 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
- Sunday September 28, 2003 at 1:35 pm
Let me try to provide you with a few bits of local info that would help you come to your own more qualified conclusions, away from the innuendo.First, re the 3-month time granted for the preparation of the defence case and the perception of this being fair or not. One of our dailies, VECERNJE NOVOSTI, interviewed on 20 September 5 of our most prominent lawyers on the matter. Their names would not mean much to you, so I would only say they are all counsels for the defence at The Hague in other cases, and all of them are no supporters of the former regime (quite the contrary: being lawyers with a developed private practice for decades, they are the epitome of that petit bourgeois class that stands contrary to anything resembling a socialist system; amicus curiae Tapuskovic falls into this category as well). And some of them even admitted to have personal political resentment towards Milosevic, yet that didn’t prevent them from judging the 3-month ruling almost unanimously as being unfair. Only one of them stated that “all the disadvantages stemming from the decision not to have a counsel is only a personal choice of Milosevic”. Here are some quotes.
The first lawyer noticed how the Tribunal profited of the dual nature of Milosevic in these proceedings: as a defendant he has to remain incarcerated like any other defendant, and as a counsel he cannot be granted more time than any other counsel: “Three months is the usual time-limit for us lawyers, counsels for the defendants at the Tribunal. The Chamber’s ruling is formally and outwardly just, but the Tribunal has obviously seized the opportunity to punish Milosevic for refusing to appoint a counsel like all other defendants did.”
The second lawyer points out the less-than-usual size of the case: “The Indictment against Slobodan Milosevic has been thus composed to encompass the bulk of at least seven other cases: one for Kosovo and three for Croatia and Bosnia each. To do the job, Milosevic has only two advisers and a number of other assistants, but they are unable to muster the full insight into the enormous material that’s constantly being presented. Formally, the Accused had two years to prepare his defence, but one wonders how it could be accomplished at all when the evidence had been submitted to him mostly just before the beginning of or during the proceedings. Such a task could not be carried out within the time-limit granted not even by two official counsels. The tribunal is in a hurry for formal reasons, to provide a speedy and efficient trial. However, behind it all there’s a desire to carry out the proceedings within the time-limit insufficient for Milosevic to prepare a good quality defence.”
The third lawyer interviewed went so far to state the following: “I am personally embittered by the Tribunal for turning the least sympathy-inspiring person in the country, which Milosevic was to me, into a person one feels sympathy for, because he has been denied his rights by any objective standard.” He explained his views about the “shamefully small amount of time” that’s been granted as follows: “It’s a huge material to be mustered. It is necessary to talk to each witness before his testimony, for which the Accused will not have sufficient amount of time, obviously. Apparently, they saw from the cross-examination of the witnesses for the Prosecution how well prepared for each and every witness Milosevic was, and therefore now they want to prevent him doing the same with his own witnesses.”
Let me give you one more quote from another lawyer, who used to have high expectations from the Tribunal, but now he lowered his standards significantly, expecting only to “at least respect its own rules”, which also didn’t happen, because they granted the Accused way too little time for any serious preparations: “I don’t know why and I am surprised that the time factor has been placed above other principles of the criminal procedure, these of a fair trial and the establishing of material truth. The basic criterion, proclaimed by the Tribunal itself, is the equality of parties in the proceedings. If it were proven that the Prosecution had only three months to get prepared, I would agree that the Accused be granted the same. But we all know that this had lasted much longer, for years, and therefore Milosevic should be granted the same amount of time. I have expected the Tribunal to at least respect its own rules.”
It’s kind of sad to read such disillusioned opinions from the lawyers who looked up to the revered legal standards of the Western countries which helped them and others like them to topple the previous regime, only to find out that these standards are like a rubber band, adjustable to fit the needs of the day.
Another bit of info, showing that the search for documents by the legal assistants to Milosevic (as well as by the counsels for other defendants) is quite open, and not some clandestine, bribing operation: even our current DOS authorities are obliged by law to let them see (and even to photocopy when unclassified) documents when publicly and officially requested. And to get that info one does not need to be “connected” to some mysterious inner source, it only takes a short trip to your local newsstand to purchase newspapers.
Here’s the translation of an article from NOVOSTI dated 13 September. [start quote] SECRETS FOR MILOSEVIC TO SEE - BELGRADE , 12 Sept. - As learned by NOVOSTI, the Federal Council of Ministers has granted the counsels for the defendants at The Hague, Slobodan Milosevic, Dragoljub Ojdanic and Miroslav Radic, the access to the documents they requested. At one of the recent sessions of the Council, Tomislav Visnjic, counsel for Ojdanic, was granted access to 16 military documents totalling 40 pages, from the period between 1998 and 2001. Moreover, the access to 36 military documents, marked “highly confidential” and “military secret”, made in the period between 1993 and 1999, was allowed also to the lawyer of the former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic - Zdenko Tomanovic. The legal representative for Radic, Borivoje Borovic, was also allowed not only to see but to photocopy as well 16 unclassified military documents, bearing dates from 1991. [end quote]
So, the confidential military secrets are obtainable to lawyers in an open procedure and the fact is being reported by the media. It’s also regulated by law that members of the Bar can officially request (and obtain) the info on criminal records. One example of that was the testimony of Ratomir Tanic: when Milosevic cross-examined him, he produced a fax received from his legal assistants, which was the official document confirming the valiant witness to be a criminal convicted for robbery. And this was obtained within two days, upon official request to our court, which was obliged to comply. So, no bribery was necessary, everything was perfectly transparent and public. Sorry to dispel the concoction of the “connected”.
Vera Martinovic
Belgrade
Yugoslavia - Sunday September 28, 2003 at 2:50 pm
"If crooks knew how much it pays to be honest there will no crooks"
Old proverb
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Sunday September 28, 2003 at 3:02 pm
Thank you Vera,As somebody who watches the "trial" on a regular basis wouldn't you also agree that a large portion of the documents that Milosevic uses (perhaps 60%) he actually obtains from the hundreds of thousands of pages that the prosecution dumps on him?
How many times have you been watching the "trial" and he begins his question by referring to a document marked with ERN number such-and-such? All of those documents he received from the prosecution.
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday September 29, 2003 at 5:21 am
Yesterday the Ditch television network VPRO aired a very nice piece on teh Milosevics trial. The progral m series is called tegenlicht. It was the first time I heard critical voices in the Western Media on how this trial is being handled. Be sure to check it out at:http://info.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/index.shtml?7738514+7738518+7738520+14130404
You can watch the program in streaming video. It is however in Dutch.
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Monday September 29, 2003 at 6:39 am
There are 2 parts to the documentary Most of the interviews are in Serbian, German and English. Really worth watching and an eyeopener!
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Monday September 29, 2003 at 7:18 am
VeraThank you for the deeply informative post.
By-the-way......the War Party must be getting desperate if it is now airing 'documentaries' which even have a 'critical voices on how the trial is being conducted'
The War Party is clever in it Hitlarian propaganda. When its lies are exposed, it will admit 'some minor errors' as a way of showing how 'objective' they are.
The full Truth of course always elludes the War Party. For their tales have a foundation of lies, half-truth, and misinformation.
The longer the Milosevic hearings go on the better.
AP V
NY
NY - Monday September 29, 2003 at 8:42 am
AP That is really a very short sighted reaction on the documentary i brought up in my previous post. Even when the media exposes the true running of the Milosevic trial, you dismiss it as propaganda. This documentary clearly shows how the prosecutions case is faltering and highlight topics that were discussed on this forum for months. It is the first time I saw key exerpts from the trial proceedings on key witnessess on my television set. It shows that you didnt see the program or that you see the hand of the 'war party' in anything that is being aired or written on the trial, which would indicate a high degree of paranoia on your behalf.
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Monday September 29, 2003 at 11:11 am
Peter Varavejke,I can't understand Dutch. Would you be kind enough to briefly summarise what issues the documentary dealt with. It looks like they dealt with the so-called "concentration camp" story that ITN did in 1992.
Did the documentary point out how ITN made those pictures? How ITN put their camera crew behind a barbed wire fence and then filmed the REFUGEES at the REFUGEE CAMP and falsely passed them off as prisoners at a concentration camp.
Did the documentary explain how this propaganda was manufactured?
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Monday September 29, 2003 at 12:36 pm
The broad tone of the documentary is the politized character of the tribunal. The first part deals on how the prosecutions actions are preliminary driven by the media picture develloped through the years. A picture that was made and polished by PR firm to 'educate' the American people. Several commentators say that the installation of the ICTY was the result of an emotional reaction in the West to this picture, so that it could be seen doing something. It asks the question on how images and group thinking influence our perception of facts. The ITN story features in the part were the demonisation of the serbs is discussed and how this strategy developped. Thomas Deichmann is interviewed on how he discovered the manipulation of the images (barb wire on inside of poles, no barbed wire around the rest of the camp, cars drving in and out the camp). The documentary shows unedited ITN footage which supports the allegations of the manipulation. One of the general conclusions is that the tribunal now has diffuclties in proving the often over the top allegations and demonisations then made for political purposes. Part 2 deals a large part with specific witnessess and the troubles the prosecutions has making its case. It attacks the use of protected witnessess and closed sessions. The documentary brings into the open how witnessess (often war criminals) are promised money, immunity and a new life in the West for their statement implicating Milosevic. Captain Dragan gives an interesting interview from the golf course. Even if you dont understand dutch large parts are in English, German and Serbian.
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Monday September 29, 2003 at 6:18 pm
I just watched the documentary and have to say that I am surprised. It has Mr. Lilic, Captain Dragan, Mr. Vasiljevic, Mr. Tanic and all the segments very much show the real Mr. May-an agressive and disrespectful judge. All insider witnesses either turned out to be defense witnesses or were shown to be liars. Good piece of work by the tv channe.
Dan B
Canada - Monday September 29, 2003 at 6:28 pm
I wonder if anyone would be able to tell us what the people at this Dutch forum are saying: http://react.vpro.nl/tegenlicht/forum/list_topics/10
Dan B
Canada - Monday September 29, 2003 at 7:01 pm
The SLOBODA/Freedom Association has held its Assembly Meeting in Belgrade on September 27, 2003. The Assembly has 180 members. At the September 27th meeting important personalities from the political and intellectual life of Serbia, Montenegro, the Republic of Srpska and the Republic of Serb Krajina took part, including Mirko Marjanovic, long time Serbian Prime Minister, Momir Bulatovic, former Federal Prime Minister and President of the Republic of Montenegro, members of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts Professor Mihajlo Markovic, Professor Milos Macura, Professor Cedomir Popov, Professor Kosta Mihailovic, Professor Ivan Maksimovic and many others. The Founder and Co-Chairman of the ICDSM, Professor Velko Valkanov, and the Chairman of the Russian Committee, Alexander Zinoviev, have sent their written messages. Bishop Filaret of the Serbian Orthodox Church has sent his blessing. Professor Mirko Zurovac, a well known Belgrade philosopher, has been elected Assembly Chairman for the next two-year term. All previous members of the Board have been re-elected and the Board was expanded to 30 members.I have contacted the dutch network to see if they are planning an English version.
Dan B
Canada - Monday September 29, 2003 at 8:04 pm
The following article is apparently from the IWPR. It came to me in a mailing list and I assume the whole thing will appear shortly. Key Srebrenica Witness Admits LyingMomir Nikolic's fictional account of massacre raises questions about plea-bargain system.
By Chris Stephen in The Hague (TU 327, 29 September 2003)
The Hague prosecution's star witness in the Srebrenica case has admitted in court that he lied in testimony when he said he ordered one of the biggest single massacres of Bosnian Muslims. ........< >.............
Nikole J
Canada - Monday September 29, 2003 at 8:44 pm
The tide is changing:
Talks in Washington about impeaching George W. Bush for violation of a law his visionary father created, sweet fateful coincidence!
The Dutch, or at least their TV discover the meaning of justice!
And, what? Perjury at the ICTY?
Who did it in Italy, who shut off the electricity?
Too much free market a la Berlusconi.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday September 29, 2003 at 8:48 pm
The trial remains suspended, perhaps in suspension, but aha, tomorrow at 10 AM Dutch time, the chamber will meet to discuss the health or rather the lack of it, of the accused. Will the doctor be at the hearing?
I doubt it. Just the witch doctors will deliberate.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Monday September 29, 2003 at 11:31 pm
Will anybody come to the rescue of this strange group of castaways from the pirate ship ICTY sinking in a sea of lies? Pretty soon we will know which flag they were flying , rats have started to abandon ship .
M P
Rep de Panama - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 12:26 am
Peter Varavejke,The documentary (what I could understand of it) is very good, and when I could't understand I usually had an idea of what was happening.
Good find!
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 2:38 am
Thanks Peter !
That was two well spent hours.
Hope to see these programmes exported to networks around the world!
It's high time for a debate in the media to start, that focuses on all the unjust things that are going on.
Too many people are not even informed of what 'evidence' are beeing presented by the prosecution. They only know that Milosevic is obtructing the proceedings by getting the flu and by using up time with political speeches. That is as much as Swedish media has reported.
And too many people are convinced that whatever is going on in den Haag, it's all being done for a good cause. Namely to nail Milosevic!
But is it alright to falsify history and to violate normal rules of legal proceedures? Does this tribunal have a right to rule and decide on everything, as May seems to think? What law is that based on?
No judges or jury in a civilized country can rule like Solomon, out of their own wisedom. They are to rule by the lawbook. But there is no international law on how countries should be gouverned or by what criteria somebody should be declared a Dictator. Or any rules about how warpropaganda and different assessements of facts and figures can be 'decided' upon by an International Court of any sort.
If the Tribunal would just focus on their 66 counts of violation of Customs of War and Geneva Convention, that would be fine. The Prosecution case would have finished long ago if they had concentrated on relevant matters. And if they had any hard evidence it should have been clearly put. ..But for the rest, all the massive, time-consuming guessing and speculation on political, historical, factual matters as well as gossip and hearsay about peripheral people, could have been left out. The testemonies are so mixed up so that nobody can make out what is fact and what is fiction.
Maybe they are just stalling and prolonging the process while awaiting the incriminating documents to turn up..
We need a debate on the poor quality of witnesses and these two TV-programms are indeed a good start on that subject. And also about the documents being admitted,'for what they are worth' as May says.
The Expert Witnesses, are they really unbiased experts or are they propaganda tools? Instead of clarifying and establish actual facts when possible, they seem just too eager to add to the exaggerations put forward by the prosecution.
The Insiders, are they really Insiders or merely gossipy Outsiders, who convey what they overheard and guessed the meaning of, and telling us who they saw in what corridor of what official building in Beograd? And doesn't most of it seem irrelevant anyway? Like who spoke to whom, and what was said. ..And if they kept a diary with the exact wording? Especially if it later disappeared or got burnt.
The Internationals, are they telling the whole truth or are they adjusting their evidence to help the good cause of this trial? In most cases they have nothing to pin Milosevic or any of the military officers they dealt with. Their opinion on matters are clearly sought though, while at the same time the opinions of jugoslav people are whisked away as irrelevant and 'merely his opinion and of no use to us'.
For the above witness categories a crucial question is: Are they providing any relevant evidence?
The Victims, I suppose are of course in most cases (hopefully) real, although they know nutheeng about KLA, Green Berets or ZNG:s respectivly. But how can Milosevic be asked to put his case about each and everyone in crossexamination? Everyone agrees he wasn't there. Shouldn't the prosecution have more supportive evidence and carry out investigations if needed, to put their case clearly about each alleged crime. Now they have the easy bit, they just put the witnesses stories out there to be entirely believed and leaves it to the accused to prove any contradictory case. Even if May has said the burden of proof is not on the accused, 'of course not', he seems to say that if Milosevic can't put a positive case and support it, he is screwed!
And as several has pointed out already in this forum, the prosecution should be required to state clearly for every crime or crimesite how they consider Milosevic to be responible for that paticular crime.
Ann-Marie Laios
Sollentuna
Sweden - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 2:42 am
THE KRSLJANIN TAPES: PART 1
http://emperors-clothes.com/dispute/3way.htmSlobodan Milosevic's decision to remove Ramsey Clark from the co-chairmanship of the ICDSM and Krsljanin's reaction.
On the tape you will hear:
* Krsljanin admit that Ramsey Clark attacked Slobodan Milosevic.
* Krsljanin objecting to Milosevic's decision to remove Clark from the ICDSM co-chairmanship by saying, "...we don't want to turn Committee [ICDSM] into some body which is working on the basis of our Friend's [i.e., Milosevic's] will..."
An interesting listen indeed. I guess Jared Israel has been telling the truth.
http://emperors-clothes.com/dispute/3way.htm
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 5:14 am
The whole article on the lying Srebrenica witness can be found at:http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/tri/tri_327_1_eng.txt
Peter Varavejke
Belgium - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 5:40 am
QUIZQuestion: What do you call a racist lawyer who propagates lies in order to justify dropping cluster bombs on people?
Answer: Tony Blair
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 6:17 am
The trial chamber (pot) rules: Mr. Milosevic will appear in court because medical reasons only three days a weeks.
amici curiae Kay (NATO) was splendid today in making prosecutor's Nice (NATO) arguments for a imposed council on Mr. Milosevic totally an failed idea: it would not save time, it would not help the court, it would not serve justice because Mr. Milosevic will not cooperate and cease his defense in fact ending the trial!
Further Mr. Kay (NATO) made a rather surprising attack to the practice of calling more and more prosecutor's witnesses while pressing the court for time. Kay (NATO) implied this is to mask the lack of case by the prosecutor and he expected the court to be aware of it. A rather nice and surprising warning!
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 6:21 am
A stale vorspeise
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 6:23 am
A stale vorspeise
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 6:25 am
This is what I mean:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3150720.stm
G C
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 6:35 am
I just watched a documentary in swahili made by the Afrikaan TV about the ICTY-R and as far I could understand the trial is a mess.
G C
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 8:49 am
I wonder if the prosecution have ruled out an "ouija" consulting session , or maybe a "medium" to communicate with the other world , think about it Mrs.Del Ponte , this can be the answer to your sleepless nights and will make your bosses very proud of their choice .
M P
Rep de Panama - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 11:27 am
Gogol: maybe you should rethink your (NATO) and (OCCUPIED) remarks. It seems that some people even from NATO and pro-Western countries, cannot but help see the true picture. I feel already that Robinson and Kay are sensing that this whole trial is a farce. Even Tapuskovic noted (on the Dutch program), that this trial had led him to rethink a lot of his opinions and prejudices about Milosevic and his responsiblity. The key question now is how Kwon will swing - his strange smiles and gestures make it difficult for me to predict which way he would rule. However, it is pretty clear that May is itching to nail at least a few counts onto Milosevic.
P M
USA - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 11:35 am
"Milosevic health forces trial cut"
.....< >........ The court has already appointed standby defence council to assist Vojislav Seselj, another Serb nationalist who opted to defend himself.It seems that being a nationalist is a good reason to be put on trial and only Serbs are not allowed to be nationalist.
Nikole J
Canada - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 12:27 pm
A summary/commentary on today's status conference:http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg093003.htm
I agree that Mr. Kay seemed to do a good job, although I can't help but wonder if this isn't a good cop/bad cop game that the tribunal is playing with Milosevic.
Nice and del Ponte are the bad cops, and Kay and Tapuskovic are the good cops. When dealing with good cops and bad cops one has to remember that they are both nonetheless cops who share a common objective.
Afterall why would Nice be suggesting that one of the Amicus should serve as an imposed legal assistant if he didn't think that it would benefit his agenda?
Andy Wilcoxson
Washington, United States - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 1:50 pm
Highlight of the New Labour choreographed conferenceDuring today’s Hitlerian rant at the Labour Party conference, suitably decked out in Tory Blue, Tony Blair revealed that he didn’t believe in “principles” but only in progress - in going forward - in other words ‘Might is Right’.
He questioned why so many in the party were upset by his attack on Iraq and the ousting of Saddam Hussein when most were ‘content that he had got rid of Milosevic’: Thus perpetuating his racist myth about Milosevic and the Serbian people, especially those in Kosovo, who supported him.
The answer to his question is that ‘so many’ have not yet caught up with Blair’s lies about the Serbs in Kosovo.
Meanwhile Tony’s KLA friends continue to disgrace themselves, when not abducting and murdering the Kosovo minorities, by desecrating Christian graves.
New quiz:
All of these men have been responsible for forces which have made attacks during the past fifteen years upon other ethnic groups resulting in thousands of deaths: Blair, Clinton, Bush, Blair, Kucan, Tudjman, Izebegovic, Thaci and Milosevic.
Qualification: The Serb’s counter-attacks upon the KLA terrorist army and its supporters such as Mujahedin are deemed to be attacks.
Spot the odd man out.
For the blinkered Tory (sorry I mean New Labour) faithful and their 12-minute pre/post standing ovation: A clue. Who is the only one to have been indicted to appear before an international court to account for these actions which have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 2:20 pm
I must say Im a little confused again about whats going on within ICDSM but I've given up trying to work out whats going on.I would like to respectfully disagree with Gogol and Mr Artisian. I have stated many times that the concept of justice is a rallying point that appeals to the massess. Frankly Im sorry that more dont feel that way I do.
Not everyone can understand about globalisation or the media or other concepts. People do understand that everybody has the right to a fair trial. We should make everybody imagine what it must be like to be in Milosevic's place. Is it fair? Is the dice loaded against him? Should we as human beings sit idly by without lifting a finger to help?
These are the questions this fruitcake asks you Mr Artisian (and dont be too liberal on the custard).
Alf Bentley
UK - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 2:45 pm
Political manouverings. A palace coup with VK the new target. New ICDSM committes appearing all over the shop in order to crown the take over.Well done EC. As Judge May says (IAC and Vladimir K) 'you've had your time.' Its a move that the 'fan club' are proud of.
Phil Weston
UK plc - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 3:58 pm
Pussy Galore"How long are my men supposed to go without sex and alcohol?" asked Staff Sergeant Spry, a 17 year veteran serving with the 173rd Airborne Brigade near Kirkuk. "If I don't get some pussy soon, I'm going to marry a local girl - or else explode."
Extract above from a Scott Taylor report.
I advise Sergeant Spry and his men to put in for a transfer to Kosovo where all their needs would be more than satisfied by the stock in trade pimping of Kosovo’s new rulers who reputedly supply at least half of the London market. All this puts Blair’s enthusiasm for globalisation in a new light.
I don’t know about the alcohol but they have drugs a plenty.
But do it soon for there is talk of the US pulling out just as Blair’s forces have already done. Does anyone believe all that Blair conference rhetoric about ‘We started the war so we will stay to secure the peace’: Does Blair really intend to waste billions more of British tax payers hard earned money on his immoral self serving wars? I don’t think so: As in Kosovo so in Iraq.
God: the British are so gullible.
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 4:59 pm
Down to three days a week and as amici curiae Mr. Kay (NATO) said, "the accused is supposed to rest, not to work during those four free days, and in that spirit the court can't expect him to compensate for the lost time in court" by so saying stating the obvious for the trio of vegetables a.k.a. the chamber (pot).
Not too far from another final ruling I preddict: "the chamber (pot) finds and rules Mr. Slobodan Milosevic unfit to stand trial for health reasons" where from the Serbs quisliongs will undertake the rest.
Gogol Charlemagne
Shangri-La - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 5:43 pm
Makes you wonder doesn't it? Milosevic gets 6 weeks to present a witness list before the defence phase. On the other hand, the other side has had almost 2 years to prepare a witness list and as Mr May admitted, it's about time the witness list of the other side were finalised.Sounds like a pretty even handed approach. 6 weeks versus 2 years. Go justice, New World Order style!
Would someone please bring back Fascism, Nazism and Communism... at least we all knew what we were dealing with and what to expect from those systems.
This new DEMOCRATIC one is a little murky for my liking.
David
Oztralia - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 7:32 pm
“I don’t have a reverse gear” Tony Blair, 30 September 2003Let me see if I’ve got this right.
Milosevic is on trial because his forces countered an Islamic KLA incursion including Mujahedin - supported by Blair - which was deliberately murdering policemen and civilians regardless of ethnicity in Kosovo. Undoubtedly innocent civilians died as a result of Serbian counter-insurgency measures. Many more were arrested on suspicion and property damaged and destroyed.
In Iraq Blair’s illegal invading coalition force, not the legitimate sovereign authority, is also the object of attacks by a local insurgency. The local Iraqi population is consequently subjected, day in and day out, to reprisals such as follow:
Hawija's hospital director, Dr Jasim Abd Allah Jiburi, accused US troops of shooting on hundreds of demonstrators who pelted them with stones, killing 10-year-old Husayn Dakhil Ahmad and wounding 25-year-old Meaad Abd Allah in the chest.
Eventually commanders called in A-10 Thunderbolt attack aircraft, helicopters and tanks. Angry residents cursed at reporters who entered the fire zone afterwards. One Iraqi man, running away with his wife, said many homes were damaged. "Is this the freedom that we were promised?" he asked. Lt. Col. Jeff Swisher, of the 1st Infantry Division, defended the use of force, saying, "If we are attacked, we are a well-trained and disciplined force, and we will respond."
This war reeks of Israeli revenge and the coming months and years will see Iraq turning into a grotesque mirror-image of occupied Jerusalem or the West Bank and Gaza - replete with the confiscation of land and revenue, the mass detention of civilians, the demolition of homes, the door-to-door searches, the roadblocks and 24-hour curfews. Even the very language and terminology of US Marines is becoming jarringly like that of the Israeli Defense Forces. Mark Franchetti in The Times recounts the words of US Marines who had just machine-gunned 15 civilian vehicles at a roadblock in Nassiriya. Here is Corporal Ryan Dupre venting the same hatred and spewing the same vindictive analogies as the Israelis: “The Iraqis are sick people and we are the chemotherapy. I am starting to hate this country. Wait till I get hold of a friggin’ Iraqi. No, I won’t get hold of one. I’ll just kill him.”
Now does Blair believe it is ‘The right thing to do’ to support Islamic terrorism, including Mujahedin, as he did and continues to do in Kosovo: Or does Blair believe it is ‘The right thing to do’ to combat Islamic terrorism as he claims to be doing in Iraq?
For a man who claims not to have a reverse gear Blair shows a remarkable ability to perform a volte face. Hitler like he is able to mesmerise with his rhetoric but being riddled with contradictions his speeches may be described Macbeth like as: “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
Concerning Blair’s claims to fairness and justice perhaps his New Labour mate Richard May is able to throw some light on how it is he has been appointed to be the presiding judge in the trial of Blair’s former adversary Milosevic?
In any half decent system of justice this case would be thrown out on this count alone.
Is it really necessary to prolong this farce at the Hague any longer?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 8:17 pm
Not only reverse gear , no gear box , no transmission and the only place left form him is history's junk yard .
M P
Rep de Panama - Tuesday September 30, 2003 at 8:25 pm
I despair of the quality of European justice practitionersRuling on the case of a man parading around a German town clutching the head of his sister in-law, which he had just severed, the judge had this to say:
"It was like something from the Middle Ages," judge Gerd Nohl said in his ruling. He accepted suggestions that the accused, a Kosovo Albanian identified only as Burim M., was of diminished responsibility whose moral judgement had been affected by his experiences as a rebel fighting Serb forces in his homeland.
Judge Gerd Nohl’s modern history is also a little flakey: Bosnia 1993
Is it really the case, as many like Blair would have us believe, that everything evil in this world can be judged the responsibility of the Serbs under Milosevic’s rule?
That is the purpose of this Trial of Milosevic?
Peter Taylor
Herts/UK