 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
- Friday February 07, 2003 at 12:27 am
Kosovo is going to get its independence, that is for sure.Rita..........are you advocating violating international law and the willful flouting of UN Security Council mandates ?
As you well know, the President and Secretary of State take such matters very seriously
AP V
NY
NY - Friday February 07, 2003 at 2:06 am
Everobody,Please do not talk to this so-called "Rita" person.
"Rita" is a fraud. She isn't a journalist. Nobody believes that she writes for some NY journal (which she conveniently refuses to identify) and that they send her to exotic places like Cyprus and Belgrade to write her stories. She dosen't even tell the truth about her own name. She has given us 2 different last names in the last week.
Please just ignore her. She is a waste of your time. She lies, she's a racist, and she's a moron. She has no credibility and so there is no need for you to to defend yourself to her.
Back to the topic at hand is this letter from Milan Martic that the Western media thinks is so damning.
First of all it is only a letter asking Milosevic for help. So my response is: Milan Martic asked for help, SO WHAT? That proves nothing. You can ask anybody for anything.
Secondly, we know that Martic is in detention at the Tribunal (as a part of the "joint criminal enterprise") waiting for his trial to begin.
I would like to ask the people here who might know something about him if they think that he would testify against Milosevic.
Although, if he did testify he would be putting the noose around his own neck. He couldn't testify against Milosevic without pleading guilty himself. But the tribunal might offer him a deal.
I am churious what does everybody here think.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday February 07, 2003 at 2:53 am
Andy, why do you think she is not a journalist. It takes a journalist to be that kind a conniving bastard. Don't you have a little too idealized picture of journalists? Check the big American newspapers. Now they are trying to fit us into the mold, if not theirs, then someone else's.We are breaking the big media, when they try to break us. Let's see how it works. Here we see another instrument of spin: "If you don't tell me what I want to hear, you'll make some interesting reading in my next article". It is fascinating to see for oneself how the machine really works.
Let me paraphrase the post a bit more:
"I know that you know that I am lying, so I won't reveal who pays me, not to discredit my employer, except that no-one pays me, it is just you corrupt people imagining things, which makes some interesting reading in my next article. For instance, I know that you know that my humanitarianism is one of those 'bullshit stories,' but look who's calling the shots. I work for a NY Journal, I am in Cyprus (good luck Cyprus), and when I say the Balkans story is over, then it is over. It is a pity it went so bad for Bosnia, no matter how hard we tried to mess things up there. In fact we know Milosevic would be acquitted, because we are caught at our lies, but that is why we make sure the trial gets no publicity, which we have the right to do, because we have the power to decide who the Serbs deserve."
Jari Nousiainen
Finland - Friday February 07, 2003 at 3:39 am
One mistake was made though. The US is not the world we are living in, although that statement explains how someone could choose the side of the Americans. That also explains how the expression "international community" got it life. My plan for using the Chinese courts may seem megalomaniac, but my point is that there is some hope out there, if the potential could be harnassed. Yes, we can all hear what the US would say: "Now those reds are after our politicians. To arms, all who love the free world!" I guess the Islamic militancy would suddenly become a non-issue (at least if the journalists say so).But as long as this is a matter of justice, the Chinese courts are an option. Don't tell me the "free world" is free of any obligations it might have. Is that now how the "free world" is defined?
Don't tell me the courts in the free world haven't had the chance to be fair. They have had so many chances it is ridiculous. The Dutch courts have developed such a tactic for throwing politically incorrect court cases out that one must almost pity them, like the decision made by the district court of The Hague, which suggested that Milosevic should request provision release by making a complaint to the "Commanding Officer".
As we now see, the catchword is racism, followed by nationalism and humanitarianism. Well, we know who is an American nationalist (the US is the world we live in) and an anti-Slav racist (come on, start by the Serbs, then expand it to the Macedonians). However, this is one of those reasons (though I didn't think of it before) why the Balkans cleaning should be headed by Mandela. Who is going to accuse him of racism?
Indeed, the Balkans Forum network has the advantage of having "the greatest statesman in the world" represented in its ranks (through the ANC) as well as the two Hitlers, Milosevic and Saddam (Mandela may soon join them if he continues making that sort of "politically disastrous" comments criticizing Bush). Maybe that makes it a bit harder for Red China to be dismissed as a red threat. But a concerted effort by the Belgrade Forum would be needed. If it doesn't do something, it is destined to stay as dead as it is now.
I was searching the JURIST website for any news on the legal steps taken after the bombing of the Chinese embassy. Nothing. But the point is this. The bombing was a war crime. According to the ICTY Statute, the perpetrator of the war crime should be punished. If he is not, then the superior of the perpetrator bears the responsibility together with him.
But wait a minute. What would be the excuse for not punishing the perpetrator? We have seen it in the Dutch courts: the court follows slavishly the statements made by the government to the point of absurdity. On the other hand, I am not sure how Milosevic is supposed not to have punished the perpetrators, especially when the Serb courts did hand down war crimes sentences.
But a particularly interesting method of silencing the courts is paying money, which is what the Americans are good at. For instance, the CIA agent reportedly sued the state for bombing the Chinese embassy. What happened? Did the state pay him to shut up, as the Americans did to the military after the Krajina operations? Did the Americans have an out-of-court settlement with the Chinese (which is by definition kept secret)? Aha, but such a settlement is not what the ICTY Statute calls for. The Statute cries for punishment. No-one can doubt what that means (at least if it is not applied to the Americans): that means a criminal conviction, so no matter how much money you pay, the criminal conviction is still needed. And that has not happened.
There is one difference between the bombing of Serbia and the bombing of Iraq, and it doesn't reflect favourably on the bombing of Serbia, believe it or not. After the 9/11 attack, Article 5 of the Nato Charter was invoked (collective defense). I guess the Iraqi campaign is being fitted into that framework. But would that make of the bombing of Serbia? If it wasn't defense, what was it? Aggression? Probably. But whatever it was, it was a violation of the Nato Charter.
Maybe it should not be surprising that the ICTY prosecution has become expert at bending the ICTY Statute.
J N
Finland - Friday February 07, 2003 at 4:25 am
Andy, we know the prosecution has faked tapes. It has misquoted Milosevic's Kosovo Polje speech. As Pera said, the prosecution is just begging for a mistrial. It is good, though, that somebody still makes noise about a letter from Martic.Well, Martic wouldn't have made the request to Milosevic to help him, if Milosevic hadn't had some control over the troops. How much, that is the question. If someone requests Kofi Annan to send peace-keepers to some region, is Annan responsible for the crimes these troops may commit? Well, yes, he might, if no action is taken. So the letter says nothing of the kind of responsibility he might have.
And you are right, anybody can ask anybody for anything. This is circumstantial evidence. However, as we know, anything goes in this tribunal, including hearsay, which we all know perfectly well, according to May.
But I must say I am still having doubts about the claims that Milosevic had no control over the troops. To be more precise, the French involvement in Srebrenica doesn't seem to fit in. Milosevic seems to be denying he had any part in the war, by shifting the blame on the French, and that seems a bit too thick to me. So I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he might have had some control in Krajina too.
But such responsibility - political or whatever you would like to call it - doesn't mean that the person bears individual criminal responsibility. In order to establish that, you must show that the defendant neglected one of two things: preventing war crimes, or punishing the perpetrators aftewards. And the Martic letter, which was called "a trump card" by B92, proves absolutely nothing! Sure, the prosecution may be building a case against Milosevic, but that is what they have been saying all along, and I would like to remind them that it is going to be Milosevic's turn in about three months.
Let us remember the context. Milosevic's individual criminal responsibility is almost non-existent even withing the parameters set by the prosecution. But however much Slobo may have screwed up, that shouldn't excuse the much bigger crimes committed by the other sides of the conflict. And by no means should this be the reason to deny the bombing victims reparation.
J N
Finland - Friday February 07, 2003 at 6:00 am
I had problems with my ISP yesterday, plus the usual close (I beg you pardon, private) sessions and trying to keep awake while prosecutor Nice (NATO) conducts his examination, in his low voice, secretive way which the general did not like much.
I had the impression, as impressions is about all one can have here really, the general was under subpoena to testify, he did not sound too willingly at all, and a bit hostile to Nice (NATO). Judge May (NATO) had suppressed some of the evidence agreeing with Mr. Kay (NATO-BUT NOT MI) who basically said the same rule applied to Mr. Milosevic shall applied to the prosecutor: "Agreed" joyfully May (NATO) concluded and a whole tab was removed. Irrelevant perhaps but sweet nevertheless. Robinson (COLONIAL) in his scholarly tone of voice and choice of words asked some clarifications. And Kwon (OCCUPIED-NOT FOR MUCH LONGER) had questions as well. But I have to say, for the most part, my ISP not withstanding nothing made much sense. There was not trial today as it is part of the giving a rest to the accuse health policy every two weeks to have a four day weekend.
The declarations by North Korea in regard no sitting idle while the US begins a military build up lead me to check the Armistice Terms and as I suspected this document spells out the number of foreign troops to be stationed in Korea, 35,000 to be exact. If one more soldier arrives another one from the deployment has to leave and from the same port of entry, the document says. So, the hanky-panky has started and now the statement of Rumsfeld regarding fitting two conflicts at the same time makes sense.
Going to war against Yugoslavia, a.k.a. humanitarian bombing, it was claimed was so urgent, that it would have been counter productive to debate, democratically as it should, in the well meaning free world, for days on end at the UNO SC and have the humanitarianintervention put to a vote. The implication being some of the SC members were not sensitive to humanitarian issues to approve such a humane way of intervening. The decision not emanating from the UN-SC was of course illegal and contrary to the NATO Charter, but it was decided to be very justified by the urgent nature of the call to be humanitarian. Even Thomas de Aquinas was found wrong in his findings centuries ago that a just war can only be approved by the highest moral authorities after meeting some other very detailed criteria, none of which NATO and her heavy handed generals could imagine in their wildest dreams.But as this Rita said: It is Over in The Balkans.
For now.
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 6:49 am
The halo is evaporatingTrust-me Tony was the subject of the BBC Five Live chat show again this morning as the BBC tried to augment his spin of the previous evening: where he went into overdrive on his stock-in-trade ‘Portrayal of Sincerity’.
How can anyone who the lied to the British people about nonexistent Rape Camps, Death Camps and Tens of thousands of slaughtered Kosovars in Kosovo retain any credibility? His ‘Portrayal of Sincerity’ is a big act that is now tainted beyond recovery.
Even so ‘Dictator’ Blair’s BBC propaganda machine worked overtime this morning to restore the act. Although opinion polls show that the vast majority of British people are against the war unless sanctioned by a second UN resolution the producers selected callers in the opposite ratio.
What is the connection between the Blair government and al-Qaeda: What were the SAS doing training KLA terrorists, including Mujahedin and al-Qaeda, in Kosovo: What are hundreds if not thousands of al-Qaeda trained operatives doing in Britain?
Until these questions are answered honestlyby Blair he has no credibility in his war against global terror.
A ‘war’ that can only be won by honest warriors.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Friday February 07, 2003 at 6:55 am
Yes, I forgot to comment on the newspeak term "humanitarianism". Whatever it means, you can be sure we all lack it. But then you think of humanitarianism, think of the humanitarian intervention. And take the advice, next time you see a humanitarian cluster bomb near you, take a deep breath and think of Dharma.I mean, this is sick. It is bad enough for someone to go on bragging that he or she is involved in the most objective bullshit paper in New York, but it is even worse to justify anti-Slav racism, American nationalism and the military expansion in the name of humanitarianism.
Let's start guessing at the source: New York Times? I knew there was something wrotten in New York, but this takes the biscuit.
And to come back to Ann-Marie's question: why would somebody brag about things like that? I guess people just want to brag, that's all (whether or not Kay is MI).
Jari Nousiainen
Finland - Friday February 07, 2003 at 7:46 am
Andy, I disagree. Morons like Rita should not be left unchecked and running loose. While normal people are ignoring such personas, they are using opportunity and they can be dangerous. We saw to many times trough out history what unchecked morons can do (like Hitler when moderate politicians in Germany thought that he is just a loud mouth without teeth and that he will go away). God knows we "Balkan people" know what can happen if political apathy settles in. So regardless of our own political views (if we have them or not) we should be loud in pursuing truth and fighting morons like Rite. Remember even they can get organized - just look at ICTY and Karla.
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Friday February 07, 2003 at 8:11 am
If I might say so, ANY negative response to people like Rita merely debases the quality of this excellent forum.Suffice it to say no comment is required in any event as Rita speaks so eloquently for herself in the first place. I certainly couldn't do her equal justice no matter what comment I made about her.
What a sad waste of space!
David
Australia - Friday February 07, 2003 at 10:42 am
Re: Matric LetterAgain the Prosecution comes up with more evidence which supports the defense. The pleading tone of the Martic letter strongly suggests that neither Milosevic nor the Yugoslav government were lending support to the RSK.
People don't send letters begging for support if they are recieving it.
So far it has been the Prosection's turn at bat.In the last 12 months of Tribunal hearings, the Prosecution has (unwittingly) revealed much new information supporting the Yugoslav position and undermining the HumWarrior mythology.
The defense hasn't even had a chance yet to present its case.
AP V
NY
NY - Friday February 07, 2003 at 11:06 am
I saw a few minute of Norman Solomon on Cspan this AM and he makes a lot of sense. I am not sure what all of the callers had to say but what I did hear was unbelievable.The callers believe Iraq was responsible for the World Trade Center. Bush and the hero convinced them.
You see it will take a long time to undo the harm done to the Serbs by the propaganda.
Most people believe in their government.and in the case of iraq, the tax cut helped a lot!
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 11:53 am
The AP reporting from Zagreb on Feb. 7Croatia honoring their newly crowned handball world championship was having a love fest with their Nazi past.
Fok singer, Marko Perkovic Thomson, shouted a slogan used by Croatian Nazi forces to which the Croatian fans responded by the dozens with their ever loving Nazi salutes.
Well folks do not think that a good deed goes unappreciated. These fans know who was responsible for their illegitimate independence from the sovereign state of Yugoslavia.
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 12:12 pm
Propaganda creates myths. Remember the Belgian babies at the tip of the Kaiser bayonets. America was finally moved to go and join the Great War.
Then in 1991 the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador whom had never been in Kuwait told the US Senate, tears on her cheeks, how the Iraqi soldiers had stolen the baby incubators to Baghdad after tossing the babies on the floor. This, one has to believed fired the US masses to fight for freedom and democracy.
This construction costed the Kuwaiti government $9m paid to a NY PR firm which of course made the "story" available and enriched to all media outlets. It is legal, if legality was so important, to plant a story overseas, pick-up as factualand introduced in the media US mainstream until it effect is being felt, people drop dead of boredom, or is proven so ridiculous that is quickly forgotten.
Oh, Orwell where are you!
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 1:48 pm
AP V, I agree with you but I think that it is worse:People do not bag for arms from their commander in chief if they are ordered and inspired by him to go into a battle. They do not ask him to exercise his influence but to issue an order. The point that prosecution is making is that Mr. Milosevic is the creator and commander of the whole enterprise, and if this was true then he would have provided all the means necessary for the enterprise to proceed without problems not wait for his subordinates to bag for his help.
Pera Bora
Ottawa
Canada - Friday February 07, 2003 at 2:52 pm
Rita,congratulations on your overnight marriage. Would we have discovered this if not for one of us having access to Lexis-Nexis? I hope you enjoyed your poke at the beehive for professional purposes. I notice that your professional analysis that we all seem to be Slobo's people and in need of humanity. Clearly reading is not your forte and you appear to have settled on the cliched stereotypes. Sincerety indeed.
Alexei Gorbulski
Brussels
Soviet Socialist Republic of Belgium! ;) - Friday February 07, 2003 at 3:10 pm
Regarding a discussion about the poster by the name Rita Rita, I am puzzled by the following:I all the discussion Forums which are discussing former Yugoslavia or the trial of Slobodan Milosevic I have yet to encounter a rational opponent be it a Croatian or American.
Every and each of these individuals exhibited an incomprehensible racist bias against the Serbs, never able to engage in a normal discussion. Their aim was to be provocative and engage in the slur of insults.
I am puzzled by this. Is there anybody out there capable to engage protagonists on this forum in the intelligent debate?
D. Jovanovic
USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 6:33 pm
More fraud, this time Javier Solana is the forger:
Yugoslavia Dissolved? Unconstitutional Change of Constitution in the New World (Dis)Order
By Jela Jovanovic [Posted on 6 February 2003]
Let us put aside for the moment the contents of the so-called Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro. It proclaims a 'state community' that nowhere exists because no state could possibly function based on its principles.
Apart from that, it is necessary to draw the attention of the domestic and international public and relevant institutions to the unconstitutional way this act was forced through the Serbian Parliament.
Contrary to the Constitution of Serbia, which stipulates that a Constitutional change requires a 2/3 Parliamentary majority, the deputies supporting Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic and his Democratic Party proclaimed that a simple majority was sufficient to accept this Charter *dissolving Yugoslavia*.
As if that was not sufficiently illegal, Parliamentary Chairperson Natasa Micic arbitrarily ruled that two *former* delegates - Goran Vesic, who resigned in June 2002 and Stevan Lilic, whose resignation was verified by Parliament, would be counted among the 130 voting for the Charter.
And more: at a 30 January Press Conference, Dr. Vojisla Seselj, president of the Serbian Radical Party, revealed the names of ten people who voted *although they are not deputies*.
The non-deputy voters are: Aleksandra Joksimovic, Jozef Kasa, Nebojsa Lekovic, Petar Misic, Gorica Mojovic, Visnja Nezic, Branisla Pomoriski, Zivica Predojev, Alan Selimovic and Goran Ciric.
How could a viable state be founded through such violation of the law?
It is urgent that the Constitutional Court annuls the results of this latest gangsterism.
Jela Jovanovic art historian Yugoslavia
For fair use only.
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Friday February 07, 2003 at 6:48 pm
A little historical perspective;
It is almost universally admitted that this war is an imperialist war. In most cases, however, this term is distorted, or applied to one side, or else a loophole is left for the assertion that this war may, after all, be bourgeois-progressive, and of significance to the national-liberation movement. Imperialism is the highest stage in the development of capitalism, reached only in the twentieth century. Capitalism now finds that the old national states, without whose formation it could not have overthrown feudalism, are too cramped for it. Capitalism has developed concentration to such a degree that entire branches of industry are controlled by syndicates, trusts and associations of capitalist multimillionaires and almost the entire globe has been divided up among the "lords of capital" either in the form of colonies, or by entangling other countries in thousands of threads of financial exploitation. Free trade and competition have been superseded by a striving towards monopolies, the seizure of territory for the investment of capital and as sources of raw materials, and so on. From the liberator of nations, which it was in the struggle against feudalism, capitalism in its imperialist stage has turned into the greatest oppressor of nations. Formerly progressive, capitalism has become reactionary; it has developed the forces of production to such a degree that mankind is faced with the alternative of adopting socialism or of experiencing years and even decades of armed struggle between the "Great" Powers for the artificial preservation of capitalism by means of colonies, monopolies, privileges and national oppression of every kind.
Please diseminate at will.from Socialism and War, Lenin, July 1915
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 12:31 am
It seems that the prosecutors and this witness they got didn't do their homework.This letter that Milan Martic sent to Milosevic was dated June 9, 1993! The date here is important because Yugoslavia didn't have a federal president on June 9, 1993.
On May 31, 1993 Dobrica Cosic was removed from the office of Yugoslav President by the Yugoslav Parliament. Yugoslavia was without a president until Zoran Lilic assumed office on June 25, 1993. There was no Yugoslav president on June 9, 1993.
This is important because Aleksander Vasiljevic said that "It would be natural if Mr. Martic would in relation to the problems he had in his communications with the Army of Yugoslavia address the president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia who is in charge of commanding the Army of Yugoslavia.
If he addresses the person he did address at that time he was just one of the members of the supreme defense council of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia so it would be natural for this to be sent to the other member of the Supreme Defence Council of Yugoslavia. So, He is actually addressing here the person he believes has factual influence and can issue orders through the general staff for granting the equipment Martic's requestes."
The problem with this course of action for Martic would obviously be that on June 9 there was no President of the FRY for him to address his concerns to.
The letter dosen't ask Milosevic to issue an order. The letter asks him to use his position to "exert pressure" on the general staff of the army. If Martic thought that Milosevic was actually the commander of the Army he would have asked him to issue an order, not to merely put pressure on the Army.
It is perfectly logical that Martic would ask the president of Serbia for help given the fact that there was no president of Yugoslavia to ask.
Who else could Martic ask?
This letter proves nothing against Milosevic. The letter only proves that the prosecutor and the witness are stupid. Since they expect that it would be logical for Milan Martic to ask for help from somebody who didn't even exist at the time!
Then again earlier in the day Nice had a document he said was taken in 1990 that was constantly referring to events that it said took place in 1991. Nice attributed the constant mention of 1991 throughout the 1990 document to mis-translation.
I could see how that could happen. In Serbian 1990 is written as "1990," but in English 1990 is written as "1990." I can see how a translator could repeatedly mistranslate a Serbian "1990" into an English "1991."
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 4:36 am
What the prosecution has managed to prove so far is that Milosevic addressed some other Serb politician on a first-name basis. That he got letters from other Serb politicians. That he facilitated meetings with Serb politicians.This adds to a war crime only if you assume the existence of a war crime in advance. Look at it! The prosecution has proved Milosevic had Serb buddies. If the prosecution has managed to prove anything else, let us here it.
On the other hand, the material surfacing from the prosecution's case really incriminates the enemies of the JNA, as AP V has pointed out in his post on February 5: like the order by Izetbegovic to attack the JNA, and multiple attacks by Nato on the Kosovar refugees. This trial takes away the last excuse for anyone to condemn (legally) Milosevic and stay sane at the same time.
And that is why discussions like this are so annoying to the opinion-makers. Sure, the Balkans story may be over, but this discussion isn't. And it is the Milosevic trial that is the reason for continuing discussions like this. The strategy of the big media just to keep silent isn't working. As long as the trial is going on, the more the media keep silent, and the louder the people will hear us. The ratio must be discouraging to the media. For the two "objective" voices we recently heard, we got contributions from three new persons opposing them. That is like a vote of no-confidence in the mainstream media.
The news has to be kept so simple even the journalists can understand it. This is very important. Since there is no proof to substantiate the charges, the media have to operate in round figures, so that the information comes out the same from all the major outlets. The figure 7,000 is easier to remember than 1,200, which someone might confuse with 12,000. Such a mix-up must be eliminated.
And once the journalists run out of news, beca because there isn't any, they provoke the news themselves. The big media makes no secret of its American imperialist bias and its anti-Slav racism, but the minute a government, like the Yugoslav government in this case, starts denying them visas, to protect public security, the hounddogs from the press attack that government and accuse it of suppressing the freedom of the press.
Then the press appeals to their special position in another way too. We didn't see what they saw, because we were not there. True. That means one of two things: 1) either we should shut up because we don't know the facts, or 2) what they say they saw never really took place. And there is enough fraudulent news coming from the Balkans to suspect that all the news may belong to the second category.
The problem is that the official view won't stand the scrutiny by such enlightened public like us. And it is here that the real motives of the people who spew out such moronic bullshit come clear. Even such a discussion gives them a chance to be famous for a short while. That gives them a feeling of power. And yet they know that this feeling is illusory. It becomes evident that what really keeps the official version going is the money that is paid to spread it. Such a realization is an insult to anyone's professional pride. Suddenly we have these arguments about money. It must be a shock for the bullshit people to realize that we are not paid by anybody and yet we are coming on strong. Who would pay us? Then it comes clear that the money power has nothing to do with the truth. And then the question becomes: why is nobody paying people to get the truth out?
Let us see this in the geopolitical context. The US is the world we live in. The US has the money. It will bring prosperity and happiness everywhere it goes. Those who deny this are blind, nationalistic ego-bastards who don't know what is good for them.
I trust some people are sincere in this belief. But let us consider this against the background of the recent topic of the China/Malaysia/North Korea/Japan complex. The US made Japan one of the world's leading market economies after WW2. Then it was followed by the "Asian Tigers". Malaysia and Indonesia were just about to be included in that group when it all collapsed. And whatever the reason, the collapse served American interests very well. Japan had become too strong. It was buying the US. It will remain a mystery what part the US played in the economic collapse of the Far East, but the Americans haven't lost must sleep over it.
So much for American money bringing happiness. Now look at China. China's resistance to market change was scorned. In retrospect, this scorn makes perfect sense. China survived the Far Eastern economic meltdown (not that they was necessarily much to collapse).
So the US decides to bring happiness by other means. For instance, by ridding the world from the axis of evil that starts at North Korea. Such a humanitarian move would also place the US military comfortably at China's back.
If the US were bringing happiness and prosperity, it would admit it committed a crime in Yugoslavia and it would repair the damages to the Chinese. Now the US hasn't done that. But, ironically, there are some telltale signs that it knows it is wrong.
I said that the US doesn't recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ, unless it can be certain that it will win the case. That suggests that if the US doesn't recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ, it knows it would lose.
And it is telling that the US didn't recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ in the Legality of Use of Force. It would be interesting to see what exactly was the reason for this refusal.
Did the US regard the matter too trivial? The purpose of the UN is the "suppression of acts of aggression" (Art. 1-1 of the UN Charter). Does the US think such a purpose would be too trivial for the ICJ to handle?
The US tried to circumvent the jurisdiction of the ICJ in a somewhat case Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua by saying that there was no treaty obligation. The ICJ countered that by concluding that the subject matter was dealt with in the customary international law. Is that not the case in Legality of Use of Force too? The Nicaragua case dealt with a similar case of supposed humanitarian intervention. Doesn't customary international law say anything about the matter any more? Are we supposed to ignore the fact that the "spirit of Nuremberg", which the US administration invoked, was actually a prohibition of aggression?
I have been accused of promoting the Chinese model on this discussion. Somebody may have seen better than I did at the time where the real sticking point of the Yugoslav "closure" is. Once that sticking-point is approached, one begins to hear the familiar cold war rhetoric again. That is probably also why the Americans never acknowledged the post-communist Russia as anything else than the old "Evil Empire". All that rhetoric had to be kept in store so it could be resurrected in time of another red peril.
Come on, why would the Nato have bombed the Chinese embassy, if it hadn't known it would someday come to this? The bombing of the Chinese Embassy and the inclusion of North Korea in the axis of evil make too much sense. Justice works for the US only as long as it can make others play by the rules and it can "feel good about itself" by breaking the rules. That is the US, the free world, we are living in.
Jari Nousiainen
Finland - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 6:38 am
Gogol, you're absolutely right: I omitted to point out that telling remark of May about genocide being a technicality (I'm afraid I was too sleepy when writing that time). I heard that and I also heard the impatience in May's voice whenever General Sadish Nambiar was being mentioned. This is perfectly understandable having in mind the way he was practically forced to resign from his high position in YU as soon as his clear understanding of the situation became obvious. One small example of his position was the reprimands he gave to his underlings such as Kirudja when they started to throw around the WW2 vocabulary of concentration camps and genocide. On the other hand, those who forced the resignation of the General could not possibly admit the real reasons for it, his reputation was and is impeccable, even slimy Kirudja said he was 'honourable and highly professional', so May was unable to dismiss his statement partially quoted by Milosevic (Pythagoras, thanks for the link) nor the video showing the General answering questions of the students in the auditorium of the Law School in Belgrade in 2000 (not in India, Gogol). Both pieces of evidence presented the General's view that there was no genocide, only random killings and violence from all sides characteristic for this type of conflicts. May could only throw in an acid comment that 'genocide is a technical term, which we will have to define'. Wow! The ICTY panel of judges will redefine genocide, the same as they redefined extradition, impartiality, due process, conditions and terms of detention…Speaking of which, I caught the other day a piece of the latest status conference for Milan Martic, when he was asked by the judge whether there are some complaints re his detention. He said that the medical care is ridiculous, that he wants to see a doctor at least from time to time, 'though I'm sure he's awfully busy' and not always a nurse. He actually said that he complained his reading glasses are not strong enough for him anymore, and instead of sending him an ophthalmologist to measure the power of lenses required in diopters, a nurse came with a handful of different glasses, telling him to pick up one pair! He scornfully lifted up his new reading utensil, obtained in such a professional way. The judge was embarrassed and said they'll see to it. Come to think of it, Milosevic's defence team reports that all those trumpeted 'regular medical exams' of their client are actually daily visits by a nurse, giving him a pill. As I recall, the ICTY spokesman, media and Frank here all claimed that Scheveningen provides first-class medical care. I doubt it. And if they expect Martic to testify against Milosevic, they are persuading him the wrong way, Andy. They'll just make him more defiant and sympathetic to Milosevic in their joint misery, prompted by the shipshape medical service given them in the can.
To AP Vucelic: Thanks for highlighting my reports and additionally breaking them into smaller paragraphs; I tend to get carried away and forget to make them more reader-friendly. And thanks for providing the link to check out the comments of my reports on FreeRepublic forums. I agree with D. Jovanovic: the lack of rational opponents is disastrous. On this forum we had one recent diversion of an irrational foul-mouthed illiterate and it was ugly; imagine when there are so many every day as over there. People may disagree, but one has to be able to communicate disagreement without provoking nausea. Nevertheless, it was OK to be tested even by such opponents, it put both my strong and weak points in the prospective.
To Dan B.: General Aleksandar Vasiljevic started his testimony two days ago and as announced the examination-in-chief alone should last 2-3 days more. I'm waiting for his testimony to be completed before I try to evaluate its weight. Some basic facts: the General was the Chief of Security Administration of the JNA, before he retired in mid 1992. Yet, the Prosecution keeps introducing all kinds of documents of a later date, and he constantly points out that fact and his inability to confirm the veracity of such papers. He was reactivated in 1999 during the NATO bombing and definitely retired after the 'revolution' of 5 October. The most significant fact about him is that he is named in the ICTY indictments as the member of the 'joint criminal enterprise'. He is testifying with the threat of an indictment over his head. Before leaving for The Hague, he stated to our press that he didn't 'cut any deals with the Prosecution, except as regards the protective measures for himself and his family'. He was originally announced as a protected witness C-039, and being a different human material than Milan Babic, decided to testify openly. But it's visibly difficult for him. He's not very forthcoming and he's rather impatient with Nice, correcting his insinuations and hints in grossly suggestive questions. He avoids to look at Milosevic and I believe he never even mentioned his name in his answers (once he referred to Milosevic re Martic's letter with the clumsiest formulation possible, 'it would be normal for Martic to address the President of the FRY; if he addresses whom he addressed [i.e. Milosevic]…').
While at it, that 'trump-card' letter of Martic to Milosevic: all media deftly avoided to quote one important part of the answer that the General gave. He said that 'he [Milosevic] was one of the members of the Supreme Defence Council.' Other members were President of other Republic and the Army. Was it not perfectly natural that Martic should beg him 'to use his influence and position' and try to persuade the Army to give them some supplies (because they obviously didn't)? Whom he should address instead, the President of Montenegro, perhaps? And there was not just one such letter: an almost identical letter of a later date by Goran Hadzic to Milosevic was also introduced and the key words were: "We kindly ask you to try to exert your influence within your authority on the fulfilment of our requests." Within your authority as one of the members of the Supreme Defence Council and try to influence, and not to order. Maybe if the media trumpeted more than one 'trump-card' letters, it would become obvious that it was something repetitive, indicative of the JNA's reluctance to help and of Milosevic's factual lack of influence. I would like to quote just one exchange, to get the idea how suggestive the questions are and how uncooperative the General is. Nice: "Your superior, General Kadijevic, was technically subordinated to the accused?" General Vasiljevic: 'Neither technically nor in any other way, I believe." Nice keeps asking for private sessions every 5-20-30 minutes, lasting from 5 to 30 minutes each. What are they protecting now? Interest of justice? Or interests of the Prosecution?
Dragan Vasiljkovic aka 'Captain Dragan' was reported by our press to have departed for The Hague 3 days ago to testify. He's a shady character, some papers wrote his background was Australia or the Foreign Legion. He trained the volunteers in Krajina, but for relatively short time and back in Belgrade he established funds for helping families of those killed and wounded, as well as an Internet centre. He stated that he wanted 'our side to be heard at the trial as well' and that so far he has heard many lies there. But, let's wait and see how both General Vasiljevic and Captain Dragan would acquit themselves in the end.
And I've missed to see one witness before the General, Dr Vesna Bosanac, director of the Vukovar Hospital. She must've testified briefly, only an hour or two, under the rule 92 bis D (brief recap of a testimony from another trial, apparently) and Nice seems to have announced he will fight against the possibility of cross-examination in such cases in the future. If anyone saw this testimony, could we hear something about it?
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 7:30 am
Vera,
Thank you, your clarity helps to put it all together, as unfamiliar as I am with many of the elements of this tragi-comedy.
I was not feeling well the night of Dr. Vesna (Spring) Bosanac testimony. She looks, and looks are sometimes important, not like spring but more like stormy Icelandic weather and her nature, her body delivery was heavy, scornful, I could'n stop thinking how could this woman have run a clinic and try to pass as someone dedicated to life, health, optimism when she sounded and looked as a komandant in you know what kind of camp, the ones needing no debate about what to call them.
In any case, the testimony I saw was a jumpy one, interrupted, cocky answered, insults mildly objected by May (NATO) contradictions between statement and testimony, always blamed on the translations UN reports, Red Cross reports showing thanks to Mr. Milosevic and Tuposkovic how little sense this testimony made.
The use of the close sessions, which incidentally they insists in correcting themselves to call privatesessions, the incident of this sessions has increased with no protected witness, for not reason and as far as I can tell for any subject they wish. It is time to tell it as it :
THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC TRIAL, THERE IS NO MEDIA REPORTING, AND IT IS IN CLOSE SESSIONS AS THEY PLEASE!
I wonder if you could, dear Vera, give us some hope on the recent fraud leading to the end of Yugoslavia. The Western media has explainned next to nothing.
Mir!
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 7:32 am
Thanx Vera. I just feel I have to insert a correction here to what I said: the US argued in the Nicaragua case that the case concerned a treaty obligation, over which the ICJ had no jurisdiction, but the ICJ replied that a similar obligation was to be found in customary international law. Whatever. The message is clear: the free world has only rights, no obligations.Back to this fascinating Chinese Embassy bombing. Let's look at it this way. Pretty soon someone in the US administration must have realized that the longer the bombing went on (it was supposed to be over in a couple of days), the more likely the US would be held responsible for the damage. So step 1: Bomb the Chinese embassy, which was done on May 8, to make any reparation seem like a revenge of the defunct world communism (Milosevic was red, that is why they hated him). Step 2: indict Milosevic (which took place a couple of weeks later) to make any court case seem like a snag in the humanitarian intervention.
There are of course many more tales about the Chinese Embassy bombing. One which has to do with the recent developments in this discussion can be "verified" at www.fair.org/activism/embassy-bombing.html . By the way, a month later, the Observer came with a different story.
Jari Nousiainen
Finland - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 8:03 am
: Thanks for highlighting my reports and additionally breaking them into smaller paragraphs; I tend to get carried away and forget to make them more reader-friendlyVera
Thks for the positive attitude regarding editing. I make an journeyman's attempt to clarify your articles for a wider audience w/ a minimum of editing.
The truth is slowly getting out !
AP V
NY
NY - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 9:16 am
Can somebody direct me to the list of names of 200 000 dead from Bosnia? Are they anywhere published and is there a list of missing persons? If we take that number as correct that means that on average 183 people died per day. That does not make any sense. I can not recall any battle or a crime that so many people died unnoticed especially under the watchful CNN eye. Is list printed anywhere I would like to see it.
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 12:49 pm
The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) and the International Red Cross (IRC) have compiled list of refugees and missing persons. Both organizations have long ago stopped issued estimates of victims for the simple reason their estimates and figures are much lower than the estimates from other organizations. This data is available at their respective web sites.
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 2:00 pm
Well here is the question: Who (which organization) should be under international law responsible to Investigate (not estimate) casualties of the war? As far as I know, there is a Holocaust museum in Israel and on the walls of the museum are the names of every Jewish person killed in WWII. They were able to identify almost all of 6 million. Why there is no such documentation for Bosnia war and whose estimate its 200 000. What I am trying to say that next time CNN or BBC quotes that number Serbian Community should challenge that information in courts.
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 2:41 pm
JNI don't consider myself an expert on anything but I would like to attempt to lighten this thread up. As I see it, Uncle Sam is not the big bad wolf.
I read your take on US involvement and like Walter, you manage to find weeds and not vegetables. And then question the motives of the farmer. The only farmer successful enough to control the market. When people cannot buy, the farmer can give, loan or trade.
A place I worked at, gave away a turkey or a ham at Thanksgiving. This was greatly appreciated for a few years , but then fighting broke out as to who got the turkey last year and who gets the ham this year. The company was getting a black eye from all this and the program was discontinued. So now, all the people get is a socialist Christmas card at Christmas. Now that I've confused myself enough, on to some of your specific points.
the US has the money
I don't know where our gold reserves, trade balance or debt stand, but we've been loosing for years. Like a farmer giving away vegetables. More accurately we have gross national product which has been decimated by Islamists at the WTC, and by that they are inheriting a whirlwind. Our GNP was possible only with sustained optimism and a constitution, guaranteeing freedom by a brilliance that no longer exists. Optimism and freedom is what we have, trying to hold, and it has been our biggest export. All the money in the world won't help without it.You seem to imply that North Korea is a lamb and W is a lion. That is not true, if we were there, we would not be on this thread. North Korea has violated an agreement, not to build WMD in exchange for free oil and vegetables. They responded a few years back by firing a few missiles over Japan and shipping missiles to Yemen as recently discover on the high seas. Its' a no brainer knowing what that regime is about. They may have succeeded in blackmailing our last dysfunctional president, but like I've said, W is of a higher caliber. And to the charge that all this is to get on the back of China has no merit, and I don't think that you really meant it.
tell tail signs that it knows it did wrong
I agree with that. We had a dysfunctional president, a witch, and enablers of the most manipulative kinds. We have managed to replace the first 2 and minimize the later. Hopefully W will have time to go back and rectify what he can. Until then, I'll reserve judgment.China has just gotten on the roller coaster that 'asian tigers' just got off. For now, they have optimism, massive foreign investment and free labor. Down the road they will have only optimism, but I'm sure they are better off for it all, as is the rest of asia. Just think, starvation has been eliminated in China. I wonder who could take some credit for that?
the US doesn't recognize the ICJ
Neither do I and most here. Its' basically, in the final analysis, political. Has been issuing rulings for years, that all countries seem to reserve options to comply or not. Our justice is delineated in a constitution, worked out as a sovereign country, and that will never be given up, but that is what is at stake, for all countries including YugoslaviaOne really has to give Milosevic an A+ for optimism, and from what I can tell, from the tribunal transcripts, being on a the right track in running a overly multicultural country.
J P
US Wis - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 7:56 pm
“No more lies”With this proclamation ‘Trust-me’ Tony came to power.
Yet a disgraceful list of his government’s lies has culminated with the recent revelation that the British Dossier on Iraq, praised by Secretary Powell to the UN Security Council during his presentation of the Anglo/US case for war, is a fraud. Material passed off as British Intelligence is “plagiarised” from a student’s thesis.
Tonight it seems that at least the Germans and possibly the French, to their credit, have had enough of this nonsense. Blair’s twisting of arms to further warmongering on behalf of Anglo/US administrations is not going to work this time as his lies did during Nato’s criminal assault upon Kosovo.
Do you remember the Blairs’ lies during the Kosovo debacle: well documented in news media around the world? The non-existent Rape Camps, Death Camps and Tens of thousands of murdered Kosovars being among the worst of them.
While Blair frequently passes off his attack upon Serbia as a humanitarian mission he refuses to face the facts. Teflon Tony always knows he’s in the right: killing Christians in Serbia or Muslims in Iraq with his banned weapons.
While the racist criminals he supported in Kosovo continue four years of terror with this week’s grenade attacks upon Serbs in Mogila and Mitrovica, Blair turns away and refuses to see the evil he has created or to recognise the UN Resolution 1244.
What is all this blather by Blair over Iraq that UN Resolutions must be respected on pain of war? The Humpty Dumpty factor I suppose. I get it - that’s what he means by “No more lies”. Simple really: he just changes the meaning of words until they conform to his wishes. A lie is the truth when it suits his purpose.
This is the Kosovo, the Field of Blackbirds, which Blair now crows about:
- Saturday February 08, 2003 at 9:07 pm
First of all I believe JP has not the foggiest idea of what truly happened in the former Yugoslavia. Maybe he should treat himself to viewing “Yugoslavia, An Avoidable War.”Now as far as the United States having nothing but freedom and optimism. I would suggest he take a look at the Patriot Act.
The United States is a wonderful country from “sea to shining sea,” as the song goes. I have been in several European countries and would not trade my life in the USA to live in one of them. Unless I was as rich as George W. Bush or any member of his family then I could live anywhere in style. However, Mr. Initials, our government is not exactly honest with us. As a follower of the Balkan CIVIL wars, and the stories told to me by my relatives who ACTUALLY know the history of the Balkan countries, our government told us many tall tales. Our free press was just like the big parrots sitting in a cage in the pet shops. “Squawk, squeak!” Anything you say the parrot mimics.
How much attention did you really pay to the Balkan CIVIL wars? Did you just read what Anthony Lewis wrote along with a few who were more fiction writers waiting for the big prize the “Pulitzer?”
For many years we respected sovereign nations. Yugoslavia was one of them. The Serbs, in particular,were great admirers of the USA. While the USA, leading Nato, bombed the Bosnian Serbs, there stood three Serb children on a hilltop watching the bombing and one was wearing a jacket with the initials “USA.” This photograph appeared in one of our newspapers. I wonder if anyone felt ashamed? I felt saddened and hurt.
You say Bush is of a higher caliber than Clinton? Clinton....you call him “dysfunctional,” won the election. As much as I disagree with his bombing of a sovereign nation and the homeland of my ancestors, he was a legitimate president. George W. Bush walked into the Whitehouse without a trace of a red face. ..higher caliber!He was selected and not elected.
What country do you fathom is not going to try to get their hands on the nuclear bomb after the bombing of 78 days of a sovereign nation. Everyone knows this is the mightiest nation in the world with an army that is the greatest in the history of all warring mankind.
Do you really blame North Korea for wanting the Nuclear bomb? I know some Koreans who are good Americans but you know what? .....they want Korea to unite and they think Clinton did a better job of handling Korea.
I want another George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, John Adams, John Quincy Adams, and Franklin D. Roosevelt to head this nation from “sea to shining sea” No more short change. I want the American people to understand that governments and media do lie and to wake up and realize that “collateral damage” means killing, killing, killing........it does not mean the bombs hit some old crappy bricks.
About the farmer handing out vegetables there is an old saying. What good is it to give a gold envelope sealed with shit.
I hope I lightened up this forum friend. You are American and I luv you for it but I wish you were not so much Republican that you do not see the trees for the forrest.
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Saturday February 08, 2003 at 10:40 pm
RE: MARTIC letterIf the letter was written in 1993, then one can only conclude that 'Milosevic' was not providing military support prior to 1993 !
Thank, yet again, to the Prosecution for (unwittingly) helping to prove the defense case.
AP V
NY
NY - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 1:15 am
Sorry KL, to stir up your liberal side. I quit following Anthony Lewis articles years ago and his wife Ann, media advisor to Clinton is some fruitcake. To top it off I don't also cotton to her brother, representative Barney Frank who is another fruitcake, no pun intended. You say our press squawks a lot, I agree, partly because of the likes of Tony and Ann.If you maintain that W was selected and not elected, then you're not being rational. Despite all the shenanigans, W won with more votes than Clinton had in two try's and Gore had in umpteen counts. Even the squawk squawk media couldn't manage to steal the election, but they sure tried.
americans should wake up to the media
We were as appalled as the European rank and file , as the senseless bombing continued for 78 days. Only to end when NATO 'relented' to Milosevic's bottom line right to sovereignty and title to Kosovo.Americans also woke up to the liberal Democrats during the mid-term elections. Almost a clean sweep with the help of W on the campaign trail against a party that will stop at nothing. First they elected a dead senator from Missouri, then they bribed Jeffords to switch, broke the law with replacement Lautenburg, broke the law again with putting last minute Mondale on the ballot.
Food for the forum! Now that 8 nations peeled off from a power play by Germany and France, with another 10 or so following, what does that say of what is thought of W's caliber? How many nations will peel off when it's verdict time for Milosevic versues the NATO big boys and truth and honor is on the table. I know where Russia, Greece and badgered Italy stood, we'll see if there's a verdic backlash. One more little letter by a few signers and Milosevic will walk. This ball game is not over, thanks partly to one man, Milosevic, who I know only by following the 'tribunal' proceedings , forums such as this and Freerepublic.
J P
US, Wis - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 3:03 am
J.P.,Here is some reading that you might enjoy: A U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee Report entitled, "Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base"
The Republican party knew all about this stuff in the Balkans (as evidenced by their own report) and they even knew about the "de facto partnership" as the report calls it, between Bill Clinton and Osama bin Laden.
My question to you as a Republican is why didn't the Republican party attack Bill Clinton over this information?
Bill Clinton was caught in bed with terrorists, including the king of terrorists Osama bin Laden, and the Republicans didn't do anything about it. But as soon as Clinton got caught with his dick in a 21 year old White House intern's mouth the Republican Party made all sorts of noise.
President Bush has said that if you support terrorists then you are a terrorist. Well Clinton supported terrorists so why hasn't W locked him up down in Camp X-Ray there in Cuba?
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 9:51 am
I wonder if the reason that Bosnia will not organize census is that it might show that there were no 200000 dead from Bosnia war. See this
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 10:48 am
Our nation, the only and strongest world power is preparing for war. Much depends how well informed is our citizenry. But is it?I can not help but review a much less significant conflict, but a war nevertheless which our country and NATO fought with Yugoslavia. The conflict was almost forgotten and much of the citizenry believes it was just and a humanitarian war.
Now, I have read two books and one report written by the three generals who were commanders of UN forces in that region: General Luis MacKenzie, a Canadian, General Sir Michael Rose, an Englishman and an article by General Satish Nambiar, of India.
All three present a completely different picture of the conflict and our government role in it. General Satish Nambiar writes:
“The United Nations has been made totally redundant, ineffective, and impotent. The Western world, led by the USA, will lay down the moral values that the rest of the world must adhere to; it does not matter that they themselves do not adhere to the same values when it does not suit them. National sovereignty and territorial integrity have no sanctity. And finally, secessionist movements, which often start with terrorist activity, will get greater encouragement. One can only hope that good sense will prevail, hopefully sooner rather than later. “
He further adds:
…” as the First Force Commander and Head of Mission of the United Nations forces in the former Yugoslavia, from March 1992 to March 1993, handling operations in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Macedonia, I would say that reports put out in the electronic media are largely responsible for provoking this tragedy.”
I now wonder are we given the truth about this imminent war or are we blindly led by the “management and the media”?
Will these three generals testify on behalf of Milosevic?
D. Jovanovic
USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 12:04 pm
Christian Jennings is reporting from Pristina, Scotland News on 2-9-2003Catch 1244
Summary:
Since Yugoslavia no longer exists the Albanians want what they believe to be their rightful independence.
Yesterday the police arrested an Albanian man in connection with a grenade attack in which four Kosovo Serbs were injured. Two of them were seriously injured.
The attack coincided with another one in the Serb held Mitrovica.
The Albanians living in Kosovo see the international community as being in bed with the HATED Serbs and a stumbling block to the independence of Kosovo.(They always use that line......remember Mum likes you better than me and then Mum would bend over backward to prove her great love for you.)
The following cut and paste job is from the article as I did not want to screw it up.
Out in the frozen hills and on the back roads of Kosovo, small groups of armed and uniformed Kosova Albanian men have started to set up roadblocks and check documents, ensuring that the hated Serbs cannot return. More frighteningly for the international community is the fear that four years after they arrived to protect Kosovo’s benighted and picked-on Albanians, the UN and Nato have realised that they could suddenly become the targets of their former protégés. D. Jovanovic: Excellent post. Good information.
My Republican friend: Al Gore had 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush. My vote went to Ralph Nader.
Yes, I am a liberal, I love what the USA has to offer, roads, bridges, libraries, police, firemen, museums, clean air and water, free public restrooms, National Parks kept in tip top condition, and when there is a flood, fire or earthquake our government is there to help. All of this acquired by our good tax dollars. If this could all be done without my paying taxes I would be delighted but since it cannot and I love the benefits I will continue to be a liberal and pay my taxes and reap the benefits. However, I detest paying taxes for bombs. I console myself by reassuring me that those who encourage war are the ones who used their tax dollars for those bombs and they are the ones responsible for the killing. My tax dollars went toward the clean air we breath.
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 12:32 pm
Ms. LoveI took the liberty to repost your two latest post.
I said these are from another person but I did not name you. I hope you do not mind!
D. Jovanovic
USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 12:55 pm
Yugoslavia may have or may have not died a murderous death, but Kosovo and Metohija are an inseparable part of Serbia, something the media has always tried to ignore. The UN resolution authorizing KFOR deployment was valid, although renewable for only one year!
There can't be any question of the status of Albanians as a minority including national rights for Albanians in Kosovo, or any other part of the World, since the national home of Albanians is Albania!
Gogol Charlemagne
Conn., USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 2:25 pm
D.Jovanovic:I certainly do not mind your reposting my posts. We have to stand up for what we believe in. That is one reason I give my name. It is not a pseudonym.
I have a confession to make to you as I too reposted one of yours. The one about General Rose, et al.
I did not think you would mind spreading truth.
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 2:48 pm
Kathryn Love: I once thought of myself as a "Liberal" as well, but this idea I lost or disposed of during Clinton's reign. It did not get past most of us that the Liberals never made a peep against Clinton's, aka NATO's, bombs on Serbia and that it is these same feel-good Liberals who now protest the war against Iraq. I, too, am against the war on Iraq, but find it very difficult to align myself with those who, obviously, are looking at the Iraq issue as a political one -- i.e. they're against Bush more than against bombing another country. I can only wonder how they would have responded had the instigator of the new Iraq war been their beloved prior leader, who in my opinion should rot in hell along with his witch of a so-called wife. Sorry if I sound bitter -- it's because I am. I more and more have to regard myself as an Independent, looking at each issue separately from any political party allignment and I'd llike to suggest that it would be good if more people did the same. On some things I am more liberal, on others more conservative. It is important to look at the facts of each issue, not to label oneself as Liberal or not, don't you think? Al Gore might have had more actual votes (I don't know if I believe that or not, but it hardly matters to me one way or the other inasmuch as 500,000 votes either way can be counted just by errors made), but I can't say I wasn't pleased that he lost, despite the fact that I don't care for Bush, because anyone who so simperingly supprted Clinton as his Vice-President and never spoke out against his heinous acts, either during his term or after, in my opinion didn't deserve to be President, himself. I, too, voted for a third party, but my relief lay in the fact that Gore did not get to have that so-called honor, now so tarnished, of being President of this country.
Anna Pullinger
Walnut Creek
CA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 2:50 pm
Can anyone tell me how you separate your text into paragraphs here? What am I doing wrong?
Anna Pullinger
Walnut Creek
CA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 3:58 pm
AWThe Republican did try to take Clinton down, from Water Gate, China Gate on through impeachment
But it's hard to take down the 'king' with a 30%+ diehard Democratic following and who has essentially full 'media' support. If we had a non partisan Senate it would have been a done deal.
The Republicans , especially with leader Lott were never passionate fighters, as are the Democrats . We lucked out there too, with Lott now replaced by Frist (cross your fingers)
W has his plate full handling current problems. IMO it's not the presidents job to indict former presidents, bad precedence, leave it to the justice department , it may happen yet. It will be real black eye for the last administration if Milosevic walks, or even gets convicted and there's a backlash while final arguments are made and gets a rehash in the 'media'.
J P
US,Wis - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 3:59 pm
I really hope somebody challenge Bosnia war casualties numbers. http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/kosta/autori/kenney.george/bosnia.calculation.html "...Today, Silajdzic, now the Prime Minister, routinely talks about genocide and the "Bosnian holocaust" with nary an eyebrow raised in his audience. But there was no holocaust. For Bosnia, an area slightly larger than Tennessee, to have suffered more than 200,000 deaths would have meant roughly 200 deaths per day, every day, for the three-plus years of war. But the fighting rarely, if ever, reached that level. After the Serbs carved out the areas they wanted in 1992, fighting declined steadily, reaching a virtual stalemate by autumn 1993. Now on the front lines, combatants often shoot past each other, tacitly understanding that in a low-intensity war nobody wants to get hurt. Outright warfare, therefore, has probably resulted in deaths measured in the tens of thousands, induding civilians. If there were huge numbers of other dead, they would be accounted for only by systematic killing in concentration camps or the complete, as- yet-undiscovered extermination of entire villages. Neither the International Committee of the Red Cross nor Western governments have found evidence of systematic killing. Nobody, moreover, has found former detainees of concentration camps who witnessed systematic killing. Random killing took place in the camps, but not enough to account for tens of thousand of dead. And, apart from the few well-known massacres nobody sees signs of missing villages, either. The Red Cross has confirmed well under 20,000 fatalities on all sides. Extrapolating from that and from the observations of experienced investigators in Bosnia, its analysts estimate total fatalities at 20,000 to 30,000, with a small chance that they may exceed 35,000. Analysts at the C.I A. and the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research put fatalities in the tens of thousands but hesitate to give a more precise range until the war is over. European military intelligence officers with extensive experience in Bosnia estimate fatalities in the mid tens of thousands. From these and other estimates by generally reliable relief workers, and given the arguments about the physical impossibility of high numbers, I arrived at the range of 25,000 to 60,000 fatalities. THE QUESTION OF HOW MANY FATALITIES there have been in Bosnia is far from academic. Many wars, maybe all -- but this war especially -- are fought for prestige and honor, not rational reasons. Many atrocities in the former Yugoslavia have been justified as revenge for killings during World War II. Yet the number of fatalities in Yugoslavia during World War II was also never documented. In fact, interpreting those numbers today defines your brand of ethnic nationalism. Thus, people in the Balkans think the number of fatalities makes a difference -- and since they do, so should we. The difference could be between getting a settlement in our lifetime and waiting generations. Not to break the cycle is a grattuitous, even immoral error. Red Cross officials, normally secretive, surprised me by warmly embracing a public airing of the question. Their worry is that obsessive attention to Bosnia will come at the expense of the world's ability to allocate humanitarian resources among similar or more serious wars. Of perhaps greater long-term concern to them is that wild inflation of Bosnian fatalities will discredit reports of subsequent atrocities..."
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 4:13 pm
Here is another: "...The International Committee of the Red Cross published a press statement on September 13, 1995, in which it was stated: "The ICRC's head of operations for Western Europe, Angelo Gnaedinger, visited Pale and Belgrade from 2 to 7 September to obtain information from the Bosnian Serb authorities about the 3,000 persons from Srebrenica whom witnesses say were arrested by Bosnian Serb forces. The ICRC has asked for access as soon as possible to all those arrested (so far it has been able to visit only about 200 detainees), and for details of any deaths. The ICRC has also approached the Bosnia-Herzegovina authorities seeking information on some 5,000 individuals who fled Srebrenica, some of whom reached central Bosnia..." See the full article
Ana Dakic
Serbia - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 4:23 pm
To Anna Pullinger:
To use a new paragraph just imbed < p > and < br > if you want just to use a new line.
as it appears in the example down belowAny text
Any text
If you want a new paragraph just input< p >
And you've got a new pargraph
If you want a new line just input < br >
and you got a newline
Pero Peric
Canada - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 4:50 pm
Thanks very much, Pero.
Anna Pullinger
Walnut Creek
CA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 5:22 pm
Ana Dakic,We all sense from the misinformation, disinformation and just plain lies that the figures are GROSSLY exagerated for the benefit of anti-Serbian propaganda, and, should the subject of the actual number of dead in Bosnia ever get a public airing , the propandists would be hard put to prove their false allegationsm and, in fact, would quite probably be disgraced in the process. That is precisely why the subject DOESN'T get an airing in western media of any kind. Witness the figures about the "hundreds of thousands" of dead Albanians in KosMet. No bodies, the subject was dropped and the thought allowed to linger that there were that many killed. Hillary Clinotn even so recently as a few days ago referred to saving people in Kosovo from "genocide."
How to get the subject in the news is a difficult question -- one needs influence. Hillary gets heard. Bill gets quoted. Madelaine is invited onto news programs for her comments. The Serbs have never been so wiley as the Albanians to hire a PR firm to put the Serbian point of view out to the public. Nor is the western public interested -- other than, possibly, in the context of titilizingly scandalizing Clinton again by pointing out how the Balkan wars were played out much to his and others' self-interest and career advancement for the likes of Albright. Not many would care about the truth coming out just for accuracy because for them it's old news and not terribly interesting. There's the problem.
How do we find someone of stature in the world who cares about this and other such issues? Ramsey Clarke is ridiculed whenever he opens his mouth as a hasbeen Liberal. We need a handsome Serb, perhaps, who is well-educated and speaks good English and a PR firm to get him out there -- in the US, at any rate, image is everything...
Anna Pullinger
California - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 6:40 pm
Anna,With this site you need to use basic HTML formatting to get your message to display in the way that you want it to.
I have made up a key for anybody who wants to see it that will tell you how you can format your messages with italic, bold, and underlined text or how you can add links to your posts.
On to another topic I would like to make a correction. The FRY did indeed had an "acting president" between Dobrica Cosic and Zoran Lilic.
I based my assertion that the FRY had no president on a number of Western wire service reports that said that Yugoslavia had no president between Cosic and Lilic.
The Acting president of the FRY from 1 June 1993 until 25 June 1993 was a man named Milos Radulovic, a member of the DPS from Montenegro.
Radulovic was the president of the Chamber of Republics of the Federal Assembly, and according to the Yugoslav Constitution at that time if the President of the FRY is discharged from office the president of the Chamber of Republics should assume the President's responsibilities.
So technically it was right to say that the FRY had no president, because Radulovic wasn't officially the president. However, he was the "acting president" and he did chair a meeting of the Supreme Defense Council on 7 June 1993.
For the sake of anybody who might be interested here is an interview that Radulovic did with RTS the day he became the acting president.
Radio-Television Serbia in Belgrade - 1730 gmt 1 June 93
Text of recorded interview with Milos Radulovic, chairman of the Chamber of Republics of the Federal Assembly and acting president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, by Sonja Djuric.
[Djuric] Have you acquainted yourself with the new duties you will have according to the constitution, considering that Dobrica Cosic, the FRY [Federal Republic of Yugoslavia] president, was relieved of his post last night?
[Radulovic] If you are referring to the duties that are defined by the constitution, I knew them before. If you are referring to some details that are very important for performing this function, then I do not know enough about them. I hope that during my first meeting with Mr Cosic I will be briefed on everything in more detail.
[Djuric] When (?will you) take over the duty and how will this look like in practice? What does the constitution and legal norms say about this?
[Radulovic] The constitution and the Law on Election and Dismissal of the President of the Republic are not very specific about many things. Considering that we are encountering this for the first time, we will have to find some solution that will be based on the constitution and law.
[Djuric] How do you feel personally?
[Radulovic] I personally could have done without this additional burden.
[Djuric] Will you remain in the Chamber of Republics as chairman?
[Radulovic] Yes. The Constitution states that in case of an early termination of the term of office of the president of the Federal Republic, this duty would be performed by the chairman of the Chamber of Republics until the election of a new president, regardless of who the chairman is.
[Djuric] Is there any agreement on how long this period of having an acting president of Yugoslavia will last?
[Radulovic] According to the Law on Election and Dismissal of the president of the Federal Republic, the president should be elected within 30 days. I hope that we will not need that much time to elect a new president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
[Djuric] Which republic should produce the president?
[Radulovic] I cannot answer this question. This will be resolved by others, respecting, of course, the basic constitutional provision that the president and the prime minister cannot be from the same federal unit at the same time.
[Djuric] Thank you, Mr Radulovic.
[Radulovic] Thank you.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 8:33 pm
Anna I would disagree on the point that Serbs need to employee any of PR Companies.We should not make an agreement with an Evil.
I would rather recommend that interested Serbian community bring all or one of the PR Companies who were involved in Ex-Yu wars and paid by Croatian, Bosnian and Albanian community to spread lies, and consequently such an activity led to catastrophic outcomes.
There are basic elements of criminal activity involved:
Intension and malicious attempt to change
Consciously spread of lies
and as “corpus delict” lost property and lives of Serbian people and other nationalities, lost of Serbian land and heritage, creation of ethnically clean states, inflicted hatred toward Serbian community all around the World etcI think that Serbian community has enough potential to well document many of PR activities even though it would perhaps face obstruction from the current government and others governments from ex-Yu or elsewhere.
Most likely plaintiffs wouldn’t be a problemThe question is:
How strong would be a legal base for such a case; perhaps Jari could shed some light on it.
Pero Peric
Canada - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 8:47 pm
Correction:The line should read:
“Intension and malicious attempt to change public opinion by knowingly spreading lies or unconfirmed information in order to provoke force”
Pero Peric
Canada - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 9:03 pm
Anna:As I was born in America I am indeed an American. When I vote I must always vote for what is right for the American worker. I know from what I have seen and what has been told to me by people who had years more experience in life than I have, and I have had plenty, that the Democrats are responsible for the Civil Rights Act, Veterans Rights, Social Security, Minimum Wage laws, Medicare, and the right for workers to organize. I care about Veterans, racial prejudice, the elderly, the right to a decent wage. These are the issues I care about.
I have a lot of pride in my Serbian heirtage, but I still am an American and I place a lot of pride in that as well. I have written many, many letters on behalf of the Serbian people, and have made many telephone calls. I have never stopped and, I wish that all this madness would go away. At times I cannot believe that all of this really happened and is still going on.I want all of our Serbian people to be able to smile again with a carefree heart.
Clinton did bomb the Serbs. However, there were a lot of people who prodded him on. Former Republican Senator Robert Dole was asking Clinton to bomb Serbia proper during the Bosnian Civil War. During the Kosovo Civil War, Senator Robert Dole went to the Whitehouse and met with Clinton. This was during the time Clinton was in trouble for his personal life. The word is that they made a bargain, Clinton bombs Kosovo and Dole does not go after him on his personal life. Robert Dole made all the talking head shows and repeatedly asked for the bombing of Kosovo. No one person did more damage to the Serbian people than Republican Senator Robert Dole. What about Henry Hyde participating in a Resolution to turn Kosovo over to the Albanians. The Albanians had plenty of money to pass around and there were many who had their hands out.
Both parties were guilty of what happened to Serbia and there were people in both parties that were against the bombing. Dennis Kucinich a Congressman from Ohio, is a Democrat and a Croatian American. I do not think there was anyone who tried as hard as Dennis Kucinich to stop the bombing. He is also against bombing Iraq. Maybe Kucinich feels as I do. It is cruel to drop bombs on innocent lives whether they are Iraqis, Serbians, whatever. I myself, pray that the bombing of Iraq never happens. I would hope the Democrats would be against it for whatever reason. Enough bombing.
How you vote is up to you and the way I vote is my privilege.Let us show the world what good people we are. My Serbian American Mother, was an angel, I bet yours is too.
Kathryn Love
SJC
USA - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 9:06 pm
Pero,I, too, disaprove of the use of PR companies in politics, thus my use of the term "wiley" for the Albanians who did so. However, I think it's ironic how Serbs in their faith that the truth will come out, and not fearing the truth because they know it isn't what has been portrayed about them, sit back waiting for the world to find out what is real and what isn't when the world isn't even interested in looking at the question because it believes it already has the answer -- albeit an incorrect one. We need capable spokespersons. I despise the fact that image is everything in the West, especially in the US, but it's a fact of life. Didn't you cringe in pain for Yugoslavia when during the bombing the only persons speaking on behalf of Serbs were those awful ministers with their broken, hard-edged English sounding like the bad guys in Star Wars?
There is so much that is positive and contrary to the propaganda to tell the world about Serbs and Serbia and time's awastin'. We need to find the most efficient way to get out the truth. To have sympathetic spokespersons posing questions such as "How many actually died in Bosnia" and demanding answers, then debating them as necessary. How else do will we bring the truth into the consciousness of the public?
Anna Pullinger
California - Sunday February 09, 2003 at 9:28 pm
Kathryn Love,I never said you should vote this way or that. Like you, I voted for a third party, so I hardly disagreed with you there.
My point was that there is no reason for party loyalty based on the decades old past that you bring up. The current Democratic Party is a sham and no more represents the American worker than anyone else, besides which there is nothing to prevent me as an Independent from supporting worker's rights issues, nothing whatsoever. However, I feel completely justified in never giving those blind supporters of Bill Clinton the time of day, especially the Hollywood crowd that is so high and mighty now in their anti-war rhetoric. I maintain, though it is impossible to prove, that those same people would support this upcoming horrible war in Iraq if Bill Clinton were behind it. It matters not one bit who urged Clinton to do it -- one of the biggest eggers-on was Hillary as we all know -- but he went for it, frothing at the mouth. I despise all those associated with the bombing, Holbrook, Dole, Albright, etc., etc., etc. but, as the say, "the buck stops" at the President's desk.
Like a great many others, I'm sure, my first gut response when the bombing started was to want to get a flight to Belgrade and be there with the Serbian people. I cannot make and will not make any excuses for this country's wrong actions abroad. I happen to know enough about what went on in Yugoslavia to recognize the deception of the US government in regard to that country. It makes me doubt everything they say now. If they were lying about that, what else might they be deceiving us about where I don't have enough facts to know for sure?
My pride in America died with that first ever bomb dropped on Belgrade since Hitler had attacked it. My 76 year old father, a Kosovo Serb, who brought us here from Serbia in 1959 to escape from Tito's regime, has bought a house in Serbia and is moving back there -- at his age! Why? Because he can no longer abide his adopted country after what it has done to his home country. Because there are principles we cannot overlook or should not overlook.
I worry about him, but I cannot blame him.
Anna Pullinger
California