Former Top NSA Official: 'We Are Now In A Police State.'
Posted on December 18, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog
32-year NSA Veteran Who Created Mass Surveillance System Says Government Use of Data Gathered Through Spying “Is a Totalitarian Process”
Bill Binney is the high-level NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information. A 32-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a 'legend' within the agency, Binney was the senior technical director within the agency and managed thousands of NSA employees.
Binney has been interviewed by virtually all of the mainstream media, including CBS, ABC, CNN, New York Times, USA Today, Fox News, PBS and many others.
Last year, Binney held his thumb and forefinger close together, and said:
We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state.
But today, Binney told Washington’s Blog that the U.S. has already become a police state.
By way of background, the government is spying on virtually everything we do.
All of the information gained by the NSA through spying is then shared with federal, state and local agencies, and they are using that information to prosecute petty crimes such as drugs and taxes. The agencies are instructed to intentionally “launder” the information gained through spying, i.e. to pretend that they got the information in a more legitimate way … and to hide that from defense attorneys and judges.
This is a bigger deal than you may realize, as legal experts say that there are so many federal and state laws in the United States, that no one can keep track of them all … and everyone violates laws every day without even knowing it.
The NSA also ships Americans’ most confidential, sensitive information to foreign countries like Israel (and here), the UK and other countries … so they can “unmask” the information and give it back to the NSA … or use it for their own purposes.
Binney told us today:
The main use of the collection from these [NSA spying] programs [is] for law enforcement.
These slides give the policy of the DOJ/FBI/DEA etc. on how to use the NSA data. In fact, they instruct that none of the NSA data is referred to in courts – cause it has been acquired without a warrant.
So, they have to do a 'Parallel Construction' and not tell the courts or prosecution or defense the original data used to arrest people. This I call: a 'planned programed perjury policy' directed by US law enforcement.
And, as the last line on one slide says, this also applies to 'Foreign Counterparts.'
This is a total corruption of the justice system not only in our country but around the world. The source of the info is at the bottom of each slide. This is a totalitarian process – means we are now in a police state.
Binney grew up in rural Pennsylvania and graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in mathematics from the Pennsylvania State University in 1970. He said that he volunteered for the Army during the Vietnam era in order to select work that would interest him rather than be drafted and have no input. He was found to have strong aptitudes for mathematics, analysis, and code-breaking, and served four years from 1965–1969 at the Army Security Agency before going to the NSA in 1970. Binney was a Russia specialist and worked in the operations side of intelligence, starting as an analyst and ending as Technical Director prior to becoming a geopolitical world Technical Director. In the 1990s, he co-founded a unit on automating signals intelligence with NSA research chief Dr. John Taggart. Binney's NSA career culminated as Technical Leader for intelligence in 2001. Having expertise in intelligence analysis, traffic analysis, systems analysis, knowledge management, and mathematics (including set theory, number theory, and probability), Binney has been described as one of the best analysts and code breakers in the NSA's history. After retiring from the NSA he founded 'Entity Mapping, LLC,' a private intelligence agency together with fellow NSA whistleblower J. Kirk Wiebe to market their analysis program to government agencies. NSA continued to retaliate against them, ultimately preventing them from getting work, or causing contracts they had secured to be terminated abruptly.
Whistleblowing
In September 2002, he, along with J. Kirke Wiebe and Edward Loomis, asked the U.S. Defense Department to investigate the NSA for allegedly wasting 'millions and millions of dollars' on Trailblazer, a system intended to analyze data carried on communications networks such as the Internet. Binney had been one of the inventors of an alternative system, ThinThread, which was shelved when Trailblazer was chosen instead. Binney has also been publicly critical of the NSA for spying on U.S. citizens, saying of its expanded surveillance after the September 11, 2001 attacks that 'it's better than anything that the KGB, the Stasi, or the Gestapo and SS ever had' as well as noting Trailblazer's ineffectiveness and unjustified high cost compared to the far less intrusive ThinThread. He was furious that the NSA hadn't uncovered the 9/11 plot and stated that intercepts it had collected but not analyzed likely would have garnered timely attention with his leaner more focused system.
Niet alleen de bureaucratie is gelijkgeschakeld, maar ook de westerse mainstream pers. Haar doel is niet te informeren, maar te disciplineren. Al in de jaren zestig schreef de gerenommeerde Amerikaanse socioloog C. Wright Mills dat
het doel van de opinie-organisatoren [is] om de bevolking in een voortdurende staat van emotionele onderworpenheid te houden... Immers, als het maar eenmaal gelukt is om een mentaliteit van volgzaamheid en gehoorzaamheid te kweken, is het niet moeilijk meer om de mensen te doen geloven en te doen voelen wat men maar wil... hun opinies zijn parallel omdat ze alle uit één bron afkomstig zijn: die van de media.
Het belang van de ideologische versie van de werkelijkheid werd in de achttiende eeuw door de Schotse Verlichtings-filosoof David Hume benadrukt toen hij schreef over 'the easiness with which the many are governed by the few' en 'the implicit submission with which the men resign their own sentiments and passions to those of their rulers.' Hume concludeerde in OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT:
When we enquire by what means this wonder is brought about we shall find, that as Force is always on the side of the governed, the governors have nothing to support them but opinion. It is therefore, on opinion only that government is founded; and this maxim extends to the most despotic and most military governments, as well as to the most free and most popular. The soldan of EGYPT, or the emperor of ROME, might drive his harmless subjects, like brute beasts, against their sentiments and inclination: But he must, at least, have led his mamalukes, or prætorian bands, like men, by their opinion.
Vandaar het doorslaggevende belang van een gelijkgeschakelde, voor het systeem betrouwbare, pers in de massamaatschappij. Hoewel ik de afgelopen jaren honderden voorbeelden heb gegeven uit de commerciële massamedia van Hume's en Mills' gelijk, zal ik voor het gemak nog een recent archetype geven, omdat die zo keurig in de taal zelf is verborgen. Dinsdag 18 maart meldde Trouw:
Moord op Krim-Tataar tekent 'klimaat van wetteloosheid'
Een Tataarse activist is dood gevonden op het Oekraïense schiereiland de Krim. De 39-jarige Reshat Ametov verdween begin maart tijdens een demonstratie in het centrum van de regionale hoofdstad Simferopol. Hij is daar meegenomen door drie onbekende mannen in militaire uniformen, stelde de mensenrechtenorganisatie Human Rights Watch (HRW), die spreekt van 'een klimaat van wetteloosheid' op de Krim.
Donderdag 27 februari 2014 berichtte De Volkskrant:
Amnesty: Israël doodt moedwillig Palestijnen
Sinds begin 2011 zijn in het bezette gebied zeker 261 Palestijnen ernstig gewond geraakt door munitie waarmee de Israëlische troepen schoten. Onder hen zijn 67 kinderen. Tegelijk zijn zeker 8500 Palestijnse burgers - onder wie 1500 kinderen - ernstig gewond geraakt door andere oorzaken. Het gaat dan om het afschieten van rubberen kogels en de ruime inzet van traangas. Volgens Amnesty zijn hierdoor ook enkele mensen gestorven.
En ook Trouw meldde:
Amnesty: Israël doodt moedwillig Palestijnen
Israëlische militairen en politieagenten gebruikten in de afgelopen drie jaar grof, willekeurig en veelal onnodig geweld tegen Palestijnen op de bezette Westelijke Jordaanoever. Bestraffing van daders blijft vooralsnog uit, ook al is er in sommige gevallen bewijs dat slachtoffers moedwillig zijn gedood en is er mogelijk sprake van oorlogsmisdaden…
In 2013 zijn volgens Amnesty 22 Palestijnen gedood door de Israëlische troepen, meer dan het totaal van de twee jaar ervoor. Van hen kwamen veertien om tijdens protesten. Er waren vier kinderen bij en bijna alle doden waren onder de 25 jaar.
Wat onmiddellijk opvalt is dat Trouw, nog voordat er een onderzoek is ingesteld, meteen spreekt van 'Moord' en klakkeloos doorgeeft dat er sprake is van 'the climate of lawlessness that has been pervasive in Crimea over the last week,' een kwalificatie die Human Rights Watch nooit gebruikt wanneer het de langdurige collectieve bestraffing betreft van de Palestijnse bevolking door Israel. Van vitaal belang is te weten dat Human Rights Watch wordt gefinancierd door de miljardair en speculant George Soros, met in totaal honderd miljoen dollar. In dit verband is het doorslaggevende feit -- angstvallig verzwegen door de westerse mainstream pers -- dat de mensenrechten zowel door westerse regeringen als door bepaalde mensenrechtenorganisaties worden misbruikt als politiek wapen. In zijn boek Ideal Illusions. How The U.S. Government Co-Opted Human Rights heeft de Amerikaanse hoogleraar James Peck deze ontwikkeling gedocumenteerd beschreven. Peck was op 26 maart 2012 een van de sprekers tijdens het International Symposium Human Rights: Ideal Illusions in Den Haag. Hij wees toen op ondermeer het volgende:
As the human rights movement evolved it moved ever further from the concerns which had animated the peace movement. It became concerned with the 'laws of war,' but it took no stand on war itself. It took no stand on aggression, arguing it couldn’t really be defined. In the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq the firm refusal of human rights organizations to take such a stand was painfully evident: 'First, on most military matters, we are neutral, because we see our principal job as monitoring the way a war is fought, and to do that effectively you can’t be seen as for or against a war. Human Rights Watch would have been much less effective in trying to shape the Pentagon’s approach in Iraq if we were viewed as confirmed opponents of the war.' This is a long way from Nuremburg. And it is a long way from raising the question of how a 'rights based nation' can democratically commit aggression—and who is then responsible…
Up until the George W. Bush administration, the greatest advantage of Human Rights Watch, wrote its longtime former director, was its 'identification with a country with a reputation for respecting rights.' Of course, the movement’s leaders noted, Washington itself has committed some terrible human rights violations; indeed, they spent a good part of their time describing them. But when mistakes and even crimes occur, those who opposed such egregious acts saw their task as shaming Washington into changing its ways, to remind American leaders that the government’s power and the nation’s ideals achieved a more perfect union when dedicated to human rights…
Being 'free from' also points to an immediate challenge for human rights groups. They are often seen by many in the South and elsewhere as indirectly linked with Washington. The issue has been directly brought to the fore by Georges Soros’ grant of 100 million dollars to Human Rights Watch – with a matching grant that could bring this to $200 million. 'To be more effective' Soros said, Human Rights Watch 'has to be seen as more international, less an American organization.' Why? Because 'we lost the moral high ground during the Bush administration.' And the organization’s Executive Director adds, 'We need to be able to shape the foreign policies of these emerging powers' – Brazil, South Africa, India. Soros himself is not unknown to regime change, having been involved for some time in Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States (NIS). Human Rights Watch also has a new Chairman – the former President of the Council of Foreign Relations, and the longtime editor of its journal Foreign Affairs. Several leaders of Human Rights Watch, and members of its board of directors, have come from national security circles and the Council of Foreign Relations. From this perspective, some leading US human rights groups often do seem very much part of Washington’s semi-official world. And the trend continues: the longstanding Executive Director of the Human Rights First Committee joined the Obama administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Labor, and Human Rights. The Executive Director of Amnesty USA came to his position after working for more than a decade in the Ford Foundation’s Human Rights Unit.
The media don’t really distinguish one 'human rights group' from another. When Freedom House, once headed by a former CIA director, is labeled a human rights organization in the New York Times; or when the arrest of individuals working for semi-official US 'democratizing NGOs' in Egypt is criticized as a violation of 'human rights' by Human Rights Watch we have entered into the blurring together of quasi-official, governmental, and non-governmental groups in ways again so useful to power, but not to human rights. And we have, usually unknowingly, stepped into Washington’s 'war of ideas' which thrives by lumping together the positions of diverse groups in ways that provide a cover for the pursuit of its own particular interests. This is just one example of how the human rights movement has not been 'free from' Washington’s influence – not nearly free enough, that is, if it is to have a viable global presence and a truly impartial critical stance.
Waar het hier om gaat is de onafhankelijkheid en daarmee de betrouwbaarheid van een organisatie als Human Rights Watch (HRW). De speculant George Soros heeft in elk geval een groot belang bij het financieren van Human Rights Watch, zoals professor Peck terecht opmerkte. En ook de leiding van deze mensenrechtenorganisatie heeft een duidelijke politieke agenda, zoals de directeur van HRW, Kenneth Roth vertelde nadat de organisatie met de gift van 100 miljoen van Soros 'looks to expand global reach.' Roth verklaarde: 'We need to be able to shape the foreign policies of these emerging powers.' Bovendien is 'Soros himself not unknown to regime change, having been involved for some time in Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States (NIS),' zoals de Washington Post berichtte.
Ook gezien de opvallend sensationele wijze waarop Rachel Denber, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch berichtte over één (!) nog niet onderzochte 'moord' op de Krim, is het alles behalve overdreven te stellen dat Human Rights Watch niet alleen het belang van de mensenrechten dient, maar ook een politieke agenda heeft die spoort met die van de macht in Washington en die van Wall Street. En welk belang heeft de financier van HRW? We weten inmiddels dat hij met de 100 miljoen dollar gift aan HRW de politieke koers wil bepalen van soevereine landen. Bovendien werd op 14 april 2011 bekend dat
Ukraine’s leading political party has said that the international financier George Soros has been preparing a 'Libyan scenario' for the country.
The information about George Soros’s involvement in Ukrainian politics was openly voiced by Yulia Timoshenko in 2008. Timoshenko, then the country’s prime minister, said that she was attempting to minimize the effect of the global financial crisis by following George Soros’s advice. This raised suspicions that through such advice George Soros could influence the rate of the Ukrainian national currency in his own speculative interests.
Een onderonsje in de wandelgangen tussen George Soros en John McCain.
Waarom zou de door de 'vrije pers' als 'filantroop' bewierookte miljardair Soros, die via regelmatig dubieuze beursspeculaties een gigantisch vermogen bijeen wist te vergaren, de westerse politieke intriges in de Oekraïne financieel hebben gesteund? Op woensdag 26 februari 2014 gaf hij daar zelf de volgende verklaring voor:
Ukraine is a potentially attractive investment destination.
Ondermeer daarom moest het democratisch gekozen bewind in Oekraïne met geweld ten val worden gebracht. Het voormalige Oostblokland met zijn 55 miljoen inwoners is voor een speculant een 'aantrekkelijke investerings bestemming.' Het is namelijk een lage lonen land dichtbij de EU, én met de 11 miljard subsidie van de Europese Commissie kan de basis worden gelegd voor een neoliberale markteconomie die, zoals overal elders in het Westen, de kloof tussen arm en rijk vergroot dankzij deregulering en privatisering en dankzij de 'baanloze groei,' veroorzaakt door de automatisering. Om de geplande neoliberale toekomst van Oekraïne mogelijk te maken moest volgens Soros en zijn volgelingen nog wel het volgende worden georganiseerd:
To encourage participation, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) could invest in companies alongside foreign and local investors, as it did in Central Europe.
Ukraine would thus open its domestic market to goods manufactured or assembled by European companies’ wholly- or partly-owned subsidiaries, while the EU would increase market access for Ukrainian companies and help them integrate into global markets.
Zo gezegd, zo gedaan. Binnen één werkweek werd de neoliberale elite op haar wenken bediend en sluisde de Europese Commissie via de European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 11 miljard euro naar het nieuwe regime, waarin leden van de neonazi partij, op vitale posten, deel uitmaken.
Desondanks is, volgens George Soros, al dit geld van de Europese belastingbetalers, lang niet voldoende. Twee weken later voorspelde de miljardair dat 'Ukraine Could Ruin The EU.' De bevolking van de Europese Unie, op wie al jarenlang wordt bezuinigd in de verwachting dat daarmee de kapitalistische economische crisis verdwijnt, moet onmiddellijk met nog veel meer geld over de brug komen:
The billionaire financier says in its tepid response to Russia’s Crimea land grab, the EU flubbed a key chance to breathe new life into the stale union.
George Soros, one of the world’s leading investors, has warned that the European Union is in danger of falling apart if it fails to confront Vladimir Putin’s naked aggression in Ukraine.
The billionaire financier told The Daily Beast that European governments should have seized on Russia’s land grab in Crimea to breathe new life into a union that is disintegrating and stumbling towards oblivion. Instead, he argued, squabbling European nations have failed to meet the challenge and continued to act in their own narrow self-interest. 'Europe was totally unprepared for this crisis and Putin outmaneuvered Europe with no difficulty,' he said.
Soros, who became known as the Man Who Broke the Bank of England after making $1 billion by betting against Europe’s previous financial union, has long insisted that the Euro was being fatally mismanaged. His latest book, published this week, is entitled The Tragedy of the European Union. A loud supporter at the launch of the Euro currency and a cheerleader for a united Europe, Soros has been confounded by what he calls the 'nightmare' reality 15 years after its introduction.
Speaking in London, he said it was heart-breaking to see European governments shrug their shoulders at the precise moment the continent was finally witnessing an unprecedented popular uprising in the name of the European Union. 'Ukrainians have effectively proved that they are willing to sacrifice their lives to get closer to a Europe that is, at the same time, in the process of disintegration,' he said.
With Putin’s troops in Crimea and a referendum on joining Russia due to be held over the weekend, Soros said there was still time for Europe to act, and reinvigorate the European Union’s withering soul.
'I would argue passionately that [the European Union] should not be a failed experiment and events in Ukraine are a wake-up call to face that issue,' he said. 'It’s a challenge, and I hope that Europe will respond to it and actually really rediscover its original mission because that’s what got lost in this distortion that has occurred.'
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, indicated that Europe was willing to increase pressure on the Kremlin on Thursday during her most emotional and strident speech since the start of the Ukrainian crisis. She said a referendum orchestrated by Crimea’s pro-Russia parliament would be a 'catastrophe,' and indicated that the EU was willing to impose travel bans and asset freezes on people and firms accused of helping to violate Ukraine’s territorial integrity as soon as Monday.
Soros argued that it was more important for Europe to offer positive assistance to the struggling Ukrainian government. 'It’s very important to respond and respond the right way, which is not necessarily to impose sanctions on Russia, but to actually help Ukraine financially, and also with technical assistance—something like a European Marshall Plan for Ukraine—that would be the right response,' he said.
Boven: v.l.n.r. Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Oleh Tyahnybok van de neonazi Svoboda-partij en John McCain.
Beneden: De met geld van Washington en Soros aan de macht geholpen Oleh Tyahnybok brengt de neonazi-groet.
Hoewel de westerse commerciële massamedia Soros een 'filantroop' betitelen, zal duidelijk zijn dat we in werkelijkheid met een asociale intrigant te maken hebben 'who became known as the Man Who Broke the Bank of England after making $1 billion by betting against Europe’s previous financial union,' die het Verenigd Koninkrijk in één dag 3.300.000.000 pond armer maakte. Desondanks geeft de polderpers zonder enige terughoudendheid door wat Human Rights Watch beweert. Vandaar dat ook Trouw klakkeloos doorgeeft dat er een 'moord' is gepleegd op het Russische schiereiland waar een 'klimaat van wetteloosheid' zou heersen. Het spreekt voor zich dat de mainstream pers en Human Rights Watch nooit maar dan ook nooit zal stellen dat door de terreur van de zogeheten 'Joodse staat,' in de bezette Palestijnse gebieden al decennialang een 'klimaat van wetteloosheid' bestaat. Het zionistische regime staat boven de wet, omdat het een bevriende natie vertegenwoordigt, Rusland is weer de oude boeman, en Human Rights Watch zal er alles aan doen om dit beeld, meer is het niet, diep in het bewustzijn te laten doordringen. Hoe beter deze 'mensenrechtenorganisatie' hierin slaagt des te zekerder ze ervan kunnen zijn dat Soros haar blijft financieren. Zoals bijna ieder mens een prijs heeft, kent ook bijna elke mensenrechtenorganisatie haar prijs. De prijs van Human Rights Watch is 100 miljoen dollar uitgesmeerd over tien jaar, 10 miljoen per jaar, niet meer dan een fooi voor een miljardair als Soros, die door speculatie op één dag, Black Wednesday, 16 September 1992, meer dan 1.200.000.000 euro opstreek. Maar die context verzwijgen mijn collega's, uit angst ooit nog eens hun hand te moeten ophouden. Meer over de westerse mediacorruptie later.
Beneden: De met geld van Washington en Soros aan de macht geholpen Oleh Tyahnybok brengt de neonazi-groet.
Hoewel de westerse commerciële massamedia Soros een 'filantroop' betitelen, zal duidelijk zijn dat we in werkelijkheid met een asociale intrigant te maken hebben 'who became known as the Man Who Broke the Bank of England after making $1 billion by betting against Europe’s previous financial union,' die het Verenigd Koninkrijk in één dag 3.300.000.000 pond armer maakte. Desondanks geeft de polderpers zonder enige terughoudendheid door wat Human Rights Watch beweert. Vandaar dat ook Trouw klakkeloos doorgeeft dat er een 'moord' is gepleegd op het Russische schiereiland waar een 'klimaat van wetteloosheid' zou heersen. Het spreekt voor zich dat de mainstream pers en Human Rights Watch nooit maar dan ook nooit zal stellen dat door de terreur van de zogeheten 'Joodse staat,' in de bezette Palestijnse gebieden al decennialang een 'klimaat van wetteloosheid' bestaat. Het zionistische regime staat boven de wet, omdat het een bevriende natie vertegenwoordigt, Rusland is weer de oude boeman, en Human Rights Watch zal er alles aan doen om dit beeld, meer is het niet, diep in het bewustzijn te laten doordringen. Hoe beter deze 'mensenrechtenorganisatie' hierin slaagt des te zekerder ze ervan kunnen zijn dat Soros haar blijft financieren. Zoals bijna ieder mens een prijs heeft, kent ook bijna elke mensenrechtenorganisatie haar prijs. De prijs van Human Rights Watch is 100 miljoen dollar uitgesmeerd over tien jaar, 10 miljoen per jaar, niet meer dan een fooi voor een miljardair als Soros, die door speculatie op één dag, Black Wednesday, 16 September 1992, meer dan 1.200.000.000 euro opstreek. Maar die context verzwijgen mijn collega's, uit angst ooit nog eens hun hand te moeten ophouden. Meer over de westerse mediacorruptie later.
De westerse mainstream pers mag dan wel in de eigen propaganda zijn gaan geloven, de rest van de wereld doet dit geenszins. Eerst de leugen van de Huffington Post:
WINS CRIMEA, LOSES WORLD
Obama Announces Sanctions Against Top Russian Officials... EU Slaps Travel Bans On 21 People... Obama: International Community Will 'Never' Recognize Vote... Annexation Could Happen Within Days... Putin Declares Crimea 'Sovereign And Independent' State... U.S. Official: Mass Evidence Of Voting Anomalies... REPORT: Russia To Sanction U.S. Senators... LIVE UPDATES...
Four lessons to be learned from the Ukraine crisis
(People's Daily Online) 09:14, March 19, 2014
（Editor：LiangJun、Huang Jin）
Amnesty International bericht:
NEWS
MARCH 19, 2014
Ukraine: Nationalist MP launches brutal attack against TV executive
A violent attack by a nationalist member of parliament against the head of one of Ukraine’s leading TV channels yesterday must be urgently investigated, and those responsible brought to justice, said Amnesty International.
Oleksandr Panteleymonov, head of the First National TV Channel, was visited in his offices by Igor Miroshnichenko from the Svoboda (Freedom) Party and at least five thugs who beat him and forced him to write a resignation letter.
Igor Miroshnichenko is a member of the parliamentary Committee on freedom of speech.
“It is astonishing that a member of the parliamentary committee on freedom of speech was involved in this attack. The acting authorities must send a signal that this sort of behaviour will not be tolerated in Ukraine,” said Heather McGill, Ukraine researcher at Amnesty International.
The attackers accused Panteleymonov of working for the Russian authorities after a live broadcast of the signing of the agreement between President Putin and the de facto Crimean authorities.
They used racist language and demanded that Oleksandr Panteleymonov apologise. They filmed the whole attack and posted it on the internet. The attackers then abducted Panteleymonov telling him that he would be forced to apologise to protesters still camping out on Independent Square. He was released a few hours after the attack became public.
“This assault on freedom of expression must be immediately investigated and those responsible must be prosecuted. Anything less will only open the door to further attacks against media professionals and activists,” said Heather McGill.
“The acting Ukrainian authorities must waste no time in demonstrating that basic human rights are protected in Ukraine and that nobody will face discrimination because of their political views or ethnic origin.”
1 opmerking:
Weergaloos goed artikel:
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.nl/2014/03/today-every-free-person-in-world-has-won.html
Groeten, Ben
Een reactie posten