 MILOSEVIC TRIAL DISCUSSION ARCHIVE |
| JURIST >> LEGAL NEWS - WORLD LAW >> Discussion >> Milosevic Trial Discussion Archive |
—————————————————————————————
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic is on trial for war crimes in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague. This marks the first time a head of state has been personally prosecuted before an international criminal court.
Is Slobodan Milosevic getting a fair trial?
————————————————————————————
NOTICE: Comments posted to this discussion board are solely the responsibility of individual posters, and not of JURIST, its owner, operators, host or staff. JURIST reserves the right to block or remove posts that are in violation of law or that advocate illegal acts, that are obscene, disruptive, defamatory, threatening, harassing or abusive, that are in breach of intellectual property rights, rights of publicity or rights of privacy, that are advertisements or solicitations, or that are not related to the topic being discussed.
————————————————————————————
- discussion archive
- Thursday October 09, 2003 at 2:18 am
October 8th at the Hague:http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100803.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 2:27 am
Dear ZS -
Thanks for the kind words. Moving Jews to support the Serbs is one of the main things Emperor's Clothes is trying to do. We have had some success, mostly among those Jews who realize the real danger that exists from aggressive Islam. On the other hand, the problem among these people is the illusions they have about the U.S. They don't realize that from Afghanistan to Bosnia to Turkey, the US is sponsoring precisely Islamic fundamentalism, even while it pays lip service to opposing Muslim extremism. These illusions are fostered by operatives of the US establishment.
The illusions about that Establishment are fading among *some* Jews because of the insanity of the Roadmap for creating a Palestinian terrorist state, pushed by Bush and company.
But many Jews are fooled by the expressions of support the US government makes for Israel, and thus do not see that the US establishment is fomenting anti-Semitism and Muslim extremism.
The problem of Jews and Serbs has a component on the other side as well. Yugoslavia under Tito became a close ally of the most genocidal of the Arab leaders. This is what Jews in the US heard -not about what the Serbs had done in World War II, but Belgrade's role in whitewashing Arab fascists as "nonaligned". The Yugoslav arrest warrent for Hajj Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem who was behind Nazi terror in Bosnia, was quietly shelved and Tito went into alliance with Hajj Amin's offspring. The rethinking of mistaken positions on *both* sides is therefore crucial to forging alliances. Significant people among pro-Israel Jews have told us that the fact that we (TENC) are exposing what they *know* are lies about Israel makes them take seriously our charge that they have been lied to about Serbia. It is because of our effort to forge this alliance - which is a potential of great danger to the US establishment's strategy - that Emperor's Clothes has come under such ferocious attack. It is precisely the danger of this alliance that has caused the Establishment to make its current effort to put pro-Islamist forces in control of the public face of Milosevic. Identification of the pro-Milosevic campaign with grotesque anti-Semites like Jacques Verges and champions of Islamic fundamentalism and extremism, like Ramsey Clark, would kill the possibility of forging this alliance. That is why the greatest enemies of the Serbs are pushing from behind the scenes to make these men the public image of Milosevic; it is because these forces are very powerful that Mr. Krsljanin sounds so desperate and *afraid* in his conversation with me, which we have put on audio file and transcript on the Internet. Why is Krsljanin afraid? Because I had put his signature on an email telling Ramsey Clark he was removed thus possibly giving these forces the impression they had been double crossed.
In other words, this struggle in the ICDSM, whose intensity appears unfathonable to some people, is not a game.
Jared Israel
USA - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 3:34 am
Please leave Jew-Serb issue alone. This is not the place for this. What we should focus on is the "trial" in Hague, on new practice introduced by the "court"-introducing written statements without examination-in-chief. Those who fairly regularly watch "trial" transmissions (when they are on, which is not the case in Serbia-Montenegro for the last month or two alegedly due to some satelite link failure (?) may notice that the "court" has been trying to hide witnesses and their "testimonies" from public. They exert every type of pressure to hinder Milosevic s cross examination and they are so impudent in doing so that they do not even try to pretend justice.That is the real issue here, not relations between Jews and Serbs.
Svetlana Vugdelic
Bar
Serbia and Montenegro - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 5:18 am
"The problem of Jews and Serbs has a component on the other side as well. Yugoslavia under Tito became a close ally of the most genocidal of the Arab leaders. This is what Jews in the US heard -not about what the Serbs had done in World War II, but Belgrade's role in whitewashing Arab fascists as "nonaligned". "So how come the Jewish establishment and its myriad organisations didn't condemn the Croats but went for the Serbs? Or have I got it wrong and Tito was actually a Serb?
Does that mean Kissinger didn't know any better? Does that mean Zimmermann didn't know any better? Does that mean Liebermann didn't know any better? Does that mean Allbright Korbel didn't know any better? Does that mean Wiesenthal didn't know any better? Does that mean prominent Jewish figures and the leaders of so many Jewish organisations didn't know any better?
Gee whizz! They must all be simpletons like me! I wonder if the next generation will do any better?
David
Oztralia - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 5:43 am
Getting back to the Plague at the Hague, does anyone know why it was in the "interests of justice" not to take evidence from Milan Milanovic in a proper examination in chief? Or what was the excuse used by May at least? As far as I know May was NOT OBLIGED to accept a written statement even if the appeal chamber's "rules" allowed it.
David
Oztralia - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 5:55 am
While agreeing with Svetlana Vugdelic in that "relations between Jews and Serbs" should not be allowed to become the issue in this JURIST forum, - which is in principle meant for discussing whether or not the former FRY President, Slobodan Milosevic, is getting a fair "trial" at the false tribunal in The Hague - I suggest that since Jared Israel et al. are mainly devoted to "moving Jews to support the Serbs (as a "block" maybe?)" the remainder of us unite in asking JURIST for a fresh site, a Jared-free zone, - leaving this old one entirely to the iddle babble of mr. Israel and those who may already have been moved by his efforts.At the same time I wish to thank the Moderator for finally having (almost) updated the JURIST "discussion archive".
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 6:26 am
David (October 09, 2003 at 5:43 am)I would have thought that both mr. Milan Milanovic himself and those setting up "the appeal chamber's rules" would know why it was "in the interests of justice" not to take his evidence in a proper examination in chief?
These gentlemen may have conveyed their reasons to somebody else as well, - however hardly to any known participant in this JURIST "Milosevic Trial Discussion".
Thus I would read your above remark as a request, even a challenge for mr. Milanovic and those responsible for the particular decision (or indeed for this "trial" as a whole!) to come forward now. By providing authoritative answers to (our) legitimate questions, they could greatly contribute to saving the debate - and maybe even some of their reputation?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 7:05 am
It might just be in the PUBLIC interest, as well as in the interests of justice, for the rationale to be made clear by the Inquisition Chamber.In a democratic world, Justice also needs to be SEEN as well as to be done. Unless of course we work on the presumption of the "hidden hand" of justice "a la Fascist, style"!
(BTW: How are the folks at Guantanamo doing? When do they get the Slobo treatment? Maybe there'll be a US class action against them. You know, the type where they find ONE person guilty, therefore ALL are guilty.
Saves a lot of time Mr May, so please pay attention and see if you can sneak that into the ICTY rules in the interests of justice too!)
Don't you just love the economies of scale such an approach could bring to the justice industry? Maybe that's the next stage of judicial development we can expect from the ICTY.
David
Oztralia - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 8:26 am
"New Haven, Connecticut the site of the mighty Yale University (yes, G.W. Bush passed with a C). Location: barber shop kept by two friendly and talkative ladies. Conversation subject: Schwarzeneger and California. Next customer, an older lady who greets everyone by asking "did you see what is going on in California?" followed by "I just came from teaching, at high school X where everybody is in chock". "What do you teach?" one of the barber-ladies asks. The bomb shell: "I teach the holocaust and some history"So is the mass culture of the United States!
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-LA - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:00 am
- Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:00 am
"Why is Krsljanin afraid? Because I had put his signature on an email telling Ramsey Clark he was removed thus possibly giving these forces the impression they had been double crossed."
1 2
Canada - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:02 am
David,The excuse was that because the witness swears that the statement is true, and because the witness is still cross-examined that the sworn statement is just as good as an examination-in-chief.
It was argued that because the tribunal uses professional judges as opposed to a jury that there was no need for live evidence.
May and Kwon agreed that Milanovic could give testimony through written statement, but Robinson issued a dissenting opinion.
May and Kwon also agreed that the former UNPROFOR commander Gen. Rupert Smith could also be dealt with through a written statement today. Robinson didn't issue any opinion on this occasion because he wasn't there.
The idea here is obviously to put more evidence against Milosevic than he has time to refute in the space alloted for cross-examination.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:03 am
As usual, the abrasive and flamboyant Holbrooke hogged the limelight. In a commentary for Dnevni Avaz, a militant Bosnian Muslim daily, he denounced the ruling Bosnian Serb party as "Nazis who should disappear," and heaped praise on the ailing Muslim leader Izetbegovic as someone Bosnia "could not have existed without."
Just as reminder Holbrooke was part of that glorious Bill Clinton team of luminaries.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:15 am
David dont you know that rules of justice dont apply to Guantanamo since Jared Israel supports US foreign policy dont you Mr Israel? Support US goverment policy on Israel Support US policy on Iraq Support US policy on Guantanamo (presumably) Support US policy on Syria Support US policy on Iran Support US policy on N Korea Im sure theres plenty more where that came from. Bravo! What a loyal Bush supporter. The champagne must be out to toast Arnies victory in Calafornia too?
2 4
Canada - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:43 am
"The problem with not having a digital signature is that you're open to forgery.""I had put his signature on an email telling Ramsey Clark he was removed thus possibly giving these forces the impression they had been double crossed."
1 2
Canada - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 9:45 am
ICTY TRIBUNAL ABANDONS LAST TRACES OF JUDICIARY- WHILE ITS PRESIDENT PRAISES WARMONGERS BEFORE GOING TO UN
Total Desperation and Harassment of Law in the "trial" of President Milosevic
In another astonishing development at the political creation known as the ICTY, the Appeals Chamber has granted the Prosecution's request to admit written statements instead of testimony, if the witness attends the hearing and affirms that the statement is true, and makes himself available for cross-examination and questions from the bench.
After the world's major news media abandoned any significant coverage of this shameful farce, now the even the Prosecutor wishes to avoid the embarrassment of public testimony. Her own witnesses shielded from public view, like dust swept under a rug. It will now be possible to request that not a single witness actually testify before being cross-examined! And it is likely that cross-examination will be as brutally limited as what has been "granted" to President Milosevic in the past: only one hour!!!
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees the right to a public trial. Throughout this process, all have observed the increasingly private proceedings in the matter of President Milosevic. More secret applications by the Prosecutor, more closed sessions, more secret witnesses, and now witnesses who do not have to testify at all before being cross-examined. Cross-examinations cannot make sense to the public if they have not heard the witness' evidence! This institution is violating the public's right to understand the content of President Milosevic's cross-examinations ! The right to a public trial benefits everyone, including the public, for who will judge the judges?
If the Prosecution had a case, would she really want to hide it? Where is the right to a fair and public hearing? Where is the search for truth? NOT AT THE HAGUE, to be sure!
Why the rush to judgment? Do the ICTY staff have something better to do than hear the witnesses who were supposed reveal the "truth" and bring about "reconciliation"?
In the worst manipulative sense, one can expect now that the Prosecution submits immediately couple of dozen of written statements and claims that they have proved the indictment. But what about cross examinations? Well, the witnesses are too busy to come just in the days when President Milosevic is not too ill.
At the same time, his life-threatening illness is a matter of the particular care of the tribunal. Yesterday, having the illness as a pretext, the so-called judges granted surrogate counsels called "Amici Curiae" more rights. A step towards imposing a counsel against defendant's will.
And then, another gesture of generosity. A nurse measured President Milosevic's blood pressure in one of the breaks. Only 160/110! Not enough! He will certainly not have an infarct in the next three hours! So he can go on!
Adding insult to injury, the ICTY President Theodor Meron ("a man of continuity" - once Israeli Ambassador to Canada, then Clinton's negotiator for the Rome Treaty and finally Bush's executive at The Hague) yesterday, only two days before delivering his annual report to UN (October 9 to the Security Council and October 10 to the General Assembly) addressed the "US Helsinki Commission", praising the US which refuses to be subjected to the authority of any international judicial body for the atrocities committed in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq or anywhere else - for its "contribution to international justice". Special, well deserved homage he devoted to the murderers of Yugoslavia, to the father and mother of the tribunal, Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright, by quoting their hypocritical blasphemies from Srebrenica (crocodile tears over "the vulnerability of ordinary people to the dark claims of religious and ethnic superiority") and New York, from the time of the creation of the tribunal: "This will be no victor's tribunal. The only victor that will prevail in this endeavour is the truth."
The only "Truth" now is that this is a Show Trial. The only trappings of justice left at the ICTY are judicial robes and the ability to turn off President Milosevic's microphone.
The "task of the continuity" of crime is there. That's why Meron says: "I chair a group of judges assigned to search for additional ways to improve our efficiency, and the Prosecutor has also offered a number of helpful suggestions that the judges are actively considering." What it means in practice, we have seen yesterday and today.
All this proves that the end of the tyranny is near. The magnificentstruggle of President Milosevic backed by all the Serbian people has completely defeated the attempt to cover the blood of innocent victims with the Hague robes.
Now, when everything is so rudely clear, let us all rise to save the life of Slobodan Milosevic and future of Serbia from the deadly hug of The Hague!
Sloboda/ICDSM, October 8, 2003
(relayed as received by Godfred Louis-Jensen)
(As this forum is not for fundraising, you are kindly requested to consult:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
for detailed instructions on joining or helping the struggle of the SLOBODA /Freedom Association.
Visit also:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (SLOBODA/Freedom association),
and
http://www.icdsm.org/ (The International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic)
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 10:51 am
Agreed that it is "in the PUBLIC interest for the rationale (for not taking evidence from Milan Milanovic in a proper examination) to be made clear",I hereby repeat my request to those responsible for the decision to give us their reasons!
With all respect then neither the "excuses" (or "arguments")cited by Andy Wilcoxson (October 09, 2003 at 9:02 am), nor the fact that Judge Robinson in this particular case MAY have "issued a dissenting opinion," takes us anywhere towards a decent answer to David´s question on WHY it "was in the "interests of justice" not to take ("live") evidence" (October 09, 2003 at 5:43 am).
(It actually seems to me that Andy Wilcoxson's "explanation" raises the pertinent question of whether the Tribunal has not been "professional" throughout the "trial" - and/or whether the written statements of all of those witnesses, which were actually examined live by the Prosecution, have not been judged to be "true"?
For all our reservations about this "trial" such a conclusion, (while perfectly logical?) is absurd - the reason being that the "reasons" offered by Wilcoxson are neither sufficient nor even basic.
Although I am no lawyer I could easily think ofmore compelling reasons - and I trust, that a lot of JURIST discussion members could do that as well. Yet I suggest that it would be a great leap forward for this "trial discussion" if instead of mere speculations this forum were to receive authoritative answers from those responsible - or from "associated entities", for that matter).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 11:32 am
Since the Tribunal is obviously desperate to hide its proceedings from the general public, it would be illogical for us to call it a “Show Trial.”Perhaps we should call it the “Hidden Trial” or the “Shadow Trial?”
Michael Thomas
London
UK - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 11:51 am
SUGGESTED DRAFT "OPEN LETTER TO THE ICTY APPEALS CHAMBER"Sir,
By admitting written statements instead of (live) testimony the ICTY is violating the public's right to understand the content of President Milosevic's cross-examinations (as these cannot make sense to the public if they have not heard the witness' evidence).
Would the Appeals Chamber have any justification for thus limiting mr. Milosevic's right to a fair trial as guaranteed in The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights?
signed
(Comments/supplements to this DRAFT would be appreaciated)
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 11:55 am
Godfred Louis-Jensen,To be perfectly clear I am not claiming that the reasons I cited in my response to David were either sufficient or basic. They are simply the explanation that was given by Mr. Nice and agreed to by Mr. May and Mr. Kwon.
I very strongly condemn this new procedure, for the reasons that are outlined in my synopsis of yesterday's proceedings, which can be read at:
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100803.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 12:09 pm
Fair enough, Wilcoxson,- and yet neither "the explanation that was given (delivered) by mr. Nice and agreed to by Mr. Kwon," nor your strong condemnation (both of which I have noted!) would qualify as an answer as to WHY this decision was made.
Or do you think so?
Neither does our "exchanges" on matters (on which we more or less agree) really qualify for a "debate". I maintain that real progress and success for the "Milosevic Trial Discussion" depend on involving (also) qualified responses, serious arguments from (representatives of) "the other side"...
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A RK - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 12:53 pm
Commentaries, or even comments on this latest development in the Milosevic "trial" from Professor d'Amato or, say, from Professor Marjorie Cohn of the Thomas Jefferson School of Law might be useful for this JURIST Forum...Why do "professionals" in the U.S. keep so silent?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 1:53 pm
In any court of law in the English speaking world written submissions would be ruled as inadmissible evidence. Notes of police officers and statements made by witnesses to the authorities are admissible when those who wrote them or gave them are on the witness stand testifying. Witnesses are not permitted to read from the witness stand something concocted prior to the trial.Written statements add an extra burden on the defense since Milosevic must read and synthesize the concoction , while at the same time they provide prosecution witnesses with a way out when caught in obvious lies. Prosecution witnesses just need to say that they don’t know anything more than what they said in their statement. Mr. May is there to say “you have your answer lets move on”.
Milosevic daily exposes the culpability of NATO in the Yugoslav tragedy but only few of us are aware of the ramifications of this culpability internationally. America uses the “fear factor” to silence critics who would expose them as the real criminals. Milosevic has been totally silenced and it matters not that international law and justice has been turned on its head at the ICTY. For most Americans that is OK. Americans are more concerned with Koby, Roy and Arnold because the media makes money from such circuses. News in America is produced for simpletons that is why the American government can kill hundreds of Iraqi civilians and imprisons others without trial and no one cares. Justice for Milosevic is just one more lie that the Americans must sell as the truth and they are doing this through silence.
Walter Trkla
Kamloops
BC Canada - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 6:05 pm
Andy
You are not quite right.
The new practice was not favoured by May! The prosecution's motion on this was rejected. Both May and Robinson had the same opinion. Only Kwon had a separate opinion which he elaborated on in the ruling.
The prosecution then filed an appeal, and the Appeals Chamber granted the appeal, agreeing with Kwon. So May and Robinson got runover by the bigger guys.
The new Sworn Statement used to be called the Witness Summary, that we never saw anyway, but at least heard a sentence or to uttered by the witness in answer to cryptic questions.
Ann-Marie Laios
Sollentuna
Sweden - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 7:06 pm
Sometimes I wonder if we all watch the same trial. The hearing, arguments yesterday clearly indicated the appeal court finds rule 89 (admission of evidence) acceptable but not as Mr. Nice (NATO) interpreted it, in fact it gives the presiding and not too smart judge leeway to decide when and related to what part of the case the evidence so presented can be just in written form or (how poetic) in viva voce and amici curiae Mr. Kay (NATO) repeated it to the court again and again, Mr. Milosevic making the same argument. Kay (NATO) also said the prosecution had corrupted the use of admission of evidence by presenting the whole case, over 200 witnesses under rule 92 bis (actually very similar to rule 89) with written statements. Mr. Nice (NATO) claims this is current all over the world and he is wrong and un corrected, the main evidence in any criminal court is given verbally, directly alive and certainly not by the prosecution writing the statements using and abusing the witnesses to certify it to be the "truth"!
But, don't you worry, just wait and see what will happens when Mr. Milosevic catches the lies and contradictions in the "certified to be the truth" statements!
God bless Roman Law!
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 10:05 pm
- - - The Appeals Chamber by majority (Judge Hunt dissenting)
Allows the appeal from the Decision of the Trial Chamber, in so far as it
Finds that, as a matter of law, the Rules allow for the admission of a written witness statement under Rule 89 (F) when the witness: a) is present in court, b) is available for cross-examination and any questioning by the judges, and c) attests that the statement accurately reflects his or her declaration and what he or she would say if examined; and
Returns the matter to Trial Chamber III for it to consider the admission of evidence in accordance with this present Decision.
- - - -With this abc that applies to every witness (!!!)But yet, The trojka is to rule if it is in The Interest of Justice to hear the evidence live or not.
Quite rediculus, as their previous ruling stated that they wanted to hear the evidence-in-chief live!
This is just another attempt to shift the burden of proof to Milosevic! As Key has argued before, the prosecution should make clear what they seek to rely on with every witness, even 92bis and put their case clearly.
Now, as they don't have much of a case, they want to put as much irrelevant evidence in as possible, hoping that Milosevic will dwell on that and miss their points in cross. Maybe they aren't quite clear on them themselves!
When it is time for closing arguments, they will pick the few raisins they have out of the cake and try to make a case then.
But I think that Milosevic's stategy in cross is not to refute their points. It is rather to put as much of the BS he can into perspective. He shows how each and every event is the result of the participation of different individuals, who had their own minds. So he lets the witnesses gossip away.
The prosecutions fairy-tale of Greater Serbia and Joint Criminal Enterprise and Pulling of Strings becomes more and more unbelievable.
And yet, he avoids blaming anyone (exept Mesic!) for anything. Quite admirable.
Ann-Marie Laios
Sollentuna
Sweden - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 10:13 pm
So since the judges, instead of a jury, are the self appointed arbiters of fact, the evidence does not need to be presented publicly? So much for the right to a PUBLIC trial!So why does the accused have a right to a PUBLIC trial? Because a PUBLIC TRIAL IS IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE! Not a HALF PUBLIC trial, a FULL PUBLIC TRIAL!
The Chamber's acceptance of written statements, i.e. statements written by the Prosecution NOT the witness, seems to contradict the above principles. It smacks of perverted totalitarian practice where the PUBLIC IS NOT ENTITLED TO KNOW the full truth because ONLY the judges need to know the full truth.
Now Nice is proposing even more such witness statements! For what reason? To save time! To save money! To save the credibility of the Prosecution's case! To save the "international justice system at the ICTY" from huge embarrassment! And all in the interest of justice!
How does it benefit justice to shortcut and pervert centuries old, established juridical procedures in the civilised world in order to save negligible time? It doesn't!
But it does expedite the lynching of course! Summary justice, that's what it's called! You find a "rustler" and you hang him from the nearest tree. No point taking him to a proper court and following proper procedure only to waste time in reaching the preordained result. Hang them high and dry and don't waste unnecessary time.
Some progress we've made since the Wild West days, haven't we? Some progress we've made since the Nazi, Fascist and hard-core Soviet Communist lynch sessions! I guess now that Communism is dead, the democratic West's leaders and their minions no longer need to pretend they are a much preferred alternative to totalitarianism. They think they can get away with anything AND with impunity because we, the sheeple have no alternative.
That's what's wrong with this Plague at the Hague! Milosevic is just the patsy they happened to pick out because he didn't play ball. And that speaks volumes for his position.
No amount of written statements by the Prosecution is going to deny Milosevic the right and privilege of being the first martyr in the hands of the New World Order's executioners! His crime... Treason and insurrection against the New World Order and against Privatisation of public assets on a global scale. Treason against a Global oligarchy!
David
Oztralia - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 10:21 pm
As if ANY of us owed them an oath of allegiance! Then again, maybe they rule by the divine right of kings or some other esoteric doctrine such as a new 21st century "democracy"? Let it not be in my name and with my consent.
David
Oztralia - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 10:29 pm
Ann-Marie,I said that "May and Kwon agreed that Milanovic could give testimony through written statement, but Robinson issued a dissenting opinion."
I was only speaking about that particular witness, not about the prosecution's submission in general and how the appeals chamber and May and Robinson all initally reacted, and you are of course correct on that score.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Thursday October 09, 2003 at 11:19 pm
Sorry Andy,It's quite impossible to follow the trial now, I'm several days behind. The latest videos on bard.edu doesn't work, transcripts takes longer and longer to appear.
Only when I'm home to watch Domovina.net am I partially up to date.
So I spend my time reading through rulings and the 'expert reports' and of course your trial synopsis.
..And Vera, where are you??
As I'm getting more and more paranoid, I suspect these delays of videos and transcripts to be a part of the overall attempt to make this trial less and less public.
Where can I complain ?
Ann-Marie Laios
Sollentuna
Sweden - Friday October 10, 2003 at 12:49 am
October 9th at the Hague "tribunal":http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100903.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday October 10, 2003 at 5:52 am
Ann-Marie Laios,may I suggest, that you complain to your (Swedish) government, - which (through membership of the U.N.) is co-sponsoring the ICTY "trial(s)".
For maximum efficiency you probably need i.a. to clarify, what you are missing by these repeated "delays of videos and transcripts", - it is hardly convincincing to merely explain, that you "are getting more and more paranoid", and have to "spend your time" reading through rulings, 'expert reports' and Wilcoxson's reports etc.
Maybe you should start by clarifying why in fact you are even attempting to "follow the trial" that 'closely'? If there had not at all been any "videos" from the proceedings (as there isn't in most cases) would you have been missing the show, then?
Or to put it in a different way:
What is it, that you (still) feel to missing from the ICTY?
(I admit that personally I never bothered to watch a single video from this "trial". I went to The Hague once (at an early stage) to see for myself that the show was "really there": Watching mr. Milosevic (as well as Prosecutors and Judges etc.!) "live" added a dimension to the transcripts - but didn't hook me on these "videos" (for which I would not have time anyway). Could you kindly explain what use you think to have been able to make from watching the videos - other than "spending the time" of course? Please).
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Friday October 10, 2003 at 6:23 am
Ann-Marie,I would suggest that you e-mail Bard College: hague@bard.edu
Tell them that by not regularly updating the video they are making it difficult for you to follow the trial.
I would also second Godfred's suggestion that you complain to the Swedish Government. Ask them to apply pressure on the tribunal so that they will provide the transcripts in a timely fashion.
You could also write a letter directly to the Tribunal requesting that the provide transcripts in a more timely manner. The Tribunal's address is:
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia Churchillplein 1 2517JW The Hague Netherlands
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday October 10, 2003 at 6:25 am
The address is:International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
Churchillplein 1
2517JW The Hague
NetherlandsIt was illegible in the previous post.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday October 10, 2003 at 6:29 am
If "Smith was forced to admit that he didn't see any indication that Milosevic had any direct control over the VRS," as Andy Wilcoxson reports in his "Trial" synopsis (October 10, 2003 at 12:49 am), - then the British general was a useful witness, - no matter his "objectivity". Is that not true?Or would Wilcoxson maybe suggest that mr. Milosevic should not call say Clinton to the stand for fear of a U.S. President's lack of "objectivity"? Might it not be useful to call a Tony Blair to account for his lies?
Godfred Louis-Jensen
Copenhagen
D E N M A R K - Friday October 10, 2003 at 7:41 am
Godfred Louis-Jensen,I consider that President Milosevic should be able to call anybody he wishes to come and testify.
If he wants to call Bill Clinton, and Tony Blair, then by all means he should be able to call them, and he should be able to ask them any questions that he wants to.
General Smith was certainly hostile towards Milosevic, but since President Milosevic is smarter than Smith he was able to force him to admit some useful facts, eventhough Smith didn't want to.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday October 10, 2003 at 12:24 pm
Walter I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis above and I wish more people did.Let me add that the British media also suffers from truth 'blackouts'.
Alf Bentley
UK - Friday October 10, 2003 at 2:09 pm
Just saw the CNN debate of the Democratic Candidates for president. Kucinic was ignored because he was the only one who opposed the war on Iraq from the outset and was the only one who did not suffer from amnesia. He was the only one who offered an exit strategy for US forces. One of the three points that he made called for the Iraqi oil to be given back to the international market and the Iraqi people rather than to Bush’s oil cronies. He also stated that UN should take command and control to stabilize Iraq. He said Americans should rebuild what they destroyed and must leave since they lied to get into the war.Gephardt, Dean , Clarke .and others said that since we are there now we must stay the course. Even though, they all now disagree with Bush’s policy with the exception of Kucinic they had no alternative than to follow Bush’s failed policy built on lies. The world of the Democrats like that of the Republicans is full of mud and piles of shit.
One lady asked a very good question.. She asked “What will you do as president to change the fact that America is the most hated country in the world”? Rather than telling the American people that to do this America must change its foreign policy, observe international law, stop bullying weaker nations, and promote international good will rather than anarchy and fear the candidates responded with platitudes and the need to sell the American vision of motherhood and apple pie for everyone. Also they needed to say that they would educate the American people on what it means to be a citizen of the world and all the responsibilities that go with that citizenship.
General Smith needs to read the letter by one of his officers (Thornton written to Time magazine) that I posted some time ago. In this letter Thornton was very clear on what was going on in the safe areas (Srebrenica, Zepa and Gorazde). These areas were only safe for Muslim soldiers who terrorized, burned and killed Serbian villagers in and around these safe areas.
Alf, amnesia in the media just like in politics serves the interest of the owners and the lobbyists since most owners and politicians promote their own self interest. Democracy will never succeed as long as self interest takes precedent over the general will of the majority. In most countries we speak of democracy but because of the nature of the electoral process we are subject to the dictatorship of the minority. In most cases the propertied classes. Present government in Canada was elected by I think 40% 0f the people while in US Bush was elected by some 25% of the people.
Walter Trkla
Kamloops
Canada - Friday October 10, 2003 at 2:15 pm
These areas were only safe for Muslim soldiers who terrorized, burned and killed Serbian villagers in and around these safe areas.Smith explained to the "court" that the safe areas were not ment to be demilitarized. He just said that they were safe places for Muslim refugees. That's nice. So the Muslims get little UN-protected pockets that get to keep their weapons and then terrorize the Serbs in these safe areas and in the surrounding areas, and then just pop back into the warm fuzzy safety of the "safe area."
Incidentally, these atrocities were not conducted only on the outskirts of these safe areas, as was the case with Srebrenica, but right in the safe areas themselves. Examples are Tuzla and Bihac (not to mention Sarajevo), where Serbs were incarcerated in detention camps and expelled, and Gorazde, whose Serbian half was torched to the ground and population massacred and driven into the countryside.
P M
USA - Friday October 10, 2003 at 4:05 pm
GodfredI don't call the decision to follow the trial 'paranoia'. Nor reading whats available.
I am a rational person that doesn't see conspiracies and deliberate manipulations in everything that happens.
At least I thought that a case like this would be followed by the media and commnented on in some way, but in Sweden it seems like a great big lid has been put over it. Looks like a conspiracy.
Now, 'server problems' and transcripts that are posted in great chunks and other disruptions in the information, along with all the tricky business that are going on in the case, it looks deliberate. Like a conspiracy.
This suspision I feel of a greater conspiracy, that is what I tell myself can't be true. That is the 'paranoia' I have.
Ann-Marie Laios
Sollentuna
Sweden - Friday October 10, 2003 at 4:56 pm
Ann-Marie it is almost impossible for intelectuals and journalst to admit that they have been all duped by "inferior balkan people". It is different for politician as they follow their own agendas,no matter who is right and who is wrong.
serjoe b
Italy - Friday October 10, 2003 at 5:48 pm
A Pact with the Devil
“Milosevic has been totally silenced and it matters not that international law and justice has been turned on its head at the ICTY.” Writes Walter noting the double standards of the coalition in murdering thousands of Iraqis on the laughable pretext that Iraq threatened us with Weapons of Mass Destruction - amounting so far to a single finger sized vial of botulism - while the Serbs were bombed into submission for resisting the very real threat of Islamic terror, including Mujahedin, in Kosovo. But the picture gets ever blacker by the hour:Blair, he of the Blair Bush war on Iraq, loves to posture as the great humanitarian, the great champion of human rights. Now it seems he is party to an agreement even more wicked than those that go before. In return for ten thousand Turkish troops - mainly Sunni Muslims - to put down the Iraqis, including Kurds, it is claimed the coalition has promised to ‘sort out’ the Kurdish rebels: To finish the job the Turks started:
During 15 years of state repression, more than 30,000 Kurds were killed and half a million were forced to leave their homes at gunpoint by the Turks. “The Turkish government has been far worse to the Kurds than Saddam has,” is a comment oft repeated in southeastern Turkey. The rape of men and women and public executions by being dragged by tanks were common.
In Kosovo before the bombing there were a total of some 3,000 killed on both sides not 30,000 as in Turkey. In Kosovo there were some 200,000 thousand hiding in the woods from the fighting not “half a million forced to leave their homes at gunpoint” by the Turks.
So Mr Humanity jumps in again with two feet. Not this time to protect the “rebels” but to ally himself with a state, which has slaughtered 30,000 Kurds. Consistency was never Blair’s strong point.
Forget the claptrap you must always read the bottom line: What’s in it for Phoney Tony when massaging his giant sized ego. You may be sure that Blair’s New Labour chum Richard May, presiding judge at The Hague, will turn a blind eye to this latest demonstration of the farce he is conducting.
And the British people are soon going to ask what’s in it for them: ‘What good came of it all and where have all the billions gone?’
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Friday October 10, 2003 at 6:13 pm
Walter and PM,It is also useful to note that those Muslim soldiers in those so-called "safe-areas" didn't limit their terrorizing to just attacks against the Serbs.
Those Muslim soldiers terrorized even their own civilians who had the misfortune of being stuck in the enclaves with them.
http://www.balkanpeace.org/cib/bos/boss/oric/oric03.shtml
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Friday October 10, 2003 at 8:38 pm
Milosevic was condemned long time ago , but his imprisonment or death during the trial will not be in vain . He has shown the world that that the exagerated pursue of justice ends in an excess of injustice . And for Serbs keep in mind "It is better to be a lion for 5 minutes than a sheep for the rest of your life"
M P
Rep de Panama - Friday October 10, 2003 at 8:48 pm
Carla , where is Gotovina? have you tried London? , he can be living there under the name of Tony Cash , check it out? . see you in 6 days , ciao¡
M P
Rep de Panama - Friday October 10, 2003 at 10:54 pm
Godfred said:
- I suggest that since Jared Israel et al. are mainly devoted to "moving Jews to support the Serbs (as a "block" maybe?)" (emphasis mine-WM) the remainder of us unite in asking JURIST for a fresh site, a Jared-free zone, - leaving this old one entirely to the iddle babble of mr. Israel and those who may already have been moved by his efforts.Yes, sir, as a block; after all that's how Ruder and Finn succeeded and changed the history of Yugoslavia, isn't it? If Ruder Finn succeeded masterfully in their evil plan, why not give Jared the chance to reverse the current? Personally I don't believe he can succeed but at least an honest try would be welcomed and nobody should put a stick in his wheel. No matter how crude and clumsy Jared may be, it's in nobody's interest to simply make him disappear and hope for miracles later. In spite of his limits, Jared should understand that the case of Milosevic and Yugoslavia cannot be discussed within the framework of larger world agendas. Forget your anti-Fascism, forget Israel, Jared, and stick to a single issue.
A while ago, somebody in a Serbian newsgroup asked me: "Why did you single out the Serbian cause?" I don't single out. In a recent Vagabond, in an article titled "Pashtunistan", I mention (quote from memory): "Now the Serbs know that they are not alone. It's time that the world also remarked the plight of the Pashtuns who urgently need support."
W. Markiewicz
Canada - Friday October 10, 2003 at 10:57 pm
Correction of italics. the first paragraph of my previous post should be italicized as a quote.
W. Markiewicz
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 2:45 pm
"An honest try would be welcomed."
1 2
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 6:59 pm
W. Markiewicz writes that “Jared should understand that the case of Milosevic and Yugoslavia cannot be discussed within the framework of larger world agendas” and the Borg 12 pipes in that “An honest try would be welcomed”. How dishonest and inappropriate from someone who hides behind number 12.Mr. Markiewicz I am sure that Jared is well capable of defending his position and if you think that he is dishonest lets hear your evidence. As for Jared forgetting “anti-Fascism,--- Israel-- and sticking to a single issue of Milosevic and Serbia the picture of why Milosevic is in the kangaroo court would be incomplete. The “larger world agenda” of the USA has been discussed on this forum ad-nauseam. How do you separate the breakup of Yugoslavia which was part of this agenda? What is taking place in the Middle East, Central Asia, Chechnya, and Cuba and so on is part of the same agenda even though NATO would like us to believe that it was humanitarian principles that guided their missiles into Serbian homes, hospitals and civilian infrastructure. The agenda is political and economic domination by the few of the many. Making Milosevic responsible, making Saddam responsible, making Castro responsible is the Trojan horse for American world domination and one more step in the success of this agenda. Milosevic Trial cannot be seen in isolation from NATO expansion, EU expansion, and Globalization.
Walter Trkla
Kamloops BC
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 7:18 pm
"I am sure that Jared is well capable of defending his position.""An honest try would be welcomed."
1 2
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 7:20 pm
"The agenda is political and economic domination by the few of the many.""But the ICDSM is *not* a mass organization. It never had more than a few (very few) *actually functioning* members."
1 2
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 7:25 pm
"Milosevic Trial"
1 2
Canada - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 8:31 pm
I had a DreamIn 2009 following a disastrous Dubya second term Hilary Clinton is installed as America’s first woman President. In the intervening five years millions of Serbs had found refuge in the USA from continuing terror attacks by a rampant Islamist Greater Albania led by Hashim Thaci. Following the collapse of the EU protection forces Greater Albania now embraces Bosnia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia and Southern Serbia.
Being a highly educated people the Serbs quickly rose in the ranks of the US governing classes. Thus Clinton’s administration includes Cohenski as Defence Secretary, Ms Albrightska as Secretary of State and her senior assistant is Rubinavic.
Sir Anthony Blair, double Noble prizewinner for Humanitarian interventions in Kosovo and Iraq now in his third term as Prime Minister of the UK, is hunting his third Nobel Prize. London is regarded as the capital of the Islamists’ world. His Foreign Secretary is Lord Richard May being ennobled for having convicted - in spite of the dodgy evidence - that “dastardly scoundrel Milosevic”, as Sir Anthony describes him, and sentencing him to thirty years solitary confinement.
As is his wont Blair pontificates on the world stage about the ‘Butcher of Tel Aviv’ and his massacres of the Palestinians. Cherie Blair expresses her horror at “ the rape camps” in the Sun newspaper that features Sandra Saucy Boots on page three. Albrightska demands to know of Madam President: "What's the point of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?"
The prominent American Serb PR firm Ruderski and Finnskovic launches a propaganda campaign on behalf of the Arabs. Thus convincing US Serbs and most of the rest of the population to support the American Serb leaders in the administration. The Director, Janic Haarfic, is questioned on his moral responsibility and replies: “We are professionals. We had a job to do and we did it. We are not paid to be moral."
Clinton appoints US General Milanovic, whose parents came to the USA after being persecuted by the Nazis inWW2, to be in charge of operations. The Anglo/US coalition demands that Israel destroys the security wall and returns to the pre-wall boundary. Receiving no reply from Sharon the USA and UK launch pre-emptive tactical nuclear strikes to destroy Israel’s nuclear weapons and airforce: the whereabouts of which the secret services had easily established.
Repeating the demand they now give Sharon ten days to act. Sharon puts a referendum to the people and the plucky Israelis stand firm. Milanovic launches his aerial bombardment with instructions not to spare the cluster bombs: The settlements are sacked by Islamic terrorists under the protection of the Anglo/US airforce. Not wishing to repeat the mistakes of General Clark in Serbia Milanovic sees to it that every Israeli tank in the occupied territories is destroyed regardless of collateral damage.
Sharon and the Israeli Generals are dragged before ICTI, where the presiding judge is a friend of Yasser Arafat. Peter Taylor, who contributed many comments on the unfairness of the ICTY at the Jusrist Milosevic Trial Discussion begins to contribute to the Jurist Sharon Trial Discussion. Why he asks was Israel attacked by the Anglo/US alliance for defending itself from Islamic terror: noting that the war leaders are all American Serbs. He is accused of having a fixation on the Serbs and branded a Slav-hater for expressing his incomprehension as to why the American Serbs - whose own homeland had suffered so much at the hands of the Islamists - should not oppose the actions of this Serbian led US administration against the Israelis.
When he tries to reason with his critics the answer comes back:
“So what?”
And then I awoke: it was all a dream.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Saturday October 11, 2003 at 9:05 pm
The same way a lot of us "droped" into this forum , I'm pretty sure there are lots of people following this forum and awakening from the "trance" they were put by the media and by the lies of the enforcers of this "opera buffa" at The Hague , and as far as I am concern "never so few have done so much for so many"
M P
Rep de Panama