Pakistan by Robert Maginnis,  6 May 2009 How secure are Pakistan's atomic weapons ? Last week, General David Petraeus (commander of America’s Central Command, which covers all U.S. forces in the Middle East and south Asia),  reportedly said Pakistan may be just two weeks  from falling to Islamic extremists.  There’s not much the U.S. can do to prevent that fall,  and the implications for Pakistan, Central Asia,  and the entire world could be catastrophic. Petraeus’ statement  is based on current operations -- the stuff reported in the press -- and secret signal and human intelligence  which expose the enemy’s true plans. Those secrets coupled with a disastrous set of circumstances  apparently convinced Petraeus the Taliban intends to quickly consume Pakistan. The Telegraph, a British paper,  reports Petraeus said that “the Pakistanis have run out of excuses” for failing to take on the Taliban.  He is reported to have urged action  to destroy the Taliban  in the next two weeks  before the U.S. decides its next course of action. Petraeus’ pessimism is understandable.  Pakistan’s government has shown weakness when dealing with the Taliban,  a radical Islamist enemy allied with al-Queda. Pakistan naively surrendered land for Taliban promises of peace  that were quickly broken. Now, the insurgents are methodically transforming Pakistan into an Islamic camp. The extremists are closing on the capital  and promise to continue their march   until all Pakistan falls. Pakistan’s military  has been slow to counter the Taliban’s advance. Rather, it keeps most forces along the border with India. Besides, the army has performed poorly against the Taliban  in part because it lacks counterinsurgency skills and equipment  but also because it lacks the will  to fight its own citizens. Petraeus is also aware  that Pakistan has reached a tipping point  because of economic and social realities  which have created an opening for the Taliban. Its economy is in free fall,  which fuels discontent.  Inflation is double digit  and jobs are scarce. Pakistanis, according to surveys,  say things are getting worse,  which bolsters the extremists’ leverage.
“The Taliban know only that  when the government is unable to deliver services,  and when there is unhappiness among the general population  because food prices have gone up tremendously,  gasoline is not available,  electricity shortages are rampant,  that it is much easier to convince the people that the Taliban have the solution rather than the government,”
said Shuja Nawaz, a director with the Washington-based Atlantic Council. Pakistan has hundreds of thousands  of internally displaced people  who fled before the advancing Taliban.  These people form temporary camps  which drain government resources and create massive discontent  which plays into the Taliban’s hands. Pakistan is also home  to more than 12,000 madrassas -- Islamic schools -- which for more than 20 years  have fed and housed hundreds of thousands of children  while pushing a militant brand of Islam. Madrassas offer no instruction beyond the memorizing of the Koran, creating a widening pool of young minds  that are sympathetic to militancy. Police in Punjab, Pakistan’s largest province, say more than two-thirds of suicide bombers had attended madrassas. That’s why Ibn Abduh Rehman, who directs the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, warned “We are at the beginning of a great storm that is about to sweep the country.” Pakistan is a bomb, the fuse is burning and as Petraeus has said, time is short.  Pakistan is the center of gravity  for the global war on terror. It harbors al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders,  provides safe haven  for terrorist training camps  and is the staging ground for terrorist operations across the globe. It’s also a snake-pit ripe for extremist recruiting. Imagine how bad things could become  if that 170 million person country  were run by extremists. It would be worse than the pre-2001 Afghanistan -- a country run by strict Sharia (Islamic) law,  a training ground for hundreds of thousands of jihadists,  home for laboratories for mass murder weapons   and a country that comes equipped with a relatively moder n military armed with nuclear tipped missiles. Everyone should be concerned about Pakistan’s 60-100 atomic weapons and their ballistic and cruise missile arsenals. The Pakistani military assures the Obama administration the nukes are secure. But the Pakistanis have never shown the U.S. where and how the weapons are secured  even though America gave Islamabad more than $100 million to create a secure arsenal. We have every reason  to question their assurances. The same Pakistani agency that created the Taliban  now controls the atomic weapons. The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s intelligence service, created the Taliban with American help in the 1980s to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, but the ISI continues to supply and employ Taliban services. Why should America trust the ISI, especially  if its Frankenstein [monster] takes over the government? The Taliban have also announced  their terrorist intentions. Taliban commanders promise to welcome and support al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and other militants aiming to oust Americans from Afghanistan. Imagine what al-Qaeda could do with a country like Pakistan which has a large Indian Ocean coastline -- think Somalia with nukes.  America’s war in Afghanistan  will suffer a serious set-back with extremists in Islamabad. We depend on Pakistan’s Karachi port  and two main supply routes through that country to sustain operations in Afghanistan.  A Taliban-run government would immediately sever those routes. So what can the U.S.  do to prevent Pakistan from being taken over and then what should we do should that happen? There’s very little the U.S. can do  to vaccinate Pakistan from the extremists. American leaders have already prodded Islamabad  to fight back, and our promised economic and military aid  will take months to begin arriving  and may not be enough even then. Our diplomats could appeal to India, Pakistan’s arch enemy,  to withdraw forces from their common border. That would take pressure off Pakistan,  providing them the freedom to shift some of their 250,000 forces now on the Indian border  to the counterinsurgency fight. But the best short term solution  would be a military coup  that replaces Pakistan’s weak government,  declares martial law   and quickly redeploys the army against the Taliban. Even that solution may be too late if the army doesn’t vigorously take charge. The Obama administration must prepare for the worst -- Pakistan falls into extremist hands.  Our first priority  must be securing Pakistan’s atomic weapons.  We should develop plans with and without Pakistan’s ISI and military  to move all atomic weapons out of that country to a secure location like Kandahar, Afghanistan’s military air field. This risky operation depends on whether the ISI and or the military cooperate, which is far from assured. We must find new resupply routes to Afghanistan. Our options are either look to the north accepting Russia’s pre-conditions  and or turn to Iran which will demand a steep diplomatic cost as well. Unfortunately, we lack the aircraft to sustain our forces in land-locked Afghanistan.  With extremists running Islamabad,  the Afghan war would expand  to include Pakistan and quite likely morph into a broader regional war  that includes India. It’s doubtful the U.S. and NATO  will commit more forces to a Central Asian