 MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE |
| JURIST >> LEGAL NEWS - WORLD LAW >> Discussion >> Milosevic Trial Discussion Archive |
—————————————————————————————
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. This marks the first time a head of state has been personally prosecuted before an international criminal court.
Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial?
————————————————————————————
NOTICE: Comments posted to this discussion board are solely the responsibility of individual posters, and not of JURIST, its owner, operators, host or staff. JURIST reserves the right to block or remove posts that are in violation of law or that advocate illegal acts, that are obscene, disruptive, defamatory, threatening, harassing or abusive, that are in breach of intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, that are advertisements or solicitations, or that are not related to the topic being discussed.
————————————————————————————
- discussion archive
- Monday July 28, 2003 at 6:53 am
Ian, scroll down towards the bottom of Budding's freshman seminar syllabus and you'll find the readings on KosMet.This is a seminar on the breakup of Yugoslavia and there isn't a single primary source used. Note, that the readings are pretty much accounts by journalists.
The book by Lampe is pretty good, for it is primarily a economic history and therefore relies on fixed statistics for its analysis.
Otherwise, Budding is pretty much feeding the children at Harvard junk.
AP V
NY
NY - Monday July 28, 2003 at 8:08 am
Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus...Ian, - yes, I just wanted to hear you saying that. And then still:
The (question of) fairness in "any" trial (including the socalled "trial" against mr. Milosevic?) hinges on (for one thing) "the sifting and weighing of evidence," - which (I suppose?) in turn "hinges on" (again: for one thing) the details of history, as you say (or on details of THE history? Hinges on THE particular details of the RELEVANT history, - NOT just "details of history"...).
(Denmark (for one!) has a "historical experience" of loosing a large part of her territory (to Preussen, 1864) under "conditions" not unlike those of Serbia (or the FRY) today...even I, although no lawyer, historian or even a librarian would be capable of providingis capable of providing the court with "a correct understanding" of THAT history. It could be interesting, maybe even useful in some way, - and yet I wonder about the RELEVANCE).
Anyway, Ian - right now I wonder how mrs. Carla del Ponte and mrs. Hartmann are doing in New York today?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 8:41 am
There must be SOMEBODY, who genuinely believe, that mr. Milosevic is "getting a fair trial".Mustn't there?
Why don´t SOMEBODY step forward then and argue for the ICTY? NATO? Hashim Thaqi...?
Or: Would in fact not a true U.N. Secretary General demand to know from his Chief Prosecutor whether it is true or not, that regarding mr. Thaqi's case we do have the bodies of the Serbian policemen, we do have all the evidence required concerning their murder, we do have a witness testimony - and even mr. Thaqi's confession?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:33 am
Dear Godfred .I am convinced that there are lots of people that truly believe in the ICTY fairness , but after all recent incidents they prefer to hold their opinions due to the cracks on the credibility of U.S. U.K. reasoning, draging with them few countries to form a pseudo-coalition thinking that by doing so they'll get some favors , including Poland , who by the way has forgotten that Poles put the blood to capture casino in WWII and the allies took the credit and now they are used again "short memory indeed"
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:40 am
I genuinely believe that the three judges are more than capable of discerning if Mr. Milosevic is getting a fair trial, and of taking that into consideration in their final ruling.The principle of Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus doesn't apply only to witnesses. It also applies to Judges.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario - Monday July 28, 2003 at 10:35 am
We should invite Judith Armatta from CIJ to present her case here.
Dan B
Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:34 am
Ian, well yes, - so do I, I think! In principle, that is!In kind of reality I seem to remember though, - and I may be quoting Presiding Judge May correctly for stating this, some day last April, more than sixteen months ago when the Prosecutors had sought and gotten an extention of ONE YEAR for their case, the Prosecutors case, making it into a total of some sixteen (16) months, that:
(in fairness to the accused and indeed to the judges, who one day will have to come down with a verdict)
NO CASE SHOULD LAST ANY LONGER THAN THAT!
- which has indeed by now the "case" against mr. Milosevic!
How on earth is mr. May and his distigushed colleagues going to take that "into consideration in their final ruling"?
Mr. Annan, - do you read us? You know, that like the small hinge of a revolving door, then...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M AR K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:47 am
Latest
rial was postponed Monday due to the defendant's ill health, the presiding U.N. judge said. The former Yugoslav president was scheduled to see a doctor later Monday and a report on his condition will be submitted to the trial chamber. Milosevic, who turns 61 next month, takes heart medication and doctors say he is at risk of a heart attack. Proceedings have been delayed by several weeks because of bouts of flu and high fever. On Friday, he received painkillers after complaining he felt unwell, delaying hearings by 90 minutes. The court said the latest health problem was unrelated to his heart trouble, but declined to give details. Milosevic has been on trial since February 2002, defending himself against 66 war crimes, including genocide. The tribunal closes for a three-week summer recess on Friday.
Another international tribunal paid and staffed by the United States is discussed in the prestigious American newspaper The Wall Street Journal a must reading showing how the US sees international law, justice and peace! Don't miss it!
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday July 28, 2003 at 12:01 pm
At issue here Godfred is bias. Mr. May has repeatedly advised Mr. Milosevic that his time will be abbreviated if he wastes time, and has made additional time available only when he judges it warranted.But it is the prosecution who appears most guilty of wasting time. They are calling witness after witness who contribute little to their case against Milosevic, and have nothing substantial to say. They often appear more like witnesses for the defence. This has a much greater total impact on the progress of the trial than anything Mr. Milosevic does at this stage.
The whole shotgun approach Wladimiroff accused the prosecution of using essentially reduces to aiming blindly, and hoping that something falls on your head. If this isn't a waste of time I don't know what is. If the prosecution has evidence they should present it; if they do not they should close their case.
Godfred, do you think Mr. May is consciously aware of his own bias here? It is said that there are none so blind as those who will not see.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 12:24 pm
Is Judge May consciously aware of his own bias?Well, - what do I know, Ian?
However I actually visited the "trial" in The Hague myself for a week last year, - carefully studying everybody involved.
Judging from his appearance I'd say: Sure, - mr. May is aware of his bias!
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M AR K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 4:23 pm
I believe that many of the time wasting experts called by the OTP are simply being called as a way of granting favours.Note that one day the ICTY festival will end and Nice, et. al. will all need to find another gig. Paying Budding, Riedelmeyer a hefty per diem to testify at the ICTY is one way of connecting to the Fellows of Harvard U. who may just be convinced that Nice would be a purrrfect candidate for that tenure track position at the JFK school opening up.......
Apparatchniks one and all
AP V
NY
NY - Monday July 28, 2003 at 4:34 pm
A question for all who have been following the trial closely. What in your opinion is the most damning evidence presented so far by the OTP and when was it presented? I would like to review that evidence.The prosecution must wind up soon, and it is constructive to have a better understanding of what it is that Mr. Milosevic has to rebute in when he is given the opportunity to present his defence.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 4:59 pm
It is very difficult to evaluate seriously any evidence presented given the gross procedural violations. A normal court would have already called to the bench (US legal jargon) the chief prosecutor and tell him: "you have ten more witness, pick your best, to make your case other wise the case is out". This would have happened the first fortnight of the trial, in February 2002 . . . The rest is the CIRCUS and I regret law scholars all over the world don't speak up, at least not loud enough!
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday July 28, 2003 at 6:33 pm
Ian, I would suggest that you visit www.cij.orgThey take a pro-tribunal stance. http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=133&tribunalID=1
I have read all the reports, and here is the CIJ summary of the kosovo evidence: "Where's the Smoking Gun? A review of the Kosovo evidence reveals Milosevic’s guilt"
http://www.cij.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewReport&reportID=152&tribunalID=1
Dan B
Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 7:17 pm
What is the most damning evidence presented by the OTP? (Ian. July 28, 2003 at 4:34 pm).Something well worth considering, I suppose, - although in my opinion there is none whatever! I think one should go also for the second most damaging evidence, even for the third most damaging stuff, just to make sure...
And may be one should ask: What would the OTP consider to be the most damning evidence presented?
In my opinion only "Kosovo" matters (if better organised "Croatia" and "Bosnia" could have made an interesting "hearing" on "Balkan history").
Personally I would not qualify as one of those "following the trial closely", - except for "Kosovo"! So I leave it to others to judge, - may be to the judges?
After the first seven long months of the prosecutions case, during which the prosecutors examined 320 pieces of evidence and called 125 witnesses to testify about "Kosovo", a professor of Balkans history in the U.S. was suggesting that "to succeed in the Croatia" and "Bosnia" stages", the prosecution should present more substantial evidence and "call witnesses with more authority."
Florence Hartmann, the prosecution spokeswoman was also confirming that the prosecution was "already then" considering calling more high-ranking witnesses (1).
Then why didn't the prosecutor call Hashim Thaqi, a former leader of the KLA, whom the Danish Prime Minister, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, was receiving in Copenhagen a few months after the Nato aggression, introducing this notorious murderer as "Mr. Prime Minister"?
(1) http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2002/09/24092002153930.asp
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M AR K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 7:27 pm
Many thanks Dan. An interesting site. Seems that if you are pro-tribunal Mr. May doesn't shout at Mr. Milosevic; instead he thunders. The subtlety of language is a frightening thing. It seems to have a power all its very own.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:03 pm
Yes Dan, - thanks.Many thanks however also to Judith Armatta, who is providing such observations as this: "...Serbian forces attacked...immediately after the first NATO bomb was dropped."
Is that not to certify, that "Serbian forces" (the forces of the FRY Government!) did NOT "attack" prior to the NATO agression?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:20 pm
A 180º Turn
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:31 pm
A Personal Tribute[Stratfor provided superb up to the minute information on the war in Kosovo. Matthew's untimely death is the worlds loss. I extend my sympathy to all who knew him.]
Stratfor is mourning the loss of its chief analyst, Matthew Baker, who has been with the company since its inception in 1996. Matthew, aged 33, was shot and killed at his home in Austin, Texas, on the evening of July 24.
As chief analyst, Matthew helped keep Stratfor's analysis ahead of the mainstream media coverage. He was interviewed frequently by the press as a military expert, especially during the Kosovo war and again during the recent Iraq war. Matthew has been quoted by many media sources, including the Boston Herald, Sun Sentinel, London Free Press, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, FoxNews.com, the Washington Times, and by Stars & Stripes and other military journals.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:33 pm
A natural event.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:35 pm
Stradford.com is a branch of the NSA and CIA. Saint Klauss is not.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday July 28, 2003 at 9:57 pm
Stratfor is a made in the US intelligence service. But it's intelligence re the US led aggression against Serbia was definitely not in sync with US propaganda, was well thought out, reasoned, and to the extent that I was able to validate it at the time factual.I am all in favour of American intelligence. Like Gandi's famous comment about Western Civilization I think it would be a good idea.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 10:25 pm
Where, mrs. Armatta? Where's that "Smoking Gun"?The "review" submitted by Judith Armatta and updated on 14 February 2003, when the prosecutions case had lasted for more than one year, is surely a gift to the defense of mr. Milosevic! May I suggest that with antagonists of mrs. Armatta's calibre few would need no friends.
Says Armatta: "Though he's has been promoting it for years, not all Albanians are liars."
Oh, - they aren't? Fine, but why would mr. Milosevic "promote" that "all Albanians are liars"? Assuming that mrs. Armatta is talking about "Kosovo Albanians", Albanian speaking citizens of Serbia, does she have any evidence of such "promotion"? Even once? Was this allegation of Armatta's at all covered, or even mentioned during the "Kosovo" part of the trial?
If so: Where, mrs. Armatta?
Dan! This "smoking gun"-rubbish of Armatta's must have been countered already. Do you know about that?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 10:46 pm
Ianduring the Kosovo & Metohija phase of the Milosevic hearings, there was one or two incidents described by witnesses which had a solid tone to them. The rest of the incidents were clearly KLA hits and/or NATO collateral damage.
Of course no link to the government, nor to President Milosevic was ever established even for the tiny minority ( 1 or 2) of incidents which appeared to be the work of loyalist forces.
Rather than spend much energy on refuting the OTO lies, I'd suggest President Milosevic get hold of the UNMIK records on Commander Remi........and call Remi to the witness stand.
From what I've heard, Remi is a obvious psycho. Given the fact that he was the most active KLA leader, people watching can make their own conclusions.
In fact, President Milosevic should make it a point to call the most unsavory henchmen of the War Party to testify.
The War Party has tried to keep these people hidden. Let Milosevic use his time to show the world and Judges exactly who Washington & London supported.
I'd love to see that manic SDA Prime Minister go beserk at the ICTY.
AP V
NY
NY - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:04 pm
Utter Smoke! Armatta's "review of the Kosovo evidence" makes no mention of the crucial incident at Racak, but states that:"When KVM head William Walker charged in the media that Serbian forces had carried out a massacre in Drenica, he was declared persona non grata and ordered out of the country."
So Walker "charged in the media"?
Did mrs. Armatta follow this "trial" at all? Does she know any difference between Drenica and Racak?
She must be joking...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:36 pm
I discovered this today from the latest British Helsinki Human Righs Watch"Many Serbs are unconvinced that Mr. Miloševiæ was personally corrupt pointing out that talk of his ‘missing millions’ seems to have waned as the trail to this hidden fortune seems to have run cold. However, whether by accident or design, the Miloševiæ government never got to grips with mafia criminality or paramilitary forces like the Red Berets. Yet, attempts at The Hague to tie him closely with such groups have, so far, failed. The testimony of one prosecution witness, ‘Captain Dragan’, on 22nd February ended in farce.[1], Later, on 16th April, Arkan’s secretary supposedly provided the ‘smoking gun’ proving that Miloševiæ ordered the funding of paramilitaries. However, on closer examination, her evidence didn’t add up to much - the diary she supposedly kept at the time has since ‘disappeared’.[2] -----
Gogol, as for Armatta's article, I have included her e-mail here in case someone would like to reply to her article or other articles (www.cij.org)--Jarmatta@cij.org
Dan B
Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:40 pm
To confirm,Austin police charged a man with murder after authorities said he shot his neighbor during a fight about barking dogs and a fence separating their property, officials said Friday. Tommie Alaniz, 55, remained in the Travis County Jail on Friday morning with bail set at $250,000. Authorities said he shot and killed Matthew Baker, 33, the chief analyst for Stratfor Inc. in Austin, during an argument outside their homes in South Austin. http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/metro/072503/0726shooting.html
Dan B
Canada - Monday July 28, 2003 at 11:44 pm
Is May biased against Milosevic? He need only review some of the tape material and his manner towards Milosevic to see the answer for himself. He can contrast that with his fawning attitude towards the other side and some of the more "notable" witnesses (and some not so notable witnesses) and draw his own conclusions. It's in full 32bit colour! He ought to be ashamed of himself, but then again he no doubt sees it as his "job" to behave like an asshole towards Milosevic no matter what is presented.The same goes for the likes of Judith Armatta. There's a piece of work for you if ever I've seen one. No matter what is said or done, she'll purvey the stories she gets paid to write. It really makes you wonderhow some slimeballs manage to sleep at night. It's not as if the rest of us were blind or stupid but on the basis of the proceedings, stories like those of Armatta are an insult to the intelligence of the world's population. How she can so brazenly file stories like she does, in obvious contradiction of what any of us sees is beyond me. As for Milosevic being Mandrake or some sort of magician who casts spells over people so they'll testify for him, that's just the pits!
Ok, so she's rotten, she works for her 30 pieces of silver. That I understand and can come to terms with.
What I really do resent is the likes of her, May, Bliar, Bush et al treating us with such contempt that they do not even bother to spin intelligently and subtly. They do not even bother to go through the motions of crediting us with any intelligence. It's crass and blatant bullshit run amok. Maybe they don't even give a damn whether we buy it or not. So much for democracy and our representatives in democracy being the servants of their public. So much for "people power"!
Maybe it's time there was some accountability on their part. Maybe even more questions need to be raised and asked. Enter our "free press" and media! Where on earth have they disappeared to? In somebody's pocket, no doubt!
Look at what's happening in Guantanamo. And you ask if Milosevic is getting a "fair" trial? Judging by the way things are going there these days I'm surprised no one's asked "Why should Milosevic GET a trial at all?"
David
Australia - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 12:06 am
Dan, did you mean British Helsinki Human Rights Group.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 12:22 am
correct
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 6:30 am
"Why should Milosevic GET a trial at all?"Well, - David is right of course in "judging by the way things are going...these days", this "trial" must be recognized by Bush, Bliar and their lot as a grand "mistake". Henceforth suspects will be summarily shot at sight - imagine having separate "trials" against any terrorists, Saddam Husseins, Bushes, Blairs...?
Milosevic however IS in fact getting a "trial", - false, flawed, yes and to be judged by a mr. May, summarized by, say, Judith Armatta (who must surely be a fool)...
Still: "We" have to continue taking the "trial" seriously, - even if the other side obviously doesn't! For one thing I'd therefore suggest that Dan, who (on July 28, 2003 at 10:35 am) was thinking of "inviting Judith Armatta to present her case here" (in the JURIST Forum) to have some second thoughts and do some groundwork:
(1) Would Armatta have a "case" at all - other than as "presented" in this "Smoking Gun" article? If so, then what's that about in brief? Please tell us...
(2) Hasn't the "Smoking Gun"-thing, which appears to me to be just ignorant crab - been competently refuted already? In which case it may not be "necessary" to spend (any more) time on Armatta... (3) Shouldn't JURIST "invite"? I mean: it's JURIST's site, not "ours".
Couldn't Dan kindly clarify this - preferably before any number of "us" enters into serious work on this and related matters, - which might not be "necessary"? Under the circumstances "we" can ill afford to waste time!
"We" can NOT afford to waste time! >P> I honestly believe, that (much of)the vast material collected under this "Milosevic trial discussion" is of considerable value - even if it wasn't taken any further, but merely was made operational by indexing etc.
Would anybody be seriously working on that?
David (July 28, 2003 at 11:44 pm) ! I get you, - yet I do recommend not to kill a Mockingbird...
For what it is worth I shall copy the above to Judith Armatta, - but Dan, please clarify! Thank you.
PS: In the meantime I shall post of course at the earliest convenience any relevant answer(s) in response to my "Open Letter" to U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan (dated July 27, 2003 at 3:24 pm). This letter was copied to the Danish Prime Minister, mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who is having a holiday, I believe, but who is otherwise known to respond as appropriate.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 6:43 am
Carla del Ponte shown yellow cardAnnan decides to replace Carla Del Ponte as Rwanda prosecutor
Del Ponte was chief prosecutor of both the tribunals but Rwanda government, backed by the United States and Britain, had been lobbying for her removal from Rwanda tribunal. PTI News India 29 July 2003
Is this a warning from Blair and Bush (on behalf of Clinton): Don’t indict Thaci, Izebegovic and Tudjman’s associates or else? I strongly suspect that del Ponte is being leaned on not to indict the leaders of these forces who are thereby exonerated of massive war crimes.
So the trial continues with a biased prosecutor which we knew from the first day in court when she laughed in the face of Milosevic. The Anglo/US Serb bashing fest is to continue. The judges should dismiss the case on these reasons alone.
Several hundred thousand Serbs have been displaced, dispossessed and tens of thousands killed and injured. Many of them suffering torture and mutilation in the process: Note the many horrific decapitations practised by insurgent Muslim fighters: And no one is responsible according to del Ponte.
PS. Walter: I hope you enjoyed your trip to Seattle. Pity there was a mismatch: The Celtic team is literally not in the same league as United. However it must have been some compensation to watch Van Nistelrooy the best striker in the game today.
I imagine Robert Burns had someone like Carla del Ponte in mind when he wrote:
Curs'd be the man, the poorest wretch in life,
The crouching vassal to a tyrant wife!
Who has no will but by her high permission,
Who has not sixpence but in her possession,
Who must to her his dear friend's secrets tell,
Who dreads a curtain lecture worse than hell.
Were such the wife had fallen to my part,
I'd break her spirit or I'd break her heart;
I'd charm her with the magic of a switch,
I'd kiss her maids, and kick the perverse bitch.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 10:29 am
What? Is Carla del Ponte's joint mandate as head of both the Rwanda court and the ICTY "too much for one person," as Kofi Annan is suggesting (1), - implying, that the Suisse woman is all of a sudden - after four years with her mandate - set to become "a person"?Or is del Ponte now to become just "one person" - having been more than that for the last nearly 4 years since given the mandate?
Or Annan may simply be missing "the person" for this job?
May I refer then to my "open letter" to the Secretary General (July 27, 2003 at 3:24 pm) in which it is suggested, that his long deserved release would enable mr. Milosevic to assume all rôles at the ICTY, - including not only that of Chief Prosecutor, but of any prosecutors, judges and amici curiae - excluding but the little rôle of "the accused" (which should as from now be entrusted to NATO heads and collaborating terrorists such as Hashim Thaqi...
(1)http://www.nzz.ch/2003/07/29/english/page-synd4077952.html
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 10:42 am
Hi, Louise Arbour gave an interview today to CBC Radio (28 minutes, make sure you listen to the first 10 minutes). http://media.cbc.ca:8080/ramgen/cbc.ca/thecurrent/media/200307/20030729thecurrent_sec3.rmShe states after being asked is there hyporacy that Americans are not being tried. Her answer: "The answer to that is a political answer, they have to start somewhere."
Dan B
Canada - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 11:36 am
Writing about "THE PLAN", mrs. Judith Armatta of the CIJ is claiming as a fact in her little "review of the Kosovo evidence" (1), that "in at least a half dozen incidents (Albanian) men were separated (from women, children and the elderly), and then killed by the VJ and/or Serbian police, - and that the then FRY President not only knew about, but actually planned these alleged crimes... Armatta curiously does not say, or even hints which "incidents" she has in mind, but the description curiously "fits" with the American "ambassador" William Walkers much publicised "interpretation" of what happened at the village of Racak on 15 January, 1999 - which interpretation the trial has shown to be nothing but a series of lies on part of the former head of the OSCE KVM.I no longer believe that mrs. Armatta is joking. Has she gone raving mad?
(1) "Where's the Smoking Gun". By Judith Armatta, February 2003.
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 1:10 pm
From the circus:
PRESS ADVISORY
Please be advised that the trial of Slobodan Milosevic is scheduled to resume on Monday 25 August at 9 a.m. after the ICTY summer court recess. Also be advised that the last weekly Press Briefing before the recess will take place tomorrow at 11.30 a.m.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 1:27 pm
I went to a face the public session given by Louise Arbour when she was still the Prosecutor and she avoided answering any serious questions. She is part of the problem (and whore when it comes to justice).
How can she say now that her proffesssionalism interfered with her delivery of justice?
This radio interview is another propaganda piece to support justice as a tool of policy. Shameful.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 1:37 pm
Back in the 60's I read Jacques Ellul Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes
Habor no hope knowing your enemy kill it or die.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 1:59 pm
I am going to find me a f...g island and become another Crusoe , I have just read that the Swiss are going to back the bid for "Lucrecia" Del Ponte to the ICC and nominate the U.N. tribunal for the peace Nobel prize , personally I think they deserve the prize but for chemistry due that everything they deal with goes into shit www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=105&sid=4077952 (sorry for the rudeness)
Milan Prika
Rep of Panama - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 4:39 pm
Carla del Ponte’s big lieTime and time again throughout the past four years del Ponte has claimed she will bring to trial the leaders of the KLA responsible for thousands of victims during their campaign of terror both before, during and after Nato’s aerial bombardment.
Time and time again she has offered up excuses for not doing so. Now it is claimed she has no witnesses. It has been pointed out - as if she didn’t know - that her own Protected Witness K6 has given substantial evidence that is recorded in the Milosevic trial records.
Then there is the well documented evidence of Bujar Bukoshi.
Any scan of the internet reveals many sources of evidence. Here is just one more brave and honest ethnic Albanian, Faik Jashari whose testimony is ignored by del Ponte:
"I consider that for the crimes that were committed and are still committed by Albanian separatists and terrorists with the help of the international community should urgently be initiated proceedings at the International Court in The Hague, for the extradition of Kouchner, Thaci and others, who are directly involved in the crimes against humanity.
The court had NO witnesses when it indicted Milosevic. How many witnesses does she need to indict Thaci?
Let’s not kid ourselves this court is a farce: The leaders of the KLA will never be indicted. This is not a court of justice. It is a political tool - a show trial - to absolve Phony Tony and his fellow war criminals for their folly and their atrocities.
Blair the consummate actor, pretending to believe passionately any contradiction which serves his purpose, reminds me of Autolycus the Rogue in The Bard’s ‘The Winter’s Tale’:
Ha, ha! what a fool Honesty is! and Trust, his sworn brother, a very simple gentleman! … I see this is the time that the unjust man doth thrive … Though I am not naturally honest, I am so sometimes by chance … If I had a mind to be honest, I see Fortune would not suffer me.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 5:25 pm
Is Blair for the terrorists or against them?DEFENCE & FOREIGN AFFAIRS STRATEGIC POLICY, JUNE 2003
Terrorism in The Balkans - By Gregory R Copley, Editor.
Iran's clerical leaders now are at a critical juncture in their fight for survival. They will have to use their terrorist resources in the Balkans as a lever in their global war against the US.
The Iranian, bin Laden and other connections into Balkan terrorism are now being more clearly understood as part of a global phenomenon, and the US and the West have a critical need to fight terrorism in Bosnia and Serbia. However, it is important for the Balkan governments to help educate the major powers about the seamless linkages between the symptoms of terrorism in the Balkans and the causes and sources of anti-Western terrorism in Iran, Syria, Libya and the bin Laden organizations.
It is now of continuing and ongoing importance that major Western governments become informed as to how the imagery of the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo was, for the past decade, manipulated. Only by understanding this can the West can understand that the interests and peoples of the region - Bosnian Muslims, Serbs and others - were maligned and misrepresented in the interests of transnational Islamist terrorism. The wars of the 1990s cannot be swept away as merely being "ancient history"; it is critical to tomorrow's counter-terror wars that the real perpetrators of terror in the Balkans become known, as well as the real victims. The world community does not yet understand the reality of that confusing period. And in some ways, the victims of the wars may also be too close to the trauma to adequately write a truly objective and balanced view of history.
In other words: The "war on terror" must develop tactics to deal with the symptoms of ongoing terrorism and its networks in the Balkans, and simultaneously develop and prosecute new strategies to eliminate the sources of terrorism sponsorship. But at the same time the Balkan governments need to invest heavily in correcting the history of the Balkans in the 1990s which in Bosnia and Serbia, in reality, the terrorists wrote. Until now, the governments and people of the region - with the exception of Croatia - have not taken their own history into their own hands.
Blair supported terrorists in the Balkans - and in Thaci still supports them - while claiming to oppose them elsewhere or is it just the oil in Iraq. Oh how embarrassing.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 5:51 pm
We don’t know the half of it.But what we do know is shocking enough. After smashing their way into the house Blair’s thugs continued their thuggery:
The soldiers rounded up five family members, including the general, and handcuffed them. Seventeen-year-old Ahmed fled upstairs, and the Americans pursued him with a hail of gunfire. A couple of minutes later, they dragged Ahmed downstairs, bleeding heavily. When Gen. Saleh protested, the soldiers beat and kicked him …
The Saleh home bears witness to the violence of the arrests there. When a Chronicle reporter visited recently, there were dozens of bullet holes on the second-floor landing of the stairwell, indicating the fire of soldiers shooting at Ahmed as he fled upstairs. Only one bullet mark was visible on the ground floor, and it appeared to be from a bullet fired from below that ricocheted off the wall.
The stairway and upstairs bedroom were smeared with bloodstains, which Mayda Saleh tearfully said was her son's blood. On both floors, cabinets and dressers were smashed, and windows, beds and even picture frames were broken.
In a similar raid nearby on June 26, American troops shot and killed a 13- year-old boy, Muhammad al-Kubaisi, who neighbors said was standing on a rooftop watching the raid.
Interviews with Iraqis in recent weeks turned up dozens of allegations of abuses committed during arrests or interrogations.
If it wasn’t right for Milosevic’s security forces to behave like this how is it justified for Blair’s coalition forces in Iraq? And if it is justified why is Milosevic on trial instead the leaders of the KLA such as Thaci?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 6:13 pm
Milan Prika, - no need to be sorry, really (July 29, 2003 at 1:59 pm).Cuidado, tal vez?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
DE N M A R K - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 10:18 pm
No way is it "justified" for Blair’s coalition forces to behave like that in Iraq, Peter (July 29, 2003 at 5:51 pm).There is no comparison with the actions of the FRY army and police forces in Kosovo prior to the NATO war in 1999, - neither is there (to the best of my knowledge) any evidence of but vaguely similar or widespread thuggery on part of the Serb gvt. forces during the NATO bombing.
It would be stupid for president Milosevic to indulge in facistoid violence, - and he isn't.
It would be clever for president Bush not to indulge in facistoid violence, - and he isn't.
It is all very sad, really. I've just been reading through Judith Armatta's "reports" or "reviews", including that on "the Smoking Gun", which for all its sillyness does not promote impressions even remotely as bad as those left by mr. Bliar.
It may prove unbearable, I trust?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Tuesday July 29, 2003 at 11:42 pm
Yes, it is justified to behave like that in Iraq when your "interest" and "security" are in danger like oil (of course somebody elses) or geopolitical control , in the first case you just come in and take it , in the second case you create a conflict then come in and take it over . Godfred . Seguire su consejo
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 9:35 am
Peter
We don’t know the half of it.That's right you don't know the half of it, check out the below URL. It's straight from the horses mouth.
Milan
Yes, it is justified to behave like that in Iraq when your "interest" and "security" are in danger like oil (of course somebody elses..It what we call a "win win" situation, ie, everyone wins.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/hitchens
J, P
USA,Wis - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 2:37 pm
Christopher Hitchens has had a noticeable agenda for the last several years.
Anna P
California - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 5:17 pm
I investigated and found that the teaching of the Harvard professor Budding is extremely biased and thus I wrote her a following letter:Professor Audrey Helfant Budding
Harvard University
ahekfant@fas.harvard.edu
Dear professor Budding,
By virtue of “Google” I found the Syllabus of your Freshman Seminar 43t, “Nation, State and Ethnic Cleansing: The case of Yugoslavia”
I have been born in Yugoslavia and immigrated to U.S in 1953. I am 73 yr old and have more or less witnessed a good part of history you are trying to teach and “interpret”. My education is that of a physicist ( Ph.D. University of Chicago 1959), and not that of a historian.
Nevertheless I find that your Syllabus is full of glaring mistakes. To begin with your reference material hardly includes any Serbian author, whereas many Croatian authors are well represented. Obviously missing is “Wartime” by Milovan Djilas.
However most glaring bias is to be found in your statement in Week 4, Yugoslavia’s Death and Rebirth in the Second World War. You state:
“The interlocking civil wars within the Second World War, Yugoslavs slaughtered each other along political and intercommunal fault lines.”
There is no mention of Jasenovac or the Ustashi slaughter of close to 600,000 men ,women and children.
On the other hand in your Week 10 ,War Crimes and International Responses you state:
Bosnian Serb forces massacred thousands of Muslim men after overrunning UN-designated “safe area” of Srebrenica. Focusing on Srebrenica we will seek to understand the dilemmas of international intervention….”
The allegation is that in Srebrenica some 7000 men have been executed.
I find these omissions and obvious bias unworthy a proper historical lecture and more over given from the cathedra of the venerable institution such as Harvard.
Sincerely yours,
Drasko Jovanovic
Senior Physicist Emeritus, Fermilab
Visiting professor UIUC, retired
D. Jovanovic
USA - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 5:32 pm
JPYour URL referred to a number of articles by Hitchens: I presume this is the one you intended me to read:
" Hitchens wasn't surprised by the lethal efficiency of the U.S. Army, and praised its military intelligence. "They were rolling up these networks. They were getting more tips than they knew what to do with," he said. "They were very, very confident." Hitchens said media coverage, which focuses on U.S. casualties and the complaints of soldiers who want to go home, left him unprepared for the reality in Iraq. "Morale is very high" among both troops and Iraqi citizens. "People waving American flags at the troops in the street - you can't fake that.
I note from his other articles that he is glad that the Hussein regime has been disposed of - so am I. But I do not like the manner of its disposal by those who earlier supported him in power and encouraged his attack upon Iran thus causing millions of deaths.
International law requires a UN mandate for war or permits it in self-defence. Hitchens’ bottom line appears to be ‘The end justifies the means’. This is the sort of dangerous self-deluding thinking that will justify a crushing attack by China - with or without Russia’s support - on the USA in 2020.
You appear to have missed the point of my comment which was that some human rights abuses by coalition forces in Iraq are being reported but many are not.
Don’t misunderstand me. When regular forces are subjected to terror attacks they often respond badly. When colleagues of Serbian security forces were ambushed, shot in the back and decapitated by the KLA and their Mujahedin allies I have no doubt they made “determined” efforts to root out the perpetrators just as coalition forces have done in Iraq. There is one big difference: The Serbs were absolutely justified in their attacks upon an Islamic insurgency, which was murdering its citizens including loyal ethnic Albanians on Serbian sovereign territory. The coalition forces in Iraq have no such justification. According to International law they have no right to be on Iraqi sovereign territory.
Don’t misunderstand me again. Atrocities by insurgents do not justify a heavy-handed response by security forces. It is up to their leaders to call to account those responsible for any human rights abuses brought to their attention. But I do not hear any calls from Blair or Bush to examine these well-publicised human rights abuses in Iraq while holding Milosevic to account for similar alleged and often bogus charges in Kosovo: without any proof that he was even aware of any human rights abuses.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 7:40 pm
To the new "Conquistadores". EL RESPETO AL DERECHO AJENO ES LA PAZ .- BENITO JUAREZ. CADA PAIS TIENE SU PROPIA ASPIRINA .- GEN. OMAR TORRIJOS
Milan Prika
Rep. of Panama - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 9:23 pm
Moderator. Please reset your page : is very wide .Can't see the whole line. Thanks
Vasile Ianos
NJ - Wednesday July 30, 2003 at 10:02 pm
Ian, my thinking recently went the same way as yours: the evidence presented so far by the OTP certainly deserves reviewing and I hope I'll be able to do something in that department during the summer recess. I can say that I have been following the proceedings relatively closely, by watching approximately 3/4 of testimonies and trying to write about some of them. It is almost impossible to pinpoint the most damning evidence presented, because practically each testimony had been tainted by obvious perjury, in part or completely. My overall conclusion so far is close to that of AV P from New York: there were only one or two witnesses during the Kosovo stage that sounded true and logical in describing the incidents they allegedly saw, but no link to Milosevic or the government with any atrocities had been established. I intend to read transcripts a bit more and come up with some indications.The point is that the OTP knew from the beginning they have no smoking gun testimony and their approach was clearly that of a patchwork technique (which is nice when making a quilt, but dubious when presenting a case). In other words, they were ready to sift through the pile of obvious lies for these pieces of the puzzle that could be jammed with some effort into the already predetermined picture they created in the Indictment. If in the process the truth suffers, well, so much worse for the truth. The resulting picture was bound to be a lopsided monster, crudely stitched up, unable to stand and unviable to exist as a simple and convincing presentation of events.
The expectations of the OTP regarding the testimonies they intend to get from their witnesses are clear from reading the Prosecution Opening Statement (transcripts of 12/13 Feb. 2002). All three Prosecutors (Del Ponte, Nice and Rynevald) kept announcing to the Bench, in regard to each specific allegation from the Indictment: "You will hear evidence from the witnesses". It looked strong, but then there were several slip-ups which revealed this is not quite so.
Nice confirmed how important history was for the Prosecution's case (of course, as presented by their "experts"), by stating that "even distant history sometimes available to this Court through the witnesses, will have a relevance from time to time in showing what the accused thought". [Apparently, the OTP considers the presumed/guessed thoughts as evidence.]
Speaking about the Rambouillet "negotiations", Nice admitted that not only the thoughts of the Accused, but also the beliefs of witnesses would be the material for their case, by saying that "Some witnesses believe that some of those present at the Serb side were trying conscientiously" and that "Albanians were perhaps reluctant to sign". But, of course, Nice immediately warned the panel that "there was a lack of sincerity" on the part of such witnesses. [Notice that no hard evidence for either of these claims had been announced as forthcoming, such as the testimony about who said what, or who signed or refused to sign what, only beliefs and warnings about insincerity. Nice was well aware what those so-called insiders could say - namely, what really happened, and what really happened was unfavourable for his case, so he warned the judges in advance against his own witnesses.]
Here's my translation of the today's wire by our news agency BETA re the summer break of the Milosevic "trial" and the planned Prosecution witnesses for the rest of their available time:
[quote] THE MILOSEVIC TRIAL TO CONTINUE ON 25 AUGUST - The Hague - The former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic's trial at The Hague will be continued on 25 August, after the summer recess at The Hague Tribunal, as it was stated at the ICTY. The Milosevic trial was interrupted this week due to the poor health of the Accused - for the ninth time since its inception on 12 February 2002. The Prosecution will wrap up the presentation of its case by the beginning of December and the majority of witnesses after the summer recess will testify about the crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica, the Prosecutors stated today at The Hague, as reported by BETA. At the brief session this morning in court, the Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice said that the Prosecution has 62 days left to present its evidence against Milosevic, according to the previous court ruling, and they are to finish this job "by the end of November or the beginning of December". Nice said that the Prosecutors are to give up bringing a large number of previously planned witnesses, in order to finish presenting evidence within the set time-limit. However, he added that the Prosecution might use a part of the time at its disposal after December, when certain requested documents are submitted by the Belgrade authorities. Nice provided a list to the Trial Chamber, containing the witnesses to be brought by the end of the presentation of evidence, pointing out that a new and important witness informed the Prosecutors last night by a letter that he's willing to appear at the Milosevic trial. However, he does not want to be a witness for the Prosecution, nor to have any contacts with the OTP, but requests to give his evidence as a witness for the Trial Chamber, Nice stated, adding that the submission to this effect will be presented to the judges. The Prosecutor also declared himself to be an "optimist" as regards another potential witness, whose testimony requires a special permission by a foreign government. At the inception of the process, the OTP had confirmed its intention to summon the former US peace mediator Richard Halbrooke, but so far he has not appeared at The Hague Tribunal, although this had been negotiated. Nice also announced that the Prosecution would request a permission from the Trial Chamber to interrogate in a more aggressive manner its own witnesses who had been "very close" to the Accused. "For instance, this will apply to the witnesses - if summoned - who should confirm in front of the Court the veracity of what they have written in their books ", the Prosecutor explained. In its pre-trial submission, the OTP had amply quoted from the book 'The Last Days of the SFRY' , the memoirs by Borislav Jovic, the former President of the Federal Presidency and one of the closest collaborators to Milosevic. Nice said that the OTP has speeded up the presentation of evidence to the maximum and announced that he would continue to request the Accused to be made more efficient and focused as well in his cross-examination of witnesses. [end quote]
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 12:36 am
c.1995 N.Y. Times News ServiceBELGRADE, Serbia - A book based on the diary of one of President Slobodan Milosevic's closest political colleagues has created a sensation here because, contrary to the official propaganda, it depicts the Serbian leader as deliberately provoking war in the former Yugoslavia.
The author, Borislav Jovic, was president of Yugoslavia until just before the outbreak of the conflict in 1991, with battles between the former Yugoslav republics of Serbia and Croatia.
He describes Milosevic as a leader who delights in court intrigue but makes all decisions himself. He reports conversations in which Milosevic insists there will be a war by Serbia against the other republics of Yugoslavia and says that as early as 1989 Milosevic had to be dissuaded from ordering the army to intervene in Slovenia. Addition: This potential witness was also under investigation by the prosecutor.
The full article here: http://www.amber.ucsf.edu/homes/ross/public_html/bosnia_/milos2.txt
Dan B
Canada - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 11:29 am
ICRC report on Bosnia 2001People unaccounted for and their families By the end of 2001, the ICRC had collected 20,741 tracing requests in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The families of 2,498 miss-ing persons received answers (300 persons were found alive, 2,198 were confirmed dead). The families of another 867 missing persons received information on their relatives' death but not their mortal remains. The families of 17,376 missing persons had not yet received any informa-tion on the fate of their loved ones. Over 5,800 families consulted at least one of the two volumes of the Book of belong- ings containing photographs of clothing and other belongings recovered from bod-ies exhumed in the Srebrenica area. By the end of 2001, the books had resulted in 243 strong leads for forensic specialists to work on. Six identifications had been con-firmed by DNA analysis, while DNA confir-mation was pending for another 31 pre-sumed identifications. A total of 113 leads had been rejected, and 93 were still being investigated. A third Book of belongings, concerning various regions of the Repub-lica Srpska, was in preparation. Through ICRC field work, the fate of four ICRC-registered detainees who had gone missing from detention places during the conflict was clarified, which left 264 detainees unaccounted for.
Report on Bosnia 2002
In July, the presidents of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) met in Sara-jevo - their first joint meeting since the end of the war - to discuss, among other things, refugees, IDPs and missing per-sons. One result of the summit was a pro-posed protocol to expedite the exhumation process and the search for missing per-sons in Croatia and the FRY. The human remains of between 1,400 and 1,700 people were exhumed in 2002, bringing the total since 1992 to around 15,500.
So if we presume that all missing are dead that is 20000 + 155000 that means that Bosnian war based on Red Cross had 35500 victims on all sides.
Dakic Ana
Serbia - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 3:07 pm
For some interesting books on the Balkan wars visit:http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m-col.html
Visit Antiwar for your daily shot of news!
Peter Vervaeke
Belgium - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 5:30 pm
Vera, I watched virtually every day of the Kosovo trial on the videos kindly made available by http://hague.bard.edu/video.html.My conclusion which I suspect would be that of any who took the trouble to follow that section of the trial, was essentially identical to yours.
Dan: If it can be shown that Mr. Milosevic deliberately provoked war in the Balkans, then I who have zero time for those who start wars, would be happy to see him found guilty on this charge. But the evidence simply doesn't seem to support this claim. Or more correctly, I have yet to see such evidence.
Ian Davis
Waterloo
Ontario, Canada - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 5:36 pm
There are none so blind as those who do not want to see.A special edition of Panorama on BBC2, March 2000, called: ‘Moral Combat’ contained this material:
Reporter Allan Little explored the origins of what later became a widespread observation, in a Macedonian context, about guerrilla groups seeking to provoke reprisals - likely to be reported as ‘atrocities’ - in order to draw international intervention to their side.
The film contained an interview with KLA leader Hacim Thaci, in which he admitted he and his colleagues had been well aware that their strikes on Serb police patrols were likely to lead to villages being bombarded. And Dugi Gorani, another Kosovo Albanian member of the Rambouillet negotiating team, recalled being told by one western diplomat that outside military involvement would not come until the body-count among his co-nationals surpassed five thousand.
Do ethnic Albanians have special dispensation from Nato to murder Serb Policemen some of whom were ethnic Albanians?
No I thought not.
Apart from all the other evidence and witnesses pointed out - including the testimony in court records of her own Protected Witness K6 - here is Thaci himself admitting the fact.
For how much longer can Carla del Ponte keep up the pretence that she has no evidence or witnesses to Thaci’s involvement in crimes of terror, especially the deliberate and provocative murder of Serbian policemen?
Post ScriptumThe URL, indicated here, of the HTML version contains the words ‘Thaci+boasts’
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 6:53 pm
Peter, you are right to remind us once again of Thaci´s belligerent past now that we have been made privy to Milosevic´s war plans as early as 1989. Just let us keep in mind that war is not a war crime in itself. So Milosevic may or may not have entertained ordering the army to invervene in Slovenia. That is not a war crime, and besides, at that time, Slovenia was part of Yugoslavia, so the army even had the obligation to intervene (which is the word used here). We are not even talking about aggression. The evidence provided kindly by the former Yugoslav President Borislav Jovic might shed light on Milosevic´s power over the military, but that is all, and even then the "evidence" is not conclusive.
J W
Canada - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 8:50 pm
"For how much longer can Carla del Ponte keep up the pretence that she has no evidence or witnesses to Thaqi’s involvement in...the deliberate and provocative murder of Serbian policemen?" (July 31, 2003 at 5:36 pm).As ICTY action is obviously long overdue with regard to Thaqi and his gang I find it impossible to provide an answer - yet with all respect I wish to second Peter's question. Hear, hear!
Only vaguely connected to this is, that: Tonight, when on my way home I was passing the Knippels Bridge in central Copenhagen I stopped to briefly chat with a couple of tourists. They turned out to be Suisse; and I could not resist asking about their opinion on del Ponte?
They barely knew her work at the ICTY (Sic!), - but seemed quite thrilled at the thought of having gotten her extradited from Switzerland.
"Please keep her," they said (I am not certain of the bearing of this on the case of Hashim Thaqi).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 8:55 pm
War crimes court gives Bosnian Serb life
AP, The Hague
"Dr Milomir Stakic is hereby sentenced to life imprisonment," said Judge Wolfgang Schomburg, reading the verdict as Stakic stood, looking stunned. The court said he would be eligible for parole in 20 years.I didn't follow Dr. Stakic's trial. They don't make it easy for us; the news is full of Bush's opposition to gay marriage, a life and death issue I suppose, unlike a mere conviction at the Hague. Ho Hum.
Yet the way this all is going I doubt that Dr. Stakic is any more guilty than you-know-who in that Nato gang.
Nikole J
Canada - Thursday July 31, 2003 at 9:01 pm
I posted too soon -- Dr. Stakic is not guilty -- I don't know how I could even compare him with anybody from the Nato gang!!!
Nikole J
Canada