PANA Press Release

national | miscellaneous | news report

Thursday February 27, 2003 15:01

by IMC

Sent to all media newsrooms today.

Press Release
Peace and Neutrality Alliance, Mid West/Shannon Region
Wednesday 26 February 2003

The Peace and Neutrality Alliance (PANA) and several other peace groups,
including the Limerick based Mid West Alliance against Military Aggression
(MAMA), NGO Peace Alliance, and AFRI, have decided not to support this
direct action anti war protest at Shannon Airport on Saturday 1st March.
This decision was taken very reluctantly because some elements have publicly
advertised their intention to engage in inappropriate direct action and
destruction of property that could result in violence. Genuine peace groups
are opposed to the use of violence as a means of promoting peace, while
acknowledging the need at times for certain forms of non-violent direct
action, or civil disobedience. Plans for inappropriate direct action, such
as the pulling down of part of Shannon airport's perimeter fence, have been
publicly announced. This makes it almost inevitable that there will be a
confrontation with the Gardai and members of the Irish Defence Forces, and a
possibility of some violence. We are opposed to any violence against members
of the security forces, or against any action that is likely to lead to
violence or injuries.
It was clear from the huge turnout in Dublin on 15th February that the vast
majority of Irish people support peaceful protests against war, but do not
support war itself, or support violence as a means of achieving peace.
Violence is the principle tool of warmongers and has no place in the
promotion of peace.

In order to continue to provide peaceful avenues of protest for people of
good will, it has been decided to organise two events in the coming weeks.

March 8th is International Women's Day, which is being celebrated this year
by a Global Women's Strike. The Irish organisers of the Global Women's
Strike have planned a peace rally at Shannon airport under the banner
"Invest in Caring not Killing". We urge as many people as possible to
support this event.
It is worth recalling that the Shannon Peace Camp began on the 6th January,
Women's Christmas, with a 24-hour Women's Peace Camp. This then led on to
the combined Shannon Peace Camp that successfully raised awareness of the
misuse of Shannon airport as foreign military refuelling base, forced the
Irish Government to admit that large numbers of armed US troops were passing
through Shannon, and led to three of the US chartered troop carriers
withdrawing from Shannon as a refuelling base.
Our motto must continue to be "make peace not war" and peace can only be
made by peaceful means.

Our second proposal is that St Patrick's Day should be designated as a Day
of Peace. People in every town and village in Ireland will be encouraged to
participate in St Patrick's Day parades as marchers and spectators, with
banners and posters actively promoting peace. This may prove particularly,
and tragically, appropriate as mid-March 2003 may coincide with the
beginning of the war against Iraq. Further details on St. Patrick's Day of
Peace will be announced later.

We call on all Irish politicians to truly represent the will of the Irish
people in opposing war.

For further information please contact:
Edward Horgan, Peace and Neutrality Alliance, Mid-West/Shannon Region,
Email: [email protected]

save preference

Comments (39 of 39)

PANA joins chorus condemning Direct Action

by Joe Black

Thu Feb 27, 2003 15:07

After the F15 demonstrations Rodger Cole was widely quoted in the media comparing the US presence at Shannon to snakes and upholding the example of St Patrick driving the snakes out. Yesterday we discovered this was posturing as PANA took time out not only to attack the planned attempt to drive out the US planes but to add their voice to the chorus of lies about the protest.

It is not unusual to find those who celebrate direct action when it is in the past or in another country taking another attitude when they are asked to stand up. But PANA have gone beyond this, they are creating an excuse in advance for the security forces to have a go at the protest.

The organisers of the direct action have been clear that it is non-violent. Yes we are publically defying the state but the only 'violence' likely is us hitting our heads off the batons of the state security forces. In this letter sent to all the media PANA, in advance of the protest, are giving the all clear for state violence to be used against us.

Worse than the gutter press

by Chekov

Thu Feb 27, 2003 15:23

PANA's characterisation of this as a 'violent' protest actually goes beyond anything that we have seen in the gutter press. Today's article in the star was, I thought, scraping the barrel, but this takes the biscuit. To not take part, fair enough, but to publically slander and vilify the protestors who are willing to go beyond meekly asking is beneath contempt. Pana made absolutely no attempt to contact the Grassroots Network to express their fears, instead they choose to launch a scurrilous attack through the capitalist media, none of whose hack journo's even dipped this low.

Hat's off lads, another dagger in the back!

we respect their tactics they disrespect us !

by conor (wsm personal capacity)

Thu Feb 27, 2003 15:27

It’s depressing but none too surprising from PANA!

but of course they are entitled to their political and moral opinion but just a few comments from moi

PANA: We are opposed to any violence against members
of the security forces, or against any action that is likely to lead to
violence or injuries.

Me:In fairness the action has been announced as a peaceful walk and an attempt to tear down the fence. The organisers have not mentioned anything about about violence even defensive violence. I am still strongly of the view that there is NO WAY the state would deploy armed troops against the protest - I'm sure PANA et al are also well aware of this

Pana:It was clear from the huge turnout in Dublin on 15th February that the vast
majority of Irish people support peaceful protests against war, but do not
support war itself, or support violence as a means of achieving peace.
Violence is the principle tool of warmongers and has no place in the
promotion of peace.

Me:Obviously this is still VERY Much A MATTER OF DEBATE - the tradition I'm bought up in WOULD NEVER see minor property damage as equivalent to or anything like large scale modern warfare - to compare the two is weird logic in my view.

There is no evidence that the people on the march were urging exclusively one course of action OR another - i did see quite a few inflatable hammers though which might have indicated a view on one particular action !

Pana:In order to continue to provide peaceful avenues of protest for people of
good will

me:is that what we're about - peaceful, ineffective channels for the assuagement of guilt, or is it stopping a war that could kill thousands of people

pana:We call on all Irish politicians to truly represent the will of the Irish
people in opposing war.

Me:Yeah that'll happen all right......................

Joe Black: But PANA have gone beyond this, they are creating an excuse in advance for the security forces to have a go at the protest.

Me:Unfortunately there may be truth in this !

Conor

Typical middle class twaddle

by Paul

Thu Feb 27, 2003 15:35

Pulling down the fence is violent? I think not.

If there is any violence it will come from those defending the US murder weapons behind the fence, not the direct action protesters.

PANA members / affiliates not consulted

by PANA member

Thu Feb 27, 2003 15:40

As a PANA member I wasn't consulted about this. I'm not aware that the affiliates were consulted either. Can anyone enlighten me?

To PANA member

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:10

Below is the list of email addresses this was sent out to. I suggest you email them saying this statement does not represent you and you are not aware of PANA agreeing it. If PANA wants to distance itself from the action that is its choice but the rather obvious suggestion that the cops should crack a few skulls is going a little too far!!!

Non violent direct action

by conerned, thats all

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:18

its not very responsible of PANA to release such statements as the above, or using the word violence to describe DA because it further isolates the people intending to travel to shannon on saturday and gives a convieniant exit strategy if anything goes wrong and mis represents the ambitions of activists. however the reason that groups are not in favour of saturdays demo, is not becasue they are against direct action, in fact i would love to see a massive inclusive action to shut down the airport and show that power is with the people.but inviting large numbers of people to take part in quite a demanding action may bring people into a situation they were not prepared for or people will back down at the last minute isolating those who see through the action.
and why is this action to breach security so important. security has already been breached, its proven. taking down the fence,will not only serve to agitate the state coersers, and standing on the other side is not going to shut the airport, ground warmachines or make the government wakeup.

Romantic ireland

by Gaillimhed

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:27

Looks like business as usual in the land of the betrayers.

Hurler on the ditch?

by Joe

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:32

So you "would love to see a massive inclusive action to shut down the airport and show that power is with the people" but then say "inviting large numbers of people to take part in quite a demanding action may bring people into a situation they were not prepared for"

Forgive me if I'm wrong but this seems to suggest you want a massive action without the required masses! These excuses are getting odder and odder!!!

Seriously, a well publicised mass action has been widely advertised for Saturday. Everyone including every one of the organisers would have personal 'improvements' they would suggest. The plan has been formulated by a long period of debate between a lot of people. You could wish for ever for an ideal action that satisfied your every need, your choice on Saturday is simply whether there is enough here for you to play some role (even as an observer) or whether you will wait for the perfect action to manifest itself at some point in the future.

On other news, the train blocade in continuing in Italy and I've seen one brief claim that dockers are refusing to load ships with military equipment. Anyone with italian able to check this out on indymedia?

Affiliates

by Janus

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:33

As far as I know affiliates weren't told the statement was going out. They were aware that PANA wasn't taking part in the Shannon demonstration but they weren't told this stance was going to be taken.

No Violence, please

by Sean Thompson

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:38

Subverting Irish sovereignty, mocking Irish neutrality, Aherne by allowing the U.S. war machine to use Shannon is complicit in the impending mass murder of 1,000s of civilians. Dan Berrigan has pointed out that their non-violent symbolic destruction of weapons of death were characterized by the bought, mainstream press as 'violent'. He said this when he defended Mary Kelly. He said that her symbolic destruction of the U.S. war machine was an act of 'justice and compassion'. Let's have more acts of justice and compassion. And expose Aherne's complicity in mass murder.

Direct actions

by Ray

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:42

At the last couple of Shannon demonstrations, there have been attempts made to get through the fence. What happened? Because it wasn't organised in advance*, most people didn't know about it. So those who wanted to take part were annoyed because they didn't know it was going to happen, and some of those who didn't want to take part were annoyed because they didn't want to be involved.

So what happens this time? Discussions take place all over Ireland, involving dozens, if not hundreds of people, many of whom have been involved in organising demonstrations and non-violent direct actions before. A detailed plan is circulated. Observers are organised. Legal support is arranged in advance.

And what's the response? "Oooh, what did you go telling us for, now it won't work!" "But what if some people aren't prepared for this action that you've explained in detail?" "Jaysus, I bet the airport police won't like that!" "Take down the fence? How very VIOLENT of you!"

The classic response is, "Oh, sure we're in favour of direct action. But only if its mass direct action ... like, er, this one is (or could be if we supported it). And only if it has mass popular support ... like, er, 100,000 people on the streets of Dublin protesting against the war. Okay, okay - we're in favour of mass direct action, with widespread popular support, AS LONG AS IT HAPPENS IN SOME OTHER COUNTRY. Yeah, that's it. Three cheers for the Spirit of Seattle!"

*and the IAWM stewards effectively sabotaged discussion on the day

PANA and Nice

by tony

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:44

I delivered a lot of PANA stuff during the Nice referendum. They can forget it for the next one I get stuff elsewhere.

I am not for the direct action but respect those who wish to take part. This PANA statement is disgraceful.

Shamefully Selective

by kitty-kat

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:45

"This then led on to the combined Shannon Peace Camp that successfully raised awareness of the
misuse of Shannon airport as foreign military refuelling base, forced the Irish Government to admit that large numbers of armed US troops were passing through Shannon, and led to three of the US chartered troop carriers withdrawing from Shannon as a refuelling base."

The Airlines that pulled out cited security concerns as their reason for pulling out. I comend the members and supporters of the Peace Camp, but to be fair, the actions of Mary Kelly and the 5 Catholic Workers are largely responsible for the changes that have come out. Just look back through the media coverage (I have lots of it at home) Shannon became the buzzword as every household in Ireland learned of these brave acts.

Still, no one from PANA to contest what has been written above. No doubt we will have no response.

SHAME.

Not MAMAs position either

by barry

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:55

This position expressed in this press release is not the position decided on by MAMA at their last meeting which I attended.

There was general support for calling for direct action in the form of a blockade at Shannon to demonstrate that the people of Ireland did not accept a US military facility on our soil.

As we did not feel that either the action called for or another IAWM walk to the terminal building to hear speeches were appropriate at this time we decided to participate in March 1st only as individuals and that our common position would be to support the call for solidarity with the Womens Global Strike action at Shannon on March 8th and to call for reclaiming Paddys Day for Peace on a national level.

mama support for above statement?

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:57

According to at least one person in Limerick

PS Ed Horgans e-mail does not reflect MAMAs position, the decision was to
have no part or presence at shannon other than to advertise for March 8th
and 17th.

(I've with held name as it was posted to another list but its from a MAMA and gluaiseacht member)

scratch that there he his himself above me !

by conor

Thu Feb 27, 2003 16:58

face the facts

by the facts, ma'am

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:17

the planning for March 1st is a disaster and the organisers are to blame

If the various groups worked together, put aside their ideological/historical differences, a larger consensus could have been achieved.

Then those 100,000+ in the streets of Dublin on F15 would have supported whatever will happen on the 1st.

stop the infighting and focus on the enemy: George W Bush and his war.

The real facts

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:26

The organisers are to blame?

GNAW approached the IAWM weeks ago and announced that they were going to organise a mass direct action in Shannon for March 1st. We invited them to participate on whatever level they wanted. They refused and then proceeded to call their own demo for the same time and place of which direct action was to play no part.

Since then we have constantly sought dialogue and co-operation with any and all anti-war groups. Unfortunately it seems that most of the leaders of the prominent anti-war groups in the country are very good at talking and very bad at action. However, these detractors are only a tiny fraction of the anti-war movement, the politicians and wannabe's who see this type of movement as more of a chance to raise their public profile than actually doing something about the war. Hopefully the people will see through them and let their voices be heard on saturday in a way that is difficult to ignore!

The facts

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:36

The facts are that the GNAW called the March 1st protest in the first place. The facts are that the GNAW have consistently come out in support of the actions called by the IAWM. The facts are that a detailed plan of direct action has been worked out for the demonstration on the 1st, so that everyone knows what's going to happen.

There is no organisational problem. There is a political problem, in that many people don't want to take any direct action against the war. While I'd expect this from centrist, reformist groups like PANA - and I'm glad that they're at least taking part in marches and other actions - watching 'revolutionary' groups tying themselves in knots trying to explain how the 'Spirit of Seattle' they've been talking about for the last three years _actually_ means avoiding any direct action that might annoy somebody.

I mean, maybe I was just imagining it, but _I_ remember activists in Seattle blockading streets to prevent a WTO meeting from going ahead. I don't remember them persuading the traffic cops to go on strike, or redirect all WTO traffic away from the conference centre. Nor do I remember them deciding to postpone their direct actions until there were ten thousand of them at each intersection. I obviously missed the real lessons of Seattle somewhere in all the excitement.

you made my point for me

by the facts ma'am

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:38

Chekov

Perhaps it is one side that is to blame and not the other - i don't know, I wasn't there.

But the unity of F15 is gone so quickly? Why?

Everyone wants to steal the show now, secretly jealous of the SWP's well done efforts. It's sad but true.

Perhaps there should not be an action unless there is more unity? But, the war approaches... time is short and people just have to work together, all sides.

come on lads, we have more in common than not!

To the facts:

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:46

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:49

There is unity in the movement about marches. Everyone supports marches. Everybody has mobilised for the big marches, including PANA, GNAW, SWP, IAWM, SP.

There is no unity in the movement about direct action. GNAW think it is the most effective tactic (backed by lots of evidence I must say), others don't. GNAW have and continue to make every effort to emphasise that this is not a split but a sign of diversity and we support all anti-war intiatives even if other people don't support ours.

re: All the facts Maam

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:53

The GNAW direct action for March 1st was called well before Feb 15th (first floated at the previous demo in fact). It's called by people who have been demonstrating at Shannon from early last year when 70 were attending the demonstrations. I think the SWP did a pretty good job of organising the IAWM march (but this in itself acknowledges the problem with the IAWM does it not). But does this give them the right to sabotage DA at Shannon? I don't think so..

Grassroots Network statement in response to Ed Horgan's press statement

by Grassroots Dublin - Grassroots Network Against War

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:54

ggantiwar at yahoo dot com

087-7939931

The Grassroots Network Against War have been very surprised by the press release issued by Ed Horgan, in the name of PANA but apparently without consulting the PANA affiliates. Apparently Mr Horgan has been misinformed. We would like to repeat, again, that this is to be an entirely non-violent act of civil disobediance. There will be no "violence against members of the security forces". This has been made clear at every opportunity by the organisers. Perhaps Ed Horgan has received some disinformation on this matter.

To restate once again our justification for this
action. Already 3 airlines have quit Shannon ver security concerns. We feel that if a large number of people, acting in an entirely peaceful way, pull down the fence and engage in a peaceful trespass at Shannon airport, this will send a clear signal to the government and the US military that they can not secure their killing machines in the face of the anger of the Irish people. We feel that this may have a real impact on the global anti-war movement, by
showing people that they can act against their
war-mongering governments. In this context we feel that the potential damage to a fence, although regretable, is utterly irrelevant if it can help to stop this brutal war and the attendant slaughter of Iraqis.

Every mass movement attracts individuals and groups who are more concerned with raising their public profile than in effecting real change. That is their perogative and we would not deny them that. However, we are committed to ending US military use of Shannon airport. In doing so we will act, as we have always done, in an ntirely peaceful manner. If Ed Horgan and others in PANA want to limit themselves to rallies and marches where they get a chance to bask in the limelight, we will not seek to deny them that. However, we would ask for the same respect from them for our attempts to stop Irish collusion in his war.

We would encourage everybody, of all ages and points of view, to take part in the protest on March 1st. This is a chance for the people of Ireland to let their voices be heard through their actions and this is the only way that we can have any real effect on this war. 100,000 marched in Dublin and the government did nothing. Now is the time for ordinary people to act. If we wait for the politicians and the 'leaders' we will be waiting forever.

not really unity

Thu Feb 27, 2003 17:58

'a sign of diversity'

this is a joke, right?

F15 was a point of unity for everyone, now there are different groups doing different things, which is fine. But just THINK for a moment on how the Indo and others will just eat this up and spit it back on the faces on the 100,000+ that came out against the war.

'diversity of actions' is just another way of saying you don't know how to educate and agitate the general public into action.

I do hope March 1st goes well and that the DA is NON-VIOLENT. are participants prepared and trained for this? Other than the usual meetings, what prep has there been?

It is a serious question, not trying to be flipant. If people are not trained well people will get hurt.

What do you want?

by Fresh fried

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:15

unity against the war, too much to ask?

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:17

I want a mass movement against the war. Build on the success of F15, not fragment and destroy the success of F15.

Everyone posting here is taking my critism to personally.

To 'the facts ma'am'

by Phuq Hedd

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:21

Just out of interest:

1.Of which group or political party are you a member?

2. What sort of unity for a Direct Action do you think there can be between those that advocate DA and those that condemn it?

3. Do you think that "the real enemy: G.W.Bush" will be fought better by mourning and bewailing the Iraqis killed with the assistance of planes that passed through Ireland, or by stopping his planes passing through Ireland?

4. Do you condemn Direct Action as a tactic? If not then when should it be used?

5. Do you think that most crucial changes in society have happened as a result of Direct Action?

6. What is it that you mean by Direct Action?

7. What are you proposing to do to stop Bush?

Candidates have 10 minutes per question. Answers may be in point form but must be more than a yes/no. Folk songs or repitition of party dogma are considered plagiarism.

But now you're contradicting yourself again

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:23

Because if the action is undertaken by some highly trained group of elite non-violent direct action commandos, it can't be a mass direct action. So we're back to complaints about elitism, 'its only a small minority', and all that crap.

A detailed plan has been drawn up. Its very simple, and easy to understand. Anyone who turns up can have it explained to them in a couple of minutes. And this means that it can involve lots of people.

Its getting ridiculous. Organise direct action one way, and people will say "Oh, I can't support that, its too X, Y, and Z. But I am in favour of direct action. Just not this one."
Organise a direct action another way and the SAME PEOPLE will say, "Oh, I can't support that. Why didn't they do X, Y and Z? That would have been much better. I'd have supported direct action then."

If you're against direct action, at least have the honesty to come straight out and say so, not make up ever more ridiculous hoops for people to jump through, and ever more ridiculous justifications why the time for direct action is still just around the corner.

i give up

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:27

like i said you boys take it all too personally.

I offered my criticism and now i get the inquisition.

who cares what party I am in? The point you miss is that this war is oppose across the political spectrum of citizens.

What are you doing to repeat the success of F15? Or is what you are doing is destroying the unity of that day?

That was the question.

by Fresh fried - NTM

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:28

The facts Ma,am

you seem to suggest that we should abandon our political beliefs to put forward a single marketable front. The indo's hacks don't worry most people who are truly anti-war the real issue is the most effective way to shut down shannon warport and this has been shown, fairly conclusively, to be direct action. Now if some on the left wish to play to mianstream media by being cautious at every turn that is their prerogative you cannot however expect those that have more radical, and i would say more realistic, views to fall in line. If you are looking for a three word headline look else where this is a left comprised of people of diverse beliefs Catholic workers, anarchists, marxists, trots, socialists and eco-warriors (to name a few) who co-exist side by side in relative harmony. It is only when one group attempts to force its beliefs that 'things fall apart'.

Your Ma

by Your Ma

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:32

Your ma PANA, your ma.

I care what party you are in

because I suspect you of being a wrecker who is trying to defeat the Irish anti-war movement and to make sure that March 1st is not a success.

I don't believe you are interested in unity at all.

I hope that you are ignorned and that all members of all parties and none will come to Shannon on March 1st to take part in direct action.

Failing that it would be nice if they would join as observers under the Pink flags to show solidarity and act as observers.

Failing that it would be nice if they would join the IAWM march for their separate but equally valid protest.

getting boring

by ma'am

Thu Feb 27, 2003 18:45

'put forward a single marketable front'

sure, why not? and then educate and organize and build up and the situation allows itself. all this vangardist stuff puts people off. Is that not obvious?

'because I suspect you of being a wrecker who is trying to defeat the Irish anti-war movement'

See. this is what I'm talking about. you might as well say 'you are either with us, or against us.' So much for the claims of 'diversity' I think you are just intimidated by criticism outside your narrow ideology.

And I am for DA, when the situation makes it a good strategy - such as with Dubsky, Kelly & CW5.

Once again, BUILD on F15, don't divide it.

Direct Action on Shannon builds on Feb.15th which builds on Direct Action at Shannon

Thu Feb 27, 2003 19:07

which builds on.....

see the point?

As far as the "division" argument goes it looks to me as though GNAW has invited people to take part in an open, fair and democratic Direct Action. It's all been announced in the open along with the caution that there are some small risks involved.

The response has been from PANA and people like you(what party were you again?) to attack this as being "not building on F15" or "vanguardist").

The evidence is clearly there that the huge amount of condemnation of direct action at Shannon (both the previous "ripping down the fence which is sure to alienate people" (SWP line) and "violent attacks on warplanes" (NGO liberal line) was mistaken. The result of all these actions is that F15 was huge, people were thinking, talking and doing about Shannon.

The poverty of your thought and the repetitive denial of evidence leads me to suspect exactly what you are.

the box you placed yourself in

Thu Feb 27, 2003 19:10

phuk hed or what ever your name is

think outside of the box, please.

Help me see outside of the box please

Thu Feb 27, 2003 19:19

See, here's the box I see:

1. There's been a war on Iraq since 1991
2. There's been lots of concern about this among "the left" and liberals
3. There's been a series of marches both in Ireland and around the world getting larger and larger and larger.
4. There's still a war on Iraq.
5. Bush has clearly announced his intention to invade Iraq
6. Bush is moving munitions through Ireland
7. Direct Action has been taken several times and there's no evidence that anyone has suddenly decided to support the War because of that
8. Several airlines subcontracting to the USAF have pulled out because of the Direct Action.
9. People condemned Direct Action because it was supposed to "put people off".
10. The war is going ahead, people are still claiming that Direct Action will "put people off".

The conclusion that I draw is that Direct Action should happen now because it is no good _after_ the war and there's no evidence that it's going to put the majority of people off. In fact one survey taken at F15 by "Cian" showed that most people there were in favour of it.

Care to join me in my box on March 1st?

PANA you f**king wankers

by King Mob

Sat Mar 01, 2003 19:52

You and the rest of your wish-washy liberals and socialists can f**k off. You'se and you'se alone screwed up what would have been an otherwise extremely successful direct action. Thanks a lot.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Lockdown Skeptics

Voltaire Network

PANA Press Release

Comments (39 of 39)