Только благодаря этому материалу, я узнала много полезного и нового.

Cпасибо создателям этого прекрасного сайта очень много полезной и интересной информации которая приносит только огромное удовольствие!

The Dictator and his ACCOMPLICES

The question remains: what happened during the night of 20th
December 2010 in Minsk? Why was the demonstration, absolutely peaceful,
without hidden agenda to overthrow the government, so bitterly and fiercely stopped
and its participants demonstratively beaten up? It becomes even stranger when we take into account that the official
shooting of this bloody play was performed from assorted points of the city
simultaneously. One cannot escape
imagining a director editing his film, savouring the repulsive details of
street brutality. At first sight the
events on the streets of the capital during the night after the election don’t
make sense at all. What was the purpose
of the violence? What gains did it bring
to its perpetrators? During the last
three years, Lukashenko and his team mates have managed to organize several
confidential and quite powerful communication channels in Western and Eastern Europe. Truly
promising alternatives have finally emerged that could help resolve financial
and privatization-related issues, as well as problems of access to raw
materials and the legitimacy of Lukashenko and his team. Criticism of the President on international markets
has dropped almost to zero. The lobbying potential of Lukashenko`s European friends has
also increased significantly.
While yesterday they would never publicly admit
they had contacts with agents of Alexander Grigoryevich, on the eve of the
election they proudly flaunted this fact – a slap in the face of those few
still insisting on a more careful reading of the Belarusian dictator’s true
intentions.     

Alluring
trade and financial contracts had sprung up. It seemed that official Minsk
would sooner or later have to hold auctions among Europeans on the most favourable
conditions. Although Russia in its turn was
flexing its muscles, brutally attacking Lukashenko in the media, it felt very
nervous watching the so-called ‘European breakthrough of Belarus’ and at the
same time continued … secretly negotiating with the regime! Let me for now (and just for now) admit the obvious: it would be illogical to kill this tendency by staging such a
violent and grotesquely absurd bloodbath in Minsk. But allow me to add just one thing: that only the greatest of fools would rely on the
predictability of Mr. Lukashenko.

It seems like Mr.
Lukashenko has deliberately started three simultaneous distracting operations. First of all, hiding nothing, his boys
began to create an ‘illusion of negotiability’ of the regime’s representatives.
Once again, it was just an illusion. An illusion which is, by the way, not very
intricate.  But the
world was always full of people ready to eagerly shut their eyes to obvious
things and to believe in the most shameful myths. One of these myths is that Lukashenko
is able to change his politics entirely. 
 In the meantime the boys of Alexander
Grigoryevich went on assisting different people of name into a hypnotic trance.
The chants they used were the same all the time. The dialogue principle of international
politics. The unique Chinese alternative of the economy. These words were repeated
by the establishment. Consider another cosmetic exercise: Lukashenko somewhat
liberalized internal political conditions of the country. Of course, no one
ever thought of moving towards a full-fledged competitive society. But the regime stopped groundless intrusions into the
ghetto where the opposition had comfortably lived for years.. Lukashenko`s agents began actively and
professionally negotiating with foreign non-government funds and consultancy
structures (such as the EBRD). One could also add that these non-government
funds willingly participated in the plot of the President. That is the huge and
real tragedy of thousands of Belarusians that occurred during the night of 20th
December. These funds actively cooperated with opposition
leaders, with civil society structures of Belarus. It is shocking enough to
know just one thing: this cooperation sometimes involved ... representatives of
the official Minsk!
The latter regularly participated in preliminary negotiations rounds. They also
advised whom (and why) these funds and structures should cooperate with. What does it all mean in practice? Let’s just
ask the partners of well-known Mr. Milinkevich if they have the answer. These
sneaky guys can tell a lot of interesting stories with a lot of bright details
when asked accordingly. I am fully aware of the fact that today the very same
Milinkevich (apparently shocked by the atrocities of “Lukashenko, a friend of
mine”) is trying to neutralize his past lamentations that the world "badly
needs a dialogue with the official Minsk".
 As for
those who do not believe me, I have a suggestion. Let us now see the truth
without any sort of hypocrisy. These streams of blood on the streets of Minsk – aren’t they a
direct result of steps taken by these sneaky bastards (sorry for my language)
guided by Mr. Milinkevich? Or shall we praise him for his attempt to westernize
Lukashenko? The answer is obvious in my opinion. The second operation was started by Lukashenko’s boys: a significant
increase of the Family’s control over promising industrial, raw materials,
transit and financial assets. Lukashenko’s team was searching for optimal
and legal ways to become members of certain companies for their future sale via
their own partnership. The ultimate aim is to have legal opportunities for withdrawing money from such companies. The third operation performed by the
President on the eve of the election: expensive
modernization of the secret service. The goal was to get rid of anything
deemed unnecessary. Even after the modernization this service is not ready for
(let alone can tackle) any  serious
intelligence or counterintelligence challenges. Instead, powerful stormtrooper
corps were formed. The secret service of Belarus is represented by gangs
organizing primitive provocations and street violence rarely seen before. The
regime has vividly demonstrated that its position is based on force rather than
analytical skills. When we compare Lukashenko’s reflections during assorted
social events before the election with the steps being taken secretly at the
same time, we can draw but one conclusion: absolutely incompatible actions were
being performed simultaneously. Somewhere
Lukashenko consciously used to tell us a
complete lie. All in all, I believe that the President (as the only and
final perpetrator of all the plots) was absolutely aware and in control of the
situation. That’s why I suggest that we take two most simple versions which
accurately (though rather simplistically) explain the reasons how this
bloodbath in Minsk
could take place.  

Version 1: Mr. Lukashenko deliberately tried to
restore and secure the most authoritarian regime in Belarus. The very regime in which people are publicly killed
and tortured in prisons for years. However, in order to ‘upgrade’
(the verb Lukashenko would most probably use) the state, one must collect some ‘strategic’
stock. Or some reserves, if you like. The West did give him these reserves
(though partially).  Contracts
began to bring lavish results. Business rushed into the
country sensing lush earnings. That was the end. Now big business will try to
ensure that Lukashenko (as the main condition for their enormous profitability)
stays in power as much as possible. The next strategic goal was to frighten Russia by
suddenly terminating a lot of … joint projects. In other words, to deprive oligarchs
– who are close to the Kremlin and enjoy its loyalty – of the opportunities to
make loads of money in Belarus,
as well as to make Russia
play its initial role of ‘selfless assistance’ provider. Now I have to explain to the uninformed reader that Russia’s state budget loses large amounts when
cooperating with Belarus.
Still, certain oligarchs (as well as servants of Lukashenko) make loads of
money instead. According to the basics of this version, the President actually
does not want any termination of ties with Russia (or more accurately, with
its affluent sons). Another goal of the plot is to temporarily (up to date
of the 2010 election) break any links between the fragile civil society and any
alternative foreign ‘sources of energy’. In other words, to bleed the opposition, to sap its strength, to turn them into a pack of dogs
fighting for the last piece of meat. To break them
psychologically, making them beg for another US banknote. Lukashenko
brilliantly managed to achieve this goal. Some ministers (Sikorski, for
example, to be mentioned later on) or even presidents (Ms. Grybauskaitė) before
your very eyes, vying with each other, were ratting out each and every
alternative opposition leader. To cut a long story short, Alexander Grigoryevich
successfully built up the mentioned ‘strategic reserve’. On 19th
December at 10 p.m. he finally pulled the trigger. Such an authoritarian regime
can survive quite happily for several years, based on terror. But it will
sooner or later face a revolution. That is the end such regimes always get. Blood
(let alone death) is never forgiven. No
matter how unthinkable this scenario is for Lukashenko at this moment, one day
he will wake up in absolute solitude, just several minutes before a crowd
enters his chamber to seek revenge for the mutilated bodies and souls of their
dear ones. The next question keeps revolving in my mind: why on earth would a person who has loads of money and
good communications with key players (who say or do nothing against him) would
suddenly select the violent option? Why wouldn’t he just invite
everybody to a conference at the night of the election to watch as the
commission gives him 80% of support live on TV? Was the brutal crackdown a
method to assure everyone that 80% is the only valid result? As you see, we
have reached a dead end once again. The most probable thing is that there is no
logic behind the crackdown. Also there is no logic behind the actions of the
secret service taken that night. That’s quite a flawless picture, isn’t it?
Still, as logical and reasonable as it may seem, this picture is not correct. The reason of my statement is simple. It rests
entirely on the motives of a mentally sane and rational individual. But does
Lukashenko make an impression of a sane person? That is the very question that
Mr. President wants everybody to ask. People can always say something like
“hey, obviously this situation cannot bring him any gain; it is just a plot
against him hatched by hawks from the president's inner circle". As a
response, let me just quote the definition of delusion, which is "a set of ideas, beliefs and conclusions that
originated not as the result of processing the information obtained. Such
ideas, beliefs and conclusions are not influenced by the obtained information
either; it is not important whether these delusive conclusions correspond to
real facts".       

Let us now approach
the subject from the other side and try
to defend Lukashenko instead.
Defenders of the President emphasize that it is highly disadvantageous for him
to put on such plays of own ‘court knights’ with bloody consequences for
ordinary people. In other words, they don’t believe that Lukashenko
would ever resort to violence. Ok then. Mr. Kuleshov (Minister of Internal
Affairs), a drunkard unable to construct a sentence without a drink, a person
who would have been expelled from high school but for a miracle, suddenly arranged
a detailed plan on how, whom and when to beat. And then, secretly, he staged
the violence. Lukashenko in the meantime noticed nothing. Isn’t it a little bit ridiculous? Or, maybe Mr. Scheimann
was the person behind the scenes? In comparison with Kuleshov this person may
be regarded as a pillar of modern science in the country. Lukashenko was again
left to guess the plans of his partners, wasn’t he? Or was it Victor
Lukashenko? He is another respected and recognized intellectual in the
political establishment of Belarus.
He could successfully play the leading part without prompts of his father. By the way, the son of Lukashenko indeed played one of
the key roles. It was he who directed hundreds of plain-clothes muggers to
break jaws of women and the elderly. Moreover, the situation on the streets of Minsk sometimes resembled
a close contest between the corps of the dictator’s son and of Mr. Pekarsky,
Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs, for the first place in the number of
people beaten up. The question remains: who organized all this turmoil? Once again, Alexander Lukashenko is the last person to
benefit from the crackdown, isn’t he? But what shall we do with
the inconsistencies we cannot get rid of? The most apparent one is the feeling that the play was cunningly prepared. It
seems that the preparation took at least 5-6 months (not days). I would like to say it once more for those who are
still not getting the idea: for 6 months the company of
the President rigorously selected people to play different parts. Small gangs
were to fiercely beat up demonstrators on adjacent streets with maximum
injuries prior to their rally on the Square as well as during the demonstration
and after the ‘official’ crackdown. Total control over phone calls (during the
previous two weeks) and tracking of the movements of the key participants were
also performed. Close 24-hour surveillance of hundreds of opposition activists
on D-day was maintained. The routes of the demonstrators were agreed in advance
(we shall discuss this issue later on), allowing stormtroopers to successfully
block movement with the help of special-purpose vehicles. Dozens of people can also confirm that they saw SWAT
guys in ambush in different places. The demonstrators faced outrageous and open
provocations near the building of the government. Those arrested spoke about instantaneous arrests of people in remote areas of the city during
the night. Arrests in the next few days were carried out according to lists
compiled by someone.  Brigades for immediate interrogations were ready. The
whole capital was surrounded by the army. You have no choice but to agree that the picture is
too vivid to persist in chanting the following words: “the leader had a temporary blackout, and security
officials took the advantage". I give my firm “no”. It is too apparent that everything went according to a plan, a developed and rehearsed plan. No accidental movement. All key decisions were made by the members of
the crisis centre headed by Lukashenko. At the same time, he watched live coverage of the
violence; he knew who is who and who
poses/doesn’t pose a threat. This statement is key to understanding the
psychology of this person and the cynicism of his European allies (to be
discussed below). The President WASN`T
afraid of the consequences. He consciously organized this mass massacre. He deliberately put on a reality show. Another piece of evidence: on the next day a crowded and carefully orchestrated
press conference was held. The winner was "outraged by the attempt to
overthrow him". Hundreds of reporters took part in it. They cheerfully
laughed at his witty and insulting remarks about those beaten up in Minsk. One gentleman said,
quote: “Ok then, they gave him a bloody nose. Why on earth is he trying then to
file a complaint?". Any response of the audience? Sure. The roar of silly
and echoing laughter. By the way, who are these ‘persons’ listening to him? How
could it be that they were fully outfitted in evening dresses and tuxedos so quickly? Where in Belarus could he find this finest
scum of the earth? Another fact for future (or coming-soon?) investigation is
the list of names of those strange beings roaring with cheerful laughter at the
sadistic details of the Minsk
events. Consider another thing: the speech of Lukashenko was written far before
this meeting of ‘genetically non-Belarusians’. The conclusion drawn now seems
rather strange, thought quite logical. It
perfectly fits into the overall paradigm of Lukashenko’s Belarus
development: the dictator was deliberately going to organize a bloodbath. Why? Only this
question matters. Why did Lukashenko want to shed blood of his own
compatriots on the streets of sleepy Minsk?

Let us for a while
leave Lukashenko alone and return to those who (though sometimes unconsciously)
participated in the preparation of the massacre. Here they
are: Radosław Sikorski, the present Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland, and Dalia
Grybauskaitė, the current President of Lithuania.These two
(a statesman and a stateswoman) are co-authors (to put it bluntly) of the bloodshed
in Belarus. An agent of Sikorski (a Mr. Protasevich) (a very cool dude by the way) played the part of
European spokesman. You wouldn’t believe it, but that cool dude was actively
coordinating the sharing of messages among European news agencies about the
“perfect election process in Belarus
showing that democracy blossoms in the country”. To cut it short, families of the massacre victims, those
beaten, humiliated, tortured Belorusians may (or even are obliged to) file a
class action suit in any European court against Mr. Protasevich to pay for
undisputable psychological and physical pain and suffering. Reflect on this
offer a bit, and it won’t seem to you as imaginary (in legal terms) as it seems
now. Think about it carefully, and we will think about the help we will
definitely provide you with. Protasevich who deliberately tried to hide his
actions taken in order to put on the violent play is a direct and apparent
accomplice of the bloody beatings on the streets of Minsk. By the
way, this bulk sending of reports by such individuals is the reason why Western
media could not immediately grasp the meaning of what was happening in Belarus.
Consequently, they also failed to draw the attention of the international
community to what was taking place in the country. Who knows, Lukashenko could
have been cooled a bit down in that night. The activities of Kazimira
Prunskienė (the envoy of Grybauskaitė)
are more complex and more repulsive. It is an
indisputable fact that Ms. Grybauskaitė (both behind the scenes and openly)
used to speak about Lukashenko as a friend who needed help. Mrs. Grybauskaitė
(via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as via Lithuanian MPs in the
European Parliament) initiated a full-fledged campaign to support Lukashenko
(i.e. a dictator) among officials of the institution. The behaviour of
Prunskienė during the night of the beatings perfectly matched with the idée fixe of Mrs. Grybauskaitė. It
finally resulted in the cynical situation where the ambassador of Lithuania in Belarus was beaten up severely
before her very eyes when he tried to protect Belarusian girls from the
stormtroopers of Lukashenko. The envoy quietly disappeared into the doors of a
luxury hotel as if the massacre on the streets of Minsk was a mere carnival. The situation is
rather horrible. One country with two absolutely different personalities –
Bagdonas (the ambassador) and Prunskienė. In fact, real Lithuanians (not the
nation imagined by its respected President) are wildly sympathetic to the
democrats of Belarus.
Lithuanians literarily suffer physical pain when they see the atrocities committed
by Lukashenko. Luckily for her, Mrs. Grybauskaitė and a limited
number of her pragmatists do not feel the pain that her countrymen do. Any ‘why’ here is unnecessary. This is an example of anomalies life sometimes offers us. The last figure
is Mr. Sikorski, who is now one of the fiercest denouncers of Lukashenko. His
statement shortly after the election was straight, clever and tough. In an
interview for Gazeta Wyborcza he
said, quote: “It is highly probable that
Lukashenko did not win the election. According to the information received at the initial
stages of the election (from Tuesday to Saturday) only 30% of the voters voted
for him. On Sunday that portion increased to 40%. Although it was the best
result among all the candidates, it was not sufficient to become a winner of the
first round of the election. A person who is the winner of the election with 79% of
the ballot according to the official results announced by the Central Election
Committee would never take a decision about such a violent crackdown on
opposition demonstrators”. Shortly
afterwards another statement was made. That was the joint statement of four
Ministers, namely Radosław Sikorski (Poland),
Guido Westerwelle (Germany),
Carl Bildt (Sweden) and
Karel Schwarzenberg (the Czech
Republic). The wife of Sikorski, a columnist
of The Washington Post Mrs. Anne Applebaum, made a much tougher statement
almost instantly after the events: "There
is usually no need for such popular politicians to beat, arrest and chase their
opponents, as well as to send numerous agents provocateurs and to close
web-sites”. Having no intention to dispute these words, I will nevertheless
admit that such a vehement and quite personal reaction of a diplomat, the
Minister of Foreign Affairs of a neighbouring state, is rather odd to say the
least. At the same time, such a reaction is quite OK when we
assume that Sikorski wants to continue playing a role in big politics and to
achieve his ambitions. It is a rather difficult goal now, since the core of his
political stance was his desire to turn Lukashenko into a loyal and obedient
politician as well as to form a group of ‘pragmatic friends of the official Minsk’. In other words,
Sikorski at some point became the most consistent lobbyist of Lukashenko of the
last couple of years. He was the person who spent a lot of resources to block
the Belarusian alternative opposition on European political markets, to form a
tame opposition and to stop any unofficial support to Belarusian civil society.
He also was the person who contributed mostly to the promotion of Lukashenko in
Europe as a … just-converted democrat. In
short, Sikorski should be regarded as a person with the blood of the Minsk massacre victims on
his hands. His continuous support of Lukashenko has made the crackdown
possible. Once again, Belarus
will soon be free from the regime of Mr. L., and it will sooner or later have
to raise the issue of the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs. Moreover, people of Belarus can do that right now. Anyone
can easily approach this highly respected person in the European parliament and
ask him the next rhetorical question: “Dear
Mr. Sikorski, are you personally ready to donate blood for those who were
beaten, killed, disabled and frozen in Minks in the night of 20th
December and during the next 4 days?”. Though it is a purely rhetorical
question, the issue is rather promising in terms of court consideration. By the
way, when writing the above lines, I was not able to get rid of just one
thought. I am deeply grateful to the Polish Minister for his courage to change
his rhetoric. After all, he finally (and rather quickly) recognized his
catastrophic mistake. In other words, he put his personal ambitions aside, when
it was much easier for him to keep on telling people about someone who framed
Lukashenko. Instead, he initiated the most powerful and honest information
campaign. That was a courageous deed! Better late then never. Sikorski once had made a
mistake, but this was an act of courage. Let us
compare the behaviour of Sikorski with that of Mrs. Grybauskaitė. She is no
longer visible. She keeps silence. I will tell you more. She will never break
it. Alternatively, she will justify the actions of
Lukashenko. She will probably do that when reminiscing about oil loading terminals in Klaipeda. I am sure
that the President of this ‘strategic ally of Belarus’ is more preoccupied with the
reduced cooperation between two countries than with the fate of the imprisoned
and beaten victims of her ‘friend’. Isn’t it the most pragmatic approach?
Welcome to Lithuania! Or, which
is more correct, welcome to the business according to Grybauskaitė! I will now
speak directly to the Madam President. You are right when you tell us that a lot of
demonstrations end in crackdowns (sometimes violent). Blood is shed abundantly
sometimes. But there is a huge difference between what happened in Belarus in December
and a traditional crackdown in any part of the world. In Minsk a very disgusting practice was employed. Any explanation needed? Once again: do you need any explanations about the methods you friend employed?

The procedure is
rather simple. You just dress a stout mobster in black and give him a brass knuckle.
He then approaches a girl/woman/anyone (underline whichever appropriate) from
behind and gives a powerful punch in the face of the victim. The power of the
punch is increased by 400 grams of lead,
which gives the victim no chance to remain safe and sound. I am sure that your imagination will easily provide you with other
details of such treatment (you can replace a brass knuckle with a rod of metal
it you like).

 Immediately
other guys are near the victim, hitting him (or her) fiercely with their feet. The
object of your admiration gave these ‘law enforcement officials’ his direct and
express consent to such actions. Do
you still consider it to be a typical crackdown? Personally I wouldn’t. It is the
gangsters’ tactics employed against their own citizens. You can watch hours of
video shot on the streets of Minsk
to see the skills of Lukashenko’s mobsters. You can ask your friend if he can
give you some of the videos. You can also enjoy the show together with Mr.
President. Why don’t you pay these guys extra money for bringing two
democracies closer together? When you publicly or privately reflected on the
prospects of powerful and lucrative economic cooperation with Belarus, Lukashenko was personally planning a bloody
crackdown to be carried out on 20th December. You can visit the capital of Belarus and
spend a couple of hours face to face with Lukashenko laughing at his silly
jokes. It is also a chance to once more discuss the future of economic cooperation
between the countries. Nothing personal. The thing is that sometimes quite
accidental people become presidents and bring a lot of suffering. All in all, it is most likely
that Mrs. Grybauskaitė will quietly congratulate (or has already congratulated)
Lukashenko with his victory. She can go on discussing phantom economic projects
to be concluded with Belarus.   

The most important
question remains: why would Lukashenko
deliberately organize the operation on the streets of Minks in the night
between 19th and 20th December? The answer is simple. It was a deliberate,
well-analyzed and successful attempt to change the regime, bring it to its last
stage. To tell the truth, the regime is now close to its end. Lukashenko was
personally designing the plan for several months. He was busy with eliminating
any alternative opposition. Endless mass arrests for almost a week after the
election, interrogation of thousands of people – all that was planned in detail
in advance. To cut it short, it all was pre-determined. It is not a surprise
that at the end of all violent arrests Lukashenko seems to bluntly tell the
world (and his Eurofriends): “You won’t
do anything to me. Or do you want any negotiations on oil & gas, transit or
construction project stopped?”. Of course, they don’t. When all the fuss is
over, when all Christmas gifts have been opened, they will once again invent
another “Eastern partnership though mediators” to camouflage their baseness. Another
piece of information to consider:  Lukashenko
did not cooperate with his European partners during those long months. He
simply and quite openly screwed them in any way he liked. His advisor, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, also managed recently to disclose base designs
during the presidential election. He imprisoned thousands of people. Some of
them were simply hanged in public. Lukashenko
also must have been inspired by his 'friend from Venezuela”, Hugo Chavez. The latter
is permanently fighting his enemies. Some of them are executed. Then Mr. Chavez
can easily sign oil supply contracts with American companies. Are these
dictators overthrown by their people? No. They are
safe and sound presidents of their own countries. Both are bloody ones, like
Lukashenko. Both are comfortably sitting on their thrones
listening to diplomatic blah, blah, blah of Sarkozy/Merkel/Berlusconi telling them that all countries have
the right to walk their way. By the way, no opposition activist planned any kind of coup. This is too
evident to be doubted. They do not have either the resources or the means to launch any. Any
attempt to justify the massacre and thousands of arrests by saying that the
opposition planned a coup is rather idiotic. Period.  Of course, some opposition candidates were involved in
certain agreed actions. Usually such candidates seem to be overconfident and
reckless. But it turned out that Lukashenko had his own final and tough plan
that was different from any other agreements. It also
turns out that the seemingly irrational and illogical violent crackdown on the
peaceful demonstration is the result of deliberate and well-planned actions of
the dictator. 

Now let me say a few words to the Belarusians who
proved today that their hearts are in the right place. Never beg. Never kneel. Never do the things which you are
told to do by people who came to Belarus
from Poland or Lithuania and
who claim they know exactly what happens. The
cynicism of some of them may injure as efficiently as the sticks of Kuleshov’s men. All these non-governmental funds
and European partners are cynical to the core. It means that we must identify
their names along with the names of Lukashenko’s agents provocateurs who appeared
on the streets of Minsk.
A list of individuals similar to Protasevich must be compiled. Such list (along
with any other evidence) must be shown to European media as well as the
families of the enlisted persons. Pictures of the Minsk massacre victims will vividly show the
things that really happened. It will help indifferent European envoys (and
their indifferent families sitting comfortably at home) take great pride in own
careers built with the help of the blood of some people suffering somewhere in Belarus…  

P.S.  If you have enough time, courage
and will, I would ask you to translate this article (or the parts dealing with
Sikorski and Grybauskaitė) into the native languages of the individuals
mentioned above, including Polish, Lithuanian, or just English. Perhaps, when
reading it, they will be touched somewhere deep in their black souls and
express their formal apology to the people of Belarus. To those people who paid
with their own blood for the games they play…