More information?

Содержание

Regarding the Żubr activists, it is hard to get international sympathy for activists who associate with a war criminal such as Condoleezza Rice, responsible (together with Cheney, Bush, et al.) for killing about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_survey_of_mortality_before_and_after_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq">100,000 Iraqi civilians from March 2003 to September 2004</a> (and probably another similar number from October 2004 to December 2005) in order to steal their oil. If they are detained on false charges, of course that is a bad thing, and they should be free, but when one group of non-state terrorists fights against state terror, it is difficult to support either side.

If żubr activists want international support, it's time they start declaring their independence from US terrorism.

Regarding the Vitebsk explosions, there are two obvious hypotheses:
<ul>
<li>Białorus authorities made the explosion in order to have an excuse to arrest anti-Łukaszenko political party members 
<li><a href="http://belarus.indymedia.ru/1928">US State Department/NED/IRI/NDI/USAID</a> trained a few "democrats" in bomb-making techniques who planted the bomb in order to provoke the Białorus government into detaining and/or arresting political party members, and claim that peaceful democrats are being oppressed.
</ul>

Both of these hypotheses are consistent with the detention of Aleksandr Dorofeev. 
<ul>
<li>Is there evidence that the Białorus State is willing to kill/wound dozens of citizens in order to retain power? Are there precedents? (This is a wiki: someone who knows more, please add info.) 
If this hypothesis is correct, then the authorities are taking a big risk, because if they are found out, then they will look repressive. 
<li>There are plenty of precedents for the CIA/NED/etc hypothesis, according to which citizens are killed in order to justify US-supported opposition groups and international military intervention (most recently: Venezuela April 2002, Haiti Jan/Feb 2004). 
If the CIA/NED/etc hypothesis is correct, then the authorities are in a difficult position. If they do nothing, then the risk is having more bombs go off and a risk of an escalating cycle of violence. If they detain political party members, many of whom may not even know of the CIA/NED/etc actions, then they still may not obtain credible proof of the identity of the bomber and they will look unnecessarily repressive.

But speculation is not evidence. Is there any direct evidence for either hypothesis? (Apart from the historical patterns of CIA and KGB actions over the past 50 years...)

Powered by Free Software, including Ruby programming language, PostgreSQL database. Samizdat engine is free software; you can distribute/modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or later.