 MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE |
| JURIST >> LEGAL NEWS - WORLD LAW >> Discussion >> Milosevic Trial Discussion Archive |
—————————————————————————————
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. This marks the first time a head of state has been personally prosecuted before an international criminal court.
Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial?
————————————————————————————
NOTICE: Comments posted to this discussion board are solely the responsibility of individual posters, and not of JURIST, its owner, operators, host or staff. JURIST reserves the right to block or remove posts that are in violation of law or that advocate illegal acts, that are obscene, disruptive, defamatory, threatening, harassing or abusive, that are in breach of intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, that are advertisements or solicitations, or that are not related to the topic being discussed.
————————————————————————————
- discussion archive
- Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 12:29 am
Does anybody have any details on the secret tapes Milosevic showed today at the trial during the Erdemovic testemony? It also deals with the group "spider".
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 4:29 am
Christopher BlackSince you are a lawyer and mix within legal circles, can you please give us an idea as to how eminent lawyers and legal scholars in the legal establishments worldwide view the Milosevic "trial" and the way it has been conducted so far?
I am particularly interested in their INDEPENDENT assessments of "due process" and their views about May's conduct of the proceedings and the quality of "justice" being meeted out.
Alternatively, perhaps if you are unaware of the general sentiment, could you point me in the direction where I might get some idea of it myself as I seem to perceive pretty much a wall of silence.
Thanks for your great work so far.
David
Oztralia - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 5:00 am
Andy Wilcoxson said:"If we can finally get to the bottom of the Srebrenica tragedy we will have done not only the Serbian people a tremendous service, but also the Muslim victims of that heinous crime."
It may have escaped attention but there are plenty of SERBS who were killed in and around Srebrenica. In fact, identification of the bodies found in and around Srebrenica is only partially completed and the great majority of bodies have not been identified, and they don't amount to anywhere near the figures alleged to have been killed in the "massacre". That means they could be Serbs OR Muslims for all we know! Oric and co were very busy exterminating Serbs in the area.
So far we only have Nato and their media stooges parroting crap about "The Srebrenica Massacre" and figures of around 8000 UNARMED Muslims. The facts and figures DO NOT seem to support such claims, unless one is to take spin as gospel! The ICTY seems to have no trouble doing that, but then again, the spin comes from its paymasters so what else can one expect?
As for Erdemovic, I thought "following orders" was no excuse! At least it wasn't at Nuremberg. My how things have changed! Just goes to show that if you do as you are told and lie through your teeth, you get off lightly. If you stick to truth and principles you get 40 years!
Moral of the story is: Kiss your master's ass if you don't want to kiss your own ass goodbye.
If there's one thing we can all be sure of it's that Slobo is not an asskisser. It used to be the one thing the Serbs were renowned for and at least he's sticking to their great tradition. Shame about the others :-(
David
Oztralia - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 5:27 am
Mr. Black,It is not me who is claiming that there was a Srebrenica massacre it is Slobodan Milosevic who claims that. So if you or others take issue with that then you can direct your arguments against him.
According to President Milosevic the Srebrenica massacre was carried out by, "a mercenary military formation within the army of Republika Srpska but not under the command of the army of Republika Srpska but within the French intelligence service, they agreed to have this crime committed, that is to say, to abandon Srebrenica and to carry out this slaughter."
Of course I have concern for the Serb victims at Srebrenica. I have condemned Naser Oric on numerous occasions, and I have condemned the U.N. for allowing Oric to use the so-called "Safe Area" of Srebrenica as a base to attack the Serbs from.
But the fact remains that a large number of unarmed Muslim men were slaughtered at Srebrenica in mid-July 1995. It is uncontested, although the scope of it might be. As I said in my post to Ana the most important thing is to establish who planned the massacre and why, and I have faith that Slobodan Milosevic will prove his case.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 6:57 am
"It would be worthwhile to write a comparative analysis of some testimonies covering the same “crime sites” and compare them with the Indictment," writes Vera Martinovic (August 24, 2003 at 11:25 pm).Indeed! How about compairing the tetimonies of Canadian general Maisonneuve (env. 28 May, 2002) and American Ambassador William Walker (env. 12 June, 2002), - for a start, which may prove to suffice.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 6:59 am
Andy, I agree. Even Milosevic does not dispute fact that some killings did occur (Lilic stated that he was upset and angry and called Mladic moron - Lilic testimony ). What is the scope of that is yet to be seen as well who id give the order. That is what I would like to know.
Dakic Ana
Serbia - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 8:33 am
Can we get this straight - was there a massacre at Srebrenica and if so why do we still find alleged proof all over the internet that Srebrenica was a lie? What I would like to know is what these people get out of denying that people were killed there? The idea that somebody could deny such henious crimes no matter who committed them makes me wonder about the sanity of these people. I must say that I am not convinced that Erdemovic committed the crime under orders from France either. I think its safe to say that Bosnians carried out the killings although which ethnicity is another matter and not relevant since Milosevic wasnt in charge of Bosnia.
Hugo Carpenter
Hungary - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 8:42 am
It is not me who is claiming that there was a Srebrenica massacre it is Slobodan Milosevic who claims that. So if you or others take issue with that then you can direct your arguments against him. , AW, Aug. 27/03well then I guess among those who can direct that argument against him should be included Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser, since it was JI who posted Still More Evidence - Was the Srebrenica 'Massacre' a Hoax?, with an introduction entitled "The Answer is Yes!" by Jared Israel ("If executions have taken place, the Serbs have been hiding it damn well. Thus, I don’t believe any of it." - JI, 4/28/00), as well as numerous other commentary in the same vein, and since, as one of the articles of indictment in their little kangaroo court trying Jacques Vergès, they wrote:
Deutsche Welle broadcast various horrific statements by Verges, statements which damned Milosevic either by identifying him with views he detests (such as Holocaust denial) or by defending him in ways that made him appear guilty of war crimes.
Take this exchange about the supposed massacre in Srebrenica[my emphasis, Jared and Nico's words - PWP] (Bosnia) in 1995:
[Excerpt from 25 October Deutsche Welle broadcast starts here]
Deutsche Welle: Milosevic himself claims the Srebrenica massacre was planned with the help of the French secret service and was carried out by Muslim soldiers.
Verges: I refer to the evidence given by general Moriean [phonetic spelling] concerning the Srebrenica massacre - he was there to represent France and the international security forces - he told a parliamentary investigatory committee in Paris that he asked Milosevic to do something to stop the attack on Srebrenica. Milosevic met this request so he's clear of any wrongdoing here.
[Excerpt from 25 October Deutsche Welle broadcast ends here]
Note that the above exchange conveys the impression that:
a) There *was* a massacre at Srebrenica carried out by official Bosnian Serb forces and that
b) Milosevic was at the top or near the top of the chain of command of these forces.
These are the very lies [my emphasis, Jared's and Nico's words - PWP] that the Tribunal is trying to prove.
Jacques Verges says he's Milosevic's Lawyer. It's a Lie., JI & NV, Aug. 17, 2003
P WP
Bas Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 9:03 am
Is it not so, that:"whether there was a Srebrenica massacre" is a question for investigation, - and not for "discussion"?
It seems to me, that the question to (fairly!) resolve at The Hague is not "whether there was a Srebrenica massacre" (or a "Racak massacre" etc.), - but whether the "Amended Indictment Against Milosevic and Others" (as prepared by the ICTY Prosecutor Carla del Ponte and dated June 29, 2001), holds water.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 9:32 am
By letter dated 12 August, 2003 mr. Milosevic was informed that he would be denied "until further notice" any visits from members af the Socialist Party of Serbia and other close associates.Such a decision (apparently taken by the ICTY Registrar, mr. Hans Holthuis), would obviously threaten the preparation of the defence case, - and even the wording of the letter leaves little doubt that the ICTY intends to cut off the vital communications between mr. Milosevic´s and his closest associates, such as the SLOBODA/Freedom Association.
It is necessary that the JURIST "Trial Discussion", which is devoted to investigating whatever fairness is granted mr. Milosevic during the "trial" in The Hague, must scrutinize this particular infringement on his rights. While the succes of the President in counteracting the Prosecution's case has been based on his ability to efficiently cross-examine a seemingly endless row of witnesses, the defence case will require a series of initiatives, which cannot be followed up from isolation at the Detention Unit.
I hereby urge JURIST "Trial Discussion" participants (as well as anyone else with an interest in fairness and justice) to head the obligation to speak up against this arbitrary decision of the ICTY Registrar!
My posting of August 20, 2003 at 8:37 pm, which include a copy of ICTY's letter dated 12 August 2003 from the ICTY Registrar, Hans Holthuis to mr. Milosevic, refers.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 10:58 am
Hugo Carpenter & PWP,The key question in regard to Srebrenica is who was really in charge of the 10th Sabotage Division.
It is not in dispute that it was a unit of the VRS, but the question is who was actually in command of that unit.
It is completely out of the question that President Milosevic had anything to do with this.
President Milosevic showed the orders of the general staff of the VRS to the tribunal, and those orders were explicit in their instructions not to harm civilians.
Obviously civilians were harmed, therefore this unit was not acting under the command of the VRS general staff.
Since the unit was acting under some command other than that of the VRS general staff, we must ask under who's command it was acting?
It appears from the testimony of Erdemovic that his commanders were bribed in order that they would purpetrate that slaughter. So the logical question is who bribed them?
Obviously this VRS unit was bribed by the people who wished to have a massacre carried out. Who wanted that that? President Milosevic says it was the French secret service and the government of Alija Izetbegovic, and I believe that he will prove his case.
In fairness to the people who had previously believed that there was no Srebrenica massacre (myself included) -- I believe that we did the best with the information that we had at the time.
Now it turns out that President Milosevic says that there was a massacre in Srebrenica. This is new information, and it has to be taken into account when discussing Srebrenica in the future.
This is a learing process, every day that I watch that so-called "trial" I learn something that I didn't know before -- and all of it confirms the complete and total innocence of Slobodan Milosevic.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 11:25 am
In fairness to the people who had previously believed that there was no Srebrenica massacre (myself included) -- I believe that we did the best with the information that we had at the time.AW, Aug. 26, 2003
The quoted passage from Israel & Varkevisser was written on Aug. 17, 2003, and that article written a little over a week ago provided a hyperlink embedded in its text to the Srebrenica hoax article, with the also-quoted introduction by JI. This hyperlinked article was clearly provided with the intention of being some kind of "antidote" to the quote of Vergès.
P WP
Bas Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 12:10 pm
P WP,The Verges quote is a problem because it implies that Milosevic held some sort of command in Srebrenica.
Verges said that Gen. Morillion asked Milosevic to do something to stop the attack on Srebrenica and that Milosevic met the request.
The biggest problem with what Verges said is that Milosevic couldn't have stopped the attack unless he had some sort of command over the people who were launching the attack in the first place. So by saying what he said, Verges in essence said that Milosevic had command not only outside of Serbia, but specifically in Srebrenica, which is exactly what the prosecution is trying say.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 12:25 pm
Andy
Are you saying the prosecution is going to call Verges to the witness stand?
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 12:28 pm
SrebrenicaI wonder what US security forces would do in the face of such massive provocation if a Hispanic insurgency in Texas chopped off the heads of Texas civilians and displayed photographs of them like Oric and his Mujahedin terrorists did around Srebrenica?
Perhaps the Waco massacre is an indication of what would happen? Here 86 civilians, mainly women and young children, perished when a massive US military force attacked them: because they resisted the armed entry of customs officers pursuing a firearms licence offence. Admittedly some officers were killed attempting forced entry before the massive reprisal but their heads were not chopped off and photographed for display!
None of this excuses the wanton killing of captured Muslim fighters at Srebrenica - if that is what happened.
But what has all this got to do with Milosevic who as President of Serbia had no command responsibility for Bosnia? To emphasise the point the trial transcripts will show the following statement by the prosecution witness Erdemovic, a Croat in the Bosnian Serb army, who claims he was personally responsible for the murder of one hundred of 1,200 victims of his battalion in the Srebrenica region:
Could you see or hear the participation of anyone from Serbia in these events," Milosevic asked Erdemovic, hidden from public view by blinds with his image scrambled on courtroom monitors. "I could not see anyone who was from Serbia according to what I could see or tell," Erdemovic replied.
Also the fact that these indictments were tacked on to the Kosovo indictments after it became apparent that there was no evidence of genocide in Kosovo - and four years after Milosevic was praised, at least by some, for his influence in securing the Dayton peace accord - smacks of desperation on the part of del Ponte. No court of true Justice would entertain such charges.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 12:46 pm
From what I have seen I have no reason to change my mind that Srebrenica was carried out by Bosnians. I think SM thinks the same thing. I still find it hard to believe that the French could have taken over a division in the Bosnian Serb Army but lets see what evidence SM will produce. Im glad I never made any assupmtion about Srebrenica one way or the other. I wish people would just hold off before they start to make big claims with little proof. I cant ask anyone to feel the same way but I would feel terribly guilty and a little ashamed at denying the grief of relatives who lost loved ones in Srebrenica. I say again from whichever ethnic background. I wish journalists / researchers would hesitate and think a little before they deny or make claims equal to nazi concentration camps.
Hugo Carpenter
Hungary - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 1:19 pm
Spreading the lies"Yugoslavia: The Fall of Milosevic," a three-part documentary that will be rebroadcast tonight on the Discovery Times Channel, immediately establishes the significance of its protagonist as the first head of state to be brought before an international tribunal on charges of war crimes and genocide.
The first in this series of three proganda pieces commissioned by Blair’s chums at the BBC reveals its bias by emphasising the hoax massacre at Racak while totally ignoring preceding real massacres by the KLA such as those at Glodjane, Klecka and Orahovac.
You will need to record the first of these programmes to see the most significant events: that is if they have not been edited out of the US version! I assure you that they are on my recording of the BBC broadcast of January this year.
A film of a column of KLA soldiers in their normal uniforms is shown with Mujahedin, in traditional dress, marching at the rear of this column. A little later a brief film clip is shown of these Mujahedin in mufti in training with KLA in normal uniforms. The appearance of the Mujahedin is very brief: no more than a second or so.
These scenes prove beyond all doubt that Blair’s Britain and US forces under President Clinton supported Islamic terror in Kosovo. Now that is a real crime against humanity.
Don't miss it. Let me know if the Mujahedin has been censored out of the US version.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 1:21 pm
Hugo Carpenter,I agree that we all need to just wait and see what President Milosevic says here.
I feel passionately that we need to get to the truth about this. It is obvious that there was A Srebrenica massacre, but not THE Srebrenica massacre that the media has been howling about for the last 8 years.
We owe it to the victims, and we owe it to the Serbian people who are collectively and unjustly demonized for this.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 1:34 pm
Colm Doyle testified today for the synopsis of his testimony see the following link:http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg082603.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 1:49 pm
The witness Erdemovic appeared at the Tribunal in 1996 and here is a picture and article about this. At that time, the defense wanted Erdemovic acquitted on the grounds that his confession did not provide enough proof for the court to decide an acceptable sentence.http://www.cnni.co.uk/WORLD/9611/28/bosnia.war/index.html
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 2:00 pm
While Milosevic was been acused of ethnic cleansing and genocide the U.S-NATO aggressors were trying really hard to find Milosevic and eliminate him by bombing his wereabouts , maybe they already knew that if Milosevic would've survived and handed in to stand a fair trial, he might've prove that the whole legality and "sexied" justification for the aggression against a soverign country, was nothing but a pure act of dominance and submission to the new Empire. After thinking back some years , comes to my memory the circumstances in which Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby died , history repeats itself and in spiral sense , "ones the dog is dead rabies are gone" . As I said before there are no surprises only surprised , you all guys deserve and have all my respect for the great effort put on behalf of finding the truth
Milan Prika
Rep of Panama - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 2:20 pm
Would anybody be able to send me a copy of the documentary Yugoslavia: Fall of Milosevic, or does anybody know where one can buy one? Willing to pay shipping etc.
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 2:26 pm
Dan,
Don't waste your time and money. It is pure propaganda, a 5 year old can do better. "Yugoslavia, the Avoidable War" is a 1000 times better, with real interviews from real people, not the product of psychotic thinking.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 2:37 pm
I have Yugoslavia the avoidable war. I was just wondering if I could see that first parter.
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 5:40 pm
Andy this is email for Reuters: editor@reuters.comMaybe we should use it. Just keep on sendig them your articles since most of the news just reprint what Reuters said.
Dakic Ana
Serbia - Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 9:46 pm
The problem with Drazen Erdemovic and his participation in the alleged or real execution of prisoners around Srebrenica is that his 1996 trial and yesterday’s appearance in the Milosevic proceedings have posed more questions than they gave answers. Actually, there was no Erdemovic trial at all. Pretty much like the admission by Plavsic of ‘persecution’ but without further elaboration of, say, orders given by the Bosnian Serb authorities to persecute Muslims. This is the problem with plea-bargains: they clarify nothing, but only serve to take the individuals in question off the hook and help charge others.Apparently, the whole previous Erdemovic case was simply took as an established fact and incorporated as it were into the Milosevic case. Therefore, I tried to check the transcripts from the Erdemovic 1996 trial, but since he plea-bargained (pleaded guilty, got 10 years, which was subsequently reduced to 5 and he served even less, and in return he had to testify against General Krstic and Milosevic, and he took part in the hearing into the indictment of Radovan karadzic and General Ratko Mladic), there was no transcripts for his case, except for one day only: 14 January 1998 (the plea agreement procedure, followed by a pre-sentencing session). Judging by that, Erdemovic admitted to be guilty as charged (but only to count 2 - a violation of the laws or customs of war; he pleaded not guilty to count 1 - crime against humanity). BTW, Judge Mumba explained briefly these two counts: a crime against humanity ‘is an attack of a widespread or systematic nature on the civilian population’. To this, Erdemovic pleaded not guilty. Thanks, Mr Mumba, for pointing out that Erdemovic was not guilty of attacking civilian population (so, these were POWs that he had shot - if indeed he had shot anybody) and that his crime was of a narrow and exceptional nature. This sole transcript for Erdemovic case is highly informative, and I intend to revert to it later on.
So, I went to the Erdemovic Indictment to check the charges against him. Well, they are quite limited and vague at the same time, with sloppy wording. Here are some points from the Indictment dated 22 May 1996:
Point 9 deals with who perpetrated the killings on 16 July 1995 at the Branjevo farm near the village of Pilica : ‘Drazen Erdemovic and other members of the 10th Sabotage Detachment’. How many members? The Indictment remains silent on that. The BBC article of yesterday generously calls the unit ‘his battalion’. A detachment is hardly a battalion. Erdemovic yesterday referred to his whole Sabotage Unit as vod = platoon, which could be up to 40 soldiers. He himself stated yesterday there was only himself and seven other members of the 10th Sabotage Detachment’ who were at the farm. He named all 7. He also stated that the majority in the Sabotage Unit were the Croats from Bosnia, just like Erdemovic himself is.
Point 10 of the Indictment speaks of the organization: the unspecified unit members ‘were informed that bus loads of Bosnian Muslim civilian men from Srebrenica, who had surrendered… would be arriving’. Informed by whom? How many busses? Nothing about that in the Indictment. And how can civilians surrender? Erdemovic referred yesterday to the people bussed to the farm sometimes as POWs and sometimes as Muslim males. He claimed that the man to give the info on the incoming busses was one Brano Gojkovic, ‘an officer’. In his cross-examination, Milosevic put to Erdemovic that his group of 8 had simply ambushed the busses, profiting from this info, and executed them without authorization. Erdemovic denied that, but got mixed up with the quotations from one of his numerous previously given written statements (apparently, he gave as many as 11 of them, each more detailed and richer than the last, between 1996 and 2001). Milosevic quoted from one of the statements how Erdemovic was under the impression that the bus drivers thought they were driving the POWs to be exchanged, and not executed, and even stated that one of the men told him as much.
Point 12 of the Indictment deals with the number of victims: ‘These summary executions resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Bosnian Muslim male civilians.’ So, the Indictment is deliberately vague about the exact number. Speaking about it yesterday, Erdemovic was more generous: he said there were ‘about 1,000 Muslim males from Srebrenica’ killed and that he ‘personally shot about 100 men’. The sole transcript of the Erdemovic case, mentioned above, speaks offhandedly about ‘1,200 souls’ but these are the picturesque closing words of counsels. The sole transcript also mentioned that the excavations at the site had found only an unspecified small number of bodies. The time frame was quite specific: by Erdemovic’s own admission of yesterday, the whole thing lasted between 10 a.m. and 2 or 3 p.m. of that day, 16 July 1995. So, how many people were killed?
The Indictment gave no further details whatsoever, but yesterday’s testimony, brief and confused as it was, gave more: of particular interest were the bits covering the chain of command. Apparently, these 8 men at the farm got info from a certain officer Gojkovic that morning that the busses will be arriving. According to Erdemovic, another unnamed officer of the VRS (Army of the Republika Srpska), a lieutenant-colonel, was briefly at the farm before and after the executions, not during it. Erdemovic explained in detail the general attitude of the Sabotage Unit Commander Milorad Pelemis and of the other commanders of the unit towards the VRS top brass: ‘they never obeyed Mladic, and considered themselves as his equal’.
Other details revealed the possible motives for the resentment of Erdemovic: as his wife told him, according to her fellow passenger’s story (a talkative mistress of Pelemis riding in the same bus with her once), his unit commanders started to spend large sums gallivanting about the Belgrade hotels, purchasing flashy cars and ordering heavy hand-made jewellery, while Erdemovic himself was wounded in hospital, receiving not nearly that much (he was deliberately vague about the sums he personally received, claiming he ‘didn’t remember’ the exact amount). Another strong reason, according to the sole transcript: he started to quarrel with the other members of his unit (about money?), they decided ‘to get rid of him’, so he got shot by one of his ‘fellow soldiers’, that’s why he was in hospital. The only way to escape them was to come to The Hague. So much about the voluntary testimony.
As for the French connection, Milosevic claimed this Sabotage Unit was not subordinated to the Security and Intelligence Service of the VRS Headquarters, but had been controlled by the French Intelligence Service instead. He announced his intention to prove that, and the involvement of other foreign intelligence services as well. He quoted several foreign names to Erdemovic, claiming they had been connected with the activities of his Sabotage Unit, but Erdemovic denied knowing them. Milosevic asked how come that the only man to be accused for the killings at Pilica was Erdemovic himself, who had been arrested by our police and subsequently extradited, not being the citizen of Yugoslavia? Who helped escape all other 7 men involved, provided them with false foreign passports (he quoted some real and false names used), and organized and paid for their trips abroad? May prevented Erdemovic from answering and Milosevic from going any further, by asking ‘Why is that relevant?’ and saying ‘He doesn’t know about that’, gesturing towards the witness. Milosevic didn’t miss the chance to mock May, saying the relevance will be shown in due course, ‘but if he knows nothing about that and if you claim he knows nothing about that, then I won’t ask him about that.” The only thing that Erdemovic knew was that his Commander Pelemis went to Zaire as a mercenary; other names and destinations he ‘could not remember’, although he read about them in the press later on.
The pathetic attempt at implicating Serbia with Srebrenica came from the alleged conversation of Erdemovic with an unnamed man while in hospital. The man supposedly told Erdemovic that he was a member of the Serbian police and that some of their units had participated in the take-over of Srebrenica. The problem is, this piece of info was in the very last of the total of 11 written statements of Erdemovic, the one he gave on 3 November 2001, after his trial in 1996, his sentencing, serving his reduced time and his release. In none of those other previous statements (10 of them) over the 6 years had he mentioned that. When asked why, Erdemovic explained haltingly: ‘Anything that the Prosecution asked me, I told them…they asked me then, so I said what I had heard. They have never asked me before about the involvement of the Yugoslav Army and the Police.’ Interesting insight into the methods of the OTP and, more important, into the development of the “case”: of course they never asked anybody about such involvement back in 1996, Milosevic was never indicted then, he was helping the peace process, the Dayton Accords… The Kosovo, the NATO bombing and the Milosevic Indictment all came later on and the willing & thankful Erdemovic, now out of jail, was handy to give yet another “statement”, where he readily confirmed ‘anything that the Prosecution asked me’.
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 12:33 am
Re SrebrenicaNot having been able to ask Milosevic directly about this matter and going only by trial transcripts and news reports I can only assume that Milosevic takes the position that any massacre IF THERE WAS ONE, must have involved French intelligence. However, I again challenge Mr. Wilcoxson to tell us what the evidence is that there was such a massacre in the first place. This is no place for speculation and just repeating Nato propaganda. If he has knowledge of this alleged evidence thenn please refer us to it. I am not aware of any. Further, a Dutch marine I nterviewed who was there at the time feels very bitter about the Dutch being blamed for standing by and doing nothing becuase, he told me, they did not see any such massacre take place and cannot beleive the stories made up since. He also told me that "if you want to know who the really worst ones were there around Srebrenica, it was the Moslems, they did some horrble things." Now maybe this is also disinformation but again, it is more consistent with the findings or lack thereof on the ground of any evidence of a massacre there as alleged by the Prosecutor.
Christopher Black
Toronto
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:32 am
16:00 - Hans Logway , former OSCE representative in Kosovo, says that in the same way that stories about weapons for mass destruction have justified the war against Iran, so did stories about genocide and humanitarian catastrophe justify NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999. He claims that documents German military intelligence agencies had contained no indication of genocide or mass exodus of Kosovo Albanians, only evidence of a brutal civil war in which civilians were the victims. Logway claims that NATO aggression on Yugoslavia was a political scandal: "An investigation is needed to determine who and for what reason chose to falsify evidence."He should be called as a defense witness.
Dan B
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:32 am
mistake: instead of Iran, it's Iraq :-)
Dan B
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 2:39 am
Mr. Black,I actually appreciate your criticism. You are right, my article was not sufficiently clear. Therefore, I have made alterations to it to clarify what I am saying. I incorrectly assumed that people were already familiar with what President Milosevic had previously said about this.
Specifically I direct your attention to President Milosevic's statement on page 10309 starting on line 12 of the Friday September 27, 2002 transcript.
I don't personally have any evidence about Srebrenica. I wasn't there. All I know is that Slobodan Milosevic has said that there was in fact a massacre at Srebrenica, and I assume that he probably has better information than I do.
I am not claiming for a minute that "the Serbs did it," or that it was committed on the scale that the media says it was. Let me be perfectly clear, there was apparently A Srebrenica massacre, but not THE Srebrenica massacre that the media has been talking about for 8 years.
All I can do is direct you to read the transcript that I mentioned above and see what Milosevic said about who committed the massacre and why they did it.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 3:05 am
thks Vera and Andy for the articles
AP V
NY
NY - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 4:26 am
Thank you Godfred. I fully agree that:"whether there was a Srebrenica massacre" is a question for investigation, - and not for "discussion"
The Western Powers have spent 8 years and tens of millions dollars "investigating" the events following the fall of Srebrenica.
The fact that they have found little evidence for their "massacre" claims speaks volumes.
Michael Thomas
London
UK - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 4:40 am
A massacre or THE massacre in Srebrenica!It seems that to some people a denial of THE massacre (the massacre alleged by NATO) has become tantamount to a denial of the Holocaust! LOL! Gee whiz, denying the official version of life as we know it!
It may clear up Andy's point if one notes that Serbian has no articles such as may be used in English to refer to "THE" or "A" massacre. Citing Milosevic's "recognition" that a massacre of some kind occurred, it would not be clear whether Milosevic referred to THE massacre or A massacre, the latter possibly being on a much smaller scale and maybe not even remotely connected to THE (alleged) massacre parroted by NATO and the media which evidence does not support so far.
If Milosevic has some evidence, no doubt we will hear of it if they let him survive long enough. We will see.
In the meantime, it strikes me as interesting that Erdemovic's "unit" or most likely platoon, contained such a large number of Croats! What were they doing there? Is it possible that Milosevic is alluding to the possibility that these Croats, who probably had little love for the Moslems in any event, were part of a unit which included Serbs from Bosnia and who were mercenaries "sponsored" by the French in Africa and "invited" to Bosnia by the French secret service. Being mercenaries of course, who possibly masqueraded as volunteers, their primary allegiance would not be to Karadzic or his Serbs or to a Bosnia within YU, particularly if they were Croats, but to Mammon who pays them handsomely for their services. Hence, can it be validly inferred that they were under Karadzic's, Mladic's or Milosevic's command?
Certainly, it was not in the Serb's interest to stage a massacre on any significant scale, just as it was not in their interest to stage the marketplace massacres or the Racak massacre, ALL of which have been used to blame the Serbs in order to bomb them. So one need simply asks the "Who gains?" question. If one also takes into account the alleged Izetbegovic statement at a Bosnian Muslim presidency council meeting that Clinton had said that the Muslims needed a massacre to so outrage the public of the world that NATO could get their fingers into the pie, then the probability of greater motivation for such massacres clearly lies NOT with the Serbs but with NATO and Muslim operatives.
Mere speculation, but no less improbable than the scenario that the Serbs are stupid and irrational to the point of shooting themselves in the head. Having watched Milosevic and the manner in which he has handled the clowns in the ICTY, I find it difficult to believe that HE at least is stupid enough to have had anything to do with such "massacres".
David
Oztralia - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 6:17 am
Srebrenica: “Body Counts” By Edward S HermanBut only Bosnian Muslim bodies were sought, not victims of the Bosnian Muslims or Croatians, although there is extensive evidence of repeated massacres of Serbs in Bosnia in the years 1992-1995.
In 1994 and 1995, Muslim commander in Srebrenica, Naser Oric, proudly showed journalists videotapes of his "war trophies," including severed heads and heaps of bodies of Serbs, but these were not the bodies the collective was seeking.
The NATO establishment, including New Humanitarians and genocide hustlers David Rieff, Susan Sontag, Aryeh Neier, Christopher Hitchens, Ian Williams et al., have been exceedingly quiet on the implications for likely source of massacres of the fact that thousands of bin Laden's troops and allies had been imported to fight the Bosnian Muslim cause in those years.
When will the trial of Naser Oric begin: it has a bearing on the Milosevic trial: And why has del Ponte not indicted Izebegovic the Bosnian war leader?
This biased farce claims to be justice?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 6:43 am
No, Peter Taylor! This biased justice lays claim to being a farce.
David
Oztralia - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 6:54 am
TestTest
Matthias Gockel
Germany - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 6:58 am
Dan B,"Hans Logway , former OSCE representative in Kosovo..."
The name is Heinz Loquai! He just published a second book, in which he demolishes further some legends that were used to justify the NATO war against YU.
If anyone is interested, you can read an interview he recently gave (it's in German though):
http://www.taz.de/pt/2003/08/23/a0085.nf/textdruck
Matthias Gockel
Germany - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 7:05 am
Andy Wilcoxson claims,to "learn something every day that I (A.W.) watch that so-called "trial".
Who are we to doubt, that this is so? But forgive me for suggesting, that Wilcoxson does not appear to appreaciate the virtue of keeping quiet, when he has nothing (new) to add:
While Wilcoxson may be right in judging, that "the key question in regard to Srebrenica is who was really in charge of the 10th Sabotage Division" (August 26, 2003 at 10:58 am), I maintain, that this question (as well as other facts) is not a matter for "future discussion on Screbrenica", but for proper (on site and other) INVESTIGATION.
I in turn agree with both Hugo Carpenter (August 26, 2003 at 12:46 pm) and with Michael Thomas in that "the fact that "the Westen Powers" have found little evidence for their "massacre" claims speaks volumes" (August 27, 2003 at 4:26 am).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 7:57 am
Gabby Louis-Jenson said "But forgive me for suggesting, that Wilcoxson does not appear to appreaciate the virtue of keeping quiet, when he has nothing (new) to add:"lmao...You have got to be kidding right? I have been following this forum from nearly the beginning, and read most of the archives too, so let me say gabby, when it comes to long-winded reiterations nobody holds a candle to you.
joel aksamit
usa - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 8:53 am
I agree with Andy Wilcoxson on this (there may have been a masacre but not The Masacre) and the truth about Srebrenica is not far off. Milosevic will produce his evidence and more bodies will be found and identified.It will look pretty bad if anybody committs themselves one way and comes out not only being wrong but being disrespectful to those who were killed.
Hugo Carpenter
Hungary - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 9:19 am
The Srebrenica theories have been floating around for a long time. If I remember correctly, the idea of the French connection was used in another trial unsuccessfully. We will have to see if Milosevic is about to bring new, fresh evidence or to shine onto the old evidence some new light.
Dan B
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 9:54 am
The important statements of Heinz Loquai ... in English
Google (and probably other services too) has an instant translation feature for many languages, including German. A google web search for "Loquai Kosovo" reveals that the vast majority of writings by or referring to Loquai are in German, but translated documents can be acquired immediately by clicking on "Translate this page". The automatic translation is not of literary quality, but every detail is understood in the English text with minimal difficulty. See for example the English translation of Loquai's recent interview with Tageszeitung, which was referred to by Dan B and Matthias Gockel.
Pythagoras C
Greece - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 11:18 am
Since mr. Joel Aksamit hasn't read my "reiterations" sufficiently carefully to even being able to spell my name correctly, then what do I care about his idle voice of "opinion" (August 27, 2003 at 7:57 am)?In fact, with regard to "Screbrenica", or to "Croatia" and "Bosnia-Herzegovina" altogether (which I believe does not matter in the "trial" against mr. Milosevic anyway!), I have been "reiterating" next to nothing.
On the other hand it hasn't or seemingly it may not be stressed suffiently, neither by me or by anybody else, that a "trial" like this ICTY show which runs at length and largely in vain for lack of evidence due to missing or improper INVESTIGATIONS by the Prosecution of alledged crimes as may be the case, is indeed a major international scandal. There is no point at all in adding to such scandal by stating or by "agreeing", that "there may have been a massacre etc."). It is possible, but hardly reassuring, that new evidence in the form of "more bodies" will "be found and identified", as Hugo Carpenter says, - if this happens only after the Prosecution has concluded its case, instead of prior to the charges being worked out.
If anybody could be said to be showing "disrespect of those who were killed", then surely that must be the ICTY Prosecutors and their henchmen in the U.S. and NATO countries, to the extent they have been basing their charges on mere hearsay, - as the "trial" has certainly shown it to be the case with the alledged "massacre of Racak" (on which topic admittedly I have been reiterating quite a lot, - hopefully to some avail).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 11:44 am
The true message is in the bulletThe paradise Blair claims to have created in Kosovo continues to be a nightmare. But New Labour and its supporting media hacks, especially in the BBC, continue the myth for the British public. Presentation is everything. ‘No news is good news’ and that is exactly what we get from New Labour.
While UNMIK is urging the minority populations to return to their homes in Kosovo: terrorists, by continuing to take pot shots at them when they are not taking axes to them, are telling them to stay away. When will the BBC alert the British public to the terror that Blair and his cronies support in Kosovo: initially with RAF bombers four years ago.
Are there no honest men in the BBC: Is there no one with the courage to report the dreadful consequences of Blair’s illegal attack upon the sovereign state of Serbia in support of an Islamic terrorist insurgency: Is there no one prepared to report continuously and honestly the trial of Milosevic?
When will we learn of the massive lies told by New Labour to support the illegal attack: When will we learn of the quarter of a million of Kosovo’s minority populations ethnically cleansed from their centuries old homeland and unable to return: When will we learn of the two or three thousand murders committed under KLA/KPC rule: When will we learn of the hundreds of thousands of destroyed damaged and sequestered properties including more than one hundred Christian Church properties: When will we learn the truth about this fascist, racist state created by Blair and his chums and his cluster bombs?
As long as this wilful silence on these matters continues the BBC will represent for me: Blair’s Blackguards Corporation: A corporation failing its charter to report the truth. Indeed in broadcasting propaganda such as: ‘Yugoslavia: The Fall of Milosevic’ it is worthy of everyone’s contempt and disgust.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 11:57 am
Chris Black says he can't ask President Milosevic directly about Srebrenica because he's not in direct touch with the President. (Just on that point, we are forwarding these discussions to the President, so Chris Black should not worry. His voice will be heard.)
Since Chris is not in contact with the President, I would suggest he try reading the trial transcripts. This could prove most informative, an excellent starting point for an aspiring legal advisor to the President!
By reading the transcripts, Chris Black will discover so many things. For instance, he will no longer have to say,
"I can only assume that Milosevic takes the position that any massacre IF THERE WAS ONE, must have involved French intelligence...-- Chris Black
He will discover that President Milosevic in his widely reported remarks of 27 September 2002 *definitely* stated that a massacre took place at Srebrenica, definitely stated who had carried it out and made perfectly clear that this was *not* the one we all heard about. Rather, the massacre he described occured under the command of French intelligence. Chris Black can read Milosevic's statement by going to the second half of the article, A Massacre? Apparently yes, but not *the* Massacre, at Srebrenica
Once he does read the transcript, Chris Black might want to talk to his friend, Maitre Jacques Verges. Speaking to millions of people, Verges accepted without question the official story about Srebrenica. He then struck a pose of "defending" Milosevic by saying Milosevic called off "the massacre". That of course would put Milosevic, instead of French intelligence, in the command position. Won't Mr. Black want to chide Verges for this?
It is interesting to note that Milosevic blames French intelligence. But Jacques Verges blames Milosevic, and Jacques Verges' source for this is...a French General. Small world, Mr. Black.
Jared Israel
USA - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 12:16 pm
Jared Israel here is a text of your buddy Petar Makara where he call your hero Milosevic a dictator, how do you feel about it? http://srpska-mreza.com/pm/analiza.htm
Niko Neznanovic
Srbija - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 12:59 pm
We are in total agreement on your last comment. That is why we occupy the moral high ground which is why we must be responsible unlike the coyotes and their masters. I dont expect integrity from them but I think we do have it and must keep it.
Hugo Carpenter
Hungary - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:24 pm
Very lively I see.Nice to see Vera back.
Has anybody any information about whats been going on today at the Hague? I heard there was supposed to be another protected witness. Maybe they should call them coached witnesses.
Alf Bentley
UK - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:26 pm
Mr. Israel,If you are going to continue to misrepresent even your own posts on your website I really don't know how any useful discussion can continue re Srebrenica. You state above that Maitre Verges "struck a pose of defending Milosevic by saying Milosevic called off the "massacre". But this is not what was said according to your own words on your site to which you have posted a link. On your site you refer to Verges as stating
"I refer to evidence given by General Moriean concerning the Srebrenica massacre... he testified to a parliamentary investigatory committee in Paris that he told Milosevic to do something to stop the ATTACK on Srebrenica..." An attack is not a massacre. Further, although the Prosecution staff no doubt follow the discussion on this site, I do not see how it helps Milosevic to use the ordinary mail in order to send him critiques of these discussions or anything else. Every piece of his mail is censored. The Prosecutor reads it before he does. That is why it is impossible to to send him anything other than simple greetings. If you are openly sending him sensitive material or material which can only help the Prosecutor then I have to question why you are doing so.
If we assume, for the sake of argument that the Prosecution staff do not bother with the Jurist discussions then sending them directly (becuase that is what you are doing when you mail him this material) the statements made here can only have one result: providing them with aid and comfort. Why would you do that? Unless you want them to know about your attempts to undermine his support and provide them with things with which to construct their case against him.
This is not some game of one upmanship we are playing here. This man's life is at stake.
Christopher Black
Toronto
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:51 pm
What happened today at The Hague can be read at:http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg082703.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 1:56 pm
“It was the right thing to do”As in Kosovo so in Iraq: The emails released by the Hutton enquiry seem to confirm: Blair parrots the words of Campbell, New Labour’s co-author of the two Dodgy Dossiers. BTW now that MI6 assures the Hutton enquiry that their intelligence was not exaggerated by Campbell we may draw our own conclusions upon the ‘intelligence’ of MI6: where are the WMD which may be activated with 45 minutes notice?
- Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 2:06 pm
Mr. Black does it not make sense that if Verges claims that Milosevic could have stopped and did stop the attack that he had command responsibility? I hope that you will affirm the position that Verges with his Srebrenica comment in no way helped Milosevic's defense. As for Mr. Israel sending him the mail, I think Mr. Milosevic deserves to know what has been going on the whole time, assuming he does not. Since there seem to be large disagreements within ICDSM one would hope that Mr. Milosevic would be aware of those. If Mr. Israel has no other way of communicating with him, what would you suggest? Phone him? As for you statement that this is "This man's life is at stake." I would urge you to read again what Verges. "Milosevic called off..." Whatever he called off is not of dicussion, what Mr. Veregs states is that Milosevic had control and he was able to call it 'off'. Maybe you should focus your attention on him, instad of Mr. Israel who has brought our attention to Mr. Verges' comment.
Dan B
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 2:12 pm
Mr. Black,Attack or massacre it makes no difference. The point is that Slobodan Milosevic had absolutely NO command authority outside of Serbia. President Milosevic did not have any authority to order any sort of military operation to either be launched or to be stopped anywhere in Bosnia or Croatia. He didn't command anybody who was fighting over there.
Bosnia and Croatia were CIVIL-WARS and Serbia and the FR Yugoslavia had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with them.
This is one of the most fundamental key points of his defense. How can you not know that? It makes no difference if he said attack or massacre.
Slobodan Milosevic was the President of SERBIA and had absolutely NOTHING to do with any military operations outside of Serbia. That is the key point.
Slobodan Milosevic only did 2 things with respect to those wars:
1. Milosevic tried to end the wars by facilitating peace negotiations, and trying to find a solution that was fair and even handed towards all of the warring factions.
2. Milosevic sent HUMANITARIAN aid to the war zone in order to try and aliveate the suffering of the people who were there.
Slobodan Milosevic was exclusively a PEACEMAKER and a HUMANITARIAN. Those were his ONLY rolls. Slobodan Milosevic was ABSOLUTELY NOT a commander who could order troops in Bosnia to attack or not to attack.
I really can't understand how you could make such an arguement, if he said attack or massacre it makes no difference because either way it undermines Milosevic's defense.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 4:07 pm
Andy
From a legal point of view your line of defense is unsustainable. That crime may or may have not taken place all together makes no difference since the accused is facing a trial where public opinion has found him already guilty and the judges are more than leaning to believe the prosecutor, his (her) lies and half truths. All what the accused can do is to prove he was not responsible because and give the most convincing reasons and facts. Trying to prove the event to be fictitious, attack or massacre or both is irrelevant.
The French general was right to ask Mr. Milosevic to intervene and use his influence and prestige to stop whatever it was in violation of any agreement or detrimental to the peaceful settlement which most parties were fighting for and Mr. Milosevic had demonstrated had the necessary influence (President Clinton shook hands with him after Dayton saying "here is a man we can do business with" he had indeed made a difference) to make a difference and this fact is not to be confused with what the prosecution's case is all based on, that if Mr. Milosevic was influential and could exercise his prestige he was then fully responsible for all the wars in Yugoslavia. Mr. Milosevic was fighting to save peace and Yugoslavia, his enemies foreign or local were working for her destruction and now having succeded in their crime they need to finish him off.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 4:18 pm
WOW¡. Thats justice, there is going to be a public inquiry to get to the bottom of Dr. Kelly's case about the 45'readines of Irak to wipe out the U.K. from the face of the earth . Give me a break¡ . Has anybody heard of gypsies telling the fortune amongst themselves? , The "snakes enchanter" will keep on playing his flute in his #10 show room for as long as his audience live in a collective state of hipnosis
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 4:46 pm
TO STOP THE ATTACK, AND HE MET THIS REQUEST "...he told a parliamentary investigatory committee in Paris that he asked Milosevic to do something to stop the attack on Srebrenica. Milosevic met this request so he's clear of any wrongdoing here."
From a legal point of view, from the perspective of what teh prosecutor is trying to prove, it benefits them. It benefits Milosevic in the sense that he stopped it, but also shows that accrding to Mr. Verges he had control OR enough influence to stop it. Hopefully Mr. Verges will refrian himself from any further comments as these.
Dan B
Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 5:16 pm
As in the Sebrinica case the twisting of facts continues now in for the Kososvo period. What strikes me is taht these falsehoods appear in press agancy reports witch will just be copied and pasted in hundreds of newspapers. By who are these reports controlled, do these agancies have an agenda?? The press should kn ow better by now after the Iraq show, but keeps parroting Blair and Clintons false propaganda lines.An example of today fromhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3077280,00.html
Milosevic's 1998-1999 crackdown left up to 10,000 dead and hundreds of thousands expelled. Most of the victims were ethnic Albanians.
Nearly 200,000 Serbs fled Kosovo after the war, fearing revenge attacks by ethnic Albanians.
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 6:08 pm
"Latest news" : "Ex-Mayor gets life for war crimes" . ITV , UK . Dated 31 jul 2003 , 15.24 pm . This is the cherry on the frosting,even Google is part of the agencies agenda, pretty soon Milosevic's farts will become WMD used in the siege of Sarajevo. Carla,you're disappointing me, running out of ideas?
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 7:14 pm
Dear Mr. NeznanovicAbsolutely right to point up the hypocrisy re: Makara. The record is very clear about who stood where in the fall of 2000 when the choice for Yugoslavia was between continued economic and political sovereignty under Milosevic and being fed to the Western-controlled DO(G)S and their figurehead, Kostunica. The record is very clear indeed about where Makara stood (about the "dictator," Milosevic) and where the IAC stood. And isn't it interesting to see the alacrity with with Emperors-Clothes accepts the "dissident" credentials and convictions of a Makara 3 yrs on, while dredging up 30-yr old COINTELPRO stuff to "prove" that Ramsey Clark is a false dissident and a U.S. "agent"? But then, hypocrisy of the rankest sort is just another arrow in the quiver of Emperor's-Clothes, along with fraud, slander, willful misrepresentation, and opportunism.
We see the zero credibilty (assuming negative values can't be assigned) of JI when we compare his railing against the Toronto Star's misrepresentation of Chris Black as "pressuring" Milosevic to accept formal legal counsel before the ICTY, to another Jared Israel totally parroting the Star's charges only days ago on this board. But then, if you're willing to steal from someone, why wouldn't you be willing to misrepresent and slander them? Anything goes when you're the Messiah in your own eyes.
Dear GC of S-La (-là ;-) - agree absolutely about the simplistic reasoning used concerning "command responsibility." That someone - anyone - from FORPRONU would be in contact with Milosevic to explore his views regarding a situation in Bosnia is hardly confirmation of "command responsibility" - and if Milosevic was somehow being approached to use his good offices to try to influence a situation in order that the risk of mistreatment or extra-legal executions of POW's or civilians would be minimised, and if he tried in any way to use his good offices to that end, this is hardly an admission - explicit or otherwise, of "command responsibility" - nor is it, in itself, proof of a massacre by a group answerable to him or anyone else. From what I can see Vergès is referring to the French National Assembly inquiry, whose rapporteurs claimed that Morillon had lengthy communications with Milosevic on the matter of Srebrenica. Whether Morillon and the French double-crossed Milosevic is of course another matter.
I think of the case of Iraq's military occupation of Kuwait, for example, and the efforts of high Cuban officials to convince high Iraqi officials of the danger that this decision would bring military and humanitarian calamity upon Iraq. That these discussions took place are a matter of record. That Cuba/Castro were trying to use their good offices to disabuse the Iraqi leadership of their policy hardly proves: a) Cuba's/Castro's "command responsibility" or their "last word" in the matter, b) Cuba's "support" for U.S. bombing of Iraq c) Cuba's endorsement of fabricated "war crimes" charges regarding Iraqi forces' conduct in Kuwait, e.g. the incubator babies fraud, d) Cuba's support for sanctions against Iraq, e) Cuba's support for Kuwait's very real, U.S.-backed economic warfare against Iraq prior to Iraq's occupation, etc. And I'm sure history is legion with other examples. NB that I'm not implying any moral/political equivalency between Iraq's occupation of Kuwait and the military and political measures of self-defense undertaken by the Bosnian Serbs. That's not where the analogy lies.
P WP
Bas Canada - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 7:56 pm
Jared Israel spends a lot of time with us all of a sudden. Doesn´t he have any other place to go? If the 9/11 was the work of the American government, as he argued a few months ago, why does he agree that Iraq should be bombed to stop this kind of terrorist acts? He sounds insane, which is a handicap.
Anthony Weissmuller
Great White North - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 8:44 pm
Anthony Weissmuller, eh? Is that PWP? Chris Black? We have imaginary people representing the bankrupt faction that has claimed control of the ICDSM to use it for Mr. Verges and Clark, making up fictions, e.g. the *lie* that I supported bombing Iraq.
p>I am going to indulge myself and answer another imaginary person, Chris Black's attack dog, PWP. A practictioner of the slanderous gutter lie. I didn't respond when he lie-smeared me; I found it demeaning answering lies from a madeup person. But I will not let this gutter trash spook smear Petar Makara.Above, this PWP wrote supporting somebody's snipe at Petar Makara, editor of www.srpska-mreza.com, who spent 10 years working to establish a record of the truth about Yugoslavia. PWP, daref to write:
"Absolutely right to point up the hypocrisy re: Makara. The record is very clear about who stood where in the fall of 2000 when the choice for Yugoslavia was between continued economic and political sovereignty under Milosevic and being fed to the Western-controlled DO(G)S and their figurehead, Kostunica. The record is very clear indeed about where Makara stood (about the "dictator," Milosevic) and where the IAC stood."
Here's the truth. Makara is tireless and an encylopedia. What Petar Makara is quoted saying against Milosevic, PWP you idiot, was not in 2000. It was in 1996. Like many Serbs he was furious with Milosevic over Bosnia. As everyone who works with Serbs knows, division is their calamity. It is a mark of my good sense that I learned from Makara even though we disagreed about Milosevic. It is a mark of his *sainthood* that he opposed the coup in 2000. In the buildup to the coup, he was one of the few well-known anti-Milosevic Serbs who *opposed* attacking Milosevic. He wrote an article entitled, "The Internal Affairs of Serbia are *Internal*!"
In it he said:
"Why should anyone in the Diaspora be going around, organizing conferences in various countries or in Washington, and so on, with the intention of mobilizing the Serbian people against the current government? By doing that they have in effect betrayed their own task of defending the Serbian people in the West. They have left their own trenches and are intentionally or unintentionally helping the enemies of their people. PM"
This was an act of great courage. Most of Petar's friends were against him doing it.
When Milosevic was kidnapped, Petar Makara wrote the best thing ever published on the kidnapping. "The Theft of the Serbs Only Treasure"Read it, it will make you weep. In it he broke with Kostunica.
As for the IAC, don't get me started. Well, just for starters, when NATO took over Kosovo I tried to get them to publish interviews, e.g. with "Ceda Prlincevic", the Jewish leader expelled from Kosovo, to show that Kosovo was being turned into a nightmare. They flat out refused. It was only after Emperor's Clothes brought out that and other interviews, such as the one with the "Women from Orahovac", and other such stuff that they began to cover the rape of Kosovo. And their leader, Ramsey Clark, publicly supported the assertion that Karadzic's forces were war criminals - and this was on CNN. As for supporting Milosevic after the coup, the minute Milosevic was kicked out, Ramsey Clark's IAC deserted him. They refused even to send one person to the March 22-23 2001 Belgrade Forum meeting commemorating the bombing. They figured Slobo was finished and they dumped him. Give me one Petar Makara instead of a hundred IACs.
Jared Israel
USA - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 8:52 pm
Oh it was in 1996, not in 2000, eh? That makes all the difference, doesn´t it? But while we are on the subject, who was behind the 9/11 attacks? George Bush?
Anthony \"Johnny\" Weissmuller
Great White North - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 8:56 pm
Sorry, I forgot, "you idiot".
Anthony Johnny Weissmuller
Great White North - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 9:05 pm
You know, you idiot, Milosevic made it part of it his "defence" that the Islamic militants were behind the terrorist attacks in New York. So how dare you, you idiot, that these attacks were organized by George Bush, you idiot?
Anthony Johnny
Great White - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 9:59 pm
Mr. Israel, does this look like the IAC "dumped" Slobodan Milosevic? Two chapters of the IAC book "Hidden Agenda" are texts of Slobodan Milosevic himself! http://www.iacenter.org/hidden_toc.htm
Dobri Svedok
Republika Srpska - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 10:32 pm
Andythks for the daily reports......but I suggest giving them more illuminating titles.......imagine someone a few years from now trying to find some specific day's summary......recall that you will eventually have a few hundred of these daily reports on your webpage........so please try to be considerate of those reasearchers in the future who will need your summaries.....:) :)
AP V
NY
NY - Wednesday August 27, 2003 at 10:38 pm
JI,No, here's the truth, you fat, lying reptile. Makara, as you know fully well, was for Kostunica in 2000, and in that same year, his personal website was running a "vote-in" or whatever about whether Milosevic should be taken out before he "gives away" more Serbian lands, and Makara favoured trying Milosevic for "treason" over Bosnia, just not handing him over to the fancy-a**, snooty-toot foreigners for trial. Why hand him over to "foreigners" when home-grown Cetniks can do the job?
And of course, the reason why you've got your XXL knickers in a knot over what I said about Chris Black is because you know that what you said about the CBC and Toronto Star and Chris Black back in 2001 directly contradicts what you said only days ago on this board, thus proving you a liar, and of course you don't like having your XXL neck being hanged with your own industrial-strength rope and maybe you should think about that the next time you post lurid headlines on your gutter website branding otherpeople "liars."
And here's some more truth, O Emperor's Lard Bucket: you know that the IAC was defending the SPS and Milosevic in the early 90's and particularly in 1996, while you were nowhere on the radar screen on Yugoslavia, being perhaps too pre-occupied failing your SlimFast courses, and while Makara along with the bourgeois opposition you so righteously denounced in 2000 - the same bourgeois opposition, backed by the U.S. State Dept, the CIA, the NED, etc - joined together in anathematizing the "dictator" Milosevic. And you know how easy it is to prove all this, don't you, O Great Internet Impresario for Yugoslavia?
And I'm not Anthony btw, and I hate to break this to you but not all us Canadiens think alike and maybe you and your lame-brained apprentice should stop your "j'accuse" 's about what other person on the board I am b/c frankly, it's getting a little embarrassing.
And thanks for bringing up the Belgrade Forum btw because among the participants there and the co-signers of the Forum document, as you know, were Palestinian movements which you and Dr. Gil-White at the I'm Ok, Zionism's Ok Clinic have recently taken to calling "nazis" and "anti-semites" and in that regard, I refer readers to this link to the SPS's statement on the murder of Ali Abu Mustafa, posted by some dude using the handle Borba100 (any idea who he is?): http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2001/msg05934.htm
And while we're still on that subject, and since you enjoy such privileged contact with President Milosevic, and have held forth so indignantly about Vergès "associating" him with causes he abhors, perhaps you could share with us what his position is on the Palestine question, and what the League of Yugoslav Communists' position was on this question, and the SPS's position.
Thanks (in advance).
P WP
Bas Canada - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 12:06 am
Insulting Petar Makara and making "fat jokes" about Jared Israel all while hiding behind a pseudonym takes a lot of courage, I have to hand it to you PW P, your bravery inspires me.I only have one thing to say to a man as great and as brave as you are, "Idi u picku materinu."
Petar Makara's website is at www.srpska-mreza.com . I encourage everybody to go there and see just what sort of a man Petar Makara is.
Mr. Makara is one of the most patriotic Serbs that I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. Visit his website, his work speaks for itself.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 9:54 am
well AW, looks like the mystery's solved about who that Borba100 dude is, as we can see by this follow-up post:Re: Serb Socialists Bitterly Condemn Murder of Abu Ali Mustafa
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Serb Socialists Bitterly Condemn Murder of Abu Ali Mustafa
From: Borba100@xxxxxxx Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 15:50:48 EDT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 9/1/01 12:43:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, A.Wosni@t-online.de writes:
<< Isn't it strange that a once ruling "Socialist" Party can't tell the difference between the 'Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine' (PFLP) whose general secretary Abu Ali Mustafa was, and the 'Democratic Front' (DFLP), a rightwing split from the PFLP then led by Nayaef Hawatmeh? - A. Holberg >>
I read A. Holberg's comment to Vladimir Krsljanin, who leads the SPS international work and who was Assistant Foreign Secretary for African and Middle Eastern Affairs, while the Socialists governed Yugoslavia. He said: "Thanks to A. Holberg for pointing out this error that the translator made in translating our statement to English. It stems from the similarity between the Serbo-Croatian words for "democratic" and "popular." Secondly, we will not be drawn into A. Holberg's attempts to label the various Palestinian groups. The SPS has fraternal, extensive and long-standing relations with all Palestinian left wing movements and parties, and all have been most supportive of the Yugoslav cause."
I should like to add this: it's a shame that A. Holberg must frame his or her correction in venomous fashion. The SPS is under fierce attack, with hundreds of members abused and jailed and its leader kidnapped to Hague's Tribunal, where he is conducting himself like a modern Spartacus. The noteworthy thing about the statement which I posted is this: it shows that the SPS has not been "turned" by the attack (a hundred times worse than anything the left ever experienced in the US) as evinced by the fact that the SPS still dares to defy the Imperialists and tell the truth.
Jared Israel www.tenc.net - Emperor's Clothes
link: http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2001/msg05951.htm
P WP
Bas Canada - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 10:05 am
And while sort of still on the subject, in an otherwise bleak Serbian political landscape, Jared can at least draw some satisfaction from these positive developments:Israel supports the DOS regime in Serbia
The state of Israel is supporting the DOS regime in Serbia since its very beginning, i.e. October 2000.
This has been revealed by the Israeli ambassador in Belgrade himself, Yoran Shani, in an interview to "Nacional" published in 2002 (see a protest letter in serbocroatian at: http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1743). On that occasion, ambassador Shani said he was proud of having personally supported DOS' coup against Milosevic.
At the beginning of 2003 the President of Yugoslavia Vojislav Kostunica decorated the ambassador:
Diaspora representatives, Israel ambassador decorated
BELGRADE, March 3 (Tanjug) - Before the end of his mandate, Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica has bestowed orders on distinguished Serbs from the diaspora, Israeli Ambassador Yoran Shani and head of UNICEF office Jean-Michel Delmotte, the Official Gazette said. Shani was decorated with the Yugoslav Star of First Degree for exceptional merits in developing and improving interstate relations, while Demotte was decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Merits of Second Degree. US citizen Mila Lazarevic - Nolan was also decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Merits of Second Degree. Chairman of the US Serb Unity Congress Miroslav Djordjevic, leader of the US Serb National Defense Slavko Panovic, the daily Amerikanski Srbobran, chairman of the US Serb National Council Dusan Ljubenko and French emigrant Zada Djurovic were decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Flag of Second Degree.
A few weeks ago, a new clear step was made by the Israeli authorities in terms of a cooperation agreement with the Zivkovic regime:
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
TEL AVIV,July 30 (Beta)-Serbia&Montenegro Defense Minister Boris Tadic said on July 30 that he had talked with senior managers of the Izreali military and aircraft industry about possible modes of cooperation and that there was a possibility of reaching an agreement. Tadic told BETA in a telephone conversation that the projects included a certain type of automatic rifle produced by Serbia&Montenegro and unmanned aerial vehicles. Tadic said that these vehicles had important software components, which could be produced in Serbia and Montenegro. He added that they had also considered the possibility of modernizing Russianmade helicopters, which are commonly used in Serbia&Montenegro and the neighboring countries. Tadic, who is on a threeday visit to Israel, said that an expert meeting had been scheduled, to discuss the possibility of reaching an agreement with the Isreali aircraft industry on one of these projects.
He said that he had talked with Izreali Prime Minister Shimon Perez about the peace process in the Middle East and the Balkans and the solutions that could be applied in both cases.
DEFENSE MINISTERS OF ISRAEL AND SERBIAMONTENEGRO SIGN COOPERATION AGREEMENT
TEL AVIV,July 31 (Beta)-Minister of Defense for SerbiaMontenegro, Boris Tadic, and the Israeli defense Minister Saul Mofaz, have signed an agreement on July 30 in Tel Aviv, about a collaboration between the two ministries.
"We've analyzed the possibilities of militaryindustrial cooperation, which was the goal of this visit, modernizing helicopters, new antiterrorism weapons, which are at a high technological level in Israel", said Tadic during a telephone conversation with Beta.
The Defense Minister for SerbiaMontenegro also said that the results of the visits to Israel will be seen after expert and work groups from the two countries meet in Belgrade in September, where a finalization of all the agreements will be made.
We don't know exactly what the abovementioned "antiterrorism weapons" are. However, the most recent "antiterrorism" actions in both countries as well as the notorious "antiterrorism" attitudes of both governments do speak for themselves.
Italo Slavo
link: And while sort of still on the subject, at least in an otherwise bleak Serbian political landscape, Jared can at least draw some satisfaction from these positive developments:
Israel supports the DOS regime in Serbia
The state of Israel is supporting the DOS regime in Serbia since its very beginning, i.e. October 2000.
This has been revealed by the Israeli ambassador in Belgrade himself, Yoran Shani, in an interview to "Nacional" published in 2002 (see a protest letter in serbocroatian at: http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/1743). On that occasion, ambassador Shani said he was proud of having personally supported DOS' coup against Milosevic.
At the beginning of 2003 the President of Yugoslavia Vojislav Kostunica decorated the ambassador:
Diaspora representatives, Israel ambassador decorated
BELGRADE, March 3 (Tanjug) - Before the end of his mandate, Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica has bestowed orders on distinguished Serbs from the diaspora, Israeli Ambassador Yoran Shani and head of UNICEF office Jean-Michel Delmotte, the Official Gazette said. Shani was decorated with the Yugoslav Star of First Degree for exceptional merits in developing and improving interstate relations, while Demotte was decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Merits of Second Degree. US citizen Mila Lazarevic - Nolan was also decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Merits of Second Degree. Chairman of the US Serb Unity Congress Miroslav Djordjevic, leader of the US Serb National Defense Slavko Panovic, the daily Amerikanski Srbobran, chairman of the US Serb National Council Dusan Ljubenko and French emigrant Zada Djurovic were decorated with the Order of Yugoslav Flag of Second Degree.
A few weeks ago, a new clear step was made by the Israeli authorities in terms of a cooperation agreement with the Zivkovic regime:
TADIC: POSSIBLE MILITARY COOPERATION WITH ISRAEL
TEL AVIV,July 30 (Beta)-Serbia&Montenegro Defense Minister Boris Tadic said on July 30 that he had talked with senior managers of the Izreali military and aircraft industry about possible modes of cooperation and that there was a possibility of reaching an agreement. Tadic told BETA in a telephone conversation that the projects included a certain type of automatic rifle produced by Serbia&Montenegro and unmanned aerial vehicles. Tadic said that these vehicles had important software components, which could be produced in Serbia and Montenegro. He added that they had also considered the possibility of modernizing Russianmade helicopters, which are commonly used in Serbia&Montenegro and the neighboring countries. Tadic, who is on a threeday visit to Israel, said that an expert meeting had been scheduled, to discuss the possibility of reaching an agreement with the Isreali aircraft industry on one of these projects.
He said that he had talked with Izreali Prime Minister Shimon Perez about the peace process in the Middle East and the Balkans and the solutions that could be applied in both cases.
DEFENSE MINISTERS OF ISRAEL AND SERBIAMONTENEGRO SIGN COOPERATION AGREEMENT
TEL AVIV,July 31 (Beta)-Minister of Defense for SerbiaMontenegro, Boris Tadic, and the Israeli defense Minister Saul Mofaz, have signed an agreement on July 30 in Tel Aviv, about a collaboration between the two ministries.
"We've analyzed the possibilities of militaryindustrial cooperation, which was the goal of this visit, modernizing helicopters, new antiterrorism weapons, which are at a high technological level in Israel", said Tadic during a telephone conversation with Beta.
The Defense Minister for SerbiaMontenegro also said that the results of the visits to Israel will be seen after expert and work groups from the two countries meet in Belgrade in September, where a finalization of all the agreements will be made.
We don't know exactly what the abovementioned "antiterrorism weapons" are. However, the most recent "antiterrorism" actions in both countries as well as the notorious "antiterrorism" attitudes of both governments do speak for themselves.
Italo Slavo
link: http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2727
P WP
Bas Canada - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 11:54 am
Here are several points concerning Erdemovic, based on the only transcript from his trial that’s been published. These points fall into two categories: those dealing with factual issues that give a glimpse into what really happened, and those covering legal issues that show the royal mess that the ICTY had managed to make out of the proceedings. Hope this’ll help thinning the thick mud surrounding the Srebrenica fact & fiction.First, a short layout: this transcript, dated 14 January 1998, covers one day at the court consisting of two sessions. In the morning, the plea bargaining was announced to have taken place, and Erdemovic pleaded guilty to have bended slightly the good customs of war (crime against humanity, a bigger charge, has been dropped as a reward). Then both counsels rehashed the case to some detail. In the afternoon, the pre-sentencing hearing was held. There was even one witness questioned (an OTP Investigator, who explained 3 mitigating factors that should reduce the punishment - this coming from the witness of the Prosecution). Then the counsels gave their ideas of how much the Accused should get (both the Prosecution and the Defence mentioned the same number - 7 years) and finally, one of the judges announced that the sentencing judgment will be delivered in due course. All the time during that day the debate was very lively, everyone took part - both sets of counsels, all judges, even the Accused - so there was plenty to learn from that one transcript.
After the guilty plea, the Presiding Judge asked the Prosecution: ‘Is there a sufficient factual basis for the crime and the Accused’s participation in it and if so, what are the facts, Mr Prosecutor?’ The facts presented were weak, blurred and uncorroborated by anything other than say-so of Erdemovic himself.
The fact is that the Prosecution submitted then and there two psychological evaluations of Erdemovic, done in June and November 1996. According to the words of the Defence counsel, ‘Erdemovic’s intent in committing the crime was significantly diminished, and here I would also like to respectfully refer to the findings of the medical commissions’. It seems that these evaluations indicate some kind of mental problem, due to which Erdemovic was not completely accountable for what he did. Not much more was elaborated, other than few curious remarks that shed some light on Erdemovic’s state of mind: ‘in the end, Erdemovic himself became a victim of his own “fellow soldier”, who gravely wounded him’, ‘he was only 23 years old in 1995’ and ‘the unavailability of other choice took him to all three warring sides’. Interesting psychological interpretation: when a civil war breaks out, the expected pattern of behaviour for a person without strong political or nationalistic opinions, instead of staying home and laying low, is to go to all three warring sides one after another, simply because you have no other choice. Nevertheless, the Defence counsel concluded that ‘his character is reformable’. Not if he keeps embellishing his story on each new trial testifying as the Prosecution witness.
Another point was that the OTP apparently went to the Pilica farm to actually check what Erdemovic told them (that the bodies of those killed that day were buried there), so they carried out an exhumation at the site. According to the words of the Prosecutor Niemann, ‘Not all of the victims were uncovered, but it would seem that a large number of them may have been removed.’ And that’s all about the inquiry there is. Interesting piece of doubletalk: never said exactly how many were uncovered, nor gave the list of their names, nor their post mortem, only provided us with that innuendo about a large number that may have been removed. ‘It would seem’? Based on what? So much for the precise forensic investigation that you rightfully invoke all the time, Godfred.
The Prosecution mentioned that there was apparently another alleged smaller massacre that same day, at a building in Pilica, where Erdemovic refused to participate, but only watched the killings from a nearby café. Evidence for that? None other than the words of Erdemovic, again.
The “facts” that the Judge wanted from the Prosecutor boiled to that same sparse wording from the Indictment when describing the “event”. No witnesses other than Erdemovic himself appeared in the proceedings during these 2 years (there were only 2 Defence witnesses, Witness X and Witness Y, but they spoke only in general praise of the Erdemovic’s character), no investigations other than that visit to the site when unsatisfactory exhumations were done, no forensic reports were submitted into evidence.
But, the Prosecutor has revealed certain interesting circumstances which brought Erdemovic to The Hague. Requesting leniency for his opponent’s client, the Prosecutor stated as a mitigating factor that ‘he was already in the process of coming to The Hague before he was arrested by officials in the FRY’. And what was that process? Erdemovic contacted a certain unnamed French journalist (ah, the French again!). These moves uncovered his tracks to the authorities, so he got arrested.
The OTP Investigator Ruez (another Frenchman, would you believe, who also happens to be the OTP team leader for the whole Srebrenica investigation) offered some background facts while he testified as to why Erdemovic should be shown more leniency. He was also vigorously questioned by all judges, which provided additional details. For instance, Ruez said [speaking of Erdemovic] that ‘before his first contact with the French journalist we did not know about him’. Ruez proceeded: ‘At that time there was no office of ICTY in Belgrade, therefore he had to contact several of our organizations and press people…these actions led to his arrest by the YU authorities’. Interesting usage of the pronoun ‘our’. Did Ruez mean French organizations as well as French journalists? Or did he mean security & intelligence organizations (Ruez is temporarily in the OTP and permanently in the French Police). Small wonder Erdemovic aroused suspicion and got arrested while he was contacting ‘our organisations’ and journalists. Other 7 from his group had already contacted whom they were supposed to contact and left the country.
Ruez also claimed that Erdemovic told his story from noble motives, ‘his obvious motivation is not to please the OTP to get some weakening of his possible punishment’, ‘he wants the truth to be known’. Pity that later on in his testimony Ruez explained a simpler, more probable motive: ‘he started to quarrel with other members of his unit… they decided to kill him…to get rid of him…he got shot…he had to escape and the best escape he could have at that time was to come and testify to the Tribunal’. Better in jail for a few years and then witness protection programme, than dead.
Ruez also stumbled over the issue of duress: he claimed that Erdemovic acted under duress, that his life and the life of his wife and child were in danger. Judge Shahabuddeen wanted to know how come this claim of duress pops up only now, but was missing in his previous statements. You know how Ruez acquitted himself? By claiming he never mentioned duress before simply because he was never asked about that! And now, when the Judge asked him about his personal impressions of the state of mind of the Accused, he came up with the duress. No wonder all those witnesses keep answering ‘nobody asked me that’, they have learned it from the OTP.
Another small thing: if Erdemovic acted under duress at that farm and dared not to oppose, how come that he did dare to oppose the participation in that second alleged massacre of that same day? According to the Prosecution, he claimed that he flatly refused to kill another smaller group of people at another place in the afternoon, but instead he sat down at the café and watched the shooting instead. His story branches out so wildly that it’s difficult to make all those sprouts under control.
Now, to legalia: what first came to my attention was how Judge Mumba invoked the laws and practices of the former Yugoslavia, by saying to Erdemovic: ‘We take into account the sentencing practices of the courts of the former Yugoslavia’. The Yugoslav laws were invoked twice by the Prosecutor: ‘the Trial Chamber should take into account the general practice regarding prison sentences in the courts of the former Yugoslavia’ and ‘it is worth noting that in the former Yugoslavia, this type of crime would be punishable by a term of imprisonment between 5 and 20 years’. Also, the Defence counsel spoke of his study of the Supreme Court of Yugoslavia, as well as other High Courts in the republics of the former Yugoslavia’, submitted to the Chamber. Interesting how the ICTY didn’t take into account nor found worth noting the Yugoslav laws when Milosevic had been kidnapped and shipped to The Hague, in contravention to two Constitutions and several laws.
The plea bargaining, according to my Oxford Dictionary of Law, is an agreement between the prosecution and the defence by which the accused changes his plea from not guilty to guilty in return for an offer etc. etc. But, there’s a trouble with the Erdemovic case: he has never changed his plea because he has never pleaded not guilty in the first place. According to the Prosecutor, ‘shortly after Mr Erdemovic came to The Hague, he voluntarily confessed to his crimes’. What’s more, he officially pleaded guilty on 8 separate occasions, according to the words of his Defence counsel: ‘Today, the Accused Erdemovic pleaded, and I have counted these pleas, because I was present at all of them, it is the eighth time, and this time he pleaded guilty for the war crime.’ What does this mean? There was no need for any plea bargaining, the guy has never pleaded not guilty, he confessed at once and pleaded guilty many times. The ICTY obviously wanted to profit from this mixed up man to the fullest, so they took 2 whole years to cook up the plea bargain that would be most convenient for them, that would include all the necessary testifying against Gen. Krstic. Milosevic, Karadzic and Mladic. Hell, they most probably wrote up all those testimonies for him. Yet, for all that time they were unable to establish any factual basis of the Erdemovic story, but who cares for that?
ICTY has made a real mess of the case in legal sense and I believe that’s the reason for not publishing all other transcripts.
Dan B., thanks for providing the link for the CNN article dtd 28 Nov. 1996, announcing that the sentencing of Erdemovic was then imminent (he got 10 years that time and after the abovementioned transcript it was cut down to 5). Cute that the Defence at that time wanted him acquitted, arguing that his confession alone provided insufficient evidence. But they quickly came to their senses from noble motives of saving some other key ICTY cases and agreed that sufficient evidence was missing in action. And cute that the CNN article has photographs of Erdemovic; when he testified few days ago his image was blurred and his voice distorted. Whoever wants to find him, knows already what he looks like, or else can consult the net.
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 11:56 am
Del Ponte's Out of Africa
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 12:34 pm
Normally legal systems, criminal law and cases are based on the conclusive and undeniable evidence a crime has been committed. A judge or a court at one moment or another sees the evidence, forensic and otherwise presented by the prosecution, evidence collected by the police and the investigating bodies involved. Once there is a crime some one can be suspected of having it perpetrated. Simple logic, wouldn't you think?
Two names come to mind Racak and Srebrenica. At Racak the bodies, the dead people are there in the gully, the press photographed them, etc., but the forensic work is inconclusive, erratic, unprofessional, the evidence is not safely guarded, tainted, in a word unacceptable to any criminal court worth its name. Yet at the ICTY the prosecutor is allowed to proceed presenting its case.
The second case Srebrenica is even less real, the victims are not there, not visible, not palpable, There is only a claim, a figure 7,000 or 7,5000 or 8,000 take your pick! The forensic dossier is no where to be seen. Some have used, not for the first time mind you, the act of indictment as evidence the crime it exists. Again the troika of legal cretins are passively at the mercy of the prosecution and let themselves being treated as the spineless bastard they really are.
Kofi Anna and the UNO Security Council are pleased with Carla del Ponte, pleased with her performance with Yugoslavia since at least nobody has spilled the beans yet. In Africa, aha mama Africa is not the Swiss Alps and Carla must have stepped in some real elephant gavno and she has to be replaced by an African prosecutor, is Schwarzeneger African enough?
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 12:53 pm
Today's "trial" report is avaliable!http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg082803.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 3:03 pm
"She is a bit unhappy with the split,but it's something she accepts as it is a decision of the Security Council". BULL SHIT¡¡ you had no choice but to stick to the agenda given to you "Madame" Del Ponte, don't you see you're as big a loser as the U.N. building itself? . Arrividerci cara Carla .
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 3:40 pm
She did a good job against the mafia in Italy at least.
Agrateful Italian
Italy - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 3:50 pm
Press Conference of Federal Information Minister Goran Matic Massacre Near Srebrenica was Staged by French and Muslim Agents by M.Galovic
Politika, Belgrade, FR Yugoslavia, February 12 2000 What happened before the slaughter of about 1,200 Muslims, which took place on July 20 1995 at the farm "Pilice"? Meetings of intelligence agents in Zvornik, Tuzla and Vlasenica. Executioners, among whom were Croats, Muslims, Slovenes and Serbs, were paid two million German Marks. Suspicious behavior of the Dutch battalion. The group "Pauk" [spider] abducted Stevo Todorovic in Yugoslavia and handed him over to the Hague. About the murder of the Defense Minister, Pavle Bulatovic. Media, the opposition, and Albright The massacre of about 1,200 Muslims, which took place on July 20 1995 at the farm "Pilice" near Srebrenica, was staged by the French and Muslim intelligence services. Federal Information Minister Goran Matic emphasized at yesterday's press conference that there is evidence for these claims. This crime was committed by recruiting the locals, and the evidence is based on the statements of the participants in the spy affair "Pauk".
"The solving of the crime near Srebrenica is our debt to the truth," emphasized Matic.
This massacre, according to Matic, was used for huge media manipulation, with the goal of demonization of the Serb side and its top political and military leaders. "For example, that summer the TV show 'Good Morning America' produced by ABC TV broadcast pictures of 'Muslim refugees from Srebrenica' clambering through snow in the middle of July," Matic gave an example.
Multiethnic Gang "In order to find the truth it is necessary to discover who prepared and who committed the crime, what was the purpose of staging of the crime, and how was that crime abused by the Hague Tribunal. The same participants organized similar crimes in other places, especially during the NATO aggression against FR Yugoslavia," said the Federal Information Minister. First indications that the massacre near Srebrenica was carried out by the Western intelligence services and extremists surrounding Alija Izetbegovic surfaced immediately after the crime. Specifically, said Matic, Jugoslav Petrusic and Milorad Pelemis (group "Pauk") are responsible for the crime, on behalf of the French intelligence service, as well as General Morillion, who returned because of this to Bosnia-Hercegovina where General Jeanvier was in charge of the UN troops, agent of the Sarajevo government Alija Delimustafic and the commander of Srebrenica Naser Oric.
Their meetings took place during 1994 and 1995 in Vidikovac near Zvornik, in a military base in Tuzla and in Vlasenica. The last meeting took place in Zvornik in July 1995, in the house of the former mayor, a Muslim, and the security for the meeting was provided by Milan Jovovic. The tactical situation around Srebrenica was worked out on a British map, which was found on Milorad Pelemis during the investigation in connection with the affair "Pauk".
"At that meeting, it was agreed that Srebrenica would surrender without fighting, that Naser Oric would leave the town, and that U.N. forces would also withdraw. It was agreed that the members of the Tenth Commando Unit carry out the massacre, for which they were promised DM2 million," explained Matic.
He reminded journalists of the suit filed by Srebrenica Muslims against the Netherlands, whose soldiers withdrew, allowing the massacre of the Muslims, as had been planned in advance.
Serbs are blamed for the massacre, although it was committed by a multiethnic gang, whose members were Croats, Muslims, Slovenes, and several Serbs. Matic charged Milorad Pelemis, former special forces policemen Franc Kos and Zijad Zigic, also known as Zivko Micic, with murder. Drazen Erdemovic, who is supposed to testify against Karadzic and Mladic in the Hague, was with them.
Murderers Controlled by the West "The Hague needed him for some other things, so that he was sentenced to only four years in prison for the murder of 120 people, while his wife and the child were moved to the Netherlands. On the other hand, Goran Jelisic, a Serb, was sentenced for 12 murders to 40 years in prison. However, we'll discuss doubtful criteria of that Tribunal on another occasion," said Matic. He said that Milorad Pelemis, mentioned in numerous Hague indictments, has without problems obtained a Schengen visa and then fought for the French in Zaire.
"The West keeps under its control murderers and criminals who serve its interests. What is the West offering us? Democracy of paid murderers?" wondered Matic, emphasizing that exactly the case of Milorad Pelemis proves a lot.
Naser Oric himself confirmed in a letter the existence of a conspiracy with the goal to frame Serbs for a massacre near Srebrenica. In a memorandum to Alija Izetbegovic he says that he did not agree with the plan to surrender Srebrenica, regardless of all the consequences, but that he did take the money promised for the implementation of that plan at the Yellow Bridge near Bratunac.
Goran Matic publicized another previously unknown detail, related to the activities of the group "Pauk" in Yugoslavia.
"When the Hague prisoner Stevo Todorovic saw footage from one of our first press conferences on the Dutch TV he recognized Jugoslav Petrusic. He exclaimed: 'That is the man who arrested me!' Petrusic, Rade Petrovic and Branko Vlaco kidnapped Todorovic in Yugoslavia and took him to Bosnia," said the Federal Information Minister, emphasizing that the Hague Tribunal uses criminals to arrest "unsuitable" individuals.
The goals of the French agents, according to Matic, were to enable president Chirac to convince the British to support a more radical attitude towards the Serbs and to finish the war in Bosnia by a NATO entry to that country. That would justify the staging of the massacre near Srebrenica, for which the Serb side was supposed to take blame in order to condemn general Mladic and the leadership of the Republic of Srpska.
Dan B
Canada - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 6:10 pm
I thought that they found only 1,800 bodies, 1/3 of these were ABiH Soldiers "killled in a fair fight" and the rest (about 1,200) were found in and around villages where Nasir Oric's execution squads operatedAt face value therefore Erdormovic's story of his 40 man platoon killing 1,200 POW's contradicts the forensic evidence.
AP V
NY
NY - Thursday August 28, 2003 at 9:12 pm
Dear Agrateful ItalianI do not believe that you are one tenth of an Italian.
Whatever the case could be I will be on your side if you advocated a fair trial for her.
ivko rig
it