MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE
JURIST >> LEGAL NEWS - WORLD LAW >> Discussion >> Milosevic Trial Discussion Archive
————————————————————————————— Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. This marks the first time a head of state has been personally prosecuted before an international criminal court. Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial? ———————————————————————————— NOTICE: Comments posted to this discussion board are solely the responsibility of individual posters, and not of JURIST, its owner, operators, host or staff. JURIST reserves the right to block or remove posts that are in violation of law or that advocate illegal acts, that are obscene, disruptive, defamatory, threatening, harassing or abusive, that are in breach of intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, that are advertisements or solicitations, or that are not related to the topic being discussed. ———————————————————————————— discussion archive Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 1:09 am JN List of Killings in KosMet 1996 - Feb 1998 it is a brief account of each murder, examing the detail should start to provide a clear picture of exactly who was murdering Albanian civilians. It only goes up to Feb 98, but Kosovo.comshould have acess to the stats for feb 1998 - march 99 & beyond more to follow AP V NY NY Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 1:17 am sample of archive material available at Kosovo.com June 25, 1999 NEWS YORK TIMES Kosovo's Rebels Accused of Executions in the Ranks By CHRIS HEDGES The senior commanders of the Kosovo Liberation Army, who have a signed agreement with NATO to disarm, carried out assassinations, arrests and purges within their ranks to thwart potential rivals, say current and former commanders in the rebel army and some Western diplomats. The campaign, in which as many as half a dozen top rebel commanders were shot dead, was directed by Hashim Thaci and two of his lieutenants, Azem Syla and Xhavit Haliti, these officials said. Thaci denied through a spokesman that he had been responsible for any killings.................. the rest of this article can be found at http://www.kosovo.com/testimonies5.html#38 AP V NY NY Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 1:41 am Dan,I believe that Milosevic can call anyone he wishes to testify. Albright is there because she will not face any cross examination of consequence. We will not see Albright as a witness when Milosevic requests he presence. On the other hand, if he calls Plavsic he needs to have her examined by a psychiatrist since, I understand, she is nuttier than a Christmas fruitcake. Walter Trkla Kamloops BC Canada Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 3:38 am I decided to tune in early to the Tribunal this morning and found a surprise. It is a video entitled Justice at Work, basically a PR tool for the Tribunal. If you look at Rule 89, General Provisions, you can see that the evidence rules are quite broad. Under Rule 89(C), a Chamber can admit any relevant evidence that is deemed to be relevant by the Chamber. Therefore, Plavsic's statement will come in, with or without her sponsorship. E. Bennett USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 3:57 am Jagos, your question is a very good one. I think the answer is simple. As Hitler said: "People don't believe small lies, only big ones." And obviously someone is really trying to make this big, since now even Mr Holocaust's, Elie Wiesel's, name has been mentioned. Some time ago I made a little Google search and found that Wiesel had said that the war in Yugoslavia had nothing in common with the End Solution in Germany. I posted it in this discussion. So I am not sure what this is all about. Maybe one has to dig into all of the statements made Wiesel on Yugoslavia. But as his name suggest, Mr Wiesel knows how to make his statements suit the occasion. And why would someone want to make it that big? Well, maybe the connection to Hitler is more direct than just something Hitler said. The Yugoslav imbroglio has been hinging on the imagery imported from WW II, and now that some bozos like us keep exposing the Yugoslav lies, nothing seems secure any more, not even the Holocaust. Maybe that is what this is all about. So maybe the Holocaust rhetoric with which the US government was trying to court the favour of the Muslims in the Balkans is working just the way the Muslims wanted it to work in the first place: to bring the Holocaust into disrepute, or in any case, turn it against the Jews (as we have seen the Palestinians do in Palestine). There can be no question about HRW's bias. I think I showed just a couple of days ago that they draw very one-sided conclusions from the material they got. This is hardly surprising, as we know into which use all this info is put. HRW was sending Milosevic e-mail report in order to incriminate him. Mr Dick Dickers is not keeping the distance to the OTP that he should, if members of his organizations are used as witnesses in this trial. So Nebojsa, what exactly is your problem? As if that weren't enough, we had that extract from the HRW website citing official statements made by the KLA to the effect that the KLA is observing the Geneva Conventions. That was the end of discussion for HRW. Those statements signalled to HRW that these people could be trusted. To be fair, one has to admit that there is a precedent for that move. In the Nuclear Tests judgment, the ICJ decided that unilateral statements made by one state (France) could be trusted so that they wasn't even a dispute with another state (Australia): once France had promised to stop the nuclear tests in the French Polynesia, the ICJ was satisfied that it would - so what was Australia's problem? But that would be easy, wouldn't it? Everybody who says he has observed the law, has, and that is the end of story. However, what happens when both sides of the potential dispute say they have observed the law? Then you would have to choose between them, in so far as their claims are contradictory. And the sooner you choose sides, the likelier it is you are guilty of bias. This principle has even influenced the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. In the Naletilic case the ECHR said the ICTY is impartial, because its Statute says that it is impartial. That is neat, isn't it? I guess the learned mumbo-jumbo ("to uphold our proper idiom", as one professor put it) would be that this reflects the Nuclear Tests judgment. So there is a very elaborate mechanism how the case law of one international tribunal is affecting the case law of another. And that is another perspective to Jagos's question. Remember that we have not only ICTY and ICTR, but also the International Criminal Court. Ian has been saying that the Milosevic trial is a learning experience, and from the ICC viewpoint, it certainly is. The Milosevic case is an ideal countdown to the activities of the ICC, and every bit of this trial is followed closely to prepare the future moves by the ICC. In fact, I think this is one of the most plausible legal arguments that could be contrived for the Milosevic trial. It sounds good, but what it is actually saying is that the bigger the fiasco, the greater the learning experience. And consequently, those who are vowing to learn the most are making the biggest mistakes. One of the ICTY supporters said that he supports the tribunal but not in this form. I asked in what form he would support it, but I got no answer. At least it is obvious that this is a great learning experience to find the right form. It is entirely in line with the general trend that the same person is making such big mistakes. In his privileged position, he should not be promoting anti-Milosevic propaganda material. On the other hand, I have the feeling that this is something he is expected to do. He has been relaying statements made by May to this discussion, so I think this propaganda approach is in line with May's wishes too. This is not good. Wladimiroff's statement in the Dutch press would have been fine with May. He said (again) that this tribunal is professional enough not to be influenced by something that appears in the press. However, later Wladimiroff was formally discharged exactly because of these statements. What do we have? An ICTY supporter relays to this discussion statements that threaten with sanctions anyone who defies May's wishes. On the other hand, we got the discharge of Wladimiroff imposed on May (as it were). So, it seems that anyone who relays May's wishes to this discussion is subject to the disciplinary regime of the tribunal just like Wladimiroff. On the other hand, May's word is not necessarily the last word. Sometimes even the wish to make the tribunal appear impartial overrides it. That means that anyone in a responsible relation to the tribunal should be disciplined for tarnishing the tribunal's impartial image. And whether Milosevic was a dictator or not is not what the tribunal is judging. It is only trying Milosevic for the crimes that he is charged with. Even if it is obvious that Milosevic's political opponents, who are many, would like to keep him behind bars for political reasons, there is no reason why the tribunal couldn't release him all the same. What happens after that is none of the tribunal's business. Maybe the President would get a bit of criticism, but then he might write the same kind of snotty letter that he wrote to those that had complained to him of the neglect of Milosevic's medical care: "It doesn't belong to my duties". And let me take the liberty to point out to you in this connection that the President of the Tribunal is just plain wrong! All we can do is to try to forgive him because he is a professional. Let's see... Rule 32 C of the Detention rules says: "The President may order an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death or serious injury of any detainee." Rule 34 says: "(A) The medical officer shall report to the Commanding Officer whenever he considers that the physical or mental health of a detainee has been or will be adversely affected by any condition of his detention. (B) The Commanding Officer shall immediately submit the report to the Registrar who, after consultation with the President, shall take all necessary action." Then we have an interesting insight into the video monitoring and the halogen lamps in Rule 36 ter: "(A)In exceptional circumstances, in order to protect the health or the safety of the detainee, the Registrar, with the approval of the President, may order that the cell of the detainee be monitored by video surveillance equipment for a period not exceeding thirty days. (B) Renewals which shall not exceed a period of thirty days shall be reported to the President." I think the word "President" means the President of the Tribunal. And the above excerpts are only from the section "Medical Service" of the Rules of Detention. On the basis of these excerpts it seems that the President is LYING. Also in the section on Complaints, we read (Rule 85): "A detainee, if not satisfied with the response from the Commanding Officer, has the right to make a written complaint, without censorship, to the Registrar, who shall forward it to the President." This forwarding seems a superfluous procedure, because the President has confirmed he has no competence in the detainee's medical care. Let the tribunal put its own house in order before trying to save the world. And again, it should never be too early to start learning from your past mistakes. Jari Nousiainen Finland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 4:13 am The Babylonian Whore is making a speech called "evidence" . . . tune in. Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 4:20 am She admits to be the "mother" of the tribunal. Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 4:51 am AP V, Kosovo.com was down, but let us focus on Croatia for change. We now have an insight into Ovcare farm. Let us go through the lists in the Appendices of the initial Croatia indictment. Sometimes it can be good not to know so much. Maybe that is May's excuse. At least, that way you can study complex material with a fresh approach. At this point, it may be the best just to mention the different lists. Every list has a specific paragraph that it refers to in the idictment. I think Baranja came up in the cross-examination some time ago. There are two lists dealing with the Baranja victims. These seem to be men of fighting age. There is a list of the victims of Lovas minefield. It is obvious that the victims were men of fighting age. There are a seven lists on Erdut. They are listed in a somewhat erratic order: case one, case two, case seven, case three. Case one has only one victim: a woman. Most victims are men of fighting age, there are a couple of women and some elderly gentlemen. Then there is a list on Vukovar. This is not the Vukovar Hospital/Ovcara farm case. These are men of fighting age. In this case there are also 23 unidentified deceased. Then we get back to the Erdut cases: case four, case five, and case six. Obviously, these Erdut victims are listed apart from the rest, because these are older people. Annex II is about "CIVILIAN SHELLING DEATHS IN AND AROUND DUBROVNIK 1 OCTOBER - 6 DECEMBER 1991". Most are men of fighting age, though not all. I will come back to these in the future. Jari Nousiainen Finland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 4:53 am No, it was Erdut case seven that had only one victim: a woman, born in 1937. J N Finland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 5:39 am Judge May (NATO) stops Carl Bildt to talk about Mr. Milosevic in regard to Dayton. He did not stop Maddie and others to do the same. Bildt is the other side non-NATO, EU, non American and non military. It was disgusting to see Dr. Albright talk about her chilhood giving her the right to torn to pieces a country from her new home and identity. She especialised in her field, in transition from communism to . . . . what is it? Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 5:54 am Maddie here is the fruit of your folly: CLICK Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 9:29 am Better late than ever. First, a few links on Vukovar stuff: Involuntary blood taking from Vukovar Serbs Testimony of Dr. Mladen Ivnakovic @ Vukovar hospital Accused Officers of the Yugoslav Army It Is the Turn of the "Knights of Vukovar" If It’s Good Enough for Serbia’s Goose, Why Not for Croatia’s Gander? The Balkans' whipping boy -------------------------------- What people should know about Vukovar is that the JNA General Staff was is crisis. Remember that even then, it was still a multi-ethinic affair and that JNA units were haemmoraghing men (numerous example of Croatian pilots 'defecting' with their Mig-21s during the Croatian conflict). The JNA had no strategy for dealing with such an internal insurrection - this coupled with the freeze in the general staff meant that it was left up to those on the ground to make many of the decisions. The other thing that might be of interest is the reports of RAI TV journalist Milena Gabanelli. She was with the JNA when they entered Vukovar. In one case she saw massacred children which she believed were Serbs slaughtered by the Croatians (though she does state that she is not entirely sure). There is also a report (though I do not recollect if she made it), that when the JNA reached the hospital, they found the corpsed of about 200 murdered Serbs piled up in front of the entrance. The JNA rapidly removed the bodies so that they wouldn't incite the local Serbs to take retaliation. There are also a number of videos taken on Vukovar's 'liberation' of the Croatian HOS's handiwork. As for Ms. Gabanelli, she faced an orchestrated smear campaign against her led by certain elements within the Vatican and recieve death threats from members of the Italian-Croatian community. Somebody didn't like her reporting. Funnily enough, she doesn't like to talk about it much these days.... I would try and dig up some links, but it was a long time ago and I'm now off on holiday! Alexei Gorbulski Brussels Soviet Socialist Republic of Belgium ;) Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 11:54 am Let me revisit the letter which the President of the Tribunal wrote in response to ICDSM's complaint of the poor medical care Milosevic was getting. It can be read at the TENC site http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/jorda.htm . The crucial passage I was referring to was the second paragraph: "I wish firstly to inform you that your request does not fall within the province of the President of the International Tribunal. Pursuant to Rules 65 and 74 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, it is for the Trial Chamber seized of the case to order the medical examination of an accused and to rule on requests for provisional release. I am taking the liberty of pointing out to you that Trial Chamber III ruled on the matter on 6 March 2002." I, in turn, am taking the liberty of pointing out to you that this is absolute bull. The President is referring to the Rules of Procedure, but if you look of the Rules of Detention, you can easily conclude that the medical care of the detainees most assuredly falls "fall within the province of the President of the International Tribunal." If the President doesn't know the province of his own duties, what does he know of anything? And if he doesn't know his own duties, is there anybody in the ICTY who knows what he or she is doing? This is the President Claude Jorda of the ICTY! And then to the links provided by Alexei. As I said, I don't know anything about Croatia, but I think the crucial passage in the last link (which appears also in the Goose and Gander link) is this: "An article in the monthly journal Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy in December 1992 noted: 'At least 1,000 Serbs, mostly women, old people and children, were shot, knifed, axed or bludgeoned to death systematically, one-by-one, in two main centres One visiting Croat female journalist, during the Vukovar fighting, unfamiliar with firearms, asked one of the young gunmen to cock a pistol for her so that she could feel what it was like to kill a Serb. She shot, indiscriminately, an old Serb woman who was standing under Croat guard.' In November 1991, the Toronto Star said that 'a photographer reported seeing black plastic bags containing pieces of the bodies of children about 5, 6, or 7 years old.' When Serbian forces broke through and discovered the grisly scenes, Croatian soldiers tried to escape justice by fleeing to the Vukovar hospital and becoming 'patients,' with their weapons at their side." OK, that is about the Vukovar Hospital/Ovcara Farm thing. It seems clear that a massacre did take place. It is equally clear that the prosecution sees only the massacre of the 255 men committed by the Serbs, but not the alleged massacre of 1,000 Serb civilians committed by the Croats. Neither does it care that the soldiers should not have sought refuge in the hospital. The prosecution's case is dismal. So why does one get the feeling that somebody somewhere is trying to bring us back to our senses by introducing that old Holocaust trick again? Elie Wiesel has already been mentioned. It is remarkable that we are not dealing with the fate of the Jewish people here but with the past mistakes of Clinton administration! The Holocaust sure sells cheap. And judging by the signs that the Holocaust story is used to prop up a case which is patently false, fraudulent or at least unrecognizably biased, what should we think of the Holocaust per se (or Wiesel's version of it, which is pretty much the same thing)? We Gentiles are supposed to stand idly by when the big wheels keep on turning. But maybe it is a different matter when two Jews are at each other's throats. To give you some perspective into the Jewish exegetical tradition, where opposing viewpoints can be debated, let me point to you an article by the Israeli journalist and ex-politician Israel Shamir, which I bumped into yesterday. This is not very gentle stuff, but as long as the writer is a Jew, I think he has the right to say it. It is about Jared Israel: http://www.israelshamir.net/english/strange.shtml . Jari Nousiainen Finland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 12:17 pm And as to Elie Wiesel, what I was referring to is this: "French newsman Jacques Merlino said that Elie Wiesel told him that there was no comparison between the Nazi slaughter houses of World War Two and the prison camps where Muslims and Croats had been held prisoner by Serbs. Wiesel had visited these prisoner of war camps in ex Yugoslavia." Visit the site at http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/wk2balkans.html . J N Merlino Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 12:22 pm And as to Michael Rose's "grim" pro-Serb past, check this out: http://www.infotrad.clara.co.uk/antiwar/ deception.htm . J N Finland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 1:00 pm What a day! What a finale thanks to her acceptance of culpability: "I am the sole responsible" she said, "this responsibility can't be extended to other political leaders" (contradicting yesterday's blames on Mr. Milosevic) "and certainly not on the Serbia nation" and further " at the time we could not see our wrongs as we understand them today because we were acting under fear, fear of being the victims once more and our determination of not allowing ourselves to be victims again, made us instead the perpetrators" Quite a direct reflection on the Jews of Israel. But the tone in court was all about acceptance of culpability to make reconciliation possible, acceptance of guilt, Bildt tried his best to put the blame on Tito saying that under brotherhood and unity the unresolved past lied awaiting to set darkness anew (exculpating Germany and America among others) Bildt admitted at least during his time as High Representative of . . .in Sarajevo changed his consciousness about the Balkans, since he knew little and was wrong about it when he first arrived. Imagine other colossal (ignorant) figures higher up. He also said Dayton despite all attempts has failed in creating unitarian Bosnia and while the Yanks had the military power he had no authority, he said that with some bitterness. I will not say about Dr. Albright, she is too much and I hope darling Vera will delight us with her insights, "we were watching Yugoslavia for a long time" she said, "I wanted the spirit of Nüremberg to prevail, nobody wanted it, nobody thought it will be possible, how to be seen fair, it was victors justice some feared, how to appoint judges, I wanted female judges since many victims were women, but we made it possible" she did it because she felt "Yugoslavia was in away her second home" Then South Africa and her reconciliation " it worked (!) there and it should work here, the admission of guilt (under immunity Oh! forgotten word) in the front of the victims has made South Africa a new country". But Robinson (COLONIAL) had a bit of a good sweet touch of revenge questioning this white South African: "Do you have any evidence, scientific evidence that the admission of guilt brings truly reconciliation? The answer was inconclusive and it sound as if the South African government is more than satisfied for now, after having averted a "blood bath". Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 4:41 pm Tribunal Live Bard College has archived the past two days of the Plavsic trial before the ICTY; tomorrow afternoon's session will follow. The Hague tribunal will be on recess until Jan 8th, 2003 (Jan 9th for the Milosevic case). During the recess Domovina Net and XS4ALL will replace one Tribunal Live RealServer (version 5) with two new RealServers (version 8). This means that, after the recess, regular listeners/viewers who use the 'Favorites'-feature in their RealOne/RealPlayer (Plus) will need to revisit one of the webpages listing the A/V-links. Loading the (an) audio/video stream(s) once, and then bookmarking them (it) in your RAplayer will do the trick. People still using a RealPlayer (Plus) version 5 will also need to upgrade to version 8 (Plus) or RealOne. WinMedia streams are not effected by this upgrade. Frank Tiggelaar Amsterdam Holland Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 6:35 pm why can't I "see" yke link to Monday, 12.16.2002 - 09:30 - 16:00 Tuesday, 12.17.2002 - 09:30 - 16:00 Wednesday, 12.18.2002 - 14:30 - 16:00 Closing arguments I can see the text, but it's dead-"unclickable". ozren vukobrat canada Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 6:53 pm There was no Mr. Milosevic trial in those days. His, it resumes tomorrow for one single day which I suspect is going to charged in various ways before going in recess until 9 January 2003 . . . Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 7:06 pm Thanks Gogol, but I was refering to Plavsic video archive page athttp://hague.bard.edu/Biljana_Plavsic.html. I do have RealOne. ozren vukobrat canada Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 7:14 pm H E R E Gogol Charlemagne USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 7:23 pm Gogol, I get to the page athttp://hague.bard.edu/Biljana_Plavsic.html , but where I'm supposed to click for video is only a plain text Monday, 12.16.2002 - 09:30 - 16:00 Tuesday, 12.17.2002 - 09:30 - 16:00 Wednesday, 12.18.2002 - 14:30 - 16:00 Closing arguments ,no active link. ozren vukobrat canada Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 7:43 pm I don't have such a problem. Is your browser set properly? G. C. USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 8:05 pm Promises, promises … The UN Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights’ Report 16 October 2002 Page 15 states that 3,700 persons are still missing in Kosovo according to the Red Cross. Of these approximately 2,750 are ethnic Albanian and 950 are members of the minority population of the province. In contrast: data in this UNCHR report from the Office on Missing Persons and Forensics states that some 4,600 bodies have been located of which only 2,100 have been identified. The graves still to be examined number 270. This leaves 2,500 to be identified and 1,200 to be located: unless the reports of the missing have been exaggerated: which case might be indicated by the small number of graves remaining to be examined and the failure, after nearly four years of searching, to discover the location of this number of alleged victims. The bodies found (4,600) plus the bodies still to be located (at most 1,200) sum to a categorical limit of 5,800 victims of abduction and death in suspicious circumstances. The maximum number of victims still to be located is deduced from those reported still missing (at most 3,700) less those found but not yet identified (2,500) Who is responsible for these at most 5,800 deaths? We are NOT told the ethnicity of the 2,100 identified thus we are left to extrapolate the data for those still missing. The proportion of minorities still missing (950) to the total claimed to be still missing (3,700) is 26%. Applying this ratio to those identified we estimate that 540 bodies have been identified as those of the ethnic minorities in Kosovo. Thus we have some 1,500 of the Kosovo minority population murdered by the KLA. But to this figure we must add the 1,100 loyal Kosovars murdered by the KLA according to the testimony of the Kosovo Albanian politician Bujar Bukoshi, giving a minimum total of 2,600. After three and a half years of Nato occupation we should not have to speculate on these figures. Indeed the report has condemned this record as “inhuman treatment”. We may however speculate on whose interest this dereliction of duty serves. Also the report of 1,200 persons still missing is suspicious: the estimated proportion of 900 ethnic Albanians of this total of 1,200 missing bodies may have been exaggerated and the 270 unexamined graves may contain only the estimated missing 300 bodies of the minorities. How can the authorities in Kosovo not have found these bodies in three and a half years of searching? According to this analysis at least 2,600 of these at most 5,800 victims were clearly the responsibility of the KLA. The Serbs then may have been responsible for at most the remaining 3,200 victims of this total of 5,800. Bearing in mind the possible exaggeration by 900 described above the Serbs victims may range down to 2,300. This figure may fall again supposing the KLA murdered many more loyal Kosovars than the 1,100 we have claimed according to Bujar Bukoshi’s testimony: And of course the 2,600 victims of the KLA would rise accordingly. There is another factor to take into account. What if the KLA secretly buried battle casualties and claimed they had been abducted? We are told that no one claimed the bodies of many of the so-called victims of the Racak massacre. Were these insurgents from Albania and the Diaspora? This would also explain the difficulty and extremely slow progress in identifying many of the alleged victims This would also reduce the number of alleged victims of the Serbs to below 2,000. No wonder the ICTY is not interested in the establishing the true figures. These figures do not include the hundreds murdered in Kosovo by Nato bombs especially cluster bombs. Almost 400 perished in raids on just five targets with hundreds more injured: Those being the attacks upon two refugee tractor convoys at Djakovica and Korisa, the Dubrava prison, a bus near Luzane and three days later a second bus travelling from Pec to Rozaje in Montenegro. So much for Nato’s claim of a total of only 500 civilian victims during its bombardment of the whole of Serbia! Let us remember the origin of this war. Western powers supported an armed incursion to enable Kosovars to fly the Albanian flag on public buildings, to change the street names, to impose Albanian as the official language … to Albanianise this region of the sovereign state of Serbia. In Soho London, where the business branch of the KLA now owns 70% of the sex trade and is heavily engaged in the associated rackets of human and heroin trafficking, will the Blairs allow the Albanianisation of this region of London? What would the Blairs do if these crooks resorted to flying the Albanian flag on public buildings, changed the street names and insisted on the use of the Albanian language? What would the Blairs do if when challenging these moves the crooks started murdering local people to get their own way and recruited al Qaeda or Mujahedin to chop off soldiers’ heads as provocation? Pretty much what the Serbs did I would imagine - otherwise they would quickly be replaced by a government that would. Remember the five IRA members summarily executed in Gibraltar ‘no questions asked’ and Bush’s recent irony in issuing Fatwahs on Islamic Terrorists? To summarise: IF the ICTY was to take the trouble to determine the true figures THEN of the five or six thousand victims of abduction and murder they may find that less than 2,000 may have been the victims of the Serbs and at worst 3,200. These might not have been victims of the authentic security forces who were repulsing an horrific attack on their own sovereign territory but those of tit for tat reprisals or paramilitaries beyond the control of normal government. Such situations thrive in civil wars and this civil war was provoked by the KLA and supported by Nato. In contrast they might find that the ‘Joint Criminal Kosovo Enterprise’ formed by Nato, al Qaeda and the KLA had been responsible for at least 2,600 of those abducted and murdered plus more than 400 killed by Nato bombs plus 800 openly murdered by the KLA and its hybrids since Nato’s occupation of Kosovo: A grand total of some 4,000 or more . So why after a series of promises to do so has del Ponte not indicted the KLA leaders to appear before the Hague court to explain these massacres and murders? The promises: Ms del Ponte has made many promises to indict KLA leaders and indeed it is her duty under the terms of the court to do so in view of the figures published by the UNHCR. We all know that her promises are insincere because the indictments never materialise and because if KLA leaders were to appear in the Hague they would implicate Nato leaders. The powers that be will never allow that to happen. Ms del Ponte’s first excuse for failing to produce indictments was that she did not have access to witnesses in Serbia. Now that she has, since the illegal deportation of Milosevic, the current excuse is that she has no witnesses at all. But at least one of the KLA leaders is on record of boasting about his murder exploits. Also lack of witnesses did not stop the indictment of Milosevic during the Nato bombardment when it was not possible to contact witnesses. Surely the facts speak for themselves. When will the court examine the well documented massacres at Glodjane, Klecka, Orahovac, Izbica, Lipovica, Klina, Volujak , Gnjilane, Junik and the attrocites at Lipljan in the murder of a group of 14 Serb farmers and the destruction of the Serb coach and its passengers near Merdare? Promise #1``We are investigating KLA activity during the conflict,´´ Del Ponte said. ``Our mandate is always to look at the highest responsibility in the chain of command, and that is also the case for the KLA.´´ Associated Press June 2000. Promise #2 “The Chief Prosecutor for the former Yugoslavia, Carla del Ponte, said during a visit to Kosovo in June (2000) that the KLA was also being investigated; now her spokesman has given details of those investigations … “The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has confirmed that investigations have begun which could lead to war crimes indictments against members of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA).” BBC News September 2000. … Promise #N-1 The Hague tribunal chief prosecutor Carla del Ponte said in Strasbourg Wednesday that this year already could be issued indictments against former members of the paramilitary organization of Albanian terrorists in Kosovo and Metohija, the KLA.” Tanjug April 2002. Multiple indictments did not materialise. Having resiled from this position we have del Ponte’s statement that a single leader would be indicted by the end of the year: Promise #NThe first indictment in the war crimes case of three former Kosovo rebels is to be issued by the end of the year, chief UN war crimes prosecutor Carla Del Ponte said Tuesday … “I will be ready with the first indictment before the end of the year and the other two next,” Del Ponte told reporters in Kosovo's capital, Pristina. AFP, October 24th 2002 It is now the “end of the year” and none of the promised indictments for KLA leaders to appear at the Hague court have emerged. Carla del Ponte has no shame and this court no basis for justice while it ignores these crimes of the KLA. For the past three years del Ponte has been falsely promising indictments for obvious crimes committed by known leaders of an Islamic terrorist organisation in Kosovo. Do not be mislead by the recent UN indictment of several KLA members in Kosovo for the murderous attack on a loyal Kosovar family after which only one of the children recovered from his injuries to relate the ordeal. One of the indictees is indeed a former leader of the KLA but his indictment does not refer to any of the thousands of crimes committed before, during and immediately after Nato’s aerial bombardment. Also this case is to be heard in Kosovo! The perpetrators of such crimes must appear as promised before the court in The Hague not in one of Kosovo’s ethnically biased courts. Kosovo is an unstable, corrupt, racist society under the military control of those who aided and abetted these crimes. Many witnesses dare not appear in a Kosovo court for fear of their lives. The car bomb in Pristana just a few days ago was perhaps a warning of what is to come if the trial of these cowardly murderers goes ahead in Kosovo. No wonder del Ponte can claim that she can find no witnesses to testify if they are expected to do so in Kosovo courts. The evil that is Kosovo today is the kind of world created for us by weasel wordy lawyers who dissemble, hedge, trim and finally evade with the New Age “Law is style, not truth” aplomb revealed by Jari. Of Fraudster Foster who arranged the purchase of half a million GBP’s worth of property on their behalf: Blair’s wife declared to the world “He was not my financial adviser”. In a similar attempt by a KLA protagonist to evade public exposure during the KLA assaults in 88/99 we have an almost a parallel statement ‘I did not have sexual(financial) relations with that woman(man)’. But the subjects of these exposures were trivial matters. These examples serve only to unmask the hypocrisy of those who falsely claim to be “Whiter than white”, “Purer than pure” and demand of others that they tell ‘The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’. To assist Blair’s criminal attack upon Serbia, Blair’s wife declared in the Sun newspaper during 1999 that she was “… horrified about the Rape Camps” in Kosovo although she had no knowledge of them as they did not exist. Blair, his ministers, and media gurus referred to the mythical tens of thousands of Kosovars slaughtered by the Serbs. These are shocking lies still hidden from most citizens of the Western world. While KLA leaders remain at large we are entitled to assume that it is the purpose of this court and especially Judge May to see to it that these lies continue to be perceived as the truth. Thus we witness merdey word games played by ‘smart’ lawyers to mask their partiality or criminality and hide the truth. Historians will form a proper judgement on these affairs. Meanwhile will none of our leaders or media uphold the two fundamental pillars of Justice: Impartiality and Truth? Peter Taylor Herts/UK Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 9:07 pm You will remember that, during her testimony, Jeri Laber had claimed that a headline-writer at the New York Times had inserted an inappropriate headline to an article she had written. Here is that article from Nov. 10, 1990: Why Keep Yugoslavia One Country? By Jeri Laber and Kenneth Anderson; Jeri Laber is executive director of Helsinki Watch; Kenneth Anderson, a lawyer, is a member. Polat, a remote village in Yugoslavia's troubled Kosovo province, is too small to appear on our map. Until the ghastly events of Sept. 13, its name was virtually unknown. We went to Polat in early October to investigate reports of violence by the nationalist Serbian government against ethnic Albanians. We returned with serious doubts about whether the U.S. Government should continue to bolster the national unity of Yugoslavia. A brilliant autumn sun lit the dry, brown cornfields and tree-covered hills of Polat, but the village was in mourning. Its residents -- several hundred ethnic Albanians living at subsistence level -- described how, in the predawn hours of Sept. 13, they had awakened to the barking of their dogs, looked out and saw Serbian government tanks in their small courtyards. Without warning, soldiers and police began firing automatic weapons, shattering windows and stuccoed walls. Besim Latifi, a 22-year-old law student who had come home to help with the harvest, opened his door and was met with a volley of bullets that killed him on the spot. No one saw what happened to Skender Munolli, 34, whose battered corpse was released to his family a few days later with one bullet in the hip. According to their families, neither young man had had any previous trouble with the police. In addition to the two killings, more than 30 men and women from Polat were beaten and taken off to a jail, where they were tortured for about 24 hours; one young man was forced to lick his own blood from the floor. Kosovo is a province within Serbia, the largest of Yugoslavia's six fractious republics. Kosovo's population -- more than 90 percent ethnic Albanian -- is united in a predominantly nonviolent struggle to become independent. In July, after the Kosovo Assembly defiantly declared its independence, the Serbian government suspended Kosovo's parliament and government; at least 10 members of the assembly have been arrested or are being sought. Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian Socialist (formerly Communist) Party's demagogic leader, has said that Serbia will pay any price to maintain control of Kosovo, the birthplace of Serbian culture. He is engaged in a calculated policy of colonization that includes relocating Serbians to Kosovo. An estimated 30,000 Albanians have been removed from their jobs in Kosovo. Several hundred Albanian doctors and medical workers were fired summarily; some were taken away in handcuffs from the hospital, even out of the operating rooms. The Albanian-language press and radio have been abolished. In schools, Albanians are segregated from Serbs. Kosovo's capital, Pristina, is an occupied territory, with military checkpoints everywhere. Houses are searched without notice, and people are arrested arbitrarily. In the past year and a half, more than 60 Albanians were killed by police. "We live under glass," an unemployed Albanian professor told us. "I don't know what it is like to laugh. How long can I tell my children to be patient?" Kosovo is not the only troubled area within Yugoslavia. We visited villages in the Croatian Republic where the tension is equally high; an armed minority composed of Serbs has declared autonomy within Croatia. Franko Tudjman, the nationalist President of Croatia, has said that his government will "invite our entire people to take to arms" if Croatian sovereignty is threatened. The Slovenian Republic's government, which has also declared its sovereignty, has already taken control of its own defense forces in direct defiance of the central government. Borislav Jovic, head of the Yugoslav government, recently acknowledged that civil war was looming on the horizon. Yugoslavia was long the darling of the U.S. State Department. A Communist country independent of Moscow, it was our Communist country as distinct from theirs. Seen as a buffer straddling the East-West divide, it has received most-favored-nation status and has been exempted from any serious scrutiny of its many human rights abuses. But the revolution against Communism that swept through Eastern Europe left an ideological vacuum in regions that are now veering away from a center that cannot hold. The U.S. Government cannot stop that process, even if it leads to inflaming old border disputes between Yugoslavia's nation-states and its larger neighbors. Yet we continue to give economic support to a federal Government in Belgrade that is apparently too weak to speak out or act against those who are committing human rights abuses. Why not acknowledge the Government's impotence and offer aid to those republics that will protect the rights of all their citizens? We might be able to help them in a peaceful evolution to democracy. There is no moral law that commits us to honor the national unity of Yugoslavia. But there are laws, both moral and statutory, that commit us to deny aid to governments that oppress. george szamuely new york ny Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 9:24 pm to George Szamuely: "Eloquentiae Unda Sapientie Guta" D. Jovanovic USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 9:30 pm George Szamuely: Why don’t you read: http://members.tripod.com/Balkania/resources/terrorism/ kla_chronology_96-98.html All what is stated in the article you quote had a pre history, read it! D. Jovanovic USA Tuesday December 17, 2002 at 10:58 pm Alexei, thanks for the links re Vukovar, this being my personal little quest. And thanks, AP Vucelic, for warning me about the futility of exchange with HumWarriors - I fully agree; but I'm brought up that way to respond politely as long as I'm politely asked, so this will be my limit in answering them. Nebojsa, sorry for a delayed answer, I've been too busy. According to the Oxford Dictionary, biased is the one who gives a leaning of the mind towards or away from sth; has a predisposition; is in favour of/opposed to sth without having full knowledge of it . All this fits to perfection to Helsinki Watch/Human Rights Watch. Try to find political conclusions in their 'reports' about KLA or NATO war crimes. Is there any mentioning of KLA being a terrorist organization or of NATO being under the US hegemony? And is there any political conclusion that NATO countries or the US should be punished by sanctions or that they themselves (or somebody else) should investigate their crimes? The only conclusions about those venerable organizations were that KLA "recognizes the Geneva Conventions" (?!) and that NATO did not intentionally kill those 500 (?!) people during their bombing spree in 1999, so everything is kosher. On the other hand, all their 'reports' are full of purely political premises and conclusions about the "Serbian Government', 'the Serbs' and the 'Yugoslav Army', all of them grossly exaggerated or completely wrong (like the one about the 'Serbian hegemony' and 'occupation of the parts of Croatia'). Yes, I've bothered to read several related 'reports' from their site; I have no intention to analyse them here on your behalf - you do that yourself. And let us know in what way specifically do you find the organisation unbiased. Yes, the 'report' was indeed such a scandal and it had been rejected vehemently in a letter from the Presidential office, point by point (read the transcript). Indulge me: by which other reports were the HRW 'reports' supported? Perhaps by the ICTY indictments? They in turn supported the ICTY indictments, so there you have a nice circular reasoning of one thing supporting another, without any proper and thorough forensic investigation. Yes, there are indeed 'plenty of particular names' in these 'reports', but collected from the hearsay evidence/anonymous sources, as if specifically prepared for the only court in the world which would admit them - ICTY. I believe that the accuser has to bear the burden of proof, not the other way around. Probably Milosevic couldn't be bothered to investigate these allegations, being too busy guzzling Chivas Regal (though, I think you give too much credit to Mesic's testimony: apparently, as established during the General Naumann cross-examination, Milosevic drinks only pear brandy, when he drinks at all). Or, was he perhaps too busy fighting KLA terrorists? Or, was it not downright impossible to send investigators to the alleged 'massacre' sites, as the example of a local judge demonstrated, who was sent to investigate Racak 'massacre' and who was greeted by KLA mortars? This Plavsic hearing is really nothing more than a PR vehicle for the ICTY, which was more than obvious with the last 'witness', Dr Alex Boraine from the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (Btw, didn't the phrase 'the joint witness of the Defence and the Prosecution' strike you as somewhat odd? All these people indeed spoke with both sides of their mouth simultaneously, which was laughable.). There it was this Methodist preaching to our Trial Chamber III about the necessity to 'look into the future full of hope', because this is a 'first step into the reconciliation' (by indicting only the Serbs' leadership?!). He recommended that Plavsic should 'repent and explain how she came to such a decision' (although he admitted that even his own Commission 'never asked for repentance'). He even ventured to say that the courts such as ICTY 'create the important basis for the notes on history', with May in a close-up, benignly smiling (there you have it, history re-writing confessed). He explained the catharsis that his country felt by watching daily TV transmissions of the whole process (How this could help the ICTY, I wander, with its almost total media black-out? And here's where Robinson interrupted him, questioning the effects of reconciliation, in fact, stopping the embarrassing parallels.). Then the witness stopped preaching and went into political plead on behalf of the defendant: Plavsic tried her best to 'implement the Dayton Agreement' (the mantra of all 'her' witnesses; but who was the one who forced the Bosnian Serbs into accepting it?). The 'demands from the victims should not be treated as a revenge' (i.e. she should be forgiven). He believes and hopes that 'her act will induce other leaders to plead guilty and to recognize this institution '. Now, who might that be who is the only one not recognizing 'this institution'?! He thinks that 'her addressing other leaders might be significant' and he does 'strongly support her addressing the others'. In a word, considering Plavsic's life and work, she was given 'a second chance' and 'should be commended'. The only logical next step after this would be to recommend Plavsic for the sainthood. Then, Plavsic stood up and read her few pages. And contrary to the media reports, she simply failed to meet the high hopes of the Tribunal. She spoke too much about 'the reputation of my people', about St. Sava and Bishop Artemije, about 'crying for justice in what has become, for the Serbs, the wilderness of Kosovo'. At the very end, she appealed to 'this Tribunal' to 'do all within your power to bring justice to all sides. In doing this, you will perhaps be able to accomplish the mission for which this Tribunal has been created.' Please, read her statement carefully when the transcripts arrive, don't rely on Free Serbia. I'll prove their undying bias on this example. Plavsic said, and I quote: "This responsibility is mine and mine alone. It does not extend to other leaders and their right to defend themselves. It does not extend to the Serbian people." The same line, as quoted by Free Serbia, goes like this: "This responsibility is mine and mine alone. It does not extend to other leaders and certainly not to my Serbian people." So, what Free Serbia felt that should be left out is the mentioning of other leaders' right to defend themselves, as acknowledged by Plavsic. Indeed, she failed to meet the high hopes, she didn't address Milosevic et al to repent. Why didn't they simply make her read that famous 'document' that she allegedly submitted, where she accused all of them, as reported by the media? This way, the woman almost fared well, not totally despicable. And they will either give her 10 years, suspended sentence or let her walk. But, maybe this little speech of hers, lacking the proper addressing, will be her doom after all. Because, at the very end of today's session, Carla Del warned that Plavsic 'didn't co-operate and is not co-operating' and that she hopes 'she will decide to co-operate'. But, Carla wasn't at all opposing the continuance of the provisory release, she explained to Robinson that 'nothing has changed' by this hearing, which only served to present 'extenuating circumstances, her behaviour, her implementation of the Dayton Agreement (Is this the Prosecution speaking, or the joint witness of the Defence and the Prosecution?). All in all, Plavsic can walk if she decides to co-operate. And judging by the Los Angeles Times, 'she can be compelled to testify, said Jim Landale, a spokesman for the Tribunal' (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-plavsic16dec.story). If Plavsic wasn't that despicable, another one was: Albright (though Ellie Wiesel strongly competes). Please, allow me to give her just once the appropriate denomination: Wicked Witch of the West. Wicked because she's on record as being OK with hundreds of thousands Iraqi children dead because of the sanctions, she considers this "acceptable". A witch because… well, it's obvious; and her mini-skirts and vicious cowboy outfits didn't improve her looks a bit. And 'of the West' is an understatement: while in the office, she was the nightmare of the whole world. However, I'll not go into detail of her 'testimony', as she herself didn't go into 'details recounted to her by victims' (I'd really like to hear the list of the people she spoke to). In addition to the usual Dayton sing-song praise, WWW claimed that Plavsic wasn't her 'puppet on a string'. Well, take a look at this article from St. Petersburg Times, 'Seductive Kassandra to the Rescue in Bosnia' (http://www.osvaldorios.com/snt-petes.htm) and see to what lengths/depths the US administration went in order to keep Plavsic in the office, what was used to pull the strings of this particular puppet and how they treated the Bosnian Serbs like some jungle tribe, to be bribed by glass pearls: State Dept. intervened with Miami distributor of Latino TV soaps to donate 150 episodes of 'Kassandra' just to boost Plavsic's popularity! It didn't work: she lost the elections. But, we haven't seen the last of the Plavsic saga. Vera Martinovic Belgrade Yugoslavia Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 1:54 am As far as I am concerned the Plavsic hearings are nothing more than an exercise in Hate propaganda, designed to turn the Serbs and the Jews against one another. Andy Wilcoxson Washington, United States Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 3:43 am In so far as the US adventure in the Balkans was part of the overall plan of the Clinton administration to appease the Muslim world and bring peace to the Middle East, the Jews and the Serbs have stood against each other certainly longer than the Plavsic hearing. And the crimes have had their retributions long before the Plavsic hearing. The Middle East peace plan has been a dismal failure and the Israelis now say they didn't want it in the first place. So the Jews turned against the Serbs, and both ended up losers. TENC is doing a great job - journalistically - but I agree with Israel Shamir: "[I]t is not worth one penny if they do not speak against the real instigators of the war." He is speaking of Iraq, but it would go for Yugoslavia as well. I have tried to the last to toe the politically correct line, but parading Elie Wiesel and Albright together in such a short time is too much. And it is obvious that they are not paraded just as individuals but as representatives of their whole community (though less so in the case of Albright). Now the whole weight of the community is thrown behind the fiasco in the Balkans. Shouldn't one try to warn that this will end up in an even bigger catastrophe than the war in the Balkans? Wouldn't it be in the interests of that community too? Even greater force will be needed to patch up the past mistakes in the future, and you will end up in a vicious circle till the Doomsday. I am not a conspiracy theorist. However, should one try to deny the plain facts? Shamir gives another quotable quote, this time from Norman Finkelstein: "If the leading Jews act together, should we shut our eyes in despair and cry: oh no, it can not be, otherwise we shall be condemned as ‘conspiracy-theorists’?" Yes, it is true that one shouldn't criticize the good work the ICDSM and TENC are doing. Neither should the Milosevic trial be seen as an occasion to cure all the world's evils. That way, Milosevic will only end up losing. But the way I see it, he is losing anyway. In order for him to have a chance, a gigantic paradigm shift is needed, and I am not sure we are getting it from TENC or ICDSM. We get some desperate attempts in that direction, like the lunatic conspiracy theories about 9-11, but that is where it stops (and should stop). Of course, if one points out that Elie Wiesel is a profiteer, one is easily labelled as an advocate of the End Solution. But let me quote Shamir again. He quotes Michael Neumann. Yes, I am hiding behind the backs of these eminent Jews, but that is what anybody would do: "Our only hope was expressed by the brilliant Canadian Jewish philosopher Michael Neumann: 'Sooner or later, the great white men of America will wake up to their true interests, and get themselves a new set of speechwriters and pundits. The Jews will go out of style'." OK, go on preaching peace and harmony between the Jews and the Serbs, and see if anything changes. It may be that nothing changes even if you don't preach peace and harmony, but if Shamir and Neumann are right, there might still be hope. What I have said above is the setting. Yes, we can go on with this discussion of ours, but I am not sure if anything changes. On the contrary, we get more of such hanky-panky as Plavsic. She said that Milosevic cooperated with her in the crimes in Bosnia. As has been pointed out, Milosevic will not have the opportunity to cross-examine her to defy her claims. But more importantly, what was her "crime"? As Gogol said, she admitted having a share in a little bit of human suffering caused by the war. This is muy impressive! This is so low as can be. But I think the longer we are following the trial, the more normal we consider all the things that are happening. We can hardly change anything. It is us, the ones who live close to the trial, that are changed by the trial. We almost nod in agreement with what happened to Plavsic. This is what we should expect from the tribunal after the "interests of justice" game with the protected witnesses. This is again all in line with the interests of justice. We are the vanguards of the brave new world! Then we have that case called Mr T. I think that he should be disciplined by the tribunal for disseminating propaganda just as Wladimiroff was discharged for making inappropriate comments to the press. In Wladimiroff's honour let it be said that his comments were at least correct. But does Mr T feel troubled? He goes on with his bulletin board tactics as he has always done. But Mr T is little fish. If the man at the top, the President, Claude Jorda, is lying about the "province" of this responsibilities, it is he who should be discharged. And who is going to do that? And we can go on endlessly about HRW and Helsinki Watch. Why? They are not on trial. Everybody knows they have been tailored for the benefit of the prosecution, but who cares? It is not the reports that give the legitimacy to the prosecution's case - it is the prosecution's case that give the legitimacy to the reports. And the case is closed. I may be overly pessimistic, but I hope there is at least some realism in what I am saying. I think it will help the defense to go on with perusing the lists of the victims in the indictments. At least it may prove a catharsis to some people, and that is important too. But if the prosecution is unscrupulous enough to align the Plavsic sentence, as the tribunal did earlier with Krstic, to get Milosevic convicted, don't you think they have developed or are developing some stupid but unstoppable plan for gagging the defense when it gets too much to bear. But at least the lack of air time is evenly allocated between the prosecution and the defense. Jari Nousiainen Finland Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 4:01 am Hey, what is the matter with the video/audio from the ICTY this morning? Gogol C USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 4:02 am And it ain't over yet. The Albanian students in Macedonia just had a poison scare. This is how it started in Kosovo. And to quit this namby-pamby talk about the Jews, I just checked what Norman Finkelstein had actually done. You know, I don't know these guys. Well, it seems there is something the foes of Elie Wiesel might find an interesting read: The Holocaust Industry - by Norman Finkelstein. Visit his homepage at http://www.normanfinkelstein.com . J N Finland Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 4:15 am Domovina Net's http server is down presently; xs4all engineers are working to solve the problem. You can follow the events in the Hague live by using one of the makeshift links below: http://2002.xs4all.nl/domovina/html/Icty/eng/room1v_live.ram" (video Eng) http://2002.xs4all.nl/domovina/html/Icty/bcs/room1v_live.ram (video BCS) http://2002.xs4all.nl/domovina/html/Icty/eng/room1_live.ram (audio Eng) http://2002.xs4all.nl/domovina/html/Icty/bcs/room1_live.ram (audio BCS) Sorry for the inconvenience, Frank Frank Tiggelaar Amsterdam Holland Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 4:18 am Vera is right in pointing out Carla del Ponte is un-impressed about yesterday's Plavsic hearing when she said: "Monsieur le president, nothing has changed she is not coperating", the troika did not ask, what do you mean, what do you want, she pleaded guilty, she showed remorse, she asks for clemency she even lies a little, and you Carla the Hardheaded still is unhappy? The answer lies in her case against Mr. Miloseivc which still is unresolved. It will remain so. Gogol Charlemagne USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 4:20 am dankebar G C USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 5:21 am Tribunal Live is back up again. Frank Tiggelaar Amsterdam Holland Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 6:28 am Am I imagining this situation or do I detect a disproportionate number of influential Jewish people who have it in for the Serbs? I find it baffling that any Jewish person should attack the Serbs and practically none the Muslim fighters in the Balkans: Especially the KLA over Kosovo where Jews were driven out along with the other minorities. The Jews and the Serbs seem to have so much in common. They are both subjected to Islamic terror attacks. They both suffered horribly at the hands of the Nazis. What on earth have the Serbs done to the Jewish people to deserve the likes of Albright, Rubin, Wiesel ... ? Peter Taylor Herts/UK Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 8:55 am The Plavšiæ case should be seen in three different contexts: 1) the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina; 2) the present situation in B. and H.; and 3) the trials in The Hague. My view: ad. 1) she said sorry for the atrocities that were commited by her side during the war; I've never heard anyone, let alone those who shout instead of talk, saying atrocities were not commited by all sides; what she did is to be respected, ad. 2) provided she hasn't been instrumentalized this can be a start of reconciliation between the warring ethnicities in B. and H., ad. 3) she didn't say the atrocities were masterminded from outside, which is extremely important in Miloševiæ case, which is probably why Del Ponte is not satisfied. One more thing: I'm not informed enough to know who gets what from her pleading guilty, but doesn't WWW get the justification for her involvement? ivko rig Milan Italy Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 9:18 am The only evidence of crimes against humanity and genocide in the Balkans that Mr Wiesel can give is hearsay evidence. His only service to this flawed court is his prestige which history will now mark down. Because he gives no hearsay evidence about the crimes of the Croats, Bosnian Muslims and the KLA. The fact that you doubt that crimes were committed by the KLA in spite of the evidence of the UNCHR report give me reason to add you to the list. I shall not discuss this matter with you again until you answer the question: What on earth have the Serbs done to the Jewish people to deserve the likes of Albright, Rubin, Wiesel, Nightmare ... ? Peter Taylor Herts/UK Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 10:44 am After reading Ms. Plavsic’s tesgtimony I can only say my prayers are with her. She appears to just be tired of having the lynching mob after her. As for the “worse nightmare” I do not think Peter should respond to someone who hides behind a pseudonym. If he cannot give his true name he is hiding something. What are is he afraid of? No one suffered more then the Serbs in the Second World War. The difference between the Serbs and the Jews, people like Eli Wiesel, who never let up. The Serbs were never given that opportunity and not one cent was made from their misery. Eli Wiesel damages his own reputation. Kathryn Love SJC USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 11:13 am Article regarding testimony in Hague hearing on Emperors Clothes by Jared Israel. I must defend Stella Jatras. Stella is a Greek American. Her husband was in the United States Military for many years and is now retired. They are both upstanding citizens. To demonize Ms. Jatras who does not receive any monies for her defense of the Serbian people and Serbian nation is a ploy by people who use pseudonyms to attack anyone who supports the Serbs. Kathryn Love SJC USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 11:53 am So Judge May (NATO) ruled today based on the medical reports and the summissions by the amici curiae and the prosecutors: 1.- The trial will continue at the current pace, allowing time for Mr. Milosevic to be sick and for rest periods. NO extension of time will be given to the PROSECUTION. 2.- NO defence council will be appointed against the wishes of the accused. 3.- No provisional release will be granted. So , it seems to me Mr. Nice (NATO) is the biggest looser. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 11:58 am CASTING THE SERBS AS FASCISTS How did the Serbs come to be viewed as fascists in this conflict? This characterization has now become an accepted fact, an issue beyond debate. It makes U.S. motives seem unimpeachable and on the side of good against evil. In April 1993 Jacques Merlino, associate director of French TV 2, interviewed James HarW director of Ruder Finn Global Public Affairs, a Washington, D.C-based public relations firm. The interview shows the role of the corporate media in shaping a political issue. Harif bragged of his services to his clients—the Republic of Croatia, the Republic of Bosnia~Herzegovina and the Parliamentary opposition in Kosovo, an autonomous region of Serbia. Merlino described how Harif uses a file of several hundred journalists, politicians, representatives of humanitarian associations, and academics to create public opinion. Harif ex plained: "Speed is vital . . . it is the first assertion that really counts. All denials are entirely ineffective." In the interview Merlino asked Harif what his proudest public relations endeavor was. Harif responded: "To have managed to put Jewish opinion on our side. This was a sensitive matter, as the dossier was dangerous looked at from this angle. President Tudjman was very careless in his book, Wasteland of Historical Reality. Reading his writings one could accuse him of anti-Semitism [Tudjman claimed the Holocaust never happened-SF;] In Bosnia the situation was no better: President Izetbegovic strongly supported the creation of a fundamentalist Islamic state in his book, The Islamic Declaration. "Besides, the Croatian and Bosnian past was marked by real and cruel anti-Semitism. Tens of thousands of Jews perished in Croatian camps, so there was every reason for intellectuals and Jewish organizations to be hostile toward the Croats and the Bosnians. Our challenge was to reverse this attitude and we succeeded masterfully. "At the beginning of July 1992, New York Newsday came out with the article on Serb camps. We jumped at the opportunity immediately. We outwitted three big Jewish organizations-the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League, The American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress. In Aug ust, we suggested that they publish an advertisement in the New York Times and organize demonstrations outside the United Nations. "That was a tremendous coup. When the Jewish organi zations entered the game on the side of the [Muslim] Bosnians, we could promptly equate the Serbs with the Nazis in the public mind. Nobody understood what was happening in Yugoslavia. The great majority of Americans were probably asking them selves in which African country Bosnia was situated. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 12:05 pm THE D A Y T O N DAYS . . . CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: What about press reports this weekend about the massacres in Srebrenica? We've all known about those massacres, but now, the window has been opened even wider on some of the atrocities there. How are press reports of this going to affect these negotiations, do you think, and probably the inevitable calls for punishment of war criminals? SEC. HOLBROOKE: Well, as you, yourself, just said, we've known for a long time that a war atrocity of historic proportions took place in Srebrenica in July. We've known this. We've taken action on it. We cooperated with the journalists who wrote these brilliant reconstructions. They've added detail to what we already knew. But I want to be clear that they only accentuate the need to push forward towards a peace settlement. There are people still alive whose lives are at risk. Asst. Sec. John Shattuck has made three trips to the area wearing his portfolio as Assistant Sec. for Human Rights and met with President Izetbegovic and President Milosevic and other officials in the last few weeks trying to get people who are still missing in the area East of Banja Luka to be accounted for. We're working on prisoner releases. We're working on-- CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: But can you-- SEC. HOLBROOKE: --finding out what happened. And we are going to continue to push on this. CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Can you get a peace plan in these negotiations without dealing with the war criminal issue? SEC. HOLBROOKE: We are dealing with the war criminal issue. We are not having any indicted war criminals as part of delegations coming here. If they wanted to come here, they'd be arrested when they landed, and we are not going to in any way compromise the pursuit of indicted war criminals. From the mouth of the horse. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 12:17 pm Source for the above: NEWSMAKER INTERVIEW WITH ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE RICHARD HOLBROOKE, OCTOBER 30, 1995 National Public Radio (link no longer available) Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 2:03 pm Elie Wiese: "I don't know much about politics, and I don't want to know. That's why I rarely involve myself in politics." http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/apr/09inter.htm What do you have to say about Israel's assassination policy? Usually, I am against violence. But what should Israel do? I don't criticize it. So you feel that the use of force by Israel against the Palestinians is always reactionary, never deliberate ? No doubt. It is always a reaction. So you don't think there are any human rights violations [by Israel] occurring in the region? I cannot tell you really. But I can tell you that any other country in the same circumstance, besieged by so much violence and hatred, I don't think they would act differently, be it England or the US or any other(especially NATO my addition) . There are these suicide bombers killing innocent civilians, mostly young or even children on the street or at a nightclub. Where is the glory in this? Do you have any Palestinian friends? Not friends. But I know some of them. Pera Bora Canada Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 2:28 pm Vera thanks for the answer.Hope all`s well with you. I will take my Chivas now. Nebojsa Matic Oslo, Norway Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 2:31 pm A historical note: while the Nazi occupiers trusted the Croats (except the ones whom joint Tito's partizans and there were many) they had no trust what-so-ever on the Serbs and in Serbia the German High Command explicitly charged German troops to carry their genocide, making it plain that no Serb was to be entrusted with any part of the task and that included collaborators ! There were several orders issued to this effect, they were used after the war as evidence during the Nüremberg Trials. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 3:37 pm Thanks for your explanation Alexei. I was aware that it was a small group but it is so powerful that it insidiously warps the perception of all. Much, I imagine, like the New Labour government has been warping others view of a British people that it no longer represents. Peter Taylor Herts/UK Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 3:58 pm Mr. Elie Wiesel is involved in the wars of ex-Yugoslavia almost since its beginning. He is part of Jewish leadership who is building new bridges towards Muslims over Serbian dead bodies. There are many Jews especially in Israel who do not share this view of his. Elie Wiesel: "I don't know much about politics, and I don't want to know. That's why I rarely involve myself in politics." http://www.randomhouse.com/boldtype/1299/wiesel/interview.html Mr Wiesel was involved with demonisation of the Serbs almost since the beginning of the war. He emerged in 1992 when he was invited by president Milosevic of Serbia, to observe the war ravaged cities and to discuss ways of ending the war in BiH. When he came to Bosnia he was allowed by the Serbs to visit all the sites that he wanted. When Croat and Bosnian side were asked to do the same, they flatly denied him access to any of the sites. He never protested and insisted to be allowed to visit sites of atrocities committed against the Serbs. Back home he gave a couple of very strange interviews. He was not answering the questions. He was mostly turning hie eyes around and mumbling and the anchors were doing questioning and answering for him. And of course this was not what he has seen but pure propaganda. In 1993, Mr. Wiesel gave a keynote speech at the dedication of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. In his speech he accused Serbs as only guilty party for war in ex-Yugoslavia and indirectly asked for Belgrade and Serbia to be bombed. At the opening of the Museum no single official representative of the Serbian victims of Holocaust of the WWII was allowed. Among the official guests were Mr. Tudjman and Mr. Izedbegovic. At the time Mr. Tudjman forces have destroyed almost completely the memorial site of Jasenovac were at least 700.000 Serbs, Gypsies and Jews were slaughtered. Mr. Tudjman was running a Neo-Nazi State, as Mr. Mesic almost admitted at his cross-examination. Mr. Tudjman become loved in Croatia when he published a history book denying that Holocaust happened in Croatia in WWII. Mr. Tudjman even stated that if there were any killings of Serbs and others in Jasenovac that they were done by Jewish inmates. Mr. Izedbegovic has a proven record of alliance with Nazis at the end to the WWII This is when Mr. Elie Wiesel became close to Mr. Clinton's administration. I have reason to believe that he is one of the masterminds of Mr. Clinton's administration anti Serb propaganda. At the time he was frequent guest in the Whit House. During bombing of Kosovo Mr. Wiesel visited Albania and refugee camps run by Israelis. In a short appearance that I so on CNN he was surrounded by singing Albanian children from Kosovo. Here is what he had to say:" I am glad that at last I can here some Muslim children singing Jewish songs. His appearance at the hearing at Mrs. Plavsic's trial was a golden opportunity for him to show that he was right. Kind of, I sad you so celebration. What disgusted me is that he avoided to speak about what he saw personally in Bosnia, but reverted to the pure anti Serb propaganda , of his own making, professed by Mr. Clinton administration. It is strange that not a single of the "honorable" judges of the ICTY knew that he visited Bosnia during the war and asked him about his personal experience there. I was always thinking that a witness who was part of the events should talk about what he so not about what others talked about them. It is even stranger that I have not found a single article talking about sentencing of Mr. Plavsic and testimony of Mr. Wiesel that is mentioning that he visited Bosnia and was asked by Mr. Milosevic to help in the conflict resolution. Pera Bora Canada Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 5:41 pm LATEST War crimes prosecutors seek up to 25 years for Plavsic A testimony by Plavsic in the Milosevic case could establish a direct link between the former Yugoslav leader and the wartime Bosnian Serb leadership, something prosecutors desperately need to prove if they are to show that Milosevic can be held responsible for their actions. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 6:47 pm Peter, Do you remember reading about the story of unexploded serb artillery shells being found in Sarajevo with hebrew script on them? It was explained in the international media that (to paraphrase) 'the serbs wanted ammunition in return for allowing the jews out of Sarajevo'. Let's put it this way, I believe that there is a more interesting story out there. Maybe one day we will hear about it... Alexei Gorbulski Brussels Soviet Socialist Republic of Belgium ;) Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 6:55 pm Interesting!http://www.balkanpeace.org/hed/archive/ dec02/hed5381.shtml ivko rig Milan Italy Wednesday December 18, 2002 at 7:48 pm Ivko, thanks for posting the URL. I find the following quote from it interesting: "Croatia is now being monitored by four members of the task force - the United States, Israel, France and Argentina - to see what will come out of plans to introduce Holocaust education in Croatian schools." My comment: The two monitor countries USA and Argentina are the countries that since the WWII and still now are known as safe havens for Ustasa war criminals. Do these countries as well need some of Holocaust education, meaning they helped a lot of war criminals to evade justice. This applies to Canada where I currently live too.. Pera Bora Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 1:33 am Vera: Did Plavsic implicate Milosevic or not? Also, why do you think she entered a guilty plea?Do you think she just got tired of the lynching mob or is she a little sick? The moderator should remove posts that give false identifications. This cheapens the forum when you allow pseudonyms. It allows for any unballanced individual to tarnish the forum. Kathryn Love SJC USA Thursday December 19, 2002 at 3:36 am I think the shells with Hebrew scrpipt on them were mentioned in the Dutch NIOD report and used as an indication that Israelis supported the Serb cause, while the Americans supported the Muslim cause. There is indeed a significant distinction between the American Jews and the Israelis (which Shamir pointed out, too). I must say I tend to sympathize with the Israelis. I don't think it is their fault what is happening in the Middle East, because the same thing is happening in Kashmir, the Philippines, Pakistan etc. But that said, let me bring up a few points about the Gentiles' relations with the Jews. First, whenever you criticize a Jew for something he did, you get corrected and told that he is only speaking as an individual. But whenever a Jew criticizes a non-Jew, he can voice his criticism in the name of the whole Jewish community. That is the secret of the Holocaust aura. This aboutface can happen so fast that you don't even realize it. Jared Israel used this trick when he said that Ari Fleischer is just a guy who has a job in the government, or "why not see an Israeli plot in my being Jewish as well?" Things get interesting when a Jew criticizes the Jews, which makes Finkelstein, Neumann and Shamir so fascinating. But it gets even more interesting when a Jew denies the plain facts. Jared Israel keeps weaving these conspiracy theories about 9-11, because he just refuses to admit that somebody could hate the Jews so much that they would knock down a couple of skyscrapers downtown New York. Now who is in denial? These are your chums from the Clinton days. Second, it is obvious that every time you criticize a Jew for something that he did and you don't believe that he spoke just as an individual, you get accused of hate. Well, judging by the recent reactions, it should be clear which way the "hate" goes. It is becoming a nightmare. There are certain things you cannot question, because you get accuses of hate, even if your interest is purely intellectual. That also means you cannot say that a Jew hates somebody, because that shows you hate the Jews. And the end result is that the Jews don't hate anybody! Simon Wiesenthal was once asked if the Israelis hate the Palestinians, and he said no! And the non-Jews are expected to be in denial, but only about the "right" things. For instance, you can't say anything about the prominent place of the Jews in the US government, though I think it was the explicit policy of the Clinton administration to hire as many Jews as possible. Well, explicit or not, you had better keep quiet. When the Serbs asked some American Jews do something about the bombing, the answer was that just because someone has some sort of last name doesn't mean he has any influence on someone else with a similar name. But isn't this an admission that there were a lot of people with similar last names whose influence would have counted? We are to observe a thing and then immediately deny it. So the only supremacy that everyone could agree on is the Jewish supremacy. That is openly admitted and denied almost in the same breath. But suddenly it becomes a non-existent choice: either a position in the US government or the gas chamber. Let me come back to the notorious admission by James Harff. He said that it was crucial to get the Jewish opinion on his side. Why? Well, you guessed it, now deny it. But judging by the way it is put, we should somehow believe that it is all fault of Ruder & Finn. The Jews whose opinion it was crucial to recruit didn't know what they were doing! Can be believe this? Just being a Jew makes you immune. If you were a Serb, you would get instantly listed in the "joint criminal enterprise". But the Jews don't form a joint criminal enterprise, even if it was crucial to enlist them in the joint criminal enterprise. They were deceived. So the fault is the instigator's, not the perpetrator's. Just as the tobacco company is responsible when a smoker gets sick. Only, we are never told who the instigator was. And the immunity gets you very far. Albright said that she made a lot of mistakes in the Balkans. I guess she could have listed every war crime that the US committed in the Balkans and get a standing ovation from the tribunal for being so honest! The last thing that would have crossed anybody's mind would be to indict her. No, she is the mother of the tribunal. Do you need any more evidence that the tribunal was set up to get you immunity from war crimes prosecution? Was that why she appeared in the tribunal, or why was Albright allowed to speak in the first place? Is it better to show us the plain facts and thus derive us the joy of discovering them? How cruel. Once you get messing with the Holocaust, things get really convoluted. That is the origin of the opposition between the "revisionists" and the "official version". And now that we have touched on the "revisionists", we should also touch on the "official version". Judging by the way the "official version" was brought up some time ago, it is obvious that the Holocaust memory permeates the Yugoslavia tribunal. First, there is the official version. People disagree what it is but I think the "official version" is the same as the prosecution's case. Then there are the revisionists. These are those who deny the prosecution's case. But if the prosecution's case is the official version before the verdict, what is the use of this trial, if not to teach us that this is the way of all flesh that denies the official version? No matter what the Milosevic's share in all that happened, this should be enough reason to speak up for him. And let me see. Was it now denied that 1,000 civilians were killed in Vukovar before the Serbs marched into the Vukovar hospital and killed 255 Croats? If 1,000 civilians got killed, it goes to show, first, that it is the side that kills less people that gets prosecuted. But also, if the Serbs killed the 255 Croat in the heat of the moment, how could the massacre be pinned on Milosevic? On the other hand, it should be pinned on him, if you want the people to be in denial of the 1,000 killed Serbs. I don't hate the Jews, I love them. Some of my distant family are Jews. And because I love them so much, I am not afraid of saying to them that they can be just as full of shit as anybody else, only more so. Jari Nousiainen Finland Thursday December 19, 2002 at 5:34 am Jari You open up a very interesting subject especially in light of the Plavsic's statement. Substitute most of what you say about Jews with Serbs. I would be interested in your opinion - does it also apply? Does it mean that non Serbs have less right to an opinion about Serbs than Serbs themselves do? Isnt is the case that some here have accused non Serbs of being Serb haters because their opinion differs? You are right too that it gets interesting when Jews criticize Jews (and also Serbs criticizing Serbs) but I noticed reading above that when a Serb criticized another Serb, the Serbs with the majority opinion in support on this forum pretended not to understand. Your other point about one Jew (or Serb) is taken as red for speaking for the whole community. I would like to ask posters and Vera too - do they believe she speaks for the Serbian community? This is indeed a very interesting subject (since it merges a number of relevant topics such as the relations / similarities between Serbs and Jews, the identity vs opinion arugment and so on I hope that now there is a little time off the court trial that we can give this debate a proper airing. I should also say that I agree with most of your conclusions with one exception concerning the prosecution / official view. That is an argument for speaking out against the tribunal not for speaking up for Milosevic. BTW I am not the nightmare character pretending as another anon Another Anon Planet Earth Thursday December 19, 2002 at 6:32 am It is a little bit too far fetched to compare Jews and Serbs. There is not very much to compare except a delicate and devastating moment of humanity's history namely WW 2 and its 60 to 80 million victims. There is one thing I have not noticed in this discussion of sorts, and it is the Serbian nation record of the treatment or her Jews. With very few exceptions you will mot find something similar in this world. Serbia was exemplary in the way Jews were treated. Many Jews were among the most ardent defendants of Yugoslavia, Tito himself got his education while spending five years in jail with a theoricist a sephardic Jew, a descendant of the Jews the Ottomans wisely invited to settle in their domains when Spain expelled them in 1492, becoming ever since integral part of the region, still well remembered all over Yugoslavia, recently I heard of a terrorist attack in a high school in Macedonia, the school bearing his name. The history of relations between gentiles and Jews is a long and complex one, of course the easy, simplifying American mind have converted it into a hollywood story and America's europhobia makes it so easy, now European are falling into the same trap in their enchantment with the New World. Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Thursday December 19, 2002 at 6:49 am Paddy Ahsdown this winter accused Mr. Milosevic not of defending the state from terrorism, not for trying to restore law and order fighting the KLA, but of using disproportionate means of using tanks and artillery against villages and defenseless people. While this circus was going on, all TV news casts of the world were showing tanks entering towns supported by helicopter gun-ships strafing compounds, buildings, bulldozers leveling family houses, troops expelling civilians out of their land, public assassinations and things that they are not even in the indictment of the Serbian strongman , not even in the list of crimes not seen in Europe (never mind South America and SE Asia) since WW 2. . . Lets talk about Jews! Gogol Charlemagne Conn. USA Thursday December 19, 2002 at 7:15 am The land of the free . . ."What's next? Concentration camps?" Gogol Charlemagne U S A Thursday December 19, 2002 at 7:37 am Good read at on the ICTY and it's role in rewriting Balkan history: http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m-col.html Peter Varavejke Belgium Thursday December 19, 2002 at 9:46 am Message on creating paragraphs For contributors who wish to make their text easier to read by breaking it up into paragraphs: Prefix the sentence intended to start the new paragraph with the following group of three characters: <P> On most keyboards the < character is created by an upper case comma key. The > character is usually created by an upper case full stop. Example: Prepare your text thus: First paragraph. <P>Second paragraph. <P>Third paragraph. The text published on this forum will then appear thus: First paragraph. Second paragraph. Third paragraph. PSIt may be easier to form the paragraphs while creating/editing your text so that it is obvious where to place the <P> code. But remember that a paragraph will not be formed in the published text unless you also place the <P> code before the sentence starting the new paragraph. Peter Taylor Herts/UK Thursday December 19, 2002 at 10:05 am "And let me remind posters about the gypsies that everybody seems to have forgotten about who were persecuted both in WW2 and in the Kosovo conflict who live in appauling conditions in Yugoslavia today forgotten by all." How true the above statement. Perhaps Yugoslavia should have expeled all the gypsies like Slovenia, Croatia and Albanians in Ksovo have done so. If they did, there wouldn't be any gypsies living in appalling conditions in Yugoslavia. Anon, FYI about 50% of population of Yugoslavia lives in appalling conditions. Mira A. Temporary UK Thursday December 19, 2002 at 12:30 pm "And let me remind posters about the gypsies that everybody seems to have forgotten about who were persecuted both in WW2 and in the Kosovo " Anon, what many people implicating Serbs into crimes during the WWII are conveniently forgetting is that Serbia was an occupied country during that time and that it was ruled directly by Germans. Yes Serbs, Gypsies and Jews were prosecuted during the WWII in Serbia but not by Serbs but by German Nazis. Crimes against Gypsies in Kosovo started happening when UN i.e. NATO took control over Kosovo and brought to power Kosovo Albanian Democrats of KLA. Before the bombing of Yugoslavia quite a number of Jews lived in Prisitina (capital of Kosovo) and after the bombing none. I haven't heard that Mr. Milosevic or any other Serb was ever accused of any crime against Gypsies or Jews by the ICTY or any other international court. Have you? Gogol - Serbia's record concerning the Jews is not as clean as some might suggest. Anon, even Mr. Wiesel who sad many accusations against Serbs has never accused Serbs of anti Semitism. Pera Bora Ottawa, Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 12:31 pm MODERATOR: Why are you posting those who identify themselves with fictitious names and addresses? We who post on here have used our names and addresses in good faith thinking that you would delete those who used fictitious names and addresses with one purpose and that is to smear the forum. If they wish to post they should not be ashamed to admit who they really are. By allowing them to post you do the rest of us a disservice. Kathrun Love SJC USA Thursday December 19, 2002 at 12:50 pm Anonymous postings to this forum, or postings made under obvious pseudonyms, will be removed. JURIST discourages forum participants from responding to or otherwise encouraging anonymous posters. JURIST Moderator Thursday December 19, 2002 at 1:45 pm If Biljana Plavsic refused to testify against Milosevic, why do we see this headline here at Jurist? where did they get this information? "Plavsic says Milosevic masterminded ethnic cleansing..." DW_WORLD.DE Mon Dec 16 23:29:00 EST 2002 Nicole J Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 2:03 pm I do not know where these accusation of Mrs. Plavsic come from? This is what Marilise Simons of New York Times reported today: “The prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, showed her displeasure today over Mrs. Plavsic's refusal to testify against other Serbs, including the former president, Slobodan Milosevic.” http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/19/international/europe/ D. Jovanovic USA Thursday December 19, 2002 at 7:44 pm Here are 3 articles (each from a different writer) that have been published in The Guardian: "The Guardian sent three writers to the Hague to witness Milosevic in the dock from their own perspective."(www.guardian.co.uk) -A chilling smile from my torturer ...by Jadranka Cigelj -The man of many parts does not play the fool -by Michael Billington -Playing the odds in the justice game - by Geoffrey Robertson QC http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,862405,00.html Dan A. Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 7:46 pm Forgot the other two http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,862048,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,861337,00.html Dan A. Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 9:24 pm I AM NOT SURE WHY THE MODERATOR CONTINUES TO REMOVE MY POSTS AND YET HE ALLOWS OTHERS WITH A PSUDONYM TO REMAIN. I SENT AN E-MAIL TO HIM/HER BUT THERE WAS NO COURTESY OF REPLY. THIS FORUM IS VERY IMPORTANT SO THAT TRUTH AND JUSTICE PREVAILS. KEEP ON POSTING. I CAME ON THIS FOROM NEITHER TO BURRY MILOSEVIC NOR TO PRAISE HIM BUT TO TELL OTHERS WHAT I KNOW TO BE THE TRUTH. SO JARI, IAN, PETER, GOGOL, VERA, KATHRYNE, PERO, IVAN, SIMON and EVEN FRANK, I think it would be nice to know you all in person. Since the moderator removes my posts without explanation, I bid you all good luck and it has been nice to talk to you. Walter Trkla Kamloops BC Canada Thursday December 19, 2002 at 10:25 pm Walter, having corresponded with you I am confident that you are you. Never attribute to malice that adequately explained by stupidity. Perhaps the moderator merely made a mistake. Ian Davis Waterloo Ontario