 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
- Sunday August 17, 2003 at 4:04 am
Swiss Nazi Francois Genoud reportedly financed and/or helped plan strategy for at least three of Jacques Verges' cases. Who is Francois Genoud?
The following are excerpts from the Philadelphia Inquirer article on Genoud that appeared a year aftr he committed suicide in May 1996. To read the article in full, and also a German news report which mentions the Genoud-Verges connection, go to http://emperors-clothes.com/genoud-verges.htm
Excerpts From Philadelphia Inquirer Article, "Hitler's Swiss Connection," by David Lee Preston; Philadelphia Inquirer; Jan. 5, 1997
"He [Genoud] was an unrepentant Nazi who devoted his life to aiding Adolf Hitler's surviving henchman and those he saw as Hitler's natural anti-Jewish successors: Arab terrorists.
He was a financier of fascism, and a manager of the hidden Swiss treasure of third Reich.
A shadowy figure in six decades of international intrigue, he masterminded an airplane hijacking, underwrote attacks on Israel and paid for the defense of Adolf Eichmann, Klaus Barbie and "Carlos the Jackal." An anti- Jewish propagandist, he made a fortune publishing Nazi tracts.
In the end he slipped away just as a 50-year old scandal was breaking that might have implicated him in one history's great cover-ups: The Swiss collaboration with Nazi Germany in hiding gold looted from Holocaust victims and subjugated governments.
"Beginning in the 1960s, Genoud helped finance numerous Arab terrorist causes, selling weapons and paying legal fees. In November 1969, he sat alongside the radical lawyer Jacques Verges as an adviser at the trial in Switzerland of three terrorists from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) who had blown up an El Al plane in Zurich that February. Genoud's Arab Commerical Bank paid for the defense.
"Two decades later, Genoud would team up with Verges again, this time as financier for the left-wing lawyer's defense of Barbie, the Gestapo chief known as the 'Butcher of Lyon.' In June 1987, Genoud ignored a summons to appear as a witness in the Lyon court trying Barbie for crimes against humanity. Barbie killed 4,000 non-Jewish French citizens and deported 7,000 Jews to death camps. He was convicted in 1987 and died in prison.
"Genoud meanwhile, set up a fund to help Nazis in prison. 'He even had baskets of chocolate sent in to people in jail,' says American journalist Kevin Coogan, who met Genoud in 1986."
...[Genoud on Hitler's hopes for the continuation of his 'work' in the Third World]"It was at the Nuremberg trials in 1946 that Genoud befriended Maj. Gen. Herman Bernhard Ramcke and obtained Bormann's account of Hitler's conversations from Ramcke's subordinate, former SS Capt. Hans Reichenberg. In the preface to the Bormann document, Hitler's Table Talk, Genoud wrote that Hitler wanted the people of the Third World to carry on the work of the Thousand Year Reich." [END OF EXCERPTS]
Jared Israel
USA - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 4:52 am
Another tidbit from that Genoud article:
"In 1934, back in Switzerland, the 19 year old Genoud joined the pro-Nazi National Front, and two years later he began to forge the other political links that would prove so valuable. He traveled to Palestine. There he met the grand mufti of Jerusalem, the pro-Nazi religious and political leader of Palestinian Muslims, Amin el-Husseini, who was to spend most of World War II in Germany, and who, according to British author Gitta Sereny, 'would consider [Genoud] a confidant until his death in 1974.'"
This was of course the same Hajj Amin al Husseini who organized the Bosnian Muslim Waffen SS division, Handzhar which slaughtered thousands of Serbs, Jews and Roma in Yugoslavia and fought the Russians at Stalingrad. He escaped prosecution at Nuremberg and was never tried by Yugoslavia, which issued a warrant for his arrest for crimes against humanity.
Jared Israel
USA - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 7:59 am
Alf said 'Unlike you I am certainly not proud of the UK or the US for that matter. What are you proud of exactly?'My response had already been stated directly beneath the post in question - 'I might also add to my previous post that I'm not particuraly proud of Bush's policies either or the actions of my country for that matter. However I'm not ashamed to post my true name and origin.'
Now that this none issue has been dismiss, can you please answer as to why you posted your location in the UK and the US in two consecutive post.
PS My country is not my government nor the people who pull their strings.
Joel Aksamit
USA - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 9:00 am
Raska District Human Rights Committee
Public communiqué no. 27-08 2003
August 16, 200After yesterday's violation of the Serbian government's decree of an official day of mourning for the children murdered in the village of Gorazdevac, a new incident occurred today in Novi Pazar. At the Novi Pazar-Rad football match fans of the Novi Pazar team shouted slogans clearly and directly supporting the act of terrorism by Albanian terrorists a few days ago. The fans shouted:
"Hashim Thaci"
"KLA, KLA"
"Kill the Serb, kill the Serb"
"Independent Kosovo"
"This is Turkey"
"We will not give you Kosovo"and many other abusive slogans and songs.
The UN claims to uphold civilised behaviour: So when is del Ponte going to do her duty and put a stop to this racist violence and abuse in Kosovo by indicting the KLA leadership?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 11:15 am
The ICTY is not a court of justice , it is a mean to justify the criminal aggression of a sovereign country dealing with a serious threat inside it's own borders . Now that the truth is showing slowly but steady and the scale of justice has started to incline to the other side it is no way in this world that this so called tribunal will do something against the same ones that had been publicly kissed and praised as "victims" to be saved from "genocide" and whose leader had a Mr. Minister treatment . The empire will achieve his goal to blame and "prove" the rigthness of his acts , the world is "packed" with Amanpours and Sheas to do the "job" . Del Ponte is nothing but the toilet paper used by Nato to clean their own mess (want to be polite this time)and she'll do nothing new unless she's told like , get your ass out from Rwanda¡¡¡
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 11:24 am
Very well I will oblige although I dont see how its got anything to do with Milosevic and the trial.On the computer I used in an internet cafe there were two options one was UK and one US - I clicked on UK but it must have come out US. I hope you are pleased with that answer or do you want the name of the internet cafe as well?
Now will you please answer my question as to what exactly you are proud of and why you said that in response to my mail that obviously struck an emotional cord within you. By the way its not enough to disassociate yourself with Bush's policies. Most of the things I mentioned were not done by Bush and most of them were done with the support of the American people. Think about that before you start delighting in an accident of birth or I am supposed to go around being proud that Britain once ruled half the world as well?
Alf Bentley
UK! - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 11:34 am
If B92 is to be believed they also said that the Kosovo media owned by Albanians condemed fact that Zivkovic and Covic were 'allowed' to visit Kosovo territory. Not only are they completely shameful but they are also completely stupid. One of the best hopes for the Serbian community in Kosovo is the sheer bloody minded stupidity of the Kosovo Albanian side.If the West truely hasnt made its mind up about what to do about Kosovo the Albanians are presenting a good case for a return of Serbian troops to the territory. This must be blinding obvious for the new governor there.
Peter Taylor I know you follow Kosovo closely do you have any information about the new governor? Does anybody have any for that matter?
Alf Bentley
UK - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 1:57 pm
On the subject of Klaus Barby:
The first sympathizers of this evil man, the chief of Lyon's Gestapo, were the American agents of the OSS the predecessor of the CIA. They found Barby to be a rather nice chap, full of information on the French communist members of the Resistance some of them tortured an killed in Lyon under Barby's personal command. The OSS hided from the French Government in 1946 and later the fact they had been in contact with the Butcher of Lyons as he was known. Eventually they helped him to escape to Bolivia where in the late 70 was extradited to France. There is evidence he had done, continued I shall say his handy work for his new masters until due to his age he became more or less useless to their crusade and cause.
Verges was right in defending a criminal, defending in the legal sense, just in case there is any doubt has nothing to do with defending the accused ideas or crimes, just making sure that the full protection of the LAW, justice is brought to bear. For those who practice lynching it is a hard concept to understand. Every one deserves the protection of the Law, everyone who tests society to its limits shall meet society duty to understand its crimes. Verges defended not only Barby, a Nazi criminal protected by the Americans, also defended the victims of the French Government in their terror to keep Algeria French, their 200 or corpses floating on the river Seine to the perplexity of the Parisians. This horrible event since the 50's remains largely un-dealt with.
Eichmann, did he deserved a defense lawyer in his trial in Jerusalem? Or shall justice and society have been served better by a bullet in the head?
Only when the passions are set aside, when the explanations can be heard, when the process understood, when the truth made clear for everyone to see, only them can there be justice. Let the Verges, the Clarks, the Kunstlers do their jobs, the Guantanamo concentration camps will be the alternative as the Nazi camps of the past once were.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 2:06 pm
Would it be a good idea to make a no-name list of situations that have occurred in the courtroom. The list would be kind of like textbook case examples that a law student might be tested on. For instance, when the witness denies he stated something, or when the prosecutor leads his witness putting words in his mouth, or when the presiding judge rules something irrelevant. The list would not say what the trial was about. I don't know enough about law to make up such a list. There are plenty of lawyers who object to the way this trial is run and there seem to be plenty more who think all is well with this trial. I wonder if the latter would be so pleased if they didn't know who is on trial. Yes, I'd like to show that they are not so all fired objective as they think they are.
Nikole J
US - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 4:25 pm
AlfHere is a link to a brief description of Harri Holkeri
As you may read he is a career Politician and a Bankster - as a percipient friend would say - who is well known to US politicians.
What worries me are statements like this:
Following the talks, Holkeri said he would fully respect UN Security Council Resolution 1244, but that he would not permit parallel institutions to operate in Kosovo.
Although the appointment of High Representative of Kosovo is legally the choice of the UN Secretary General in practice it has been the choice of the US Administration. Holkeri was ‘chosen’ when the US objected to the original choice: a Belgian who opposed the US invasion of Iraq I believe.
I read the situation thus: Holkeri is regarded by the US as a safe pair of hands. A man who will implement the agenda of certain prominent US politicians and grant independence to Kosovo and - what amount s to the same - create a Greater Albania. I hope I am wrong.
I do not believe that Holkeri (and his deputy Charles Brayshaw, US) mean to return Serbian security forces to Kosovo as required by Resolution 1244 in order to guard Serbia’s border with Albania and protect Serb patrimonial sites over one hundred of which have been destroyed. This detail of the agreement has been ignored now for more than four years and would be incompatible with the agenda above.
When Holkeri declares that he will “not permit parallel institutions to operate in Kosovo” I take this to mean that he intends to allow the abuses demonstrated during last week’s atrocity on Serbian children to continue: that is the Serbs are to continue to be subjected to abuse by the KPC (KLA) who murder them and stand by and watch as they are assaulted by Albanian mobs: that injured Serbs are to continue to be mistreated by Albanian physicians: that Serbs are to continue to be denied access to safe transport and so on.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 5:28 pm
GCGuantanamo concentration camps will be the alternative as the Nazi camps of the past once were
So now, 500 rifle carrying, madasra trained killers equates to 5million+ innocents that passed through the Nazi camps?
Makes one question everything you say.
J, P
USA,Wis - Sunday August 17, 2003 at 6:41 pm
Gogol defends Verges - without saying a word about the content of Verges' appearance on Deutsche Welle and without giving a evidence for his claim that Verges did not defend Barbie's beliefs and actions. He says "let him do his work" - of defending Klaus Barbie? And "let Clark do his work" - of defending concentration camp murderers against deportation? Sure, even a Nazi deserves a lawyer - but don't try to force Clark and Verges, vocal apologists for Nazis and Muslim terrorists, on those trying to defend the Serbs against the charge that *they* are the new Nazis.
JP wrote "So now, 500 rifle carrying, madasra trained killers equates to 5million+ innocents that passed through the Nazi camps? Makes one question everything you [Gogol]say."
Elegantly put! Gogol says Verges is not a holocaust denier - but of course, by so glibly equating Quantanamo, where they keep vicious terrorist prisoners in harsh conditions, with Aushwitz, where they gassed infants, he makes clear *he himself* is a Holocaust denier.
What I wonder is, when will one of the people who *brought Verges* to The Hauge in February 2002, staging it so he appeared on the panel of the press conference I led when the trial began - when will one of those people come forward *as himself* and defend bringing Verges in? When will one of these people justify linking the the Serbs, victims of Nazism, with the Nazi apologist, Verges? Because Verges used his appearance at that press conference which I am shamed to say I led as the springboard to go forth as an 'authorized' supporter of Milosevic.
Jared Israel
US - Monday August 18, 2003 at 3:13 am
One hardly needs to reach for the "lies" in Deutsche Welle for evidence of Jacques Vergès "posing" as acting in a legal capacity for Mr. Milosevic. One can find such "poses" reported faithfully and unchallenged as fact by the ICDSM itself (see ICDSM press release below; emphasis added), whose website Mr. Jared Israel administers out of his back pocket. Maybe this has less to do with Vergès "posing" as Milosevic's legal counsel than it has to do with somebody else re-writing history to suit the purposes of a power struggle w/in ICDSM. Judge for yourselves - PWPInternational Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic (ICDSM) www.icdsm.org PRESS RELEASE
Regarding the upcoming so-called trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, the ICDSM will hold a press conference Friday February 8th about the following matters:
1. President Slobodan Milosevic's case against the Dutch State and the ICTY which is coming up before the District Court of The Hague. We are charging that the ICTY and the Dutch State have conspired to obstruct Slobodan Milosevic's lawyers from preparing his case before the European Court of Human Rights. On this see Appendix I;
2. The Dutch government's attempt to prevent the ICDSM from holding meetings to inform public opinion and the press; the refusal of the so-called Hague Tribunal to allow former President Slobodan Milosevic to meet with delegations from the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and the Yugoslav NGO, Freedom Association;
3. The ICDSM press conference Tuesday, February 12th in The Hague;
4. A letter from the ICDSM which has been sent to all Heads of State in the world;
5. Open Letter to the people of The Netherlands;
6. A public meeting of the ICDSM Monday, February 11 in Amsterdam, Krasnapolski, St Johnsrooml II, Dam 9, Amsterdam
The February 8th press conference will be held at: LINX International Sloterkade 20 Amsterdam. Time: 14.00 hour
Present at the press conference will be:
Mr. Christopher Black, head of the team of legal advisers of President Milosevic
· Mr. Nico Steijnen, lawyer of President Milosevic in his cases against the Dutch state and the European Court
· Nico Varkevisser, spokesperson of the ICDSM
APPENDIX I - MR. MILOSEVIC UNDERTAKES LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ICTY AND THE NETHERLANDS
By order of President Slobodan Milosevic, on December 20, 2001, a 140-page provisional application was filed at the European Court of Human Rights by a team of lawyers: Mr. N.M.P. Steijnen, the Netherlands, Mr. Chr. Black, Canada, Prof. Mr. A. Bernardini, Italy, Mr. Z. Tomanovic, Yugoslavia, Prof. Mr. M.N. Kouzenetzov, Russia, Mr. Jaq. Verges, France, Mr. D.M. Ognjanovic, Yugoslavia. This provisional application, which we have had to formulate under conditions that violated all human rights guarantees with respect to normal communication between lawyers and client, must be further implemented. In this delicate phase of the European Court procedure the puppet-tribunal has further intensified its interference. It has banned Mr. Christopher Black from any communication with President Slobodan Milosevic and has, without explanation, refused Mr. N. Steijnen further access to President Milosevic. Other members of President Milosevic's team of legal advisers are limited to very rare contacts, depending on the humour of the 'tribunal,' which never permits free and unmonitored communication and free exchange of documents with President Milosevic. Mail between members of the legal team and President Milosevic is intercepted and opened, whether it is confidential not, and often simply vanishes. Under these conditions how can attorneys conduct legal work? President Milosevic's team of lawyers has officially informed the European Court that since our work has been blocked by the puppet tribunal's interference, therefore we are forced to suspend work until the puppet tribunal ends its violations of our client's human right to an unfettered defence. The puppet tribunal's human rights abuses, in defiance of the European Court of Human Rights, has caused this deadlock. To break this deadlock, President Milosevic has ordered legal action. To that end, a summary injunction procedure has already been filed at the District Court of The Hague against the relevant parties: the ICTY itself and the State of the Netherlands. The demand to all parties is: uphold your responsibility to safeguard human rights. Present a solution that will end these severe human rights violations in the field of defence rights. The State of the Netherlands is specifically summoned to take the initiative.
Place: District Court of The Hague Date: 12 February 2002 Time: 13.30 h. Amsterdam, February 7th 2002
International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic www.icdsm.org Contact in The Netherlands: office@globalreflexion.org Sloterkade 20 - 1058 HE Amsterdam - The Netherlands Ph. ++ 31 20 615 1122 - Fax: ++ 31 20 615 1120 THE ICDSM RELIES ON CONTRIBUTIONS FROM SUPPORTERS TO PAY EXPENSES You may support the work of the ICDSM with a contribution by credit card by calling in Amsterdam 31 20 6151122 or in the U.S. 1 617 916-1705 Or mail a check to: ICDSM 831 Beacon St., #295 Newton Centre, MA 02459 (USA)
P WP
Bas Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 4:00 am
AFP dispatch as carried in Belgium's Le Soir, 2/12/02, below, with emphasis added. Note that Me Jacques Vergès is identified in this report as a lawyer for Milosevic at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and not at the ICTY, a "court" which Vergès is on record as denouncing as illegitimate, as is Ramsey Clark, another recent target of smearing at the "Emperor's Clothes" website. Now, where do you suppose AFP/Le Soir picked up this "lie"? Perhaps they got it from Jared Israel's ICDSM, whose press release (see my previous post), identified Vergès in exactly this capacity.L'avocat français Jacques Vergès dénonce un "faux procès"
L'avocat français Jacques Vergès, membre du Comité international pour la défense de Slobodan Milosevic, a estimé mardi matin que le procès de l'ex président yougoslave qui s'ouvre à La Haye était un "faux procès". C'est un faux procès et Slobodan Milosevic doit continuer à dire que ce Tribunal est illégal, a déclaré Me Vergès, qui tentait sans succès de pouvoir entrer dans l'enceinte du Tribunal pénal international (TPI) pour l'ex-Yougoslavie.
En raison de l'affluence, un système de tickets et de réservation a été mis en place pour assister à l'audience dans une salle à la capacité limitée. Les deux avocats belgradois proches de Slobodan Milosevic, Me Zdenko Tomanovic et Me Dragoslav Ognanovic ont en revanche pu entrer dans l'enceinte du Tribunal où ils assisteront à la comparution de Slobodan Milosevic.
M. Vergès, qui est l'un des défenseurs de Slobodan Milosevic devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme à Strasbourg, a dit qu'il annoncerait probablement mardi dans l'après-midi la composition de la Commission pour la vérité en ex-Yougoslavie qu'il compte mettre en place à Paris pour montrer l'inanité des accusations contre Slobodan Milosevic, selon lui. Il a précisé qu'il y avait beaucoup de volontaires dans la diaspora yougoslave en France pour soutenir financièrement cette action.
Slobodan Milosevic répond à partir de mardi des crimes contre l'humanité, crimes de guerre pour son rôle dans les trois conflits majeurs qui ont déchiré l'ex-Yougoslavie. Il est inculpé en outre de génocide pour son rôle en Bosnie.
AFP
P WP
Bas Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 6:44 am
"P WP",I see that another set of initals has emerged from some vague location in the great white north to defend Jaques Verges.
What's the matter, are you a secret witness at the Hague Tribunal who has to hide behind a pseudonym? Do you have something to hide, or are you just a coward?
Are you afraid to use your real name because you live in a litigious world where stupid people, who are incapable of defending their positions, threaten to file lawsuits in order to intimidate their opposition into silence?
Or is it that you are scared to engage Mr. Israel in a direct debate in your own name because you are afraid that he will make a fool of you?
By the way, in case you didn't notice, this isn't Quebec. People are speaking English on this forum.
Allow me to translate your French article into English.
The French lawyer Jacques Verges denounces a "false lawsuit"
The French lawyer Jacques Verges, member of the International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic, said Tuesday morning that the lawsuit against the ex-Yugoslav president scheduled to open in the Hague was a "false lawsuit". It is a false lawsuit and Slobodan Milosevic must continue to say that this Court is illegal, declared Mr. Verges, who tried without success to enter the building of the international tribunal (ICTY) for ex-Yugoslavia.
Because of crowding, a system of tickets and reservations was set up to house the audience in a room with limited capacity. The two Belgrade lawyers close to Slobodan Milosevic, Mr. Zdenko Tomanovic and Mr. Dragoslav Ognanovic on the other hand could enter the building of the Court where they attended the appearance of Slobodan Milosevic.
Mr. Verges, who is one of the defenders of Slobodan Milosevic before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, said that they would probably announce Tuesday afternoon the composition of the Commission on the truth in ex-Yugoslavia which he intends to set up in Paris to show the falsity of the charges against Slobodan Milosevic, according to him. He specified that there were many volunteers in the Yugoslav diaspora in France to support this action financially.
Slobodan Milosevic's trial begins on Tuesday for crimes against humanity, war crimes for his role in the three major conflicts which tore ex-Yugoslavia apart. Moreover he is accused of genocide for his role in Bosnia.
As long as we are using the Media I will point you to The Guardian, which states that "Ever the showman, Verges, 76, claims involvement in an application to the European court of human rights in Strasbourg, arguing that the Netherlands should never have handed Milosevic to the UN court. But his name does not appear on the rambling 143-page document, submitted by a Dutch attorney named Nico Steijnen."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4351996,00.html
As we can see by the published decision of the European Court of Human Rights, Nico Steijnen is the only lawyer mentioned as representing Slobodan Milosevic. Verges dosen't appear anywhere on that document.
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/Hudoc1doc2/HEDEC/200203/77631_01_di_chb2_19032002e.doc
This so-called "P WP" makes the point that Jared Israel maintains the ICDSM website. Perhaps this so-called "P WP" would like to post the link to the ICDSM website so that we can read the statement he posted directly from the horse's mouth.
I looked, but I couldn't find it anywhere on the ICDSM website. I even used the archive.org service to look at the dated archives of the website (to make sure the statement wasn't deleated later) and it looks to me like it was never on the ICDSM website.
What say you Mr. "P WP"?
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday August 18, 2003 at 7:38 am
Jared Israel it is your contention that the prisoners held at Guantanamo are viscious terrorists. Wow! Since when did you pronounce somebody guilty before they stand trial? Where is your evidence that these men are guilty? Isnt that what we ask accusers of Milosevic? Shame on you!In the same breath no doubt you would complain that the same government and media have condemned Milosevic (who at least has the right to trial). Yet you repeat the mainstream crap about the prisoners at Guantanamo.
Thats not inconsistancy thats hypocracy.
Probably now you think that you can do without support from somebody like me but let me warn you. There is a body of support for Milosevic who are there primarily for justice. They defend his rights not because of his policies or any other reason but because they belive he has the right to a fair trial. If you dont belive that this right should be afforded to everyone as we do it will become clear that you are just using Milosevic and us.
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 9:19 am
Alf Bentley,Are you seriously comparing Slobodan Milosevic, and the victims of the Nazi holocaust, to the likes of David Hicks?
What's the matter with you?!
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday August 18, 2003 at 9:43 am
No Im not. What are you talking about Andy? If I didnt know better I would think that you deliberately made such a comment to muddy the waters.Are you suggesting that somebody should be prounounced guilty before a shred of evidence is produced? That is my question to Jared and now to you.
I have read your postings before and you are always going on about the evidence or lack of it against Milosevic - thats why I respect you. If you are now going to say that the right to a fair trial isnt universal then speak up man. Where is the evidence that the 'vicious terrorists' or 'trained killers' at Guantanamo are guilty?
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 9:49 am
Gosh, Andy, I think you might be better advised to direct your question about hiding behind pseudonyms and such to your pals Marat and Lazarov (how's the weather in Jo'burg, Sergi, and what the heck ever happened to Marat anyway? I don't mean THE Marat of course - Andy can do a google search to figure out what happened to HIM), or perhaps to all the grateful readers of the product over at E-C, who sound like the happy users of hemorrhoid cream writing in to endorse how it's changed their lives, and none of whom have last names. ("Di,"Jeff," "Gabriel P.,"Igor K.")You find it interesting TOO do you, that that press release isn't on the ICDSM website? Why do you suppose that is? Again, perhaps this question would be better directed elsewhere. What say you, "John"? As for the Guardian item, which I gather is the one you'd like us to believe, then does that mean that it's not only more accurate than AFP, but also Jared's ICDSM? If that's so, that speaks well for the Guardian, but not exactly for Jared's (and Nico's) ICDSM. Speaking of press releases, is this ICDSM press release airbrushed off the site yet, now that you've "proven" that Ramsey Clark's an "agent"?:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/resistancepoliticalfront/message/19887
Of course, we KNOW Jared does airbrush stuff, like the slimey attack he ran on Clark, accusing him of being a U.S. gov't/ICTY agent(which you helped "research") which was published on the ICDSM website on May 17th, doubtless following a highly democratic consultation process of the committee, which included Clark as its chairperson. That piece was (bravely, courageously) yanked from the site shortly thereafter. Got an explanation for that?
Do you have any response you'd like to share with us to the letter Chris Black sent you? You like "open" letters, at least, when they seem to suit your purposes. Maybe you could share with us your response to Chris's letter. (below)
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 3:04 AM Subject: Re: A 2nd Open Letter To Vladimir Krsljanin Dear Mr. Wilcoxson, Instead of acting as a shill for Jared Israel I suggest that you ask him to be forthright enough to speak in his own name and have done with it. And while we are speaking of "proper behaviour" in "debate" I further suggest that you relieve yourself of the ignorance which you are so ready to display. Let me assist you. The position of President Milosevic has been clear and consistent since the beginning. There cannot be any public criticism of Ramsey Clark. That is his position as expressed to the meeting of the ICDSM at Scheveningen, Holland at the end of June last and it was his position when I met with him. His postion re Ramsey Clark has been consistent throughout. He is to remain and public criticism of him or of any other committee members is to cease. There is no place for it no matter what the personal opinions of certain individuals might be. There is only one criteria for being a member of the committee; the willingness to defend President Milosevic. The structure of the ICDSM was also agreed on at that meeting as reflected in the statement of Klaus Hartmann. I was there. I was a witness. You were not. However, there is no doubt that you must know this as Nico Varkevisser was there and what he knows Jared Israel knows soon after and no doubt so do you. It is more than disenguous of you to characterize it in any other way. Please enlighten us, Mr. Wilcoxson, as to the source of your "knowledge" that the president "removed Ramsey Clark". Someone is lying to you or you yourself are lying becuase it is completely false. His instructions were the exact opposite and everybody heard that including Nico Varkevisser. If Mr. Varkevisser had other views he should have stayed at the meeting and enlightened us instead of petulantly walking out when the IAC member walked in. But he chose to remove himself from the discussion despite Mr. Krlsjanin's pleas for him to return and share his views for which we were all waiting. The instructions as we heard them from the president were simply that we should simplify things as much as possible, that we should keep Clark, but as to the rest of the structure of the ICDSM he had no fixed views; but was inclined to favour fewer titles and more equality among members, a democratic approach. We all then discussed how best to carry out the president's suggestions and we agreed to the structure as expressed in the statement by Klaus Hartmann. It was further agreed that the personal attacks on several members but particularly Ramsey Clark by others, meaning Jared Israel, had damaged the functioning and public image of the committee and must stop. If people wanted to attack or criticize others they should do so directly to those members and provide them with an opportunity to refute those criticisms and do so within the committee. I can further advise you that President Milosevic told me personally over a year ago that the committee was to keep Ramsey Clark becuase of his value to the name and the respect of the committee and his defence of the Serbian people. Other considerations did not concern him. So, the answer to your questions, Mr. Wilcoxson, is negative to both. Mr. Clark was not removed, he was confirmed, and no one ignored or overode the President's wishes. So unless you want to accuse all of us at that meeting to be liars, Mr. Wilcoxson, which would, I assure you, bring an action for libel and slander against you I suggest you seek reflection and reconsider how your actions are damaging the cause of Slobodan Milosevic. One could be forgiven for thinking that your actions are indeed the actions of a group which is attempting to discredit the ICDSM; and there is only one group which would beneft from that, Mr. Wilcoxson and that is NATO but I am sure you do not act for them, or do you? Let me also say this. That you can dare attack the honesty, or integrity, or sacrifice to the cause of President Milosevic, of Vladimir Krsljanin or Dr. Valkanov is as vicious as it is unjust. But then what can one expect from a man with no sense of honour and whose obviously inflated sense of himself is only matched by his ignorance of the facts and his cowardice. I demand that you withdraw your words and apologize. Christopher Black Barrister Chair, Legal Committee ICDSM Toronto, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Wilcoxson To: 'Vladimir Krsljanin' Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 3:34 PM Subject: A 2nd Open Letter To Vladimir Krsljanin Mr. Krsljanin, If you want to call me a liar that is absolutely fine with me. I don’t care what accusations you make against me as long as you provide some basis for them. By your decision to publicly reinstate Ramsey Clark as the ICDSM Co-president, in spite of President Milosevic’s wishes, you have brought the internal debates of the ICDSM out into the public arena. So long as we are in a public debate, I hope that you will at least respect some basic rules of proper behavior. When you, claiming to be the coordinator of the ICDSM, resort to the use of inflammatory terms such as, “liar,” “destructive element” and even “gangster” this debate can only harm President Milosevic’s struggle. Instead making aggressive and baseless accusations against me, I would kindly request that you answer the questions that I put to you in my previous e-mail. Did Slobodan Milosevic remove Ramsey Clark from the post of ICDSM Co-president, or didn’t he? In your original “discussion paper,” which Mr. Hartmann drafted, you stated that President Milosevic’s view was that “one president might be more adequate [than 2] for the International Committee, otherwise including just members.” This statement is an admission that President Milosevic has not changed his mind regarding his decision to remove Ramsey Clark. Since as everybody knows there were two ICDSM co-presidents until Milosevic removed Clark. However, in the final draft of the discussion paper, it states quite clearly that the ICDSM will have 2 co-presidents, one of whom being Ramsey Clark. I am curious to know why the views, expressed by President Milosevic, regarding the organizational structure of the committee were omitted from the final draft of you and Mr. Hartmann’s discussion paper. You claimed that President Milosevic accepted the positions that you put forward in your e-mail regarding the so-called “conclusions of the ICDSM.” I challenge you to state very specifically which positions in particular that President Milosevic accepted - in fact, why don’t you share with us what he wrote? Or did you, Mr. Hartmann, and Mr. Valkanov decide to over-rule President Milosevic’s decision regarding Ramsey Clark’s status in the committee? You wrote to me in January and said that the “President has all the information (this is what we particularly care about) so that he can make responsible decisions.” The President, made a decision to remove Mr. Clark from the post of ICDSM co-President and I honestly can’t understand why we are even having a debate over his decision. This is his committee and his decisions should be adopted by the committee without question. I noticed that in your response to me you very conspicuously avoided the topic of President Milosevic’s decision to remove Ramsey Clark as the ICDSM Co-president, even though that decision of his is at the core of my challenge to Ramsey Clark’s status as ICDSM Co-president. You wrote in your reply to me that: “The attacks on Ramsey Clark are part of a political smear campaign against a man who has stood solidly on the side of the Serbian people through their most difficult moments. This effort by destructive elements is nothing less than a form of political gangsterism that directly undermines the struggle led by President Milosevic.” I wrote you an e-mail on January 1st of this year warning you that I believed Ramsey Clark was a U.S. Government agent. I told you about his history of spying on socialists and anti-war activists in the United States. You replied to me on January 2nd and you said, “thank you very much for the warning. Of course we know even more than you wrote. And we are and will be cautious.” So you agreed with me, you even thanked me and said that you “know even more” and that you “are and will be cautious,” with respect to Ramsey Clark. What has changed since January to make you change your mind about Mr. Clark so drastically? Does your love letter for Ramsey Clark mean that you agree with the way he acted in his interview in front of the National Press Club last May? Mr. Krsljanin, you a man who signs his name as President Milosevic’s advisor, if you are a man of character who wants to lead Milosevic’s support organization, then it is vital for everybody who wants to support this organization that your words and your actions reflect the will of President Milosevic. That is the core element needed for unity, and political trust within the ICDSM. If you think that you can create unity by threats of expulsion, then you are mistaken. You will only destroy the committee. You will leave many good people in a confused and frustrated situation. You will do such irrevocable harm to President Milosevic’s struggle that I can only say with such friends the President needs no enemies. I am again appealing you to please answer these two very important questions: Did Slobodan Milosevic decide to remove Ramsey Clark from the post of ICDSM Co-president, or didn’t he? Did You, Mr. Hartmann, and Mr. Valkanov take it upon yourselves to over-rule President Milosevic’s decision regarding Ramsey Clark’s position in the ICDSM, or didn’t you? You did not address these questions at all in your previous response. The only thing that you did make clear is your wish to transform the ICDSM into the ICDRC (International Committee to Defend Ramsey Clark). Signed, Andy Wilcoxson Member of the ICDSM Webmaster of www.slobodan-milosevic.org
P WP
Bas Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:07 am
"P WP,"The letter that you quoted was sent from Chris Black to me.
Therefore, you must be Chris Black.
Welcome to the debate Mr. Black.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:35 am
This morning Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser published on the TENC site another of their absurd attacks on the ICDSM which both of them left some time ago. In that posting they state two lies; first, that Milosevic "has never gotten or been interested in getting any legal advice from anyone". Second that the legal committee ceased to exist in February 2002. The first lie is as absurd as the second. Milosevic has always sought legal advice on all manner of things which is why he has been visited several times by lawyers on the ICDSM including myself, Ramsey Clark, Professor Aldo Bernadini from Rome, Nico Stejnen in Holland, and has been in contact with other lawyers by letter and telephone including David Jacobs in Toronto, Hans Paech in Berlin, Prof Bim Singh in India, and has asked for the assistance of Tiphaine Dickson in Montreal. Milosevic has not rejected legal advice. He has only rejected appointing a lawyer to represent him in open court at the tribunal for fear it would jeopardize his refusal to recognize the legitimacy of the tribunal. In fact, if one looks at the press coverage of several press conferences held by the ICDSM in Holland, at which Nico Varkevisser was present, it was stated time and again that one of the problems with the ICTY is that they would not permit Milosevic to consult with counsel on a confidential and privileged basis. That is, all visits by counsel were monitored. Why would Milosevic and the ICDSM (including Mr. Varkevisser and Mr. Israel) complain about the lack of confidential visits with counsel if Milosevic did not want legal advice? I can tell you that I have met with President Milsoevic several times in both Belgrade and The Hague and on each occasion he asked for legal advice on issues. I am not breaching privilege here as those visits were recorded by the ICTY and so privilege does not attach. Mr. Israel and Mr. Varkevisser both know this becuase I was in regular communication with them until October last year(when they cut communication becuase I refused to help them stab Jacques verges in the back wit their slanders about him), and informed them and the other members of the ICDSM of the content of those meetings. The legal committee still exists. No one on the legal committee is aware that Mr. Israel dissolved it in Febraury last year and of course that is because he has no right to do so. In fact, if one reads the press release about the press conference in The Hague in February the legal committee is an important part of that. Nothing has changed since. This statement that it ceased to exist is a pure invention by Israel and Varkevisser and I suspect it was invented in order to discredit my responses to Andy Wilcoxson which I signed as head of the legal committee. Since Mr. Wilcoxson does not have the courage to respond to me and since neither Mr. Israel nor Mr. Varkevisser have the courage to do so either, and since they know they cannot refute what I say, they now try to simply try to erase us from existence. Neither one of them has the guts or the moral integrity to directly confront either Mr. Verges or Mr. Clark with their accusations privately first to get their response. Instead, being the cowards that they are, they launch a series of public attacks, all of them against the express wishes of Milosevic and the agreed policy of the ICDSM. Joe McCarthy was the master at this in the 50s and it seems Mr. Israel and his handlers, whoever they may be, have taught him that lesson well. Neither Jared Israel nor Mr. Varkevisser have any interest in the ICDSM except to attempt its destruction. This, as I said to Mr. Wilcoxson, benefits only one group, Nato. The continual slanders about members of the ICDSM being anti-semitic, Nazis and the like are designed to support the Nato propaganda line that Milosevic is a fascist. Under the guise of rooting out "fascists" Israel and Varkevisser are doing all they can to confrim in people's minds the lies of Nato. The ICDSM stands for one thing only; the defence of Slobodan Milsoevic against the unjust charges, the lies, of the Nato puppets at the ICTY. Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser stand for support for the Nato lies, for the destruction of the Committee which works to support him. Since Mr. Israel and Mr. Varkevisser have seen fit to leave the ICDSM they have engaged in a determined campaign to discredit everyone in the ICDSM including its founder Dr. Velko Valkanov, its heart and focal point, Vladimir Krsljanin, and everyone else. Their real motivations and their real roles are known only to themselves but the effect is to discredit the ICDSM and its work, to damage the support for President Milosevic in his struggle for justice for himself and the Serbs people and all the people of Yugoslavia. But this they cannot suucceed in doing as the cause of Slobodan Milsoevic is just and the ICDSM and its members remain dedicated to that cause. Christopher Black, Barrister Chair, Legal Committee ICDSM Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Christopher Black
Toronto
Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:46 am
Mr. Wilcoxson, Again you have your facts wrong. I am not PWP and have no idea who that is. Unlike yourself I am quite capable of speaking in my own name. That person got that letter Mr. Wilcoxson becuase I made it public and distributed it widely. Everyone has it and I am sure are still waiting for your response with baited breath. "Debate" Mr. Wilcoxson? You have got to be kidding. You have not responded to one of my letters to you. You do not debate. You bait. You are as dishonest a man as I have ever come across. Christopher Black Chair, Legal Committee ICDSM Toronto, Canada
Christopher Black
Toronto
Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:50 am
At last now we can have it out in the open. And I dont mean open war I mean get to the truth of the problems at ICDSM. Again I say this is about justice. If anybody thinks they can ride on the coatails of Milosevic to promote their own agenda they had better think again.Godfred if you are out there (and you should not have disapeared in response to an attack like that) you should return.
Andy Wilcoxson - Im waiting for an answer to my questions.
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:50 am
It was about time.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday August 18, 2003 at 11:51 am
wrong (as usual) Andy. I'm *not* Christopher Black, nor do I know Mr. Black personally, but I like his style and admire very much the work he's done on Yugoslavia and other progressive causes. But thanks for giving us an illustration of the kind of investigative skills and deductive reasoning ("...therefore, you *must* be Chris Black") which make you a 3rd-rate collaborator on Emperors' Clothes and such an audacious practitioner of its gutter journalism. Maybe the next time you do "research" you should just use a 1-900 psychic hotline or something. As for the part about how you (pl) all speak English on this forum, let's not debate that; in your case, I'm just willing to accept that claim on faith.
P WP
Bas Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 12:48 pm
Whilst Im waiting for a reply from Andy or Jared I would like to put the same question to Christopher Black.Do you belive that the prisoners at Guantanamo should be pronounced guilty ('killers' and terrorists) before any judicial process?
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 1:24 pm
Shortly after the appointment of A. Hitler as Chancellor the Reichstag went up in flames. Hitler asked and got special powers to dean with the new danger to the security of the German State. March 20 of 1933 Dachau the first concentration camp was open in Germany to deal with communists (blamed for the Reichstag fire) socialists, trade unionist and anyone representing a special danger to the state. No due process, no charges, no trials were ever afforded to the detainees, simply because if they had been taken to regular Courts they will have acquitted as Dimitrov and his co-defendants were except one who paid with his life.
Any analogies?
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday August 18, 2003 at 1:31 pm
Alf Bentley,Of course, even terrorists, should be granted a fair trial, and I'm not saying that they are all guilty. And yes the "military tribunal" process leaves a lot to be desired.
However, the men locked up at Guantanamo were captured on the battlefield in the act of fighting for either Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. I don't think that it is unacceptable to refer to them as killers and terrorists.
Hashim Thaci has never been put on trial either, but you can't deny that he's a killer and a terrorist.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday August 18, 2003 at 1:36 pm
Aparently the US Army has become the International Branch of the US Justice Department.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday August 18, 2003 at 1:53 pm
By the standards we afford prisoners they are all considered not guilty until proven otherwise in a court of law. Unless you subscribe to Bush's view of the world that is.I do not concur that they were captured on the battlefield. You have too much faith in the word of American PR. They were captured (or kidnapped) on Iraqi sovereign territory by an external aggressor. Some of them were defending this territory and I am willing to bet that others were just civilians who ended up bundled into vans blindfolded etc. (Now thats beginning to sound familiar).
Your last comment I do agree with but its not for you to say that. I mean you have said before that people must provide evidence to back up their claims. I agree with that. You have to do what you tell others to or not claim anything. Even if we 'know' something it must be proved in a court of law. After all those who accuse Milosevic of being guilty also 'know' he's guilty so whats the difference?
The principle must be defended. People distastful or not have the same rights as all of us. That goes for Milosevic, Pinochet or Guantanamo prisoners who are illegally imprisoned and may not get a fair trial. In my opinion thats what the Milosevic trial is all about. Its illegal and unfair. Guantanamo is also illegal and unfair - except they have even less rights than Milosevic. We should defend their rights too
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 2:03 pm
my mistake for saying Iraqi of course Afganistan is what I meant.That Bushism I admit makes me look a little well... stupid.
Alf Bentley
UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 2:58 pm
Regarding Attorney Jacques Verges friend and financial sponsor, Genoud, guardian of the Third Reich's treasure derived from the gold teeth pulled from their murder victims, see http://emperors-clothes.com/genoud-verges.htm
Regarding the Hague Tribunal's attempt to *force* Milosevic to accept legal advice from Ramsey Clark, see http://emperors-clothes.com/verges/notlawyer.htm#order
Regarding Mr. Milosvic's official statement on legal advice, see http://emperors-clothes.com/verges/notlawyer.htm#december
Jared Israel
USA - Monday August 18, 2003 at 5:22 pm
David Hicks kills for kicks?The more the mud is stirred the more undesirables crawl out of the woodwork - waterlogged of course - at the bottom of the pond.
Australian David Hicks could be one of the first prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay to face trial before an American military tribunal.
Mr Hicks, from the southern city of Adelaide, was captured while fighting for the Taleban in Afghanistan in November 2001.
As a teenager, he experimented with drink and drugs and was expelled from school at 14.
One day in 1998, he phoned his parents to tell them he had decided to join an organisation called the KLA … David Hicks was actually going to the Balkans, to fight against the Serbians with the Kosovo Liberation Army. He converted to Islam and soon went to Pakistan, where he is thought to have joined the Kashmiri Islamist group Lashkar-e-Taiba.
At some stage during 2000 he is believed to have attended an al-Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan.
When Hicks joined the Taleban the USA was supporting them in their fight against the War Lords in Afghanistan as it had, along with Blair’s Britain, SUPPORTED THE KLA AND STILL DO IN KOSOVO. How was this mug supposed to know the USA was going to change sides overnight when Saudi terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center and thus convert him overnight from loyal ally - especially for his assistance in murdering policemen and civilians in Kosovo - to infamous foe?
What was it KLA associate Kadriu said, in essence, as he perjured himself with Judge May’s assistance at the ICTY: ‘There were no Mujahedin/al-Qaeda in Kosovo, Milosevic is barmy’.
Are you observing Judge May or have you still got your head stuck in the mud at the bottom of the pond along with the low life you so like to help?
I find it incredulous that Milosevic has been called to defend himself for fighting Nere-do-wells like this who were supported by Blair and Clinton to murder Serbs and loyal Kosovar civilians: the world’s gone mad.
None of this detracts from Hicks’ human right to a fair trial which he like Milosevic will not get courtesy of Blair and which ever US president Blair can suck up to at the time.
What on earth are the charges going to be: It’s OK to invade Serbian sovereign territory along with the KLA terrorists and murder Serb police and civilians before 9/11 and we don’t mind so much even after 9/11 - observe the KLA leadership has not been indicted and murderous attacks are still ongoing: It’s even OK to fight for the Islamist Afghan Taleban government against the War Lords of the Northern Alliance before 9/11: But it’s not OK to fight for the Afghan government against an invading army after 9/11? I’ll write it again: the world’s gone mad!
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Monday August 18, 2003 at 6:07 pm
At a cabinet meeting held later in the morning, February 28, Chancellor Hitler demanded an emergency decree to overcome the crisis. He met little resistance from his largely non-Nazi cabinet. That evening, Hitler and Papen went to Hindenburg and the befuddled old man signed the decree "for the Protection of the people and the State." The Emergency Decree stated... "Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed." http://www.bofhlet.net/tasteless/13/burns.htm
Dakic Ana
Serbia - Monday August 18, 2003 at 7:37 pm
sure is hard to get good help these days. This just in:JOINT STATEMENT OF THE BOARD OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE TO DEFEND SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC - ICDSM
The Board of ICDSM informs that Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser are not members of ICDSM. They left the Committee, its goals and commitments in May-June 2003 by launching a series of reckless actions against it and its leading members, even misusing the name of President Milosevic. Their unauthorized misuse of the title, website and financial account of ICDSM to promote their fabricated allegations and distorted facts has to stop immediately, otherwise they should face moral and legal consequences.
ICDSM remains committed to the struggle to free President Slobodan Milosevic from his illegal NATO prison and to promote and assist his battle for truth, freedom and dignity in the interest of the people. This battle is of the greatest importance for equality and democracy in the World.
Our engagement will be only to that end.
This is our common and indisputable position.
August 18, 2003
THE BOARD OF ICDSM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association) http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
P WP
Bas Canada - Monday August 18, 2003 at 7:38 pm
Hi up there,Finally we've got this page turned into a battlefield. There is no more (or very little) INFORMATION available, mostly mutual accusations and insults. It looks very much like PR campaigning so characteristic for our beloved mainstream media.
So, gentlemen, can you do it over email or open a designated page on YAHOO?
Pasha Ponomarenko
Australia - Monday August 18, 2003 at 7:44 pm
About the debate should Ramsey Clark or should he not defend Milosevic I see the issue, without knowing much detail as follows.Ramsey Clark would use the podium to expound his views and get as much publicity as possible for himself. I do not think that his defense would play any role in the outcome of the trial.
I believe that the outcome of the trial is predetermined. Milosevic will be found guilt even if God almighty defends him.
By eliminating Clark, the issues Milosevic will be clear and on the record for posterity. It is history which will judge Milosevic and NATO.
D. Jovanovic
USA - Monday August 18, 2003 at 8:11 pm
Alf Bentley (cc. Peter Taylor):In response to your posting (of today at 11:50 am) this is to certify, that I am still "out there" - following with much sympathy the efforts of yourself (and others) in making this "trial discussion" focus (rather than on mere "squabbles") on the facts of conflicts in Yugoslavia and the issue of justice - legality and fairness for the cause of mr. Milosevic.
In my view you are doing very well ( - and why would I need to "return"? I did not "disappear", and certainly did not keep silent in consequence of any attack, but rather decided to respond to the suggestion of Dr. Velko Valkanov to "concentrate" on the main issue(s). This can be done in a variety of gallant ways, and I suppose that each of us should do what we consider to be best at doing).
Let me take this opportunity however to (re)state, that while (in my view) mr. Milosevic has 'already' won his case against the ICTY, what remains is to make sure, that he is also SEEN to have won - that justice is SEEN to be done, if you like (and that even by the dumbest of a nation whose Prime Minister may justifiably be considered to be "stark raving bonkers" - at least as far as our armed engagements is concerned).
While as trial discussion participants "we" may safely leave it to mr. Milosevic and those who are giving legal advise as required on the conduct of his defense, there is still a different and very considerable task for us in communicating the results to the general public! I note with regret, that realistically we may have made little headway with this (and even if the situation at your particular place is not as bad as in Denmark I suspect that you may unfortunately agree with me).
Let me illustrate this: The other day in a public library in Copenhagen I met an elderly countryman, a distinguished former civil servant and former Member of the European Parliament, still a respected voice in the (domestic) public debate of this little kingdom of Hans Christian Andersen; when I told him that in my view mr. Milosevic "has already won in The Hague", showing him excerpts of the Trial Transcripts and other documents he was expressing horror: If so "then who committed the murder of these thousands of victims in the former Yugoslavia"? He was asking this (standard!) question rather rhetorically - while walking away from me (I have abbreaviated this "encounter" of course, but in my personal experience the position of the elderly gentleman is in essence representative of the Danish public today. What are we, NATO, going to do when we lose our scapegoat, our Hitler incarnation...).
Hence, while I am confident that the "trial" defense of mr. Milosevic is in good and competent hands (and that most of us can add little anyway (other than maybe the odd inspiring thought?) I am much less certain that we have even begun to convince the general European public, - not to speak of the opinion in the U.S. (or on Mars proper). It all has to be done, however - and I am working as best I can towards this goal in my native Denmark, - where I am at home.
("...der har jeg rod, derfra min verden går," as H.C. Andersen would confidently say).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday August 18, 2003 at 8:12 pm
Drasko,
Before you come to any conclusions it seems you have a lot of reading to do. Just a friendly advise.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday August 18, 2003 at 8:41 pm
D. Jovanovic, - our postings were crossing; and we cannot be right both of us, of course:It is fair enough with me not to (seem to) have much confidence in God Almighty as an attorney - but while mr. Milosevic might be convicted in spite of obvious weaknesses of the ICTY Indictment against him (and others), I do not see how on Earth he could be found "guilty" (as charged)?
It is a truism that "history will judge Milosevic and NATO."
But wouldn't the Trial Chamber have realized that as well, maybe? Would they not have realized some time ago, that we are history ourselves?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday August 18, 2003 at 10:17 pm
Dear Alf Bentley The prisoners at Guantanomo Bay should not be facing trial at all. The law knows only two categories of prisoners in war, those taken in combat and who are entitled to all the rights guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions including the right not to be "tried" by their captors, and those caught in an act of treason for which they would face the regular court systemn under treason charges of the national criminal code. There is nothing in between. The prisoners held at Guantanmo Bay were captured primarily in the course of combat between the United States and its puppets in a clear act of aggression, and the forces of the de facto and de jure government of Afghanistan who had the right and the duty to defend their country. The are therefore combatants under the Geneva Conventions and entitled to the status of prisoners of war. The US position is illegal, immoral, and designed as an act of terror against the populations of those countries who may consider resisting its diktats. These men are nothing more or less than hostages threatened with execution. The same methods were used by the SS in WWII. But they are hostages taken not just from the people of Afghanistan, they are hostages taken from the people of the world. Of what "crimes" are they guilty? None. Defense of their freedom. Terrorists? On whose say so? The US regime which, like their Nazi predecessors, calls any resistance fighter a "terrorist" even though it is the Unite States which is guilty of world terrorism and massive war crimes in a long list of countries. The argument that the Taliban are responsible for the attacks on New York by giving aid and comfort to Bin Laden is pitiful in light of the fact that no one still knows who committed the attack on New York and the Pentagon and further because the Taliban had offered to give up Bin Laden several times but the offer was refused. Refused becuase that war was planned long before that attack which provided the excuse for the agression against and continued illegal occupation of Afghanistan and then Iraq. As for Mr. Wilcosxon's lack of concern for the rights of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners, what can one say. If sir, you hold those prisoners to be "terrorists" before you have heard any evidence or even their side of the story and in complete denial of the facts concerning the Taliban, Bin Laden and New York, then what on earth are you doing claiming to defend a "terrorist" like Milosevic? Where is the logic the consistency in your position? There is none. But I guess your terrorist is my resistance fighter and vice versa. So then your position is not based on ethics or law or justice but on politics. You reveal yourself. The world is horrified by the images of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. You apparently lick your lips over their pending murder. Shot as examples to the world. Well, I know whose side I am on and I am not with the firing squad. Christopher Black Chair,Leal Comittee Toronto, Canada
Christopher Black
Toronto
Canada - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 12:26 am
CBI'm getting crosseyed reading your posts. Would you be so kind as to paragraph the points you make?
It's very simple, a a less than sign < then a P followed by a more than sign >, will start a new paragraph, where ever they are inserted.
Now, what do you do with prisoners while a war is being fought?
What do you do with prisoners intent on their premature death and yours?
Would it be wrong to 'de-program' these prisoners and hold them until you do?My understanding is that most, if not all the prisoners where 'recruited' from outside of Afghanistan, and were not 'defending their own country. Afghans fighting for the 'Taliban' are still all in Afgahanistan.
J, P
USA,Wis - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 2:03 am
Since "Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser are not members of ICDSM", but "left the Committee, its goals and commitments in May-June 2003" as stated by the Board of the ICDSM (on August 18, 2003), then how can an article co-authored by the two of them (1) posted on 17 August, 2003 and claiming that "Here's the truth (and): We know this first hand because we have been, respectively, the spokesperson for Milosevic's support committee, in charge of all press conferences and general activity in The Hague (Nico Varkevisser) and the Website editor (Jared Israel),"be undersigned by:
Jared Israel
Editor, Emperor's Clothes
Nico Varkevisser
Spokesperson, ICDSM
(International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic)
?
(1) http://emperors-clothes.com/verges/notlawyer.htm
I do not see which "battlefield" Pasha Ponomarenko has in mind when making the comparison (August 18, 2003 at 7:38 pm), but it surely must have been muddy...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 2:31 am
As if we were not feed enough crap on the "Trial Discussion" proper, the "Latest...from Google News" appear to pick up and include just anything if only the former FRY President's name is being referred to, such as this:http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=60674
Small wonder maybe that Pasha Ponomarenko is complaining that there is very little (relevant)INFORMATION available...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 4:05 am
One can only hope that if Mr. Milosevic is so concerned about the purity of his support that his attention has been drawn to Jared Israel's shameful and outrageous defence of that mass-murdering giant slug of a fascist war-criminal, Ariel Sharon, in this forum a while back.Israel there excused Sharon of the murders, hell, genocidal murders (why not? everybody's doing it) at Sabra and Chatilla, on the basis that it was the (fascist) Lebanese "Christian" Phalangists that actually committed the massacre.
The little matter that it was Sharon who had to be consulted and give permission as to whether the Phalangists, Israel's allies, would be allowed to enter the camps or not wasn't mentioned. Nor the fact that he did, in fact, give that permission.
Anyone arguing that Sharon wouldn't have had an idea of the consequences of permitting the Phalangists to enter the camps, would be engaging in extreme fantasy. The reputation for brutality of the Phalangists - as murdering bastards - was well known. The word Phalangist itself is known to have close fascist connotations (via Franco's 'Falangists', originally, I believe).
The state of the American so-called left can only leave non-Americans (amongst whom for brevity of wording I include Canadians) in despair. They really haven't got a sodding clue. Whether we're speaking of Jared Israel, Noam Chomsky or the more glitzy of the species, such as Martin Sheen (the voiceover of "Bringing Down a Dictator", a PBS film lauding Otpor as shining lights and strangely referring to Milosevic in the title, who, of course, was elected).
Well, I say they haven't got a sodding clue, but then, who knows? People with ulterior motives very often do have a clue, which just isn't apparent to the rest of us - well, not without considerable digging, even if then.
It's rapidly becoming so that the the brave chap who runs this website may well be the 'last (American) man standing'.
Now, there's a fellow who, so far at least, definitely does not give the impression that many American "lefties" give me that, hey, just a few tweaks here and there, and America will indeed become the "last great hope for mankind" (the nauseatingly innaccurate phrase seemingly obligatorily used by one Presidential candidate after another come election time). On the contrary, that he thinks, along with many aliens (forriners to you, JP), that the US is the biggest danger to mankind, and has been so for decades.
Jared Israel's characterisation of Gogol as a holocaust denier is unspeakably disgusting in its rank and clear misleading dishonesty, and a huge insult to Gogol. It is absolutely NOT possible to conclude that Gogol is an holocaust denier from the relevant post that he made here. This rises to the level of Israel trying to promulgate a LIE. The mischaracterisation is therefore also amazing, in that it lacks the much greater sophistication that even those who have had the scales fall from their eyes with regard to Mr. Israel would expect. So, may be I was right in the first place: many of them just don't have a sodding clue.
Gogol said:
"Only when the passions are set aside, when the explanations can be heard, when the process understood, when the truth made clear for everyone to see, only them can there be justice. Let the Verges, the Clarks, the Kunstlers do their jobs, the Guantanamo concentration camps will be the alternative as the Nazi camps of the past once were.
Just where the hell is the equating of Guantanamo with NAZI camps here, that Israel alleges? For anyone trying to read someone else's words with the intent of extracting what is meant, it is NOWHERE. Only the mind of a rabid partisan axe-grinder constantly on the look out for a soft underbelly to attack could see it otherwise.
Gogol is quite clearly making the point that where a system of jurisprudence is despised and abrogated, for whatever reason (identity of the accused, or whatever) that unpleasant alternatives result. He gave an example from an earlier era, and another from this. He did not equate those two examples.
To be as pernickety as Jared Israel (once was?), Gogol would have to have added something like: ' ... and the Guantanamo Bay camps are every bit as bad as the NAZI camps were.'
His only "mistake", if such it was, was to assume reasonably that those here normally presumed sensible would accept more or less automatically that the Guantanamo camp situation is far less than satisfactory, if not outrageous, which is a widely held view. It is certainly my view. Apparently it is not Jared Israel's.
Israel owes Gogol an apology.
It is quite amusing, however, to see American "leftie" Jared Israel give such a rousing pat on the back to the American rightie (no piss-taking quote marks required) initials, JP. (The last bolding is piss-taking, in that the 'JP' initials are not annoying to Israel, whereas the 'JW' inititals are, may be it's the 'Dubya' part of those initials, hey, I can relate to that; JS was cautious to use his own precautions to guard against this). Emperor's Clothes, meet FreeRepublic. You have mind-meld.
JP got the pat on the back for saying:
"So now, 500 rifle carrying, madasra (sic) trained killers equates to 5million+ innocents that passed through the Nazi camps? ... "
To which Israel's response was: "elegantly put!. So, surprisingly Israel does here what he rightly berates and warns against in relation to Yugoslavia. He goes along with the assumption that all of those held in Guantanamo are killers, without worrying about all that tiresome stuff such as independent counsel, and witnesses and all that stuff - precisely Gogol's point. As well that they are all madrassa trained, which is not necessarily the case, some of them indeed having decided to escape the delights the less well off and dispossessed find in Blair's, nee Thatcher's, England. Moreover that all Madrassas are 'equal' (as in equally bad). This shows an amazing disparity in the standards of evidence acceptable to Jared Israel, on the one hand with regard to Yugoslavia, on the other with regard to those abducted from Afghanistan like so many 18th century press-ganged sailors.
OK, now that's out of the way. ;-)
Excellent stuff, P WP of Lower Canada. Merci beaucoup pour l'information.
D(usom) S(arajlija)
Interesting that you recalled Curt Weldon's (R-PA), anti-Clinton tirade - that's what it was - certainly not a pro-Serb or pro-Yugoslav tirade. His speech was entirely predicated on the idea that two wrongs make a right. He was using the Clinton era lies concerning Yugoslavia to excuse the (much more facile and crude) Bush era lies to justify the murderous invasion of Iraq. A wonderful example of the the most absolutely and totally institutionalisedly corrupt political system on the face of the planet - that of the US. He was saying in effect that it's OK that the Repubs. went in and murdered tens of thousands of Iraqis on fake pretexts, because the Dems. had already done similar with the Yugoslavs.
Haven't posted here for a while. Among other things, have updated my own "home-page" "suite" of communications in regard to the Iraq outrage. Those interested can check it out, as far as I remember from the last time it got mentioned here, it's now got an, erm, interesting E-Mail exchange between the General Secretary of the "Labour" Party and myself, a letter to the British Foreign Affairs Committee (started off from an idea I got from a post I made here), a letter to the Brit. Spook agencies, a Model Resolution to unseat pro-war voting MPs, a "Support George Galloway, Reclaim the Labour Party" slide-show, and soon also to be linked to from the homepage, a letter to the British Armed Forces written at the same time as the spook letter.
So, Peter, as you can see, it's easy enough to keep too busy without sticking up stuff I've nicked from someone else up there. ;-) Nevertheless, if you want to send me an article on all the Thaci/Del Monte/K6 etc, stuff, I'll html it for you and stick it up there, with or without attribution, or as you wish. I can't do it all. Just a reminder of something I mentioned before, and which I believe someone else has also mentioned in the interim: E-Mails cost nothing.
Be sure to check under your bed for holocaust deniers tonight before you turn your lights out, Mr. Israel. You know, as usual.
... eh, what, that's enough for one post ...
(Mira - is that you? Fallen out with me? Hope not. May the peace of the Cam be upon you, aka CamPeace!?! ;-)
D(ennis) R(evell)
Etats Unis - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 4:36 am
I wrote, regarding JP's point about Guantanomo: "Elegantly put! Gogol says Verges is not a holocaust denier - but of course, by so glibly equating Quantanamo, where they keep vicious terrorist prisoners in harsh conditions, with Aushwitz, where they gassed infants, he makes clear *he himself* is a Holocaust denier."
As Emperor's Clothes has vigorously documented, the US government is the usual hidden sponsor of Islamist terror including, ironically, the terrorists who were taken into receivership in Afghanistan where Islamic fundamentlaism is *still* firmly in the saddle under US rule. (Much of the former Taliban is now part of the Afghan army!) So even if all the people being held at Guantanomo are the worst terrorists,it is grotesque hypocrisy (aside from highly questionable law) for the US government to be trying them. My formulation was not precise in that regard because I was taken by JP's astute insight, which is the *main* issue: the obscentiy of Gogol comparing the imprisonment at Guantanomo with the Holocaust. (This obscenity does not appear to bother certain people even a little!)
It is precisely the goal of the little clique that now claims to be the ICDSM to bring the supporters of Milosevic behind defending Islamist terrorists against their once (and future) employers. That certainly isn't Milosevic's idea. But it's perfect from the US Empire's point of view. They know there will inevitably be opposition, so let it fall in line behind the Islamist terrorists.
Jared Israel
USA - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 6:10 am
Dennis Revell: Tu ecris trop trop bien. Bravo! On n'a pas le doit de demander, mais j'espere tu peux excuser nous americains un peu. C'est pas facile a trouver la verite' ici et il faut beaucoup de temp d'etre bien eduque' en comment fonctionner le monde. On doit lire et lire et lire et oublier completement tout ce qu' on apprend dans l'ecole et sur le TV. De toute facon, je suis d'accord avec toi, malheureusement. La vrais gauche est mort chez nous. Ce que existe maintenant est quelque chose sophistique' pour cacher la verite' et se confuser les gens qui veut savoir la verite' et faire de bien. On ne peut plus avoir confiance en Chomsky, Israel, etc. Probablement, ils sont deja achete' et vendu par persones inconnu. C'est comme ca. C'est dommage. C'est la vie...
josef crow
new york
ny - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 6:14 am
We have noticed of course that an announcement has been made that we are expelled from the ICDSM. The clique that issued this announcement claims it is because of our attacks on leading personalities - meaning Ramsey Clark - in May and June. This is a lie because before we wrote anything about Ramsey Clark, a member of this clique publicly stated that steps were being taken to expel Nico Varkevisser. It is remarkable that having stated their intention in the beginning of May, they are not able to actually pull off the public announcement until mid-August. Apparently they had great difficulty collecting a few people to make their organizational coup. We will issue a more thorough statement in the future.
Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser
USA and Netherlands - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 7:21 am
Dennis the MenaceGlad you found time to pop in again and shake us all up. (-:What is it you do when you are not terrorising contributors to the Milosevic Trial Discussion? :-)
Now that you have opened up the debait again about the effectiveness of letters/emails versus postings here let me respond thus. Most of the senior people I came across before I retired could not even operate an email system and relied entirely upon their secretaries. As with snail-mail the secretary usually had strict instructions to filter out ‘unwelcome’ correspondence. Let us agree to disagree.
Now about my ‘lifting’ the ‘Maat, Themis and Justitia’ post: Printed out it amounts to seven pages of A4. Five and a half pages have been ‘lifted’ directly out of the trial transcripts - but this is acknowledged. The surrounding words are entirely my own. So have no fear that you might be challenged by someone else claiming to be the author.
It arose thus. It is no secret that one of my major themes has been that civilisation as opposed to barbarism depends upon Justice and that Justice in turn depends upon upholding Truth and Impartiality, which Blair and the ICTY seem to be determined not to do. Because of this I wondered about the significance of the statue on the Old Bailey, Britain’s major criminal court, and if it would be possible to write something around this. When Godfred - welcome back Godfred - asked me for details of my claim that Thaci had boasted of being involved in the murder of policemen I renewed my search for the long lost source. Instead Googol came up with K6’s evidence. In this I saw an opportunity to combine the two: after googoling some research about ‘Goddesses of Justice’ and being surprised to find not one but three.
One further point on this theme: Maat, the Goddess of Truth, was one of the three major Gods of the ancient Egyptians and history reveals that Egypt enjoyed its most civilised periods when its rulers obeyed her prescriptions.
So proceed without fear. A man of your many talents surely does not need my help to copy and paste?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 8:43 am
Dennis Rewell: Ja, - du skriver helt enormt godt, gamle krukke. Bravo! Indeed I do feel "mind-meld" - whatever that is supposed to mean?Josef Crow, - vraiment tu ne peut plus avoir confiance en..."etc."? Mais when did you (or anybody?) ever have - and just how far would confidence in "etc." extend these days, anyway?
Peter must be right: The entire world has gone mad...(thank you, Peter).
Figure that (apart from "Racak", which still needs to be worked out "to the satisfaction of the architect") from now on I may as well concentrate on the "Milosevic trial news (from Google News)":
...which today picked up a mindblowing line, just one sentence by a Michael Radu writing, that (1):
"The UN (which, interestingly, has been less vocal about Amin than it has been about Milosevic......)"
Has it? Now, - what is so "interesting" anyway in compairing (or "equating"?) the FRY President with a - now diseased - Ugandan dictator, a.k.a. "Big Daddy" or, more formally "His Excellency President for Life Field Marshal Al Hadj Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular", a murderer of 100.000 to 300.000 people...?
Interesting? The world MUST have gone mad! But eh, - that's enough for today...
(1) Dead Cannibal. By Michael Radu. FrontPageMagazine.com | August 19, 2003.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9417
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 11:37 am
I note in Jared Israel"s text, "So many attorneys, so little work", a phrase which is an outright lie. He says, "Verges has never been involved in any legal work for Milosevic. He has never given Milosevic a word of legal advice."1. Jacques Verges brought together four well-known and highly respected French jurists who signed a juridical consultation demonstrating in technical and unquestionable words that the Tribunal of The Haguewas completely illegal. The main excerpts of this important legal text were published in my monthly paper, Balkan Infos,No 69. September, 2002.
2)Jacques Verges has published a book, co-signed with General Pierre-Marie Gallois,(one of the foremost and brilliant supporters of the Serbs), explaining in detail why and how the trial of Milosevic is a farce. This book has become an essential reference for all those who need legal arguments to attack the Hague tribunal. If that is not "being involved with legal work for Milosevic", I don't know what is.
3. Jacques Verges has been a personal friend of mine for more than twenty yearsand I can tell you that calling him a "nazi" is just as preposterous as calling me an archbishop.
Louis Dalmas, Editor, Balkan Infos Paris, France
Louis Dalmas
Paris
France - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 12:43 pm
Gogol Charlemagne,I stand so advised. But to read all this polemics in this site is taking too much of my time, which I do not have.
I plainly admit that I do not understand it.
D. Jovanovic
USA - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 12:48 pm
Oh,I must add. I do not believe that Milosevic is guilty of any charges presented so far in that Cangaroo court.
But, I believe that it is next to impossible for US and England and others to absolve Milosevic of these charges. They would rather blow up the whole court with all present than to allow such a thing to happen
D. Jovanovic
USA - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 1:38 pm
Personally , I think that Mr. Milosevic knew from the first day he arrived to The Hague , he will never see Serbian soil again , and the only thing left for him was to demonstrate the illegality of the tribunal and the absurdity of the charges , for what he has done a superb job fighting like an upside down cat , the whole trial has been proven a bad taste operetta , and it will be an example of how a nation can be demonized thrugh it's leaders in the most infamous way . Now the true colors are showing and sooner or later Serbia and Milosevic will be absolved and this farse of a trial will be a must for all law schools to be analized and debated . on the other hand Milosevic's heart condition can play a substantial roll on the whole case .
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 2:36 pm
Hello, Louis Dalmas. I have not heard from you for a long time. I regret the circumstances.
You say Nico Varkevisser and I were lying when we wrote, " Verges has never been involved in any legal work for Milosevic. He has never given Milosevic a word of legal advice." I beg to differ.
1. Yes, we know about the article you published with "technical and unquestionable" refutations of the legality of the Tribunal. We have several such also on Emperor's Clothes. But regardless of their worth as argument, they do not constitute doing legal work for Milosevic, unless having lawyers make declarations is doing legal work. On the contrary, a great deal of *real* legal work *has* been done for Milosevic - by Nico Steijnen. This involved *law suits*, not articles. Verges was publicly praised and cited and quoted all over the international media for supposedly being involved in the preparation of one of those law suits - and it was all a lie. He did nothing. He wouldn't even answer Nico Steijnen's messages. This *false* publicity accomplished a purpose: it allowed people to claim Verges was doing all this legal work for Milosevic thus lending credibility to the lie that he is Milosevic's attorney.
But then, perhaps by your generous and broad definition of "doing legal work," Verges was so engaged when he stood near the Hague Tribunal and said about himself, for the cameras of Deutsche Welle, "They're refusing to allow Mr. Milosevic's lawyer to enter. This tribunal is illegal. In all democracies, trials are public - this trial's being held under police supervision." Do you see? What splendid legal work! He is a lawyer! He says the Tribunal is illegal. He speaks - not to the relatively few people that read some declaration, but to millions who watch Deutsche Welle. The language may not be "technical", but the statement that he is Milosevic's attorney is "unquestionable". An unquestionable lie.
Bny lying that Verges was Milosevic's attorney, the powers-that-be can a) associate Milosevic with Verges' reputation, which is not so good with the world at large as it is with his friend Louis Dalmas and b) strengthen the red-brown operatives within the Milosevic work itself since Verges is *called* red and is very much a brownshirt.
2. You cite the book for which Verges is listed as an author. I have not read it but given what Verges said on Deutsche Welle I dread its contents. (To millions of viewers of Deutsche Welle, Verges said that Milosevic had intervened to stop a real massacre ) by Serbian forces at Srebrenica, thus agreeing with *all* the Tribunal's claims about Srebrenica - and this from "Milosevic's attorney"! Anyway, regardless of the contents of this book, it is not legal work.
basically, Louis, you are arguing that Verges made statements or wrote things supporting Milosevic. Yes he did. As I wrote:
" Attorney Verges has given at least 170 newspaper and TV interviews in which a) he is *correctly* identified as having been the lawyer for Carlos the Jackal and Klaus Barbie, also known as the Butcher of Lyons, and b) he is *falsely* identified as Milosevic's lawyer "
These included his Deutsche Welle interview. Together, Verges' media work may have reached hundreds of millions of people. Thousands of times more than his book. As I told Vladimir Krsljanin who was one of the people responsible for bringing Verges to the press conference I led when the "trial" began - as I told Mr. Krsljanin: Sure Verges has a big media reach. But that reach is poison. The more people he reaches, the more harm he does to the Serbs and Milosevic, who are accused of being Nazis, the very politics with which Verges is correctly associated in the public mind.
3. You say you know Verges' and that, "I can tell you that calling him a "nazi" is just as preposterous as calling me an archbishop." Another friend of Verges, the late Nazi financier Genoud would of course differ, but thank you for the testimonial, Archbishop Dalmas.
Jared Israel
USA - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 4:27 pm
Here are some interesting statistics.STATISTICS ON ALBANIAN TERRORISM DURING THE NATO OCCUPATION OF KOSOVO
STATISTICS ON ALBANIAN TERRORISM DURING THE NATO OCCUPATION OF KOSOVO
It is interesting the way that NATO and the media keep on claiming that the KLA has been disbanded. If anything they appear to be more active.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 4:28 pm
Sorry, the 2nd link should read "Albanian terrorism in Kosovo PRIOR to NATO occupation"
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 5:41 pm
Dear DR,One can only hope that if Mr. Milosevic is so concerned about the purity of his support that his attention has been drawn to Jared Israel's shameful and outrageous defence of that mass-murdering giant slug of a fascist war-criminal, Ariel Sharon, in this forum a while back.
Tout à fait, mon ami américain! (oops sorry, I forgot Andy wants us all to "speak white"), and you are by no means the only one to have pointed up that hypocrisy, and I can tell you that more than one of Emperor's-Clothes' long list of erstwhile collaborators have demanded - even publicly on repeat occasions in at least one case - that materials of theirs on E-C be removed, such was their disgust at even being associated with the site as it made its odious transformation into TheIDF'sNewFatigues.com.
This recent snootful we've been treated to about the "red-brown" infiltration in ICDSM is pretty rich coming from an apologist for a racist "blood and soil" ideology which has dispossessed and degraded millions of Palestinians, and for a state which armed apartheid South Africa (a fellow practitioner of racist settler-state ideology) and the Central American death-squad dictatorships to the bitter end. And in that regard, and apropos of Nazi collaborators in Palestine, in case you haven't discovered it yet, I was delighted to see that the entirety of Lenni Brenner's classic "Zionism in the Age of Dictators" is now on the web: http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ . M. Dalmas will please correct me if I have this wrong, but Jacques Vergès, as I understand it, is the son of a communist Réunionnais , and served in the artillery of the Free French forces, participating in - among other things - the landing in Provence. Not exactly a "nazi" pedigree, but perhaps in his next post Jared can regale us with what he did during the War.
I've lost count of how many times that worthless Deutsche Welle hyperlink at E-C has been put up here. The functionally literate among us will note that Vergès at no time in the transcribed portion E-C presents us with says that he's arguing Milosevic's case at the ICTY, nor that the reason he couldn't get access to the courtroom was because he was Milosevic's counsel before the ICTY. This isn't said at all, it's just mendaciouly inferred by JI, that's all, and this technique of making outrageously phony inferences and brazenly passing them off as categorical pronouncements in article headlines at E-C in the style of the Murdoch or Hearst press was the same one used w/ respect to Ramsey Clark, and there's a letter about that here btw: http://www.topica.com/lists/ANTINATO/read/message.html?mid=908353501&sort=d&start=27436
When you actually distill out all the garbage inferences, the only accusation is that Vergès is "lying" by saying he's a legal rep for Milosevic. This is exactly what the ICDSM themselves said in their 2/8/02 press conference document (see my prior post).
Andy's reaction to this was to suggest - and this is what's called an *accurate* inference, Jared, just so you can compare and contrast - that the press conference document I posted was a forgery and couldn't be authenticated b/c it's not on the ICDSM website, to wit:
This so-called "P WP" makes the point that Jared Israel maintains the ICDSM website. Perhaps this so-called "P WP" would like to post the link to the ICDSM website so that we can read the statement he posted directly from the horse's mouth.
I looked, but I couldn't find it anywhere on the ICDSM website. I even used the archive.org service to look at the dated archives of the website (to make sure the statement wasn't deleated later) and it looks to me like it was never on the ICDSM website.
This was calculated to intimidate cyber-peasants like yours truly into thinking we'd been duped. But a simple google search shows that this press conference document is all over the g-d web, including here - and this is what's called a *real* smoking gun, Jared, just so you can compare and contrast - where the poster, Ms. Jovanovic, received it directly from one Mr. Nico Varkevisser!: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg86903.html (note the email addy for "Targets", Mr. Varkevisser's publication).
Just another example of the airbrush at work. Pretty incompetent airbrushing though. I mean, a truly skilled fraudster can inspire a certain perverse admiration in most of us, but there's nothing more pathetic than an incompetent fraudster. So the way they want to leave it is: it's ok for ICDSM to refer to Vergès as being on the Milosevic legal team, but woe betide anybody else who tries to, cuz as you Americans say, "that was then, this is now."
P WP
Bas Canada - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 6:34 pm
PWP (whoever that is) points to a press release that says that a host of lawyers, including Mr. Verges and others, had their names listed as bringing a law suit before the European court. Let's finish this once and for all. At the time - Feb. 7, 2002 - we were still trying to get someone other than Attorney Nico Steinjen to do something, *anything*, to help Steinjen who *all alone* was bringing that law suit. We coddled, we flattered. Along those lines, the names of some lawyers, including Verges, were put in a press release even though they had done nothing to with *any* of the work involved in going before the European Court. Nothing. Zilch. Nico Steinjen jsutifiably objected, by the way, and we quietly stopped refering to these other guys.
It was just as much a fiction as having Chris Black at the press conference a few days later, when the "trial" started, presenting himself as head of a Legal Committee *none of whose supposed members* had worked with Steinjen on the actual papers to present to the court. All fiction. So the fiction of the Legal Committe was carried forward in press releases and paid lip service to at press conferences and all these guys got to preen themselves in front of cameras. Phooey. This is precisely what I am now criticizing - when Verges appeared at that press conference which I led, when the "trial" started, he was presented as a member of a Legal Comamittee that in fact was a mirage. This had disastrous consequences. It empowered Verges to give interviews creating the public impression that Milosevic was associated with his Nazi-apology politics. It empowereed Chris Black, who used his mythical position as head of a only-on-paper Legal Committee to give newspaper interviews saying that he opposed Milosevic's strategy of not having a lawyer - and worse. Was this a help? So what did we have? At best some prima donnas, at worst wolves in sheep's clothing, with a license to do harm. I am partly responsible for this error. It was I that brought Chris Black into the support work. And I went along with the fiction - for awhile. But as I said, Steinjen was justifably furous at havbing these lawyes who refused to do any work listed - he was especially annoyed about Verges - so the fiction was abandoned.
And by the way, it is ludicrous to have a person who won't even give his real name - this PWP - attacking Andy Wilcoxson, who is an actual person who spends all his time fighting for the Serbs. Phooey again. Meanwhile, of course, PWP writes this nonsense to obscure: Genoud and Verges. Because the clique that announced the expulsion of me and Nico are the ones who brought the pro-nazi Verges into the ICDSM, telling the rest of us poor mugs that Verges had attacked Nazism during the trial of Klaus Barbie. A lie!
Jared Israel
USA - Tuesday August 19, 2003 at 10:43 pm
well Jared, this whole diversion about initials and aliases and such has already been dealt with by me and others in previous posts. I think it's time for you to find a new diversion.I don't recall you taking similar umbrage when you were high-fiving "J.P." on his "elegant" riposte to whomever about whatever, so it's become, or should have become, pretty clear to the whole class at this point that you have no problems with initials and pseudonyms when it's someone who *agrees* with you. And so a thinking person will - si vous me permettez - smell a [Ma]rat upon reading this huffery.
It might be more convincing were you not so busy turning the E-C website into a parody of those meretricious infomercials which air on tv around 2 am, featuring gleeful endorsements of your product from folks without last names nor geographical co-ordinates. ("Di," "Jeff," "Igor K.") So why are you protecting *their* identity? I guess so they won't suffer ostracism, given the pervasive climate of pro-Muslim, pro-Arab, pro-Palestinian sentiment in Dubya's America, and its stultifying effect on free discussion of the issue? That seems reasonable enough. (“I always felt I knew that Israel was good, and the Arabs were bad, but I didn’t know where to turn, I was afraid to speak out, afraid of what my pushy leftist friends would think. *Thank you* Emperor’s Clothes!” - Sylvia K., Boca Raton)
That's rich too about the "clique" that's expelling you (viz., the ICDSM board). As opposed to, say, the broad, democratic, town hall-style gathering of committee members who decided to run your hatchet job on ICDSM member and chairman Ramsey Clark on the ICDSM website on May 17th. Doubtless you have the minutes of that democratic consultation, the motions passed, etc. If you don't have them handy to share with us now, that's ok. I can wait.
P WP
Bas Canada
