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

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:34 am
  http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/int-time95.htm
  
  Ian Davis
  Waterloo
  Ontario, Canada

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 1:16 am
  Dan, re Jovic I don’t know what the ‘general sense’ would be, but the facts are that he’s a bygone politician who stepped down from the YU Presidency in 1991 precisely because nobody, not even Milosevic, could force or influence JNA to intervene militarily to prevent Slovenia and Croatia from seceding (although many argue that was just what should have been done). Here’s what the US Foreign Military Studies Office said in its ‘The Yugoslav Conflict: A Chronology of Events’ under ‘1991’: “14 March - Yugoslav President Borisav Jovic resigns in protest of the collective presidency’s refusal to authorise military intervention in the political crisis.” So, Bora Jovic would be another “political insider witness” who will testify how Milosevic didn’t do something which was the opposite to what he’s been accused of (he didn’t militarily prevent the breaking up of YU but he’s been accused of breaking it up, by allegedly using the same JNA over which he had no influence to use it in the first place; pretty much like the indictment saying Milosevic was the key interference in all things Bosnian during its civil war and Owen testifying this being the “greatest mistake of President Milosevic” not to interfere). Knowing Mr Jovic to be blessed with sufficiently high level of intelligence to realize how illogical this case is, no wonder he comes to testify as an unwilling witness. His own vanity of an ex-politician will no doubt be on display but all he could say would be about the things Milosevic didn’t do (and which he, Bora Jovic, thought Milosevic should have done). Otherwise, his diary had been selectively quoted and misquoted and “explained” to suit all kinds of preposterous theories. The quotes I’ve read differ significantly from the explanations attached to them (e.g. see Celebici Trial, Tribunal Update 55, 1-5 Dec. 1997).

  Pantelija, TV B92 had stopped the “trial” broadcasting for one week in October and the same happened a couple of times before in the last year; currently, they have resumed it. If you in B&H were able to watch it uninterrupted all the time through B92, then it’s even more weird that we in Serbia were unable to do so. Are you sure that the transmissions went on continuously?

  Today’s POLITIKA (on its front page, with the continuation on page 2) published the following:

  [start quote] The Hague Tribunal Behind The Scenes - THE ANATOMY OF A CONFESSION - When the Repentant Momir Nikolic Was Lying And When Was He Telling the Truth And With What Purpose - From our special correspondent - The Hague, 12 November - The London-based journalist Chris Stephen as of 1 December will not work any more for the British website of the Institute for War and Peace in London. The reason why he, as one of the leading reporters and commentators of this site, had lost the option of prolonging his contract, in his own words, is one of his pieces on the Tribunal.

  As a regular reporter, Stephen wrote a piece on the testimony of Momir Nikolic at the trial of Vidoje Blagojevic and Dragan Jokic re Srebrenica. This trial, where two officers from Republika Srpska stand accused for genocide, goes on in the shadow of the Milosevic proceedings, but Stephen didn’t miss how the repentant Momir Nikolic, who had pleaded guilty in a plea agreement with the Prosecution and now appeared at the trial as a witness, invented that he had ordered a massacre to which he had no connection whatsoever, as it turned out.

  He wrote this piece as a journalist should have about a detail that could be understood as a warning, especially since the whole chain of confessions of guilt at The Hague is currently in full swing. However, the Prosecution didn’t like the piece, claiming that the report on the untruth said by Nikolic had been publicly presented at the trial. The Prosecution had even contacted the financiers and editors of the website, which is otherwise quite interesting and which regularly follows the events at the International Tribunal for the crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia.

  Chris Stephen says that, unlike the financial bosses, his editors give him their full support, but that they had been told that each one of his pieces up until 1 December, when his contract expires, would have to pass a parallel supervision.

  By the way, the original version of his piece on the Momir Nikolic’s untruths and his confession had been withdrawn from the website of the London Institute.

  According to some descriptions circulating in the Tribunal’s corridors, the Prime Minister of Serbia Zoran Zivkovic met Carla Del Ponte during her last visit to Belgrade with this piece by Chris Stephen in hand. This additionally enraged the Chief Prosecutor, especially since the plea agreements with scores of those accused at The Hague are under way, as it’s been heard.

  Florence Hartmann, Spokeswoman of the OTP, demanded today at the Tribunal that POLITIKA also corrects the “untruths” in our piece of the day before yesterday that was written on the testimony of Momir Nikolic at the trial of Blagojevic and Jokic. As Hartmann puts it, the point is that it is not true how ‘a certain US attorney of the Greek descent’ (Hartmann refers to Michael Karnavas, whose statements POLITIKA quoted) found out that Nikolic was telling untruths, but that this had been already corrected in the very proceedings, which had been allegedly included in a statement by Momir Nikolic.

  TRUE INFORMATION - This is the exact wording of that statement by Momir Nikolic, signed on 6 May 2003 by the Accused Nikolic, his Defending Counsel Veselin Londrovic and Peter Mc Closkey, Leading Counsel for the Prosecution, that had been read out at the trial before Momir Nikolic was cross-examined by Michael Karnavas, the Defending Counsel for Vidoje Blagojevic: ‘I solemnly declare all which follows to be correct and true: My Defending Counsel and myself have recently spent some time with the OTP discussing the possibility of reaching a plea agreement.

  During these discussions with the OTP at first I have incorrectly stated that I was the person on the photograph with a soldier in the territory of Sandici, although I am actually not the person on that photograph. In addition to that, at first I have incorrectly also told to the OTP that I had ordered the execution in Sandici and in the Kravica warehouse on 13 July 1995, although I have actually never gave such orders. Shortly after giving these incorrect statements and in continuation of the discussions with the OTP, I have voluntarily informed my advocates and the OTP that I had given these incorrect statements.

  From that moment on and up to the end of the negotiations on the agreement I had been giving only completely true information. I gave the incorrect statements because at that time I wrongfully and inappropriately believed that this would help me to reach the plea agreement. At the beginning of the discussions as well as while they lasted, both the OTP and my Defending Counsel were telling me that I should speak only the truth and nothing but the truth and I sincerely regret giving these incorrect statements. Neither my Defending Counsel nor the OTP were suggesting in any moment that I should tell the untruth. I take full responsibility for my acts in this sense and I solemnly state that this statement and the statement on facts enclosed with the plea agreement, to the best of my knowledge, are true and correct’, is this statement verbatim.

  TRIAL TRANSCRIPT - In addition to that, Florence Hartmann also gave us a part of the trial transcript of 19 September 2003. It shows that Nikolic answered to the Prosecutor as to why had he originally, before the plea agreement was reached, blamed himself for the crime he never committed: ‘I would like to say to the Trial Chamber that this was my decision, that this was the judgement I made. And I was not at that moment under the influence of neither my advocates nor the OTP. Nobody put any pressure on me.

  When the discussions on the agreement were already well under way, it seemed to me that this decision would never be reached, and I was very eager for this agreement. I made a mistake. I confessed to something I have never done, because I wanted that agreement. I accepted responsibility for something I have never done’, Momir Nikolic said.

  Only after this statement by Momir Nikolic, which apparently not even the OTP has tried to conceal, the Defending Counsel Michael Karnavas came up and tried by his cross-examination to clarify the details of these lies.

  However, as it is heard, the nervousness about plea bargains and guilty pleas here at The Hague is rising and reassessment is under way both among the accused in the detention unit at the capital’s suburb of Scheveningen, as well as among the advocates and the OTP team.

  The case of Momir Nikolic, who was accused for the crimes in Srebrenica together with his colleagues against whom he testifies now, is just an example what could a plea bargain without a trial bring. And we are not talking about a common local theft or robbery but the culmination in the work of the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

  The process that is to establish whether there was or there was no genocide in Srebrenica is under way. It is in the best interest of all the victims and the perpetrators as well as the justice in general to establish the truth. Is it attainable without a trial and by a plea bargain? Or is the risk too big to lose it somewhere between determining the length of the sentence and searching for evidence?

  As Momir Nikolic claimed in his signed statement, nobody has ever put any pressure on him. The sentence without a trial on Momir Nikolic, born 1955 in Bratunac, will be passed on 2 December. In his agreement it has been stipulated that the sentence would be passed on him only after he finishes testifying in the Srebrenica case ‘so that the Chamber would have insight into the total content and scope of the co-operation by Mr Nikolic, and could evaluate it before his sentence is passed.’

  And as it is heard, new plea bargains are under way. [end quote]

  After reading this, several things come to mind: first, note how the Spokeswoman Hartmann was anxious to correct the impression that their witness was caught lying by the Defending Counsel. The fact that their witness was lying doesn’t bother her in the least. Second, the point of the lie was not to put more blame on himself, but to implicate others. Only after he (and his advocates) realized the lies could be easily exposed later on by other witnesses, Nikolic decided to recant “without” any pressure. He said he was on a photo at a place where he never has been and in a company of another defendant. That place was the alleged killing site, and neither Nikolic nor that other man were there at that time or ever. Nikolic lied he ordered a massacre there; not only he never ordered anything, he was never at that place, therefore, he could not have seen the other defendant there. Read the original piece by Chris Stephen, titled ‘Key Srebrenica Witness Admits Lying’, published at IWRP on 29 Sept, but then quickly removed and replaced by edited piece titled ‘Key Srebrenica Witness Apologises For Lies’ on 4 October. The original could be found reprinted at FreeRepublic (http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/991985/posts).

  This is the third thing that comes to mind: the journalist who got sacked for trying to do his job. The paragraphs that had been edited from the original version are the perfectly logical conclusions made by Chris Stephen about the lengthy six-month plea bargain negotiations with Nikolic, his desperation to get a deal ‘that he was willing to lie’, and that after this the prosecutors are in a difficult position because ‘some defendants could be tempted to embroider the facts’. Poor Chris Stephen, who for a moment forgot the ‘financiers’ he was working for and thought he could actually be a real journalist, report something and draw conclusions. But his sin is not only in these conclusions; his sin is the mere fact that he reported the thing at all. Note the fussing with statements and transcripts around The Hague corridors of Ms Hartmann; note the alleged fuming of Del Ponte with that vile Zivkovic, who is just clever enough to detect what could be embarrassing for somebody and then use it. The damage control was easy, because no mainstream media actually reported the embarrassment. Only that silly Brit at the IWPR, but him we can tell to the ‘financiers’ and he’ll be fired.

  And the last, but not least, note the chutzpah of the old POLITIKA, that published the explanations obtained from Hartmann apparently obediently, but on the front page, in painful detail that included even the conclusions that are equal to the edited conclusions by Chris Stephen and with a general tone of disbelief and scorn. It was a small pleasure to read. And it fully shows the ICTY for what it is.
  
  Vera Martinovic
  Belgrade
  Yugoslavia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 5:52 am
  Stalin and Hitler would be proud of ICTY - it is after all the closest to - politically motivated trials. Thank you Vera!
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 5:54 am
  p.s. If you go to http://hague.bard.edu/video.html you can listen to archived testimony of Lord Oven.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 9:07 am
  And how is his statement different from what Lord Owen Said?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 9:12 am
  Not everyone cheerfully greeted this year's first day of school in the small town of Kutina in central Croatia. Stjepan Kefelja Elementary School this September after they pulled their children out of the otherwise cheerful 2b class. The talk of the town had become an eight-year-old girl Ela, who had moved with her foster parents to Kutina some months ago. Ela is infected with HIV...

  So much for Croatian civilization and europeism
  
  Another Curious
  but better

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 9:51 am
  Thanks, Vera, for the piece from POLITIKA. Another passage from the original TU 327 piece (29 Sept 2003) also deserves mention:

  "But now doubts about his [Nikolic's] reliability as a witness have arisen after he admitted that a statement he gave to prosecutors earlier this year contained a lie."

  The second version of TU 327 was primarily designed to restore this "reliability" by repeating several times that Nikolic had "apologized" already in May.

  The second version also makes clear that "the issue of Nikolic's earlier lies" came up for the first time under cross-examination "this week". Stephens even tries to save the prosecution's face by emphasizing that Nikolic's statement/apology from May 6 was released to the public "last week". But this means it was released just a few days, but still in time, before the issue came up during cross-examination.
  
  Matthias Gockel
  Germany

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 10:40 am
  And your point is? He did send arms or not - yes or no? Judging by statement it seams to be NO. On the other hand Lord Oven confirmed that croatian REGULAR troops were committed in Bosnia - but NOT Serbian/Yugoslav/FRY troops. So how come that tudjman was not charged with genocide for Ahmici and Mostar?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 11:06 am
  Yet again what it has to do with Milosevic?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 11:08 am
  Good for Greeks - thank you brothers!
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 11:18 am
  Seeing as how only parts of Milosevic's interview with Time were posted above I would like to post the entire text of that interview:

  http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/int-time95.htm
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:21 pm
  At least they changed uniforms, croatian troops on the other hand did not even bother to do even that.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:28 pm
  "This clever tactic not only indicates....." - so does this means that croatian troops were less less clever by not changing uniforms?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:36 pm
  Bottom line is: there is a proof that croatian troops were engaged in Bosnia - Lord Oven said so in the court. There is NO proof that Serbian/Yugoslav/FYR were engaged in Bosnia - Carla and Nice would see to it. So what ever anybody write in the books to sell them is fiction. What is said on the court is fact. Courts and crossexamination separates facts from fiction. As Serbian people would say: “Psi laju a karavani prolaze.”(Dogs bark on the passing caravans).
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:43 pm
  So?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:50 pm
  Can you form a single thought of your own or do you need somebody else thoughts to have your brain going? Just Curious :)
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 12:54 pm
  What is the witness name?
  
  D A
  S

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 1:10 pm
  Yet another secret witness just like Stalin and Hitler used to have. Cowards, just like you Just Churious hiding behind pseudonyms. Why should we trust them? I consider them to be liar since they know they are lying and that is why they are hiding. But somebody up there in haven sees it all.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 1:19 pm
  That can be faked in Icty. Still Coward - Just Churious hiding behind pseudonyms
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 1:56 pm
  Curious, don't forget Israelis sending us Uzis.
  
  Vera, we couldn't watch the trial continuosly throughout the whole year but in October we could, through B92
  
  pantelija damjanovic
  Bosnia and Herzegovina

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 3:04 pm
  Now, why would Israel help an antisemitic nation?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 4:07 pm
  Personally I am not at all convinced by Andy Wilcoxson's statement, that "there are plenty of things that should be discussed" (Friday November 14, 2003 at 6:49 pm).

  Although I greatly admire the inspired work of Vera Martinovic, Peter Taylor and some other JURIST discussion participants, may I suggest that the quality and nature of Dakic Ana's latest comment (at 3:04 pm) to the babble of "Just Churious" is more than ample proof, that the entire 'Bosnia' case is a disgraceful waste of time.

  Although I am admittedly not a lawyer, I maintain that mrs. Clara del Ponte lost her 'case' way back during the 'Kosovo' part of the 'trial'- and there is no way for her to rectify that situation!

  So why doesn't del Ponte, "Just Churious" and other suckers give themselves (and mr. Milosevic!) a solid break?
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 5:00 pm
  

  So Mossad supplied the Serbs with arms against the UN sanctions while the rest of the Jewish "establishment" crucified the Serbs for the Holocaust they were allegedly perpetrating against the poor Muslims? Just goes to show that one should not envelop oneself in blind anti-semitism. Seems like there are still some decent Jews around.

  How come we don't have Mossad on trial, considering they were doing the same thing Milosevic is accused of doing? Or Iran, the US, Germany and many other countries who were supplying the Croat Fascists and Muslim Mujaheedin? Or were they just supplying "HUMANITARIAN" arms and fuelling the wars for their own ends?

  Just goes to show that if you have the clout, financial or military, you can choose your own "freedom fighters" and label your opposition as "terrorists", or vice versa.

  So much for justice! So much for the ICTY!

  Money talks, and in the case of the ICTY we all know whose money is doing the talking.
  
  David
  Oztralia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 5:04 pm
  Del ponte = tragic-comic Milosevic = sole winner & Hero ICTY = put on show 100 greeks = Serb thermopilae NATO & Clark = SS & Himler Djindjic = Quisling SCG = Vichy Republic Serbia = Guernica , Hiroshima , Nagasaki , Lidice , Dresden , My Lay , Stalingrad , Soweto , to name a few . Holocaust = Serbs , Jews , Armenians , Siux , Apaches , Dakotas , Blackfoot , Inkas , Aztecs , Kurds , Ausie Abos , want some more use the memory and stop playing "annoyed" because of language , and by the way scientists have discovered a new type of fuel made out of "annoyed" brains , they named it "assohol"
  
  Still Checking
  The Path
  Between the Oceans

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 5:39 pm
  

  PM Zivkovic stated in an interview: "I am completely certain that the eventual arrest of Mladic, if he is here at all, would make it possible for all other cases to be processeed here in our own country. I state that categorically. Furthermore, that position has been confirmed to me also in discussions with US and EU representatives."

  Seems like Carla is not the one who is running the show after all. Maybe she should consult more with the US and EU (read NATO) representatives.

  No question who pays the Pied Piper, is there!? "Justice for sale!"
  
  David
  Oztralia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 7:55 pm
  Cry me a river!
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Saturday November 15, 2003 at 10:26 pm
  I am not sure what point Mr. Curious whishes to make. I think that everyone on this forum knows that the Serbs received help from their friends as did the Croats and the Muslims. Those that fought Fascism during the last century helped the Serbs. Those that fought with the Fascists and those who have become Fascists fought with the Croats and the Muslims. So what? Birds of a feather flock together. I know on what side honor and morality sits and we all know that Mr. Curious sits in a “Pile of Mud and a Foot of Shit. Not only does he sit there he is obscured by it and we are not able to identify him. If we could identify him/her we might send him a rope to save him/her from his identity crisis.

  That the progressive Greeks, Russians French and the Israelis helped the Serbs is a great revelation by Mr./Ms. Curious. In Bileca they built a monument to a Russian volunteer who lost his life helping the Serbs. I salute him! A young girl from Canada, nicknamed ‘tele’ was a sniper with the Bosnian Serbs and so were many Serb volunteers from Serbia. So what? It is payback time for my grandfather from Herzegovina who fought on the Salonica front in 1916. For Mr./Ms. Curious it is OK for one side to have weapons, volunteers but if the other side gets assistance that means they should be sent to the Hague. What logic from a person who fears that his identity will compromise his/her cut and paste postings.

  By the way Mr./Ms. Curious it was not the Greeks that informed the Serbs about NATO’s plans but the French. Those rotten French! No more French wine or French Fries for you.

  More Curious claptrap "Lots of weapons were transferred from Greece to the Montenegrin port of Bar” How so Curious when the NATO Navy had the port blockaded

  More claptrap from the Curious as he/she writes that “The arms embargo paralyzed the Bosnian army, while it had virtually no effect on Bosnian Serb forces and Serbia”. You seem to forget that the two largest arms factories were in the Bosnian Army area (Gorazde and Sarajevo) . You seem to forget the Hungarian and Muslin Arms sent to the Bosnians via Zagreb and the Croats took their share. You seem to forget the NATO planes and US construction of airfields in Bosnian Muslim areas. You seem to forget that the most modern airfield at Bihac was in the Bosnian Army area”

  More stupid questions from Curious “Why has Karremans, or Major Franken, or Major Bouring, not come to the town for one single moment”. Soldiers die so that officers can write their memoirs you idiot.

  Peter, Wilfred Owen is one of my favorite poets. It is obvious to me that Mr., /Ms. Curious has not read any of his poems otherwise he./she would have the courage of his/her convictions and we would help him/her with his/her delusions.
  
  Walter Trkla
  Kamloops BC
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:51 am
  Thank you once again Vera for a fascinating and outstanding contribution. I have already circulated it on the Internet.

  Moderator--Please shorten this page. It is very hard to access. It is really ridiculous that every 10 days or so people have to keep making the same request.

  Also, there has to be a way to keep out discussion saboteurs. Any damn fool can copy and paste vast chunks of meanningless text and make the board either inaccessible or tiresome for people.

  It shouldn't be too hard to figure out who's copying and pasting to advance the discussion and who's just deliberately clogging up the board.

  The contributions of such saboteurs should be deleted on a regular basis. Keeping them posted day after day is simply an embarrassment.
  
  Robert Hessen
  Seattle
  Washington

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 8:52 am
  The only period when Croatia was even an "independent state" was during WW II, when its Nazi-installed government committed genocide against killed hundreds of thousands of Serbs and Jews.
  
  Another Curious
  But Better

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 1:03 pm
  Anybody who postes under a pseudonym should be regarded as a saboteur.

  Responding to these cowards only encourages them to post more blocks of copy/paste text here. Therefore, they should be ignored.

  I would also like to say that the moderator here is doing a very poor job. All he/she has to do to keep this discussion on track is delete posts coming from people who use pseudonyms, and keep the page a manageable length.

  If the moderator could find it in his/her heart to come here once every 3 or 4 days and do their job then I would be most greatful.
  
  Andy Wilcoxson
  Washington, United States

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 2:20 pm
  

  WASHINGTON - Retired Gen. Wesley Clark (news - web sites) will interrupt briefly his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination to testify at the U.N. war crimes trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic (news - web sites).

  Clark said Sunday the Swiss chief prosecutor in the trial at The Hague (news - web sites), Carla Del Ponte, has asked him to appear in mid-December to testify against the ousted Serb leader.

  "Because of the historic importance of this proceeding - the first trial of a head of state before a war crimes tribunal - I have agreed to appear," Clark said in a statement.

  Clark told NBC's "Meet the Press" that during his work for the Joint Chiefs and later as NATO commander, he spent dozens and dozens of hours in negotiations with Milosevic.

  "These are conversations that the prosecutor says would be significant," said Clark. "This is about what Milosevic knew, when he knew it, what his intent was, how he viewed situations, how he operated."

  I guess this will be something to watch, as Clark is running for president and the nomination.

  http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031116/ap_on_el_pr/clark_milosevic_3
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 4:01 pm
  This news just in. The Serbian Presidential elections have failed again, but surprisingly to many in the country and experts. According to yahoo news today, "Veteran pro-democracy politician Dragoljub Micunovic was expected to soundly defeat hard-line nationalist Tomislav Nikolic." And here comes the lastest news, Nikolic from the Serbian Radical Party, (It's leader being Seselj) has finished 350,000 voted ahead of Micunovic, but the elections are invalid, because the voter turn out was only 32%.

  0,7% for Avlijas, 9,3 Velimir Ilic, 33,1% for Dragoljub Micunovic, 46,6% Tomislav Nikolic, 2,9% Marijan Risticevic, and 2% for Dragan S. Tomic.
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:00 pm
  

  Clark is going to tell the Chamber Troika how Mr. Milosevic forced Nato to bomb Yugoslavia making him a war monger and criminal for it.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:00 pm
  "Hermann Goering (was) a German general..." writes Jennifer C. Kerr, an 'Associated Press Writer' reporting all the way from Washington on a scheduled ICTY testimony of his modern American colleague as a war criminal, retired U.S. general Wesley Clark.

  Well, - to me even Rumsfeld might be 'a German general'. Kerr is right though in suggesting that the retirement of the old Nazi, who "saved himself from the hangman's noose...(on)...the night before his scheduled execution", was somewhat more dramatic than what might (yet) be expected from Clark's (and Rumsfeld's?).

  I also believe that the 'Associated Press Writer' is doing her very best when presenting Wesley Clark as the NATO commander, who "led a 78-day bombing campaign in 1999 aimed at expelling Yugoslav forces involved in a bloody crackdown on ethnic Albanians in Kosovo"?

  Looking forward to the cross-examination in The Hague,

  I remain,

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

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:09 pm
  

  It is promissing, Mr. Milosevic is going to have the opportunity to ask about war crimes general Clark (NATO) ordered e.g. the bombing of the RTS building and the killing of its journalists.

  Carla is out of control!
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:23 pm
  Re Clark testifying: I hope Milosevic questions him about NATO's reprehensible tactic (under Clark's command) of bombing & then returning to bomb the rescuers. I read where one medic lost both legs to this obscene practice. Although it became known that a second bombing would occur, resuers were not detered from rushing to the scene of a first bombing.

  Members of one quiet, non-military-target, Serbian town are currently suing Germany because, after the NATO bombing of a small bridge, the congregation of a nearby church poured out to help the injured & minutes later were also bombed. Apparently, they were not permitted to sue NATO, so they chose one of the NATO countries to take to court.

  Such a vile practice, perpetrated regularly by NATO, must be exposed & laid at Clark's feet for it could have no military purpose, but only the objective of breaking the spirit of the general population and must have been conducted under orders of Clark himself.

  Of course there is a massive list of war crimes for which Clark should be held accountable. I, for one, am very glad that's he being brought to testify & will be available for cross-examination.
  
  M Donne
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:51 pm
  

  Clark testifying? About what? The myriad lies NATO concocted to bomb and destroy everything the YU people built in the last 60 years?

  Won't be any surprise when May limits Slobo to just the questions they want him to ask, or he won't be able to ask anything at all.

  Apart from that, if this is a historic process as Clark claims, how come the media has been so singularly uninterested in the proceedings?

  What a "farcade" this whole show is!

  At least we'll be able to see Clark squirm and lie with a straight face and a faint smile of cynicism as he impresses the freedom loving people about how it is necessary to bomb everyone in the world as part of the American humanitarian and democracy for everyone strategy.

  In the meantime, they introduce Nazi type laws in the US like the FEMA Act, Patriot Act I and II, etc etc.

  Maybe the American people might take a leaf out of the Serbs' book and boycott the next American presidential elections if they wake up in time.

  No point in voting and signing your name to an ass**** and then saying "We didn't know!" Zieg Heil, Messrs Clarke, Bush and co!
  
  David
  Oztrailia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:59 pm
  To understand that the importantance of these elections:

  Kosovo and Metohija- Tomislav Nikolic 77.6%

  Results of Serbia 46,4%Tomislav Nikolic---- 35,3%Dragoljub Micunovic

  What remains to be seen now is how the Parliamentary elections end. Nikolic stated that he would not send anyone to the Hague and those that are there must receive the full backing of the State..

  As for Clark, with him having command and control responsibility:

  The 65-page Amnesty report details a number of mass killings of civilians in NATO raids and states that "civilian deaths could have been significantly reduced if NATO forces had fully adhered to the rules of war". When it attacked convoys of Albanian refugees near Djakovica on 14 April and in Korisa on 13 May, "NATO failed to take necessary precautions to minimise civilian casualties". "General Wesley Clark has stated, 'We knew when we struck that there would be alternate means of getting the Serb Television. There's no single switch to turn off everything but we thought it was a good move to strike it, and the political leadership agreed with us.' "In other words, NATO deliberately attacked a civilian object, killing 16 civilians, for the purpose of disrupting Serb television broadcasts in the middle of the night for approximately three hours. It is hard to see how this can be consistent with the rule of proportionality."

  http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/060700-02.htm
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 5:59 pm
  

  Isn't it ironic that the Serbian elections are invalid because only 32% showed up to vote? In the last US election only 26% showed up to vote and Bush was appointed. And that is representative democracy!

  So how democratic are the US elections compared to Serbia's when the president doesn't have the support of at least half his people? Just goes to show on what basis US democracy is f(o)unded!

  Go democracy!
  
  David
  Oztralia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:01 pm
  About Clark - like that testimony is going to help him to win presidential elections. If I were him I would NOT go to Hague it may just backfire. There are few republican voices justg waiting to compare Kosovo to Iraq.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:04 pm
  What I mean is phantom WMD to phantom genocide.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:07 pm
  

  Richard Holbrooke was also going to testify but as it turned out his government did not let him do it. This may happen to general Clark, specially now that he has so much public visibility in the midst of a coming electoral campaign
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:09 pm
  

  Dan B wrote: "Nikolic stated that he would not send anyone to the Hague and those that are there must receive the full backing of the State.. "

  Amen! A politician with a spine, a sense of decency, justice and respect for the dignity of his people. Maybe he's not a politician after all! If it's not too much for the others to do, it shouldn't be too much for the Serbian state to do either.
  
  David
  Oztrailia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:11 pm
  

  By the way, general Clark and Holbrooke were together in Belgrade threatening Yugoslavia.
  
  Gogol Charlemagne
  Shangri-La

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:18 pm
  Republican or Democrat, it doesn't matter a bit. They just play the game for the public's sake. The real agendas are being pushed through in any event. It's all a matter of the type of gloss one wants to put on it. The show must go on, whether it's Clinton or Bush in the White House. The $87 billion is still approved. The Kosovo show was also approved. So was Iraq.

  Nothing will change while the oligarchy pulls the strings and tells the Clintons and the Bushes how and when to smile.

  You don't see Bush changing the policy on the ICTY, do you? You don't see Bush changing his policy on Serbia, do you? All that changes is the packaging.
  
  David
  Oztrailia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:23 pm
  On the side: In the United States, in 1996 voter participation fell below 50%, the first time since 1924 and the second lowest since 1824 Since the 1960s voter participation has fallen by more than 25%. Turnout amongst voters aged 18-24 in the 1996 residential election was 30%. Turnout among young voters in the 1994 mid-terms was just 15%. The final turnout in United States is 105,404,546 out of 209,128,094, which is 50.4%
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:28 pm
  

  Holbrooke has already testified in his memoirs. And it isn't pretty for him or the US administration. Slobo would have a field day with it. That's why he's "not allowed" near the Hague.

  It will be interesting to see what they do if Slobo calls Holbrooke as a witness. Will the US administration defy Mr May or will Mr May defy the US administration? Or will Mr Holbrooke have an "accident" or an "illness" which prevents him from appearing?
  
  David
  Oztrailia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:30 pm
  Dakic Ana,

  nobody including mrs. Carla del Ponte is talking of 'genocide' with regard to Kosovo, - not even of any "phantom genocide".

  NATO is charging mr. Milosevic with 'murder' - and with participation in a criminal set-up aimed at forcing the 'expulsion' of a significant number of Kosovo Albanians from the territory of that Province.

  Said expulsion only occured after and in consequence of the air attacks from 24 March, 1999, - and according to the then supreme NATO commander, now retired General Wesley Clark, that was 'entirely predictable'.

  I guess that mr. Milosevic would agree that indeed the consequences of NATOs (idiotic!) attack were predictable - if hardly 'entirely' so?

  May mr. Milosevic be permitted to ask a few questions on that point...
  
  Godfred Louis-Jensen
  Copenhagen
  D E N M A R K

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:44 pm
  

  The one consequence that was predictable is that Kosovo would be free of the Serb population and would be taken over by the US (Bondsteel etc) for quite a long time. At least while it suits the economic and geostrategic aims of the US. Nice R&R base for the US troops from Germany, Italy etc, when they are asked to leave the Continent because the Cold War is over. Still gives the US a geostrategic foothold in Europe, together with its takeover of Albania, from which to play havoc with the EC, the EU and the Russian Federation if they don't play ball with the US.

  We can't have the Russians cooperating too well economically or otherwise with Europe. That could leave the US out in the Cold. And we all know that when the US catches cold the rest of the world HAS to catch pneumonia, whether it likes it or not. It's called "germ warfare" and it has some serious WMDs to back it up.
  
  David
  Oztralia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:48 pm
  

  In the meantime, we can entertain and distract ourselves with the "war on terrorism", humanitarian wars and the war for democracy and justice (ICTY, Guantanamo etc).
  
  David
  Oztralia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 6:59 pm
  Godfred, I recall Kilnton and Bleeer talking about it in 1999 when my family is being bombed to stop genocide
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 7:08 pm
  Just Curious you are an idiot just like all ustasa are - with small brains and little feet. In Kosovo, in 1941 four of my kum (godfather) brothers were killed while he and his mother were forced to flee. He was never allowed to return and his home that his family owned since 17 century is occupied by Albanians he was never able to evict. But don't worry ustaso - a shame of the Croatians, Serbs survive and remember.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 8:17 pm
  I am a doctor clas 1991, How can it be confirmed by gynecological exame as credible? Is that the same woman that gave birth to Black child?
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 8:31 pm
  BTW if Serbs raped that many woman when did they have time to fight a war? To comit a rape it shal take man 5 min at least (even for Serbs - mno pan intended) + refractory phase to do it again. So 10 000 women * at least 50 times raped *10 min at least = 83333 hours of pure rape = 3472 days of doing nothing but raping 24 hour a day. if we have that one man takes 10 min that means that at least 144 man did nothing else bu raping 10000 women in a day - where can you find such stoic men. My God there is no limit of your stupidity.
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 8:45 pm
  I can't understand the blindness and stupidity of the ICTY and the UN , all that money spent and the shame they had to go trough when there is this character (don't know if a he or she) "just Churious" who has had the truth and the evidence so cherished by Del Ponte all the time¡¡, what's the need to go on with this Opera Buffa , call him/her to The Hague and faster than a rabbit "copulates" the case will be closed and everybody will be "happy ever after" (obladi oblada life goes on bra¡¡¡, la la how the life goes on). Oh¡sudbino , sudbino doklen trebamo te trpit .
  
  M.P. Not a coward
  100 años
  13 dias

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 9:13 pm
  hi M.P
  
  Dakic Ana
  Serbia

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 9:22 pm
  In case anyone wonders where our friend gets his quotes from:

  www.haverford.edu/relg/sells/rape2.html

  http://www.notfrisco.com/miracles/excerpt.html

  Psychological support: http://home.planet.nl/~loz/maneng51.htm
  
  Dan B
  Canada

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 9:56 pm
  Just Churious = "Bosna," "Mensa," whatever... a muslim out to destroy any sites where the former Yugoslaiva is discussed in a civil format. And he stil has the same great spelling skills in English: Ignore, ignore, ignore, IT will not go away, it will stick to this site like s___t to a shoe . The moderator really out to remove this person or hang up his moderator's hat.
  
  Anna P
  California

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 10:06 pm
  Hi M.P. we all miss you very much ! lets try to keep it up; dont let the MORAL BANKRUPTCY OF a few FOOLS WIN. ZIVELA SRBIJA
  
  jenny xoxo
  Abundance of fish
  C.A.

• Sunday November 16, 2003 at 11:46 pm
  Why don't you fix the problem yourself and leave this board?
  
  Dan B
  Canada