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

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:30 am
  David in British criminal jurisprudence the rule is that “better that 99 guilty go free than one innocent person get convicted. Or the onus is on the persecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. In civil law the decisions are made on the “balance of probabilities” or whose evidence is most believable. Civil cases may be decided on the basis of contributory factors which means that the plaintiff may be partly responsible for the damages for which he or she is suing. The decision can be split fifty /fifty or any combination of responsibility depending on who provided the most believable story.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 2:37 am
  Kathryn -- Maybe this will do it: I will type the characters with spaces. Spaces must be removed to make it work. To start a paragraph type < P > To end a paragraph type < / P > To make text bold type: < B > At the end of the bold text type: < / B > If you type all of these commands as shown but without spacing they will work.
  
  Nikole J
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 5:07 am
  I find very disturbing news from Belgrade about demolishing "suspects" house. If they are suspects, law should charge them and state should freeze all their assets. If they are guilty you sell their property or give it to charity. I think it’s a waist to take bulldozer and destroy houses. I don’t think such act does honor to Zoran Djidjic. I fact it puts a blemish on democratic government.
  
  Anna Turcotte
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 6:30 am
  It is good that I checked this discussion today. There is quite a lot of stuff here.

  David, you asked in parentheses whether the guilt has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt or whether the probability is enough. You have a point. To my knowledge, this is not spelled out in the basic legal documents, but it seems that the latter is what can be deduced from them:

  The Rules of Procedure says that confessions are presumed to have been free and voluntary (Rule 92). This relieves the prosecution from the burden of proof altogether. Also, evidence of a consistent pattern of conduct can be enough (Rule 93). This means that everything doesn't have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

  Vera, Djindjic didn't decide whether Milosevic was indicted. He even didn't decide whether he had to be transferred, because someone must have decided that he shouldn't.

  The Yugoslav law was broken. OK. However, Milosevic was indicted pursuant to the Statute. So when the laws are in conflict, the only thing is to decide which takes precedence.

  Once Milosevic was indicted, the national courts couldn't be expected to take steps to make him stand trial. The case was deferred to ICTY. This is the reverse side of the "concurrent jurisdiction", which I have tried to turn against Nato.

  And what made the transfer necessary? Two words: "failed state". Yugoslavia was considered a failed state, and Milosevic was held responsible for the failure. And since Milosevic was perceived to be a dictator, he could also be expected to make the kind of laws that prevented him from standing trial.

  So the Yugoslav law was broken, but it didn't make the transfer unlawful (!), because the ICTY law was there. But the fact that the Yugoslav law was broken is an embarrasment. The fact that the transfer did go so smoothly gave the lie to the contention that Miloseviv had the whole country under his thumb. Later, when he was in The Hague, the parliament didn't jump for joy and start passing cooperation laws with ICTY immediately. This proves that Milosevic didn't make the parliament pass the kind of laws he liked.

  The Machiavellis don't like to be embarrassed. That is why they want the Serbian parliament to pass the requisite cooperation laws now, preferably retroactively. Gogol said that the law has now been passed but it doesn't conform with the Constitution.

  This is very significant. Now that I have defected to the other side of the fence, I can see that this is what the Machiavellis mean by lacking cooperation with the ICTY. Of course, they can't tell the parliament to pass the kind of laws they want, so they use the allegedly irretraceable Mladic as a bargaining chip.
  
  Jari Nousiainen
  Finland

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 6:40 am
  Some more correction. The house demolished of Spasojevic 'siptar' was without permits. Request had been sent to local Zemun authorities but DSS (Kostunica party) veto. Now of course they cant do this. Many in local of Zemun are happy about demolishion. Demolision legal or not - probably not really but that house was blood money there is no mistake. Spasojevic was another one of Red Berets under previous Milosevic regime. Have guess why he had nickname siptar, its not good. Siptar was in 1991 already in special forces under Frenki. By 1995 Siptar was riding his red Ferrari around Belgrade with Marko Milosevic. Frenki has been taken to be questioned by police. Binic a famous Red Star football player now MP for Arkans old party has been also arrested. Even Ceca has been taken for questioning. We hope they will destroy Arkan disgusting building too.

  Vera post made other mistakes or misleadings, Mr Buha (former boss of Surcin) is not in country. He has been outside the country for more than a year. Siptar betrayed him and joined Legija and Zemun. Buha got contract of road building because he had best equipment in country. Nobody argue with that. Siptar got angry and blew it up. There is NO evidence saying Djindjic and Buha were friends and its sad that anybody should tell stories without evidence about dead Prime Minister. The cold tone of Vera post shows to me very cold attitude to premier but its ok because it is not difficult to see through hate.

  Maybe you are right Katherine that this Americans all come together for something whether war or death of leader makes America great. Sad but we have many selective patriot who are only patriot for certain Serbs.

  Should say also that ''let's kidnap the former President, who cares about law...' also could say to be attitude of Milosevic or his supporters to Stambolic.

  In many case what happened to Stambolic was worse in morals. There was political leader or his crony who decided that Stambolic could beat him in election. The order was given not just to kidnap but execute Stambolic. So Legija goes and does job under Rade Markovic instruction. Later on the great patriot legija changes side and goes to Djindjic. Legija helps to arrest his previous boss and then complains that stupid security service used same van for kidnap and murder of Stambolic to arrest Milosevic (at this time Milosevic was not kidnapped but arrested on domestic charges of which he was guilty). Djindjic later throws Legija out of Red Berets. Red Berets protest months later. Rest history.

  Yes Djindjic made deal with Legija during October revolution, yes he got support of Stanisic. But there is no evidence showing Djindjic was 'street thug' 'personally fascinated with criminals..', 'his idols' and only tried to enrich himself. There is no evidence. In fact same words could apply to former leader Milosevic but I would not go down this low. The same ones who criticize ones against Milosevic use same tactic to rubbish Djindjic?!

  It is very cowardly to speak like that of dead Prime Minister. Thouh at least Vera has good sense to know that any talk about foreign plot is rubbish.

  About state of emergency. There are mask men now with machine gun on the street stopping cars. The police want to get revenge on small time criminals. My Friend is included in number of arrested total of suppose criminals. My friend not a criminal, he opposed law saying that people dont have right to protest. They came to his house, examine his computers and now he is in police cell with no right at all. He is one of the so called criminal suspects of Zemun. Civil libertys do not exist much now.
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 7:09 am
  So Arandjel,

  How is now different from Milosevic time if what you said about civil liberties is true? I think that there is no difference between "dictatorship of proletariat" and "dictatorship of democracy".
  
  Ana Dakic
  Serbia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 7:18 am
  As an intermittent reader of voices and opinions posted on this site I now have renewed interest in the most recent events thanks to the questioning of status quo remarks by both Jari and Arandjel. Your arguments are enlightening.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 8:05 am
  Ana

  Right now in this state of emergency there is even less freedom or democracy than during Milosevic. That is correct.

  I dont belive that with Milosevic there was dictatorship of proletariat and I dont think we have dictatorship of democracy now. But maybe didnt understand the question is about. If you can put it more clear then I will do best to answer.

  Thank to Jenny. What missing in global media was too long also missing from thread. Alternative voice to majority opinion.
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 8:12 am
  Yesterday there were many diplomats who came to funeral. Among ones with really kind words was from Papandreju. There was also a woman from Finland.

  Speeches were given by new heir to thrown Zivkovic, Batic and other ones. We could not see thing there cemetary was full. Speeches were with combat. Djindjic would have liked that.

  Around quater of million of us quisling went. That is probably more than went for Tito in public. Difference was as uncle told me that state employers made workers take day of to go to funeral. Nobody forced people to see off Djindjic
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 8:40 am
  Why is everyone talking about democracy?........ How can Serbia be expected to convert to democracy in a mere half-decade? No people, who have been under non-democratic rule for such a long time can just suddenly be used to the new political systems....let alone the non-democratic dealings and controls of media from certain parties within these systems. There is no answer, just a struggle to try and obtain a kind of slowly evolving democracy, unique to the culture.....which for so long has evaded serbian politics; and which (the intelects,artists and elite of serbia have proclaimed proudly), is cherished as an inherent aspect of serbian history and culture.
  
  ivan kokotovic
  australia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:13 am
  Aranjel: Before you go thanking Jennie Morningstar, who also goes under the names of Keiko, Rita Rita, Death to Yugoslavia, and a host of other names there is something you should know. Her real name is Barbara, and I have forgotten her last name, but you can find it on the SUC forum.

  During the bombing of Serbia she was on the SUC forum and many others. From 9:00 a.m. until noon wherein she stopped for lunch, and then from 1:00 to 5:00 wherein she went home,,, she told us for her glass of wine. She did this during the bombing and is still at it.

  If you recall the news coming out of Kosovo where elderly women were being strangled for their apartments, a 24 year old nun was raped, Serbians were being dragged out of their cars and beaten to death. She posted the following “tit for tat.”

  She ridiculed the people of Bosnia who did not have the best of dental care.She usually had a slew of anti Serb people follow her on the forums with their very bad mouths. I guess they finally gave up but she continues.

  She has declared herself to be a Croat, but I doubt that she is. Her game is to provoke Serbs to say derogatory things against Croats and start trouble between the two bodies in the USA..

  If you will go to the SUC forum you will see that she is still there posting every article she can find that speaks against the Serbs.

  She is looked at as a snake by Serbs for her constant goading, provoking and downright meanness.

  If you are a Serb, think twice about thanking her. She is not your friend.

  I think Jari is much too intelligent to align himself with her. She doubted his intelligence when she was on the SUC forum and I spoke highly of him, she spoke ill of him.

  She is a weasel who will do everything she can to start trouble.

  Jennie it is time for you to hang it up. The country is going to bomb Iraq and it is a dangerous time and the last thing it needs is a trouble maker like yourself. If you have any love for the USA pray for the world and peace for all.

  
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:18 am
  Vera:

  Thank you for your last post. You are the best. Keep it up

  .
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:50 am
  

  Jari, Milosevic has not change the law in order to prevent his extradition. This is an old law adopted many years before Mr. Milosevic came into power.

  Jari's comment: "And since Milosevic was perceived to be a dictator, he could also be expected to make the kind of laws that prevented him from standing trial."
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:58 am
  A friend who works with an NGO from Kamloops went to Belgrade and here is his observation on the Djindjic funeral and the people of Belgrade. I thought the posters here would find this interesting.

  Forwarded from Don in Belgrade

  Hi Everyone Today, March 15 was a very sad day for the Serbs that I saw. All faces were serious and some were tearful. But they are strong people. Zoran Djindjic's son who is only about 7 years never shed a tear. And only when they lowered Zoran into the ground did his beautiful wife and daughter show emotion. This was at 2:30 this afternoon.

  The city is very quiet tonight with most entertainment closed. It has been an emotionally draining day for me but much more for the Serbs. “Zoran Djindjic, these criminals cannot stop what you have started and strived for; democracy, freedom, peace, and prosperity. “Many Belgradians are very fearful and unsure of the future; the economy, international relations, internal strife. “We are such a small country and all we do is shoot each other”

  I was not able to get near the church of St.Sava as there were hundreds of thousands of people and thousands of police. I stood on Slavia and watched the procession to the cemetery. It was a short and unpretentious procession with a band leading, armed forces, clergy, and what I presume were various dignitaries. The woman next me at Slavia told me “He never would wear a bullet proof vest” I will go to my church tomorrow to pray for the future of the people of Serbia” I then meet Vera -Walt's friend, for coffee, then I go to Misha's place to meet a new V.A from Canada I am to reassure her that this is a wonderful country which will not be difficult. Pray for the Serbian People and their future.

  Love Donald
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 11:07 am
  Arandjel P V, Vera, and others living in Serbia,

  I see that you are all concerned about the current state of Emergency imposed on Serbia.

  A fundamental truth in politics is this: Everything that is done in politics is done for its reaction.

  Zoran Djindjic was shot and the reaction was the imposition of a de-facto martial law on Serbia.

  Is there any suspicion in Serbia that Djindjic was killed so that others from within his own government could give themselves more power? That maybe the objective behind shooting Djindjic was precisely to create this pretext for imposing this state of emergency.

  Djindjic's political enemies regarded him as a puppet. What good does it do to shoot a puppet? After all, the puppet-master is still there to pull the strings of the next puppet; so shooting Djindjic would be pointless in that respect.

  Who is benefiting from this violent act? The Serbian government has obviously benefited with this unprecedented power that they have given to themselves, and taken from the people.

  The shooter knew where Djindjic would be and when he would be there. Does anybody in Serbia think that this could have been an inside job?
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 11:27 am
  When it comes to extradition of Mr. Milosevic to the ICTY there was a decision by the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia that such an act is in contradiction with the Constitution an the laws of Yugoslavia. Mr. Kostunica was asking for the law of cooperation with the ICTY to be adopted before any person from Yugoslavia would be sent to Hague. This request was ignored by most members of the DOS coalition until it was obvious that cooperation with the ICTY is not possible without the appropriate law and it was adopted many months after Mr. Milosevic was sent to Hague. Who ever decided to extradite Mr. Milosevic to Hague broke the law.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 11:56 am
  David, while reading your post I remembered that at the beginning of Mrs. Ranta's examination by the ICTY prosecution Mr. Nice first established, with her agreeing to it, that she hasn't had contact with the ICTY prosecution since she has submitted her report until hear appearance in the court room. Everything that followed looked like very well choreographed and rehearsed dance of two de-fanged cobras disguised as two dancing butterflies. Well, it was obvious that they have had a lot of contact but in order to state the opposite she had to be called by the troika and not by the prosecution.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:01 pm
  Mr Erlanger of New York Times has probably the best account about Djindjic assasination.

  Did Serbia's Leader Do the West's Bidding Too Well?

  http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/16/weekinreview/ By STEVEN ERLANGER March 16, 2003

  The assassination on Wednesday of Zoran Djindjic, the Serbian prime minister so highly praised by Western leaders, is a reminder that half-hearted nation-building can easily be derailed, especially when outside nations make heavy political demands on fragile post-tyrannical states like Serbia and, presumably, Iraq.

  In some ways, many Serbs say, the West squeezed Mr. Djindjic to death in a too-tight embrace of specific demands for reform and extradition of war criminals, and tied the delivery of desperately needed foreign aid to those conditions.

  Mr. Djindjic, no saint, made deals with various Serbian devils, both war criminals and ordinary criminals, in organizing the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000.

  But there are larger questions about the price the prosecutors at The Hague - and behind them, the leaders of the United States and Europe - are asking from a shaky democratic leadership of a poor and corrupted state. Western notions of guilt and innocence, already perceived as "victor's justice" by many in the Balkans, have put enormous strain on the fledgling democratic governments of Croatia and Montenegro, too.
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:16 pm
  Arandjel,

  What I am concern about is how much this action is neutral. Are they going after "Surcin clan" or just "Zemun clan"? I am all for cleaning Mafia and I do understand that some structures like police are heavily infiltrated. However, if you can not trust your own police you ask for international help like interpol. You declare war on Mafia non-selectively. Like President Kostunica said "there is no your or my Mafia".
  
  DAkic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:31 pm
  David,

  Excellent post about self-management.

  I would add one thing. And it is very important. Yugoslavia did not make progression on borrowed money.

  common property had it roots from “Common Labor Governance” of Sisak steel works, in 1950. Tito’s symbolic handing over of Sisak steel works was very loud message to West that Yugoslavia really does not want to follow Russia’s communist model, which helped Yugoslavia to overcome pressure from both West and East including embargo on goods from both sides too. The success of overcoming isolation from West and East and the common governance model contributed to some kind of social consensus between government goals and labor force which busted citizens’ enthusiasm and resulted in the biggest growth of gross domestic product in 1950-s what was ever recorded in any country in the World.

  So it was during embargo.

  Yugoslavija started borrowing money in 1966 and it was used for public consumption.

  Djilas in 1948 - refused any money from US - On the question - "What are you going to eat?" he answered "We will eat grass"

  Another obsticle was Rankovic, and it was considered that his forces slowed down reforms in 1961 and 1964.
  
  Pero Peric
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:45 pm
  OK about thanking somebody - I cant judge someone way I was judged. If Jenny is deciever then of course but usually it is better to give benefit of doubt. But really dont people have better thing to do than post disinformation comments on thread. They must live boring life.

  Andy You are right about who this situation makes benefit. So situation. We have Djindjic dead and Legija and Zemun out of the way. Djindjic was said to be closer to Surcin, at least before. Djindjic was said to offer state protection to Buha for him to return in return to testify against Milosevic. Yes sounds a little crazy but Seselj said this.

  There are theoris that part of Surcin clan may have liqidated Djindjic to get rid of Zemun and to put Buha on the side to leave Surcin in control.

  Another theory is about immediate arrest of Vukovar troika. Mihajlovic said only day before Djindjic killed that they would certainly arrest these guys. There is possibility that they, to know that extradition will be less looked for by West (motive), had Djindjic removed either with Zemun or using some of Mladic guards. After all if troika went - how long before the big one Mladic?

  As for political link. Its difficult to say. Only SRS and SSJ have active link (today) in paramilitary crime. There was much talk from Seselj before who accused Covic of mafia connection. But for Covic to do something like this is big, big risk. Anybody, anybody at all find out and they will use opportunity to put him on political side. Many politican would love that Covic was involved so they cant jump over him to get a more important position.

  As for rest. Veljo Ilic? Maybe but somehow maybe not. He is some small kind of local mafia in Cacak but dont believe he could do it. Conclusion is really organised crime but who gave the order. They showed JFK on Pink TV last night. Thank god there are no magic bulets or two or three killers. It may be difficult so get to the bottom but maybe we will still.

  What else? If Djindjic had been hit and survived maybe he could have organised it himself. It also sound crazy but it is theory. He could call election and knock out Kostunica and Radicals. Its sad we thought about Djindjic in such a way but it would be theori if he survived.

  Thanks for the post Walter. Pity it takes a foreigner to write about that in such a way.

  Sorry Kathryn but I dont agree at all about Vera last post. And I dont understand why you have one rule for Americans who should support leaders and another for Serbs.
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:52 pm
  Normally I do not engage in arguments with idiots but I do take issue with direct personal attacks that are designed to discredit an individual who may not be on the same wavelength as the dettractor. Yes, I am referring to the vicious attempts on my character and credibility posted by one Kathryn Love. I am not "Rita Rita" nor "Death to Yugoslavia" as Ms. Love falsely claims. I have never posted "day and night" on any forum at any time, which is a habit that Ms. "Love" seems to have been hopelessly engaged in for several years as evidenced by her habitually chronic posting in the Serbian Unity Congress, even today under the moniker of "Smiley." She far outnumbers any poster in her domination of that forum and always has. I frankly do not remember having responded to Jari or doubting his intelligence. Please furnish proof of my so-called post, and remember I am not Rita-Rita or Death to Yugoslavia. When Serbian sympathizers were decrying violence against fellow Serbs from Albanians I did express the fact that any group will retaliate against perceived (and documented) attacks -- tit for tat. It's human nature. I don't condone it. Vengeance has happened from time immemorial and will continue to happen. Violence does not occur in a vacuum. There's always a history. I would never ridicule a person for lack of dental care but in a bit of poetic license and incorporating an old Balkan expression "You have to show teeth" in demonstrating intent and courage I made the comparison with "showing teeth" that are missing or not strong. It was an abstract concept and I am sorry that Ms. Love was unable to understand my use of word imagry. I have been distressed and concerned about Ms. Love's past and present verbal abuse of Albanians, Croatians, German and assorted American political and governmental officials. I do wonder at the validity and truth of Ms. Love's own arguments on any topic when so much of her attacks and assault on my own self are stretched full of blatant outright lies and mistruths. Let's stick to the issues at hand and stop the personal attacks that are lies and fabrications.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 12:54 pm
  They are going after Zemun clan and setling the scores with small time criminals.

  But is it keystone cops? Uncapable cops we have many of them. Did you see them last night trying to blow up Siptar Spasojevic trzni centar? It was funny the building did not fall at all.

  Only very few people know what really hapened. Police are ordered to clean up Zemun gang. Mihajlovic he is real example of fool. Of course we cannot trust our police so much. We know it. They are not paid so much any police in world would accept money from criminals. This is way society was criminalised in last ten years. It is normal behavour. As for Interpol. Call them to come in but will it change anything?

  What is your opinion Anna? Where are you? Is situation same in your town if you are outside Belgrade?
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:12 pm
  You are right; I am outside from Serbia, but Serbian. I live in Canada but on this forum, I think it is fair to claim that I am Serbian because I do defend Serbian point of view. I am pro Serbian and I am bias. Otherwise, my family is from Cacak. There are some issues I am concerned about. Most importantly, do not think anybody told public how long this "state of emergency" should last. Two months, half of the year, one, 10 for how long. Secondly, what is the goal of this? Cleaning up Mafia. If you can not trust police, trust people. Pool out reservists in the army, fire half of police and bring new people in, produce special training, invite Italian inspectors and police to help (they deal with this on everyday bases) and achieve goals.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:26 pm
  There should be another word similar to patriotism, but with a slightly different meaning -- supporting your people is one thing, but jingoistic support of your country is another, especially when your country is led by these so-called patriots like one Bush or another or a Madelaine Albright. These patriots fall into the category of patriots where "patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels."

  Many, many, many leaders evidently take action in the name of patriotism in order to further themselves and their friends (and their businesses) mainly. We must get rid of such "leaders" whether in the US or Serbia. E.g. can anyone fathom how that yapdog Blair can so blatantly ignore his own people in a so-called democracy?
  
  Anna P
  California

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:36 pm
  To Kathrin:
  To use a new paragraph just imbed < p > and < br > if you want just to use a new line.
  as it appears in the example down below

  Any text
  Any text
  If you want a new paragraph just input

  < p >

  And you've got a new pargraph
  If you want a new line just input < br >
  and you got a newline
  
  Pero Peric
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:39 pm
  They did this already. There was big drive to get new police inside. There are many more women police and involvement of foreign police force to give some instruction.

  Must remember police was very political more so than army until recently so it need some time. Not only this police was used as possible military force, not to solve the crime.

  In fact one of saddest thing yesterday how many women police there was in the kolon - sad in nice way, it was because of Djindjic modernisier that they are in these jobs. It upset me when thinking and watching and hope these women realise this.

  This emergency will last for some time. Its bad for sure for the people but like Americans (in war on terror) they will put up with situation. Only some of us will worry about right (in correct way) and you will have Radicals and others making some story of how they want to protect rights of citizens even if they dont care about anything else but to remove DOS.

  Let me ask do you get cable television - this question is to all poster from Serb background. Do you get RTS or Pink or something at all?
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:40 pm
  
  
  HTML Correction
  Hopefully

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:45 pm
  Dr. RANTA TESTIMONY HIGHLIGHTS

  Background

  Prompted by previous ambushes against Serbian police at Racak, Serb forces attacked the village, which was defended by the KLA, on Jan. 15, 1999. After a battle (agreed by all to have taken place), Serb forces entered the village, followed by OSCE KVM (Kosovo Verification Mission) observers and journalists. They left later on that day. KLA troops then reoccupied the village and on the next day presented to KVM observers and journalists the bodies of 45 victims, 22 of which were found in a galley. KVM head W. Walker stated that a "massacre" had taken place, a theory adopted by most NATO governments and media.

  The first investigation, including 16 autopsies, was conducted by Yugoslav forensic authorities. A Finnish team (on behalf of the EU) headed by Ranta studied a total of 40 bodies. A Belorussian team conducted parallel studies. As verified during Ranta's testimony, complete reports have yet to be made public. Brief reports have been made in the media. The most important was a press conference by Ranta on March 17, 1999, which was extensively cited by western sources as "proof" of the most publicized "massacre" that played a major role in the decision for bombing. One scientific paper has been published on Racak by the Finnish team: Rainio, Lalu & Penttilå (2001) Independent forensic autopsies in an armed conflict: investigation of the victims from Racak, Kosovo. Forensic Science International. 116, 171-185. For reasons not clarified in her testimony or elsewhere, Ranta was not an author in this paper. Ranta was called to testify not by the prosecution or the defense but by the judges, a rare occurrence.

  General impressions on testimony

  The scope of Ranta's testimony was largely limited to findings pertaining to the bodies only. The location of the event was not discussed in detail, since she and her team conducted a very limited on site investigation only in November 1999. Ranta was generally very cautious, defensive and non-committal, desperately trying to sound neutral, consistent and scientifically honest. Very few important questions were answered by her testimony and very little of what she said helps the prosecution's case on Racak. Apparently the prosecution was not eager to call her because they had few expectations anyway. Milosevic, on the other hand, did make a few good points that, although by themselves not conclusive, will be significantly boosted if additional testimonies from the Yugoslav team, the Belorussian team, additional international experts and even the Finnish team are heard. As explained below, I believe he could have gained more out of Ranta's testimony. Nevertheless, if Milosevic calls the appropriate defense witnesses and asks the right questions (particularly regarding distance of firing), he should be able to prove (and hopefully help publicize) that the Racak victims died in battle and that the KLA and several western politicians lied about the event in order to create a convenient pretext for the war they were pursuing.

  Judge May was generally even-handed and rather helpful to Milosevic. He understandably interrupted when Milosevic asked Ranta complicated questions containing presuppositions of the type "you knew that your statements were used to justify aggression against Yu". May correctly guided Milosevic to remove such presuppositions and ask simpler, answerable questions. May was also helpful by repeatedly advising Milosevic to call the appropriate defense witnesses in order to have certain pieces of favorable forensic testimony admitted by the court.

  Examination by Nice

  Nice focused almost exclusively on Ranta's press appearances rather than on her team's scientific forensic reports, presumably because the latter had little to offer him. He mentioned an interview that Ranta gave to a journalist who claims that by 2001 Ranta was certain that the 22 galley bodies died in the galley (and not moved there in a KLA setup), they were shot at point blank range and that a massacre took place (I was not aware of this interview. Link anyone?). Ranta evaded answering whether these assertions was accurate, although later she said that her statements had been compatible with victims having died in the galley.

  Nice also quoted Ranta's words from the Mar. 17, 1999 Pristina press conference: "... no indication of [the victims] being "anything other than unarmed civilians". Ranta, in a classic example of her ambivalent, defensive testimony, answered: "At that time, there was no indication of them being anything than unarmed civilians". On Nice's crucial question of whether the findings were compatible with close range shooting , Ranta answered that she is no ballistic expert and that the answers she received from ballistic experts were "very variable". She did not elaborate and Nice did not insist.

  Nice inquired on the paraffin (dermal nitrates) test, which has been controversially used to test whether a victim had been firing firearms. Ranta said that she was aware that the Yugoslav team had found positive results in 37 victims, but she did not trust the test which, she said, is relatively non-specific and is not currently accepted as valid.

  Nice also tried to make a point of bullets in the galley carrying body fragments from nearby victims. This would suggest that the victims died in the galley and were not moved by the KLA in an attempt to stage a false massacre. However, Ranta stated that DNA tests from the bullets failed and no conclusion could be made.

  Cross-examination

  Milosevic insisted on the political nature of Ranta's Mar.17, 1999 press conference in Pristina , with the references to "unarmed civilians". Ranta insisted on her impartiality and scientific integrity and defended her statements of that day, downplaying them as "personal statements", not necessarily reflecting consensus within the team. Milosevic bitterly, and justifiably, complained that her "personal statements" carried ominous political weight and that she was being politically used. Ranta claimed, rather unconvincingly, that she was unaware of the political significance of her statements and that she was not pressured by anyone to make them. Milosevic further demonstrated the political nature of the (OSCE-organized) press conference by noting the presence of openly pro-war politicians in the audience and the exclusion of the Yugoslav forensic team. He further complained that the Yu team findings were not presented on that and on other occasions, despite the fact that the 2 teams had done work together.

  Although it was not mentioned in the testimony, I add here that on that occasion Ranta further exposed the political nature of the conference by speaking about a "crime against humanity", although she refused to call it a "massacre". The "crime against humanity" quote was extensively used by the war proponents as much as the "unarmed civilians" statement, it clearly has a political rather than forensic flavor and it further demonstrates Ranta's dishonesty in denying appreciation of the political dimension and bias of her press conference. Nevertheless, there was little Milosevic could have gained by pressing the point more than he did.

  Several points were raised on whether the victims were combatants. To Ranta's previous statements that no KLA insignia had been found on the bodies, Milosevic and later amicus curiae Tapuskovic displayed and commented on photos of KLA insignia on at least one body. Admittedly, they were not easily recognizable as such by a non-familiar outsider. Milosevic further argued that on several occasions fighters did not carry KLA insignia. Ranta admitted that she was not aware of these facts on Mar.17, 1999 and she cannot testify one way or the other. Milosevic then made a good point on the victims' boots. He stated that, due to inadequate security of the site (which was under OSCE KVM responsibility) the boots of some of the victims were removed when the bodies were carried to the village mosque. Religious considerations would dictate all boots being removed and the only alternative explanations for the partial removal was that somebody either did not want the boots to be examined or somebody wanted to use them because they were good military boots. In fact, several of the remaining boots (as shown in pictures and described by the Yu forensic experts) were good German-made military boots, which the perpetrators apparently were unable to secretly remove from the bodies.

  An undisputed point is that most victims wore several layers of clothing, suggesting that they were not dragged out of their homes for execution, as the prosecution theory goes, but were already outdoors, presumably fighting. Ranta said she could not rule out that they wore heavy clothes at home because of inadequate heating. Tapuskovic noted that 2 witnesses from Racak when asked about how they were dressed on that day (presumably when indoors) answered that they were lightly dressed.

  Several ballistics issues were raised, some of which proved to be too complicated to lead to any firm conclusion. Two points, however, are favorable for the defense. The multiplicity of wounds and variable projectile directions traced in most bodies argue against execution-style killing. Milosevic could have pressed more on the point.

  The most important issue in Racak ballistics, and probably in the whole Racak case, is the distance of firing. The prosecution's Racak case depends overwhelmingly on execution-style killings, which would be detected as close-range firing. Ranta, responding to Nice, claimed that ballistic experts gave her "very variable" answers to the question of distance. This is a very suspicious answer, since we have not heard in the court or the media from forensic experts supporting the close-range theory, whereas there are 5 independent sources arguing strongly against close-range firing, thus debunking the execution theory and rendering its proponents liable to ridicule and perjury charges. Milosevic elaborated on only one of these:

  (1) in a Racak-related trial in Pristina, as Milosevic argued, forensic expert Markenstein (spell?) testified that the 3 victims in question were not at close-range, as alleged, but from a long distance, specifically from the nearby hilltop to the south. Ranta claimed to be unaware of that trial and the expert's report. I don't know if these remarks refer to the Stanojevic trial, where 4 ethnic Albanian witnesses gave evidence contradicted by forensic evidence, 2 of them falsely claiming that victims had been shot through the front of the head.

  (2) In the Rainio, Lalu & Penttilå Forensic Sci. Intl. article on Racak, it is stated in the text that "Signs of contact or close-range firing were noted". In Table 3 it is tabulated that only 1 of 40 examined bodies had a wound with signs of probable close-range discharge. Therefore, 39 of the 40 victims could not have been shot at close range and the "execution" theory is debunked by none other than the Finnish team! I don't know if Milosevic did not make this point because he had not noticed it, or he did not have the time to raise it, or he deferred it because he intends to call as defense witnesses one or more of the article's authors (which he should anyway).

  (3-4) In revelations first given prominence by Berliner Zeitung, both the Yugoslav and the Belorussian teams agree with the Finnish report (parts of which has now been published in the Forensic Sci. Intl. article) that only 1 victim was shot from a relatively close range.

  (5) Director of the Medical Institute of Hamburg University Klaus Pueschel reportedly stated that "it is obvious that the victims were not killed at close range". I don't know if Judge Kwon was referring to the same expert when he mentioned that a German expert stated on TV that Ranta believed that victims were killed in a fight (Ranta essentially evaded Kwon's important remark).

  Conclusion

  Ranta's testimony per se did little to help elucidate what happened in Racak, but leaves a wide open door for more sincere and politically uncompromised forensic experts to testify what she did not dare to testify. Ranta's testimony probably disappointed media cheerleaders for the prosecution, who must have viewed her as their only hope to have even one piece of forensic evidence in their favor. They have none. The prosecution itself probably knew better and did not expect too much. Ranta must surely know that the Racak victims died in battle, shot from a distance, and that she was used to engineer a pretext for war. One can imagine the huge political pressure exerted on her in Jan.-Mar. '99, pressure that forced her to make dishonest statements to feed war-hungry NATO politicians and a cotterie of "humanitarian warriors". In her testimony she essentially tried to bring those statements closer to reality by awkwardly qualifying them. A honest mea culpa would have been professionally suicidal and legally dangerous to her.

  It is extremely important that Milosevic calls honest forensic experts such as Rainio, Pueschel, Markenstein and, needless to say, members of the Yugoslav and Belorussian teams. The same should be done by the other accused Serbian leaders awaiting trial. All honest participants and followers of the Milosevic and related trials should make an effort to widely publicize the Racak lie and expose its designers and perpetrators.
  
  Pythagoras Crotoniatis
  Greece

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:48 pm
  

  Pero, you say: "I would add one thing. And it is very important. Yugoslavia did not make progression on borrowed money." ... and you say: "Yugoslavia started borrowing money in 1966 and it was used for public consumption." This money was never returned or most of it. So people profited for not working as I said. I am not saying that this justifies destruction of Yugoslavia as the West did it. What I am saying is that the leadership of Yugoslavia (all the republics) is responsible of accumulating enormous amounts of lawns over any reasonable limits. I am saying that if any country in the Balkans is counting to succeed and stay independent as much as possible it should slow borrowing and start working hard. I am saying that Yugoslavia in early 1990-es needed serious reforms and changes, certainly not an induced civil war.

  The following quote is correct: Djilas in 1948 - refused any money from US - On the question - "What are you going to eat?" he answered "We will eat grass". When communists discovered that people is not happy with eating grass they were happy to receive tons of wheat from the USA and West in aid. They were paid for braking away from the Soviet Union and not for their work. To their credit they did something better after. They returned one third of the confiscating agricultural land to the rightful landowners and they produced 80% of food for Yugoslavs. This is the most important difference between Yugoslavia and all the other communist countries. Yugoslavia was self-sufficient in food production. None of other communist countries is. This was the best move on the part of Yugoslav communists, far better then introduction of self-management. I am not against self-management. But it was not implemented as conceived; i.e. its implementers ignored the laws of economy and this defeated the whole good concept. I think that the West is still rightfully afraid of it but it is not the West that defeated the concept but its own creators.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 1:51 pm
  For any one who doubts myself regarding Jennie, Keiko, Morningstar, Rita, Rita and numerous other names, please take time to visit the SUC forum where she goes by the name of Keiko.

  It would be interesting for you to go into the archives and read. She left her calling card here under the name of Jennie Morningstar, accusing all of being against every race, and ethnicity.

  Enough of her.

  
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 2:50 pm
  Kathryn Love - May I remind you that once again blantantly posting lies such as accusing me of being Rita Rita will not help your cause or belief. Just what do you hope to gain by promoting such a ridiculous outright lie? I am afraid that you know the answer. I have never accused all, of being against every race and ethnicity. I do find it troubling to read your posts (Smiley) which have continued to attack and abuse national groups such as Albanians and Croatians in addition to other nationalies and certain Serbian statesmen. It's time to grow up, be accountable for attempting to mislead and foolishly lie about my identity and motives simply because you don't agree with my ideas. As I have said before, falsely attacking an indidividual or group whose opinions differ from your own does not elevate your position. It only reveals you for what you are. Stick to the truth and please stick to your own manifesto of a yellow world. Lies and attacks accomplish nothing except to show the liar and attacker to be a desperate fool.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 2:58 pm
  US humanitarian bombing campaigns since WWII

  China 1945-46
  Korea 1950-53
  Guatemala 1954
  Indonesia 1958
  Cuba 1959-61
  Guatemala 1960
  Congo 1964
  Peru 1965
  Laos 1964-73
  Vietnam 1961-73
  Cambodia 1969-70
  Guatemala 1967-69
  Grenada 1983
  Lebanon 1983, 1984
  Libya 1986
  El Salvador 1980s
  Nicaragua 1980s
  Iran 1987
  Panama 1989
  Iraq 1991-2002
  Kuwait 1991
  Somalia 1993
  Bosnia 1994, 1995
  Sudan 1998
  Afghanistan 1998
  Yugoslavia 1999
  Afhganistan 2001
  Iraq 2003
  ? ...

  "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but does not have an air force"

  
  
  Stanislav K.
  Estonia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 2:59 pm
  
  
  fix x
  x

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 3:05 pm
  
  
  now fix
  x

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 3:12 pm
  I get RTS on Internet, I use Free Serbia site and many more.
  
  DAkic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 3:14 pm
  This is a message from Vojislav Seselj translated by me (best I could) from Serbian. This interview took place at the airport 23rd of February 2003. (One month ago). http://www.srs.org.yu/

  “Ladies and gentlemen, I regret that you have not been able to sleep this past night, I must brag that I slept very well. Seriously, I am going to The Hague to win, within myself I already have feelings of victory. That what is most important for Serbia and all the Serbian people is that I am the last Serb who will go to the Hague Tribunal. Serbianism must not allow imprisonment of Radovan Karadjic, general Mladic, colonel Sljivancanin, major Radic or any other Serb against who in the next while there may be accusations. I am going there to fight in the name of all of them, however, Serbia must be united and the Serbian people must, as soon as possible, topple this quisling, Mafia infested regime. For the salvation of Serbia, sooner the better, Zoran Djindjic, Nebojsa Covic, Sviljanovic and others must be swept onto the dustbin of history.”
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 3:54 pm
  With acknowledgement to D. Jovanovich of USA who earlier posted this piece from the Sunday New York Times this appears to be an excellent article of analytical scope. Steven Erlanger was a correspondent during the Kosovo situation and knows the landscape well. It does seem to be compelling. Did Serbia's Leader Do the West's Bidding Too Well? (Page 2 of 2) And the mess that Serbia remains - surely to worsen now - is also a form of indictment, many Serbs say, of the West and of Washington, which wins its wars but refuses to engage in sustained nation-building. The stress of the West's demands, some in Serbia feel, is part of the nexus of reactions that led to Mr. Djindjic's murder. With his death, however, the West is much less likely than before to get the alleged war criminals it wants to The Hague. The achievement of a negotiated independence for Kosovo, which depends on agreement from Belgrade, will be more difficult. And the career of a tough but promising politician, a Westernizer who wanted to bring Serbia into Europe and not sink back into defensive nationalism, has been cut down. Bratislav Grubacic, a Serbian political analyst, said: "Carla del Ponte comes every few months waving lists of suspects, and there has been a lot of pressure on Djindjic and the government from Washington and Brussels to send these people, like Legija and Frenki, to the Hague. I think that's what this murder is all about: these guys helped Djindjic and the democrats come to power, but thought he was betraying them." The Serbs thought Mr. Milosevic would satisfy The Hague, but there were more and more investigations and lists, Mr. Grubacic said. "And these guys said to themselves, `O.K., we sent Milosevic, but we're not sending ourselves.' " Mr. Covic himself cited "constant pressure" to send suspects to The Hague as a possible factor in the murder. "We, of course, know that should be done," he said in a television interview. "But if one puts too much emphasis on these kinds of things, then you get counterproductive effects." AMONG Serbs there is, like it or not, popular distaste for the continued extraditions in response to Western pressure. Fifty-four percent think the government should stop extraditing alleged war criminals, only 12 percent think they should be extradited and the rest claim they do not know, according to the Strategic Marketing and Media Research Institute. Ms. Del Ponte, too, embraced Mr. Djindjic, and after he was killed she suggested that she fly to Belgrade for his funeral. But the Yugoslav foreign minister, Goran Svilanovic, one of the most Westernized and liberal of all Serbian politicians, could barely contain his amazement at the idea. He tried to dissuade her, he said. "I have given my position," he told Belgrade's Radio B92. "Anything more would exceed the bounds of good taste.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 4:53 pm
  Arandjel:

  I am an American first and foremost. Just as I am sure that if you are in Yugoslavia, you are Yugoslavian first and foremost. However,somehow you misunderstood me. I think I said that I dislike Bush and if I did not, I am saying so now.I did not like his father and I did not like Clinton nor did I like his administration starting with Madeleine Albright. I am a way out liberal who supports the working class,the right to organize, equality for all races, veterans’ rights, the elderly and the poor, and the Bushes and Clinton never did. This does not mean that I would do anything to jeopardize their lives.If someone even threw a tomatoe at them I would be outraged Nor would I send them to the Hague.

  I am sick and tired of bombing. I want it to stop. Not only in Iraq but everywhere else. I do not support this coming bombing but I am as patriotic as the next. We are not the same in this world, brothers and sisters differ. If you supported Djindjic then that is your perogative. Those who liked Milosevic that is theirs. We cannot force others to see it the way we want it.

  The way you described your feelings from the assassination, I know how you feel as you liked him and feel that he was good for your country. God, you do not know how much I hope and pray for your country. It is up to you in Yugoslavia. It took me forever to even get the slightest interest in any politician after the death of Kennedy.

  Good luck to Serbia and I think the name of Yugoslavia will stick.

  
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 5:16 pm
  Most people on this forum are against the Hague and are standing up for Milosevic. I can understand that perfectly but let's not forget what happened to the Serb refugees from Krajina and Bosnia in 1995. When these poor people arrived in Belgrade,most Serbs turned their backs on these people; their Serbian "brothers and sisters" until a few days before,they simply didn't want to know them. A few Serbs did try to help them but the majority of them pretended they didn't exist because they reminded them of their defeat. Then the nasty jokes against them began,and they were referred to as "peasants" all of a sudden.

  Why wasn't Milosevic out on the street to greet these poor people? Where was the "great man" then? So many of these people were not even given proper accomodation. Then of course he extradited Drazen Erdemovic to the Hague in 1996,even though Milosevic himself stated (quite correctly) that the Hague was an illegal court.

  BUT; why then did he extradite Erdemovic and Stakic,I think it was? The West certainly had double-standards in the Balkans but so did Milosevic,it seemed. Then of course in 1992 the SPS and the SRS went into a coalition. Vojislav Seselj gave a very bad image of Serbia to the rest of the world with his rascist remarks against all non-Serbs and his harrassment of Hungarians and Croats in Vojvodina,which led to thousands of them leaving. During this time,Milosevic had nothing but praise for Seselj. Then in 1993,suddenly Milosevic did not want anything to do with Seselj or his SRS and called them "primitive" and what not. Milosevic is certainly a man of many contradictions.
  
  Ryan Mircic
  St.Albans
  UK

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 6:29 pm
  
  Warning

  A few years ago before I found this Jurist forum I read regularly the posts on the SUC forum but never posted there myself.

  I found the posts there by Keiko particularly distasteful and destructive: so much so that I stopped reading them on principle.

  I was surprised by Kathryn Love’s claim above that Jenny Morningstar is in fact Keiko and even more surprised that Jenny Morningstar does not deny this claim.

  I returned to the site this evening to remind myself of just how offensive and disruptive these posts were. As I reviewed the posts of Keiko over the past year - a period over which I had refused to open them - I was surprised to find that there was nothing objectionable about them: simply references to relevant events. However when I returned to the period that I found objectionable I discovered that the moderator had removed all these contributions.

  In so far as I am concerned as long as Jenny Morningstar does not revert to the kind of posts that have been removed from the SUC forum - and you may check that this is so - her contributions will be welcome here to debate. This being so I wonder Jenny if you would like to comment upon the following two points. First your post above claims:

  AMONG Serbs there is, like it or not, popular distaste for the continued extraditions in response to Western pressure. Fifty-four percent think the government should stop extraditing alleged war criminals, only 12 percent think they should be extradited and the rest claim they do not know, according to the Strategic Marketing and Media Research Institute.

  AMONG Albanians there is, like it or not - evidenced by the riots it engendered - massive popular distaste for the extradition of a single KLA junior commander, not to mention three guards, for the torture and murder of abducted Serbs. How do you think the Kosovars will respond when the ICTY calls for the extradition of those responsible for initiating the reign of terror in Kosovo - the KLA leadership - as promised by del Ponte?

  Your post also alludes to Serbia sinking back into “defensive nationalism”. Perhaps you would like to make a balanced comment upon the manifestly rampant “nationalism” demonstrated by the Albanians in Kosovo?

  I won’t hold my breath.
  
  Peter Taylor
  Herts/UK

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 6:46 pm
  

  Ryan states: "Most people on this forum are against The Hague and are standing up for Milosevic. I can understand that perfectly but let's not forget what happened to the Serb refugees from Krajina and Bosnia in 1995."

  Yes Ryan, you are right most people are against the ICTY since nobody is indicted in the ICTY for expelling the Serbs that you are referring too or killing or torturing them in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. What they got in Serbia was far better then what they got in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. Most people on this forum that are against the tribunal are against it because the tribunal is treating Croats, Muslims and Albanians as James Bond. It has given these nations license to kill Serbs unpunished. Being against the ICTY does not mean being supportive of Milosevic.

  I am not supporting the tribunal since it is biased against the Serbs and its procedures and methods are wrong regardless whom they are prosecuting. Ones that bluntly support the tribunal are supporting selective justice and justice concept that is based on the principle illegal but legitimate.

  Do you sincerely believe that sentencing Mr. Milosevic in The Hague would enable the expelled Serbs from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo to go home ore somebody else should be prosecuted?
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 8:20 pm
  Arandjel, I’m very sorry for your friend sitting innocent in a jail. I hope that some of those bitter fighters for human rights in Milosevic time either Serbian Amazon women (you know them, don't you) or multinational NGOs will help him.
  
  D Jovanovic
  Toronto
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 9:22 pm
  Arandjel,

  When I talk to my family members in Serbia, I hear that Djindjic's support was strongest among young Serbs, that they believed his promises for their future (and who can blame them for wanting a future). I just wonder how old you are and whether you thought you had a potential future until Djindjic's assissination and that you despair of that future now. How does it stand with you?
  
  Anna P
  California

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 9:43 pm
  Did everyone note that the 37 Serb/Roma bodies id'd a few days ago were discovered in a 'Muslim' grave yard ?

  Suggests that the KLA went to some effort when it murdered civilians to get the Government fingered.

  The key to understanding Racak is 2 items
  1) Racak was a Pro-Rugova (hence neutral or anti-KLA village)
  2) Local KLA commander in Racak testified that he gangpressed some 40 civilians the day of the firefight.

  
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 9:49 pm
  My God!

  Just above is a post by somebody with my name: D. Jovanovic!

  The only difference is that he is from Canada and I am from USA.

  I admit that Jovanovic is rather common surname, but I am surprized at this Jovonaovic sarcazm?

  BTW The last post of lady Morningstar is just the verbatim copy of that Erlanger article. These were not her words. In my post I gave the refference so you can look it up.

  I agree with Ms. Love that there is something fishy about Ms. Morningstar. I have read her earlier comments (before they were erased) and found them repulsive. Mr. Taylor, I will not hold my breath either.
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:17 pm
  Mr. Jovanovic (USA): You have been posting here for quite a while and I am surprised that you have not noticed the posts from Mr. Jovanovic Canada. In fact today I asked Mr. Jovanovic (Canada) if he was related to you (Mr. Jovanovic USA) but he is not responded to me as yet. Trust me he is not posting under your name as there is a real Mr. Jovanovic in Ontario with whom I personally correspond after he published his e-mail several months ago. If you want to say hello to him write to Gogol he has my e-mail and I will ask Mr. Jovanovic (Canada) if he wants to correspond with you. ). You can never tell you might be related.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 10:41 pm
  Where is Babylon, USa, anyway?
  
  Anna P
  California

• Sunday March 16, 2003 at 11:21 pm
  Pera,
  I was replaying to statement that Yugoslavia made progress, on the borrowed money. I will elaborate that later in the next post since it requires time

  There are many outside causes in destroying SFRJ. As I noticed very educative posts by Gogol and Jari regarding IMF., and yours too, but all of these are instruments not causes

  I noticed that you and David heartedly are very close to my opinion regarding underplaying issue.

  I tried so many times on this forum emphasize importance of law. This is what distinguish society from hordes.
  I post here for a simple reason to try to find truth as I found, regardless what anyone say that Jari’s posts are very open minded and argumentative and yet professionally law oriented. Even though Jari’s knowledge about details in Yugoslavia can suspect his origin, but I don’t mind.
  I found that Walter’s posts are from historical point of view highly educative to details. If he lived in Canada (what I do not doubt) his knowledge is mystery for me.
  Taylor - very pragmatic, too obsessed with Blair (as I am with state of Slovenians, Croats and Serbs) , however very argumentative. People do not like it (If you openly said something and point to source - they don’t have contra argument)
  Vera’s posts - journalist - politically very biased. However I found them similarity Oriana Falachi reports - Excellent I like the style and I admire courage
  Gogol - wise knowledgeable man - nothing else to say, I can just listen.
  Ian Davis - I am looking for his posts.
  David from Australia - great contributor to this forum. In my opinion started discussions on the core of the problem. (Self-management) Ivan Kokotovic - It’s pity he does not post more often. (Did I cause that?)
  Jovanovic - very argumentative
  Vucelic - Do you have something to do with NASA - we could be very close in origin.
  Pitagoras
  It is very interesting to see opinion of rearly ones of serbs alies, same apply to Sergio.
  Kathrin Love - US with so many problems (not made to public yet) is not the country that somebody has to strive to follow - patriotism has two sides.
  Stefanovic - need to visit some links related to history
  Arandjel - without you this site would not have sense
  Rita Rita and Morningstar - its good they come to this site.
  Pera Bora, we can finally start discussion on the underlying causes, instruments, and Milosevic - West - Others (Kucan, Racan, Kecmanovic, Tupurkovski, Bogicevic, Gligorov) role to destroy Yuogoslavia (Tudjman, Mesic and Izetbegovic - don’t deserve to have a rule yet).
  I think It has to do with economical order, international relations, , internationalism-globalization, common-private property, self - corporate management, relations East-West, subjects who formed Yugoslavia, Tito, Non alliance
  and the instruments: diplomacy, Law, IMF - debt, nationalism, use of dissidents, UN role, UNPROFOR, ICG, ICTY, Soros, Human Rights Watch, PR Companies, etc.

  and in that order. I think one of the main underlying resons was self management , and private-corporate management
  
  Pero Peric
  Canada

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 2:04 am
  Pero Peric,

  Sorry for not replying to your questions earlier. My thanks to Mr. Taylor and Mr. Jovanovic for replying on my behalf. Incidentally, their responses serve as a basis for any evaluation of the American and British sponsored dictator, Broz. As Mr. Jovanovic indicated, Broz drew up a list of targets, during WWII, for his American sponsors and their bombers which were almost exclusively in Serbia. What to add? Broz not only owed his rise to power to Western support, but even more importantly, the consolidation of his regime. Anyone caring to point out the obvious contradictions between Marxist doctrine and the fact the development of a huge state apparatus owed itself entirely to foreign capital was dealt with in a completely undemocratic manner, not that any of the Western sponsors cared in the least.

  Perhaps key to understanding the present situation in the Balkans is a serious examination of the relationship between Broz, the Communist dictator, and his Western sponsors.
  
  Nico T
  CAN

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 2:53 am
  Ryan Mircic,

  You appear to see something distasteful in the political conduct of the Serbian Radical Party, or at least its former leader, but why not, while on the subject of unsavoury tactics, mention Vuk Draskovic and the Serbian Renewal Movement? For it was Draskovic who refused to enter in a coalition with the Radicals, not once but throughout the 90s, which would have easily toppled the Socialist government. Instead, Draskovic attempted to force a political paralysis of Serbia, followed by a violent insurrection with the Serbian Parliament as the main target, which was the exact modus operandi of the so-called "Bulldozer Revolution" in 2000. No wonder this so-called democratic leader enjoys a ready audience in Washington whenever he visits, which is often enough. And yet Draskovic did eventually join the Milosevic government, and though it was only for a brief period during the NATO aggression, he voted with the Socialists to surrender Kosovo-Metohija to Albanian and NATO terrorists. The Radicals led by Seselj were almost alone in opposition to this betrayal.

  As for the alleged "nationalism" of the DOS coalition, two years of disastrous rule speaks for itself. No need to comment further.

  It's true the Serbian nation did not fight for its sovereignty from the very earliest days when Slovene and Croat terrorists attacked JNA soldiers, and this says a lot about Belgrade, and the the sort of mentality addressed by the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences. But it's hard to see what this has to do with Seselj who was one of the few Serbian politicians who actually went to visit besieged Serbs on the front lines. As for Milosevic, he never saw refugees from the Krajina as his constituents. More importantly, neither did the terrorists' foreign sponsors. So you can attack him for that all you like, but that really counts as a MAJOR point in his favour with respect to the "trial".

  
  
  N T
  C

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 3:12 am
  

  Pero Peric,

  Gen. Milan Nedic was a very courageous individual, who undertook an impossible task and accomplished it heroically. He deserves credit for saving more Serb lives than any other wartime leader, and much more so than the loudmouths shouting "Better War Than Pact" in the streets.

  Funny how the loudmouths are never there when you need them. What are the generations which were indoctrinated during the Broz regime to make of the marked absence of those "heroes" shouting "Better Grave Than Slave" when Solana comes to Belgrade to smile and shake hands with the DOS leadership? Maybe they all died in the Luftwaffe bombing? Or was it the Allied bombing which finally did them in instead? What works for them?

  Moderator: Closing HTML script with a browser other than Netscape/IE doesn't work with this form or what?
  
  N T
  C

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 3:18 am
  With the amount of posts, it is getting harder to address everything that has been said. I will continue where I left off yesterday.

  Should Djindjic have gone to the Yugoslav constitutional courts to get an opinion if the transfer was legal? You know, the system was already geared to refusing the transfer request (although as a compromise Milosevic was already under arrest). These "system" people didn't go to the constitutional court and ask its opinion on whether it was legal not to transfer Milosevic!

  And since the "system" (I guess this means Kostunica) was geared this way, Djindjic had, amazingly, one more reason to send Milosevic out of the country, because the system couldn't be trusted! Once Slobo was out of the country, Djindjic would have at least some chance of finding out whether the transfer was legal from the strictly technical point of view (I know this is getting really convoluted).

  Besides, even after Milosevic was out of the country, the constitutional court was biased in its decision of April 12, 2002 (believe it or not). In its judgment, the constitutional court studied the question whether the transfer was legal as a normal extradition.

  The constitutional court cited the lack of national legislation concerning the cooperation with the ICTY as a reason why the transfer was illegal, but it didn't consider the possibility that in the absence of such national legislation the ICTY Statute would be applied directly. One might even toss this argument around and say that in failing to pass the necessary national legislation, Yugoslavia had failed to meet its obligations as a member state of the ICTY (although you may have to be quite EU-minded to accept this argument).

  Then the 1000-dollar question: Was the ICTY illegal? I will try to touch on this question now and then, but I have to say that it is absolute rubbish that the tribunal had to be adopted by the General Assembly. First of all, why would Milosevic say something like that? Yugoslavia was thrown out of the General Assembly, and I guess Milosevic had his hand in this diplomatic "victory"! And even if Yugoslavia hadn't been thrown out, the ICTY Statute would have been adopted by a majority in the General Assembly. There is no doubt the Statute would have got the necessary majority. In fact, Yugoslavia's interests were better secured in the Security Council, where the more Yugoslav-oriented states Russia and China could veto the resolution.

  --

  Anyway, a little defection is good. From this side of the fence you can see how big the problems for the prosecution really are. First of all, the Yugoslav legislature has been shown to be independent of the great dictator Milosevic in that it has dragged its feet in passing the cooperation laws. Someone said that the Yugoslav laws were from pre-Milosevic days. However, one could still argue that it was Milosevic who wanted to keep the legislation intact for his own protection.

  But the really sticky point for the prosecution is this: if the legislature was so independent, how about the judiciary? If the judiciary were shown to be dependent of him, Milosevic could get into trouble. But even if the judiciary had been dependent of Milosevic, Milosevic has his trump-card: the perpetrators of war crimes were punished by the Serb courts, so where exactly is the point?

  But the real catastrophe is the independece of the executive branch. The transfer of Milosevic shows this. And now the prosecution is digging the ground under its feet even more by using Mladic as a bargaining chip to get the cooperation laws in place (though this is only my theory): the longer Mladic manages to stay at large, the clearer it becomes that he wasn't dependent on Milosevic's alleged protection of him.

  I think Serbia could get a lot of heat off its back by amending the constitution to make it ICTY-compatible. But by applying the indictments as a tool to achieve this, the tribunal shows it is acting in bad faith. True, by not making the necessary corrections to the legislation Yugoslavia may show it is not cooperating, but it is doubtful if this merits the indictments.
  
  Jari Nousiainen
  Finland

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 3:48 am
  Pera Bora,

  You say the West (capitalists systems) is "rightfully" afraid of the self management concept.

  Does that imply it is a "danger" to them and that they need to eliminate it?

  Why? By what god given right do they seek to impose their own alternative on others?

  Let me guess! By the same principle that all large empires and colonialist powers were built: Might is Right... and the victims are too weak to defend themselves.

  You can start listing examples from the Babylonians, Ancient Greeks, Romans, etc., etc. to the French, British Empires, Nazi Germany, Soviet Empire and today's USA.

  Each of them aspired to mastery of the world and imposed their own values and systems. The current ones and the future ones are not likely to be much different unless something curbs their appetites.

  Stanislav K has given us a list of the most recent victims. It's amazing that the American population does not find the list impressive enough to ask their goverment what's REALLY going on.
  
  David
  Australia

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 4:11 am
  
  
  HTML Correction
  Hopefully

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 4:20 am
  Jari

  Thanks for the note about the standard of proof. It remains to be seen whether the standard applied will be criminal, civil or something in-between.

  It's a criminal "tribunal", so it may be that criminal tribunals do not apply the standards of criminal proof. Maybe we can bend juridical rules here a little more on the basis of semantics.

  One reason YU should not get more ICTY friendly is that they will end up sending more and more people to the Hague until all non-Western "reactionaries" are eliminated. Seselj is a case in point. It seems to me that his indictment could have been more expeditious rather than some 10-12 years after the events when he is a candidate for the presidency and a threat to the "progress" made in implementing "democracy". A number of indictments seem to be so conveniently timed in terms of achieving political objectives.
  
  David
  Australia

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 5:08 am
  The standard of proof is maybe the most important question at this time. Now that it is clear that Slobo is not the dictator of the Western propaganda, he can be afforded a fair trial. We have NYT on record for that.

  The NYT article we were discussing here some time ago got a little too harsh a treatment from us. We must see it with the eyes of those who still see the slow-motion footage of Milosevic waving his hand to his comrades. NYT took quite a leap by describing him as a smartly-dressed business-man-type of defendant.

  And now the trial can be considered fair, the next question is what Slobo has to do to win, and it is then that the standard of proof becomes important. Even before the trial had started, Chris Black said that Milosevic could win this case. That was of course wishful thinking at the time, but it is beginning to look as if he was right. But there is still a giant leap from "could win" to "will win".

  A lot of the standard of proof is indeed semantics. For instance, when one talks about proof beyond reasonable doubt, one means certainty. One can then say that "probability" is some weaker form of proof. This is not necessarily so. Proof that can be quite "certain" considered apart from the context can be "improbable" when the whole context is considered. So this improbability is not necessarily harmful to the defendant. This is what Walter was saying: in common law you just see the event and decide if the proof substantiating the event is certain. Outside the common-law systems you try to see the events that led to the event in question, and then you have to consider the probability. In fact, this could favour the defense. The problem is that the probability indeed has to do with "patterns" and too much may become a matter of taste: where one sees a glass half-full, another will see a glass half-empty, and I am not sure the defendant will always get the benefit of doubt. However, with the recent changes in the trial in mind, he might.
  
  J N
  Finland

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 5:12 am
  

  So far my noted of this morning session:

  Witness B1738 to be called, protected, Groome conducting.

  9.44 Takes the declaration. Facial, audio distortion and pseudonym. THe witness, Groome says the witness will refer to some places and names under assumes names. B1738 has 8 years of school and failed to finish his policy academy studies because as a Serb got into a fight with several Croats at the academy. Then he became a truck driver in Croatia and went to live with his grand mother in Bosnia because he had ethnic problems in Croatia in 1991. Returned in September 1991 to home town in Croatia, the situation was difficult. Took refuge for two months at the JNA barracks. He was told to cooperate with the army, did not considered himself being part of the army. The barracks came under fore and attack by groups of civilians. At the third attack he left the site in November. It was agreed the Croats will allow it.

  At the time of leaving the barrack, one Croat wanted to kill him by putting a gun in his mouth thinking he was a volunteer. The commander to him to leave the town. Returns to Bosnia to his grandmother looking for his family. His family was missing. Went elsewhere looking for them, to Serbia to his uncle's. He learned the police of Serbia was looking for him and moved to another town near Belgrade to stay with a friend. Responded to TV recruitment for Arkan's Tigers and went. Described the advertisement to the court. 400DM a month was offered, for contracts for 3-6-12 months. He also learned that by serving at Arkan's he did not have to serve at JNA. Describes the recruitment office guarded by armed civilians. Waited for Arkan, had a conversation with him who told him he was too young, but since he had some war time experience was allow to sign a contract for 3 months.

  He met a recruit in his way to Erdut who told him there will be no pay. An Arkan's driver took them there. The place looked like a military barrack. Wire fence and buildings inside. Inside people in uniform. about 150 of them. Arrived there in February and stayed there for two months. Names of leaders. At the camp people used nicknames. Described the training given: running, on all kinds of fire arms and explosives. They were given arms at arrival at the camp. Erdut was in Croatia, people lived there. Much time was spent running outside of the camp, carrying the guns, everyone from the outside could see from the camps' inside. He described a drunken guard disciplined by being beaten with a stick while attached to a flag pole. Described wearing an overall green and patches as uniform, a green beret or a black cap. The belonged to he Arkan's Volunteer Guard. Patches are shown. 31 March evening they were deployed to a mission after an alert, Arkan selected 45 men including him to a mission. Rumors had it they were going to Mostar. Given 2 hand grenades and rocket launchers. Left Erdut at 2 or 3 AM in a bus escorted by one or two jeeps, crossed into Serbia to a crossing into Bosnia traveling on regular road. No border controls were encountered. Crossed the Drina with a ferry, the regular ferry. Assembled with more Arkan's men and armed Serbs a Papovi and went to ( ). At Vielina got off the bus. Maps, roads, crossings, points of assembly, locations. Local people joined. The parties were told of Muslim to be liquidated after rounding them up. Local Serbs leading the way.

  10.33 Private session. Less than a minute. Described stopping 10-15 civilians and putting them in the bus station of Vialina for protection. He observed a civilian shot and killed, a civilian who did not want to stop. He refused to stop, he was a retarded person, was not armed kept his hands in his pocket, was a Serb. Superior officer open fire at Muslim Cafe Istanbul with his rocket launcher. 5-7 rockets were fired.

  10.41 Private session. Resumes in a minute. After arrival at The Hague you were asked to see a video of the attack at the Cafe Istanbul. Shown to the chamber. The cafe is recognized. Witness is not certain about dates following the events in the park. Came under fire from the water tower, for an hour at least. Entered a house for protection until fire stopped. Took the road to the hospital and entered the hospital.

  Property taken, vehicles, cigarettes, detergents, and some technical equipment. Conditions at the hospital described as normal. Two Tigers wounded, total casualties about 45. How long did it take to secure the town, 6-8 hours.

  10.56 Private session for the rest of the morning session Groome says to ask questions revealing the ID of B1738

  The UNO Charter is clear in that the Security Council can't pass Laws since its only function is to address and avert war. It is the General Assembly which can draft and debate legislation and in a strict consensual basis adopt legislation. The International Criminal Court was adopted by the General Assembly.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 7:27 am
  

  Frank,

  Just in case you're present. What is going on with the audio channel and with the link to the ICTY site?

  Between the close sessions, the protected witnesses, the lack of witnesses, the messed up Mr. Nice (NATO) schedule, what is there for the judging public to judge?

  I t is an event that in 1992 a cafe called Istanbul was attacked with 7 rocket hand launched leaving no trace of impact, no a speck, when I can see rocket launched from helicopters in the Gaza Strip, or heavy armor shelling civilians houses in the Occupied Territories, or a young woman protesting the demolition of civilian houses being killed by a bulldozer. But don't despair, thanks to another Hitler wearing a business suit this time, we will be able to see, live no doubt, the destruction of a county on moral grounds!
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 7:36 am
  

  Tony Blair should move preventively and save some grief to his, what is left of it, Labor Party and resign. I am sure George will find him a job.
  
  G C
  USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 7:51 am
  Let's see now...

  YU refused to extradite Milosevic to the Hague. Apparently its constitution forbad the extradition. So it was in breach of UN resolutions and international law?

  Now the US laws forbid extradition of any US citizen to the ICC. Is the US in breach of international law if it refuses to extradite someone to the ICC?

  On what basis are some countries obliged to cooperate with UN and international law and others are not?

  Of course, if the US withdraws from the UN because it does not like the UN decisions on Iraq, then they don't have to follow UN decisions and international law. But where does that leave the US pretexts of a commitment to democracy throughout the world?

  Is the current US administration turning the US into a renegade state? Is their notion of democracy just a matter of convenience?

  Who's going to raise a case of unlawful aggression against Iraq? The ICC?

  The US doesn't recognise the ICC which was ratified by the General Assembly. But it does recognise the ICTY which was ratified by a handful of countries in the Security Council and which it itself was responsible for establishing. Talk about selective justice!

  The message is clear... justice is not for the rich and powerful. No wonder Bush is so keen to attack Iraq. It's a great pretext, amongst other reasons, to get rid of the bothersome UN.

  We won't have a democratic UN and international community anymore, but we're sure as hell going to have a democratic Iraq. I can hardly wait. Another Shah of Iraq(n) would be just what the world needs.

  The only consolation will be that if the ICC becomes irrelevant, then it follows that the ICTY will go the same way. I guess we'll all have to settle again for reruns of Monty Python or Fawlty Towers.
  
  David
  Australia

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 10:13 am
  

  David, there is less difference in yours and mine position, than it may appear form your last post. I was not specific enough. When I used the word "rightfully" I have not realized that it means that the West has right to destroy a country that is practicing self-management, or take any other action except fair competition. I wanted to say that self-management has real potential to become the system of the future, or let me add some other improved variant of it. The only difference in our positions is that I think that the self-management system was not successful as it was implemented.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 10:49 am
  AP V from NY, you state that "Local KLA commander in Racak testified that he gangpressed some 40 civilians the day of the firefight ". Is there publicly accessible specific information?

  I agree that several of the Racak villagers were probably gangpressed. Nevertheless, Milosevic did not pursue such a line in Ranta's X-examination. On the contrary, many of his arguments implied that the fighters were voluntary. For example, he stressed that some of the victims were wearing military boots, presumably provided by the KLA to voluntary, rather than gangpressed, fighters. Of course it is likely that some fighters were voluntary and others gangpressed. I believe and hope that Milosevic has detailed information on the subject and will play his strongest cards when he calls defense witnesses.

  AP V from NY, you are doing well to stress the important implications of finding the bodies of 37 Serbs and Roma in a Muslim cemetary in Djakovica.
  
  Pythagoras Crotoniatis
  Greece

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 11:26 am
  Who's going to raise a case of unlawful aggression against Iraq?

  The ICJ, which happens to be the real world court

  A2+B2=C2

  During the first round of Racak testimony, they had the KLA leader at Racak testify. He didn't describe it as a press gang, but the context was pretty clear. It was mentioned in a few wire reports. I'm sure Vera or Gogol has the exact date, etc.

  and recall that evidently one (or two) of the bodies found were 100% civilians but not found with the rest.....found in the village itself....apparently someone refused the KLA's offer

  As for the defense case, it doesn't matter too much if they were gangpressed or willing fighters, they were combatants. (except those of course who were shot by the KLA, because they tried to run away_

  Anyone familiar with Guerilla warfare knows the MO of the KLA at Racak. Enter a loyalist-neutralist village, make certain the villagers get killed and blame it on the government. The VC were masters at this.
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 11:39 am
  

  The Russian foreign minister Ivanov has already said the UN SC will have to deal with an illegal attack on member country Iraq. Again, the function of the SC is to preserve the peace and prevent aggression. The fight is just about to begin, the World v. the United States of Amnesia. Where could I defect to?
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 12:42 pm
  Self management had a potential for success. The problem of self management was the managers. The other problem of self management in Yugoslavia was government taxation and the amount of profit left for reinvestment. Furthermore, managers skimmed and stole employee and state property. On top of this the government tax base made it impossible for many firms to expand. In many cases the good managers were hamstrung by government prioritization and their firms stagnated. Firms that were allowed to compete did so and won contracts world wide. For example, I think it was Energoinvest that beat out some of the world’s largest enterprises and took a contract here in BC on the Bennett Dam. The dam has, I think, twelve large Russian turbines and the bed was sealed by the Yugoslav enterprise. They were world’s experts in sealing dam bed to prevent water leakage under the earth structure. The dam was built some thirty years ago and is one of our largest renewable energy suppliers.

  Government rigidity in Yugoslavia did not allow good managers a free hand nor did they allow private citizens to become entrepreneurs. Bileca, a small town in Herzegovina, had an officer training school and there was a huge amount of food, left over and discarded after every meal. One of my relatives purchases 200 pigs and bought the leftover food which he fed to the pigs. This became very profitable and the local authorities charged him with speculation. The judge threw the case out saying that there was more need for initiative. INITIATIVE at all levels was lacking.

  In Sweden self management is successful because the managers are hired and are answerable to the owners, the workers. The owners are worker’s pension funds. Therefore, there is initiative to work hard and manage well with this concept. My understanding is that ninety percent of Swedish enterprises will be owned by the pension funds of the workers. This is somewhat similar to self management because the workers own the enterprise.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 12:46 pm
  My understanding is that ninety percent of Swedish enterprises will be owned by the pension funds of the workers BY YEAR 2015????
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 12:54 pm
  Let me again make clear for last time that although I had respect for Djindjic I am not his supporter. Maybe right now it sounds that way but that was respect.

  Ana Let me say 30-something. Old enough to remember better time and young enough to suffered. Lucky enough to have completed army service and served with Croats, Hungarys, Slovenes, Macedonians and even Albanian. My generation probably most critical of Milosevic because we knew for some better time and philospohy. You are right that many young ones are now saying they want to leave country. They are depressed even ones who didnt like Djindjic so much. Of course they will not have opportunity to leave. For me my life was decided long ago - I will stay whatever tragic thing happens and whatever happens will not let bitterness take me over as it has for some people. Lot of people are now saying they are sad that Labus did not stay in Democratic party that in some way he could have filled gap and been like Djindjic. That is for comfort they want to belive somebody is working around the world for them non stop. Now Zivkovic has to step into shoes of Djindjic, we shall see.

  Trial of Milosevic still seems to me little unimportant. Maybe next week I will look at it.

  Jari maybe Im wrong but there had been changes made in Yugoslavia law with cooperation with the Hague already or are you talking about something else?
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 12:58 pm
  Gogol, the ICTY was to address the war, which is the function of the Security Council, as you said. There is no clear-cut distinction between executive and legislative functions in the UN.

  But to be more practical: do you doubt the General Assembly would have adopted the ICTY Statute? And Russia and China did OK the resolution in the Security Council, so the question is academic.

  About the trial (that is what we are here for): Is this the first time the private sessions are in use, after NYT declared that the trial is going to be normal? Doesn't look too normal to me. Nice, I am doing the best I can to cover your butt, so don't let me down.

  "What gives the US the right to act the way it does?" Since the West has been used as a synonym for the US for a long time, let me remind you: at this point in time, there is no reason to equate the US solo performance with the "West". There is a rift here, and it is getting wider.

  I would say that the US acts the way it does, because it has the biggest guns. There is something to Albright's question: why don't we have these weapons, if we don't use them? I think it is realistic to expect the US to use the weapons it has, but there is a very simple answer to Ms Albright's question: you can use the weapons you have, but if you use them against the international law, you are a war criminal and you will stand trial.

  A well-function justice system would keep the US gusto in some kind of control, but that is not what we are seeing here. The US doesn't prosecute the crimes committed in Yugoslavia (too numerous to mention) or in Afghanistan. It undermines the ICC, and instead it is pushing its own Mickey Mouse courts like the one custom-made for Saddam! Don't expect this to go too well in the ROW (=rest of the world).

  The US knows it is threading on thin ice. The bilateral immunity agreements it is concluding don't address the ICC issue, and it knows that too. So it will need the biggest guns to ensure the right to use them. At this time there seems to be a vicious circle in the making.
  
  Jari Nousiainen
  Finland

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 1:00 pm
  APV, I was referring to Gogol's point that the changes are not in line with the constitution. I mean: vice versa.
  
  J N
  Finland

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 2:00 pm
  

  Pythagoras, Thanks for your very detail report on Mr. Ranta's testimony. I agree with you that Mr. Milosevic has missed to score some important points. For example he asked here about bodies with legs and hands up in the air, but when she answered that here report does not deal with this issue he moved to the next question. I think that this was his opportunity to press here and ask her opinion on the issue: "How come a body can stiffen with its hands and legs up in the air"? I think that his cross-examination is better when he is dealing with the political issues, than when he is dealing with the technical issues.

  As it was revealed in the court Mr. Ranta visited Kosovo twice in 1999 i.e. in March 1999 and November 1999. Her team compiled a separate report on Racak battle each time. Both of them were introduced in the evidence but Mr. Milosevic was not given the second one before the day of testimony of Mr. Ranta. When he complained he was promised additional two hours of cross-examination. No reprimand or threat of reprimand for the prosecution at this time on the other hand Mr. May was constantly threatening Mr. Milosevic that he should ask right questions, otherwise his cross-examination would be cut short. So no fairness and equal treatment.

  My understanding is that the second forensic report defines two important facts:

  The first one is reappearance of the bullet casing around the victims at the crime scene. If you remember a journalist was claiming that there were almost no bullets and bullet casing at the crime scene and that he has learned that an USA officer collected them and disappeared the next day after the Racak battle. Now we have the bullet casing and bullets. Tempering or not, or double tempering remains to be seen?

  The second one is that Mr. Ranta has established that three persons were killed at the spot where they were found. The reasoning goes like the following. There were bullets found in the bodies. The earth, were bodies were found was excavated and the bullets and bullet fragments were found in it. The two sets of bullets and bullet fragments were compared. In one case a human tissue was found attached to the bullet found in the ground and the DNA analyzes has confirmed that it matches the DNA of the body found on top of it. So the person died were he was found. In two other cases traces on the bullets found in the bodies and under bodies matched. So the conclusion is that these two persons died were they were found. Regarding this evidence Mr. Milosevic question was: "Mrs. Ranta when a bullet is found under the body doesn't it mean that the killed person was lying on the ground in the firing position, rather than in the upright position more consistent with the massacre killing in which case the bullet would be somewhere else not under the body?" Here answer was: "I would need a lecture of at least five hours to explain this."

  In all reports provided by Mr. Ranta it was clearly stated that the forensic evidence can not be used to explain events, but only to determine what caused the death of the victims. Additionally it stated that the criminal investigation must be undertaken in order to explain what happened. This is important because prosecution is avoiding to conduct a proper criminal investigation from the beginning and they were given professional opinion from the forensic experts that their investigation can't give answers to all and especially main questions required to solve the Racak battle case properly. This I hope invalidates private statements of Mrs. Ranta given to the journalists and in the press conference on the 17th of March 1999. In this statements she goes against the above pointed to professional position and starts speculating on her own. So, she is not naive. She knows what she is doing. For example none of the evidence that was pointing that the victims were combatants and not civilians was accepted and dealt with in here reports. Her team just decided that this evidence is not relevant or they stated that they do not understand it.

  Mr. May reacted quite nervously and inappropriately when Mr. Milosevic showed a photograph of a grave stone of one of the victims. Mr. Ranta's classification was that he is most probably a peasant. On the grave stone there was in writing that the victim was member of KLA. Mr. Mays comment was: "Mr. Milosevic we already know that on that day some KLA members were killed." Sorry Mr. May this is one less innocent victim.

  An interesting question and comment came out from Mr. Quwon: "Mrs. Ranta we are aware that that day there was a battle in the Racak. At what point your team became aware of that." Her answer, as most of them, was not a direct one. She just said that she was informed about events by the Serbian authorities. At least we know that judges are accepting that there was a battle that day and that there are at least some KLA members killed that day. This is quite a progress.

  It looks to me that in the Racak case the test if there was a massacre or not would be if there was tempering with the crime scene or not. Mr. Quwon question to Mr. Ranta was: "Do your results point to the fact that there was tempering with the crime scene." She said: No." He was quite happy with here answer.

  As Pythagoras said Mr. Milosevic would be well advised to have some good internationally recognized forensic expert on his side during the defense phase of his trial.

  I do not know at what phase of his trial it would be advisable for Mr. Milosevic to rise an issue that the proper criminal investigation was never done for all the crimes that he is accused of and to request for the trial to be stopped until this is done.

  As Gogol pointed out Mrs. Ranta is a scientist but she is poor forensic expert. Her first scientific papers in this area of science, as a co-author, are ones based on the Racak investigation. In her short biography it is stated that she is involved in the humanitarian work as well.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 2:19 pm
  

  Ranta's involvement in the Racak investigation presents some conflict of interests. Dig into her life and it will appear.

  There is nothing stopping the shooting of a corpse moved to another place. There was no blood under the corpse, but the bullets channels matched the bullets on the ground and the stiffness of the corpses did not match their positions.

  In 1992 when the UNSC considered the ICTY the ICC was far from becoming viable. I am not surprised under Yeltsin and his clique Russia signed the ICTY letter, it has not signed to the ICC joining America on that score. Perhaps Russia wants to compete with the Yanks. In any case the ICC emanates from the General Assembly and if the crimes of Yugoslavia were of such an international concern there were many other ways in dealing with them than creating a tribunal, one with a limited and selective mandate. What kind of law is that which applies to certain nations but not others, international certainly not.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 4:12 pm
  To Peter Taylor and D. Jovanovic: You can stop holding your breath and start breathing again. First of all, I posted the second part of the Steven Erlanger article from the NYT because I thought it was the best analysis, and if you will note I acknowledged both D. Jovonvic as the source and Steven Erlanger as the author. It's in the beginning of my post. To answer your question about KLA criminals being delivered to the Hague Tribunal - Absolutely. There are quite a few Croatian cowards who are also fighting extradiction and this is wrong. If you have read my posts then you know that I do not condone nationalism as an excuse to avoid justice. Unfortunately in the Balkans, no group is without its war criminals. You know, I never knew this forum existed until just recently when reading through the SUC Forum I discovered that I was falsly accused of being on this forum and then being thrown off this forum. I am an intermittent reader and poster of the SUC forum, so intermittent in fact that that is the reason for the name change. I first posted as Jenny, then changed my name briefly to Tatiana, back to Jenny. After several months absence whe I tried to re-enter I found that I couldn't under my usual name, Jenny (since it was already taken) so I changed to Morningstar and then after another hiatis I couldn't enter under either name, Jenny or Morningstar. So after several tries I was accepted as "Keiko". Sorry you found my posts under Keiko as distasteful and repulsive. Yet I have never posted personal flaming attacks, profanity, threats or lies which, quite frankly, have all been directed toward me, the most recent being the blatant and provocative attacks from Ms. "Love." Like all of you, I have a vested interest in the success of Eastern Europe after the recent Balkan wars. Quite frankly, none of us, posters, commentators and opionaires really have a lot of power to orchestrate the changes that we want to happen.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 4:26 pm
  //To Peter Taylor and D. Jovanovic: You can stop holding your breath and start breathing again.//

  Actually, they said they WOULD NOT hold their breaths. No need for you to have worried about them.

  Where IS Babylon, by the way?
  
  Anna P
  California

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 5:27 pm
  This is in some way the answer to Ms. Morningstar.

  Why am I reading and participating on this discussion Forum? It is not for the reason of winning arguments or showing off my “erudition”. I am here to get informed.

  We get reports about Milosevic trial from Ms. Martinovic and many others. We get the leads into other sites and articles which would take time to search and find otherwise. And above all we seem to be getting the truth about what happened in the Balkans.

  What have I learned:

  1) Kosovo alleged genocide and atrocities did not happen. In fact more likely there was a genocide committed over the Serbs.

  2) Srebrenica massacre did not happen! So far there was no evidence whatsoever!

  3) Racak was a staged event.

  4) The conflict in Yugoslavia was a brutal merciless civil war in which all sides were equally guilty. All one has to do is read the books written by three UN General commanders, Mac Kenzie, Rose and Nambiar. Three different nationalities, three different people , but all have agreed that Muslims played the game as well as Croats and that Serbs got the blame.

  Any objective and non biased person would get this same impression as I did.

  The only difference I might have with Ms. Morningstar is that she hangs on to slogans and propaganda which was served by CNN and US Government to the whole world, never attempting to read the posts and documents quoted on this Forum.

  A future historian will read these trial transcripts and conclude that It was darkest hour for justice, and for the United States
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 6:25 pm
  D. Jovanovic. Thanks for your response. You of course are entitled to your opinion and it's gratifying to learn that you are intellectually curious and desire to know the truth, without bias. Would you care to share your opinions on Vukovar?
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 6:40 pm
  Self management was based on common property, not the state property.

  Yugoslavian common property was wery similar to corporate America.

  The only difference was "Market - Trading floor for shares". Employeed workers were the ovners of the companies.

  All capital and spending and worker's contribution was recorded in companies' books. It was just matter of distributin shares to real owners. Something similar that Milosevic did with Residence buildings.

  In self management - there was no inside natural mechanism to protect common property, gain - loss.

  The last step - to distribute shares and form trading floor would with other economical instruments (taxes) speed up competition.

  Again, Milosevic did that with residences, enough of sign that the same would follow with all other common property.

  That would be very unpleasant for West.Despite of some of the drawbaks of self-management in 1980, Yugoslavia already established huge market in SSSR and Arab countries. West had to take that market share back by destroying industry and a country.
  
  Pero Peric
  Canada.

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 7:16 pm
  To Jenny Morningstar

  The Statement of Milica Zvjerec, Ana Lukic's neighbor Having been requested to say everything known about the case, the witness stated as follows: I live in 47 Vinkovacka St. in a private house; when the fighting started in Borovo Naselje, I was staying in the cellar with my two daughters. Ana Lukic lived in my neighborhood, at 37 Vinkovacka St. She was alone in her cellar, where she sought safety and from where she was able to look after the house and feed the pigs. her husband and four sons were not there; they had had to run away earlier. Every other day, I took bread and water to Ana in her cellar because we were neighbors and close friends. Ana told me that way back in October 1991, she had been visited by the wife of Danijel Rehak (known as "Danika-mongol", who was also named Ana; later on she was also visited by Daniel's sister Magda. They wanted her to work in the Vukovar hospital. Ana told them that she was too scared to go there, because artillery shells were falling everywhere. Several days later some ZNG members came to Ana and searched her house thoroughly. They searched it from the cellar to the attic, allegedly looking for a radio transmitter/receiver. Ana told me this a day later, when I brought bread and water to her. Several days later, Ana told me that her house had been searched again by ZNG members and that they had taken away all valuable items with them, including a clothes dryer, a color TV set, a music line and a bidet. I went to see Ana and saw that ZNG members had left a lot of cigarette stubs in the ashtray and that they had been drinking cognac, since a bottle was on the table. Ana was very scared. Following this event, Ana went to Braca Durdevic local community office, which was subsequently renamed into Braca Radic, in order to complain about the ZNG members who had stolen her property. She talked there to to Ivica Katic and a certain Bracic; they told her that her property would be returned to her. They asked her about her husband and sons. After a while Ana was visited by the ZNG members for a third time; they requested that she start working at the hospital. By the way, she used to work in the hospital accounts department. She was afraid to go and said that she couldn't leave her pigs. When ZNG told her that they would take her pigs away, she agreed to go. In the morning of 11/7/1991, my children and I moved to the "Obucara" shelter on the ground of Borovo Works. Ana came to this shelter in the evening of the same day. She came from a neighboring shelter, the so-called "Komerc". She told me on that occasion, in confidence, that in the night between November 6 and 7, 1991, she had been visited in her cellar by a ZNG member. He was tall and fair-haired and she did not know him. She said that he had come once before alone, two days before ZNG tried to persuade her go to work and when she agreed to do so. The mentioned ZNG member raped Ana that night; at about 2a.m. she managed to escape from the cellar to the "Komerc" shelter. Ana was very excited, upset and she was crying. She told me all this quietly, so that nobody in the shelter could hear us. She said that the man who had raped her was very rough. She didn't tell me any details about the rape, because that would have been very dangerous for both of us. She told me not to see her or speak to her under any circumstances, because she was kept under surveillance. She told me that after the arrival to the "Komerc" shelter she had been interrogated by Martin Sablic in person. He was the commander of the "Komerc" shelter and was later put in charge of the "Obucara" shelter. In the "Obucara" shelter, I was assigned to Dormitory 2 and Ana to Dormitory 4. Ana told me that she was being followed and that, in order not to get me in trouble, we shouldn't see each other any more. I had noticed a woman whose name was Anda; she always kept an eye on my movements; on one occasion she told me "I know that you are a Serb." On November 16 or 17 1991, I was on duty as a cleaning person in the shelter; I was assigned to lavatory cleaning duty by Martin Sablic, who was known as "Car" (The Emperor). On that day, when I was passing the dining room, where Martin's office was, I saw Ana Lukic and Vida Jakovljevic. While passing next to them, I noticed that Ana was very excited and scared; she gave me a signal with her eyes not to approach her. This made me very worried; as if I had a premonition that something would happen to the two of them. I took a bucket of water as an excuse and made my way toward the other lavatory; I passed in front of dining room where Ana and Vida were sitting. This happened at about 11 p.m.; I am quite confident about the time, since I started my duty at 10p.m.. After this I never saw Ana and Vida again. In the evening of November 16 or 17 1991, I was in the shelter when a female ZNG member went from one dormitory to another, reading out loud 15 names and ordering that these people report to Martin Sablic in front of the dining room. Having done this, she said that "anybody failing to report will get a bullet in his forehead." On the basis of the personal names and surnames she had read, and my personal acquaintance with some of the people on the list, I concluded that all of them were Serbs. The list included Neducic from Lusac, Jova Markov and thirteen other men. Jova Markov's wife, Liza, was with him. These men were taken out of the "Obucara" shelter and never came back. I know quite well that Neducic and Jovan Markov have not been found to this day. The woman who was reading the list was in the company of an armed man in ZNG uniform. I don't know who he is, because he was standing further away from me and I was unable to see him well. As for Martin Sablic, I can say that he was in charge of the shelter and that nothing could be done in the shelter without his approval. He kept a record of all people going in and out of the "Obucara" shelter. Martin was always in the company of Nikola Cibaric, a certain Bartol, a short ZNG member from Zagorje (he always emphasized where he was from), and a tall, fair-haired ZNG member wearing a pony tail. On the day following the night when 15 men were taken away from the shelter, Jova Markov's wife asked Martin Sablic when these men would return. I witnessed this conversation because I happened to be passing by. Martin said that "they should come back tonight by 2a.m., but since commander Nikola was killed - murdered, I don't think they'll come back." He was referring to Nikola Cibaric, because we had been told that Nikola Cibaric had allegedly been killed. I have not seen Cibaric after that. ... Ana Lukic wore a light-blue blouse under a long cotton sweater; on top of that she had a grey-blue track suit top. She told me that the track suit top belonged to her son. She wore red slippers on her feet. That's what she wore last time I saw her; she told me earlier that the track suit was her son's because she had been wearing it earlier as well. ... Completed at 1p.m. Milica Zvjerec was born on 1/1/1947; she was employed at Borovo Works in Borovo near Vukovar
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Monday March 17, 2003 at 8:08 pm
  I am an occasionally reader of this forum above all because I think, without intention to flatter anybody, that there is quite intelligent people inside who try to find what really happened in Yugoslavia. There was indeed a lot of lies written about this tragedy, and a lot of arrogance from every side to justify him self, while innocent people suffered.

  I know that my reaction will be displaced from the actual discussion as I’m afraid that some people will find it vexing. But I have to say that, after reading what was written about the Greek-Macedonian question, it is really disquieting how some people did not yet understand that you can not change things on better by developing some theories based on the pure continuity of some race, especially in the Balkans. And that speaking only of someone's own historical merits can not justify any exclusivity on writing of a history, but can only try to blind other people's mind and guide them to some obscure sentiments as otherpeoplephobia, extremism and hate.
  
  Dragi Metodiev
  Belgium

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 12:14 am
  F.Y.I.:

  http://www.milosevic-trial.org/trial/index.htm

  You can now use the link above to view the "trial" transcripts in both the English and Serbian languages.

  This website makes the transcripts searchable so you can enter keywords into the search engine and get the transcripts that relate to the topic you're researching.
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 1:10 am
  First of all: I will call the White House tomorrow morning and with respect inform them I oppose the bombing and I hope they get many calls besides mine. Now is the time when I wish I could go to another planet until this is all over with. Jesus what a world! Regarding Barbara aka Jennie, Morningstar, and so forth: I am sorry to take up space here but you are giving this person what she wants. She wants your attention. The best thing to do is to ignore her, if you do not she will try to turn this forum into a garbage heap.

  Some who have seen her work the forums since 1999 think she is being paid. What I think you already know.

  I am retired so there is no way that I use my employer’s time to be on the computer for hours. I am an honest woman who would never do that anyway.... each one has their own set of ethics and that is mine.

  Barbara going under the name of Jennie was on the SUC forum during the bombing and afterward from 9:00 to 5:00, taking a lunch break and then telling all that she was going home for her wine. She accuses me of lying and that is not so. I am not the one lying and there are about twenty five former posters who could attest to that.

  Throughout this time she made facetious remarks, such as her “tit for tat” when Serbs were being murdered after the peace accord in Kosovo. You could almost here her chuckle each time we posted an article about the vicious deaths of Kosovo Serbs.

  I was on the SUC forum at the time of the bombing. This was a way of keeping up with what was happening and communicating with other Serbs on the forum.Barbara was on the SUC forum for what reason? She never left the forum to support the Albanians, Croats, or Bosnian Muslims. I have never been on their forums as I respect them enough to allow them their freedom to communicate without my being slyly and viciously throwing barbs.

  Guilty? Yes,I did my share of name calling, mostly at her, while on the SUC forum not on the Albanian, etc. She has no idea of what she is talking about most of the time. At one time she decided to announce that “Black Lamb and Grey Falcon” could give one a good history of Yugoslavia. Someone evidently whispered in her ear as she next posted Rebecca West was biased as West favored the Serbs.

  To be on the SUC forum at this time it is necessary to register, and your E Mail address is exposed. Each time you read an indiviual’s post you can go on their E-mail address. When SUC changed over to this format, most posters left, in fact, almost all. After that fewer and fewer posted. I stayed on and posted news articles along with mostly one other Serb person. However, from time to time Barbara came back just happy as a lark to post an article that would show Serbs in a bad light and make what she thought was a clever, cutting remark.

  I have received E Mails from individuals who no doubt read the articles I post but do not post themselves. That is why I continue as I feel someone looks forward to reading them. All my posts with the exception of few have been news articles I collected.

  After many moths I realized that Barbara, who at first tells us she is married to a Croat, and later claims she is a Croat, was bating us to post derogatory comments about the Croats. She could start the same Balkan war here. No thanks girlie, not here. We have cousins who are Croats, we are not going to let that happen. We are Americans and we will not fall into that trap. We like it the way it is.

  Briefly here are a few loose comments from her posts,I will not copy verbatim as SUC has rules against that.

  Read SUC forum:

  On March 2, 2003, Caption: Dim Witted, et al, under the name of Keiko for full article.

  She relates to us on SUC that on the Jurist forum they are 98 to 99 percent Serbian Nationalistic in favor of Milosevic. By the way this post is directed to me. She believes jurist posters are not intellectuals but someone (me) feels inferior and to that someone they are intellectuals, heroes.,et al.

  I plead guilty, they are not exactly my heroes but I think highly of them because they are doing what I want them to do.....plead the case for the Serbian people.I am not anywhere near as informed as they are and so I cheer them on. The other poster on SUC was also more informed than me but I tried. On Jurist they are not saying “tit for tat” and gloating over the deaths and sadness of the Serbian people

  As for D. Jovanovic:

  Be careful of the spider:

  March 2, Keiko:

  Bravo Serbia and Montenegro:

  One of the jurors admitted to being investigated by the Secret Service for making threats. In describing this poster she tells us there are “nuts” out there.

  How about Vukovar now Mr. Jovanovic?

  This poster never said he made “threats.”

  She also tells me that it is illegal and immoral to post an individual’s name. Barbara’s real name appeared on SUC forum and the Serbian Cafe forum in 1999 by a few people who outed her. There is more they revealed about her but I will stop there.

  By the way: Babylon, USA is Cincinnati, Ohio.

  Why do I take the time to post this about her? Because I cannot believe that with all the heartache the Serbian people have suffered that this individual believes it is not enough. I am so very glad that in my lifetime I have never encountered anyone else who is... like her... so completely without a soul. I firmly believe she is trying to divide the Croats and Serbs in the USA.

  I m sure that there are people on the Jurist who are very aware of this woman and her games.

  I am Kathryn Love, and I do live in the great state of California. Barbara accuses me of hiding because I posted under the pseudonym of “Smiley” while on SUC. When SUC started out almost everyone used pseudonyms and that was good because some of the posters were pretty scary. I never intended to hide my identity from my government as they know who we are anyway, it was because of some of the posters that I felt it safer to use a pseudonym.

  
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  CA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:54 am
  Gogol, the ICTY statute in itself is kosher. It makes everyone, regardless of nationality, prosecutable for crimes committed in Yugoslavia. The US has even made an agreement with the ICTY on transferring American nationals to the ICTY. Why this hasn't happened is perhaps the question that we should look into.

  And the Security Council had the competence to create this organ. When you suggest that there would have been better ways to deal with the problem than this tribunal, I get your meaning: those who tried to fix the conflict afterwards by blaming mainly one side should have tried to prevent it in the first place. Whether Yeltsin gave the US too much is an interesting question (during his drinking bouts, I suppose), but the identities of the administrations and their personal problems are irrelevant from the legal point of view: they bound the state.

  You could argue that Yugoslavia wasn't a member of the UN, so the UN had no competence to create an organ which could prosecute its nationals, the head of state included. However, what the prosecution has managed to bring to light in its Croatia case is this: by not recognizing Croatia and not filing a membership application in the UN, Yugoslavia may have become accountable for the crimes committed by the JNA. So you see: the failure to apply for UN membership could actually be considered an inherent element of the crimes committed on the ground. Should the tribunal now be denied jurisdiction in the conflict just because Yugoslavia dropped out of the UN?

  I think the one point that would stick in the legality/jurisdiction question is this: the UN Security Council resolutions made it quite clear that the tribunal should have had an "exprity date", i.e. the temporal jurisdiction had to be fixed later. The most natural date would have been the end of the conflict, i.e. when the UNPREDEP was dismantled. And now we come to the Macedonian question again: the UNPREDEP wasn't dismantled in Macedonia, which might given the excuse to keep the tribunal also in place. So who said Macedonia wasn't relevant? If the UNPREDEP had been sent packing, the conflict would have been recognized as solved. Instead the the UNPREDEP used its presence to dubious objectives, and that is when we get the problems we are dealing with here: Seselj wouldn't have been indicted for crimes committed 10 years ago just before the presidential elections. Milosevic would never have been indicted for Croatia and Bosnia, because there would have been no Kosovo crimes to start with.

  No matter which angle you are looking at the things, there is no way one can excuse the private sessions. Nice, I am so disappointed. First, private sessions are not regulated. Second, it is obvious that they are used to make the trial non-public (=private). But the big question is: why would some bits be made non-public? Will they try to gag Milosevic when it is his turn too? One disconcerting thought comes to mind, and it originates from the previous chief prosecutor Arbour: the intent to hide things can be considered as an indication of guilt.
  
  Jari Nousiainen
  Finland

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 3:53 am
  

  Jari,

  The US has even made an agreement with the ICTY on transferring American nationals to the ICTY.

  I can't recall any of this, except perhaps some concerns related to some Brooklyn Albanian youth belonging to some vague mafia and volunteering to fight for the KLA. This kind of activity is always borderline with US Law prohibiting military service for US nationals under other government's armies.

  The trial is in close sessions or perhaps playing poker or dancing, it is hard to know.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:18 am
  

  Mr. Milosevic is unwell again, high blood pressure. Doctors and cardiologist dealing with it and expecting to tell the court the accused will not be available for few days.
  
  G C
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:35 am
  

  The medium which has not reported much in the past few weeks about the trial of Slobodan Milosevic will find the time, I am sure, within the justified hysteria about war, to tell us his health is slowing down the trial, when in reality the crooked prosecutor keeps telling the black wearing troika he can't get his witness to come or simply can't find them.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 6:07 am
  As we perch on the eve of war I should not have to be posting this but I have no choice. Kathryn Love - Stop the attacks on my personal character, my ideas, beliefs and words. I never wanted to be on this forum - never even knew about it until you falsely claimed and lied that I was posting under names of Rita Rita, Observer, Death to Yugoslavia. These are outright lies and you know it. You twist my words, I think partially because you don't understand them and partially because you are so ready to hate anyone whose ideas threaten your own raison de'tre. Why don't you stick to real issues instead of trying to concoct a trumped up feud with me to enhance your own image. By the way, there is a difference between intelligent and intellectual. Think about it. I have posted many articles in favor of the Serbs which are ignored by those who would rather provoke and create a stir rather than realize that working together has a far better chance of achieving peace and harmony. I make no bones about it - I believe that Milosevic was bad for all of the Balkans, not just Serbia. And I applaud the Serbian people who rejected him. Because of the climate I am afraid to admit that Djindic I felt was on the road to achieving recovery and a bright outlook for Serbia and Montenegro. But I mourn his loss, even though admitting such will put me in hot water with all those who felt his murder was justified or maybe even just convenient. As I said, I shouldn't even be having to post this statement. There are far more important issues in the world now than having to defend my opinions, identity and character against trumped up lies and mis-information.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 6:12 am
  To Dakic Ana: Thank you for your post on Vukovar. I had never seen this before. There certainly are many, many sides and turns to this event.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 6:45 am
  To: Jenny Morningstar

  This is he link.

  http://www.cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/vukovar.html
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 8:56 am
  Ms. Love,

  I am satisfied that what you say is absolutely true!

  As an added proof, Ms. Morningstar attributes my quotes about Srebrenica, Racak, and Kosovo atrocities as my “opinions”! She has not engaged in a debate whether any of the offered posts and testimonies were right or wrong, she offhand dismisses that as” opinions”.

  And most telling is her question to me about Vukovar! That placed her immediately in my mind among the zealots of Ustasha kind who use Vukovar as best propaganda proof of Croatian suffering at the hands of Serbs.

  I believe there was enough said here on this Forum about Vukovar to show that the story is not as simple as Croatian (Ustashi mostly) want it to be. Even Mr. Jari Nausianien, had posted comments on this issue.
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 9:24 am
  Ms. Morningstar,

  Nobody feels that the murder of Djindjic was justified.

  You say, "I believe that Milosevic was bad for all of the Balkans, not just Serbia."

  What do you base that opinion of yours on? What did Slobodan Milosevic do that you have a problem with?
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 9:53 am
  Kathryn, it is good to know that you are Smiley. I was wandering: "Why Smiley is not posting on this forum.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 10:18 am
  Dragi, I agree with your last post. I was keeping my self out of the discussion that you are referring to, since it became overheated. I think that when it comes to Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia and Serbia the last hostilities were during the WWII and that war hatchets were buried at the end of the WWII and that it should stay so. Since the so-called Southwest corridor is dangerous for all of us I would like our politicians to sort out the current minor differences that are overblown and plan common future for all in this part of the Balkans. One should think as well to include Albania and Turkey in these discussions. Waiting for the USA to impose their solution on us all is very dangerous. Digging out the dirt and throwing it at each other is contra-productive at this stage. It is just an invitation for the USA to step in and conquer us all. They are waiting for this opportunity all the time.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 10:41 am
  Ranta is a forensic dentist

  
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 10:50 am
  

  Here it is, not a word about prosecutor's Nice (NATO) lack of witnesses:

  Milosevic Illness Delays Trial Again
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:29 am
  “REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century” a policy paper that many on this page have referred to directly or indirectly. For this “Manifesto” to become a reality there had to exist a national catastrophe which would give the authors of the manifesto a legitimate cause for action. September 11th was that smoking gun for action.

  To justify huge expenditures for the military, at the time of domestic neglect, promotion of fear is used and the defense budget ballooned to 400 billion without complaint.

  The manifesto states that “[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.”

  Close to the heart of some of the posters on this forum is the breakup of Yugoslavia. The breakup of that nation was needed so that NATO remains intact and at the same time America will get a foothold in the Balkans , a strategic base, from which to dominate sea, land and air corridors of Eurasia and North Africa.

  The section of the manifesto dealing with Southern Europe state that America must “REPOSITION U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia.”

  Further to this it states that “American land power is the essential link in the chain that translates U.S. military supremacy into American geopolitical preeminence.”

  In order to build more weapons of mass destruction America has refused to continue with the Ballistic Missile Treaty” with the Russians. America continues to accuse others of treaty violations while they have violated more treaties in the past half century than any other nation. To this the Manifesto states that “The Navy’s surface fleet is too small to meet current requirements, war plans and future missile defense duties.” As a result the Bush administration has scrapped “The Clinton Administration’s adherence to the1972 ABM Treaty”.

  The question of Media bias is spelled out in the statement which states that there is an absolute need for “Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas - and the protection of international commerce - defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new”

  The goal in the destructions of Yugoslavia and now Iraq is American “constabulary” dominance without any challenge to its power. With this “regime change” is part of the policy. As our Prime Minister stated “Who is next?” fortunately I am stepping down so it won’t be me.”

  Robin Cook, Blair’s cheerleader during the bombing of Yugoslavia has resigned. Cook was in the inner circle of Blair’s administration who knows all the intelligence in Blair’s possession and if he had any reason to believe that Iraq was in breach of UN directives he would have been by Blair’s side. Cook might have some decency because he sees what Blair’s action has done in the Balkans to repeat more of the same in the Middle East.

  For the full text on the Manifesto go to: http://www.uncle-scam.com/Breaking/jan-03/manifesto.pdf

  My comments are made not because that I am anti American but because all of America must wake up to the threat posed to world peace by this unilateral act of aggression. National values in conflict with international good are not a path to world peace and environmental sanity.

  Retaliations have started. In Yemen a Yemeni oil worker shot several Canadians and himself this morning.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:48 am
  Mr. Trkla,

  I read your comments and wonder. Is this country lost its sense of decency and goes on and on blatantly ignoring some obvious truths?

  About Robin Cook. He was quite an outspoken protagonist of bombing Yugoslavia. How come now he feels that unilateral intervention is bad? Does he believe that arm-twisted NATO represented some sort of legal consensus representing the world?
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:59 am
  I hate to take up space but thought this was interesting.

  Was leader of Serbia squeezed too much? Steven Erlanger NYT West's demands made him vulnerable

  The assassination of Zoran Djindjic, the Serbian prime minister so highly praised by Western leaders, is a reminder that half-hearted nation-building can easily be derailed, especially when outside nations make heavy political demands on fragile post-tyrannical states like Serbia and, presumably, Iraq.

  . In some ways, many Serbs say, the West squeezed Djindjic to death in a too-tight embrace of specific demands for reform and extradition of war criminals, and tied the delivery of desperately needed foreign aid to those conditions

  . Djindjic, no saint, made deals with various Serbian devils, both war criminals and ordinary criminals, in organizing the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in October 2000.

  . The Serbian popular revolt against Milosevic that year would probably not have succeeded without Djindjic and his shadowy relationship with an officer of Milosevic's paramilitary police, Milorad Lukovic, known as Legija. And it was Legija, the next spring, who carried out Djindjic's orders to arrest Milosevic.

  . Now Djindjic is dead, slain Wednesday, with Legija leading a list of various criminals sought by the panicked authorities for organizing the murder. Serbia's new democrats, many of them complicit in the old regime, are arresting scores of people under a state of emergency that has put restrictions on the news media.

  . But what could have turned Legija so murderously against Djindjic? For many Serbs, the answer is The Hague, where there is a growing list of Serbs wanted by the international prosecutor to stand trial, along with Milosevic himself, before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

  . Milosevic was arrested because Djindjic needed millions of dollars in U.S. aid that was made dependent on an arrest before April 2001. The following June, just before an international donors' meeting, Djindjic sent Milosevic off to The Hague in defiance of his country's constitutional court and without informing the Yugoslav president of the time.

  . Another such deadline is approaching, and again U.S. and other Western aid depends on a new list of those who must be arrested and transferred. This list includes the Bosnian Serb military leader General Ratko Mladic and the former Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadzic.

  . But the prosecutor in The Hague, Carla Del Ponte, has a longer list, and among those on it is understood to be Legija himself, who has been accused of war crimes in Bosnia and Croatia, as well as Franko Simatovic, who led a paramilitary unit that is accused of many atrocities in Bosnia and Kosovo.

  . A shaken Serbian government is blaming organized crime, which has long worked hand in hand with the police, as it did with the old regime - and, according to the Serbian press, with Djindjic, too. Zoran Zivkovic, a former interior minister, has been nominated to replace Djindjic as prime minister.

  . Legija is said to have strong connections with an organized crime group based in Zemun, and Djindjic had spoken openly about cracking down on the group. Djindjic himself had many complicated business interests, with reputed connections to the Surcin mafia, and many Serbs saw him as an elegant kingpin turned politician.

  . Covic, defending the crackdown, called the Djindjic murder "a clear attempt by those who have been trying to stop the development of Serbia and its democratization, to change the course of history, to isolate and turn Serbia into the kingdom of organized crime again."

  . But there are larger questions about the price the prosecutors at The Hague - and behind them, the leaders of the United States and Europe - are asking from a shaky democratic leadership of a poor and corrupted state. Western notions of guilt and innocence, already perceived as "victor's justice" by many in the Balkans, have put enormous strain on the fledgling democratic governments of Croatia and Montenegro, too.

  . And the mess that Serbia remains is also a form of indictment, many Serbs say, of the West and of Washington, which wins its wars but refuses to engage in sustained nation-building.

  . The stress of the West's demands, some in Serbia feel, is part of the nexus of reactions that led to Djindjic's murder. With his death, however, the West is much less likely than before to get the alleged war criminals it wants to The Hague. The achievement of a negotiated independence for Kosovo, which depends on agreement from Belgrade, will be more difficult. And the career of a tough but promising politician, a Westernizer who wanted to bring Serbia into Europe and not sink back into defensive nationalism, has been cut down.

  . Bratislav Grubacic, a Serbian political analyst, said: "Carla del Ponte comes every few months waving lists of suspects, and there has been a lot of pressure on Djindjic and the government from Washington and Brussels to send these people, like Legija and Frenki, to the Hague. I think that's what this murder is all about: These guys helped Djindjic and the democrats come to power, but thought he was betraying them."

  . The Serbs thought Milosevic would satisfy The Hague, but there were more and more investigations and lists, Grubacic said. "And these guys said to themselves, 'O.K., we sent Milosevic, but we're not sending ourselves.'" Covic himself cited "constant pressure" to send suspects to The Hague as a possible factor in the murder.

  . Fifty-four percent of Serbs think the government should stop extraditing alleged war criminals, according to the Strategic Marketing and Media Research Institute.

  
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 12:21 pm
  Gogol, the US has concluded the Agreement on Surrender of Persons with the ICTY. It can be checked in the ICTY website under Member State cooperation. Art. 1 of this agreement says:

  "The United States agrees to surrender to the Tribunal, pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement and the Statute, persons, including United States citizens, found in its territory whom the Tribunal has charged with or found guilty of a violation or violations within the competence of the Tribunal as defined in the Statute."
  
  Jari Nousiainen
  Finland

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 12:29 pm
  Its fair article. On the day of Djindjic's killing there was some article saying Legija was next in the line for 'export' to the Hague. I dont know if these reports were true but.

  Meanwhile arrest carry on here. Balkan superstar Ceca is in prison, they found explosive at her house. Also Legija spent night before assasination with her plus they say that when Bagzi (it is some American kid movie? Bagzi Malon) got out from prison after last assatination try Ceca gave him money. She is stupid one but she always liked 'wise guys' just like in movies.

  Mr Jovanovic if it of interest for you it looks like Cook last function was to go to funeral of Djindjic before resignation. I still have problem not to believe that he looks like child abuser as some of our media say during bombing. But he looks very white and has strange head. Sorry that isnt intellectual comment is it?
  
  Arandjel P V
  Srbija

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 12:34 pm
  The UNPREDEP in Macedonia seems to have been a mighty excuse for the US to continue the temporal jurisdiction of the ICTY. There is also something interesting to note in the fate of the UNPREDEP in Macedonia. Remember that China refused to continue the mandate of UNPREDEP in Macedonia. The reason that was cited was the Macedonian recognition of Taiwan. Now, did China intend to punish Macedonia this way, knowing full well that there were no major problems in the country before the UNPREDEP arrived there? Or was China coming back to the statement made by the Russian representative in the Security Council to the effect that the continued presence of the UNPREDEP in Macedonia was going to endager all the progress that had been made in former Yugoslavia? What the Sino-Russian coalition needed was the right excuse, and the recognition of Taiwan was one.

  And where was the shoe pinching? Well, we know: the Americans that were cooperating with UNPREDEP may have exercised some negative influence across the border.

  If the meaning was to signal that the temporal jurisdiction of the ICTY should also have ended there, the US gave its opinion by bombing the Chinese embassy. There are not many explanations for this incident, but this is one. The hypothetical electronic equipment in the basement of the Chinese embassy also fits this theory. If the equipment was used to listen to the American telecommunications in Kosovo/Macedonia, the US discouraged China from using it for blackmail.

  Anyway, China got the excuse of the recognition of Taiwan a little too late: it was clear that there was another conflict going on, and the UNPREDEP mandate gave the excuse to regard it as the continuation of the first one. The recognition of Taiwan couldn't have come at an opportune time: January 1, 1999. China immediately closed its embassy in Skopje. The Racak "massacre" took place two weeks later.
  
  J N
  Finland

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 12:47 pm
  And to really make friends here, I thought I would come back to the Srebrenica massacre.

  We know that the figure of about 8,000 is inflated. We also know that an inflated figure doesn't meant that they may not have been a massacre. In the recent alleged massacre at Jenin in Palestine, the inflated figure was 500, whereas the final count was less than 50. So we can expect a ten-fold inflation.

  In Srebrenica this would mean that if there was a massacre, the actual figure would be to the tune of 800. We got 1,200 in the Erdemovic trial, and the recent compensation claims revolve around that figure. This fits the pattern.

  So how do we know if there was a massacre? Remember, the reason it has been so difficult to establish the body count in Srebrenica is this: the bodies are in so little pieces that it is difficult to fit them together.

  And now my friends: what explanation do you have? How could the bodies be chopped to such small pieces that it is difficult to tell which pieces go together? A normal combat situation? Hardly.

  I think it is time to start looking for the perpetrator. The Muslim ritual killings include the mutilation of some part of the body, like the head. But that is not what we are talking about here. Whoever carried this out must be one hell of a tactician to besiege a thousand men in retreat (these were probably heading for Zvornik) and still crazy enough to have them chopped to small pieces.
  
  J N
  Finland

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 1:44 pm
  

  While reading Kathryn's post it crossed my mind that some of the information provided in the posted article can be linked to the witness statements of Captain Dragan.

  Additionally Mrs. Del Ponte stated today that Mr. Frenki, Legija and Stanisic are not on her list of the ICTY suspects.

  There is information on Serbian sites that they were linked with Mr. Arkan, as well.

  This brings up a question: " Who these guys were working for"? Mr. Legija at some point of his life was paid by the French Government, since he was French Legionary. I always taught that Mr. Arkan was double agent and that he was not killed by Serbs. He was killed when his usefulness, for his masters, expired. His killer is a witness against Mr. Milosevic and he is known to the New World Order Masters. How come?

  Were the above listed persons during the civil war Serbian patriots, supporters of various parties, paid operatives of foreign intelligence services or just opportunists serving there own benefits. I suspect that the answer is some combination of the above. The future will give us answers. I am proposing that Mr. Legija was not Mr. Milosevic's man. He turned back on him on 5th of October and arrested him later on.

  I think that it is time to rise another question: Who has given to the ICTY a "super secret" tape of the Red Beret Celebration and why Mr. Frenki has overstated the role of the unit in the wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo before the Red Berets even existed? He must have know that this can be used against Mr. Milosevic, so it was his choice as highly capable operative to decide what is going to be said and what level of confidentiality should be assigned to the video tape. He was one who had control over who is going to have an access to the tape. The tape finished in the Hague Tribunal. Who delivered it? Captain Dragan, a friend, was not trusted enough in order to get one. Was this an entrapment?

  One more ting. If the above quoted statement of Mrs. Del Ponte is correct: How come that Mr. Milosevic can be responsible for the alleged crimes committed by the Red Berets, when commanders of the unit are not? In a chain of a command where the chain begins and where it ends? What methodology does the ICTY uses to decide on this. It seams that in case of the Serbian guilt it goes to the very top everybody else is excused. When it comes to the others (Croats, Muslims and Albanians) it seams that it is anybody's guess. Preferably the top is excused, lower ranks are the guilty parties. When it comes to the West nobody is guilty by definition. Where is fairness in this? The ICTY is unfair to all the victims of the Yugoslav Civil Wars and this is responsibility of Mrs. Del Ponte and this is why she is guilty as hell for providing cover up for the war criminals. She is just at the bottom of the command chain in this case.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 1:44 pm
  WT

  National values in conflict with internation good are not the path to world peace and inviormental sanity.

  The opposite is true. The individual trumps the state, the state trumps the country and the country trumps the international 'good'. It's the essense of freedom.

  I think America is finally waking up. They were duped by Clinton and are still in the dark re the Balkans. Unfortunately IMO, W's team regards it as history, but justice is slow and grinds on. But 9/11 is bringing the country into focus, again I refer to Oriana Falacci's assessment of the Islamists' worldwide 'Jihad'. It's worse than AIDs.

  People are coming to the realization that the UN is and has been an enemy of the US for years. Every vote in the UN is political. Their justice is one-sided, example Israel and Milosivic. They voted for 'disarming' Saddam by force , then are 'blackmailed' into retreat and cowardly renege, after all, it's others, the Israelis and American , not to mention Bosnia, Kosovo and Chechnya, that are being attacked..

  They've turn over the reins of the UN to 'banana countries', who have nothing at stake except competing for handouts.

  We gain nothing by taking on the Islamists first in Afghanistan and now Iraq. We have plenty of everything already, except the security that the Islamists would attempt to mete out, here in the EU and everywhere else. This blackmailing by violence has to be taken on.

  W is right on this, he speaks plainly. Japan, Italy, Spain to name just a few, agree. I hope we are not deterred and have the fortitude to complete the task. I have yet to hear Chirac make any sense.
  
  J P
  USA,Wis

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:14 pm
  

  Italy: Berlusconi to name "post-fascist" Fini as deputy prime minister

  and another facist:

  Aznar: Bush's Best Friend in Continental Europe
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:14 pm
  
  
  G C
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:16 pm
  Jari said:Whoever carried this out must be one hell of a tactician to besiege a thousand men in retreat (these were probably heading for Zvornik) and still crazy enough to have them chopped to small pieces.

  I am a doubting Thomas.

  During the Kosovo war there was a long sympathetic article by a Canadian correspondent. You know this was in 1999 and I did not take notes so I do not remember her name.

  She interviewed a young Albanian woman who was going off to war to avenge the killer of her brother. The correspondent wrote in sympathetic detail all about this poor child’s sorrow. (Maybe some of you have more memory of the details.)

  After the peace agreement the journalist went back to Kosovo and low and behold there is the girl’s brother. The girl did not flinch she said in war you have to do what you have to do. In other words, you lie, it is called propaganda. You know, like the babies being murdered by the Iraqis in Kuwait.

  These were bloody civil wars in Yugoslavia. All sides did pretty horrendous deeds. What the Serbs lacked was an ability to spread propaganda of their own. In the propaganda war the Serbs were the losers. Well, more than likely it was the Serbs did not have access to a press that was not biased against them. I understand the Russian papers were reporting to their readers the Serbian casualties.

  Retired AF Officer, Boyd commented in an article in Foreign Affairs during the Bosnian war about Christiane Amnapour. He said she was never reporting from the Serb side, she ignored massacres of Serbs. He also said the Muslims were never without food and supplies as these were being brought in almost daily to them. There was always fresh fruit and vegetables.

  The Serbs were not so lucky. If any of their prisoners were hungry, who do you feed first, your people or the ones who shot your sister or mother in the back?

  Analogy:

  A Los Angeles preschool had operated for years without a trace of child abuse. Children grew into adults and never a whisper about child abuse. One woman who was a known schizophrenic with a drinking problem made an accusation that some in the school had committed sexual abuse against her son.

  Media:

  The media ran with the story. Therapists were brought in and encouraged the children to tell the “truth.” The children who denied the accusations were told they were in denial. The media never interviewed the children who grew into adults and denied that anything had happened there. This was not what the media wanted to hear.

  Truth?

  They were led through underground tunnels, they were taken to airports, they were subject to witch craft and bloodletting and murder. No evidence found but just the same about six people had their lives ruined by the “media,” “one sick woman” and a lot of “hysterical parents.” The defendants lost everything and eventually were found not guilty over a period of a couple of years. Their reputations and finances gone. Many people still believe the owners of the school, (which is no more) and the employees, are sons and daughters of the devil.

  BTW: Mujahadeens were known for their savage killings and they were fighting in Bosnia against the Serbs. How many were indicted by the Hague?
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:28 pm
  JP:

  How sad.

  Have you been in the military? If not are you at the age where you could be? Are you afraid for those Iraqi people that they will die? Are you afraid for the men and women of your own country going off to fight the Bush war? Do you think you can afford your SUV when the bombing is over and the gas prices go down? How sad.
  
  Kathryn Love
  SJC
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 2:44 pm
  Gogol, I think that the problem that Mr. Nice is facing is much bigger. Not only lack of witnesses but lack of the case, especially in Bosnia. There is no good case against Mr. Milosevic in Bosnia. They are not ready. They are stalling. Was it you, that pointed the other day that Mr. May has stated that the troika does not need to listen to the Dubrovnik witnesses any more.
  
  Pera Bora
  Ottawa
  Canada

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 3:10 pm
  KL

  It's not Bush's war, it's yours and mine. It's Oriana Falacci's 's war. It's the victims of the WTC's war. More than 45 countries agree. More people than not in the states agree with Bush.

  There's a reason you and I live in a free country, it was paid for in blood, and the devil in another guise has demanded another payment.
  
  J P
  USA.Wis

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:08 pm
  W's not right. He's not even clued in. Listen to him talk about the subject -- he sounds like a high schooler who has to participate in a debate but hasn't done the homework. All he does is repeat the same few phrases, changing the order of the words occasionally. I think he must be sweating every time he has to answer a question because he does not have the facts. W's doing the bidding on his financial peers. Period. He's lost in this whole ridiculous issue.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:10 pm
  ...OF his financial peers..
  
  Anna P
  California

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:46 pm
  

  Killing of Serb Prime Minister Djindjic: Possible Versions
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 4:58 pm
  

  Jari,

  I wonder what decided the US to be ready to extradite US nationals to the ICTY besides the fact several Yugoslavs have dual citizenship. I doubt they had in mind any May Flower descendant type of American. Those have killed too many Indians to make a difference.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 6:20 pm
  To Kathryn Love:

  I think this is what you were thinking of:

  Nancy Durham did the original and follow-up story.

  The Truth About Rajmonda A KLA Soldier Lies for the Cause. For the past year, the CBC's Nancy Durham has been sending dispatches from a small Kosovar Albanian village. So in June, when NATO's Kosovo Force - KFOR - opened Kosovo to the outside world Nancy headed straight for Shale to see how the people there had managed during the NATO bombardment. And for the first time, in 18 months of covering the war over Kosovo, she was able to move freely throughout the region. As a result, Nancy uncovered much more than she expected. Here is the story in her own words. I returned to Kosovo in June, three days after the arrival of NATO's Kosovo Force, KFOR. It was a thrilling time, and suspenseful too. I had come to Shale, a village I haven't named until now. During the war I was asked not to. The people wanted to protect their Kosovo Liberation Army run hospital. I returned to Shale not only to see who survived, and how they managed to, but also to learn more about one person in particular. During the war here it was impossible to move freely and therefore difficult to get answers to all my questions. I am looking for Rajmonda Rreci. I met her for the first time, a year ago, in Shale's KLA hospital. I was told she was being treated for trauma, because she witnessed the killing of her sister, apparently by Serbs in an attack on her village. "And maybe I will be a part of the Kosovo liberation army because that's the only way for us except if the world help us," she said at the time. The next time I saw Rajmonda - last December - it was at the KLA's mountain headquarters in Drenica. She was dressed for her new part, and vowing to die for Kosovo's independence. "It's a Kalashnikov and it's just like one member of my family. this is for me everything," she told me. Rajmonda's story was riveting. Everyone could understand her wish to avenge her sister's killing. I asked her about my visiting Qendresa's grave. "Even I don't know where it is…", she said. "It's hard, too hard. really really hard." When we parted that winter night, I had doubts about Rajmonda's ability to survive. Her Kalashnikov rifle was no match for the Yugoslav army. But I had underestimated Rajmonda. In June, I found her still on the mountain. This 19-year-old girl had made it through war. She was staying at the KLA's logisitics house, and still a soldier, but on her day off I stayed the night and Rajmonda talked me through the last months of war. She showed me how she spent her leisure time between battles. "We sleep 12 girls, in this room, 60 in whole house," she said, "we sleep just like sardines. I asked what she did in her leisure time, between battles. She unrolled a drawing of a girl on beach. "It's just like my dreams," she said. "We always dreamed to finish the war and then we can go to the beach and have a holiday far away from this place because we saw too much and everything." Rajmonda seemed more like a child to me than a battle hardened soldier. "When you see all those that we saw, all those massacres, all the people. When you see that they don't have enough to eat. All the burned houses [so] they stay only in the land, they don't have nothing. ..You don't have time to think that you killed a man or something else. You only want to kill, to kill him because you know what he done to your family. And for me all the people from Kosovo, not only for me but all people for Kosovo are our family." "Do you think about your sister?" I ask. "I'm thinking about her but I told you I said one time you have to lose something that you love, you really love to have the freedom," she replies. Rajmonda may have won her freedom but she still belonged to the KLA. She was both loyal soldier, and teenage girl and she had begun to open up a little. Rajmonda admitted she hid things from me; that she already was a member of the KLA when we first met. What else was there to this elusive girl? The war was over, but Rajmonda was still an obedient soldier. Last December I had wanted to go to Rajmonda's village to learn more about her. I wanted to gather all the details I could to understand a young girl who had lost her innocence so tragically. Rajmonda asked me not to go there. She said she was worried it might endanger her family if I visited them. It seemed a reasonable request. It was a very tense time. But in June with the retreat of the Yugoslav army, it was at last safe for me to visit her home in Skenderaj. I wasn't optimistic about finding anyone at home because Rajmonda had told me her family was now in Albania. But this wasn't true. I found Rajmonda's mother, Barhije, at home along with two other daughters. Two year old Ilirida and, to my astonishment, Rajmonda's nine year old sister, Qendresa. The sister who was supposed to be dead. I was shocked, but Rajmonda's mother offered a novel explanation. There was a murdered sister, she said, but Rajmonda got her name wrong. It was Dafina who died. I spent an awkward hour. We looked at the family album. I saw Rajmonda as a toddler on a Montenegran beach holiday. There was no trace of Dafina. I had a sinking feeling. Perhaps there never was a Dafina. Perhaps there was no murdered sister at all. Had I been used for the cause? Six weeks later, in August, I got my chance to find out. I returned to Kosovo to confront Rajmonda. I found her still near Shale but at another KLA base. "Yeah, I lied to you," she said. Rajmonda admits she lied about Qendresa, but claims it didn't start out as a lie. She said she was misinformed. "In the beginning it was a mistake," she said, "because I spoke when I was not sure. I believed my sister was killed when I was not sure but I believe because we are in war and in war happen everything." But why didn't Rajmonda put the record straight on my subsequent visits? "I think about that and I said to myself. 'Why I have to tell her my sister is alive when there are so many girls and mothers who lost the childrens, the sisters, the family. they don't have the chance to give interview.'" Rajmonda doesn't take all the credit for her strategy. She claims the doctors at the field hospital encouraged her to lie. Shpetim Robaj was one of those doctors. He was killed shortly after I met Rajmonda, when his Red Cross vehicle hit a landmine. But Fitim Selimi, the KLA doctor who treated Rajmonda in September and then took me up the mountain to find her in winter, did survive the war. He appeared completely taken aback by the story, when I found him in Pristina in his new role as director of hospitals for all of Kosovo. He insisted this was the first he knew of any lie. "Maybe she thought the job she was doing was too little," he said. "So to show Kosovo she was doing much more she said she lost her sister and to show our suffering maybe she was even capable of saying she lost others." "I said to myself she is just a journalist and she lives in England and she don't care about us," Rajmonda said. "They don't care about us, how we live, and how we die. they are coming here just to make interview for their career and for their interest." In August, Rajmonda returned to Skenderaj with me to see her family. She hugs Qendresa, now with her hair cut short. The little girl is oblivious to the story about her death. but fascinated with the photos of her soldier sister. Pictures from our encounter last winter on the mountain and pictures from long ago. "I just wish to be again a little girl....only to be a happy child, happy kid like I was," Rajmonda said. A happy child like Qendresa, perhaps, whose supposed murder had been the foundation of Rajmonda's story. A story that had played around the world, and in at least a dozen countries, and each time it was told it reported Qendresa's death. I wondered how Rajmonda's father, Aslan Rreci, feels about his daughter being used in propaganda. "We didn't try to do any propaganda," he said. "But against the Serbs you had to fight in every way, even with propaganda like this. but this was only by accident, this wasn't a propaganda on purpose." "I'm glad it was effective in one condition," Rajmnonda says, "if this was not my story this story belonged to someone else here." I have reflected on the five days I spent with Shpetim Robaj in September 1998--the week before he died-- the week I first met Rajmonda. Could he have played a part in this, like Rajmonda claims? One afternoon he and I stood right at the cemetary in Pristina, just a few metres from where he'd soon be buried. We watched villages burn in the distance. Kosovo was on fire but the story dominating the news was the Clinton-Lewinsky affair. To many Kosovar Albanians, it seemed the outside world had forgotten them. Ilir Tolaj thought it had. He was Shpetim's close friend and colleague. One year ago he appealed to the West to intervene. He's never met Rajmonda - except on video tape - but he admits he's impressed with her performance. "If this is a lie - don't know if it's small or big," he said. "Maybe from my point it's small, from the point of the journalist it's very big and unacceptable. But if this small lie from my point of view made some kind of impact in what west country did in Kosovo then it's worth it." The fact is that Rajmonda didn't need a story about a dead sister to explain her motivation. She was born in Drenica in the very place where 18 years later, the war would began. The first fires of Kosovo's war were set in Prekaz, just a short walk from Rajmonda's home. In March 1998, Serb forces launched an attack against what they called Albanian terrorists. It was the assault which alerted the world to the Kosovo conflict. Children were among the 53 members of the Jashari clan who died. Rajmonda walked among the Jashari graves in a meadow. "My best friend was in the same class," she said. "and when the Jasharis were killed...I went in Prekaz. I saw the victims and I saw her... and when I saw her, then I said to myself now it's the moment I'm gonna take the gun and I'm gonna became a member of KLA." "How do i know that's story's true?" I asked. "Oh you will find it, it's easy," she replied. Of course finding the truth here is not at all easy. I chose to cover the war in Kosovo by following the people I had come to know through Shpetim Robaj. It's hard for me to believe he played any witting part in perpetrating Rajmonda's lie. In fact often he corrected fellow Kosovars when they told exaggerated stories of suffering. He helped me get started on telling the story of war through the eyes of ordinary people. It was partly because of his death that I wanted to return to those he'd introduced me to. It's by returning repeatedly to Kosovo that I uncovered Rajmonda's lie. But hers is just one. How many other lies will remain buried?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 6:37 pm
  
  The Looney Bin

  Pero Peric: Thanks:

  O wad some Power the giftie gie us

  
  

  To see oursels as ithers see us!

  
  

  It wad frae monie a blunder free us

  
  

  An foolish notion:

  From the poem ‘To a Louse …’ by Robert Burns.

  However I have a problem with your comment: “People do not like it (If you openly said something and point to source - they don’t have contra argument)”

  Are you suggesting that my comments would be more convincing if I did not provide any evidence to support them? And surely it is for others - perhaps a reformed Jenny - to provide the contra argument.

  In any case what is the contra argument to the exposure of a massive lie?

  Ill timed, illegitimate and immoral:

  Like you Pero my claim is that I am seeking the TRUTH. I have been listening for most of the day to the debate in Parliament over the impending war on Iraq. In a debate to determine whether or not British forces will participate in the killing and injuring of a hundred thousand innocent Iraqi’s - give or take a few hundred thousands - you would be forgiven at times for believing that you were listening to a broadcast from a lunatic asylum. Am I allowed to say that in this PC NWO?

  This is not to say that amidst the boos and yah-boos there were not some magnificent speeches. Blair, opening the debate, gave an impassioned speech which impressed many - he is very persuasive. But I remember the dishonest, racist and vicious attacks upon France. I notice the arming of RAF bombers with cluster bombs yet again in Kuwait. I remember the forged dodgy dossier and the fact that this so called democrat ignores a massive public opinion against war before the weapons inspectors have completed their task. Above all Blair ended his speech with an emotional appeal to ‘stand up to terrorism and vicious dictators’: I remember that four years ago Blair supported Islamic terrorism in Kosovo including Mujahedin and al-Qaeda! I remember that Blair released Pinochet under New Labour’s ethical foreign policy! Blair may make pretty speeches but they are full of contradictions: contradictions reveal nothing but nonsense.

  Throughout the debate the number of references to the “just” intervention in Kosovo was astounding. Do these people really not know the truth about Kosovo or is it that I do not know the truth about Kosovo?

  Before the debate Peter Hain, Blair’s minister for Welsh affairs, appeared on the BBC Radio Five Live chat show. In response to a British Muslim’s expression of despair, over the intended action in Iraq, Hain made this reply: ‘In Kosovo we saved a million Muslims from Genocide, from being massacred by the Serbs’.

  Upon hearing this my doubts disappeared. I am still being lied to on a massive scale by the New labour government and I still want to know why. How can a British cabinet minister, like so many of his colleagues, broadcast such an outrageous lie?

  It has been my analysis of the facts that Blair is a dangerous charlatan pivotal to the tragedy of Kosovo: I will not repeat the details of the argument as I have explained them many times. Sadly I see now that I an failing as the British public is denied the substantive facts and provided instead with a drip feed diet a la Hain.

  I had no objection to Britain’s support of the USA in Afghanistan but it would have been seemly to wait for the request for help. Also the tactics employed there made Blair’s comments about Milosevic’s disproportionate use of force a tad hypocritical. Blair’s egregious sycophancy in rushing over to Bush immediately after 9/11 to offer his support smacks of the serial warmonger: did he also, then, encourage the now imminent attack upon Iraq?

  In his messianic zeal to cluster bomb Iraq Blair ignores the fact that there are other more patient means of ridding the Iraqis of this evil dictator - visited upon them for their own purposes by the Western Powers - without subjecting them to even more horrors of war.

  There is a prima facie case for Milosevic to answer to a properly constituted court over the events in Kosovo: but not in this political show case known as the ICTY which is now beyond redemption. There is an even greater case for Blair, Clinton, Albright and the Leaders of the KLA to answer for there crimes but we know that they will not.

  A great wrong has been done the Serbian people in being singled out as the villains in the tragic recent events of Kosovo: especially when the facts demonstrate that they have been by far the worst victims of these awful events. They are the victims of Blair’s continuing unprincipled conduct. A principled British Prime Minister could and should have averted this disaster.
  
  Peter Taylor
  Herts/UK

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 7:04 pm
  

  Gee, I never anticipated understanding how ordinary Germans felt on the eve of Hitler's invasion of Poland.

  
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Conn., USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 7:06 pm
  JP,

  //More than 45 countries agree.// (Out of how many?)

  //More people than not in the states agree with Bush.// (What was that? 51% agains 49% or something similar? Impressive, isn't it?) //There's a reason you and I live in a free country, it was paid for in blood,// (whose blood -- other people's?) //and the devil in another guise has demanded another payment.//(Whaaaaaat?)

  Are you a zealot of some kind, JP?

  All you supporters of American imperialism will need to take responsibility for it when the world goes completely to hell because the most powerful country in it wants a world government that it takes charge of and no matter what countries or actual, live people (mostly children, I dare say) get smashed in the process.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 8:19 pm
  Mr. J.N.,

  Allow me to make some plausible scenario of what I think happened in Srebrenica. This is based on a multitude of articles I have read from the very beginning of the event. I have been is a sort of correspondence with the reporter/writer of the book on Srebrenica.

  I admit of being emotionally involved. Having witnessed the execution of some 7000 Serb men and schoolboys in Kragujevac by the Germans in 1941, I am horrified at the thought that my nation the Serbs are capable of such a crime.

  But here are my conjectures: The number of killed is somewhere between 1500 and 2000. Probably more then a half were killed in the woods while trying to escape toward Tuzla. (Not Zvornik which was in Serbian hands). Probably 700-800 were executed.

  One has to keep in mind that Naser Oric, Muslim commander was executing a series of raids against Serbian villages surrounding Srebrenica. Presumably after capturing these Muslims after the fall of Srebrenica a some sort of quick investigation and search among those captured was conducted. No legitimate proceedings but just finger pointing by witnesses. These people were separated, taken away in groups and executed. That sort of quick justice would be a plausible account.

  As to the minced up bodies, I could hardly believe that body mutilation happened. Most likely this was the result of careless excavation. For all we know the Tuzla collection of body bags is a collection from all over Bosnia. There was a minimal forensic identification with the bodies belonged to Srebrenica inhabitants.

  So if this is called a massacre so be it. But a cold blooded execution of men it was not. Only civilized and methodical Germans could execute such numbers, methodically calmly and systematically.
  
  D. Jovanovic
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 8:35 pm
  D. Jovanovic,

  The verison of Srebrenica that you have put together in an educated manner makes more sense than anything else I've read about it. Although 800 estimated killed is nothing for Serbs to be proud of, it certainly is a far, far cry from what the world has been led to believe. I hope that someday soon someone will actually deduce the truth about Srebrenica as closely as possible and publish it for all to see and put this enormous and malicious lie to rest. But, as is popularly said here, I'm not holding my breath.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 9:09 pm
  Anna P

  How big is our 'empire'. Of what does it consist? What are you talking about?

  We don't want a world govenment, re our opposition to the ICC.

  The devil has come in the guise of Nazism, Communism, Liberalism and now Islamism. People in the states, now 2 o 3, agree with Bush, but who's counting. It's the essense of 'representive' governance that the majority does not count the shots, except at election time.

  I'm not a zealot, but zealots are what I'm wary of, be they Facists, Communists , Islamists, Enviormentalists, socialists or liberal democratic kooks.

  As for blood, there was plenty in WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam.
  
  J P
  USA,Wis

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 9:48 pm
  I found this article to be one of the best on the subject, all the more sad for its predictions. Martyr for a democratic Serbia by Tod Lindberg The only time I ever saw Zoran Djindjic, the prime minister of Serbia who was assassinated as he stepped out of a car in front of his Belgrade office last week, was at an off-the-record appearance he made in Washington not long after Slobodan Milosevic gave up as ruler of Yugoslavia. One appearance was enough, however, for him to make a lasting impression as one of the most serious and brilliant politicians on the world stage. What happened last week was a timely and shocking reminder that even the serious and brilliant are sometimes not serious and brilliant enough for the tasks they face. Mr. Djindjic studied philosophy in his youth, and I will offer from memory one quotation the ground rules of the meeting, which took place at the American Enterprise Institute, having expired with his death - that beautifully captures the depth of his thinking about politics. He was emphasizing the need for economic development and investment in the former Yugoslavia. As he explained it, "Without money, there is only politics. And when there is only politics, there is hate." That is as concise a summary as one could wish of the way in which civil society, including the marketplace, tempers the passions of politics that lead people to try to kill each other to get what they want. When people exchange goods for money in a properly functioning market, they are engaging in a transaction that is mutually beneficial. The importance of this goes beyond the economic. They in effect voluntarily treat each other as equals in that they share the same end of benefiting by working together in the transaction. Multiplied across the whole of society, these transactions make for a social fabric of at least a formal equality, at least in relation to the transactions. This may in turn lead to a fuller sense of equality; at a minimum, though, this bourgeois life opens a space in which people can be free from participating in political conflict and also tends to tone political conflict down to something less than life-or-death struggle. Djindjic understood this. And he understood the task before him. The first was to engineer the downfall of Mr. Milosevic, the Serbian strongman who had set what remained of Yugoslavia on a disastrous course since the end of the Cold War, culminating in NATO's air campaign forcing him from Kosovo in 1999. Djindjic, as he described it, knew that a united opposition could win a majority in an election Mr. Milosevic had called for September 2000, apparently in the belief that his popular support remained high. The trick, however, was to settle on a candidate against whom Mr. Milosevic could not call out the army once defeated. Mr. Djindjic knew he was not that candidate. Someone with stronger Serbian nationalist credentials was necessary. The opposition rallied around Vojislav Kostunica. The strategy worked brilliantly. Mr. Milosevic was initially defiant, but found that he lacked the popular support, and more important, the muscle in the form of the army to annul the election results. Mr. Djindjic became prime minister of Serbia, with Mr. Kostunica serving as president of Yugoslavia. The clash between the two was emblematic of the extraordinary political task Mr. Djindjic had set for himself: reversing a decade of suicidal (and murderous) Serbian nationalism and aligning Serbia once and for all with the West. The Djindjic event I attended took place in spring 2001. One therefore was looking at the world through that pre-September 11 prism. As I walked out, I remember thinking, now here was a politician with a mission worthy of his talents. If you looked around the world, few leaders, especially in the West, faced anything even remotely comparable. In mature, stable democracies, the greatest challenge for most was merely the gaining and keeping of power. The new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe had required greatness, and some produced it sooner than others, but most seemed to be on their way. True, the United States had vast security responsibilities around the world, but at the time it was rather unclear what threatened us, and anyway, I had concluded, such was the overwhelming character of American power that even Bill Clinton could wield it relatively effectively, as in Kosovo. But Mr. Djindjic. If Mr. Djindjic got it right, I thought, he would be remembered as really the father of the modern Serbia that would be emerging, its redeemer against the depredations of the Milosevic era. And now Mr. Djindjic is dead. He made vast progress, but Serbia's future remains an entirely unsettled question. He turns out to have been a martyr to the cause of a liberal, democratic Serbia, not the one who brought it into being. Mr. Djindjic didn't get it right. I thought he would, and I think he did also. And maybe that is the reason he didn't: an insufficient respect for the abyss, which can yawn at any moment, whether it's the twin towers coming down in Manhattan or two bullets in Belgrade. Tod Lindberg is editor of Policy Review magazine and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution.
  
  Jenny Morningstar
  Babylon
  USA

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 9:48 pm
  To AP V from NY on Racak,

  The Racak KLA commander was Shukri Buja and he testified on June 5 and 6, 2002, giving one the most interesting testimonies to date. He provided quite a lot of military info, some of whcih openly contradicts testimonies from 2 Racak villagers who talked about "civilian" dead. Specifically, Buja admitted that the elderly Racak victims Mehmet Mustafa and Sadik Mujota (classified as "civilians" as per prosecution theory) were actually KLA members in civilian clothes and that Mujota's daughter Hanemshah (another "civilian") died with her father during the battle. These details are also important in further confirming that the distinction between civilian and combatant in Kosovo was blurred and that many KLA members did not wear uniforms.
  Although you and I are cetrtain that KLA often gangpressed civilians to fight, Buja did not say anything that could lead to such a conclusion. He is not stupid to have fallen in such a trap. His line was to accept that some civilians were fighting with the KLA by choice, but not by gangpressing. Remember that, after all, he was the one who either staged the pseudo-massacre in advance or at least made sure that the dead civilian-combatants were used for maximum effect. He was smart enough to turn a military defeat into a public relations triumph (with, of course, ample help from Walker and the Clinton administration).

  To Pera on Racak,

  ICTY judges have recognized that a battle took place at Racak, as the KLA commander Buja described in detail. Similarly, judges in the Krstic trial also recognized that battles took place after the Muslim exodus from Srebrenica. It is not ICTY but western politicians who conceal and western media who either conceal or ignore these facts. Such easily demonstrable omissions in the media provide us opportunities to send letters of justified anger.

  You make several good points on forensics. We agree that Ranta was not naive when distorting the facts in press reports and letting it be implied that there was a massacre, when plenty of evidence available to her proved the opposite. She is professionally dishonest and contemptible. Milosevic knows it, but there was no point in insisting. He surely intends to bring good witnesses, concerning probably not only the forensic aspects but also the whole series of events. It is important that the Racak lie be thoroughly debunked not only in the eyes of the judges but of the misled western public as well.

  
  
  Pythagoras C
  Greece

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:31 pm
  Jenny Morningstar,

  Puuhhleeese. I'll start crying in a minute about how Djidjic won't have any more chances to outmaneuver and outgun good people like Kostunica by meeting regularly with the mafia and kissing Madelaine Albright's hand after she bombed his country. Oh, I must get my violin out...

  Not to mention that the Hoover Instituion at Stanford is funded by the Bechtel Corporation, commonly known, I hope, to be waiting in the wings every single time a bomb heads in the direction of a foreign country, be it Serbia or Iraq, with contracts already signed for the "rebuilding" of that which should never have been destroyed.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:33 pm
  A2+B2=C2

  I recall that Shukri Buja testified that he gathered 40 (or so) volunteers from the village.

  D. Jovanovic

  Conjecture that BSA units murdered perhaps as many as 800 soldiers of the 28th BiH doesn't agree with the known facts. First, during the Krstic hearings, a soldier in the 28th testified in great detail what it was like to be a captured as a POW during the Liberation of Srebrenica.

  The POW testified that he saw a member of one of Nasir's execution squads also taken as a POW. This guy identified himself as a member of a known Oric execution squad. The witness testified he was surprised that his fellow POW would name that unit, for it was a known "execution squad".......but the BSA treated this killer with all norms accorded all other POW's

  The BSA didn't take this guy away. It is evidence that the BSA didn't single out even the most murderous of Nasir Oric's soldiers for special treatment.

  we will only know the truth of the Liberation of Srebrenica when the full forensic reports are released from to the public
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY

• Tuesday March 18, 2003 at 11:33 pm
  A2+B2=C2

  I recall that Shukri Buja testified that he gathered 40 (or so) volunteers from the village.

  D. Jovanovic

  Conjecture that BSA units murdered perhaps as many as 800 soldiers of the 28th BiH doesn't agree with the known facts. First, during the Krstic hearings, a soldier in the 28th testified in great detail what it was like to be a captured as a POW during the Liberation of Srebrenica.

  The POW testified that he saw a member of one of Nasir's execution squads also taken as a POW. This guy identified himself as a member of a known Oric execution squad. The witness testified he was surprised that his fellow POW would name that unit, for it was a known "execution squad".......but the BSA treated this killer with all norms accorded all other POW's

  The BSA didn't take this guy away. It is evidence that the BSA didn't single out even the most murderous of Nasir Oric's soldiers for special treatment.

  we will only know the truth of the Liberation of Srebrenica when the full forensic reports are released from to the public
  
  AP V
  NY
  NY