MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE

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

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 12:39 am
  Dear Sasa Kapor,

  Whatever your views, you cannot seriously suggest that you'd like to see the performance of Mr. Milosevic as a President of the (former) Federal Republic of Yugoslavia being assessed by the "International Criminal Tribunal" at the Hague?

  The "charges" - unfounded accusations they are, really - against Mr. Milosevic (and "others", - in some ways indeed against the entire nation) concern "deportation", "murder" and "persecution on political, racial and religious grounds" - socalled Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes.

  These allegations, which were in fact always seen by many of us as absurd, were serving a "New" NATO as an "excuse" for its ruthless attack "Out of Area", - although that aggression did of course have entirely different "causes" (as most of us now realize in the light also of subsequent U.S. aggression elsewhere: Afghanistan, Irak and what may be next: Iran?).

  This is not an issue particularly for the people of Serbia of course, but for all of us! Mr. Milosevic put it this way in his opening statement on 14 Februar, 2002:

  "The Americans go right (to) the other side of the Globe to fight against "terrorism", to Afghanistan, as a case in point, right (on) the other side of the World. And that is considered to be logical and normal, - whereas here the struggle against terrorism in the heart of one's own country, in one's own home, is considered to be a crime.

  That means that you are not master in your own home, that you can't react to terrorism in your own home. And I'm going to show the nexus, the link between the two..."(1)

  The "domestic" political and economic problems of Serbia (serious as they are though) have no rôle in this however - and we should be careful not to allow the ICTY (or whoever) to play that trick (as it is in fact widely done during the "trial" anyway, e.g. by OSCE "ambassador" William Walker/Prosecutor Nice on 11-12 June last year; there are many other examples, - much too many in fact, I'm afraid).

  The socalled "trial" in the Hague is but a (feeble!) attempt to cover up the falseness of NATOs accusations - the "Racak Hoax", this socalled "massacre" in Kosovo staged by the KLA, being the first and most blatant of deceptions, - as well as the only "charge" against Milosevic, Milutinovic, Ojdanic and Sainovic concerned with an incident taking place prior to the NATO aggression over Kosovo.

  The remaining "charges" as far as "Kosovo" is concerned involve incidents while the FRY was at war, - under attack from the strongest, most ruthless military coalition ever: No doubt Mr. Milosevic ordered the VJ to route the KLA, the insurgents turning into a "Fifth Coloumn" - as would any responsible President have done in the circumstances!

  (But an architect I did realize already then (in October 1998, when little Denmark too was joining the great "coalition" in what was then "NATO Action in the Western Balkans") that I would indeed have acted the way President Milosevic did, - at least I do hope so...).

  Wouldn't you in fact have done the same, Sasa Kapor?

  Well, - that is what this "trial" is all about! To have these issues sorted out in a decent way seems to me equally important for all of us, for the people of Serbia as well as for those other people(s), who (regrettably!) took part in a criminal NATO action.

  Unfounded allegations should not be mistaken for charges. And neither should they be mixed up with matters domestic, - however important these may appear to you.

  Some time ago someone from Serbia (did I forget his name?) entered this "trial discussion" stating roughly, that "we could do whatever to Milosevic, as long as we kept him away from Serbia", something like that - and you do come out a bit the same, I think? Would you really suggest that mr. Milosevic were getting a (more) "fair" trial in the light of your own worries?

  I entirely agree (with PM!) in that we should "idolize" neither Milosevic nor Serbia, but seek to concentrate (in this "trial discussion" anyway) on pointing out the absurdity of the ICTY "charges" levelled against either.

  (1) Sunday July 06, 2003 at 2:44 pm: Excerpts (from Trial Transcripts, Page 648-49).
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 12:45 am
  Sasa,

  When you ask about my experience in Serbia, presumably you mean my recent trip in June.

  I can't generalize, of course, because I spent time with a limited number of people -- just my family there and some friends and a few new acquaintances. However, I had been there in August 2002 and I noticed what seemed a pretty big change, at least to me, in the morale of the people I was with. They appear to be resigned to their day to day struggle to make ends meet and they have turned bitter and are no longer so quick to help each other out as they were before. Not all of them, of course. I also met entrepreneurial persons with all kinds of ideas about improving their lives, but those persons were very few.

  I'm sure this is nothing new, these impressions I happened to see now, just new to me. I imagine people have had a low morale, quite understandably, for much longer. Maybe I just didn't notice it before. It was a less festive visit, so probably they were just more like their normal selves. I don't know how else they should be under the circumstances.

  It made me feel impotent . I couldn't do much to help and that's exactl what I would like to do.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 1:16 am
  TO: SLOBODA/FREEDOM ASSOCIATION, Rajiceva 16, 11000 Belgrade, Yugoslavia.

  att. Vladimir Krsljanin, International Coordinator

  On behalf of the Association, you write, that "we need serious donations from abroad,"

  Are we to understand that the financial difficulties for the SLOBODA/Freedom Association and for the defense of Mr. Milosevic as described in your appeal for funds (Friday July 04, 2003 at 5:18 pm and earlier) do not concern the cases of defendants Milutinovic, Ojdanic og Sainovic, - who are facing basically the same charges as given in the ICTY Indictment dated 22 May 1999?

  It seems to me that since there would be no need for the ICTY to press charges against these gentlemen (often referred to as "others") once Mr. Milosevic is aquitted, it would be logical to finance (also) the former President's defence from munitions provided for these other gentlemen, - since all of them are facing the same charges and the truth need be told only once and for all.

  (Send by e-mail: vlada@sps.org.yu)
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 3:49 am
  Tuesday July 08, 2003 at 8:35 am

  Peter, you said:

  "I don’t own the truth.

  Yes, Peter, I know that, you couldn't possibly own it at the same time that Emperor's Clothes does.

  "All I have done is to point to the fact that records of witness statements in the trial of Milosevic contain evidence of Hashim Thaci’s acts of terrorism: Acts that have also been widely reported elsewhere: Including by western diplomats according to Chris Hedges a New York Times reporter."

  Yes, indeed. But you were rather clever, unless you lifted the analysis you did from elsewhere, which is still a bit clever, because it's something you found by your own efforts and drew to our attention. And what you found was pretty specific.

  "A second fact is that Carla del Ponte has been making excuses during the past four years that she has ‘no evidence or witnesses’ to indict Thaci: In spite of this evidence in court records of the witness K6?"

  Precisely. Like, she's unaware of the proceedings of her own "Court"?

  ...

  " ... Samantha Powers wins the Pulitzer prise although her work is so badly researched that she does not ‘know’ that Milosevic is not charged with the Genocide she claims in Kosovo … "

  Right, and Powers doesn't own the truth, either, or in her case the lies ... but she does own a Pulitzer Prize. So I think you're being too modest.

  "I make my statements here in the hope that incontrovertible facts will be picked up by historians so that the truth will eventually emerge. I see no short term turn of events. ... "

  Yes, but official letters sent constitute a more solid and permanent historical record. See next point, related to expense.

  "For three years before I found this site I wrote hundreds of letters at a cost of hundreds of GBP’s to no effect."

  Yes, but these days blasting dozens or even hundreds of E-Mailed letters to all and sundry costs not a penny. Moreover it makes the permanence of a record much more likely. Just relying on the persistence of this Jurist forum, and the odd interested historian just passing by to pick it up, strikes me as an incredibly unreliable way of establishing an historical record.

  "Thus I speak from experience when I doubt the usefulness of such a course. However if you or anyone else believes that they can make good use of the facts about “Thaci/K6”, including my explanation of them, please do so."

  Well, one use could be that if the concept of real Justice ever occurs to the World and Blair, Clinton et alia do ever end up in front of a War-Crimes Court, such a record could constitute part of the tens of thousands of pages that would have to handed over to their defence. That's pretty much what they did to Milosevic. Potentially overload the bastards, in other words.

  Well, Peter, I for one, having real life things to get on with, as opposed to the real death things instigated by Blair, Clinton, (Bush), etc, etc, etc, have done my own little bits in regard to "establishing a record", and I can't do everything. ;-)

  "But remember they are not my facts: The source is ‘The Transcripts of the Trial of Milosevic’ at the International Court of Justice, The Hague."

  Of course they're "not your facts", but you made the relationship. Now, I'm not suggesting you do as newspapers do, and impose rigid copyright on anything you write, but in some sense, that relationship you drew should be credited to you (at least in this forum - someone else in the World may well have reached the same point).

  Finally, as I did, you can stick material on the Internet for free, for the whole World to see, just by making a web-page. The rules are pretty much as in the Jurist forum, for paragraphing, and bolding, and so on. Any text document becomes a web-document just by sticking the tags HTML and /HTML at the top and bottom (using enclosing angle brackets, as usual), and giving the file an htm or html extension. (With webspawner, you don't even have to bother with this).

  And you might be surprised. Without, again, paying a penny, search engines such as Google often pick up stuff pretty quickly - so that is some guarantee of a wider audience, and probably permanence of record (people might actually copy the web-site, or the stuff on it). For example a Google on [letter +blair +iraq] brings up stuff I did on its very first page. Sure, at time of writing second from bottom, but that is out of 154,000 pages! Not bad. Ditto here, Google: [letter +mp +kosovo] - gets two hits on the first page, out of more than 7,000 pages. Nary paid a penny. The combination [letter +person involved +subject] could be the combination that a searching historian could enter looking for letters sent to/about a certain person on a particular subject. Sorry for ramblin' on ... ;-)
  
  Dennis Revell
  Etats Unis

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 5:05 am
  
  Dennis, I'm not into hosting websites but if you believe it will be usefull, as I said, you are wecome to publish on yours.

  However it is most unlikely anyone will tie down Blair anytime soon. Yesterday he got out of jail by asserting that he 'was certain that Weapons of Mass Destrcution - sotto voce - Programmes would be found'.

  When the going gets difficult he answers a different question which his acolytes are all too ready to accept.

  So now we went to war to protect ourselves from the clear and present danger of Weapons of Mass Destruction Programmes which could be launched within 45 minutes?
  
  Peter Taylor
  Herts/UK

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 8:15 am
  Sasa Kapor,

  You know that it isn't my place to speak for the SPS regarding the Yugoslav Left.

  If the SPS makes a public statmemt on that topic then I will provide everybody with the text of that statement, but in the mean time I'm not going to put words into anybody else's mouth.

  What is stopping you from visiting the nearest SPS office and asking them for yourself what they think about JUL?
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 8:23 am
  Anna,

  You can help the people. You're not powerless. I went to Serbia with a video camera and shot many hours of footage. These people desparately want to be heard. Of course people will feel dejected when they think that nobody cares about them, or they think that nobody wants to listen to them.

  I'm sure you know some intellegent people who are living in Serbia. You can set up a website and ask those people to write articles about what is happening in Serbia.

  If you have enough money maybe you can provide them with some video equipment so that they can produce videos about what is happening.

  What the Serbian people need is to be listened to.
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 9:41 am
  PLAY IT AGAIN, UNCLE SAM - IN PURSUIT OF THE TRUTH!

  THE PROSECUTOR: When you got to the village, were the press already in attendance, did you see a decapitated male in the centre of the village, or thereabouts, and were you directed to the dry stream bed near a ravine?

  THE WITNESS: That is correct!

  (From the "trial" proceedings against Milosevic at the "International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague, ICTY, 1).

  Now, when in pursuit of the truth, the whole truth and - presumeably! - nothing but the truth that infamous American, Ambassador William Walker got to the village of Racak in Kosovo on 16 January 1999, he was first directed towards "a decapitated male in the centre of the village". To this day it is not clear however - not to me anyway - what the American made of that sight?

  The evening before the Ambassador had been informed by his local counterpart, FRY general Loncar, that there were no Serbian government casualties, but that (upwards of?) 15 KLA members had been killed in what Walker was later to describe as a "purported clash", an incident at the village of Racak on 15 January 1999 (2). But the old CIA hand, who much to his surprise was appointed Head of OSCE's "Verification Mission" in distant Kosovo, decided not to leave it at that, but to go and see for himself in spite of a variety of handicaps in fact (including a bad left leg from a parachute jump he once did!).

  Turning to the beheaded male, who was dead of course, - did Walker stop to examine the cause of his death? Did Walker notice whether the body was that of an elderly, - an elderly male you know: Grey hair, white hair? Or maybe that of a younger person, killed in a fight? Did he notice if the male wore civilian clothes that an average American Ambassador would readily associate with rural farmers in the Balkans, in the Province of Kosovo at that particular time? Well, any proposition, or interpretation that the decapitated male had been in some way redressed to look like a civilian, that perhaps his uniform and army boots had been taken off, and that he had been redressed as an unarmed peasant, Walker - from what he saw, from the position of the body, head and all and maybe from multiple bullet holes - considered to be ludicrous. Right down the drain or stream bed ravine also went any suspicious notions, that an incident might have been "organized" (by the KLA? Hashim Thaci, their leader?) to provoke Western military intervention in Kosovo. Frequent attacks on Serbian police and VJ troops, that much Walker knew of course, were calculated to challenge the legitimate government forces, their response subsequently to be declared to be "repressive acts" and "in violation of Human Rights". But would KLA, the "Albanian" terrorists really be using civilians as human shields?

  Well, - the Ambassador may never have heard about Racak at all until general Loncar called him on the night before. As the Head of this "Verification Mission" he probably never bothered to verify whether prior to this incident in the little village of Racak the KLA committed murder of four Serbian policemen in order to provoke a reaction, - NATO air strikes at FRY territory. Indeed the Ambassador might have had no idea that what he was watching, decapitated male and all, was what followed from a legitimate government operation against the murderers stronghold in Racak?

  Down the slippery ravine that morning went any idea that KLA members, who were reported killed in the clashes in the area of Racak were subsequently moved so as to be discovered by the press, and by William Walker himself. He had no desire to even discuss that version either (in fact Walker has later been maintaining to have no recollection of talking to anyone, say at the OSCE Headquarters in Vienna or to others - Holebrooke? - while at Racak looking at this particular decapitated body and many more to come).

  A little traditional skullcap may have fallen off the dead man's head, but did he still have these cheap rubber boots that peasants in Kosovo wear, when they are out in the fields? Were his shoes or army boots taken off? Well, - this peasant probably was never "in the fields" anyway, not on that occasion since the FRY and Serbian government forces came to the village in the early morning hours and did not leave until too late for any serious fieldwork.

  As the bloody male was decapitated - the victim of a massacre? - presumeably bloodstains were soaked into his cloathing, blood was all over the ground, a lot of blood consistent with him having been decapitated right there - and not merely "thereabouts"?

  Did the Ambassador notice? Did the press "already in attendance" notice?

  We do not know, papers never reported that, I believe - and the ICTY trial transcripts do not tell you about that either! Maybe it never transpired from the Prosecutor's case if this supposedly experienced, very senior CIA-man noticed any other evidence that the dead male was indeed killed where he was found. Was Walker vaguely wondering, why villagers would leave the body right in the center of their village police and troops withdrawing on the day before?

  Were there any indications, any indication whatever that the head and body might have been replaced there in order to meet the Ambassador first thing in the morning?

  Frankly, - what do we know? Walker was no medic, he didn't have forensic scientific skills, he was not even a general either (although capable of course of general conclusions) and he may not even have paused to think, but quickly proceeded climbing up the rocky gully near the ravine to encounter more of the same, to make more layman's observations on which to base some firm layman's conclusions: First one, then another, then another and finally a pile of bodies, no evidence of uniforms, no evidence of insignias, no weapons, - it was indeed a "massacre".

  Video footage is showing Walker there, and just as the ICTY Prosecutor was later not too keen on repeating that, neither am I going to repeat the details: But Walker saw maybe upwards of two dozen bodies, and was told as it were of further bodies, another pile of bodies further up the hill, but he didn't particularly want to see much more of that. Thus he didn't. Walking in this dry bed or ravine was not easy for William Walker, a Senior with a bad leg from a parachute jump, he once did. Well, - it may suffice to wonder why the Head of Mission did not stop to scrutinize the very first body, the decapitated male?

  Wouldn't you have done just that, - if Head of Mission? How did he lose his head?

  There is another point, or other points - quite a number in fact: The autopsies have shown, that every body found in Racak had a "varying number of gunshot injuries and no other significant injuries" (3). Thus gunshot injuries were determined to be the cause of death in all cases, - presumeably including also this first body, that Walker saw right in the center of the village (or thereabouts). Even if the Ambassador did not stop to asses the range of firing, counting the bullet holes which according to an "independent forensic report" could have been any number between one and twenty, he might have stopped to ponder whether Serb forces would shoot first and only then decapitate the body, - just that one body in fact?

  Or whether it were somehow all "the other way round"? Anyway, - back in Pristina Walker eventually - not eventually, but in due course made a press statement describing the lot as murder of unarmed peasants, a "massacre" of civilians at Racak (4).

  (1) ICTY Proceedings, 11 June 2002. Trial Transcripts, Pages 6789-90.

  (2) ICTY Proceedings, 12 June 2002, Trial Transcripts, Page 6811, Lines 16-18 incl.

  (3) Independent Forensic Autopsies of the Victims from Racak. Department of Forensic Medicine, University of Helsinki, Finland. Accepted 11 September 2000.

  (4) William Walker's Statement: "Massacre of Civilians in Racak". 16 January 1999.
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 9:48 am
  Dennis,

  - you are welcome to publish Peter's facts (which aren't really "his" of course) on your web-site!

  I'll still second that! Would anybody care to join?
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 11:26 am
  Shouldn't HASHIM THAKI to the Hague?
  
  Godfred Louis_Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 2:26 pm
  So you wont tell whole story Andy? OK that ok. I didnt realise it wasnt your place to inform us. Your priority is not therefore to inform us but to represent position. Since when did you become a member of SPS? How awful for you. If only you lived here to see what they were doing years ago.

  Godfred dont read any more into what I wrote here. My view is probably not far away a few here.

  If you want my comment on the trial. Yes I have reservations that is why I keep reading here. It is an unfair trial. It was also an impossible trial to be held in Serbia at the time tribunal started. No I dont believe Milosevic is guilty of all charges. I prefer to wait until after Milosevic has presented his case. After that point I will read the charges carefully and make my own mind up. Before you suspect it no I certainly was not cheering bombing. It was illegal tra la la... stupid, cowardly et. am just ordinary guy who wants the best for his country. But realist also.

  You are quite right though if you are asking me about how corrupt he was. PM, Anna or Vera will probably tell you the same story I will. None of us may have proof but we know it.

  However what is hard to understand for me is how people confuse the case at the Hague and his reign. He could perfectly well be innocent of the charges and a power hungry thief. And what would surprise anybody if a politician was a power hungry thief for God sake?

  Anna dont get too depressed. We have food in the end we wont ever starve. What is a worry is decline in birth rate. At this rate we will be extinct in 50 years. How you can help we know already by presenting positive image of Serbia to the world. Maybe make a donation to some Serbian refugee children charity who are left without mothers and fathers every month. That is something the kids will never forget and make you feel good at same time.

  PM your post is very sensible. Difference between us is you have more rationality and write a little better. In the end it will fall to people like us to tell whole story so keep writing.
  
  sasa kapor
  Yugoslavia

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 3:11 pm
  Sasa Kapor,

  Right, - except I was never among those confusing "the case at the Hague" and "his (Milosevic's) reign" (although of course they are indeed connected).

  The latter is (largely) a matter for you people in Serbia, - while the former is indeed for all of us! (Tell you what as a matter of detail: In Denmark, which country went to war on 24 March 1999 for the first time since 1864 (for 135 years!) we still have not had a decent debriefing, have not had a reasonable debate in Parliament about that).

  Well, while we are in touch: Would you know EXACTLY when, where, how and to which (foreign) reporters this former KLA-leader HASHIM THACI was boasting of (his involvement in) the murder of (four) Serbian policemen in Kosovo prior to the war (one of these being mr. Przic, whom I remember died on 10 January 1999, - just five days before that incident at Racak)?

  On what occasion(s), presumeably during late 1999-early 2000 did Thaki openly and unmistakenly admit to being a murderer (as was maybe reported by "Voice of Russia")?

  Kindly refer to my posting above on Tuesday July 08, 2003 at 12:09 pm.

  I do nor really want to sound like the Presiding Judge at the ICTY, but still: Can you help?

  Thanks...
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 5:29 pm
  Sasa,

  Which Yugoslavia are you from?
  
  ivko rig
  the

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 5:45 pm
  

  The origins of the KLA (UCK) in the western media has never been properly explained. It ranges from "communist separatists" to "Muslims extremism" sprinkled with a little of Albanian irredentism. None of the above is supported by any evidence. Albania has under different government made it clear the last thing they want is Kosovo in all its facets. Religion whether in Kosovo or in Albania is something well of the past, in fact Western (US) missionaries are recruiting Albanians from both side of the border to some form of Christian Protestantism following Max Weber money and free market trail. The communist "separatists' explanation is perhaps linked to membership to the Kosovo Communist League at one time or another. The real cause of course is in the National Security Agency in Washington DC and the subjects of its empire are "free" to believe anything they like and make then happy.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 5:50 pm
  

  Don't understimate the imperial tendencies and leanings when the emperor himself says:

  "Africa is a country with much potential"
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 7:02 pm
  Going back through the "discussion archives" to this date:

  Monday February 18, 2002 at 9:00 am

  Just one week after the start of the "trial" there is this single poster in the affirmative:

  "Yes! And I think that (Milosevic) himself should tell everything to the public..."

  Send by:

  Ramadan Berisha, Kosovo

  Who may be the one person so far to suggest, that in his view Slobodan Milosevic is "getting a fair trial?"

  Much like Sasa Kabor currently calling for "the whole story", Ramadan Berisha was hoping for (the ICTY to pressurize?) Milosevic to "tell everything"...

  As if that were EVER done in any case, - even those run by the Spanish Inquisition.

  I wonder what mr. Berisha think of the Milosevic "trial" these days?
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 8:54 pm
  In case you guys haven't heard (the foreign media kept quiet about this), an "opposition" media owner just had his Mercedes blown up in the center of Belgrade a few days ago.

  I call him an "opposition" media owner because he can hardly be called us such, all the while up to a year ago he was very pro-DOS overall, perhaps leaning towards the right although I a rightist saw him as more of a Djindjic-conformist whose newspaper did more to challenge the right opposition that Djindjic's power itself.

  This guy is not only the owner of the so-called 'rightist' "Glas Javnosti" (http://www.glas-javnosti.co.yu) but it appears that he is the owner of 'Kurir' which surfaced right after the State of emergency and, I am being told, is trying to pick up where 'Nacional' left off before it was banned by the unelected, undemocratic regime of Zoka, Ceda and Beba.

  The media 'magnate' claims that he has recieved quite a few death threats in the last days, aside from his critique of the regime, he claims that the DS party owes him a couple of million Euros. Apparently, he printed some issues of 'Demokrat' pro bono (for free) during the Milosevic regime. Apparently, he was promised by Micunovic and Djindjic, then DS leaders, that he would get his money when the time comes. Well, they never paid him so I guess that is one of the main motivations for him going 'after them' and starting Kurir.

  As far as Sasa Kapor's views go, I agree, Milosevic's rule was corrupt and we cannot turn him into a saint just because he stands accused of trumped up charges in the Hague. However, I quite cannot manage to see which charges it seems he MIGHT be guilty of as Mr. Kapor claims? God knows I've looked hard and all I could see was the classical war propaganda and diatribe from Zagreb and Sarajevo about some form of 'cross-river aggression', some 'half-secret plan to create a Greater Serbia' and where all byproducts of war (atrocities and refugees) are attributed solely to one side's 'great scheme'. Bull**it. Just listen to Andras Riedlemayer and other such nitwits, they agree that Orthodox churches were destroyed in Bosnia-Hercegovina but apparently, it wasn't as organized? None of the destroyed Orthodox churches in BiH were a product of fighting, all were destroyed by Muslim and Croat dynamite. None of the hundreds of thousands of Serb refugees left Sarajevo, Bihac, Travnik, Zenica, Mostar of their own free will but rather because they were running for their lives from the improperly termed "Army of BiH" (in actuality all-Muslim save for a few token mascots such as convicted arms smuggler Jovan Divjak) and Croat military formations such as the Army of the Republic of Croatia (HV), the revamped Nazi-era HOS or the Bosnian Croat militia (HVO). Every single crime committed against the Serbs seems to be some sort of 'accidental isolated byproduct of war' which conveys the picture of some innocent-minded Muslims and Croats who were minding their own business strutting about in the forest and came about the Serb 'criminal mastermind' (the big bad wolf) who ate them.

  Well take a look for yourself what the 'innocent little red-riding hood' did

  http://www.gov.yu/cwc/english.htm

  And if this isn't organized I certainly do not know what is? http://www.antic.org/Gvoic/10epar800x600.jpg

  And if these weren't concentration and detention camps set up for Serbs I'd think this was a map of the largest towns in Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia http://www.antic.org/Gvoic/Logori_za_SRBE.jpg
  
  Igor Jaramaz
  Canada

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 10:41 pm
  Former Iraqi minister of information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf escaped from his American captors and was recaptured in London England. The British secret service M5 was able to identify the minister when he said I told you the truth yesterday as I am telling you the truth today. The minister’s plastic surgery was so good that he was able to imitate the real Tony Blair but he was not able to fool M5 who provided the real Tony with the evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Wednesday July 09, 2003 at 11:31 pm
  For those who might not be receiving mailings from balkanpeace.org, the following would seem to be in line with Igor's posting:

  www.balkanpeace.org/our/our15.shtml
  
  M Donne
  Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 2:04 am
  Given the level of understanding displayed by western governments about the the Balkans, and the willness of the masses here in the west to believe anything read or said about anyone, if that anyone happened to be Serb, it is hardly suprising that NATO accused Mr. Milosevic of crimes few Serbs believe him to be guilty of.

  If crimes are committed and ones defence is to be "The devil made me do it" it becomes very convenient to be able to immediately point at this devil incarnate. Lacking such a material devil, and being unwilling to admit this, the natural inclination is to paint horns on some lesser creature.

  It is however a mistake to go further than this and put some lesser creature on trial, in the hope that by doing so one will prove them to be something they never were. One risks being horribly exposed if one does so. Trials tend to reveal truths, even if this was not the initial intent.

  The most charitable thing that can be said in defense of NATO is that it is possible that they genuinely succeeded in doing such a good job that they ended up believing their own propoganda.

  That Mr. Milosevic stands accused of crimes of which he was not guilty was obvious long before this trial. Who, among those who knew more about him than his name, ever believed that Mr. Milosevic's crimes equalled those of Adolph Hitler, or Saddam Hussein.

  It is rather telling that back when the US wanted to occupy Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic was as bad as Saddam Hussein, but when the US wanted to occupy Iraq, no one justified the subsequent invasion there on the grounds that Saddam Hussein was as bad as Slobodan Milosovic.

  It is a great shame that the average person is lazy enough to believe the most obvious lie, while avoiding the minimal effort needed to gain an understanding of the most obvious truth.

  Having both a cat and a rabbit it is obvious to me that we are more stupid than birds. A bird knows when to shout "cat", "cat", "cat" and will do this consistently, whenever it sees one. I've never seen a bird get confused and should "cat" when it sees a rabbit.

  But perhaps some of us are more clever than birds. Those people know that if on seeing a rabbit they shout cat, all the other birds will think cat, even if all they can actually see is a rabbit.
  
  Ian Davis
  Wateroo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 4:48 am
  Sasa Kapor,

  Of course it isn't my place to make statements on behalf of other people.

  I will also say that the accusations of fraud leveled against Milosevic, and the internal political situation in Serbia are everyone's business.

  What happened to Serbia gives us a look at the methods that foreign governments will use to dominate other states. We see the tactic of outright and open aggression in the form of bombing and sanctions, but we also see other more subtle forms of attack such as the use of propaganda through the setting up and financing of media, political parties, and NGOs.

  Western Governments, especially the U.S. Government, flagrantly and openly interfered in Yugoslavia's internal affairs.

  These accusations against Milosevic eminate from his political opposition, the NGO's and the so-called "independent media" outlets that have received funding from the U.S. Government to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, not even taking into account the money coming from other foreign states.

  Of course the Serbian people "know" that Milosevic was a crook. There was a sophisticated propaganda campaign designed to tell them that he was.

  They "know" that Milosevic was a crook just like the American people "know" that Saddam Hussein was going to nuke Los Angeles with his weapons of mass destruction.

  Of course you have to say "None of us may have proof but we know it." That is typical for a person who has been the victim of a propaganda campaign. They have a strong opinion, but thay don't have any rational reason for having it. You claim that Milosevic is a criminal and a thief, but you don't have any proof.
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 5:19 am
  

  Today's trial:

  Mr. May (NATO) wanted to know why Mr. Placic said he fled Belgrade in 1994, Mr. Placic a government official employed in Belgrade said he felt like a Jew in 1941 in Berlin.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 5:31 am
  

  What the masters of propaganda said:

  The broad mass of a nation does not consist of diplomats, or even professors of political law, or even individuals capable of forming a rational opinion; it consists of plain mortals, wavering and inclined to doubt and uncertainty. As soon as our own propaganda admits so much asa glimmer of right on the other side, the foundation for doubt in our own right has been laid. The masses are then in no position to distinguish where foreign injustice ends and our own begins. In such a case they become uncertain and suspicious, especially if the enemy refrains from going in for the same nonsense, but unloads every bit of blame on his adversary. Isn't it perfectly understandable that the whole country ends up by lending more credence to enemy propaganda, which is more unified and coherent, than to its own? And particularly a people that suffers from the mania of objectivity as much as the Germans. For, after all this, everyone will take the greatest pains to avoid doing the enemy any injustice, even at the peril of seriously besmirching and even destroying his own people and country.

  A. Hitler Mein Kampf
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 6:38 am
  Where is Vera with her Lilic Analysis?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 7:15 am
  

  Probably unable to download this page . . .
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 8:52 am
  Gogol, are you suggesting what I think you are (has to do with moderator....)
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 9:57 am
  I like this Thursday.

  I will try to add to it.

  Has anyone here ever thought that Vera might be afraid of ... I don't know. Use your imagination; it's more real, at least today, than the reality itself (unfortunately, as far as I am concerned). Whatever it could be I do not believe it is the moderator.

  Guys,

  The underlying question of this forum "Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial?" was made to stray us off. It should be "Whatever happaned to the elementary human rights?".

  When I read some posts from Serbia I get really frustrated for then I wish Milosevic would stay at the Hague.

  He is too important for all others.

  Concerned about his safety.

  One more thing in relation to which I would use "never" only a few years ago.
  
  ivko rig
  the

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 11:02 am
  CONVENTIONAL WISDOM OF MASS DECEPTION

  How could a broad mass incapable of forming a rational opinion come to suffer from "mania of objectivity"? Why would a nation willing to take pains to avoid doing any injustice, not be able to make up its own mind?

  What was Gogol's "master of propaganda" really talking about? (Wonder if Hitler ever had a rabbit, and/or a cat).

  I agree that those who were smearing Mr. Milosevic never seriously believed that he would equal even Saddam Hussein as a criminal.

  However, inspired by Ian's observations from the animal farm, may I point out that recently a certain Pauline Baker, president of a Washington-based policy center that "promotes conflict resolution", is quoted for regarding President Charles Taylor of Liberia as "the Milosevic of West Africa".

  "But unlike Milosevic, he may not be brought to trial," this peace-Baker said (thus in fact admitting, that Taylor as "a serial warmonger" may have more in common with Bush and Blair).
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 11:10 am
  REGARDING TAYLOR AS "THE MILOSEVIC OF WEST AFRICA"

  President Charles Taylor of Liberia "is a serial warmonger. I regard him as the Milosevic of West Africa," said Pauline Baker, president of the Fund for Peace.

  Baker was referring to the former Yugoslav President currently "on trial at an international tribunal at The Hague."

  Sic!

  http://www.dailypress.com/news/la-fg-liberia7jul07001419,0,2471709.story?coll=dp-breaking-news
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:06 pm
  

  Godfred,

  Naturally the democracy which made A. Hitler possible is not this democracy , however the workings of propaganda remains the same. The unconsciousness of today's masses is much more sedated and for the most part in the West the greatest worries of the masses relates to choice of consumer goods or where to expend the next vacation.

  Dakic,

  I doubt it. Fixing the workings of this web site requires attention and attention requires skills. There are technical levels of competence. There are technological gaps in the World as well.

  Perhaps we should all keep our postings short and to the point so that our less technologically lucky fellow-posters have space left for their comments.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:07 pm
  Hi,

  Can anyone give me any info on teh total dead/killed in Kosovo?

  thanks
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:16 pm
  An alternative history:

  Searching www.antiwar.com for all articles containing the word Milosevic that they thought worth publishing.

  Mind you, a picture tells a thousand words:

  http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bushie.jpg
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:33 pm
  Dan:

  http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j022502.html has links to a number of articles of relevance to you.

  Cook accused of misleading public on Kosovo massacres

  Where are the killing fields

  The war in Kosovo was savage but not genocide

  Serb killings 'exaggerated' by west

  The truth leaks out about Kosovo

  The suggested numbers of dead in Kosovo are significantly less than the currently estimated number of civilians killed in Iraq by the US, in waging its kinder, gentler offensives.
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:37 pm
  Moderator:

  Please consider changing the background on this page so that links, are not precisely the same colour as the red column on the left of this page.

  It is hard enough reading black text that straddles this color boundary, but I am perhaps others here find it visually impossible to read references to links which are precisely the same color as this boundary.

  My thanks for the service you provide the world in facilitating this online forum.
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 12:38 pm
  Correction to terminate italics
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 2:30 pm
  Andy as you see most of us with Serbs (ok I count as Yugoslav actually) dont agree with you about Milosevic being clean.

  Its better for you to concentrate on charges at the Hague. It isnt your business to cheer SPS unless you became a member of the party. But that is exactly what your film will do. It will portray Milosevic as a heroic leader and all those that thought him corrupt to be victims of western propoganda. That is very easy to say Andy but insulting to our intelligence. What makes you think that you are any more resisting of propoganda in the home of propoganda - USA?

  It begs belief because despite visiting here you still dont understand the Serbian / Balkan people. Actually half of us expect to be robbed by politicians. The thing that we were upset about is how much Milosevic stole. We thought this long long before western propoganda. In this way we are wise. In another way we are stupid because we expect it as normal. In the west politicians steal as well but people get more upset about it.
  
  Sasa Kapor
  Yugoslavia

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 2:47 pm
  

  Sasa.

  In the west politicians steal as well but people get more upset about it.

  In the West, the politicians hardly steal, they are instead bought by the corporations to do their little filthy work. Now, the corporations are the thief in a scale no Eastern politician can ever dream of!

  Haven't you heard of Emron? or remember the Savings and Loans fiasco, we still pay 15 years later, and we will still pay. Any body send to Siberia? No, coroprations are protected byt the sacred principle of PRIVATE PROPERTY which in fact makes the profit of the thief legal!

  I can understand your frustration with your politicians, it makes you feel good to put them down, it gives you a little power, you think power corrupts, don't you? Many in the East had a country, with communism, with corruption and all the rest, now where is your country if not but just a spec in the accounting books of multinational corporations without a name, without an address. What a good job!
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 3:32 pm
  THIS IS IDIOCY: OPEN LETTER TO PAULINE H. BAKER

  Dear Madam,

  I wish to protest your allegations as raised in a news-article by Janet Horn and Faye Fiore from the Los Angeles Times (1) quoting you for regarding President Charles Taylor of Liberia as "the Milosevic of West Africa" - thus by implication referring to the former Yugoslav president as "a serial warmonger"! >P> Madam, this is idiocy! I cannot know for certain, but cannot exclude either that your remark is just a reflection of your ignorance of the Balkans (and maybe also of Liberia)? But your remark in any case is entirely uncalled for, the more so as Mr. Milosevic is currently on "trial" at the ICTY in the Hague, - and have not yet had a chance of defending himself and Serbia.

  You may be unaware of the trial proceedings, and you probably even care as little as a U.S. President? Let me take this opportunity to inform you, that the Prosecution, having recently been granted further extension of the time available to present its case started on 12 February 2002 has not yet produced one shred of evidence in support of NATO's Indictment!

  Hence I kindly ask you to withdraw your unwarranted remarks.

  yours faithfully

  Godfred Louis-Jensen

  (1) http://www.dailypress.com/news/la-fg-liberia7jul07001419,0,2471709.story?coll=dp-breaking-news

  cc: JURIST Milosevic Trial Discussion

  at: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/issue_milo_discuss.php
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 3:36 pm
  THIS IS IDIOCY: OPEN LETTER TO PAULINE H. BAKER

  Dear Madam,

  I wish to protest your allegations as raised in a news-article by Janet Horn and Faye Fiore from the Los Angeles Times (1) quoting you for regarding President Charles Taylor of Liberia as "the Milosevic of West Africa" - thus by implication referring to the former Yugoslav president as "a serial warmonger"!

  Madam, this is idiocy! I cannot know for certain, but cannot exclude either that your remark is just a reflection of your ignorance of the Balkans (and maybe also of Liberia)? But your remark in any case is entirely uncalled for, the more so as Mr. Milosevic is currently on "trial" at the ICTY in the Hague, - and have not yet had a chance of defending himself and Serbia.

  You may be unaware of the trial proceedings, and you probably even care as little as a U.S. President? Let me take this opportunity to inform you, that the Prosecution, having recently been granted further extension of the time available to present its case started on 12 February 2002 has not yet produced one shred of evidence in support of NATO's Indictment!

  Hence I kindly ask you to withdraw your unwarranted remarks.

  yours faithfully

  Godfred Louis-Jensen

  (1) http://www.dailypress.com/news/la-fg-liberia7jul07001419,0,2471709.story?coll=dp-breaking-news

  cc: JURIST Milosevic Trial Discussion

  at: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/issue_milo_discuss.php
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 5:26 pm
  Video archive of July 9th 2003:

  Mr. Knight has a very bad day. Not exactly his fault, but he stills ends up getting shouted at by Mr. May a lot.

  Official transcript are finally obtained from Serbia, following a long outstanding court request for them and as per requirements Mr. Knight's office correctly forwards copies of these transcripts to Mr. Milosevic.

  By the end of the day one can well imagine Mr. Knight wishing that the ICTY had never requested or seen these official transcripts.

  Mr. May obviously wants to run an orderly trial and objects to the very real problems introduced by the prosecution constantly introducing [to late and at untimely moments] large volume of new documentation for the court to made aware of, and consider. He observes that the sheer volume of documentation is becoming impossible to manage, and is undermining the credibility of the trial.

  The prosecution responds that it is required to provide Mr. Milosevic with all evidence that might be used in his defence, (as one of 68 rules of conduct) and that the Serbian authorities had only just provided him with these transcripts.

  That the prosecution is only doing its job is little more than a mitigating factor, moderating Mr. May's obvious annoyance at the suprise turn of events.

  Mr. May is also obviously annoyed at the degree to which the documents contradict earlier claims made by the prosecution in interrogating Mr. Lidic, and questions Mr. Knight about why he couldn't have drawn from these sources in the earlier examination of Lidic.

  [Can anyone clarify what precisely these contradictions were and how serious they are].

  Mr. Knight who clearly understands how unjust such a silly question is, struggles through a re-explanation of how the prosecution didn't have the documents, and how if one doesn't have something one can't be expected to do anything with it, and that if ones claims are subsequently proven to be false in the light of later and better evidence, that is something one must learn to live with. Mr. May however clearly sees no further than that the sudden materialisation of these embarrassing transcripts at such an untimely time as being entirely unsatisfactory, and that Mr. Knight must somehow be to blame for their untimely arrival in court.

  These transcripts are used by Mr. Milosevic to great effect in defending his actions in the Balkans, and in clarifying Serbia's relationship with the Serbs in Krajina. The sections he reads into the record from these transcripts make it clear that far from controlling the Krajina government as claimed, Mr. Milosevic was very much at odds with them, thinking them idiots for their conduct, and being told in turn that they were making fools of him and his associates.

  Mr. Milosevic really does get to have his cake and eat it too, because not only does he use some of the transcripts to vindicate himself, but elsewhere he claims the same transcripts are clearly fabricated forgeries [of the prosecution adding to Mr. Knight's already bad day], in that they make laughable suggestions about the conduct, actions and recorded words of his wife. He insists on the tapes from which the transcripts of his wife's voice were made being played in court, and on voice experts analysing the segments claimed to be his wife's voice, against other voice recordings of his wife.

  Mr. Knight and Mr. May find themselves in the awkward position of having to admit that they haven't the tapes, since the Serb authorities never made these available to them.. something which Mr. Milosevic probably was fully aware of all along. But Mr. Milosevic draws blood here, and you can see him rather satisfied with his own game play.

  Mr. Knight in desperation tries to stop Mr. Milosevic reading into the record clear evidence from official Serb transcripts arguing that "Reading large sections from transcripts and periodically asking Mr. Lidic if what he has read is as it appears on the printed page doesn't qualify as proper cross-examination".

  Mr. May overrules his request, observing that Mr. Milosevic has the right to read into the official record of the trial evidence which is so highly relevant to his own defence, and is coincidently doing it at an appropriate time in exploring the nature of this new evidence with Mr. Lidic who as a witness for the prosecution and someone also appearing in these transcripts is well qualified to comment on the material being read to him.

  Mr. Milosevic, thanks Mr. May for this ruling commenting that he is pleasantly suprised by it.

  Much later in a rear guard action Mr. Knight again confronts Mr. May, observing that while all that Mr. May has said is true, Mr. Knight is very conscious of the time that will be involved in reading vast amounts of material from these lengthy transcripts into the official record, and the degree to which he is conscious of the trial chambers prior concern regarding the subject of Mr. Milosevic wasting time.

  His proposal then is that the chamber agrees to read all the transcripts privately so that the court is aware of their contents and can profit from them, but that Mr. Milosevic be subsequently barred from reading selected contents of these transcripts into the official record, thus making their contents more widely known. This he argues will save considerable time, and thus conveniently expedite the trial.

  Mr. Knight clearly was on the hot seat, watching his case undermined by the most authoritive of sources, desperate to do anything necessary to avoid the degree to which his case was being rapidly undermined becoming known to more than the few. The last thing he wanted was for the record to show so clearly just how damaging these transcripts were to the prosecutions case in Mr. Milosevic's capable hands.

  Again Mr. May overruled him, pointedly observing that he had already given Mr. Knight his ruling on this issue.

  Mr. Lidic mean while agrees with everything that Mr. Milosevic says, appearing to be very much a prosecution witness, that the prosecution might in hindsight wish it had never called.

  This section of the trial should be watched.. not read about. No written account can possible do it justice.
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 6:52 pm
  Sasa The only ones to blame for your corrupt politicians are yourselfs the way you put it means that if you would've had the oportunity to be into politics you would've probably been a corrupted one , so don't "overture" us with honesty lectures and stick to the trial discussion facts
  
  Milan Prika
  Panama
  Panama

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 7:11 pm
  what about this? http://www.guardian.co.uk/serbia/article/0,2479,995099,00.html The massacre of the Bogujevci families - the wives and children of two brothers, Selatin and Safet - and of the Duriqi family took place on a springtime Sunday morning four years ago, in a neighbour's back garden in their hometown of Podujevo, just on the Kosovan side of the border with Serbia. Of the 19 herded against the garden wall, seven women and seven children died, the youngest a boy of two, in a chilling act of bloodlust. Five children, the eldest of which were Saranda and Fatos, survived the spray of bullets: 97 casings were found in the yard. ... "This was the worst event in Podujevo during the [Kosovo] war, and now these witnesses can describe for the first time what happened. Without Albanian witnesses, the trial can't show what really happened," says Natasa Kandic, a Serbian human rights campaigner who has worked tirelessly to bring about yesterday's denouement. "Serbian public opinion has to hear these stories," she says. ...
  
  Slobodan Santic
  UK

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 7:31 pm
  Ian Davis,
  thanks for the description of some truly fascinating moments from the cross-examination of former president Lilic. Milosevic made excellent use of the infamous recently released official Serbian transcripts and prosecutor Nice was humiliated! We are going to have lots of laughs with these transcripts. Even the mainstream media have already joined the fun, as demonstrated by AP's "Report: Chirac Eyed Protection for Mladic".
  
  Pythagoras Crotoniatis
  Greece

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 7:56 pm
  This post is not strictly the topic of the Forum but the subject in general is.

  Nebojsa Malic

  http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m-col.html

  Has created a compendium of “quasi historians” andother authors who grossly distort the truth and history of Balkan wars.

  What puzzles me, being a non-historian, rather a naïve physicist, is whole of the mankind history written this way? Is everything twisted and created as the biased propaganda at the time? Am I to believe any history books?

  I wonder whether and how will the rectification and the truth of the Balkan wars be written and by whom?
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 9:11 pm
  we don't have proof but we know..........

  who said this

  sasa koper
  or
  tony blair
  or
  Bush (the lesser)
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY

• Thursday July 10, 2003 at 11:50 pm
  Slobodan, the article you cite seems strangely uncertain for such a definitive article. Were the killers Serbian paramilaries, as described in the introduction or killers from the special Serbian police unit known as the Scorpions, as immediately later described.

  There is a world of difference between a paramilitary group conducting an operation, and special police unit conducting the same operation. One is presumably operating under official orders from a government, the other is not.

  Anyone who lives in England knows this distinction clearly. The English have their own civil war in Ireland to learn these lessons from, and anyone who in a British paper confused a paramilitary unit with a special police unit is either displaying a gross lack of appreciation for a glaringly obvious inconsistency in their reporting or is subconsciously hedging their bets, essentially conveying a lack of certainty about the facts they themselves are reporting.

  The report indicates that the massacre happened after NATO began bombing Serbia. What evidence is there that the massacre was an officially sanctioned one, and not simply a group of derranged thugs deciding to respond to the bombs with the reported massacre.

  The case is being tried in Belgrade. I trust that the facts will be discovered by the appointed trial, and the criminals who committed this massacre prosecuted.

  See also:

  Massacre children testify in Serb trial
  In the name of the victims
  British doctors in Kosovo appeal for NHS help

  While context doesn't excuse the crime I also think it worth citing.

  PODUJEVO/PODUJEVE
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 1:44 am
  Recently discovered documents discovered in Iraq indicating conclusively that Galloway was in the pay of the Iraqi government proven to be a fraud.

  After questions arose about the documents' authenticity, the Monitor began its own investigation. Among other things, experts found that the two "oldest" documents - dated 1992 and 1993 - actually were written within the past few months, according to ink tests.

  Who ordered this. And what else have they been up to?

  Faked papers thicken fog around Iraq war
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 4:42 am
  Sasa Kapor

  OK, so Milosevic was corrupt and feathered his own nest. It may surprise you that he's probably not very different in that respect from many politicians in the East OR the West. None of us is probably as stupid as to believe that politicians are angels.

  But that is not the point! Milosevic is not being tried in the ICTY for corruption. He, together with the JNA, the volunteers and by extension, the rest of the Serbian people stand accused of a "criminal enterprise" against the Croats, Muslims and Albanians. And for what reason? To justify what the even probably more corrupt Clinton, Blair, Kohl and co have done to Yugoslavia. In comparison, Milosevic's corruption transgressions would amount to a misdemeanour!

  Get a life and start tuning in to what is happening to your people and your country and for what reason. Is it Milosevic's fault Bondsteel is still in Serbia? Is it Milosevic's fault Bush is in Iraq or is it because Bush and his masters have their interests to pursue in both places?

  Maybe you can explain to me why Milosevic didn't take the money he could have got from the West to hand over YU. The money he would have got from the foreign corporations and govts to do so would have been more than exists in 6 Yugoslavias, and certainly much much more than he could have stolen!

  And don't bother telling me he wanted "power". He doesn't seem to me to be stupid enough to believe he could defy Europe and the US and still expect to hang on to power.

  If he'd wanted to be more pragmatic and greedy he'd be sunning himself on the Riviera instead of sitting in the Hague.

  Something more esoteric than money and power must have been driving him. Otherwise he's a complete maniac, and that does not appear to be the case. Maybe he didn't want his country occupied for another 500 years by another colonialist power? Or is that not quite "realpolitik" in Serbia these days?
  
  David
  Australia

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 7:17 am
  Gogol

  I am not suggesting that Capitalism is a fairer system than one that Yugoslavia was under whatever that was.

  Well it is the point when Andy finds trouble admitting to himself that Milosevic is a thief. Why he has this problem I dont know. Why must anybody who question Milosevic integrity be told to get a life or that he is victim of West propoganda or he is himself corrupt..? What kind of sacred cow we are guarding by the way?

  As I said many times the charges at Hague are seperate so no lectures please.

  Bravo David most sensible thing you said:

  'And don't bother telling me he wanted "power". He doesn't seem to me to be stupid enough to believe he could defy Europe and the US and still expect to hang on to power'.

  Except that exactly what he did isnt it? Or did you think it happened some other way?

  If you dont believe that politicians are in politics for power then David we have nothing to talk about.

  
  
  sasa kapor
  yug

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 7:51 am
  Sasa Kapor

  I'd be inclined to say that Milosevic is smart enough to know that he was fighting against seriously greater power than he had, but then again, Czar Lazar might have had the same notions against the Ottomans in Kosovo Field. Most likely Lazar knew he wasn't going to make it back to his throne. Didn't stop him fighting to the end, did it?

  Maybe sometimes there comes a point in one's existence when there's more to life than an unquenchable and overriding thirst for power (assuming we don't all succumb to COMPLETE cynicism).

  As for Milosevic's integrity, I'm inclined to agree with you that he's no angel (after all, he's a politician!), but it seems to me some people such as yourself seem so preoccupied in convincing many of us to that effect, to the exclusion of dropping the bundle on the real issue here and that is the likelihood that Milosevic's "guilt" before the ICTY will translate into guilt for all Serbs, together with an excusing of NATO's crimes.

  As I said, against that, Milosevic's transgressions and corruption as a politician fade into insignificance.

  So why harp on about relative trivialities when you have much greater issues to confront?
  
  David
  Australia

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 8:01 am
  Ian Davis says, that:

  "Mr. May obviously wants to run an orderly trial..." (July 10, 2003 at 5:26 pm).

  Anyway, - the Presiding Judge is supposed to shout "cat" when he sees one, isn't he? Mr. May is just being "clever as a bird".

  I have no proof, - but I know (from a number of incidents at this "trial").
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 9:25 am
  Sasa Kapor,

  I see absolutely no reason to "admit to myself" that Milosevic "is a thief."

  I haven't seen any proof that Milosevic was a thief, so why on Earth would I say that he was? Just because it would make you happy?

  Everything I've seen says that Milosevic is not a thief. The fact of the matter is that Slobodan Milosevic is broke. He dosen't have any money.

  What happened to all of those millions of dollars that he was supposed to have stolen? He sure dosen't have that money now, so where in the Hell is it?

  You're the one making the accusation here. The burden of proof is on you to prove that Milosevic was a thief, and you've already admitted that you don't have any proof, which makes this discussion with you completely pointless, and so I will move on to something else.

  After over 10 days of not watching I found that the "trial" at the Hague was as much of a joke as ever.

  Today there were 2 secret witnesses who testified, B-1120 and C-1171.

  B-1120 was a 92-bis witness for Foca. His testimony was downright comical.

  B-1120 was a member of the main board of the SDA in Foca virtually since the inception of the party in 1990.

  B-1120 initally claimed that Muslims in Foca armed themselves and formed armed night patrols before the war began, then he changed this story 5 minutes later and claimed that the Muslims had no weapons.

  B-1120 explained the deaths of 1,100 Serbs and the burning of Serb houses and the mass-exodus of Serbs from Foca to Montenegro was all done by the Serbs.

  So according to B-1120 the Serbs were killing themselves, expelling themselves, and burning down their own houses.

  Only at the Hague Tribunal....

  The next witness to testify was another secret witness called C-1171.

  C-1171 was a member of the ZNG in Vukovar.

  Apparently, C-1171 is some sort of war criminal himself, but the details of his crimes were dealt with in closed session.

  At any rate C-1171's testimony had nothing to do with Milosevic. The only thing that could possibly be connected to Milosevic was the time that C-1171 spent in the JNA's military prison in Belgrade, and C-1171 testified that nobody mistreated him there.

  Between the 2 secret witnesses the so-called "trial chamber" heard today they dealt with other 6 secret witnesses who will gave secret evidence in writing through rule 92-bis with no cross-examination.

  So what we have here is secret witnesses testifying about God-knows-what with no oppourtunity for President Milosevic to ask these secret witnesses about their secret evidence.

  Barnum and Bailey have nothing on this circus. "Judge" Richard 'Dick' May puts all other ring-masters to shame.
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 9:27 am
  I thought I would share this article with you. It comes from the right-wing National Post here in Canada. They are very well known for French bashing soread the article, like always, with a grain of salt. Report on Lilic testemony will be written today.

  Chirac accused of shielding Serb general: Transcripts say French President agreed to sabotage extradition of Mladic: Wanted for genocide

  -------------------------------

  BRUSSELS - Jacques Chirac, the French President, negotiated a secret deal to protect Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb general accused of Europe's worst atrocities since the Second World War, according to evidence submitted to the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

  The French President allegedly agreed to sabotage the extradition of General Mladic to face genocide charges for his role in the planned extermination of Bosnian Muslims, including the massacre of 7,000 men and boys in the United Nations safe haven of Srebrenica in July, 1995.

  In exchange, Gen. Mladic handed over two French pilots held hostage for 14 weeks by his forces after their Mirage fighter jet was shot down outside Sarajevo.

  The claim, dismissed as "hearsay" by Paris, was contained in the transcripts of a telephone conversation between the former Yugoslav president, Zoran Lilic, and the head of the Yugoslav armed forces in Belgrade.

  They described Mr. Lilic explaining in December, 1995, that Gen. Mladic would be safe from extradition after the Dayton Accords that ended the Bosnian conflict, even though he had already been indicted for war crimes.

  "He will not be delivered to anyone from the tribunal. He has got the guarantee by Chirac and Slobodan [Milosevic, who was president of Serbia at the time]," said the transcript.

  "Accordingly, he has to deliver these men to us, if he wants to, or he should come with us and place the men at the place of his choice." Gen. Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, the former Bosnian Serb leader, have been at large since, evading capture in the French-controlled sector of Bosnia.

  The chief UN prosecutor has described it as a "moral disgrace" that NATO forces have still not seized the two ringleaders of the Bosnian-Serb extermination campaign. M

  r. Lilic, who is a witness this week at the genocide trial of Mr. Milosevic, confirmed the transcript was accurate. But he was evasive on the details, refusing to answer yes or no when asked whether the Chirac-Mladic deal had taken place.

  The document was provided to the UN prosecutors by an unnamed intelligence service. The most likely providers are the British or U.S. governments, which devoted more effort than any others to the interception of signals in the Balkans during the wars of the 1990s.

  Mr. Chirac's spokeswoman, Catherine Colonna, said the claim was totally untrue.

  "We repeat yet again that there were no negotiations for the liberation of these two pilots. French policy has been to take a tough stand against Slobodan Milosevic and his allies."

  Diplomats say the allegation may do an injustice to Mr. Chirac, who played a key role in ending Western acquiescence to Serb-led ethnic cleansing after taking over as President in 1995, from Francois Mitterrand, who had a soft spot for the Serbs.

  The French President has vehemently denied allegations he blocked air strikes against Gen. Mladic's forces as they overran a battalion of Dutch UN peacekeepers in Srebrenica.

  A Dutch television documentary claims France reached a "gentleman's agreement" with Gen. Mladic to hold back NATO air power in exchange for the release of up to 400 UN peacekeepers held by the Bosnian Serbs.

  It cited UN documents, including a fax sent by the UN's field chief, Yasushi Akashi, to Kofi Annan, then UN undersecretary-general, complaining Mr. Milosevic had a deal with Mr. Chirac to prevent air strikes in Bosnia. But it also said no Western power had clean hands, since there was a tacit agreement ethnic cleansing was a way to solve the Bosnian problem.

  . Chirac was horrified by the slaughter of civilians in Srebrenica and has repeatedly damned it as a blot on Europe's conscience. He insists France was ready to order air strikes at any time, but the decision was made by the UN leadership under U.S. influence, not by the French commander on the ground, General Bernard Janvier.

  The French government refused to allow Gen. Janvier to testify in public during the parliamentary inquiry into France's role in the Srebrenica disaster.
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 9:56 am
  Still, - could anybody help, please, - maybe by identifying the place and date of mr. Hashim Thaki's meeting with "foreign reporters", at which the then KLA leader was reportedly "boasting" of his involvement in killings of policemen in the Serbian province of Kosovo?

  Ref. my posting July 08, 2003 at 12:09 pm

  (1) http://aaart.tripod.com/personal.htm
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 10:17 am
  Godfrey, any one who has followed this trial at all closely is going to have formed very clear impressions about Judge May, his motives, and his contributions to this trial.

  But personally I think the issue of what Judge May has done is of less relevance than the issue of what Judge May will do.

  Judge May has historically appeared to be sympathetic and supportive of the prosecution, while being obviously hostile towards Mr. Milosevic. But there are still limits. He understands that his conduct and rulings become part of the record, and that his actions are going to be judged not by the peanut gallery, but also by his own peers.

  If Judge May is faced with the choice of changing tack, or going down with the ship, I think you will observe him change tack very quickly.

  The only complicating factor stems from my own doubts about Judge May's ability to read plain writing on large walls. He has repeatedly appeared to be unable to follow even the simplest arguments.

  Consider for example berating Mr. Knight for failing to use information he had moments earlier indicated he had only received two days earlier. Or on hearing Mr. Milosevics observe that a expert witness was basing the totality of his evidence on the contents of the endictment, and the belief that that endictment was factually correct, declaring (paraphrasing from memory) "Mr. Milosevic, what is your point. This issue is irrelevant".

  I'd love to write the definitive book on this trial, but I think it would take several life times. It is taking one life time just to follow this trial.
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 11:12 am
  Simatovic and Stanisic:

  The tale of their transfer to The Hague, as told by Ms. Del Ponte, offers an intriguing look behind the scenes. Serbian officials "called us for help," she said, some time after the arrest of both men in March, because they lacked sufficient evidence to indict the two men at home for links to organized crime. Yet the officials were reluctant to release them.

  "They told us, `We cannot keep these two persons in detention, so if you can come out with your indictments and arrest warrants, it would be great for us,' " Ms. Del Ponte recounted recently at a briefing. Although her own office was doing its own investigations, she said, they were far from complete. So, Ms. Del Ponte said, "I called my staff to accelerate the work."

  Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/11/international/europe/11TRIB.html?ex=1058500800&en=896224b9264f71d7&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 11:23 am
  Sasa Kapor if you examine NATO’s Rambouet Ultimatum to Yugoslavia you will see that it is a replica of the June 1914 Austro-Hungarian Ultimatum to Serbia. It was a pretext to justify an attack on a sovereign nation just like in 1914. In both cases occupation of a sovereign nation was the ultimate goal. In 1914 Serbia exercised a moral imperative not to become part of the polyglot Austria Hungary just as Milosevic exercised a moral imperative not to be subjugated by Western Imperialism. You, Sasa, seem to suggest that small nations should put their tail between their legs when international law, norms, conventions are broken.

  Socialism and unionism is under attack everywhere as it was with NATO’s attack on Milosevic’s Yugoslavia. WTO want to reduce wages to lowest common denominator and in order to do that “collective goods” must become “private goods.” NATO powers used disinformation and blackmail in order to break up your country and now they have convinced you that you need to be rebuilt in their image.

  What Milosevic feared is now a reality all around you.. The big sell-off of state enterprises in the name of free markets is a fact of life. The purchasers are not Sasas, Ibrahims and Ivicas but foreign enterprises from Germany, America and Britain. We have the same problem here in BC where a right wing government is selling off highways and hydro dams to international purchasers. The end result for me is higher hydro bills, more fees and a lower standard of life.

  Sometimes we don’t see what is taking place in our yard because we are too busy looking over the fence. Let me point to one example in your yard if I may. The tunnel from Fatnica to Bileca is on the chopping block and British firms are bidding for it. This tunnel, some 40 kilometers long whose construction was interrupted by the war was to drain water from Fatnica and provide the water for the electric dam in Bileca which has problems with seasonal water flows. This tunnel would drain Fatnica polje. A polje is a flat arable area found in Karst regions. Draining this polje would provide a large agricultural area where three crops could be grown. It will also provide irrigation along the tunnel route but the main thing it would provide is more electricity due to near to full operating capacity of the dam. Sale of electricity is the main currency earner in south eastern Herzegovina. Well sir you can kiss this currency good bye for ever.

  This is theft of the worst kind and is taking place world wide through privatization. In perpetuity Sasa’s of the world will pay through the nose for something that was yours in the first place.

  Sasa, you claim that Milosevic was corrupt. Is there any less corruption today? Tell me is Mr. Djukanovic a member of the Mafia?.Does Mr. Djukanovic benefit from being divisive? Are all former citizens of Belgrade, Sarajevo and Zagreb safer today or is crime rampant? Is Kosovo of today an example that we should praise? Is the United Nations your example of international justice? Should international relations be decided on the principle of ‘might is right’? Who benefited from the division of Yugoslavia, certainly not you Sasa? NATO bureaucracy and armament manufacturers in the west benefited? American vision for the 21st century benefited.

  The shame of having Paddy Ashdown tell you what to do should be eating at your gut but than again you know what they say “give a dog a bone” and that will keep him quiet. It seems to me that many of you Serbs, Muslims and Croats are suffering from the Stockholm syndrome.

  Mr.Jovanovic only a few credible historians make money from their work. These historians provide a socioeconomic analysis of the past so that you and I might find parallel so that we will not be taken in by historical and political whores. Credible history is only written some years after the fact. Therefore, there are “historians” and there are “whores who write for money”. Thus far the books that I have seen on the breakup of Yugoslavia have been written by whores. The similarity between a whore and a historian who is a lobbyist is that in both cases there is a presence of a pimp.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 12:07 pm
  

  Walter you dont need to tell me about Ramboulett since we agree about that. However I disagree with you on two points. One 'Milosevic exercised a moral imperative not to be subjugated by Western Imperialism'

  This was a pure accident. As a smart politician Milosevic first saw the political benefit in this message and then believed it although I really doubt he ever had a political ideology.

  The second point is your presumption that 'What Milosevic feared is now a reality all around you'. Firstly Milosevic like any politician did not fear this but to lose power. Secondly he began the privatisation process in the first place! He was banker who saw fit to use the capitalistic model when it suits him and the communistic one when it does not. He was the one who sold off State Telecom cheaply to foreigners like Italians and Greeks. If Italian investigators have their way they will find the evidence of just how many millions Milosevic and his cronies took. So he used Capitalism to combine it with even more corruption than one would find in the West. Nightmare economic model that todays government also uses.

  Yes Milosevic was corrupt. No there isnt less corruption today. Yes Djukanovic is a crook. Are streets safer today than when Walter? Than 10 or 15 years ago - no. From 5 years ago its probably about the same but there are statistics for that.

  International relations is decided by might is right. Look at the USA. What can / could little Yugoslavia do? Nothing. The proof we must live with.

  What has Paddy Ashdown and Bosnia got to do with me Walter? If you are suggesting that Rep Srpska join with Serbia then I presume you support full self determination for Kosovo Albanians in their quest for a state also? My own opinion on this thing (Bosnia) is more flexible.

  A question to you Walter hes a s..t but he's our s..t. What does that mean to you Walter? Is it better to have that criminal Miodrag Kostic own all the sugar factories in Serbia or maybe an outsider who isnt godfather to Nenad Canak, friends with Jovanovic and big contributor to DS? It is not an easy choice to make. BTW you will be happy to know that some American Serbs are buying big businesses in Yugoslavia. I dont remember that happening during Milosevic.

  David

  You just need to make that seperation between trial and the man. On the main issues I support you guys here. Just want nobody to be under any illusion about politicians dressing themselfes in colours of anti imperialism when it suits. Though Tito draped himself in whatever colour he felt like to suit his audience too.
  
  sasa kapor
  yug

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 1:13 pm
  

  Sasa,

  BTW you will be happy to know that some American Serbs are buying big businesses in Yugoslavia. I dont remember that happening during Milosevic.

  If I remember correctly not only were Serb American investing but also becoming prime ministers, not with any greater success in pleasing the mighty masters. And what a deal that pharmaceutical plant turned out to be for Serbia!
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 2:06 pm
  Milan Panic yeah we voted for him. Sick isnt it? We also voted for Seselj at one time. Still maybe even Seselj and Panic are better than Clinton and Bush.

  Gogol thats right but you did good job to mention that. Where was Milosevic resistance to capitalism / Globalisation when he appointed Panic? Why did he convert only when he lost power? So called late conversion a bit strange for lifelong Communist / Socialist?

  Maybe there were other Serb American businessmen buying Serbian firms during Milosevic but I dont remember any apart from Panic. - And who says that only the West has Berlusconi types?

  What about that guy who has bought Zastava? What about the guy who has bought Putnik? I think we need more non political sucessful Serbs abroad. If they are happy making only small profits maybe Serbia wont suffer so much. Problem is this government will look for its own rich supporters so they can control everything.
  
  Sasa Kapor
  yug

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 2:17 pm
  On

  Tuesday July 08, 2003 at 6:49 pm

  Sasa Kapor wrote this: Please do not tell us that Milosevic and others did not enrich themselves. You heard it from some SPS guys. Im sure of that. They are not ones receiving Western propoganda - they are the ones who has a relative in tax office or housing office who gave this and that to Milosevic or cronies. You are right about how easy it is to find out things like hotel in Novi Sad. You have a duty to provide us with whole story not just one side of it.

  And on

  Friday July 11, 2003 at 12:07 pm

  The second point is your presumption that 'What Milosevic feared is now a reality all around you'. Firstly Milosevic like any politician did not fear this but to lose power. Secondly he began the privatisation process in the first place! He was banker who saw fit to use the capitalistic model when it suits him and the communistic one when it does not. He was the one who sold off State Telecom cheaply to foreigners like Italians and Greeks. If Italian investigators have their way they will find the evidence of just how many millions Milosevic and his cronies took. So he used Capitalism to combine it with even more corruption than one would find in the West. Nightmare economic model that todays government also uses.

  Do you need to be a linguist to see?

  Who are Sasa Kapor?
  
  the evel
  one

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 2:36 pm
  

  Sasa,

  I am glad you asked. Milosevic told the court the appointment of Panic was a maneuver to buy time by pleasing the increasingly stronger demands by the west to open the Yugoslav economy to international investors and to reform the political system to facilitate the bargain sale of the Yugoslav economy. So since Panic wanted and run in the elections he became the prime minister, but the West was not happy, it wanted more. Don't you think Milosevic anticipated, was always ahead of the game? Isn't he ahead of the game even today? Lets face it you had a good leader, but pettiness and good leadership don't mix, now if Milosevic was there for his own profit and power as you constantly claim what is he doing defending himself alone, denouncing and unmasking the fascists seating and behind the ICTY? He looks to me more like a Dimitrov than a quisling or a dead man like Djinjic!
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 2:48 pm
  Sasa you said to Walter:

  “If you are suggesting that Rep Srpska join with Serbia then I presume you support full self determination for Kosovo Albanians in their quest for a state also? My own opinion on this thing (Bosnia) is more flexible.”

  Do you know what is the nation and what is the national minority? Do you know who bears rights for self-determination?

  Why do you negate Bosnian Serbs as a nation? (Since you equate Kosovo Albanians as national minority with Bosnian Serbs as a constitutive nation in all Yugoslavias

  FYI in 1861 Croatian Sabor recognized Serbs as a nation equal to Croats, and Serbs were recognized in Bosnia even following the A-U annexing in 1878.
  
  Pero Peric
  Canada

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 3:14 pm
  Pero what do you suggest to do in Kosovo and Bosnia?

  Panic the free market economist was appointed by Milosevic the Communist / Socialist by name now anti globalist champion. That makes him good leader? Makes him man without any ideology for me. What is he doing at the Hague? Dont be blind Gogol - he's doing what any good politician does, defending his record. Just like all the witnesses are doing. That of course does not make him guilty of charges.

  If a guy ahead of the game finishes up being thrown out by his own people and in jail it doesnt say much for him. Unless he wanted to be thrown out of power that and untill now nobody never heard such a thing.
  
  Sasa Kapor
  yug

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 3:37 pm
  Sasa . Yugoslavia was never a small country , it's insignificant people like you the ones that have cooperated to you guys be left with what you deserve "nothing" , you have no pride whatsoever , people like you can be taken from Panama to New Zeland on a raft without seen a drop of water , keep on listening and believing on all you are told and you will get to what the empire wants from you , a bunch of zombies
  
  Milan Prika
  Panama
  Rep. of Panama

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 4:57 pm
  

  Sasa,

  If a guy ahead of the game finishes up being thrown out by his own people and in jail it doesnt say much for him. Unless he wanted to be thrown out of power that and untill now nobody never heard such a thing.

  Either you have very short memory or you believe in any thing you're told. otpor was well financed and orchestrated by Washington from their embassy in Budapest, the results of the first round of the elections, called by Milosevic himself were never counted. In fact the ballots were promptly burn. You're truly ignoring the facts about the elections which were disrupted to say the very least. Further the arrest of Milosevic by the new quislings had nothing to do with the Law, it was as well as his deportation in violation of Serbian and Yugoslav law. Obviously Djinjic had a lot to answer for and I think in a imperfect way he has.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 5:00 pm
  

  I should add the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic without a second round of the elections was the first coup, an old fashion coup. Djinjic death was the second. Wait for a third.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 10:22 pm
  Sasa,

  would you be so kind to tell us whether you are a male or a female if you do not mind the question.

  I would also like to know if you agree with the following: The only purpose of The Trial in the Hague is to bore us to oblivion.

  And the still unanswered question: Which Yugoslavia are you from?

  I am a serious man eventhough it may not be obvious in my posts and these are meant to be serious questions. I am interested in your vision of possible Yougoslavia, and none the less in what you think the real reason fot the break up of Yugoslavia was.)

  Thank you very much for the answers.
  
  ivko rig
  it

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 10:24 pm
  Let me just skip over the items of interest from the period in which I was unable to access this forum.

  No Godfred, I'm unable to locate any sites where Hashim Thaqi (this seems to be the correct Albanian spelling of his surname, according to that Albanian site with Blair-Thaqi Happy Couple photo, that Ian had provided the link for) boasted of killing policemen. But, there's something that all of you have missed, I believe: these two Interpol arrest warrants were not issued on the strength of Thaqi being a suspect, but because he had been already convicted on two separate trials in absentia back in 1993. Here is a quote from the news agency FONET on 3 July: "Thaqi was reportedly arrested in Hungary this week on an international warrant issued in 1993 when he was tried and convicted in absentia under the Milosevic regime. He was swiftly released, a move Batic [Serbian Minister of Justice] criticised. 'A court ruling is a court ruling. It is final and punishes Hashim Thaqi's criminal activities from back in 1993', he told NOVOSTI.

  There was another bit of news in the overall skimpy coverage of the Thaqi case, the one that proves that the Interpol warrants were grossly disregarded even before, again in connection to Thaqi and again by the justice-loving and law-obeying "international community": remember that Thaqi attended Rambouillet conference? And remember the Investigating Judge of the District Court from Pristina, Mrs Danica Maksimovic, the one who had been prevented by the KLA mortars and machine-guns to investigate Racak and who had been mentioned in many testimonies, notably the one of William Walker? She explained to the Montenegrin daily DAN on 5 July that it was her who had issued orders on the basis of which those two international warrants against Hashim Thaqi were out. And she was the one who had provided the evidence of Thaqi's war-crime handiwork to the Serbian Ministry of Justice, which in turn forwarded it to the ICTY. And, she recollected Rambouillet. Here is the quote: "Let's remember that Hashim Thaqi went to Rambouillet as a negotiator. There he even became the head of the Kosovo Albanian delegation, at the insistence of Madeleine Albright. Even then, the Interpol warrant was outstanding, and yet he had embarked the plane in Pristina, at the US insistence and with their supervision."

  And here's straight from the horse's mouth on 10 July :"The President of the Democratic Party of Kosovo, Hashim Thaqi, stated for BLIC daily that he was ready to meet the representatives of the Serbian authorities, in spite of the announcements that he could be arrested if he came to Belgrade, for being sentenced to ten years' imprisonment on the basis of the effective court ruling." Obviously, Thaqi knows that the current Serbian rulers are merely spouting empty threats: it sounds good to say that Thaqi will be put on trial in absentia once more. They obviously have reliable info that their constituency likes to hear that, so they say it, in view of the upcoming general elections. In the meantime, let's disregard the existing court ruling. It's been made during the Milosevic regime, anyway.

  Finally, here's what the Minister of the Interior Affairs, Dusan Mihajlovic, said at the press conference of his Lilliputian Serbian Liberals Party on 11 July: "Minister of the Police said that the leader of the Democratic Party of Kosovo Hashim Thaqi would not be arrested in Belgrade if he had the status of a guest, pursuant to the resolution of the competent state bodies. He said that the Minister of Justice Vladan Batic was right in saying that Thaqi would be arrested if he came to Belgrade, but he emphasized that the situation could change if he were the guest of Serbia. 'No country arrests its guests', said Mihajlovic."

  Sasa Kapor, you may express your opinion as anybody else here. Let me just suggest that the excessive use of the pronoun "we" and "us" be dropped and replaced with the more accurate "I". So, instead of saying "half of us expect to be robbed by politicians" you should say "I expect to be robbed by politicians". Or, instead of saying "we thought this long long before western propaganda" you should say "I thought this long long before western propaganda". Or, instead of saying "none of us may have proof, but we know it", you should say : "none of us may have proof, but I know it". Don't you see, you would sound so much sharper, let alone more exact, by using the first person singular. By saying things that way, you could argue your knowledge came either from a) having hard first-hand personal evidence, or b) having a strong gut feeling. Don't hide behind the "we" and don't pretend to be representing anybody but yourself, you will be more convincing.

  You give advice to Andy to "tell the whole story" about the SPS [Milosevic's Socialist Party of Serbia]. Well, the whole story might not be to your liking at all: the SPS has unexpectedly won a lot of votes in recent partial local elections (even being able to take over some municipalities), so "we" are obviously not so convinced that the SPS guys were such terrible thieves; or maybe "we" are convinced that the DOS guys are even more terrible thieves; or maybe both is true. I'm not the SPS member nor did I vote for them, so I will not use the "we" pronoun, I'll just quote what the political opponents of the SPS said about their latest success (and that of the Seselj's Radical party, who came strong as well). Miroljub Labus, President of the G17 Plus Party (former expert think tank turned political party) seriously warned on 5 July that the conflicts among the democrats have weakened that block, which favours socialists and radicals. Ms Milivojevic, a spokesperson to the G17 Plus, said: "It is worrisome that the forces of the old regime show the improvement. This is not good, it proves that the democratic block is not strong, it's getting weaker." Mr Stjepic, the official of the DHSS [Justice Minister's Batic Demo-Christian Party of Serbia] said: "They fared well because the turn-out was low. It's the matter of the increase in the number of those not interested in elections, those who decide not to vote for anyone." Today's POLITIKA even printed a tiny inbox explaining the situation in one of the municipalities were the socialists won the majority and are now able to practically oust DOS from the local government. The municipality in question is Pozarevac, the birthplace of Milosevic, where Sasa could argue that "we" saw first-hand how Milosevic's son Marko was managing his immense criminal empire consisting of a bakery, a theme-park and a disco club and that "we" would surely never again vote for those SPS thieves again (or, so soon). Well, a different thing happened. So, drop the "we", please.

  Hope to be able to post something about the recent string of witnesses soon.
  
  Vera Martinovic
  Belgrade
  Yugoslavia

• Friday July 11, 2003 at 10:55 pm
  Mr.Jovanovic, I turned 50 this year. There comes a point when one has seen enough history to understand that the rights and wrongs of history, are not always as they are painted by the politicians or the media.

  When one follows events very closely as they actually happen one doesn't need a historian to tell the story of what happened, or write the book for you. With age you become your own historian.

  My own position is expressed clearly in

  Letters of support

  where I think I first voiced it.

  Sasa, I think you may misunderstand some of us. We do not defend Mr. Milosevic so much as oppose injustice. If the Serbs were to try Mr. Milosevic that would be a matter between Mr. Milosevic and the Serbs.

  But when NATO ( Canada/Denmark/Britain etc.) illegally interfere in the internal affairs of another country and initiate a war of aggresion against Serbia; a Canadian prosecutor indicts Mr. Milosevic during that war; and a British judge tries Mr. Milosevic, these actions don't merely shame those who commit them if they are unjust. They shame me, being both a Canadian and British subject.

  I want all war criminals brought to justice. I don't want a two tier system where being Serb means you are guilty, even if you are not, and being American means you can't be prosecuted even if you are.

  Most people seem to think that the ICTY and the ICJ a huge step forward because they believe in "international justice". I also believe in "international justice". It goes with the territory if one is Canadian. But I am more pragmatic and think that the ICTY and the ICJ will only be a huge step forward if they discourage future crime, conflict and injustice, while defending international justice.

  Given the political nature of these courts however, I fear that this is close to suggesting that "putting foxes in hen houses is only a huge step forward if it improves egg production".
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario