Savior and Quaid Support Serbs!
n...@sentex.net
an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in their
fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
Hollywood superstar Dennis Quaid in military fatigues with a Serbian flag on
is shoulder!. I need a poster of that!
But the best part, which finally helps destroy the myth that only Muslims and
Croats suffered is that Quaid helps a Serbian woman and her baby - the product
of a brutal rape by Bosnian Muslims. Although Serb soldiers fight burtally in
the film we also see Croat-Muslim crimes. The audience finally sees the truth
that all sides were bad and yes Serbs also suffered immensely.
Oliver Stone gets much credit for bringing this important film out. He has
always presented different views of topics. In Bosnia he refused to accept the
received wisdom that all Serbs are bad and the Bosnian Mulsims and Croats were
the "good guys". Nonsense. Bravo Oliver Stone.! Ziveli Republika Srpska!!!
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
kirill
>
> The latest Hollywood movie coming out for Christmas has Dennis Quaid playing
> an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in their
> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
> Hollywood superstar Dennis Quaid in military fatigues with a Serbian flag on
> is shoulder!. I need a poster of that!
>
> But the best part, which finally helps destroy the myth that only Muslims and
> Croats suffered is that Quaid helps a Serbian woman and her baby - the product
> of a brutal rape by Bosnian Muslims. Although Serb soldiers fight burtally in
> the film we also see Croat-Muslim crimes. The audience finally sees the truth
> that all sides were bad and yes Serbs also suffered immensely.
> Oliver Stone gets much credit for bringing this important film out. He has
> always presented different views of topics. In Bosnia he refused to accept the
> received wisdom that all Serbs are bad and the Bosnian Mulsims and Croats were
> the "good guys". Nonsense. Bravo Oliver Stone.! Ziveli Republika Srpska!!!
Excellent! But let's see how much "controversy" this film
stirs up and the subsequent parade of BiH muslim and Croat
"victims" and assorted quasi-intellectuals like michael. a. sells
affirming the CIA's OBSCENE 90% Serb guilt guesstimate.
(I suspect the media will use this film as a wedge to
get more Serb demonization after most people in the West
have already forgotten the whole Yugoslav civil war).
Scope999
its bankrolled by stones Production company
but written and directed by a Serb .NOT oliver Stone
>> an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in
>their
>> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
lolol Joins?
not Quite
the american seeshis loving wife and child blown to bits at a Parisian
bistro. The culprits are fundamentalist terrorists.the american wastes no time
in taking matters into his own hands. He wreaks vengeance on a mosque of
praying Arabs, wantonly slaughtering them before his friend and fellow soldier
hustles him to safety.
The duo enlist in the anonymity of the French Foreign Legion, learning to
become brutal killing machines.the American, it is obvious, is entrenched in a
state of severe antisocial psychosis _ the shock of his family's death has
traumatized him, and he's become an unfeeling, automatic weapon himself.
he becomes a very efficient executioner, devoid of mercy and utterly capable
of the most atrocious actions. His arena is Serbia
its about how decent and otherwise devoted family man could snap and become a
monstrous instrument of sadistic murder
its an American MERCENARY -
a sick psychopathPAID TO FIGHT Alongside other sick psycopaths(serbs)
lOLOL, AND YOURE PLEASED WITH THIS?
the Irony is, the movie itself doesnt Really take "sides", the movie revolves
around the
American, and how he eventually redeems himself, and regains his Humanity-
He does it by NOT fighting with the Serbs
peterpan
>
> The latest Hollywood movie coming out for Christmas has Dennis Quaid playing
> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
> is shoulder!. I need a poster of that!
>
> But the best part, which finally helps destroy the myth that only Muslims and
> Croats suffered is that Quaid helps a Serbian woman and her baby - the product
> of a brutal rape by Bosnian Muslims. Although Serb soldiers fight burtally in
> the film we also see Croat-Muslim crimes. The audience finally sees the truth
> that all sides were bad and yes Serbs also suffered immensely.
> Oliver Stone gets much credit for bringing this important film out. He has
> always presented different views of topics. In Bosnia he refused to accept the
> received wisdom that all Serbs are bad and the Bosnian Mulsims and Croats were
> the "good guys". Nonsense. Bravo Oliver Stone.! Ziveli Republika Srpska!!!
TO THE CHETNIKS, IT MUST BE TRUE!
peterpan
>
> Its not a "hollywood" movie,
> its bankrolled by stones Production company
> but written and directed by a Serb .NOT oliver Stone
THAT FIGURES, SERBNET AGAIN, THEY SPEND MILLIONS ON PROPAGANDA, AND THE
PENSIONERS IN BEOGRAD ARE DYING FROM STARVATION!
> >> an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in
> >their
> >> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
>
Dickey Hard %=====> - $$$$
peterpan aka sera - moron:
n...@sentex.net wrote:
>
> The latest Hollywood movie coming out for Christmas has Dennis Quaid playing
> an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in their
> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
> Hollywood superstar Dennis Quaid in military fatigues with a Serbian flag on
> is shoulder!. I need a poster of that!
>
> But the best part, which finally helps destroy the myth that only Muslims and
> Croats suffered is that Quaid helps a Serbian woman and her baby - the product
> of a brutal rape by Bosnian Muslims. Although Serb soldiers fight burtally in
> the film we also see Croat-Muslim crimes. The audience finally sees the truth
> that all sides were bad and yes Serbs also suffered immensely.
> Oliver Stone gets much credit for bringing this important film out. He has
> always presented different views of topics. In Bosnia he refused to accept the
> received wisdom that all Serbs are bad and the Bosnian Mulsims and Croats were
> the "good guys". Nonsense. Bravo Oliver Stone.! Ziveli Republika Srpska!!!IF IT WAS MADE IN HOLLYWOOD, ABOUT THE REPUBLIKA SMRTSKA, AND APPEALS
TO THE CHETNIKS, IT MUST BE TRUE!
Now Hollywood is on in shortage of prozak-viagra ... sadly or luckily
move is about something else which obviously you didn't get ...
umri moronu ...
peterpan
MORE MORON, WITH APETITE FOR HEROIN!
spino...@my-dejanews.com
n...@sentex.net wrote:
> The latest Hollywood movie coming out for Christmas has Dennis Quaid playing
> an American who has joined the Serb Army in Republika Srpska to help in their
> fight against Croatian and Muslim extremists. What a wonderful sight to see
> Hollywood superstar Dennis Quaid in military fatigues with a Serbian flag on
> is shoulder!. I need a poster of that!
I suppose it is especially wonderful for Croatians and Muslims to whom the
Serbian flag meant internment and death to see the Serbian insignia on a
Hollywood star. I am sure it is especially wonderful to see said star
violate international law and obtain cheap forgiveness instead of what any
such person, a United States citizen, would deserve under US law, which is
hard time in a military brig.
>
> But the best part, which finally helps destroy the myth that only Muslims and
> Croats suffered is that Quaid helps a Serbian woman and her baby - the product
> of a brutal rape by Bosnian Muslims. Although Serb soldiers fight burtally in
> the film we also see Croat-Muslim crimes. The audience finally sees the truth
> that all sides were bad and yes Serbs also suffered immensely.
No, the truth is that of all three sides involved it was only the governments
in Belgrade and Pale that used ethnic cleansing and rape as strategic
weapons. Whereas there were excesses on all sides, it was only these Serbian
governments that did so in a deliberate policy of securing as much as
possible territory in the former Yugoslavia.
This means that it is silly for individual Serbians to feel offended by these
charges, which the UN has made not against ordinary Serbian soldiers, but
again their leaders. SAVIOR is a big lie in that it obscures this
fundamental point by a visual equation of Muslims in green headscarves,
Croats with a checkered shield, and Serbs.
> Oliver Stone gets much credit for bringing this important film out. He
has
> always presented different views of topics. In Bosnia he refused to accept the
> received wisdom that all Serbs are bad and the Bosnian Mulsims and Croats were
> the "good guys". Nonsense. Bravo Oliver Stone.! Ziveli Republika Srpska!!!
Nobody is saying that all Serbs are bad and the the Muslims and Croats were
"the good guys." The truth is instead that the Serb leadership violated
international law.
Goran
heard a lot of such story here, Serbian crimes are worse then other of same
cathegory, and Serbian rights are smaller then others. It is nothing new.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
Nonetheless, it bears repeating. Only the governments in Pale and Belgrade
actually used systematic internment, torture, rape and murder as weapons in
attaining strategic objectives, and this was a major war crime. Savior, as a
visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy, participates-in
and reproduces this crime. As a result, the Muslim ethnic-Albanian minority
in Kosovo will be AT BEST driven out to Albania which can't even feed or
house its own population. At worst, this population will be subject to a
reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
As to Serbian rights, they are most systematically violated by their leaders,
characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as pathological
liars.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
kirill <kir...@chinook.physics.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>
> Excellent! But let's see how much "controversy" this film
> stirs up and the subsequent parade of BiH muslim and Croat
> "victims" and assorted quasi-intellectuals like michael. a. sells
> affirming the CIA's OBSCENE 90% Serb guilt guesstimate.
The 90% estimate is not a guesstimate but is instead based on careful
interviewing and record-keeping. Independent of the CIA, Cherif Bassiouni of
DePaul University in Chicago constructed a data base which affirms this
estimate, and the United Nations Web pages on the same issues are screen after
screen of Serb-initiated atrocity.
More importantly, however, the difference from the record is that the Serbian
crimes were directed top down whereas it appears that the Croatian crimes were
mostly midlevel in their origination, and the Muslim crimes were individual
acts. The Croatian and BiH crimes were nonetheless evil acts which the UN
should pursue, and will pursue given its known desire to be even-handed.
The CIA has no beef with the Serbs. The United States went to war in 1917 and
in 1941 in part because of domestic outrage at the treatment of the Serbian
nation in 1914 by Austria-Hungary and in 1941 by Nazi Germany. The Secretary
of State under Bush in 1991 REFUSED to recognize Croatia or Bosnia and
effectively James Baker agreed to a definition of a post-Communist Yugoslavia
as Serbian. This resulted in the heavy arming of Serbia and the disarming of
Bosnia (Bosnia had to recruit Sarajevo's Mob to do its initial fighting.)
The CIA does indeed, as does the US government, a big problem with a powerful
Germany and it needs a powerful Yugoslavia/Serbia to keep Germany in check.
It therefore seems to have set aside any distaste for Serbia's strategies in
favor of *realpolitik*. Indeed, given our post-Kissinger support for the
biggest sonofabitch, the CIA may secretly admire the tough Serbs and their
90% batting average. Savior fights the ideological war, by presenting the
possibility that (1) one can be a tough and macho man by shooting unarmed
kids, (2) gazing at the kid's rotting body soulfully is all one needs to do
to make up for the crime and (3) being able to make a nipple from a rubber is
just icing on the cake.
> (I suspect the media will use this film as a wedge to
> get more Serb demonization after most people in the West
> have already forgotten the whole Yugoslav civil war).
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Goran
spino...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<767e1i$19$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <763lgd$2tg$1...@zevs.beotel.net>,
> "Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
>> Incredible sinn is to say that Serbs are the same as Croats and Muslims.
We
>> heard a lot of such story here, Serbian crimes are worse then other of
same
>> cathegory, and Serbian rights are smaller then others. It is nothing new.
>Nonetheless, it bears repeating. Only the governments in Pale and Belgrade
>actually used systematic internment, torture, rape and murder as weapons in
>attaining strategic objectives, and this was a major war crime.
They did? They were only one who did this? Well, for me, who's cousins spend
few years in Muslim concentration camp in Tarcin this is something new. Or
you haven't heard of concentration camp in Celebici? Celebici are near
Konjic. In Muslim-Croat offensive some 7000 Serbs were extort from Konjic
muncipal and some 70.000 from entire western Herzegovina. Manny of these
people were killed. It was necessary to clear the road
Ploce-Mostar-Jablanica-Konjic-Sarajevo, so Muslims could get weapons from
Ploce port.
Or you haven't heard of extortion of Serbs from western Bosnia, in most
muncipals Serbs consisted even 90% or MORE of population. (Drvar, Petrovac,
Glamoc, Grahovo, Sipovo).
But anyway, I'd like to hear elaboration on your statement.
>Savior, as a
>visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy,
His only sinn is that movie sends message that crime is a crime no matter
who does it. That is problem with it, Muslims consider Muslim crimes as
accidental and Serbian as strategy. Ruder & Finn PR agency did a great job,
I admitt. But anyway, I still can not understand why do you think one crime
differs from other one depending who did it. In my humble opinion, crime is
a crime. Muslim fascist propaganda is another thing.
But again, I'd love to hear your elaboration of claim above.
>participates-in and reproduces this crime.
Nonsence. You want to say that movie participates-in a crime? How is that
possible?
Reproduces? Explain please.
Phrases are not enough to me, excuse me.
>As a result, the Muslim ethnic-Albanian minority
>in Kosovo will be AT BEST driven out to Albania which can't even feed or
>house its own population.
I think this speculation has nothing to do with truth. Since terrorist KLA
started fightings in Kosovo, Albanians that live in cities over Kosovo
(cities are controlled by authorities) and in villages where there was no
KLA lived normally and they still live where they lived before. Serbian
police or Yugoslav army did nothing bad to them. Why do you think they would
in future although they did not during the worst fightings?
>At worst, this population will be subject to a
>reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
Explain please?
>As to Serbian rights, they are most systematically violated by their
leaders,
>characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as
pathological
>liars.
Quite true.
But extortion of some 400.000 Serbs from Croatia, ethnic cleansing of most
of villages in Metohija and manny in Kosovo (KLA killed, kidnapped or extort
Serbs), and number of larger or smaller extortions or crimes done by Muslims
and Croats are not something that is not important. Especially because
Serbian leaders mostly violate human rights occasionaly, and Croat and
Muslim gov. and Albanian terrorists violate rights of all Serbs.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
>
> spino...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
>
> They did? They were only one who did this? Well, for me, who's cousins spend
> few years in Muslim concentration camp in Tarcin this is something new. Or
> you haven't heard of concentration camp in Celebici? Celebici are near
> Konjic. In Muslim-Croat offensive some 7000 Serbs were extort from Konjic
> muncipal and some 70.000 from entire western Herzegovina. Manny of these
> people were killed. It was necessary to clear the road
> Ploce-Mostar-Jablanica-Konjic-Sarajevo, so Muslims could get weapons from
> Ploce port.
This doesn't make sense because of the arms embargo. How could the Muslims
get weapons from Ploce given the enforcement of the arms embargo by the
United States Sixth Fleet, the British navy and the Italians? So why was it
necessary to clear the road to do this?
Furthermore, the label "concentration camp" can be stuck on accomodation for
refugees provided by a government with limited or no resources. The label
sticks if it is TRUE that "many of these people were killed", and you'll have
to provide documentation of your claims. This documentation will have to come
from the non-Serbian press since the ex-Communist apparatchiks who run Serbia
have no clue as to what constitutes a free press. The references section of
this post gives my sources for my claims concerning the Serbs. As far as I am
aware, US satellite photographs have discovered mass graves only in areas,
including Srebenica, taken over by the Serbs.
The United States interned Japanese Americans in WWII and this was wrong. It
was not morally equivalent to the Holocaust. For one thing, a photo taken in
1943 on the Seattle waterfront shows a US soldier actually carrying the suit
case of an elderly Japanese woman, and one simply cannot imagine ANY German
soldier doing this for a Jewish person. This shows that moral distinctions
can be made between behaviors that are made falsely equivalent.
Added to this is the announced intentions of the Serbian top level. Slobodan
said in 1987 "they shall never beat you" and he MEANT that the Croatians and
the Muslims would not be able to beat up on the Serbs. He MEANT, in the zero-
sum context of Yugoslavian politics, that the Serbs would beat up on the
Croatians and the Muslims.
> Or you haven't heard of extortion of Serbs from western Bosnia, in most
> muncipals Serbs consisted even 90% or MORE of population. (Drvar, Petrovac,
> Glamoc, Grahovo, Sipovo).
Many of these forced movements were the result of the idiotic contact group
and United Nations. The striped-pants boys draw lines on maps in
India/Pakistan, in the Middle East and in Bosnia, and the next thing you know
Joe Six-Pack has to move. All ethnic groups were subject to forced movement
and to near-forced movement because they were scared of what would happen to
them in a neighborhood dominated by a different ethnic group. This also
happened along the India/Pakistan border in 1948 and it continues to happen
in the West Bank.
It happens because comfortable men like Lord Kiss-My-Ass Owen and Cyrus up-
yours Vance are infected with a post-Kissinger *realpolitik* which treats
basic humanity as a sick joke. These are the same sort of men as CEOs who
sit in comfortable offices and lay off fathers with families to suppport.
These bozos prefer layoffs to research and development, and partition and
cantonization to referendum because it's an easy and simple solution that
does not expose them to the embarassments of technological innovation OR
Wilsonian idealism.
Because democracy, whether economic or political, is to these clowns messy and
embarassing, they tend to quietly ignore and to undercut the wishes of the
people on the ground except as manipulated by thugs. Thus, Alia Izetbegovic
became the spokesman for the wishes of the Bosnian people insofar as he had
something of a thuggish background, whereas a truly democratic and/or
idealistic politician would have been ignored. But in terms of being a
gangster, Alia is a piker as compared to Slobo, who presented the diplomats
with an easy solution.
I am certain that there are areas depopulated by Serbs where before they
constituted 90% of the population. A mathematician knows how to
"gerrymander" a map (draw borders at-will, so that the preferred areas have
whatever majority the mathematician wants to see.) It appears, however, that
in areas occupied by the US Army, the Serbs are back in force, and glower at
the dogfaces as they dig up areas that are 90% Muslim. These are mass
graves, and they were willed into existence by Slobo, Rado and Ratko. (Ratko
Mladic made clear who he was when before Srebenica he killed a pig in the
presence of Dutch peacekeepers to show what a fucking man he was, and that he
was the sort of man who would kill Muslims, Dutch, and the odd pig that got
in his way.)
> But anyway, I'd like to hear elaboration on your statement.
You got it.
>
> >Savior, as a
> >visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy,
>
> His only sinn is that movie sends message that crime is a crime no matter
> who does it. That is problem with it, Muslims consider Muslim crimes as
> accidental and Serbian as strategy. Ruder & Finn PR agency did a great job,
> I admitt. But anyway, I still can not understand why do you think one crime
> differs from other one depending who did it. In my humble opinion, crime is
> a crime. Muslim fascist propaganda is another thing.
If a crime is a crime, then the criminal needs to be punished. But in Savior,
Quaid is not punished. Nor has Slobodan Milosevic been punished.
It's clear to me from reading the posts on soc.culture.yugoslavia that many
Serbs and Serbian-Americans have no brief for Slobo. What they seem to
dislike is a notion of "collective guilt." They are like white Americans who
don't want to have their chances diminished of getting into medical school
because of what their granddaddys did to slaves.
Well and good. But it seems that they, like Oliver Stone, nonetheless
REPRODUCE the will of the top criminals by critiquing, not their leaders but
people who try to bring the world's attention to the larger scale and
deliberate strategic intentionality of Serbia's behavior. What I mean is that
in an alternative universe, soc.culture.yugoslavia would be chock-full of
criticism of Slobodan Milosevic. Instead it is full of essentially
narcissistic whining about the poor Serbs, with only cynicism about Milosevic.
Modern-day politicians seem to want a sort of malpractice insurance.
Pinochet is now an old cuddly bear who some Chileans think is mightily abused
because he cannot travel to London without getting busted (and these
Chileans, like Argentineans in 1982 or Serbs in 1994, are then dragooned into
rah-rah for dear old Buenos Aires High or Santiago U or Belgrade U.) But a
Chilean actually abused by this guy in the 1970s is going to unavoidably take
some satisfaction.
Not only this, as Ariel Dorfman writes in this month's Harper's, it is even
necessary for the criminal himself to suffer for his acts and what is being
done to Pinochet is actually a favor. This is also what Fyodor Dostoevsky
proposed in Karamazov, and it seems to involve subjection of the criminal to
the same sort of pitiless law that he himself represented to his victim.
This is why Savior is such an evil movie (and why it seems, being evil, to
draw out evil in others: as I watched it in a Chicago theater, some
apparently Serbian-American punks tittered as they munched popcorn and
watched the Croatian atrocity: their false consciousness was apparently so
well-evolved that it found "the suffering of the Serbs" itself amusing.)
Instead of extending forgiveness to others, Savior asks for forgiveness for
the filmic ego of the Serb, mis-represented as a cool American.
>
> >participates-in and reproduces this crime.
>
> Nonsence. You want to say that movie participates-in a crime? How is that
> possible?
> Reproduces? Explain please.
> Phrases are not enough to me, excuse me.
See above.
>
> >As a result, the Muslim ethnic-Albanian minority
> >in Kosovo will be AT BEST driven out to Albania which can't even feed or
> >house its own population.
>
> I think this speculation has nothing to do with truth. Since terrorist KLA
> started fightings in Kosovo, Albanians that live in cities over Kosovo
> (cities are controlled by authorities) and in villages where there was no
> KLA lived normally and they still live where they lived before. Serbian
> police or Yugoslav army did nothing bad to them. Why do you think they would
> in future although they did not during the worst fightings?
Slobodan started the fighting in Kosovo in 1987 with his statement "nobody
shall ever beat you." The Serbs at that time felt abused in Kosovo because
Titoism had resulted in a sort of affirmative action in which in the limited
context of a small and out of the way province, ethnic Albanians seemed to get
preference. Big Daddy Tito had accomplished a small miracle, but destructive
children don't like miracles.
Sometimes, in urban areas of the South where African Americans have some
power, local whites feel put down in the same way. The reality is that the
African American power is limited in the wider context of the US, and the
solution for Serbs in Kosovo who wanted to be on top more or less
automatically was to move to Belgrade.
[One reason why American GIs are so puzzled by the Serbs is the ways in which
they themselves put up with racial differences in the military. Beginning in
the late 1940s, the US military was one place in American society where a
white guy had to put up with shit from a black guy. Pity more Muslims
weren't top kicks in the JNA.]
The ethnic Albanians have a legitimate beef. They were completely deprived
of a civil society in 1990 by Serbian nationalist politics although they are
the majority of the population of a poor area, the back of beyond. Most
Serbs don't want to live in Kosovo, only to preserve it as a memorial to a
DEFEAT by Johnny Turk in 1389. I'm sorry, but as regards The Field of the
Blackbirds and Tsar Lazar, I'm like, get a life. The Australians got beat by
the Turks in 1915 but have made no move to retake Gallipoli.
>
> >At worst, this population will be subject to a
> >reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
>
> Explain please?
Here there is no ethnic Albanian government to blame. There is instead the
KLA versus Serbian cops, paramilitary and regulars heavily armed with the
swag from the former JNA. The difference is the vast numerical preponderance
of the ethnic Albanians, and my fear is that a Hitler-style result may occur.
In Bosnia, the Serbs allowed the women and children to flee (for the most
part) and murdered Muslims and Croats identified as the leading men of the
community (a fact which indicates that the crime was planned.) However,
Albania may close its borders and the result will be a Serbian crime against
humanity.
>
> >As to Serbian rights, they are most systematically violated by their
> leaders,
> >characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as
> pathological
> >liars.
>
> Quite true.
> But extortion of some 400.000 Serbs from Croatia, ethnic cleansing of most
> of villages in Metohija and manny in Kosovo (KLA killed, kidnapped or extort
> Serbs), and number of larger or smaller extortions or crimes done by Muslims
> and Croats are not something that is not important. Especially because
> Serbian leaders mostly violate human rights occasionaly, and Croat and
> Muslim gov. and Albanian terrorists violate rights of all Serbs.
>
This reminds me of the way people in the States supported their leaders during
Vietnam. They regarded Nixon and Johnson as lying sons of bitches but ALSO
regarded the actual war protesters as damnfools. This did not make any sense
to me then and it still puzzles the shit out of me. My country was wrong in
Vietnam. Recently released documents and even that insane fool Oliver Stone
have made clear that in 1963 the US did something very evil. It invaded South
Vietnam (and the insane fool Stone may be right: Kennedy MAY have been shot
because the good old boys decided that an Irish pol would not have the belly
for the job.)
In my innocence and my naivete (Catholic background) I took to the streets
(Palm Sunday 1965) and was active in the antiwar movement almost until the end
of the war. I would have had a tougher time of it in Belgrade, I am sure.
All that I have learned since then is the way in which men become powerful,
and get to direct such actions as the 1963 invasion of South Vietnam or
Serbia's rampage.
Many men do not want to be on the ground like Lt. Col. Bob Stewart of the
British army, who witnessed Serbian behavior and (if memory serves me
correctly) was filmed by CNN in 1993 giving a memorable, very British what-for
to a Serbian woman in a car who was, it appears, BOTH a refugee and a
perpetrator: Stewart said to her muttered excuses, if memory serves me
correctly, "very bad luck to you."
Many men do not want to be on the ground like the waitress in my coffee shop
who is a Bosnian Muslim and who counted herself lucky to get the hell out to
Fargo ND, then Chicago.
Many men do not want to be on the ground like a cabdriver who took me to
O'Hare in 1996 and who claimed, believably, to be an ex-deputy-under
secretary of something or other in Alia's government (for the Serbs liked to
murder deputy- under somethings or others at checkpoints, and the Serbs and
JNA kidnapped Alia himself in 1992, apparently to show how cool they were.)
No, many men want to be comfortable and the way to be comfortable is to be at
least a pathological liar. Also to snigger at phrases like "humanity."
Finally to become the spokesmen for goodness and truth when "terrorists"
can't forget the ways in which their granddaddy's house was removed in 1928,
or 1991.
REFERENCES
Laura Silber and Alan Little, YUGOSLAVIA: Death of a Nation. New York,
Penguin, 1995.
Glenny, Misha, THE FALL OF YUGOSLAVIA: The Third Balkan War. New York,
Penguin 1992.
Glenny, Misha, THE REBIRTH OF HISTORY: Eastern Europe in an Age of Democracy.
New York, Penguin 1990.
Honig, Jan Willem, and Both, Norbert: SREBENICA: Record of a War Crime. New
York, Penguin, 1996.
Maass, Peter: LOVE THY NEIGHBOR: A Story of War. New York, Vintage, 1996.
Rieff, David: SLAUGHTERHOUSE: Bosnia and the Failure of the West. New York,
Simon and Schuster, 1995.
Metrovic, Stjepan (ed.), GENOCIDE AFTER EMOTION: The postemotional Balkan War.
London, Routledge, 1996.
Ramet, Sabrina Petra, BALKAN BABEL: The Disintegration of Yugoslavia from the
Death of Tito to Ethnic War. Boulder, CO, 1996.
Ali, Rabia, and Lifschultz, Lawrence (eds.) , WHY BOSNIA? Writings on the
Balkan War. Stone Creek, CT., The Pamphleteer's Press, 1993.
Stewart, Bob, BROKEN LIVES: a Personal View of the Bosnian Conflict. New
York, 1993: HarperCollins.
Michael Lipin
buuuuuuuullllllllllllshhhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!
spino...@my-dejanews.com пишет в сообщении
<767e1i$19$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> ...
>In article <763lgd$2tg$1...@zevs.beotel.net>,
> "Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
>> Incredible sinn is to say that Serbs are the same as Croats and Muslims.
We
>> heard a lot of such story here, Serbian crimes are worse then other of
same
>> cathegory, and Serbian rights are smaller then others. It is nothing new.
>
>Nonetheless, it bears repeating. Only the governments in Pale and Belgrade
>actually used systematic internment, torture, rape and murder as weapons in
a
>visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy,
>and reproduces this crime. As a result, the Muslim ethnic-Albanian
minority
>in Kosovo will be AT BEST driven out to Albania which can't even feed or
>reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
>
leaders,
>characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as
pathological
>liars.
>
Michael Lipin
out country went to war in 1917 only because we wanted to be among victors!
suurrrrrrppppprrrriiiiissseeeee!
spino...@my-dejanews.com пишет в сообщении
<767eup$pb$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> ...
Michael Lipin
Muslims
>get weapons from Ploce given the enforcement of the arms embargo by the
>United States Sixth Fleet, the British navy and the Italians? So why was
it
>necessary to clear the road to do this?"
">The United States interned Japanese Americans in WWII and this was wrong.
It
>was not morally equivalent to the Holocaust. For one thing, a photo taken
in
>1943 on the Seattle waterfront shows a US soldier actually carrying the
suit
>case of an elderly Japanese woman, and one simply cannot imagine ANY German
>soldier doing this for a Jewish person."
didn't kill civilian population. I've got few American posters from WW II
period.. look at those you can say Americans weren't any better than
Germans.
"The references section of
>this post gives my sources for my claims concerning the Serbs. As far as I
am
>aware, US satellite photographs have discovered mass graves only in areas,
>including Srebenica, taken over by the Serbs."
it wouldn't be logical for us, Americans, to support Serbs. Since WW II it's
always been this way. Russians support Cypriots, we support Turks. Russians
support Arabs, we support Israeli. and more recently in the Balkans..
Russians support Serbs, we support Croats, Bosnian Muslims, and recently
Albanians. See my point? I bet it Russians supported Croats our government
would produce 100000000s of sattelite images showing mass graves of
civilians killed by Croats. Geopolitics, honey.
">Added to this is the announced intentions of the Serbian top level.
Slobodan
>said in 1987 "they shall never beat you" and he MEANT that the Croatians
and
>the Muslims would not be able to beat up on the Serbs. He MEANT, in the
zero-
>sum context of Yugoslavian politics, that the Serbs would beat up on the
>Croatians and the Muslims."
beating Croats and Bosnian Muslims. What would US leaders say to American
people? "We shall fear Russians" or "Russians shall never beat you". THINK!
*********************
Ah... this racism. 10-20-40-50 years ago I'd live in South Afirica. Now? You
better pay me good.
spino...@my-dejanews.com пишет в сообщении
<768mls$1qq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> ...
Michael Lipin
it be released in the US?
spino...@my-dejanews.com пишет в сообщении Z
Goran
>The 90% estimate is not a guesstimate but is instead based on careful
>interviewing and record-keeping. Independent of the CIA, Cherif Bassiouni
of
>DePaul University in Chicago constructed a data base which affirms this
>estimate, and the United Nations Web pages on the same issues are screen
>after screen of Serb-initiated atrocity.
It would be extremly interesting to see such data. So, they calculated in
ALL crimes in Bosnia? What was their source for crimes done over Serbs?
Muslim and Croat government?
>More importantly, however, the difference from the record is that the
Serbian
>crimes were directed top down whereas it appears that the Croatian crimes
>were
>mostly midlevel in their origination, and the Muslim crimes were individual
>acts.
Stupid thing to say. HVO commander Tihomir Blaskic (commander of ALL Bosnian
Croat forces) is at Hague at the moment. In Konjic muncipal, RESPONSIBLE
DIRECTLY TO MUSLIM ARMY HEADQUORTERS Muslims extort 7000 Serbs. Famous
Celebici concentration camp was in Konjic and there are signs that even
Muslim president Izetbegovic visited it.
This nonsences about difference between crimes has only purpouse to justify
Muslim and Croat crimes and represent Serbs as all guilty. Well known story.
But if you have some arguments, it would be lovely to hear them.
> The Croatian and BiH crimes were nonetheless evil acts which the UN
>should pursue, and will pursue given its known desire to be even-handed.
Sure thing. Latest show in Hague showed us well about that. Zejnil Delalic,
concentration camp commander was released, and Zdravko Mucic, for nine
killings and two rapings (proved, there were manny more) got 7 years.
>The CIA has no beef with the Serbs. The United States went to war in 1917
and
>in 1941 in part because of domestic outrage at the treatment of the Serbian
>nation in 1914 by Austria-Hungary and in 1941 by Nazi Germany.
Yeah? How come?
>The Secretary
>of State under Bush in 1991 REFUSED to recognize Croatia or Bosnia and
>effectively James Baker agreed to a definition of a post-Communist
Yugoslavia
>as Serbian. This resulted in the heavy arming of Serbia and the disarming
of
>Bosnia (Bosnia had to recruit Sarajevo's Mob to do its initial fighting.)
Absolut nonsences. But let us hear you: how and from where Serbia got arms?
How was disarming of "Bosnia" done?
What do you mean Bosnia? What Bosnia?
>The CIA does indeed, as does the US government, a big problem with a
powerful
>Germany and it needs a powerful Yugoslavia/Serbia to keep Germany in
>check.
>It therefore seems to have set aside any distaste for Serbia's strategies
in
>favor of *realpolitik*. Indeed, given our post-Kissinger support for the
>biggest sonofabitch, the CIA may secretly admire the tough Serbs and their
>90% batting average.
Bullshit. USA did all possible to harm Serbs. In Krajina, Bosnia, Kosovo.
>Savior fights the ideological war, by presenting the
>possibility that (1) one can be a tough and macho man by shooting unarmed
>kids,
Could you elaborate? One can not be?
Queid is bad guy, he becomes good after meeting Natasa.
>(2) gazing at the kid's rotting body soulfully is all one needs to do
>to make up for the crime
This is not true.
>and (3) being able to make a nipple from a rubber is
>just icing on the cake.
Ne kontam.
But one thing, "Saviour" got award from US film academy for global
tolerance.
Goran
Michael Lipin
Goran пишет в сообщении <768qbm$mag$8...@zevs.beotel.net> ...
kirill
>
> In article <763lgd$2tg$1...@zevs.beotel.net>,
> "Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
> > Incredible sinn is to say that Serbs are the same as Croats and Muslims. We
> > heard a lot of such story here, Serbian crimes are worse then other of same
> > cathegory, and Serbian rights are smaller then others. It is nothing new.
>
> Nonetheless, it bears repeating. Only the governments in Pale and Belgrade
> actually used systematic internment, torture, rape and murder as weapons in
> attaining strategic objectives, and this was a major war crime.
With this you have revealed yourself to be either a
completely partisan party or a complete ignoramus.
Croats and BiH muslims ran internment and rape camps
(cf UN website), they used torture and murder for
their strategic objectives.
> Savior, as a
> visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy, participates-in
> and reproduces this crime. As a result, the Muslim ethnic-Albanian minority
> in Kosovo will be AT BEST driven out to Albania which can't even feed or
> house its own population. At worst, this population will be subject to a
> reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
The events of the summer don't point to this scenario.
Only 15% of the Albanian population got affected and
only thanks to the KLA making villages into military
bases. Considering the COMPLETE absence of news stories
about suffering Albanians this winter, it looks like
there wasn't all that much "village burning". Thanks
to NATO meddling the KLA has returned FROM Albania
and has spread its terrorism to the major towns and
cities. Thanks NATO, thanks all you fucking do-gooders.
> As to Serbian rights, they are most systematically violated by their leaders,
> characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as pathological
> liars.
The murder of Serb and Alabanian civilians by the KLA.
The ethnic cleansing of Serbs from KosMet is not
worthy of your interest apparently. You are one
self righteous turd to be posting in this newsgroup.
kirill
>
> In article <3662E7...@chinook.physics.utoronto.ca>,
> kirill <kir...@chinook.physics.utoronto.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Excellent! But let's see how much "controversy" this film
> > stirs up and the subsequent parade of BiH muslim and Croat
> > "victims" and assorted quasi-intellectuals like michael. a. sells
> > affirming the CIA's OBSCENE 90% Serb guilt guesstimate.
>
> interviewing and record-keeping.
Yeah right! In the middle of a war. You must think
everyone is retarded enough to bow in awe at some
estimate from a BIASED party in the conflict. The
CIA has no credibility in making estimates since
the USA supported the cleanisng of 400,000 Serbs
from Krajina by the Croat army with bombing
support of NATO warplanes. I am sure that the
8,000 Srebrenica dead are a SOLID part of this
estimate. Too bad that 5,000 of the 8,000 got
away right after the fall of Srebrenica and
were caught on film (cf NY Times) and that they
still can't find the remaining 3,000 bodies.
Finding 1,700 unidentified bodies (which include
Serb villagers of Oric, the muslim butcher in
charge of Srebrenica) from a 4th of BiH's territory
doesn't cut it as confirmation of the 8,000.
So let's see out of a random sample of
the 90% estimate only a few hundred out
of 8,000 are POTENTIALLY confirmed.
Thus 90% x 10%+/- = 9%+/-. Something
is wrong with the CIA estimate. I think
they are claiming all the frontline dead
among the BIH and Croat forces as Serb
attrocities, but don't count the Serb frontline
dead as Croat and BiH muslim attrocities.
> Independent of the CIA, Cherif Bassiouni of
> DePaul University in Chicago constructed a data base which affirms this
> estimate,
Is this database classified or something? How
does one get access to it? Does one need security
clearance at the CIA?
>and the United Nations Web pages on the same issues are screen after
> screen of Serb-initiated atrocity.
Don't merge the two into one piece of information.
The UN doesn't claim this absurd 90% figure. And
BTW, whereas Serbs allowed reporters into their
camps, the Croats and BiH muslims didn't (I clearly
remember a report on the CBC where a group of
reporters (oddly not the usual lot) was turned
away by Croat forces outside some walled compound).
So, duh, there are less pictures of Serb victims.
Maybe it has something to do with the biased NATO
media that, like Amanpour, would RELABEL Serb
victims as Croats or BiH muslims (hard for
a foreigner to tell them apart).
> More importantly, however, the difference from the record is that the Serbian
> crimes were directed top down whereas it appears that the Croatian crimes were
> mostly midlevel in their origination, and the Muslim crimes were individual
> acts. The Croatian and BiH crimes were nonetheless evil acts which the UN
> should pursue, and will pursue given its known desire to be even-handed.
Some more guesses passing off as facts. Do you
personally know all the BiH and Croat generals
and can vouch for this non-involvement?
If the Hague Tribunal was impartial, the
people setting it up wouldn't make PREJUDICIAL
comments about the ratio of Serb, Croat and
BiH muslim defendents that would potentially
pass before it.
> The CIA has no beef with the Serbs.
This is your vacuuous assertion. Bill "Blow Job" Clinton
stated "I have sympathy for Croatian frustrations" as
400,000 Serbs were being driven from Krajina (which
was NEVER part of Croatia (the state that is, not
the province)) and 14,000 Serb civilians were being
butchered by the Croat army. Croatian soldiers
are really brave shooting elderly Serb residents
of Knin who couldn't get out in time. The USA
chose to side with the Holocaust revisionist
neo-Nazi Tudjman and his regime so spare
the crap about "no beef".
>The United States went to war in 1917 and
> in 1941 in part because of domestic outrage at the treatment of the Serbian
> nation in 1914 by Austria-Hungary and in 1941 by Nazi Germany. The Secretary
> of State under Bush in 1991 REFUSED to recognize Croatia or Bosnia and
> effectively James Baker agreed to a definition of a post-Communist Yugoslavia
> as Serbian.
The USA changed its tune under Clinton.
>This resulted in the heavy arming of Serbia and the disarming of
> Bosnia (Bosnia had to recruit Sarajevo's Mob to do its initial fighting.)
General Lewis MacKenzie has stated that during his
tenure in Srajevo, regular flights of C-130 planes
would come in from Croatia with the patently obvious
purpose of arming the Izetbegovic government. This
whole line about "unarmed" Bosnians reminds me
of the claim that the Afghani mujahedin were fighting
the Soviets with home made weapons. Sorry, it is
a stale propaganda trick. The USA and NATO were on
the side of Croats and BiH muslims starting in
in 1992 (at the latest).
> The CIA does indeed, as does the US government, a big problem with a powerful
> Germany and it needs a powerful Yugoslavia/Serbia to keep Germany in check.
> It therefore seems to have set aside any distaste for Serbia's strategies in
> favor of *realpolitik*.
Lame ass covering. Germany is currently arming the
KLA in its bases in Albania and NATO has a policy
of supporting the KLA which has been upgraded from
a terrorist organization (like the IRA, ETA, etc.
which it IS) to some sort of liberation guerrila
movement. Mybe I should liberate my house from
Canada and declare independence. In the process
maybe I should kidnap and shoot some of my neighbours.
I should get foreign assistance from Iraq, of course.
> Indeed, given our post-Kissinger support for the
> biggest sonofabitch, the CIA may secretly admire the tough Serbs and their
> 90% batting average. Savior fights the ideological war, by presenting the
> possibility that (1) one can be a tough and macho man by shooting unarmed
> kids, (2) gazing at the kid's rotting body soulfully is all one needs to do
> to make up for the crime and (3) being able to make a nipple from a rubber is
> just icing on the cake.
Kissenger stated the obvious and now NATO is on
the side of Serbs. You must define non-support
as the condition when all Serbs are driven out
of Serbia and the land handed over to assorted
squatters.
> > (I suspect the media will use this film as a wedge to
> > get more Serb demonization after most people in the West
> > have already forgotten the whole Yugoslav civil war).
I was right, various shits are making noises.
peterpan
>
> >The 90% estimate is not a guesstimate but is instead based on careful
> of
> >DePaul University in Chicago constructed a data base which affirms this
> >after screen of Serb-initiated atrocity.
>
> ALL crimes in Bosnia? What was their source for crimes done over Serbs?
> Muslim and Croat government?
witnesses and compiled the signed afidavits form each one of them. I
have one such report, I have been able to read only about 50 pages, the
crimes these filthy animals perpetrated on human beings are beyond human
imagination. Nobody, not nazis, not Pol Pot of Cambodia, would have
thought up the various methods of killing and torture the way these dogs
have done.
And yes the crimes by Bosnians and Croats are also mentioned, and
shamefully they are sometimes approachinh the Serbian methodology, but
there were not that many of them.
peterpan
paid serbian propagandist. Once the money runs out to pay he will change
his tune! Excusing unbelievanle cruelties and slaughter which took place
in Bosnia, is just as vile, as perpetrating those crimes.
Dickey Hard %=========> - - $$$$$$$
Mozemo li da procitamo te misteriozne (po tebi) zlocine bosanaca i hrvata - posto
ih nema tolko mnogo ?!??!?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
--
___________________________________________________________
" ... If somebody makes it idiot proof,
Then somebody else will invent a better idiot ... "
T. Elam, 1998 $:-$
___________________________________________________________
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
> "Saviour" got US film academy award for global tolerance.
How nice: that anti-Serb conspiracy must have been asleep at the switch. And
global tolerance is great, but not global tolerance for deliberate Serb
violation, top-down, of international law. No justice, no peace.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Michael Lipin" <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> spinoza, honey,
> out country went to war in 1917 only because we wanted to be among victors!
> suurrrrrrppppprrrriiiiissseeeee!
Michael here inherits one, and only one, explanatory model for international
relations from the elites, owing primarily to the influence of one horrible
fat man, and that was Henry Kissinger. In this explanatory model, it becomes
naive to ascribe idealistic motives to a state, even when the state proclaims
them as did the United States in World War I. Only state self-interest can
be ascribed. It becomes naive to ascribe idealistic motives to an individual
pol. Thus US policy seeks out an alternative to Milosevic who's almost as bad
as he: any one with a vision larger than "more stuff for da Serbs" becomes a
suspect nutbar, even as the United States practically selected Saddam to lead
Iraq in the 1970s, and systematically excluded Iraqi trade unionists and
feminists.
Unfortunately for this model, which treats either normative or descriptive
idealism as naive, it itself suffers from a worse naivety. For one thing, it
is advanced without a clear definition of state self-interest, whereas
Marxism, for all its explanatory failings, has the story that this is the
interest of dominant elites. American self-interest in entering World War I
partly as a consequence of the fact that Serbia AGREED to Austria-Hungary's
bellicose demands in 1914, only to be attacked anyway, is unaccounted-for.
In a combination of cynicism and incompetence which is recognizable in
today's pols, the Austrians shelled Belgrade when the Serbs had effectively
given in to their demands following the assasination of Franz Ferdinand. In
an equal combination of Allied cynicism and incompetence Serbia had to
practically stand alone most of WWI while the Russians got organized and then
left the war, and Britain sent an interesting assortment of lunatics to the
Serb corner to "help" the Serbs. It was Woodrow Wilson's naive idea that
this mess was caused precisely by cynical secret agreements and refusal to
deal in good faith, a failure of practical idealism. Wilson was ineffective,
but ultimately proven right because (as Francis Fukuyama mentions in THE END
OF HISTORY AND THE LAST MAN) democratic states that perforce must deal openly
and honestly (idealistically) with each other don't get into wars.
The claim the *realpolitik* advocates make is that their state-self-interest
works, but it doesn't work. Kissinger's machinations unnecessarily prolonged
the Vietnam war and contributed to the downfall of his boss. British
politicians in the early 20th century abandoned their (nonsensical) ideas of a
civilizing mission that had powered the creation of the British empire in the
19th century and instead bombed civilians from the air in Iraq and slaughtered
Indians, only to lose their Empire. Whereas (whatever the morality of the
creation of the state of Israel may have been) Harry Truman's 1948 recognition
of that state stuck because of an "idealistic" component. George Marshall's
plan for the reconstruction of Europe after World War II would not be espoused
by a Kissinger but it worked to both party's advantage.
What actually happens is that the success stories have an idealistic
component in spite of the motivations of the designers. Tito was no
starry-eyed South Slav idealist but beat heads anyway to enforce neighborly
relations. This created a strong Yugoslavia. Milosevic, instead, acted in
Kosovo in 1987 in the cynical way we expect our politicians to act and the
result is 1998 Belgrade. Those howwible Turks beat heads in order to ensure
that Moslem fundamentalism does not take over their politics as happened in
Algeria because (contrary to the Serbian image of Turks as fanatics) they are
still influenced by Ataturk's idealistic goals for a modern Turkey: Serbs
don't like to recognize how this is the motor of modern Turkish policy and
how it forbids any imperialistic conquests and confines Turkey to Anatolia.
There is cynicism and manipulation and beating heads in these policies, and
no way should Yugoslavia be reconstituted as a Communist state. But they
give the lie to simple-minded cynicism which at one and the same time
declares that the only legitimate goal for a pol (whether Clinton or Slobo)
is to stay in office, and then despises the politician because of the sleazy
things he does to stay in office.
SAVIOR is a post-Vietnam movie in which a Rambo-like character (Quaid)
espouses a mercenary's cynicism. Early in the film, Quaid paras in to some
jungle hell- hole to implement some Frog nonsense (some *mission
civilatrice*.) But note how Frog use-of-force in Chad and elsewhere seems on
balance rather effective, possibly because the idealistic Frog nonsense,
whether L'Humanite or La Mission, seems to organize goals, whereas a cynical
policy is a mere grab for available advantage which overreaches.
Quaid is a clone of the actual soldiers in Vietnam AS RECORDED BY HOLLYWOOD.
The anger of the actual soldiers in Vietnam as recorded by Hollywood is at an
ill-defined Smart Set with draft exemptions or insufficient recognition, in
Quaid's case, of the Muslim terrorist threat. Serbs seem to like Savior
because it retells the 1991-1995 story in these terms.
However, this neglects one reality with which I have some personal
acquaintance. Many of the actual soldiers in Vietnam formed an organization
which still exists today, and that is Vietnam Veterans Against The War. These
guys were not angry at Jane Fonda or draft-dodgers. They instead were angry
against the top politicians who cynically violated the 1956 Geneva accords on
Vietnam, who cynically sparked a South Vietnamese coup two weeks before John
Kennedy's assassination (under suspicious circumstances) and sent them into a
bloody debacle.
The story of VVAW is not told by Hollywood, with certain exceptions that are
overwhelmed by Rambo movies and Chuck Norris who shoots up anything BUT his
idealized father-figure leaders.
Rambo and Quaid are not expected in these post-Vietnam films to come to any
sort of understanding as part of a healing process, only to find some nice
lady in Split or Santa Cruz. Thousands of Vietnam veterans did just this
only to find that said nice lady could not deal with their memories of what
actually happened. Hollywood style films seem to contribute to
post-traumatic stress syndrome precisely because political understanding is
missing. Many vets and others who go over the edge into violence seem to
have subjected themselves to the stories recounted by Hollywood, and this
process was described by Max Horkheimer as "psychoanalysis in reverse."
Many Vietnam veterans have had successful lives: many others have had
problems. I recently attended a VVAW reunion and the leading members of this
group seemed to be psychologically healthy in part because they'd troubled,
post-Vietnam, to come to a deep and political understanding of what happened,
and they had come to some conclusions about right and wrong. Savior
recommends only an ill-defined tolerance and emotional work.
One leading member of this movement has a living room full of almost every
book ever written on Vietnam: he's like my kid brother, another reader, who
while serving in the Gulf requested that I send him a Koran and a history of
the Middle East. Neither the Viet vet, nor my brother, share the lazy
"solutions" advanced by Rambo, the Chuckster, and now Savior. In Savior, we
are encouraged to assent to the destruction of BiH in the name of "tolerance"
and "all sides are guilty", whereas the texts about the war indicate a
preponderance of Serb guilt. It appears that in the States, Vietnam veterans
who bought the simple- minded Rambo account of betrayal by a left-liberal
elite are often the ones with trouble, and Serb vets may have the same
problems.
Michael Lipin
Joe
<spino...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:76bbmp$5on$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
>In article <768qbm$mag$8...@zevs.beotel.net>,
> "Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
>> "Saviour" got US film academy award for global tolerance.
>
>How nice: that anti-Serb conspiracy must have been asleep at the switch.
And
>global tolerance is great, but not global tolerance for deliberate Serb
>violation, top-down, of international law. No justice, no peace.
Exactly, all we want is justice for all. Izetbegovic and Tudjan are less
guilty ? I think that it takes two to fight. All three sides ae guilty,
but...
only Mladic and Karadzic guilty, sorry only accused:)
That stinks bad. Mladic and Karadzic were leaders of Serbs, Izetbegovic of
muslims, and Tudjman Croats so all of them should pay.
Where is justice if only one side is paying bills.
No justice, no Mladic and Karadzic in Hague!
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Michael Lipin" <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> I ASK AGAIN! What is the name of the movie you're talking about and was/will
> it be released in the US?
Savior, starring Dennis Quaid and Nastassia Kinsky was released last month in
the USA. However, it was released to art houses in major cities because most
Americans have no clue as to where Bosnia and Serbia are located. This is
unfortunate, because it makes it appear that Savior's crude and emotional
appeals and concealment of the facts constitute intelligence.
After about one week, Savior exhausted its limited audience in Chicago (for
the most part Serbian punks who tittered at representations of atrocities
against their own people) after about one week and closed down.
I am sure, however, that Savior will clean up in the video and hotel room
circuit, because there is a strong pornographic interest out there in a movie
which shows The Good Guy shooting an innocent kid and getting away with it by
staring soulfully at the lad's bloated body while helicopters shoot at him
(these helicopters are incoherent because NATO enforced a no-fly zone and did
not, for the most part, discharge any ordnance at Da Serbs.)
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Michael Lipin" <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> I ASK AGAIN! What is the name of the movie you're talking about and was/will
> it be released in the US?
[Note: this post is about an important world-wide postmodern issue, and that
is "the ruralization of the cities." It is NOT meant to imply that Michael
Lipin or Goran are "yokels", although I am not so sure about anyone with a
handle like "Dickey Hard."]
One commentator ascribed the predominance in Serbia (and also in Croatia and
Bosnia) of increasingly primitive policies to something he called "the
ruralization of the cities." In this phenomenon, the yokels come in from the
hills and fill up the cafes (and the Internet) and adopt attitudes that they
understand to be skepticism and tolerance, which in reality are a lazy
following of top-level agendas. They then regard statements of fact which
entail resistance to power with what they believe is skepticism.
The Croatian philosopher Stjepan Mestrovic writes that skepticism is the
leukemia of Enlightenment positivism. That is, an idiotic Oliver Stone pose
which discounts a fact produced by the CIA (90% of the crimes in Bosnia
perpetrated by Serbs) because of a thoroughgoing distrust of institutional
claims, especially when they come from an organization which elsewhere has
indeed manufactured lies, has of necessary to revert to a pre-Enlightenment
political non-participation.
A precondition for the active resistance to the Vietnam war was partial
acceptance of news reports, by people who knew that the news media was biased
in favor of the war. The only reason the American people were made aware of
the murder of civilians at My Lai in 1968 was that military men (most of whom
supported the war) brought the attention of the New York Times to behavior
that they knew to be in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, an
American domestic law which incorporated the Geneva conventions for the
treatment of civilians (which have been violated by Serbia as a matter of
grand strategy, by Croatia as a matter of midlevel policy, and by low level
individuals in Bosnia.)
Were opponents of the war as hip and nihilistic as Oliver Stone appears to be
today, they would have discounted the news reports as hopelessly biased and
done nothing for or against the war: if of draft age, they would have taken
the path of least resistance: and, of course, this is what many people did.
They would not have believed military reports of military crimes because they
would have been "principled skeptics" who regarded military epistemology as
something like military music...a contradiction in terms.
The most effective opposition to the war came from people who had a now
unfashionable JFK era idealism which did NOT say "all sides are equally bad".
This level of nihilism, however, is untenable, and a reversion to
fundamentalism then often but not always follows as the PostModern yokel is
unable to deal with the void. Interestingly, this happens in Roman Catholic
countries and in Muslim countries but to my knowledge there is no such thing
as Eastern Orthodox fundamentalism. If this is so (and I invite correction
if wrong) it may be because the Fundamentalist has, by definition, to hold
secular authority to the same single reading of The Book (The Bible, the
Koran, or the teachings of the Roman church). It appears in Russia and in
Serbia that the church is part of the secular authority and as such is
reluctant to allow its believers to get too excited about fundamentalist
readings.
This may help to explain the nihilistic behavior of Serbia's leaders. Now,
Alia and Tudjman are no saints (any more than Bill Clinton is a saint: any
more than secular leaders SHOULD be saints.) Unlike Serbia's leaders,
however, and without being fundamentalists, they have a reading (in Tudjman's
case, of the laws and texts of Roman Catholicism: in Alia's case, of Islam)
which can at least in principle trump state interest. Tudjman's beliefs
about the Holocaust are not forgiveable: but he has the remnants of a
coherent story in his claim that Croatia is a distinct cultural entity with
rights that would have been disregarded in a post-Communist Yugoslavia
dominated by Serbia. Alia should NOT have accepted any help in the form of
fighters from Islamic states, although it is hard to say how he could have
done otherwise in constructing an army from scratch: but his text, the Koran,
gives a basis for real respect for Christianity because it recognizes Jesus
as a legitimate predecessor to Mohammed.
Whereas in Serbia there appears to be absolutely nothing that constitutes a
guide to conduct. It of course may seem naive to expect leaders to be Boy
Scouts, but the very reason why the entire Communist world fell apart in 1989
was precisely the fact that nobody, right down to Vopos standing cluelessly
on top of the crumbling wall, realy believed in the Commie texts anymore,
especially because their nomenklatura leaders seemed concerned only with
filling their goddamn faces at the expense of Joe SixPackski. Nihilistic
worldviews, from that of Henry Kissinger to that of Slobbo Milosevic,
generate policies that are failures by their own lights: Kissinger failed to
bring peace in Vietnam (in reality, the peace was brought by the north in
'75) and Slob-o has made a pragmatic mess of a country which used to make
half-decent cars. It might be said (as is sometimes said of exceptionally
nihilistic CEOs in American corporations) that this is wrong because the guy
simply wishes to survive and he is indeed surviving. However, American
sponsorship of Mrs. Plavsic (sp?) may bring about Slob-o's removal, and
indications are that the latter has a death wish (both his parents committed
suicide.) As such, his nihilistic survival-in-a-void strategy is an actual
failure.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Michael Lipin" <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> Not all Germans hated Jews. SS units were composed of volunteeers. Wehrmacht
> didn't kill civilian population. I've got few American posters from WW II
> period.. look at those you can say Americans weren't any better than
> Germans.
How interesting: moral equivalence between the Americans and the Nazis.
In actuality, Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's book HITLER'S WILLING EXECUTIONERS and
Lucy Davidowicz' book THE WAR AGAINST THE JEWS make clear the moral difference
between American conduct in WWII and German conduct, which is relevant to the
Bosnian situation.
Davidowicz et al. make clear that Hitler proposed to destroy the Jews and
turned the policies of his government to this end. The destruction of the
Jews was a grand-strategic GOAL of Germany.
Goldhagen does confirm that individual Germans could choose to opt-out of
participation in anti-Jewish actions as long as they were members of the
Werhmacht and not of the SS, which was a volunteer outfit for the REAL
nutbars. However, he goes on to make an important point and this is that most
ordinary Germans did NOT choose this option. This proves that MOST Germans
literally hated the Jews and that this vernacular hatred was mobilized by
Hitler, in the same way Milosevic mobilized the hatred of Muslims by ordinary
Serbs.
Now, in WWII many Americans called especially for the destruction of "the
little yellow Japs", especially on the West Coast: and Truman for this reason
was able to use the atomic bomb on Japanese. But these vernacular calls were
NOT part of the grand strategy of the US. Had they been, the US would have
invaded Japan and destroyed its Emperor.
This is the distinction that has to be drawn. And note that Michael has
posters from which he thinks he has learned something. These posters are
probably of the "kill Japs" ilk.
All they show, however, is the danger of using exciting images to learn about
history, just as Savior uses Rambo-like images to get us on the side of a
clueless, murdering clown (Quaid) who deserves nothing more than clink.
> You see.. here's where politics come in. Serbs are supported by Russians, so
> it wouldn't be logical for us, Americans, to support Serbs. Since WW II it's
> always been this way. Russians support Cypriots, we support Turks. Russians
> support Arabs, we support Israeli. and more recently in the Balkans..
> Russians support Serbs, we support Croats, Bosnian Muslims, and recently
> Albanians. See my point? I bet it Russians supported Croats our government
> would produce 100000000s of sattelite images showing mass graves of
> civilians killed by Croats. Geopolitics, honey.
Get a CLUE, babe sweetie. The Cold War ended in 1989, did you know that?
Since then, our concern has been to shore up the regime of a tenth-rate
alcoholic, Boris Yeltsin, so international financial elites can get cheap
labor and markets in Russia. Yeltsin has an interest in siding with Da Serbs
because he has to placate Brown Fascists and aging Commies with "Da
Brotherhood of da Slavs", and in turn we have an interest in supporting his
tenure, as opposed to that of someone who'd speak for the actual suffering
masses of Russia. Therefore Clinton switched from calling for bombing of
Serbia during the 1992 election to his present do-nothing policy.
> He said "they shall never beat you" but he never said anything about Serbs
> beating Croats and Bosnian Muslims. What would US leaders say to American
> people? "We shall fear Russians" or "Russians shall never beat you". THINK!
Tito's policy which Slobbo violated in 1987 was that NO pol would ever speak
ethnically at all, and calls for ethnic defense were interpreted in this
context as attacks. Ethnic policies in the Balkans are a stick of shitfire
with a wick on them for the SAME reason no responsible American pol should
say to whites, as white people, "they shall never beat you." This is because
white folks are a majority in America and to tell this dominant majority that
they are "victims" is to code a call for the victimization of the minority.
In Kosovo, the Albanians are the majority, so the Serbs felt put-upon sort of
like white folks in America who live (by choice) in big cities. But in
Yugoslavia as a whole, the Serbs were on top as evidenced by their ability to
get most of the JNA and its weapons in 1991. Therefore, "they shall never
beat you" MEANT "hey, let's kick the shit out of the Muslims!"
spino...@my-dejanews.com
Ok, the Serbs got the heavy weapons of the JNA and stuff overland from Russia,
whereas Bosnia got maybe a trickle through ports overseen by the Sixth Fleet.
This gives the lie to the victim pose adopted by the Serbs. They were the
heavily armed Neighborhood Bully.
Michael, as to this tuff talk, this rat's ass you give. An American yokel,
Will Rogers, once said "all I know is what I read in the papers." It is well
to be skeptical about what one reads, but on balance Serbia's conduct cannot
be defended. This skepticism about texts (including CIA reports produced by
midlevel readers of satellite imagery who don't care about the Serbs one way
or the other) might seem pretty cool: but it is matched by an absolute
gullibility when it comes to images.
Michael Lipin
spino...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <5HRh2.1$Z73....@news.randori.com>,
> "Michael Lipin" <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> > I ASK AGAIN! What is the name of the movie you're talking about and was/will
> > it be released in the US?
>
> Savior, starring Dennis Quaid and Nastassia Kinsky was released last month in
> the USA. However, it was released to art houses in major cities because most
> Americans have no clue as to where Bosnia and Serbia are located. This is
> unfortunate, because it makes it appear that Savior's crude and emotional
> appeals and concealment of the facts constitute intelligence.
>
> After about one week, Savior exhausted its limited audience in Chicago (for
> the most part Serbian punks who tittered at representations of atrocities
> against their own people) after about one week and closed down.
>
> I am sure, however, that Savior will clean up in the video and hotel room
> circuit, because there is a strong pornographic interest out there in a movie
> which shows The Good Guy shooting an innocent kid and getting away with it by
> staring soulfully at the lad's bloated body while helicopters shoot at him
> (these helicopters are incoherent because NATO enforced a no-fly zone and did
> not, for the most part, discharge any ordnance at Da Serbs.)
>
Michael Lipin
spino...@my-dejanews.com
Michael Lipin <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> hmm........ I visit those art houses here in NY... didn't hear about this
movie.
It may have played in Chicago because of the large Serbo-Croatian population
here.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
Michael Lipin <li...@asan.com> wrote:
> Not nazis... Germans.
>
Your point being? My point was that you appeared to want to equate USA
conduct in WWII which included the internment (but not the systematic murder)
of Japanese-Americans with the German conduct which had according to Lucy
Davidowicz a grand strategic GOAL of cleansing Europe of Jews.
Serbia's ambitions are not as large, but they are of the same "logical type."
Serbia appears to want a large amount of the former Yugoslavia for Serbs.
They differ from the Nazis in that they did not appear to have the physical
liquidation of non-Serbs as a goal, although extreme elements in Serbia may
want this.
Perhaps a tribunal could classify criminal conduct as follows:
Class A: has as an announced or unannounced goal the elimination of
a population (examples: Germany 1933..1945, Turkey in Armenia 1915.)
Class B: has as an announced or unannounced goal the expulsion, not
including the physical liquidation, of a population. Serbia
probably is Class B and not A for two reasons: its policies
seemed to have focused not on the elimination of ALL Muslims
or Croats wherever possible, but instead mixed forced relocation
of women, children and non-draft age men as well as ordinary
working men, with the physical liquidation of the leading males
of communities (doctors, teachers, etc.) However, Serbian behavior
at Srebenica had class A elements both because it was announced
policy (evidence: Mladic's slaughter of a pig in the presence of
peacekeepers) and it was indiscriminate.
Class C: defines full membership by religion or *blut undt boden* (blood
and soil: ethnicity) but invites other groups to live as second-
class citizens (Croatia 1991, Turkish empire in Yugoslavia,
1389-1878, Great Britain from Henry VIII until Reform, 1500s-1830.)
Class D: maintains constitutional formalities including no second-class
citizenship (such as is guaranteed by the 14th amendment to the USA
constitution) but government violates this (USA west coast, 1941-
1945.)
Class E: insufficiently enforces its own acceptance of the Geneva accords
concerning the laws of war by officers, men and military units (USA
1965-1973, Bosnia-Herzegovina 1991-1995, almost every other
military and paramilitary unit of note except the Girl Scouts.)
All of these are felonies but class A is the most serious and class E is the
least serious: the rank-ordering is partly justified by the fact that a higher
level normally implies a lower level (for example: in Nazi Germany, Hitler was
at least willing to expel very wealthy Jews as a Class B felony, and his units
committed thousands of Class E felonies in all theaters of war.)
Lt Calley, the USA officer who carried out an example of a Class E felony in
this proposed classification, was punished (many feel too lightly) by the USA
as it enforced the UCMJ (universal code of military justice) which codes its
acceptance of international law. Bosnian officers and men are being
apprehended for "class E" behavior.
But the problem with Savior is that it COLLAPSES these categories into one in
a spirit of both intellectual laziness and lack of real compassion. Just
making these categories makes my head hurt: how much easier it must be to
look at posters and at films, and to use my Serbian insignia as a chick
magnet in Split or Trieste.
And the taxonomy makes clear that Serbia is right up there, a big winner in
Class B as opposed to those pussies in Croatia and those class E wimps in
Bosnia. Perhaps there is a sneaking pride in this?
Note: I have sometimes maintained a flip tone about what actually is a
terrible tragedy. I do so because the majority of posters to
soc.culture.yugoslavia seem to be rather pro-Serb and I do not want to offend
by a harsh and condemnatory tone, while I do want to write the truth that I
understand as an American.
I think that the reception here of Savior primarily indicates that Serbs,
like Viet vets in America, feel that nobody really understands their
situation or listens to what they have to say, and it's a safe bet that 99%
of all Americans have no clue as to "the field of the blackbirds." Serbians
as a whole, in other words, may have post-traumatic stress: but they do not
realize that one reason why Barry Romo of Viet Veterans against the War
doesn't have PTSD is a roomful of BOOKS, and not of Chuck Norris videos or
ersatz texts like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or the Turner Diaries.
[And how do you tell the difference between the "knowledge" in Fire in the
Lake, or Love thy Neighbor, and The Turner Diaries? Well, you exercise the
facilities that Immanuel Kant describes in "What is Enlightenment?",
facilities for which guys have died at Lexington and Concord. Gawrsh.]
While I think I "know" that Serbian bigshots planned and successfully got
away with a Class B felony under international law, I also know that the only
serious contender to Slobbo is Mrs. Plavsic (sp?) who according to the New
York Times is another Serbian hard-liner. So the first job is to understand
why only the hard line (Serb innocence, or equality of guilt) has any real
acceptance here.
My personal concern is that despite the fact that Americans and others don't
consciously know what went on, they somehow got the message that the new rule
is kick the shit out of people and ignore their suffering. This appeared to
have happened at companies in America where people were laid off: and it even
appeared on Mt Everest post-Bosnia, where some Japanese climbers ignored
dying members of other expeditions on their way to the top. They said "at
18000 feet there are no morals", but their very Sherpa guides thought quite
the reverse about the Goddess-Mother of the World, and in Oliver Stone's own
movie Platoon the hero says at one point, perhaps morality is even more
serious here than back home.
I grew up near a tough Croatian neighborhood where kicking the shit applied,
and one thing I learned is how NOT to fight like an English gentleman (my
rule: run like blazes.) Theodore Adorno wrote that Fascism is, in part, a
tragic return to the "nightmare of childhood" in which the rules were made by
the neighborhood bully, and I don't fucking need this. Reagan did enough to
this country.
Goran
actually.
Michael Lipin wrote in message ...
>who made that movie? I couldnt find it anywhere
>Goran пишет в сообщении <768qbm$mag$8...@zevs.beotel.net> ...
Goran
offence) know shit about ex-Yu, but you have some general ideas of politics,
ethics and society, and then put Bosnia as you imagine it somewhere.
I enyojed reading your post, but most of the things are not related to
Bosnia. Excuse me, but I am going to comment mostly things having to do with
Bosnia.
>> They did? They were only one who did this? Well, for me, who's cousins
spend
>> few years in Muslim concentration camp in Tarcin this is something new.
Or
>> you haven't heard of concentration camp in Celebici? Celebici are near
>> Konjic. In Muslim-Croat offensive some 7000 Serbs were extort from Konjic
>> muncipal and some 70.000 from entire western Herzegovina. Manny of these
>> people were killed. It was necessary to clear the road
>> Ploce-Mostar-Jablanica-Konjic-Sarajevo, so Muslims could get weapons from
>> Ploce port.
>This doesn't make sense because of the arms embargo.
>How could the Muslims
>get weapons from Ploce given the enforcement of the arms embargo by the
>United States Sixth Fleet, the British navy and the Italians? So why was
>it necessary to clear the road to do this?
Sarajevo was surrounded, only connection with outer space was through Konjic
region. It had to be secured.
About arms embargo, it was not obeyed man. How come Muslims survived three
years fighting war without any weapon? Get real. Even US ambassador to
Croatia, Galbreit said that USA let Iran, Croatia and even USA to smuggle
arms to Bosnia, Alija Izetbegovic also was talking about how they are
getting weapons. Embargo was needed so west could say they are against war.
Muslim army had some 100-200.000 soldiers. Do you think they was unarmed?
Just 1st corpus (responsible for Sarajevo and surrounding) before their
number was reduced because Dayton agreement had 50.000 soldiers. They did
few attacks trying to deblockade Sarajevo, and failed ofcourse. These 50.000
soldiers needed supplies, and only way was through Konjic and Neretva
valley. That was their most important route.
>Furthermore, the label "concentration camp" can be stuck on accomodation
>for refugees provided by a government with limited or no resources.
But accomodation for captured men and women who were killed, beaten,
maltreated, raped is sure not accomodation for refugees.
>The label
>sticks if it is TRUE that "many of these people were killed", and you'll
>have to provide documentation of your claims.
Soceity of camp prisoners has the data about that.
But not to bother, three guards from Celebici camp were sentenced in Hague
tribunal, although they got shameless small punishments, (i.e. for 9
killings and two rapes Zdravko Mucic got 7 years), but that is the way how
"fair" Hague does.
>This documentation will have to come
>from the non-Serbian press since the ex-Communist apparatchiks who run
>Serbia have no clue as to what constitutes a free press.
Sorry, but if you are supporting Croat and Muslim official government
stories, they have no greater value then Serbian government at all.
>The references section of
>this post gives my sources for my claims concerning the Serbs.
No it does not. I'll explain in the end.
>As far as I am
>aware, US satellite photographs have discovered mass graves only in areas,
>including Srebenica, taken over by the Serbs.
But they failed to find mass graves in the ground although they had three
years already to inspect. In eastern Bosnia, near Srebrenica and Bratunac
you can often see tems that are searching mass graves of people "killed" in
Srebrenica. They did not found it.
>The United States interned Japanese Americans in WWII and this was wrong.
It
>was not morally equivalent to the Holocaust. For one thing, a photo taken
in
>1943 on the Seattle waterfront shows a US soldier actually carrying the
suit
>case of an elderly Japanese woman, and one simply cannot imagine ANY
>German
>soldier doing this for a Jewish person. This shows that moral distinctions
>can be made between behaviors that are made falsely equivalent.
Ofcourse it is not the same, Germans were killing Jews, Americans (I
presume?) just interned Japanese Americans. Although it was purely racist
decision because German or Italian Americans weren't interned.
But this story has nothing to do with Bosnia.
>Added to this is the announced intentions of the Serbian top level.
Slobodan
>said in 1987 "they shall never beat you" and he MEANT that the Croatians
and
>the Muslims would not be able to beat up on the Serbs. He MEANT, in the
zero-
>sum context of Yugoslavian politics, that the Serbs would beat up on the
>Croatians and the Muslims.
Absolut nonsence. Another argument that you mostly know nothing about ex-Yu.
How the heck "they shall never beat you" can mean "We are going to beat
them"?!?! Shameless lie.
Another thing, Milsoevic said this in Kosovo polje, to local Serbs
maltreated by Albanian autonomy government. Had nothing to do with Muslims
or Croats. You know nothing.
>> Or you haven't heard of extortion of Serbs from western Bosnia, in most
>> muncipals Serbs consisted even 90% or MORE of population. (Drvar,
>> Petrovac, Glamoc, Grahovo, Sipovo).
>Many of these forced movements were the result of the idiotic contact group
>and United Nations. The striped-pants boys draw lines on maps in
>India/Pakistan, in the Middle East and in Bosnia, and the next thing you
know
>Joe Six-Pack has to move. All ethnic groups were subject to forced
movement
>and to near-forced movement because they were scared of what would happen
to
>them in a neighborhood dominated by a different ethnic group. This also
>happened along the India/Pakistan border in 1948 and it continues to happen
>in the West Bank.
>It happens because comfortable men like Lord Kiss-My-Ass Owen and Cyrus up-
>yours Vance are infected with a post-Kissinger *realpolitik* which treats
>basic humanity as a sick joke.
Yeah, we Serbs felt that good last few years.
>These are the same sort of men as CEOs who
>sit in comfortable offices and lay off fathers with families to suppport.
>These bozos prefer layoffs to research and development, and partition and
>cantonization to referendum because it's an easy and simple solution that
>does not expose them to the embarassments of technological innovation OR
>Wilsonian idealism.
>Because democracy, whether economic or political, is to these clowns messy
and
>embarassing, they tend to quietly ignore and to undercut the wishes of the
>people on the ground except as manipulated by thugs.
Hm, it had nothing to do with drawn lines, lines were drawn later in
November 1995. Before that Muslims and Croats extort some 300.000 people
from Croatia and maybe some 150.000 from western Bosnia. Ethnic cleansing.
After agreement more Serbs had to move, i.e. some 70.000 people from Serbian
suburbs arround Sarajevo.
>Thus, Alia Izetbegovic
>became the spokesman for the wishes of the Bosnian people
Never. Just of Bosnian Muslims. Bosnian Serbs and Croats had their
leadership since first post-communist elections in Bosnia, through whole
war, and they have them now too.
>insofar as he had
>something of a thuggish background, whereas a truly democratic and/or
>idealistic politician would have been ignored. But in terms of being a
>gangster, Alia is a piker as compared to Slobo, who presented the diplomats
>with an easy solution.
I can't understand your slang too good. Alija Izetbegovic is author of book
that is proposing installation of islamic state (Iran type), he was member
of islamic fundamentalist group "Fedayin e Islami".
He and his Muslims wanted to controll whole Bosnia and subjugate Serbs and
Croats. Therefore, Muslims ("UNARMED") troops were fighting with Serbs all
the time and occasionally with Croats. Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats.
>I am certain that there are areas depopulated by Serbs where before they
>constituted 90% of the population. A mathematician knows how to
>"gerrymander" a map (draw borders at-will, so that the preferred areas have
>whatever majority the mathematician wants to see.)
In few muncipals Serbs had almost 90% majority. That is a fact you can not
deny.
>It appears, however, that
>in areas occupied by the US Army, the Serbs are back in force, and glower
>at the dogfaces as they dig up areas that are 90% Muslim.
As I am informed, Republic of Srpska (Serbain part of Bosnia) is covered
mostly with Brittish (nortwest), French (east) and some Spanish in the
south. What aerea you are talking bout?
>These are mass graves,
Until now, one, 200 Muslim corpses near Zvornik. On the other hand, 180
Serbs killed in Mrkonjic grad, mass grave found, and over 60 bodies of Serbs
killed in Sarajevo till now, and some 30 Serbs killed in Kazani near
Sarajevo. Although I am not sure were there 29 0r 30. Man that worked in
exhumation of victims stated "There were 29 or 30 bodies. I can't tell for
sure because we were one body short, an extra head was found".
You really know nothing, don't you? Just what mainstream media tell you.
>and they were willed into existence by Slobo, Rado and Ratko.
>(Ratko
That has to be proved yet.
>Mladic made clear who he was when before Srebenica he killed a pig in the
>presence of Dutch peacekeepers to show what a fucking man he was, and
>that he
>was the sort of man who would kill Muslims, Dutch, and the odd pig that got
>in his way.)
Eastern Bosnia is mostly rural, we the Serbs kill pigs often, we brew them
and eat them. Mladic is originaly from Kalinovik in Herzegovina, small town,
almost rural, so he has peasant background. He was slaughtering pig, my
relatives do that all the time, and even I slaughtered one recently. Big
deal, they made up story of nothing.
>> >Savior, as a
>> >visual equation of Muslim crimes with Serbian grand strategy,
>> His only sinn is that movie sends message that crime is a crime no matter
>> who does it. That is problem with it, Muslims consider Muslim crimes as
>> accidental and Serbian as strategy. Ruder & Finn PR agency did a great
job,
>> I admitt. But anyway, I still can not understand why do you think one
crime
>> differs from other one depending who did it. In my humble opinion, crime
is
>> a crime. Muslim fascist propaganda is another thing.
>If a crime is a crime, then the criminal needs to be punished.
Exactly.
>But in Savior, Quaid is not punished.
Well, that is idea of a story. A soldier with hardened heart saves young
girl and her baby, it is heas change, katarza, he does something good after
doing evil, things. That is idea of a movie.
>Nor has Slobodan Milosevic been punished.
Neither were Franjo Tudjman or Alija Izetbegovic.
>It's clear to me from reading the posts on soc.culture.yugoslavia that many
>Serbs and Serbian-Americans have no brief for Slobo. What they seem to
>dislike is a notion of "collective guilt."
What is a brief? Condemnation?
>They are like white Americans who
>don't want to have their chances diminished of getting into medical school
>because of what their granddaddys did to slaves.
Nothing similar. For God's sake man, we have our own history, stop
explaining our story by comparing us with something else. Did you know that
some 700.000 Serbs were killed by Nazi Croats in WW2? That is OUR history.
But if because of your ignorance need comparation, compare Slobo with Harry
Truman. Truman droped nukes onto Japan, and he was wrong. But that does not
means Americans shoudn't fight fascism.
Although Milosevic did nothing similar to Hary.
>Well and good. But it seems that they, like Oliver Stone, nonetheless
>REPRODUCE the will of the top criminals by critiquing, not their leaders
but
>people who try to bring the world's attention to the larger scale and
>deliberate strategic intentionality of Serbia's behavior. What I mean is
that
>in an alternative universe, soc.culture.yugoslavia would be chock-full of
>criticism of Slobodan Milosevic. Instead it is full of essentially
>narcissistic whining about the poor Serbs, with only cynicism about
>Milosevic.
You are following wrong newsgroup. Here in soc.culture.yugoslavia we mostly
quarrel with Muslims, Croats and some emigrant fanatics God knows from
where, about recent war. The truth is that Serbs (NOR Milosevic) are guilty
(or only guilty) for recent war. You learnd some phrases about Milosevic by
heart, probably Ruder & Finn PR agency had to do something with that, but
spare us of that shit, please. We know situation, pardon me, but a bit
better then you.
But in newsgroup called yu.forum.politika we are discussing our internal
politics, and there 99.9% articls are attacking Milosevic. Once again, you
know nothing about Yugoslavia.
>Modern-day politicians seem to want a sort of malpractice insurance.
>Pinochet is now an old cuddly bear who some Chileans think is mightily
abused
>because he cannot travel to London without getting busted (and these
>Chileans, like Argentineans in 1982 or Serbs in 1994, are then dragooned
>into
>rah-rah for dear old Buenos Aires High or Santiago U or Belgrade U.) But a
>Chilean actually abused by this guy in the 1970s is going to unavoidably
>take some satisfaction.
I have problems understanding you here, English is not mu native language.
>Not only this, as Ariel Dorfman writes in this month's Harper's, it is even
>necessary for the criminal himself to suffer for his acts and what is being
>done to Pinochet is actually a favor. This is also what Fyodor Dostoevsky
>proposed in Karamazov, and it seems to involve subjection of the criminal
to
>the same sort of pitiless law that he himself represented to his victim.
Fine with me, although it is not too Christian. It could be as evening with
bastard.
>This is why Savior is such an evil movie
Excuse me, but you sound immature.
>(and why it seems, being evil, to
>draw out evil in others: as I watched it in a Chicago theater, some
>apparently Serbian-American punks tittered as they munched popcorn and
>watched the Croatian atrocity: their false consciousness was apparently so
>well-evolved that it found "the suffering of the Serbs" itself amusing.)
In what way?
>Instead of extending forgiveness to others, Savior asks for forgiveness for
>the filmic ego of the Serb, mis-represented as a cool American.
Ask forgivness for what?
>Slobodan started the fighting in Kosovo in 1987 with his statement "nobody
>shall ever beat you."
That is quite extraordinary way to start fighting, isn't it? He promissed to
evil Serbs that poor Albanians won't beat them anymore? Poor Albanians,
goddamned Sloba.
>The Serbs at that time felt abused in Kosovo because
>Titoism had resulted in a sort of affirmative action in which in the
>limited
>context of a small and out of the way province, ethnic Albanians seemed to
>get
>preference. Big Daddy Tito had accomplished a small miracle, but
>destructive children don't like miracles.
Ufff... Albanians got their autonomy (de facto, all government) and they
used it to maltreate Serbs, extort, kill, leave without job, and tried to
separate Kosovo from Serbia. Albanians have 200 years history of maltreating
Serbs in Kosovo hombre. They just continued. Albanian fascist from last
century had idea of Great Albania since last century, consisted of four
sanjaks (Turksih administrative divisions), Janjinski, Bitoljski, Skadarski
and Kosovski, although they consisted 44% of population there. That idea
lives until today.
Slobo did not started fighting, it was started last year by killing two
policemen in Drenica region in Kosovo.
>Sometimes, in urban areas of the South where African Americans have some
>power, local whites feel put down in the same way. The reality is that the
>African American power is limited in the wider context of the US, and the
>solution for Serbs in Kosovo who wanted to be on top more or less
>automatically was to move to Belgrade.
Again comparation. I don't want to think about it, I don't know situation in
US south same as you don't know situation in Serbia's south.
>[One reason why American GIs are so puzzled by the Serbs
Puzzled means confused?
>is the ways in which
>they themselves put up with racial differences in the military. Beginning
>in
>the late 1940s, the US military was one place in American society where a
>white guy had to put up with shit from a black guy. Pity more Muslims
>weren't top kicks in the JNA.]
I don't get it. Please avoid so much slang, I am not too familiar with it.
>The ethnic Albanians have a legitimate beef.
A meet of a cow? Beef?
"Legitimate"? Based on laws? Nothing similar friend.
>They were completely deprived
>of a civil society in 1990 by Serbian nationalist politics although they
>are the majority of the population of a poor area, the back of beyond.
Bullshit. Albanians are boycotting state of Serbia, because they wanted to
declare independence. They boycott schools, elections, province elections,
news, companies, health service. Although when in need they use health
service whenever they want.
And not all Albanians boycott state at all. Manny of them are still working
in state owned companies, public services etc. These days they are often
being shot as "colaborationists" by KLA. Nobody forced Albanians to nothing,
they are boycotting state of Serbia, that is whole story. Or you know
better?
>Most
>Serbs don't want to live in Kosovo, only to preserve it as a memorial to a
>DEFEAT by Johnny Turk in 1389.
Bullshit. Families of Kosovo Serbs that live there for centuries. Serbs
where majority in Kosovo until 1878. (Serbian-Turkish wars) and in Metohija
until Crimmean war (1836. if I recall). They were under constant terror of
Muslim Albanians because they were Christians in Turkish empire. Serbs
living in Kosovo now are descendants of families that lived there for
centuries. In 1921. and later number of Serbs was bigger in Kosovo because
some Serbs were settled there. But Albanian fascists extort all of them in
WW2 and settled Albanians from Albania. After the war, communist government
forbid to all Serbs extort from Kosovo to go back to their homes. Did you
know any of this?
>I'm sorry, but as regards The Field of the
>Blackbirds and Tsar Lazar, I'm like, get a life. The Australians got beat
>by the Turks in 1915 but have made no move to retake Gallipoli.
That has nothing to do with Kosovo. Kosovo has great emotional value for all
Serbs, but that is just one motivaton for us to fight to keep it. But today
troubles has nothing to do with it. Problems are: Albanian national minority
(that has always been national minorityi in Serbia) wants to steal part of
territory of Serbia and create independent fascist ethnically clean state.
Serbian authorities are fighting separatists and terrorists. Capisc?
>> >At worst, this population will be subject to a
>> >reproduction of the events of 1991..1995 in Bosnia.
>> Explain please?
>Here there is no ethnic Albanian government to blame. There is instead the
>KLA versus Serbian cops, paramilitary and regulars heavily armed with the
>swag from the former JNA.
So what?
>The difference is the vast numerical preponderance
>of the ethnic Albanians, and my fear is that a Hitler-style result may
>occur.
Why should it? It did not until now. There are just too much Albanians in
Kosovo anyone would try to extort or exterminate them, neither is anyone
trying to. Besides, number of Albanians are supporting Serbian government.
> In Bosnia, the Serbs allowed the women and children to flee (for the most
>part) and murdered Muslims and Croats identified as the leading men of the
>community (a fact which indicates that the crime was planned.)
Where did you get this information? Serbs did such things all the time. Here
is example of place where I am from. There was a Muslim village near us.
They had arms before the war and so did we. One night they attacked us. Next
day our army came with tanks and other weapon and extort all of them to
Sarajevo. Men, women and children. Noone was shot or anything.
Today when war is over we meet our neighbours again and talk as friends, as
we were before the war.
Somewhere bad things happened, to Muslims, Croats and Serbs. C'est la
guerre. War crimes. There are some in every war. Criminals should be
punished. Full stop.
>However, Albania may close its borders and the result will be a Serbian
>crime against humanity.
hahaha.... Albania may close it's borders?!?!?!?! Albania can do shit.
Albania is banana republic, state in turmoil, their border patrols are
pathetic, in every fifth border post there are some lausy payed and lausy
disciplined soldiers. North Albania is wild west, Tirana is mostly not
controlling any of it. Their border is easy to pass. Just Yugoslav border
patrols are securing it, and have problems to discover all illegal passes of
terrorists and arms smugglers. Albania can not close border even if they'd
want.
But that border is of no significance for civil population. During the
fightings civilians was passing to Albania in very small number. Most of
them left for larger Kosovo cities UNDER CONTROL OF SERBIAN FORCES where
there was no fightings, and in certain number to Montenegro. There is no
danger of Serbian crimes against humanity in any larger scale.
>> >As to Serbian rights, they are most systematically violated by their
>> leaders,
>> >characterised even by their striped-pants diplomatic friends as
>> pathological
>> >liars.
>> Quite true.
>> But extortion of some 400.000 Serbs from Croatia, ethnic cleansing of
most
>> of villages in Metohija and manny in Kosovo (KLA killed, kidnapped or
extort
>> Serbs), and number of larger or smaller extortions or crimes done by
Muslims
>> and Croats are not something that is not important. Especially because
>> Serbian leaders mostly violate human rights occasionaly, and Croat and
>> Muslim gov. and Albanian terrorists violate rights of all Serbs.
>This reminds me of the way people in the States supported their leaders
during
>Vietnam. They regarded Nixon and Johnson as lying sons of bitches but ALSO
>regarded the actual war protesters as damnfools. This did not make any
>sense to me then and it still puzzles the shit out of me.
Comparation agian. USA had nothing to do in Vietnam, it is some 10,000 km
away and fully Vietnamese.
In Bosnia and Croatia Serbs fought for territories we inhabit for centuries
and where others tried to take over our land and our homes. We had to
protect our lifes and our homes, and without help of Serbia we could mostly
do nothing. Unfortunatly in Serbia Milosevic was in charge, but we had no
choice, take help where you find it.
>My country was wrong in
>Vietnam. Recently released documents and even that insane fool Oliver
Stone
>have made clear that in 1963 the US did something very evil. It invaded
South
>Vietnam (and the insane fool Stone may be right: Kennedy MAY have been shot
>because the good old boys decided that an Irish pol would not have the
>belly for the job.)
Weren't US army instructors there after Diem from S.V. called them?
>In my innocence and my naivete (Catholic background)
Catholic background certainly means no innocence and naivete in Balkans, and
I presume in Southern America either. But Ok.
>I took to the streets
>(Palm Sunday 1965) and was active in the antiwar movement almost until the
>end of the war.
Eh... whatever. Funny thing, you were on same side as Yugoslav communists,
Tudjman and Milosevics teachers. I still have sticker saying "Help to heroic
people of Viet Nam".
> I would have had a tougher time of it in Belgrade, I am sure.
Ofcourse. US agression towards Vietnam (or whatever) was some high politics
shit. In Yug. it was just another war in a row. Every 50 year we have one.
Serbs were fighting for their rights, lives, homes and property. Nothing
similar hombre. So, your leftist stuff has nothing to do with us.
>All that I have learned since then is the way in which men become powerful,
>and get to direct such actions as the 1963 invasion of South Vietnam or
>Serbia's rampage.
I don't get it?
>Many men do not want to be on the ground like Lt. Col. Bob Stewart of the
>British army, who witnessed Serbian behavior and (if memory serves me
>correctly) was filmed by CNN in 1993 giving a memorable, very British
>what-for
>to a Serbian woman in a car who was, it appears, BOTH a refugee and a
>perpetrator: Stewart said to her muttered excuses, if memory serves me
>correctly, "very bad luck to you."
Serb WOMAN was refugee and perpetrator at the same time?!?! And you bought
that shit? Excuse me, but in Serbia we call such idiotic stories "fucking in
a healthy brain".
>Many men do not want to be on the ground like the waitress in my coffee
shop
>who is a Bosnian Muslim and who counted herself lucky to get the hell out
>to Fargo ND, then Chicago.
Ofcourse. We lived quite nice in Bosnia before the war, and then politicians
started fucken shit nobody needed.
>Many men do not want to be on the ground like a cabdriver who took me to
>O'Hare in 1996 and who claimed, believably, to be an ex-deputy-under
>secretary of something or other in Alia's government (for the Serbs liked
to
>murder deputy- under somethings or others at checkpoints, and the Serbs and
>JNA kidnapped Alia himself in 1992, apparently to show how cool they were.)
What are you saying man?!?!?! What kind of a English is this?
>No, many men want to be comfortable and the way to be comfortable is to be
>at least a pathological liar.
??
>Also to snigger at phrases like "humanity."
>Finally to become the spokesmen for goodness and truth when "terrorists"
>can't forget the ways in which their granddaddy's house was removed in
>1928, or 1991.
What are you talking about hombre? But I remember one thing, my relatives
extrot by Muslims in 1992.
About your references: who are these people, why all these books were
printed after 1990., who payed their printing? Why do you think these are
not just political pamflets? What makes them trustworthy? What are sources
of these people? Was it some shit published by Ruder & Finn. Is it a problem
to print bullshit book today sponsored by some foreign gov.? Who are these
people and what are their sources?
You gave me 0 reasons to believe them until now.
Goran
>Serbia's ambitions are not as large, but they are of the same "logical
type."
>Serbia appears to want a large amount of the former Yugoslavia for Serbs.
Serbia wants nothing. Local Serbs from Bosnia and Croatia wanted
independence from Bosnia and Croatia that already declared independence from
SFRJ.
>They differ from the Nazis in that they did not appear to have the physical
>liquidation of non-Serbs as a goal, although extreme elements in Serbia may
>want this.
There are criminals and lunatics everywhere.
>Perhaps a tribunal could classify criminal conduct as follows:
> Class A: has as an announced or unannounced goal the elimination of
> a population (examples: Germany 1933..1945, Turkey in Armenia
1915.)
>
> Class B: has as an announced or unannounced goal the expulsion, not
> including the physical liquidation, of a population. Serbia
> probably is Class B and not A for two reasons: its policies
> seemed to have focused not on the elimination of ALL Muslims
> or Croats wherever possible, but instead mixed forced relocation
> of women, children and non-draft age men as well as ordinary
> working men, with the physical liquidation of the leading males
> of communities (doctors, teachers, etc.) However, Serbian
behavior
> at Srebenica had class A elements both because it was announced
> policy (evidence: Mladic's slaughter of a pig in the presence of
> peacekeepers) and it was indiscriminate.
a) All this stuff are mostly Muslim gov. claims and theories, they have to
be proved yet.
b)We eat pigs, that is why we slaughter them. (some evidence, pathetic)
Most Serbian crimes in this war were E class.
>Lt Calley, the USA officer who carried out an example of a Class E felony
in
>this proposed classification, was punished (many feel too lightly) by the
USA
>as it enforced the UCMJ (universal code of military justice) which codes
its
>acceptance of international law.
Calley got prison for life with heavy labor, then after apply ten years, and
at the end he was released. While trial was in progress, he was in house
prison, so he did not spend a day in prison.
>Bosnian officers and men are being apprehended for "class E" behavior.
Bullshit. Polithics. Who made this divide? On what basis?
It is just propaganda: Muslims are good guys, so their crimes are E class,
and Serbs are bad guys, so their crimes are B class.
i.e. Konjic muncipal was under direct controll of Muslim army generalstuff,
because their regional centar (Mostar) was under Croat's controll. There
they had concectration camp (trialed in Hague) and extort some 7000 Serbs.
Hague tribunal led this case shameless, i.e. they let Delalic to reveal
identity of all protected witnesses.
>But the problem with Savior is that it COLLAPSES these categories into one
in
>a spirit of both intellectual laziness and lack of real compassion. Just
>making these categories makes my head hurt: how much easier it must be to
>look at posters and at films, and to use my Serbian insignia as a chick
>magnet in Split or Trieste.
Split and Trieste are not part of Serbia.
Saviour is not about Geneva convention but about one imagined person.
>And the taxonomy makes clear that Serbia is right up there, a big winner in
>Class B as opposed to those pussies in Croatia and those class E wimps in
>Bosnia. Perhaps there is a sneaking pride in this?
You should learn something about Croat extortion of Serbs and put them in
some category.
This bullshit about macho Serbs is not worth commenting, I am wandering
where did you see that?
>Note: I have sometimes maintained a flip tone about what actually is a
>terrible tragedy. I do so because the majority of posters to
>soc.culture.yugoslavia seem to be rather pro-Serb and I do not want to
offend
>by a harsh and condemnatory tone, while I do want to write the truth that I
>understand as an American.
It is my personal impression that you don't understand too good. I.e. check
number of Serbs in Sarajevo before and now.
>I think that the reception here of Savior primarily indicates that Serbs,
>like Viet vets in America, feel that nobody really understands their
>situation or listens to what they have to say,
Complete truth. But I saw nothing similar in the movie.
>and it's a safe bet that 99%
>of all Americans have no clue as to "the field of the blackbirds."
Serbians
>as a whole, in other words, may have post-traumatic stress: but they do not
>realize that one reason why Barry Romo of Viet Veterans against the War
>doesn't have PTSD is a roomful of BOOKS, and not of Chuck Norris videos or
>ersatz texts like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or the Turner
Diaries.
Neither Serbs are Nazis. What does this means anyway?
>While I think I "know" that Serbian bigshots planned and successfully got
>away with a Class B felony under international law,
Phrases, but I'd love to hear your arguments?
>I also know that the only
>serious contender to Slobbo is Mrs. Plavsic (sp?) who according to the New
>York Times is another Serbian hard-liner. So the first job is to
understand
>why only the hard line (Serb innocence, or equality of guilt) has any real
>acceptance here.
Mrs. Plavsic is not contender to Sloba. Mrs. Plavsic is in Republic of
Srpska, and Sloba is in FRYugoslavia, different country.
Serb innocence or equality of guilt are very close to truth hombre, that's
why it is so popular in Serbia.
That does not mean hard line, just Serbian rights in Bosnia and Croatia is
something most Serbs think has to be obeyed.
Did you heard of anti Sloba rallies in Serbia two years ago?
Do you know what was percentage of Serbs, Croats and Muslims in Bosnia
before the war?
>I grew up near a tough Croatian neighborhood where kicking the shit
applied,
>and one thing I learned is how NOT to fight like an English gentleman (my
>rule: run like blazes.) Theodore Adorno wrote that Fascism is, in part, a
>tragic return to the "nightmare of childhood" in which the rules were made
by
>the neighborhood bully, and I don't fucking need this. Reagan did enough to
>this country.
But USA are whole world's bully, and Croatia is bullying Serbs in Croatia,
and Bosnian Muslims tried to do that in Bosnia too.... shouldn't you support
Serbs?
Goran
they are just toooooo long.
Michael Lipin
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
>appeals not to use too much American slang
Ok.
>Goran: Sarajevo was surrounded, only connection with outer space was through …
This does not imply large-scale troop movements that would necessitate
forcible movements of population, and this makes nonsense of the original
claim.
Serbian strategy, which was to occupy large tracts of territory outside
of Serbia where ethnic Serbians lived, necessitated more forcible
movements of populations than Bosnian strategy, which was to get
corridors to the Adriatic and defend the areas around Sarajevo. So
even if both sides intended to abuse civilians, Serbia had more
opportunities and more motivation to do so.
There is also a difference between levels of force in forcible movements of
populations. People who flee owing to fear for their lives are victims: even
victimizers who flee revenge are partialy victims as well as victimizers (see
extended discussion of this issue below, in relation to Co. Bob Stewart.)
But Serbian forced relocation in Bosnia was the most serious since it forced
people out of their homes as part of strategy. Serbians who fled the Krajina
district in fear of Croatia in 1995 were not as seriously victimized as
Moslems expelled from Banja Luka.
>About arms embargo, it was not obeyed man.
Nonetheless, it resulted in only a small number of arms going to Bosnia,
whereas the heavy weapons of the former JNA went to Serbia. I get the
impression in this exchange that some posters are dealing in cardboard facts
and cardboard constructs, ideas that are taken from over-simplified press
reports from government-controlled papers, OR Hollywood-style, oversimplified
accounts.
The arms embargo was not fully obeyed but nonetheless it had an effect, and it
had a larger effect on the Bosnians than on the Serbians because the heavy
weapons of the former Yugoslavian National Army went to Serbia.
>How come Muslims survived three years fighting war without any weapon?
Perhaps they were fighting for the survival given the demonstrated intentions
of Serbia. Also, Serbian strategy was to use artillery barrages (against
military targets, and against civilians in violation of international law.)
This resulted in slowing Serbian advances but was done because of the
unwillingness of Serbian soldiers to fight as infantry units. It appears,
instead, that they preferred to hit unarmed civilians in breadlines, as in the
Sarajevo market massacre of Feb 1994.
The ABC News documentary on Bosnia makes the claim that Serbian military
leaders used alcohol rations to motivate their troops... that in many cases
the Serbians were drunk. Whereas I suppose that given that Bosnians are
fanatical Moslems (a favorite premise of Serbians) then the Bosnians were
mostly sober. Perhaps why this is why the Bosnians were on balance better
fighters, but the heavy weapons of the JNA probably overcame the difference
in troop quality.
I do understand that the mortar strike in the Sarajevo market of Feb MAY not
have been a deliberately targeted strike because mortars are hard to target
precisely: I DO NOT believe Serbian claims that this was a land mine or a
Moslem strike. It appears to be a random act of drunken cowards: but it is a
war crime in and of itself to put heavy and dangerous weapons in the hands of
drunken cowards. I do not believe that the Serb artillery men were engaged in
a “creeping” mortar barrage to locate a military target, because almost all of
Sarajevo consisted of civilian targets.
>Get real. Even US ambassador to Croatia, Galbreit said that USA let Iran,
The United States was not fully in favor of the embargo and at times was
willing to look the other way. However, most of the arms belonged to Serbia.
>Muslim army had some 100-200.000 soldiers. Do you think they was unarmed?
In modern wars such as the Gulf war, technological differences in arms are
critical. Iraq lost as a consequence of the inferiority of its technology
although it had a very large army. The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina lost the
war as a result of the arms embargo.
Again, I get the impression that people living in areas where the press is
controlled are using cardboard concepts. Having the heavy weapons of the
former JNA makes a difference.
>But accomodation for captured men and women who were killed, beaten,
The question is whether or not this was a deliberate policy. Serbia clearly
started this bestiality and did so as a matter of policy, when it sent
Moslems from Banja Luka to a camp in August 1992 in Omarska. Nothing Bosnia
did subsequently in this area is excusable because “Serbia started it”, but
it does not excuse a very serious Serbian crime, which is to initiate
ultraviolence not randomly but in pursuit of state goals.
“All sides are guilty” ignores the fact that Serbia pushed SE Europe back to
bestiality as a matter of policy BEFORE other sides responded with equivalent
bestiality. When civilians and artistic monuments were deliberately, coldly
and as a matter of policy set by Belgrade targeted by the heavy weapons of
the JNA in Vukovar and Dubrovnik in 1991 there was no precedent for this in
the phony war fought primarily between Serbia and Slovenia early in 1991.
The Croatian/Serbian and Slovenian phony war was very low-level because (1)
Serbia had a low interest in conquering Slovenian territory, and although
ethnic Croatians lived in Slovenia, neither the Serbian nor the Croatian
leadership did not, as a matter of fact, make the criminal decisions made
later on in 1991 by the Serbian brass to deliberately target civilians in
Dubrovnik, and in 1992 to empty Banja Luka of Moslems. Croatians are
portrayed as undifferentiated Fascists by Serb propaganda, but in 1991
Croatian soldiers of the JNA served against Slovenia with a very un-Fascist
reluctance.
The fact that Serbia initiated the targeting of civilians, the destruction of
archeological and artistic treasures, the forced movement of non-Serbs and
their physical liquidation beginning in 1992 makes it in part for RESPONSIBLE
for criminal responses on the part of Croatians and of Moslems, starting in
1992.
I'd be interested to know if you could post some non-fabricated, large-scale
incidents where Bosnia interned Serbs PRIOR to August 1992.
>Soceity of camp prisoners has the data about that.
Jean-Francois Lyotard, a French philosopher, points out that a total victim is
silent, mostly because he's dead. We need to hear from societies of camp
prisoners but at the same time remember that 150,000 people cannot form such
societies.
>But not to bother, three >guards from Celebici camp were sentenced in Hague
>tribunal, although they
What is unfair is that thus far these little men (Moslem, Croat and Serb) are
punished but top men including Ratko Mladic, Milosevic, Karadzic and Arkan
have not been brought to justice. And the movie Savior suggests that an
American mercenary who has killed kids should get away with no punishment at
all. If you feel that it is unfair that Zdravko Mucic got only 7 years why
do you admire Savior? Quaid gets a bus ticket to Split. Quaid uses women
and children to hide from the moral law.
You do not whole-heartedly support Milosevic. But it was demonstrated in 1989
that mass and nonviolent protests by people unwilling to be ethnically divided
can overthrow dictators, as they ended the United States war in Vietnam. The
way clever shits like Milosevic avoid this is by dividing people along ethnic
lines, and PART of this strategy is to cause people to regard an analysis of
Serb politicians’ violations of international law as an attack on all Serbs.
The leaders mobilize the pre-Enlightenment notion of collective guilt and use
it against Moslems (universally interpreted as “muhajdeen”) and Croats
(interpreted as “Fascists.”) This then causes the Serb to fear that this
notion of collective guilt will be brought to bear upon him if his leaders are
arraigned.
Milosevic’s policies are fully responsible of the rape of Bosnian and Croat
women by Serb forces because it has been known for three years that Serbia
used rape, and the shame and the silence it produces in Islamic women, as a
form of ethnic cleansing. Milosevic acted in violation of the United
Declaration of Human Rights by depriving a generation of ethnic Albanian
schoolchildren a chance at going to school. It is therefore somewhere beyond
obscene that Savior uses women and children as a moral shield, for the
filmgoer is invited to identify with Quaid’s phony redemption because he
takes care of one Serbian woman and one child. In the case of individual
Moslem murders and rapes (which pro-Serbian posters have stated occur on all
sides in war) these acts cannot be ranged alongside the systematic
victimization, in pursuit of state goals, of women and children by Serbia.
Moslem and Croat excesses happened once Serbia made clear at Dubrovnik,
Vukovar and Banja Luka that all acts, no matter how bestial, were permitted
in the war.
>Goran: Sorry, but if you are supporting Croat and Muslim official government
>stories, they have no
My sources do not include Croatian or Muslim official government stories but
the references previously posted, an ABC news documentary made in 1997, a man
no longer connected with the BiH government, contemporary articles in the New
York Times, etc. All sides have used modern public relations to get their
message out: it would be surprising if they did not. Serbians who think it
unfair that Bosnia had public relations firms don’t mention the firms that
worked for Serbia during the war, and are proud in this newsgroup about what
they regard as a Hollywood public relations victory in the movie Savior.
There is NO ONE AUTHORITATIVE TEXT on the 1991..1995 wars. But it
oversimplifies to then say, lazily, that “all sides are equally guilty.”
Instead of one authoritative text, there are multiple comparative readings
(which would use official sources and Web pages) and the more complex and
differentiated the reading is, the better it probably is.
Absent a reading like this, it is Savior’s lie to say that emotionality and an
appeal to the preferences of women who’ve survived decide the issue.
>Goran: But they failed to find mass graves in the ground although they had
>three years already to
This is denial on the scale of Holocaust denial. UN soldiers and journalists
were present at Srebenica and saw what happened: from Srebenica, Record of a
War Crime (Jan Willem Honig and Norbert Both, Penguin, 1997):
"Dutch soldiers witnessed many bodies being removed in an odd assortment of
pick-up trucks, tractors with carts and vehicles with shovels. A UN
Commission report described the experience of a Dutch soldier who had been
captured in the early stage of Srebenica…'he saw a row of the shoes and
rucksacks of 100 men.'".
These observers were present in territory taken over by Pale with the support
of Belgrade, and they were clearly observing the results of the behavior of
Serbian police and military acting under orders.
>Ofcourse it is not the same, Germans were killing Jews, Americans (I
>presume?) just interned Japanese Americans. Although it was purely racist
>decision because German or Italian Americans weren't interned.
>But this story has nothing to do with Bosnia.
It has plenty to do with Bosnia because one of the Serbian justifications is
that everybody, including the hated Americans, does it.
>Absolut nonsence. Another argument that you mostly know nothing about ex-Yu.
>How the heck "they shall never beat you" can mean "We are going to beat
>them"?!?! Shameless lie.
Take a look what is happening in Kosovo. What was the effective exclusion of
ethnic Albanians from 1991..1998 from schooling? It was a beating.
In the 1980s the "beating" Serbians took in Albania was local preference for
ethnic Albanians. The local Albanian authorities did not authorize punks to
beat up Serbs, but today beatings of ethnic Albanians are adminstered by Serb
police in the course of their duties.
Even after Serbia showed in 1991 that it was ready to bombard civilians
(Dobrovnik and Vukovar) to gain its ends, ethnic Albanians conducted a mostly
non-violent resistance to their exclusion from society and schools in Kosovo,
where they were the majority. According to an article ("Cry, the dismembered
country" by Timothy Garton Ash in this week's New York Review of Books), this
has changed: the KLA is now conducting armed resistance to the Serbs. This is
because the nonviolent strategy got ethnic Albanians beat, not only by punks
but by police and military acting under orders. Ash quotes an Albanian farmer
saying of the Serb units, "if the Americans weren't there, the police would
beat us up." If the Americans aren’t there, “they shall never beat you” MEANS
“we shall beat them, in preference to reconstructing the economy, providing
equal rights for women, educating our children, staying sober, or doing
anything else constructive.”
>Another thing, Milsoevic said this in Kosovo polje, to local Serbs
>maltreated by Albanian autonomy government. Had nothing to do with Muslims or
>Croats. You know nothing.
The Albanian autonomy government was obeying the law which under Tito
recognized rights due to members of ethnic groups including Albanians and
Serbs. Milosevic was consciously and deliberately violating laws still in
force in 1987.
He was also appealing to anti-Moslem sentiment, because the ethnic Albanians
are Moslem, as I am sure you know.
>Yeah, we Serbs felt that good last few years.
No, you seem as an ethnic group to be miserable SOBs. One journalist reports
from Pale that on Saturday night, the streets resound with the cries of
Serbian women getting beaten by Serbian men. Maybe he lies, maybe this is
just one more Saturday night, or maybe this is collective post-traumatic
stress syndrome. It is true that Sabrina Petra Ramet identifies the abuse of
women as both a cause and a consequence of the troubles:
"Indeed, just as economic crises hit hardest, so too the alternative responses
to crises- whether chauvinist authoritarianism (as in Serbia)…have already
posed new threats to women's interests."
Savior pretends to be against traditional Serbian male chauvinism, but it
validates Quaid by getting Nastassia Kinski to treat him with respect. This
itself is more sexism because acceptance by a woman doesn't constitute moral
authority: quite the opposite: gangsters typically have at least the
appearance of this acceptance.
C. S. Lewis (British writer and critic) has a phrase which may describe
today’s Serbs: “men maddened by false promises and soured by true miseries.”
>Hm, it had nothing to do with drawn lines, lines were drawn later in November
>1995. Before that
But if you take a look at the post-Dayton map, the Serbians have nothing to
complain about, do they? Bosnia has practically ceased to exist, because it
is federated with a state containing Serbs who will not live next to Bosnian
Muslims or Bosnian Croats. Serbia achieved its goals. In so doing, it
caused the forced relocation of its own people, in both Bosnia and Krajina.
>I can't understand your slang too good. Alija Izetbegovic is author of book
>that is proposing installation of islamic state (Iran type), he was member of
>islamic fundamentalist group "Fedayin e Islami".
This is a book that advocates a religious Islamic approach to politics, and
that is not the same thing as an Iran-style fundamentalism: even in Iran
itself, Western commentators oversimplify the fact that moderate Moslems call
for the ulama WITHOUT calling for complete intolerance of unbelievers.
In several works on history, politics and literature, a Palestinian moderate
who is of Christian background and from Lebanon, Edward Said, calls attention
to the systematic mis-characterisation of Moslem religious writings by Western
politicians, and to anyone with both tolerance, and serious religious
convictions of his or her own, this Western political practice is truly what
the Moslems call it: blasphemy.
For example, I had a Moslem co-worker at a former job who was a hard working
family man (as all of the Moslems I’ve met here in America seem to be.) I
asked him during Ramadan if he wanted to go out on a cigarette break (here in
America, nobody is permitted to smoke on the job anymore.) He said he would
do so after dark. During our break, the man said that “Intifada” is a Moslem
religious term that means struggle, and this can mean, not only a form of
struggle with the unbeliever but also an internal struggle. His intifadah
was avoiding smoking during Ramadan daylight.
This is merely an example of a MAN engaged in a fully human activity, and to
me it is indeed blasphemy to simplify and mistranslate the name he uses for
this struggle into a threat, in order to maintain a political position.
Elites in the USA and Serbia thus in a real sense are impious in misusing
religious concepts, in ignorant power struggles.
Moslems believe that only the Koran is a perfect guide to ruling a secular
state, even as many USA leaders who are Christians believe that the New
Testament is such a guide. This could imply complete intolerance for
unbelievers. But throughout Moslem history, most Moslem governments have
interpreted it to exclude non-Moslems from positions of authority. This is
nothing more that what was done in Britain from Henry VIII until Reform
(1830): Britons did not feel that Roman Catholics were “British enough” to
have political authority.
Thus, the Turks prevented Christians from owning land. Owning land in the
Middle Ages meant secular power and the Turks constituted their state under
their Caliph as the ulama: a secular reign run according to Moslem teachings.
The REAL intolerance is to use post- Enlightenment thinking to demonstrate,
in an ahistorical and simple-minded fashion, that the Turkish approach to
religion and politics in 1389 MEANS that modern-day Moslems run mediaeval
states. In some cases (notably Algeria) that is exactly what some modern-day
Moslems do. In Turkey, the government physically represses Moslem
fundamentalism, up to and including the violation of civil liberties.
The fact that Alia joined a Moslem self-awareness movement cannot be used,
therefore, as evidence that he wanted Bosnia to be a fundamentalist state.
Why are his early texts even to be taken seriously? Using the flaccid rule
that texts in a war zone have a double meaning, perhaps Alia said what the
Nazis wanted him to say. Using the flaccid skepticism of Savior, perhaps
Alia said what the Nazis wanted him to say while working for the Allies: this
sort of triple-meaning skulduggery (plotting and scheming) happened
frequently during WWII and the Balkans. And, most importantly, Alia and
Bosnia produced a text of a tolerant, multi-ethnic Bosnian state in 1991
which is ignored: given such skepticism, why not take THIS text, produced in
Alia’s later life, more seriously?
If you start the skeptical game, you cannot end it, in somewhat the same way
that the killing started by Milosevic cannot end neatly. At what point in his
career did Alia mean what he said?
The answer, of course, is that the reading is selected to meet the needs of
the thugs in control of Serbia.
>In few muncipals Serbs had almost 90% majority. That is a fact you can not
>deny.
This does not change the removal of the Moslems from Banja Luka and their
transfer to a concentration camp in Omarska. Furthermore, despite his Islamic
convictions, Alia opposed the ethnic cantonization of Bosnia advocated by such
idiots as John Major. It is partition and cantonization, whether in India and
Pakistan, the West Bank, or in Bosnia, that causes forced moves, not Islamic
philosophy. Serbia supported ethnic cantonization which means it is
responsible for most forced relocations.
>As I am informed, Republic of Srpska (Serbain part of Bosnia) is covered
>mostly with Brittish (nortwest), French (east) and some Spanish in the south.
>What aerea you are talking bout?
Cf. the web site for the North Carolina National guard and a recent People
magazine article describing the US army's activities in Bosnia.
>Until now, one, 200 Muslim corpses near Zvornik. On the other hand, 180 Serbs
>killed in Mrkonjic grad,
I have stated before that the basis for the charges against Serbia are not
body counts. For one thing, Serbia has conquered through deliberate terror
most of what was in 1992 the state of Bosnia, and it controls access to sites
that may contain mass graves. Serbian leaders have a direct and personal
interest in concealing these sites (and I do not deny that Bosnian leaders
have a legitimate interest in revealing them: and please note that their
interest in revelation is moral but desire to conceal is not.) Who wins the
body counts becomes irrevelant to the fact that multiple sources (see above
on who knows and how one knows) with differing interests (not a mythical
disinterest) confirm Serbian high-level intentions and strategy.
Apologists who use “you know nothing” as an argument produce something which
cannot be fully answered because it is so dysfunctional (American word: means
crazy.) They know that a mythical, authoritative Father (in Yugoslavia’s
case, Tito) has died but they want his authority to speak with power. This
is crazy because it is Freud’s moment at which the horde of male children who
have destroyed the hated/loved father have fallen to squabbling over who
replaces him. The only way out of this is not through images and their
irrationality (in which, for example, unidentified helicopters attack Serbs
in a no-fly zone, an image apparently inserted by Oliver Stone to resonate
with American fears of "the black helicopters of the UN".) It is through
texts. The reverse way (what Max Horkheimer called “psychoanalysis in
reverse”) is to be maddened by the false promises of false images by men who
want to stay in power.
>You really know nothing, don't you? Just what mainstream media tell you.
The short answer is that I do not live in a society with a controlled press.
After some openness, Milosevic has it appears completely cracked down on both
universities and the press as of 1998.
The long answer is that the above statement is less a move in a rational
debate than a symptom of collective post-traumatic stress, a symptom seen in
the USA after Vietnam.
In this symptom, the person making statements like this HIMSELF is typically
uninformed about the issue but has personal pain as a consequence of his
leaders’ criminal behavior, ranging in this newgroups from relatives forcibly
relocated because of the Moslems to having to live in Belgrade under
international sanctions. He stays stuck in this problem because of suspicion
of knowledge claims that are based on anything other than personal and tribal
accounts (such as found in Savior.) This is because his leaders spoke to him
of knowledge which he knows to be fancy lies.
My instinct is actually to be very suspicious of Peter Jennings when he makes
claims about Serbia in the ABC News documentary of 1997. This is because he
speaks in well-formed sentences. Statements like “imri moronu” or the
incoherent mutterings of a victimized victimizer (see below) become at some
level more believable.
But the way to get over this is to realize that there are levels of lies.
Lawrence Eagleburger’s underlings told him about the forced removal and
internment of the Moslems of Banja Luka and Eagleburger at first confirmed
this and then he denied it in our Senate. Eagleburger appears on the
documentary being questioned by Jennings.
The job is to differentiate the LOWER slickness of Peter Jennings from the
HIGHER slickness of Eagleburger. One thing the viewer should note is that
some of the things that the highly slick pol, from Eagleburger to Hitler,
says are known to be false through logic alone.
For example, Eagleburger makes the claim that in the Cold War the United
States would have stepped in if Milosevic had engaged in his behavior with a
still- powerful Soviet Union. This approaches the sort of nonsense Hitler
purveyed because, of course, the United States abandoned Eastern Europe to
the Communists at Yalta and NEVER stepped in to avoid violations of human
rights… whether in Hungary in 1956, East Germany in 1953, or Czechoslovakia
in 1968. Whereas even in realpolitik terms it would have been easier for the
USA to position the Sixth Fleet off Dubrovnik in 1991, because of the
impotence of the Soviet Union.
Eagleburger makes the big lie and any mis-statements by his subordinates or by
ABC News are dwarfed by this lie. This makes the lower-level and the media,
for all their flaws and for all their self-interest more believable.
So perhaps I know nothing in the way “knowledge” is defined in modern-day
Serbia (although one thing knowledge, post-Enlightenment, is not afraid of is
opposing views, and the state of epistemology in modern day Serbia is shown
by the fact that Slobo has closed down, according to Western reports,
philosophy departments in all universities.) Perhaps Serbia’s leaders would
prefer a Hollywood ending, for in Hollywood it is said that “nobody knows
anything.” If nobody knows anything, then the world is an armed camp. In
the American military there is a saying: opinions are like assholes,
everyone’s got one. Opinions may be like assholes, but do note: this is
necessary in the military for assuring absolute obedience.
>Eastern Bosnia is mostly rural, we the Serbs kill pigs often, we brew them and
>eat them. Mladic is originaly from Kalinovik in Herzegovina, small town,
>almost rural, so he has peasant background. He was slaughtering pig, my
>relatives do that all the time, and even I slaughtered one recently. Big deal,
>they made up story of nothing.
Nobody knows anything, so Ratko’s act was meaningless? Perhaps: perhaps not.
But why did he slaughter it, not at a party for UN peacekeepers, but instead
at a meeting in which the fate of the non-Serbs at Srebenica was at issue?
Yes, he wanted to show Dutch peace-keepers that he was a farm-boy and as such
more of a "real man."
The British military historian John Keegan points out, the very origin of war
to the death is found in the slaughter of large and relatively human-like
animals by ancient farm boys, farm boys like the Indo-Europeans who conquered
the Dravidians of south India because of their willingness to wage war to the
death. The slaughter of large, relatively human-like animals inculcates both
practical experience in the use of weapons and a willingness to see human-like
death. Ratko was at some level of consciousness bringing up the fact that the
West and its ideals were being confronted by "real men" from the farm and that
for this reason, Serbs should be given whatever they wanted.
>Well, that is idea of a story. A soldier with hardened heart saves young
>girl and her baby, it is heas change, katarza, he does something good after
>doing evil, things. That is idea of a movie.
And it sucks. It is a lie. It is obscene for Serbian-American punks to watch
this shit because it deliberately conceals what happened. Here is what Honig
and Both write about what happened at Srebenica:
"The process of tracking down these individuals was a careful and deliberate
one. As in Visegrad, lists with the prominent Muslims were drawn up prior to
the attack. In many places, a parallel local government administration had
also been set up some time before. A so-called Krizni Stab, or Crisis
Headquarters, COMPRISED OF LOCAL SERB LEADERS AND POLICE (emphasis mine)
would be ready to take over power and organize the removal of the Muslim and
Croat local elites. The people on the list were rounded up and either
summarily executed or sent to detention centres."
This planned execution is obviously top-down and cannot be visually equated
with individual behavior.
>Neither were Franjo Tudjman or Alija Izetbegovic.
Tudjman can't be prosecuted for being a successful idiot, and I don't know why
Alia should be prosecuted. For getting kidnapped? Bosnia adhered to the UN
charter when it constituted itself as a state in which all people of any
ethnicity would be treated the same, and it got the shit kicked out of it
(Americanism for beat up) while Western politicians stood by.
>>Spinoza9999: It's clear to me from reading the posts on
>>soc.culture.yugoslavia that many >Serbs and Serbian-Americans have no brief
>>for Slobo. What they seem to dislike is a notion of "collective guilt."
>Goran: What is a brief? Condemnation?
What I meant was that it appears that many Serbs dislike Slobo. They have no
"case" (brief) for his being a good guy. But they react to Western critics in
a way that keeps him in power.
>Nothing similar. For God's sake man, we have our own history, stop
>explaining our story by comparing us with something else. Did you know that
>some 700.000 Serbs were killed by Nazi Croats in WW2? That is OUR history.
I am named after a man who was killed by the Germans. I can get along with
Germans. Why can't Serbs stop fighting World War II? Stjepan Mestrovic calls
this emotional dishonesty, which uses past wrongs to mobilize hatred, post-
emotional. He points out how the mobilization of false emotion destroys
ability to feel real emotions, such as compassion for other people.
This was clearly displayed in post-Vietnam movies made in the USA, which were
watched in many cases avidly by men who shot children or abused their
families.
>But if because of your ignorance need comparation, compare Slobo with Harry
>Truman. Truman droped nukes onto Japan, and he was wrong. But that does not
>means Americans shoudn't fight fascism.
Truman’s decision was immoral. However, he did not then deny, as you deny,
that the crime took place. Instead, American Gis helped the victims of the
atomic bombs and the many more victims in Japan of conventional bombing.
The difference: one can imagine the GI behaving in a civilised fashion towards
the German or Japanese civilian whereas the policy of the Serbian police and
military appears that similar behavior on the part of a Serb cop or soldier
would have been insubordination, or worse: in many casesm the research of
DePaul law professor Cherif Bassiouni shows incidents in which lowlevel Serb
grunts were ORDERED to commit war crimes.
At the end of this long post, I include an extended quote from the non-
Communist Marxist thinker Theodore Adorno which shows how images distort
thought. But if you must have images, I contrast the American GI carring the
Nisei woman's bag for here at the Seattle railway station with the near-
impossibility of any such image coming out of relocations as directed by
Serbian police or military. Instead of soldiers carrying bags, the images are
of soldiers grinning foolishly yet triumphantly over the inert corpses of
Moslem women.
Now, you may be able to produce such images (and Savior manufactures such
images, which the viewer has to remind himself are literally fiction.) But
their near-impossibility is demonstrated by the textual fact that the post-
Enlightenment American military has provided a legal recourse for the GI who
refuses to obey an illegal order, whereas there is no such textual tradition
in the Serbian army.
Serbs want to deny that ethnic cleansing took place and that if it did, it was
just as OK as what America did.
This is so illogical that it cannot be debated: from contradictory premises,
anything you like can be deduced: this is why bigshots like Eagleburger are so
adept at slyly getting their hearers to accept logical contradictions: it
leaves them free to get people to accept what is convenient to them.
Fortunately, Freudian psychology finds a way at least to describe this logic
and to describe it is to refute it. In his story of “kettle logic” as a
defensive move of the psychiatric patient, Freud gives the example of a man
who says (1) I did not take your kettle and (2) it was dirty anyway when I
stole it. Serbian public relations wants the West to accept a much more
malign kettle logic: (1) we did not kill the Moslems, (2) we killed them less
than they killed us (3) killing lots is anyway justified because everybody is
doing it.
>>Not only this, as Ariel Dorfman writes in this month's Harper's, it is even
>>necessary for the criminal himself to suffer for his acts and what is being
>>done to Pinochet is actually a favor. This is also what Fyodor Dostoevsky
>>proposed in Karamazov, and it seems to involve subjection of the criminal to
>>the same sort of pitiless law that he himself represented to his victim.
>Fine with me, although it is not too Christian. It could be as evening with
>bastard.
Here I slipped up and I implied that Pinochet should be subjected to the SAME
sort of injustice as was found in Chile during the 1970s. And note that as
soon as I messed up and deviated from justice, you agreed with me.
What I meant was that Pinochet should be subjected to the pitilessness that
Chileans were subjected to, but it should be pitiless application of JUSTICE
and not INJUSTICE.
>>This is why Savior is such an evil movie
>Excuse me, but you sound immature.
Frankly I do not care if I sound immature, or hysterical. The problem in
postwar Serbia appears to be an attempt to return to normality, to maturity,
and to non-"hysteria". The ABC news report shows expensively dressed Serbs
sitting in cafes with nice sunglasses. Serbs WANT a return to normality and
civility and nice sunglasses and cafes, but one purged of dirty Muslims or
Croats.
I am personally familiar with this discomfort. Here in America our media have
placed deep within our psyches a notion that the “good life” is a WHITE
person’s life and that typically AfricanAmerican behavior is a potential
threat. For example, it actually annoys me that African American men
congregate on street corners in my neighborhood and tend to accost expensively
dressed men with various proposals, from giving spare change to getting a shoe
shine.
The images, the “psychoanalysis in reverse”, crowd in: the buried image of
the (white) Yuppie in the city versus the image of the potential criminal,
and sexual threat. I am certain that there was a similar thing going on in
the Serb’s psyche as he contrasted his desires (and the frustration of those
desires as Yugoslavia’s economy deteriorated in the 1980s) with the differing
styles of his Muslim neighbors. In my case, a text reverses the reversal,
and that is the mere fact that homeless African Americans have nowhere to go,
and that were I to be homeless I would likewise have nowhere to go, and be
likewise full of business ideas for fixing my situation.
I therefore propose that on the surface of a manufactured normality (as
portrayed in the cafes of Pale or of Banja Luka) is the TRUE craziness. But
nonetheless, I am aware that questioning this normality might seem immature
and hysterical. Ø Ø >
>>(and why it seems, being evil, to draw out evil in others: as I watched it in
>>a Chicago theater, some apparently Serbian-American punks tittered as they
>>munched popcorn and watched the Croatian atrocity: their false consciousness
>>was apparently so well-evolved that it found "the suffering of the Serbs"
>>itself amusing.)>
>In what way?
I have no idea, but in America audiences often laugh inappropriately at
suffering, especially in rural areas and in the neo-ruralized big cities. I
have no idea, but Stjepan Mestrovic names the LACK of emotionality found in
"post-emotional" appeals. Savior pulls out all the stops, from cute babies to
folk songs, and produces titters in punks. Hitler demonstrated how to unlink
emotion from reason, and post-Hitler, people have named the lack of any true
German emotional committment to Hitler.
>
>Ask forgivness for what?
Shooting kids.
>
> Ufff... Albanians got their autonomy (de facto, all government) and they used
>it to maltreate Serbs, extort, kill, leave without job, and tried to separate
>Kosovo from Serbia. Albanians have 200 years history of maltreating Serbs in
>Kosovo hombre. They just continued. Albanian fascist from last century had
>idea of Great Albania since last century, consisted of four sanjaks (Turksih
>administrative divisions), Janjinski, Bitoljski, Skadarski and Kosovski,
>although they consisted 44% of population there. That idea lives until today.
>Slobo did not started fighting, it was started last year by killing two
>policemen in Drenica region in Kosovo.
Last year, the Albanian leadership was enforcing non-violent resistance to
Serbian oppression. However, extreme elements of the KLA have taken over.
Serbia bears part of the responsibility for this since it did not respond to
the non-violent resistance.
>
>>The ethnic Albanians have a legitimate beef.
> A meet of a cow? Beef?
> "Legitimate"? Based on laws? Nothing similar friend.
A “beef” in American slang is a complaint. Perhaps we have a short snappy
word for it because we can have a beef with the cops and the boss in the
first place. What scares me about Serbia is the fact that the cops, the
boss, the bigshots in general are deviant and nondeviance then becomes a
threat to them: nondeviance itself becomes immature and hysterical and
deviant. And as part of the way in which deviant Serb politicians have been
rewarded for their very deviance, deviance is speading in America.
Serbia is a member of the UN although it is under sanctions. As a member it
subscribes to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When a country
subscribes to an international law, that law becomes part of its domestic law.
By treating Albanians WORSE than medieval Turks treated Christians, for Serbia
denied Albanians any civil existence whatsoever whereas Johnny Turk put Billy
Serb to work. Serbia therefore violated the law.
> Bullshit. Albanians are boycotting state of Serbia, because they wanted to
>declare independence. They boycott schools, elections, province elections,
>news, companies, health service. Although when in need they use health service
>whenever they want. And not all Albanians boycott state at all. Manny of them
>are still working in state owned companies, public services etc. These days
>they are often being shot as "colaborationists" by KLA. Nobody forced
>Albanians to nothing, they are boycotting state of Serbia, that is whole
>story. Or you know better?>
As soon as Slobbo said “nobody shall ever beat you” in the Yugoslavian
context, anybody with any sense wanted to get the hell out of Dodge City
(Americans “get out of Dodge City” when they know that the bullets are going
to start flying.) Slobbo’s “nobody shall ever beat you” caused the leaders in
non-Serb states to want to set up shop on their own, because not only would
they have no role in a Serb-dominated Yugoslavia, they'd be personally at
risk (Serbian policy targeted local leaders, the deputy foreign minister of
Bosnia was assassinated by Serb military units, and Alia was kidnapped in
1992 at the Sarajevo airport when he returned from the Lisbon peace
conference.) “Nobody shall ever beat you” was what we call in America a
stick of shitfire with a wick on it.
>Bullshit. Families of Kosovo Serbs that live there for centuries. Serbs where
>majority in Kosovo until 1878. (Serbian-Turkish wars) and in Metohija until
>Crimmean war (1836. if I recall). They were under constant terror of Muslim
>Albanians because they were Christians in Turkish empire. Serbs living in
>Kosovo now are descendants of families that lived there for centuries. In
>1921. and later number of Serbs was bigger in Kosovo because some Serbs were
>settled there. But Albanian fascists extort all of them in WW2 and settled
>Albanians from Albania. After the war, communist government forbid to all
>Serbs extort from Kosovo to go back to their homes. Did you know any of this?
>That has nothing to do with Kosovo. Kosovo has great emotional value for all
>Serbs,
Perhaps it now has post-emotional value because it makes no sense to keep a
1389 defeat alive. England celebrates Agincourt in 1415 (a victory) for one
reason, and that is Shakespeare. One characteristic of post-emotionality is
the replacement of the real by the false. And in a world of scarcity there
are almost always more pressing reasons to make political decisions that
feigned emotions over distant events. This is why it is equally
post-emotional, and equally unjust, for Jews to want to settle Arab lands
because of what happened in 70 AD.
Not one blackbird could ever justify one forced relocation of a Moslem, and
the demographic fact is that most of Kosovo is non-Serb. Unfortunately, the
leaders of the Serbs have carefully created a situation in which Serbs cannot
live side by side by Moslems. They thus present the international community
with a choice between "stealing" Kosovo from Serbia, or creating an even
worse disaster for ethnic Albanians than was created for Bosnian Moslems in
1992..1995.
>but that is just one motivaton for us to fight to keep it. But today >troubles
>has nothing to do with it. Problems are: Albanian national minority >>(that
>has always been national minorityi in Serbia
...but majority in Kosovo..."gerrymandering" is an American word and it means
creating districts so that your favorite group is a majority.
>) wants to steal part of territory of Serbia and create independent fascist
>ethnically clean state. Serbian authorities are fighting separatists and
>terrorists. Capisc?>
In Freudian terms, this “projects” one’s own motivation on others.
Milosevic’s entire career since 1987 has been based on Serbia for the
Serbians alone. It is now true that the KLA wants to be rid of the Serbs in
Albania, but this is because they saw what happened in Bosnia. ANY Serbians
living outside of Serbia are a pretext for Serbia to invade and to support
Serbian “liberation” movements.
>
> Serbs were fighting for their rights, lives, homes and property.
…and any other property they could grab.
> Serb WOMAN was refugee and perpetrator at the same time?!?! And you bought
>that shit? Excuse me, but in Serbia we call such idiotic stories "fucking in a
>healthy brain".>
In America we would regard fucking in a healthy brain as quite normal. And
this may be the key point: you confuse two very diferent concepts.
A mathematician knows that a description of a “set” as understood in logic
and mathematics is different from an enumeration of its members, whereas it
appears that fifty years of thug Communism have destroyed this ability to
make this distinction in the former Yugoslavia.
Marxist theory describes the SET of capitalist exploiters or “kulaks” (rich
peasants.) Thugs confused the ease in which this set can be DESCRIBED with
the very real difficulty in which its members can be ENUMERATED. Thugs also
failed to see that an individual could be in the set at one time and not
another. And thugs failed to see that sets aren’t mutually exclusive.
[This is why thugs hate intellectuals: this is why Slobo closes the philosophy
departments. It is because this is thought without images.]
So in Russia and in Eastern Europe, I believe, people got used to thug
oversimplification, and this caused them to implement Stalin’s purges.
Having been trained in this, Serbs in Yugoslavia think that one is either a
“good guy” or else a “bad guy”, and for this reason they welcome Hollywood’s
categorization of the Serbian-merc “good guy” versus green-head-scarved
muhajdeen and Croatian thugs.
This results in the fact that the women spoken-to by the British officer was,
not some “fucking in a healthy brain” but the most characteristic person in
Yugoslavia at that time. She was a member of the class of victims because she
was fleeing a Bosnian advance. She was also a member of a class of
victimizers because she had participated in the cleansing and the murder of
her neighbors.
The collapse of these distinctions is also seen in the fact that modern
Yugoslavia leaves no place for COMBINATIONS of ethnicity. Only three
ethnicities generate several possibilities, and cantons cannot be made for
each one. But it appears that thug Marxist theory eliminated the idea that
one could be both a capitalist and worker (something quite common in
America), and this destruction persists now in Serbian ethnic discourse.
> About your references: who are these people, why all these books were
>printed after 1990., who payed their printing? Why do you think these are not
>just political pamflets? What makes them trustworthy? What are sources of
>these people? Was it some shit published by Ruder & Finn. Is it a problem to
>print bullshit book today sponsored by some foreign gov.? Who are these people
>and what are their sources? You gave me 0 reasons to believe them until now
1. These books are histories of the war, with the exception of Balkan Babel,
which is a history of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. I believe that it is
unimportant that they were printed after 1990, and most of them could not
have predated the war. Because of the mess Yugoslavia is in, there is a
great deal of interest on the part of intelligent people in the West as to
why the war occurred. 2. I, and countless other book buyers, paid for their
printing. This is called capitalism. 3. Because they were issued in a free
market by a press controlled by the profit motive. 4. Nothing in the texts
make them trustworthy. It is impossible to be like Moses and bring down
texts graven in stone because immediately the skeptic will point out that
Moses could have graven the texts himself. What makes the texts trustworthy
is multiple readings from sources with different interests, and in the case
of Yugoslavia, the bullshit (including use of insane logical procedures)
comes primarily from the Serbian side. 5. Primarily, these people are
journalists who work for media that is independent of government. Some
sources, including lower-level employees of the US state department, are
jobless as a result of their claims in 1992 that Serbia was initiating ethnic
cleansing. This makes their claims believable.
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
> Uff... Denis Quaid was leading star, it was made in Hollywood... don't know
> actually.
The following passage (by the “Frankfurt School Marxist”, Theodore Adorno) is
a way of summing up the dishonesty of Savior:
”The objective tendency of the Enlightenment, to wipe out the power of images
over man, is not matched by any subjective progress on the part of
enlightened thinking towards freedom from images. While the assault on
images irresistably demolishes, after metaphysical Ideas, those concepts once
understood as rational and genuinely attainable by thought, the thinking
unleashed by the Enlightenment and immunized against thinking is now becoming
a second figurativeness, though without images or spontaneity. Amid the
network of now wholly abstract relations of people to each other and to
things, the power of abstraction is vanishing. The estrangement of schemata
and classifications from the data subsumed beneath them, indeed the sheer
quanity of the material processed, which has become quite incommensurable
with the horizons of individual experience, ceaselessly enforces an archaic
retranslation into sensuous signs. The little silhouettes of men or houses
that pervade statistics like hieroglyphics may appear in each particular
case accidental, mere auxiliary means. But it is not by chance that they
have a resemblance to counless advertisements, newspaper stereotypes, toys.
In them representation triumphs over what is represented. Their outsize,
simplistic, and therefore false comprehensibility corroborates the
incomprehensibility of the intellectual prcesses themselves, from which their
falseness-their blind, unthinking subsumption- is inseparable. The
omnipresent images are none, because they present the wholly general, the
average, the standard model, as something unique or special, and so deride
it.
The abolition of the particular is turned insidiously into something
particular. The desire for particularity has silted up while still at the
stage of a need, and is reproduced on all sides by mass-culture, on the
pattern of the comic strip. What was once called intellect is superseded by
illustrations. It is not only that people are no longer able to imagine what
is not shown and drilled into them in abbreviated form.
Even the joke, in which once the freedom of the mind collided with the “facts”
and exploded them, has gone over to illustration…he who cracks it [the visual
joke] is rewarded by admission to the collective of laughers, which contains
cruel things on its side.”
In the above incredible passage, Adorno, who died in 1970, simultaneously
manages to predict the evolution of the United States’ “satirical” television
show Saturday Night Live (from attacks on powerful politicians to attacks on
people who talked funny) and the Bosnian war. For he is saying that the very
procedures of Enlightenment (such as were used at Wright Air Force Base in
Dayton, Ohio, during the 1995 peace conference) create a reversal of
enlightenment. One of these procedures is oversimplification: for the
“ethnic cantons” so beloved by Western big-shots are PRECISELY those toy
images which allow them to forget things like mixed parentage and forced
relocation. Issues are defined by body counts, so Serbia naturally conceals
mass graves. Thinking which uses moral OR EVEN LOGICAL categories appears to
this style of thinking as Jesuitical or medieval or “Fascist.” Thus the top
man is able to get away with incoherence dressed up as ultra-coherence, and
the true medievalism returns at the top.
The ordinary person, especially if he or she is an information worker,
becomes a victim and a victimizer. At one moment, she or he pushes the
counter or devises the ethnic cantonization spreadsheet (a progenitor of the
actual ethnic cleansing spreadsheet.) At another, she or he loses their job
and is forced to flee. The dialectical irony that would have appealed to
Adorno (had he himself not been a victim of ethnic cleansing under Hitler,
and thus unable to take pure intellectual delight in the reality behind the
irony) is that the big lie is ultimately a collective victory that turns into
a defeat.
Savior, in short, manufactures something that the film-goer is trained to
accept, and that is a triumph of representation over what is represented. The
reality is a simple text, and that is that Serbia showed the world how to get
away with systematic violation of international law. But only a film with the
greatness of Casablanca could show this, and Adorno himself believed that film
cannot.
THE TRUTH IS THAT ALL PEOPLE ON EARTH ARE PUSHED AROUND BY TWO
MEN WHO ARRANGE ALL THE BODIES ON EARTH INTO PATTERNS THAT PLEASE
THEM. THE PATTERNS SPELL OH NO NO NO BUT IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO WRITE
SYMBOLS. YOU MUST DO THE RIGHT ACTS WITH YOUR BODY.
- Jenny Holzer, LAMENTS, Dia Art Foundation, NYC 1991
Goran
Michael Lipin wrote in message <368BDD84...@asan.com>...
>You do? In Russia they say the same. "Ne jebi menja v zdorovij mozg"
>
>Goran wrote:
>
Goran
>>through …
>This does not imply large-scale troop movements that would necessitate
>forcible movements of population, and this makes nonsense of the original
>claim.
Supply lines had to be secured. Muslims did it by extorting some 7000
people. Full stop.
>Serbian strategy, which was to occupy large tracts of territory outside
>of Serbia where ethnic Serbians lived, necessitated more forcible
>movements of populations than Bosnian strategy, which was to get
>corridors to the Adriatic and defend the areas around Sarajevo. So
>even if both sides intended to abuse civilians, Serbia had more
>opportunities and more motivation to do so.
Serbia was not fighting a war in Bosnia, it was local Serbs, local militias
that are later organized in Bosnian Serbs Army.
There was no Bosnian strategy because Bosnians were fighting civil war among
each other. But Muslim strategy was to conquer whole Bosnia.
But we can talk about "Serbian occupation of territory where ethnic Serbs
lived". Do you have any example for that? I know what was it like in my
hometown, Sarajevo, in a middle of Bosnia, far away from Serbia. But yet,
you might know better.
>There is also a difference between levels of force in forcible movements of
>populations. People who flee owing to fear for their lives are victims:
even
>victimizers who flee revenge are partialy victims as well as victimizers
(see
>extended discussion of this issue below, in relation to Co. Bob Stewart.)
Ufff.... is this that story how Muslims who did crimes are also victims?
>But Serbian forced relocation in Bosnia was the most serious since it
forced
>people out of their homes as part of strategy.
I know that theory, but why do you think it was part of strategy?
>Serbians who fled the Krajina
>district in fear of Croatia in 1995 were not as seriously victimized as
>Moslems expelled from Banja Luka.
Define victimized.
But when talking about strategy, when was most Muslims and Croats expelled
from Banjaluka? Was it in 1995.?
>>About arms embargo, it was not obeyed man.
>Nonetheless, it resulted in only a small number of arms going to Bosnia,
So how the heck Muslims organized 150.000 men army?!
>whereas the heavy weapons of the former JNA went to Serbia.
Most of it. Some was left behind to local Serbs in Krajina and Bosnia.
>I get the
>impression in this exchange that some posters are dealing in cardboard
facts
>and cardboard constructs, ideas that are taken from over-simplified press
>reports from government-controlled papers, OR Hollywood-style,
>oversimplified accounts.
Hm, I presume you are talking about our discussion?
Well, here is difference as I see it. You have large theories, well
developes (somewhere), and mostly know a little about what happened in
Bosnia. You "know" that ethnic cleansing was Serbian strategy, that they
killed leading men, that they were Nazis and shit like that. And me... well,
I am just poor Bosnian that doesn't know much about these theories Muslims
and leftists sold to you, but I sure know what is happening here since 1990.
>The arms embargo was not fully obeyed but nonetheless it had an effect, and
>it
>had a larger effect on the Bosnians than on the Serbians because the heavy
>weapons of the former Yugoslavian National Army went to Serbia.
We are talking about Bosnia, why are you mentioning Serbia all the time?
I am really getting sick of discussions with people who know almost nothing,
but they imagine a lot.
There was no war among Bosnians and Serbians but there was war among
Bosnians, Serbs, Croats and Muslims.
If that embargo was obeyed, Muslims would be defeated in few months. Instead
of that they fought war for three years against Serbs AND Croats. Do think a
bit, please.
>>How come Muslims survived three years fighting war without any weapon?
>Perhaps they were fighting for the survival given the demonstrated
intentions
>of Serbia. Also, Serbian strategy was to use artillery barrages (against
>military targets, and against civilians in violation of international law.)
>This resulted in slowing Serbian advances but was done because of the
>unwillingness of Serbian soldiers to fight as infantry units. It appears,
>instead, that they preferred to hit unarmed civilians in breadlines, as in
the
>Sarajevo market massacre of Feb 1994.
So, Serbs hadn't infantry and that is why Muslims did not lose? Is this what
are you saying?
And about massacres.... funny thing, but they always caused some major
intervention, bombing Serbs, embargo to Yugoslavia.... how convenient.
Serbs liked more to massacre civilians then to fight with infantry? What a
ridicilous idea? (sorry for the spelling).
Do you know how does artillery weapons look like? Do you think they have
little snipers on them so crews can see where is bread line and shoot it? No
man, nothing similar.
>The ABC News documentary on Bosnia makes the claim that Serbian military
>leaders used alcohol rations to motivate their troops... that in many cases
>the Serbians were drunk. Whereas I suppose that given that Bosnians are
>fanatical Moslems (a favorite premise of Serbians) then the Bosnians were
>mostly sober. Perhaps why this is why the Bosnians were on balance better
>fighters, but the heavy weapons of the JNA probably overcame the difference
>in troop quality.
hahahahahahaha............... why I am laughing, well, I remembered some of
my Muslim friends with whom I was drinking alcohol before war and eating
pork (it is forbided to Muslims too).
Serbs were drunk and Muslims were sober, so WHOLE SERBIA (your theory is
that Serbia attacked Bosni?) couldn't find enough of sober troops to fight
poor unarmed Muslims? And Serbian soldiers are not capable of fight without
alcohol?
What am I doing here talking with you? Are you aware what nonsences you are
talking?
>I do understand that the mortar strike in the Sarajevo market of Feb MAY
not
>have been a deliberately targeted strike because mortars are hard to target
>precisely: I DO NOT believe Serbian claims that this was a land mine or a
>Moslem strike.
Exactly. You know shit, you just believe for some reason, unknown to me.
>It appears to be a random act of drunken cowards: but it is a
>war crime in and of itself to put heavy and dangerous weapons in the hands
of
>drunken cowards. I do not believe that the Serb artillery men were engaged
in
>a “creeping” mortar barrage to locate a military target, because almost all
of
>Sarajevo consisted of civilian targets.
It was quite hard to shot that market in Sarajevo with mortar because it is
surrounded by high buildings, it is near Tito's street, surrounded by
buildings.
Believe what you want.
>>Get real. Even US ambassador to Croatia, Galbreit said that USA let Iran,
>The United States was not fully in favor of the embargo and at times was
>willing to look the other way. However, most of the arms belonged to
Serbia.
What Serbia again? So you claim Serbia was fighting Bosnian Muslims, not
local Serbs?
Well, tell me than, how come well armed army of people of ten million had so
much problems to defeat unarmed army of people of two million?
They were drunk?
Oh God, what am I doing here discussing such stupid things.
>>Muslim army had some 100-200.000 soldiers. Do you think they was
>>unarmed?
>In modern wars such as the Gulf war, technological differences in arms are
>critical. Iraq lost as a consequence of the inferiority of its technology
>although it had a very large army. The army of Bosnia-Herzegovina lost the
>war as a result of the arms embargo.
>Again, I get the impression that people living in areas where the press is
>controlled are using cardboard concepts. Having the heavy weapons of the
>former JNA makes a difference.
Your impressions are your problem. You didn't answer me, were these
150-200.000 men in Muslim army unarmed? If not, how come if we know there
was arms embargo on Muslims? If yes, how come Serbs failed to conquer them?
>>But accomodation for captured men and women who were killed, beaten,
>The question is whether or not this was a deliberate policy. Serbia
clearly
>started this bestiality and did so as a matter of policy, when it sent
>Moslems from Banja Luka to a camp in August 1992 in Omarska.
From Banja Luka? Were those people from Banjaluka?
>Nothing Bosnia
>did subsequently in this area is excusable because “Serbia started it”, but
>it does not excuse a very serious Serbian crime, which is to initiate
>ultraviolence not randomly but in pursuit of state goals.
Crimes were Serbian policy and Muslims did it occasionaly. Bullshit. Spare
me of that. And not a single proof.
>“All sides are guilty” ignores the fact that Serbia pushed SE Europe back
to
>bestiality as a matter of policy BEFORE other sides responded with
>equivalent bestiality.
Bullshit. But I'd like to hear why do you think it was like that.
>When civilians and artistic monuments were deliberately, coldly
>and as a matter of policy set by Belgrade targeted by the heavy weapons of
>the JNA
Yep, Serbs caused it. But what about Muslim crimes from 1991 and 1992.?
Village Sijekovac near Bosanski Brod, Serbs were slaughtered for no reason.
Village Ahatovici near Sarajevo. People slaughtered without reason. Bradina
and other villages near Konjic. All done in the beggining of the war, with
Serbian crimes just yet to come?
>in Vukovar and Dubrovnik in 1991
There is a difference between Vukovar and Dubrovnik fightings.
>there was no precedent for this in
>the phony war fought primarily between Serbia and Slovenia early in 1991.
I am really pissed of with your not knowing nothing about situation. But
please tell me about war between Serbia and Slovenia, it is totally new to
me. Serbia attacked Slovenia before war in Croatia, right? So, where Serbian
forces came from? Hungary? Italy? Austria? Their Croat allies let them pass?
>The Croatian/Serbian and Slovenian phony war was very low-level because (1)
>Serbia had a low interest in conquering Slovenian territory, and although
>ethnic Croatians lived in Slovenia, neither the Serbian nor the Croatian
>leadership did not, as a matter of fact, make the criminal decisions made
>later on in 1991 by the Serbian brass to deliberately target civilians in
>Dubrovnik, and in 1992 to empty Banja Luka of Moslems. Croatians are
>portrayed as undifferentiated Fascists by Serb propaganda, but in 1991
>Croatian soldiers of the JNA served against Slovenia with a very un-Fascist
>reluctance.
No comment. Too stupid to answer, sorry, nothing personal.
>The fact that Serbia initiated the targeting of civilians, the destruction
of
>archeological and artistic treasures,
Ok, like what? Dubrovnik? So, what was destroyed in Dubrovnik by planned
targeting of treasures? Or drunken Serbs missed again?
>the forced movement of non-Serbs and
>their physical liquidation beginning in 1992
Did they prove all these things and I was asleep?
>makes it in part for RESPONSIBLE
>for criminal responses on the part of Croatians and of Moslems, starting in
>1992.
What a disgusting atempt to justify war crimes of one side and blame other
even for those. Well known theories. It just confirms that Serbs were guilty
for all and other for nothing.
>I'd be interested to know if you could post some non-fabricated,
large-scale
>incidents where Bosnia interned Serbs PRIOR to August 1992.
Why prior to August 1992.? Why the heck should I? What does that proves?
>>Soceity of camp prisoners has the data about that.
>Jean-Francois Lyotard, a French philosopher, points out that a total victim
is
>silent, mostly because he's dead. We need to hear from societies of camp
>prisoners but at the same time remember that 150,000 people cannot form
>such societies.
150,000?!?!?!?!?!?!
Shameless lying.
>>But not to bother, three >guards from Celebici camp were sentenced in
>>Hague tribunal, although they
>What is unfair is that thus far these little men (Moslem, Croat and Serb)
are
>punished but top men including Ratko Mladic, Milosevic, Karadzic and Arkan
>have not been brought to justice.
Interesting, but just top Serbs are not been brought to justice.
>And the movie Savior suggests that an
>American mercenary who has killed kids should get away with no punishment
>at all.
Nothing similar. It is paranoid view, it says nothing about punishing. It is
not typicall American movie in which bad guys get killed at the end so
stupid audience should understand how bad things are bad and crime does not
pays. It has nothing to do with punishing.
>If you feel that it is unfair that Zdravko Mucic got only 7 years why
>do you admire Savior?
I do not. It was quite lausy movie.
>Quaid gets a bus ticket to Split.
(Croatia)
>Quaid uses women and children to hide from the moral law.
Bullshit. He killed his fellow Serb to protect that woman and child. He did
it planing to hide after them? Or he was trying to help them?
>You do not whole-heartedly support Milosevic.
Mostly not at all.
>But it was demonstrated in 1989
>that mass and nonviolent protests by people unwilling to be ethnically
divided
>can overthrow dictators, as they ended the United States war in Vietnam.
The
>way clever shits like Milosevic avoid this is by dividing people along
ethnic
>lines, and PART of this strategy is to cause people to regard an analysis
of
>Serb politicians’ violations of international law as an attack on all
Serbs.
>The leaders mobilize the pre-Enlightenment notion of collective guilt and
use
>it against Moslems (universally interpreted as “muhajdeen”) and Croats
>(interpreted as “Fascists.”) This then causes the Serb to fear that this
>notion of collective guilt will be brought to bear upon him if his leaders
are
>arraigned.
Milosevic could not part people along ethnic lines. He could help developing
of Serbian nationalism as Serbia's president. But in Croatia Tudjman was
ruling, and he had all the same power over Croatia as Milosevic over Serbia.
But they had little influence on each others republic. It takes two to
fight.
>Milosevic’s policies are fully responsible of the rape of Bosnian and Croat
>women by Serb forces because it has been known for three years that Serbia
>used rape, and the shame and the silence it produces in Islamic women, as a
>form of ethnic cleansing.
Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't believe
it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
But anyway, it was never provec, neither was anyone accused for mass rapings
by Hague tribunal. How come?
>Milosevic acted in violation of the United
>Declaration of Human Rights by depriving a generation of ethnic Albanian
>schoolchildren a chance at going to school.
What a bullshit again. But I'll give you chance to explain how Milosevic did
it?
>It is therefore somewhere beyond
>obscene that Savior uses women and children as a moral shield, for the
>filmgoer is invited to identify with Quaid’s phony redemption because he
>takes care of one Serbian woman and one child. In the case of individual
>Moslem murders and rapes (which pro-Serbian posters have stated occur on
all
>sides in war) these acts cannot be ranged alongside the systematic
>victimization, in pursuit of state goals, of women and children by Serbia.
>Moslem and Croat excesses happened once Serbia made clear at
>Dubrovnik, Vukovar and Banja Luka that all acts, no matter how bestial,
were
>permitted in the war.
Stupid theory. But I presume that you have reason to think so, so, give us
your list of crimes according to which you claim this.
>>Goran: Sorry, but if you are supporting Croat and Muslim official
government
>>stories, they have no
>My sources do not include Croatian or Muslim official government stories
but
>the references previously posted, an ABC news documentary made in 1997, a
man
>no longer connected with the BiH government, contemporary articles in the
>New York Times, etc.
And they got their information from...........?
Guess what, western press was situated in Sarajevo and Zagreb. Never in
Knin, Pale or Banjaluka. Think.
>All sides have used modern public relations to get their
>message out: it would be surprising if they did not. Serbians who think it
>unfair that Bosnia had public relations firms don’t mention the firms that
>worked for Serbia during the war, and are proud in this newsgroup about
what
>they regard as a Hollywood public relations victory in the movie Savior.
Ok, what PR agencies Serbs were using during the war? Although there was a
UN ebmargo on Serbia? You have data some PR agencies were violating this
embargo?
Savior is D production US movie, what kind of victory is that?
>There is NO ONE AUTHORITATIVE TEXT on the 1991..1995 wars. But it
>oversimplifies to then say, lazily, that “all sides are equally guilty.”
>Instead of one authoritative text, there are multiple comparative readings
>(which would use official sources and Web pages) and the more complex and
>differentiated the reading is, the better it probably is.
All sides are guilty.
>>Goran: But they failed to find mass graves in the ground although they had
>>three years already to
>This is denial on the scale of Holocaust denial.
Nothing similar. I just refuse to buy pathetic Muslim propaganda. Ruder &
Finn got some award for representating Muslims and Croats, find what their
official said about forming view on Bosnia. You'd feel stupid if you see how
they are playing with you.
>UN soldiers and journalists
>were present at Srebenica and saw what happened: from Srebenica, Record
>of a
>War Crime (Jan Willem Honig and Norbert Both, Penguin, 1997):
>"Dutch soldiers witnessed many bodies being removed in an odd assortment of
>pick-up trucks, tractors with carts and vehicles with shovels. A UN
>Commission report described the experience of a Dutch soldier who had been
>captured in the early stage of Srebenica…'he saw a row of the shoes and
>rucksacks of 100 men.'".
So what happenned to other 7900? Maybe some war crimes did happen, I never
denied that.
>These observers were present in territory taken over by Pale with the
support
>of Belgrade, and they were clearly observing the results of the behavior of
>Serbian police and military acting under orders.
>>Ofcourse it is not the same, Germans were killing Jews, Americans (I
>>presume?) just interned Japanese Americans. Although it was purely racist
>>decision because German or Italian Americans weren't interned.
>>But this story has nothing to do with Bosnia.
>It has plenty to do with Bosnia because one of the Serbian justifications
is
>that everybody, including the hated Americans, does it.
No it isn't. Everybody does it and we think it is not fair to declare war
crimes as exclusive Serbian invention. Not to mention theory that Serbs are
guilty even for crimes Muslims and Croats did. What would you say if I say
that all Serbian crimes are done as revenge for genocide in WW2 when some
700.000 Serbs were killed?
But fact that war crimes sure are not Serbian invention, we do not claim
that crimes are allowed to Serbs to do either. All criminals must be
punished. I disgust using crimes in political purposes, what is strategy of
Muslims during whole war.
>>Absolut nonsence. Another argument that you mostly know nothing about
ex-Yu.
>>How the heck "they shall never beat you" can mean "We are going to beat
>>them"?!?! Shameless lie.
>Take a look what is happening in Kosovo. What was the effective exclusion
>of ethnic Albanians from 1991..1998 from schooling? It was a beating.
What exclusion?
>In the 1980s the "beating" Serbians took in Albania was local preference
for
>ethnic Albanians. The local Albanian authorities did not anuthorize punks
to
>beat up Serbs,
Beating Serbians did in ALBANIA in 1980's?
What are you talking about man?!?!?!
>but today beatings of ethnic Albanians are adminstered by
>Serb police in the course of their duties.
Lie. Ethnic Albanians live freely, terrorists are being beaten.
>Even after Serbia showed in 1991 that it was ready to bombard civilians
>(Dobrovnik and Vukovar) to gain its ends,
It was war. Allies bombed Germany, USA bombed Japan, nuked. It happens in
war. Not bombing civilians but enemy cities.
If Serbs bombed civilians in Vukovar and Dubrovnik, why did not they just
entered it? Was drunk?
>ethnic Albanians conducted a mostly
>non-violent resistance to their exclusion from society and schools in
>Kosovo,
>where they were the majority. According to an article ("Cry, the
dismembered
>country" by Timothy Garton Ash in this week's New York Review of Books),
this
>has changed: the KLA is now conducting armed resistance to the Serbs.
This
is
>because the nonviolent strategy got ethnic Albanians beat, not only by
punks
>but by police and military acting under orders.
Albanian separatism was first non-violent, I mean there was no terrorism.
Now KLA uprised and separatists are fighting. And they are beaten, they are
criminals. What is so hard to understand here?
>Ash quotes an Albanian farmer
>saying of the Serb units, "if the Americans weren't there, the police would
>beat us up." If the Americans aren’t there, “they shall never beat you”
>MEANS
>“we shall beat them, in preference to reconstructing the economy, providing
>equal rights for women, educating our children, staying sober, or doing
>anything else constructive.”
Maybe in your head. Albanians in Kosovo lived peacefuly with minor human
rights violations until KLA uprised and took over territory. They asked for
war and got the war. How manny of Albanians were beaten before KLA appeared?
How manny of them are beaten in police controlled cities in Kosovo
>>Another thing, Milsoevic said this in Kosovo polje, to local Serbs
>>maltreated by Albanian autonomy government. Had nothing to do with
>>Muslims or Croats. You know nothing.
>The Albanian autonomy government was obeying the law which under Tito
>recognized rights due to members of ethnic groups including Albanians and
>Serbs. Milosevic was consciously and deliberately violating laws still in
>force in 1987.
No. Milosevic changed constitution of Serbia in 1989. (legally) to prevent
separatism of Kosovo province (that was part of Serbia even before 1989.).
National minorities in Serbia do have their minority rights and schools in
their language (Hungarians, Slovak). Albanians are boycotting state and that
is whole story. Why should Milosevic violate Albanian rights and not
Hungarian or Slovak?
>He was also appealing to anti-Moslem sentiment, because the ethnic
>Albanians are Moslem, as I am sure you know.
How?
>>Yeah, we Serbs felt that good last few years.
>No, you seem as an ethnic group to be miserable SOBs.
What's a SOB? Wait, sons of a bitch?
What a fucken lunatic you are. Totally crazy.
>One journalist reports
>from Pale that on Saturday night, the streets resound with the cries of
>Serbian women getting beaten by Serbian men. Maybe he lies, maybe this is
>just one more Saturday night, or maybe this is collective post-traumatic
>stress syndrome.
What a idiocy, for God's sake! What a idiocy. What a stupid American shit
knowing blabering. Serbs colectively beat women and their crying is heard
all over Pale?
What kind of a moron you are?
>It is true that Sabrina Petra Ramet identifies the abuse of
>women as both a cause and a consequence of the troubles:
It would be interesting to compare numbers of family violence, child abuse
and run aways in USA and Serbia.
What a stupid theory, Serbs massively rape, beat women.... while local
Croats and Muslims have absolutly different mentallity, and Albanians are
much more civilized then all of them. What kind of a moron you are?
>"Indeed, just as economic crises hit hardest, so too the alternative
>responses
>to crises- whether chauvinist authoritarianism (as in Serbia)…have already
>posed new threats to women's interests."
Women in Serbia are threatend same as all other people of Serbia.
>Savior pretends to be against traditional Serbian male chauvinism, but it
>validates Quaid by getting Nastassia Kinski to treat him with respect. This
>itself is more sexism because acceptance by a woman doesn't constitute
>moral
>authority: quite the opposite: gangsters typically have at least the
>appearance of this acceptance.
What a politically correct bullshit. Serbs are: Nazis, chauvinists, sexists,
antisemit, beating women,
drinking....................................................................
....................
what kind of a moron you are?
>C. S. Lewis (British writer and critic) has a phrase which may describe
>today’s Serbs: “men maddened by false promises and soured by true
>miseries.”
Maddened? In what way?
>>Hm, it had nothing to do with drawn lines, lines were drawn later in
>>November1995. Before that
>But if you take a look at the post-Dayton map, the Serbians have nothing to
>complain about, do they? Bosnia has practically ceased to exist, because
it
>is federated with a state containing Serbs who will not live next to
Bosnian
>Muslims or Bosnian Croats. Serbia achieved its goals. In so doing, it
>caused the forced relocation of its own people, in both Bosnia and Krajina.
Serbs had some sucess in defending our rights. But you'll notice that Bosnia
is independent and Srpska republika is not united with Serbia. We did not
suceed in achieving our goals. Croats and Muslims wanted independence from
Yugoslavia, they got it. We want independence from Croats and Muslims, we
did not get it.
In Balkans we are used of politicians saying one thing and doing another. I
am not interested in analyzing Izetbegovic whatsoever.
If he created democratic, multi-ethnic or whatever Bosnia, why did he
ignored Serbian rights and Serbian will (Bosnian Serbs', one of three equal
Bosnian peoples according to constitution)?
Why did he refused Lisboa plan? Why did he said he'd sacrifice peace for
souveregnity?
>If you start the skeptical game, you cannot end it, in somewhat the same
way
>that the killing started by Milosevic cannot end neatly. At what point in
>his career did Alia mean what he said?
He ignored will of Serbian people in declaring Bosnia's independence.
>The answer, of course, is that the reading is selected to meet the needs of
>the thugs in control of Serbia.
Whatever.
>>In few muncipals Serbs had almost 90% majority. That is a fact you can not
>>deny.
>This does not change the removal of the Moslems from Banja Luka and their
>transfer to a concentration camp in Omarska.
Once again, it has been proved and I was asleep?
>Furthermore, despite his Islamic
>convictions, Alia opposed the ethnic cantonization of Bosnia advocated by
>such
>idiots as John Major. It is partition and cantonization, whether in India
and
>Pakistan, the West Bank, or in Bosnia, that causes forced moves, not
>Islamic
>philosophy.
Not necessary. It was way to divide Bosnia peacefuly so all peoples could
run their destiny instead of Muslim domination.
Major idiot had proposals Bosnian Croats and Serbs liked and that could
prevent war and Muslim hegemonic wishes. Genius Alija refused them and
caused bloody war. What was Alija's right to refuse plan Serbs and Croats
liked?
>Serbia supported ethnic cantonization which means it is
>responsible for most forced relocations.
Idiotic statement.
>I have stated before that the basis for the charges against Serbia are not
>body counts. For one thing, Serbia has conquered through deliberate terror
>most of what was in 1992 the state of Bosnia, and it controls access to
>sites that may contain mass graves.
a) Serbia was not fighting war in Bosnia, it was civil war
b) SFOR had acess to whole Bosnia and stil have
>Serbian leaders have a direct and personal
>interest in concealing these sites (and I do not deny that Bosnian leaders
>have a legitimate interest in revealing them: and please note that their
>interest in revelation is moral but desire to conceal is not.) Who wins the
>body counts becomes irrevelant to the fact that multiple sources (see above
>on who knows and how one knows) with differing interests (not a mythical
>disinterest) confirm Serbian high-level intentions and strategy.
I don't care on Muslim shit propaganda. If crime is proved, criminals should
be punished. Full stop.
>Apologists who use “you know nothing” as an argument produce something
>which
>cannot be fully answered because it is so dysfunctional (American word:
>means crazy.)
Excuse me, but I don't possibly want to answer your stupid claims. Have you
ever tried to talk to a lunatic that thinks he knows everything best? It is
not easy.
>They know that a mythical, authoritative Father (in Yugoslavia’s
>case, Tito) has died but they want his authority to speak with power. This
>is crazy because it is Freud’s moment at which the horde of male children
who
>have destroyed the hated/loved father have fallen to squabbling over who
>replaces him. The only way out of this is not through images and their
>irrationality (in which, for example, unidentified helicopters attack Serbs
>in a no-fly zone, an image apparently inserted by Oliver Stone to resonate
>with American fears of "the black helicopters of the UN".) It is through
>texts. The reverse way (what Max Horkheimer called “psychoanalysis in
>reverse”) is to be maddened by the false promises of false images by men
>who want to stay in power.
You should check some data from Muslim army about suplying of Srebrenica and
Zepa. Using helicopters. Save this US conspiracy theory bullshit fot
yourself.
>>You really know nothing, don't you? Just what mainstream media tell you.
>The short answer is that I do not live in a society with a controlled
>press.
Oh, I forgot. But I am interested, in US media, recent bombing of Iraq, were
they writing about it anything similar with US gov. claims and stories?
What was US press view about war in Vietnam at the time?
>After some openness, Milosevic has it appears completely cracked down on
>both universities and the press as of 1998.
He did took control over universities, that is true. About press, he just
made restrictive law in which it is possible to punish newspapers for
printing a lie, or something like that. Some papers were punished with large
money punishments, but most of independend papers are still published.
>The long answer is that the above statement is less a move in a rational
>debate than a symptom of collective post-traumatic stress, a symptom seen
>in the USA after Vietnam.
So, if someone disagree with you, he is demented?
>In this symptom, the person making statements like this HIMSELF is
>typically uninformed about the issue
Could you save me of this psychoanalysis shit and speak on topic?
>but has personal pain as a consequence of his
>leaders’ criminal behavior,
Personal pain as consequence something "my" leaders did? Well, if I am
allowed to say something about me, I don't feel anything similar. And I am
not aware that anything similar is wide among Serbs.
>ranging in this newgroups from relatives forcibly
>relocated because of the Moslems
What has personal pain as consequence of leaders deeds to do with cousins
forcibly relocated by the Muslims?
>to having to live in Belgrade under international sanctions.
Same question.
>He stays stuck in this problem because of suspicion
>of knowledge claims that are based on anything other than personal and
>tribal accounts
"Tribal accounts"?!?! Man, you are full of shit. What are we, some kind of
Apache?
What problem, personal pain?
>(such as found in Savior.)
Valuable source I must say.
>This is because his leaders spoke to him
>of knowledge which he knows to be fancy lies.
What? Personal pain?
>My instinct is actually to be very suspicious of Peter Jennings when he
makes
>claims about Serbia in the ABC News documentary of 1997. This is because
he
>speaks in well-formed sentences. Statements like “imri moronu” or the
>incoherent mutterings of a victimized victimizer (see below) become at some
>level more believable.
What is "imri moronu"? "Die moron"? It is "umri".
>But the way to get over this is to realize that there are levels of lies.
>Lawrence Eagleburger’s underlings told him about the forced removal and
>internment of the Moslems of Banja Luka and Eagleburger at first confirmed
>this and then he denied it in our Senate. Eagleburger appears on the
>documentary being questioned by Jennings.
>The job is to differentiate the LOWER slickness of Peter Jennings from the
>HIGHER slickness of Eagleburger. One thing the viewer should note is that
>some of the things that the highly slick pol, from Eagleburger to Hitler,
>says are known to be false through logic alone.
>For example, Eagleburger makes the claim that in the Cold War the United
>States would have stepped in if Milosevic had engaged in his behavior with
a
>still- powerful Soviet Union. This approaches the sort of nonsense Hitler
>purveyed because, of course, the United States abandoned Eastern Europe to
>the Communists at Yalta and NEVER stepped in to avoid violations of human
>rights… whether in Hungary in 1956, East Germany in 1953, or Czechoslovakia
>in 1968. Whereas even in realpolitik terms it would have been easier for
the
>USA to position the Sixth Fleet off Dubrovnik in 1991, because of the
>impotence of the Soviet Union.
I don't give a shit about your internal policy. Main problem is that USA
consider this war as Serbian invasion on Bosnia or Croatia (although,
attacks on Iraq are defending their interests). There was no invadion and
USA had no reason to intervene. Although they shouldn't even if there was,
without UN permission.
>So perhaps I know nothing in the way “knowledge” is defined in modern-day
>Serbia
You sure have vile imagination and I have problems following it, so I'll
ilustratae something to you: If you say Serbia attacked Albania in 1980's,
and such things never happened, in modern-day Serbia you don't know what
happened in 1980's. Capisc?
>(although one thing knowledge, post-Enlightenment, is not afraid of is
>opposing views, and the state of epistemology in modern day Serbia is shown
>by the fact that Slobo has closed down, according to Western reports,
>philosophy departments in all universities.)
Another example: if you say that philosophy departments are closed, and they
are not, that means you don't know much about what Slobo did in
universities.
He did not. You are going to find some meaning in this, something similar
like slaves in southern USA was not allowed to know to read? Well, your
information are wrong, although it sounds convenient.
>Perhaps Serbia’s leaders would
>prefer a Hollywood ending, for in Hollywood it is said that “nobody knows
>anything.” If nobody knows anything, then the world is an armed camp. In
>the American military there is a saying: opinions are like assholes,
>everyone’s got one. Opinions may be like assholes, but do note: this is
>necessary in the military for assuring absolute obedience.
Milosevic'd like to make Serbia obedient, that is not revolutionary
invention. Problem is he can not do this. In 1996. masses were demonstrating
agaisnt him and his theft in elections.
>>Eastern Bosnia is mostly rural, we the Serbs kill pigs often, we brew them
and
>>eat them. Mladic is originaly from Kalinovik in Herzegovina, small town,
>>almost rural, so he has peasant background. He was slaughtering pig, my
>>relatives do that all the time, and even I slaughtered one recently. Big
>>deal, they made up story of nothing.
>Nobody knows anything, so Ratko’s act was meaningless? Perhaps: perhaps
>not.
Somebody knows something, we are some kind of reasonable creatures.
Ratko's act.... maybe it was done to show his charisma and determination. In
war, it is necessary.
>But why did he slaughter it, not at a party for UN peacekeepers, but
>instead
>at a meeting in which the fate of the non-Serbs at Srebenica was at issue?
See above. Macho bullshit.
>Yes, he wanted to show Dutch peace-keepers that he was a farm-boy and as
>such more of a "real man."
So, you discovered that Ratko planned to show that to Dutch? Wow, I was not
aware how smart he is, and how metaphorical his deeds are.
>The British military historian John Keegan points out, the very origin of
>war
>to the death is found in the slaughter of large and relatively human-like
>animals by ancient farm boys,
Origin of war is simply fighting over something. Killing for food, fighting
for survival, against animals or human, fighting to defend territory, way of
life....
>farm boys like the Indo-Europeans who conquered
>the Dravidians of south India because of their willingness to wage war to
the
>death. The slaughter of large, relatively human-like animals inculcates
both
>practical experience in the use of weapons and a willingness to see
human-like
>death.
To mystical for my taste.
>Ratko was at some level of consciousness bringing up the fact that
>the
>West and its ideals were being confronted by "real men" from the farm and
>that for this reason, Serbs should be given whatever they wanted.
Ufff...........after reading so much bullshit, here comes something I could
think about it. I could agree to some point. As I said above, he was showing
his determination, at some level of consciouseness. Very nicely said.
Yes, Ratko is determined man. So what?
>>Well, that is idea of a story. A soldier with hardened heart saves young
>>girl and her baby, it is heas change, katarza, he does something good
>>after doing evil, things. That is idea of a movie.
>And it sucks. It is a lie.
Ofcourse, it is a fiction. Such things did not happen, I think this even is
writen at the end of movie? Ya know, "All caracters and events in this movie
are fictional, any similarity.....".
>It is obscene for Serbian-American punks to watch
>this shit because it deliberately conceals what happened.
How paranoid. Movie says one story from war, fictioned, it has no such deep
meaning as you see it. It is just D class movie, pathetic and simplified.
>Here is what
>Honig and Both write about what happened at Srebenica:
>"The process of tracking down these individuals was a careful and
deliberate
>one. As in Visegrad, lists with the prominent Muslims were drawn up prior
to
>the attack. In many places, a parallel local government administration had
>also been set up some time before. A so-called Krizni Stab, or Crisis
>Headquarters, COMPRISED OF LOCAL SERB LEADERS AND POLICE (emphasis mine)
>would be ready to take over power and organize the removal of the Muslim
and
>Croat local elites. The people on the list were rounded up and either
>summarily executed or sent to detention centres."
This have to do with how war started in Bosnia. Major acters were so called
national parties, Muslim (SDA), Serbian (SDS) and Croat (HDZ). They were in
charge in their aereas, for arming local population (all three nations were
armed before war). When war started these local elites were leading their
militias in taking over rule in their place. When one militia would take
over, members of other nation elite (local enemy leaders) were in danger.
I.e. in Muslim Sarajevo all members of SDS before the war were suspect, and
number of them was killed in Sarajevo by local militia. But Muslims loyal to
Serbian gov. or Serbs loyal to Muslim gov. were not persecuted. It was war,
among other, among national "elites" mostly.
>This planned execution is obviously top-down and cannot be visually equated
>with individual behavior.
Bullshit. Top government couldn't possibly know all names of local
prominents.
>>Neither were Franjo Tudjman or Alija Izetbegovic.
>Tudjman can't be prosecuted for being a successful idiot,
>and I don't know why Alia should be prosecuted.
It is not Alia, it is Alija, in all three languages (Serbian, Croatian,
Bosnian).
For the same things Milosevic shoud be.
>For getting kidnapped?
Arrested.
>Bosnia adhered to the UN charter
Muslim and Croat leaders in Bosnia proclaimed Bosnian independence illegaly
according to SFRJ laws.
>when it constituted itself as a state in which all people of any
>ethnicity would be treated the same, and it got the shit kicked out of it
>(Americanism for beat up) while Western politicians stood by.
Bullshit. Problem was those assholes that treated all ethnicities the same
deliberatly ignored will of Serbian ethnicity, one of three equal according
to Bosnian constitution.
>>>Spinoza9999: It's clear to me from reading the posts on
>>>soc.culture.yugoslavia that many >Serbs and Serbian-Americans have no
brief
>>>for Slobo. What they seem to dislike is a notion of "collective guilt."
>>Goran: What is a brief? Condemnation?
>What I meant was that it appears that many Serbs dislike Slobo.
Correct.
>They have no
>"case" (brief) for his being a good guy. But they react to Western critics
>in a way that keeps him in power.
Well, if Western critics were against Slobo it would be ok. But they are not
just against Slobo but against all Serbian people. I.e. against Serbian
right to be independent from Bosnia and Croatia, Srbian right to fight
terrorism and separatism in Serbia.
>>Nothing similar. For God's sake man, we have our own history, stop
>>explaining our story by comparing us with something else. Did you know
that
>>some 700.000 Serbs were killed by Nazi Croats in WW2? That is OUR
>>history.
>I am named after a man who was killed by the Germans. I can get along with
>Germans. Why can't Serbs stop fighting World War II?
We are not allowed to. Again, Muslim Croat coalition was trying to rule over
Serbian territories in Bosnia and Croatia, to extort Serbs and to subjugate
us. That is story in Balkans for last 500 years.
>Stjepan Mestrovic calls
>this emotional dishonesty, which uses past wrongs to mobilize hatred, post-
>emotional. He points out how the mobilization of false emotion destroys
>ability to feel real emotions, such as compassion for other people.
Compassion for enemy is very Christian value. And it is very nice. But it is
and was very rare in Balkans last few years. I can't say I can't understand
this in some way.
But who used past wrongs to mobilize hatred....... well, you'd never guess,
all sides. Muslims are now claiming that some 11 genocides were done over
them in past (they just love to be victims) and Croats claim that they were
biggest victims of communist rule. According to them, communist Yu was Serb
dominated. Strange if we remember Croat Tito and Slovenian Kardelj who made
constitution of SFRJ in 1974.
>This was clearly displayed in post-Vietnam movies made in the USA, which
>were watched in many cases avidly by men who shot children or abused their
>families.
I fail to se conection, but are you saying watching post-Vietnam movies (I
guess these are movies about Vietnam war?) caused children shooting or
abusing?
>>But if because of your ignorance need comparation, compare Slobo with
Harry
>>Truman. Truman droped nukes onto Japan, and he was wrong. But that does
not
>>means Americans shoudn't fight fascism.
>Truman’s decision was immoral. However, he did not then deny, as you deny,
>that the crime took place.
The crime was not most crucial thing in my comparation. I wanted to say that
bad things (nuke) can be done while doing good things (fighting fascists).
>Instead, American Gis helped the victims of the
>atomic bombs and the many more victims in Japan of conventional bombing.
After they bombed them? Well, possible, so what? They were bombing civilians
10,000 miles away from home, why would they hate them? But in Balkans hate
exists for centuries, and when it is waked up once........ shit happens a
lot.
>The difference: one can imagine the GI behaving in a civilised fashion
towards
>the German or Japanese civilian whereas the policy of the Serbian police
and
>military appears that similar behavior on the part of a Serb cop or soldier
>would have been insubordination, or worse: in many casesm the research of
>DePaul law professor Cherif Bassiouni shows incidents in which lowlevel
>Serb grunts were ORDERED to commit war crimes.
Well, one sample I remember, Serbian police was watching neighbours leaving,
without grining, cotence....... just watching. They didn't need help.
>At the end of this long post, I include an extended quote from the non-
>Communist Marxist thinker Theodore Adorno which shows how images distort
>thought. But if you must have images, I contrast the American GI carring
the
>Nisei woman's bag for here at the Seattle railway station with the near-
>impossibility of any such image coming out of relocations as directed by
>Serbian police or military. Instead of soldiers carrying bags, the images
>are
>of soldiers grinning foolishly yet triumphantly over the inert corpses of
>Moslem women.
What a fucken lying bullshit. I don't say such things didn't happen, but I
can't help myself not to think about lt. Calley killing 150 people including
2 years old baby. Now compare GI war criminal with Serbian war criminal.
Sound lika we are all humans, more or less?
>Now, you may be able to produce such images (and Savior manufactures such
>images, which the viewer has to remind himself are literally fiction.) But
>their near-impossibility is demonstrated by the textual fact that the post-
>Enlightenment American military has provided a legal recourse for the GI
>who refuses to obey an illegal order,
Mi Lai shows that such institute is not always used, huh? And the need for
such thing says that illegal orders were quite common?
>whereas there is no such textual tradition in the Serbian army.
Does this means you did some research on Serbian army history? And what do
you consider by Serbian army? Army of Kingdom of Serbia? Army of Kingdom of
Yugoslavia? Yugoslav army in homeland? Yugoslav communists? JNA? VRS? SVK?
VJ?
>Serbs want to deny that ethnic cleansing took place and that if it did, it
>was just as OK as what America did.
Nothing similar. It is not enough that you are talking about Serbs, now you
are talking for the Serbs?
>This is so illogical that it cannot be debated: from contradictory
>premises,
>anything you like can be deduced: this is why bigshots like Eagleburger are
so
>adept at slyly getting their hearers to accept logical contradictions: it
>leaves them free to get people to accept what is convenient to them.
I guess US officials was not allowed to do nothing until Serbs showed them
how to.
>Fortunately, Freudian psychology finds a way at least to describe this
logic
>and to describe it is to refute it. In his story of “kettle logic” as a
>defensive move of the psychiatric patient, Freud gives the example of a man
>who says (1) I did not take your kettle and (2) it was dirty anyway when I
>stole it. Serbian public relations wants the West to accept a much more
>malign kettle logic: (1) we did not kill the Moslems, (2) we killed them
less
>than they killed us (3) killing lots is anyway justified because everybody
>is doing it.
Bunch of crap. Some Serbs did war crimes. They have to be punished.
We, the Serbs did not invented war crimes. Not all Serbs are rensponsible
for war crimes. Serbs are not responsible for Croat and Muslim crimes. Serbs
are not only who did bad things. Serbs are not wild monsters people. Having
problem with any of this?
>>>Not only this, as Ariel Dorfman writes in this month's Harper's, it is
even
>>>necessary for the criminal himself to suffer for his acts and what is
being
>>>done to Pinochet is actually a favor. This is also what Fyodor
Dostoevsky
>>>proposed in Karamazov, and it seems to involve subjection of the criminal
to
>>>the same sort of pitiless law that he himself represented to his victim.
>>Fine with me, although it is not too Christian. It could be as evening
>>with bastard.
>Here I slipped up and I implied that Pinochet should be subjected to the
SAME
>sort of injustice as was found in Chile during the 1970s. And note that as
>soon as I messed up and deviated from justice, you agreed with me.
You failed to notice part saying "that would be not too Christian, evening
with the bastard". Did you?
>What I meant was that Pinochet should be subjected to the pitilessness that
>Chileans were subjected to, but it should be pitiless application of
>JUSTICE and not INJUSTICE.
I see. Well, it goes without saying.
>>>This is why Savior is such an evil movie
>>Excuse me, but you sound immature.
>Frankly I do not care if I sound immature, or hysterical.
Well, if you just sound so it is ok.
>The problem in
>postwar Serbia appears to be an attempt to return to normality, to
>maturity, and to non-"hysteria".
To normality, as much as it is possible. It is more tendency to live normal
as we used to. Where is the problem there?
>The ABC news report
Who probably understand Serbia better then us living here?
>shows expensively dressed Serbs
>sitting in cafes with nice sunglasses. Serbs WANT a return to normality
>and civility and nice sunglasses and cafes,
We are guilty, I admitt.
>but one purged of dirty Muslims or Croats.
Absolute nonsence bullshit. Here is one information you maybe didn't know.
Since 1991. it was impossible to hear music from Serbia in Croatia or Muslim
controlled parts of Bosnia. In Serbia, music from Croatia and made by
Muslims was and still is very popular. You can hear it everywhere. Strange?
I'd love to hear your explanation about this.
>I am personally familiar with this discomfort. Here in America our media
>have
>placed deep within our psyches a notion that the “good life” is a WHITE
>person’s life and that typically AfricanAmerican behavior is a potential
>threat. For example, it actually annoys me that African American men
>congregate on street corners in my neighborhood and tend to accost
expensively
>dressed men with various proposals, from giving spare change to getting a
>shoe shine.
>The images, the “psychoanalysis in reverse”, crowd in: the buried image of
>the (white) Yuppie in the city versus the image of the potential criminal,
>and sexual threat.
It is petrified you mean?
>I am certain that there was a similar thing going on in
>the Serb’s psyche as he contrasted his desires (and the frustration of
those
>desires as Yugoslavia’s economy deteriorated in the 1980s) with the
differing
>styles of his Muslim neighbors. In my case, a text reverses the reversal,
>and that is the mere fact that homeless African Americans have nowhere to
go,
>and that were I to be homeless I would likewise have nowhere to go, and be
>likewise full of business ideas for fixing my situation.
Just one little difference (another sign you know mostly.... nothing).
Difference between white and black Americans is nothing similar to
difference between Serbs, Croats and Muslims. We had almost identical ways
of life, and we still do.
>I therefore propose that on the surface of a manufactured normality (as
>portrayed in the cafes of Pale or of Banja Luka) is the TRUE craziness.
>But
>nonetheless, I am aware that questioning this normality might seem immature
>and hysterical. Ø Ø >
It is not manufactured. People like to dress nicely, to look nice and to sit
in caffees. What a heck is wrong with that?
>>>(and why it seems, being evil, to draw out evil in others: as I watched
it in
>>>a Chicago theater, some apparently Serbian-American punks tittered as
they
>>>munched popcorn and watched the Croatian atrocity: their false
consciousness
>>>was apparently so well-evolved that it found "the suffering of the Serbs"
>>>itself amusing.)>
>>In what way?
>I have no idea, but in America audiences often laugh inappropriately at
>suffering, especially in rural areas and in the neo-ruralized big cities.
So, why the heck you took some morons as example of something? A moron is a
moron.
>I
>have no idea, but Stjepan Mestrovic names the LACK of emotionality found in
>"post-emotional" appeals. Savior pulls out all the stops, from cute babies
>to
>folk songs, and produces titters in punks. Hitler demonstrated how to
unlink
>emotion from reason, and post-Hitler, people have named the lack of any
>true German emotional committment to Hitler.
They laugh to cute babies and folk music? I don't get it. And about
unlinking emotions of reason.... nothing strange in our human kind.
>>Ask forgivness for what?
>Shooting kids.
It was tragic mistake, shooting kid if I recall. And nobody is asking
forgiveness for that.
>Last year, the Albanian leadership was enforcing non-violent resistance to
>Serbian oppression.
No. Albanian parties leaders were enforcing non-violent separatism. Trying
to separate without violence.
>However, extreme elements of the KLA have taken over.
Are you aware that peaceful Albanian leadership failed to condemn terrorism
and violence. Instead of that, they are blaming police for all.
>Serbia bears part of the responsibility for this since it did not respond
>to the non-violent resistance.
To respond how? Kosovo Albanians are boycotting most state institutions, and
want just independence. (impossible). What should Serbia do?
Another thing, here is something that has nothing to do with reason:
Albanians started terrorism. Serbs are blamed they did not responded to
separatism before, so now they are guilty for Albanian terrorism?
>>>The ethnic Albanians have a legitimate beef.
>> A meet of a cow? Beef?
>> "Legitimate"? Based on laws? Nothing similar friend.
>A “beef” in American slang is a complaint. Perhaps we have a short snappy
>word for it because we can have a beef with the cops and the boss in the
>first place. What scares me about Serbia is the fact that the cops, the
>boss, the bigshots in general are deviant and nondeviance then becomes a
>threat to them: nondeviance itself becomes immature and hysterical and
>deviant. And as part of the way in which deviant Serb politicians have
>been rewarded for their very deviance, deviance is speading in America.
You must have seen some interesting explorations when you pronounced all
Serbia as sick? (violent).
Bigshots in Serbia in general are the same as in Croatia or Bosnia, and much
better then in Albania. Or you think otherwise for some reason?
>Serbia is a member of the UN although it is under sanctions.
It's membership is suspended.
>As a member it
>subscribes to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. When a country
>subscribes to an international law, that law becomes part of its domestic
>law.
Quite right.
>By treating Albanians WORSE than medieval Turks treated Christians, for
>Serbia
>denied Albanians any civil existence whatsoever whereas Johnny Turk put
>Billy Serb to work. Serbia therefore violated the law.
And what exactly Serbia did to Albanians?
>As soon as Slobbo said “nobody shall ever beat you” in the Yugoslavian
>context, anybody with any sense wanted to get the hell out of Dodge City
>(Americans “get out of Dodge City” when they know that the bullets are
going
>to start flying.) Slobbo’s “nobody shall ever beat you” caused the leaders
>in non-Serb states to want to set up shop on their own,
Another way of blaming Serbs for everything. Man just said to people that no
one is going to beat them. And look what you made of it? How? This is sick
man. Nationalists took over only in Croatia and among Bosnian Muslims.
Macedonia and Slovenia had reformed communists in charge, and Macedonia had
no problems with satan Milosevic. How come?
>because not only would
>they have no role in a Serb-dominated Yugoslavia, they'd be personally at
>risk
>(Serbian policy targeted local leaders, the deputy foreign minister of
>Bosnia was assassinated by Serb military units,
It was after war started.
>and Alia was kidnapped in
>1992 at the Sarajevo airport when he returned from the Lisbon peace
>conference.)
Arrested.
>“Nobody shall ever beat you” was what we call in America a
>stick of shitfire with a wick on it.
It is what it says, and creating such a nonsence of it is fucken sick.
Capsic? He said "noone shall beat you" and he ment "noone shall beat you".
It is fucken crazy to see something else in it.
>Perhaps it now has post-emotional value because it makes no sense to keep
>a 1389 defeat alive.
Hombre, I explained you that Serbs live in Kosovo, and you stated they don't
want it. Serbs live there for centuries. Fulll stop.
What 1389 defeat means to us is not of importance to you neither it has to
do anything with present situation in Kosovo.
>England celebrates Agincourt in 1415 (a victory) for
one
>reason, and that is Shakespeare. One characteristic of post-emotionality
is
>the replacement of the real by the false. And in a world of scarcity there
>are almost always more pressing reasons to make political decisions that
>feigned emotions over distant events. This is why it is equally
>post-emotional, and equally unjust, for Jews to want to settle Arab lands
>because of what happened in 70 AD.
I don't care. Kosovo is part of Serbia, where PART of population wants to
separate, and along that way they kill people and extort them from their
houses. It has to be stoped, law has to be obeyed and Kosovo shall not be
independent. It was not allowed to Krajina Serbs, it was not allowed to
Bosnian Serbs, it shall not be allowed to Kosovo Albanians.
>Not one blackbird could ever justify one forced relocation of a Moslem,
Neither is anyone trying to justify forced relocation of Muslim. What forced
relocation are you talking about?
>and the demographic fact is that most of Kosovo is non-Serb.
So what?
>Unfortunately, the
>leaders of the Serbs have carefully created a situation in which Serbs
>cannot live side by side by Moslems.
Do I see typical Albanian fascist bullshit here? O yeah, I do.
Give me one reason why Muslims and Serbs can not live together in Kosovo?
>They thus present the international community
>with a choice between "stealing" Kosovo from Serbia, or creating an even
>worse disaster for ethnic Albanians than was created for Bosnian Moslems in
>1992..1995.
Nothing similar. The choice is: low frequency terrorism in Kosovo making
life miserable for all or peace and order. Peace is possible to achieve by
exterminating terrorism.
>>but that is just one motivaton for us to fight to keep it. But today
>troubles
>>has nothing to do with it. Problems are: Albanian national minority
>>(that
>>has always been national minorityi in Serbia
>...but majority in Kosovo..."gerrymandering" is an American word and it
>means creating districts so that your favorite group is a majority.
Gerrymadnering? You are right. Kosovo and Metohija are part of Serbia since
they were liberated by Turks. Albanians are minority in Serbia. But somebody
gerrymandered stuff, so they made autonomus province called "Kosovo" so
Albanians could achieve and be majority.
>>) wants to steal part of territory of Serbia and create independent
fascist
>>ethnically clean state. Serbian authorities are fighting separatists and
>>terrorists. Capisc?>
>In Freudian terms, this “projects” one’s own motivation on others.
In Serbia this is called "disgusting lie" or "odvratna laz".
When Serbs do something wrong, Serbs are to blame. When
Muslims/Croats/Albanians do something bad, Serbs are to blame.
Wierd.
>Milosevic’s entire career since 1987 has been based on Serbia for the
>Serbians alone.
Are you 100% sure? How come then that Serbia is only multiethnic state in
former-Yu today? Slovenia is almost pure Slovenian, Croatia extort it's
Serbs, and in Serbia some 65% of population are Serbs, others are
minorities. Albanians, Hungarians, Slovaks, Muslims, Romanians, Croats,
Bunjevci, Gypsies (best position of Gypsies in whole E.Europe is in
Yugoslavia).
And how much Serbs remained in Sarajevo?
Another nonsence.
>It is now true that the KLA wants to be rid of the Serbs in
>Albania,
In what Albania?
>but this is because they saw what happened in Bosnia.
Another excuse. They declared independence in 1990. or it was 1991. before
anything in Bosnia happened.
>ANY Serbians
>living outside of Serbia are a pretext for Serbia to invade and to support
>Serbian “liberation” movements.
Outside Serbia? ANOTHER THING YOU DON'T KNOW. Kosovo is part of Serbia,
always has been.
>> Serbs were fighting for their rights, lives, homes and property.
>…and any other property they could grab.
Smartass.
>> Serb WOMAN was refugee and perpetrator at the same time?!?! And you
bought
>>that shit? Excuse me, but in Serbia we call such idiotic stories "fucking
in a
>>healthy brain".>
>In America we would regard fucking in a healthy brain as quite normal. And
>this may be the key point: you confuse two very diferent concepts.
Ok, here is explanation what does saying means: you treat me as lunatic
although I am not. Capisc?
>A mathematician knows that a description of a “set” as understood in logic
>and mathematics is different from an enumeration of its members, whereas it
>appears that fifty years of thug Communism have destroyed this ability to
>make this distinction in the former Yugoslavia.
>Marxist theory describes the SET of capitalist exploiters or “kulaks” (rich
>peasants.) Thugs confused the ease in which this set can be DESCRIBED with
>the very real difficulty in which its members can be ENUMERATED. Thugs
also
>failed to see that an individual could be in the set at one time and not
>another. And thugs failed to see that sets aren’t mutually exclusive.
What thugs? What this has to do with anything?
>[This is why thugs hate intellectuals: this is why Slobo closes the
philosophy
>departments. It is because this is thought without images.]
He doesn't.
>So in Russia and in Eastern Europe, I believe, people got used to thug
>oversimplification, and this caused them to implement Stalin’s purges.
Former Yugoslavi oposed Stalin hombre, we were never under his influence.
>Having been trained in this, Serbs in Yugoslavia think that one is either a
>“good guy” or else a “bad guy”, and for this reason they welcome Hollywood’
>s
>categorization of the Serbian-merc “good guy” versus green-head-scarved
>muhajdeen and Croatian thugs.
Let us make something clear: Hollywood is selling to whole world shit about
good and bad guys, black and white, nothing grey. Hollywood, Ca. USA.
You are blaming Serbs for EVERYTHING, EVERYTHING, and other for NOTHING. Bad
and good guys. You are selling that shit to me. And you are accusing Serbs
for that? This is what I call projection.
>This results in the fact that the women spoken-to by the British officer
>was,
>not some “fucking in a healthy brain” but the most characteristic person in
>Yugoslavia at that time. She was a member of the class of victims because
>she
>was fleeing a Bosnian advance. She was also a member of a class of
>victimizers because she had participated in the cleansing and the murder
>of her neighbors.
Participated in what way? Because she is Serb? What a sick idea. For being
American, you participated in Mi Lai crime. How does this sounds?
>The collapse of these distinctions is also seen in the fact that modern
>Yugoslavia leaves no place for COMBINATIONS of ethnicity. Only three
>ethnicities generate several possibilities, and cantons cannot be made for
>each one. But it appears that thug Marxist theory eliminated the idea that
>one could be both a capitalist and worker (something quite common in
>America), and this destruction persists now in Serbian ethnic discourse.
One can't be at the same time Serb and Croat and Muslim. While two peoples
tend to rule over third, it is not something third people would like.
>> About your references: who are these people, why all these books were
>>printed after 1990., who payed their printing? Why do you think these are
not
>>just political pamflets? What makes them trustworthy? What are sources of
>>these people? Was it some shit published by Ruder & Finn. Is it a problem
to
>>print bullshit book today sponsored by some foreign gov.? Who are these
people
>>and what are their sources? You gave me 0 reasons to believe them until
now
>1. These books are histories of the war, with the exception of Balkan
Babel,
>which is a history of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. I believe that it is
>unimportant that they were printed after 1990, and most of them could not
>have predated the war. Because of the mess Yugoslavia is in, there is a
>great deal of interest on the part of intelligent people in the West as to
>why the war occurred.
Ok. But why they are good histories?
>2. I, and countless other book buyers, paid for their
>printing. This is called capitalism.
Which means, those writing them had to make them such they could sell them.
Superficial, short, easy to be read. I guess selling is more important then
truth and objectivity.
>3. Because they were issued in a free
>market by a press controlled by the profit motive.
Profit is great measure. Look just how much money is made od drugs, it must
be great, huh?
>4. Nothing in the texts
>make them trustworthy. It is impossible to be like Moses and bring down
>texts graven in stone because immediately the skeptic will point out that
>Moses could have graven the texts himself. What makes the texts
trustworthy
>is multiple readings from sources with different interests, and in the case
>of Yugoslavia, the bullshit (including use of insane logical procedures)
>comes primarily from the Serbian side.
Axiom I guess. You sure are ignorant westerner.
>5. Primarily, these people are
>journalists who work for media that is independent of government. Some
>sources, including lower-level employees of the US state department, are
>jobless as a result of their claims in 1992 that Serbia was initiating
>ethnic cleansing. This makes their claims believable.
They are journalists, so they are to be believed? Independent of government?
Let us check that profit measure: what could they sell better, story of
civil war with similar guilts in all sides, or something about good poor
side and evil satan powerful side? Bad guys and good guys?
hint: check out what Hollywood sells better.
Misha
you're on LSD.
Goran wrote:
> Yep. Here we say "Ne jebi me u zdrav mozak". Same thing.
>
> Michael Lipin wrote in message <368BDD84...@asan.com>...
> >You do? In Russia they say the same. "Ne jebi menja v zdorovij mozg"
> >
> >Goran wrote:
> >
Misha
especially if I was going against Germans or Russians.
peterpan
>
> I don't know about you people but I wouldn't be able to fight on clear head,
> especially if I was going against Germans or Russians.
So fill you head with shit, like you are doing now!
Misha
13/14) new year.
Misha
Goran
Misha wrote in message <368EC1C2...@beer.com>...
>Сербкиллер и Пе[д]ерпан имеют здоровый мозг?
I can't read this, I see just bunch of little boxes.
>You can say so but only when you're on LSD.
Say what?
>Goran wrote:
>
>> Yep. Here we say "Ne jebi me u zdrav mozak". Same thing.
>>
>> Michael Lipin wrote in message <368BDD84...@asan.com>...
>> >You do? In Russia they say the same. "Ne jebi menja v zdorovij mozg"
>> >
>> >Goran wrote:
>> >
Goran
And, especially, it is much easier to get killed if not sober.
The problem is, you do fear, always, bravery is to control the fear.
Misha wrote in message <368EC278...@beer.com>...
Misha
shooting someone. hehe
Never had plans spending life drunk.. war? maybe
spino...@my-dejanews.com
"Goran" <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote:
> >>Goran: Sarajevo was surrounded, only connection with outer space was
> >>through …
> >This does not imply large-scale troop movements that would necessitate
> >forcible movements of population, and this makes nonsense of the original
> >claim.
>
> Supply lines had to be secured. Muslims did it by extorting some 7000
> people. Full stop.
Moving people out of a war zone can be anything from ethnic cleansing to a
humanitarian act. I have been trying to put the focus on initial decisions
made by the top men and three things make the Serbian leadership responsible
for most forced relocations, even of Serbs.
(1) The forced relocations were initiated by Serbia in Banja Luka in 1992
(2) In the initial relocations, the people were taken to internment camps
rather than to safe areas by the Serbian leadership
(3) The Serbian leadership enthusiastically supported ethnic cantonization,
and I have already shown that this is responsible, for the most part, for
forced relocation. The Bosnian leadership was opposed to ethnic
cantonization.
>
>
> Serbia was not fighting a war in Bosnia, it was local Serbs, local militias
> that are later organized in Bosnian Serbs Army.
These units, according to the several authorities I have used, were not
independent of Belgrade and were armed using heavy weapons from Serbia. The
Srpska Republika is a puppet government, as was the Serb statelet in the
Krajina. This is shown by the simple fact that neither government ever
departed in the slightest from Milosevic's line.
> There was no Bosnian strategy because Bosnians were fighting civil war among
> each other. But Muslim strategy was to conquer whole Bosnia.
Its claim was the mediaeval Bosnian kingdom was distinct religiously from
Serbia because before the Western and the Eastern Christian churches split in
the 11th century, this state was part of the Roman church, and later on was
dominated by heretics (the so-called Bogomils) who gave allegiance neither to
the Pope in Rome nor to the Patriarch in Constantinople. These Bogomils, it
appears, were willing because of their already-existing tradition of
nonconformism to convert to Islam after 1389. When Bosnia was recreated in
1991, it claimed the borders of this state, which were repeated in both
Turkish and Austrian divisions, as well as divisions in Tito's Yugoslavia.
It provided a formal guarantee of ethnic equality to all groups, which it may
have violated at times because of fears that Serbs and Croats would undercut
its authority.
Therefore it is senseless to say that the "Moslems wanted to conquer whole
Bosnia". This is also shown by Serbia's territorial ambitions, which it has
satisfied by using ethnic cleansing and terror. Serbia wanted all of what has
been Serbia proper, PLUS what it could snatch in Krajina and in Bosnia. The
Sarajevo government, on the other hand, restricted its claim to traditional
Bosnia.
Milosevic's goal: to create greater Serbia, which would occupy the territory
of Srpksa and Krajina.
> But we can talk about "Serbian occupation of territory where ethnic Serbs
> lived". Do you have any example for that? I know what was it like in my
> hometown, Sarajevo, in a middle of Bosnia, far away from Serbia. But yet,
> you might know better.
I mean the occupation of territory by either Serbia or the Srpska Republica,
and I do not believe that they are independent entities.
>
> Ufff.... is this that story how Muslims who did crimes are also victims?
Yes, and seeing that there are levels of criminality and victimhood, and not
simplistic notions of good guys and bad guys, is I think the road to peace.
> >But Serbian forced relocation in Bosnia was the most serious since it
> forced
> >people out of their homes as part of strategy.
>
> I know that theory, but why do you think it was part of strategy?
(1) It ensured that people so relocated would not be able to return and cause
trouble
(2) It ensured that different ethnic groups would no longer be able to unite
on common projects...such as the overthrow of Milosevic
>
> >Serbians who fled the Krajina
> >district in fear of Croatia in 1995 were not as seriously victimized as
> >Moslems expelled from Banja Luka.
>
> Define victimized.
The Croatians allowed the Serbians in Krajina to escape to Serbia, whereas it
appears that the leading Moslem men and the men of draft age in Banja Luka
were sent to internment camps and murdered, and the women were systematically
raped.
> But when talking about strategy, when was most Muslims and Croats expelled
> from Banjaluka? Was it in 1995.?
It was in 1992.
The important thing is it was at the beginning of the war, and equally bad
responses on the part of Moslems and Croats can be blamed in part on anger and
fear at the behavior of the Serbians.
>
> >>About arms embargo, it was not obeyed man.
> >Nonetheless, it resulted in only a small number of arms going to Bosnia,
>
> So how the heck Muslims organized 150.000 men army?!
Many of them were armed with personal weapons, and as I have already mentioned
many were members of the Sarajevo Mafia. Some of them, according to some
sources, drilled and trained without any weapons at all.
>
> >whereas the heavy weapons of the former JNA went to Serbia.
>
> Most of it. Some was left behind to local Serbs in Krajina and Bosnia.
Other pieces were GIVEN to local Serbs by Belgrade, and for a reason. It is
disingenuous (polite American word for lie) to say that the Srpska people were
independent of Belgrade when starting in 1987 Milosevic spoke openly about the
need for unity among the Serbs.
>
> Hm, I presume you are talking about our discussion?
> Well, here is difference as I see it. You have large theories, well
> developes (somewhere), and mostly know a little about what happened in
> Bosnia. You "know" that ethnic cleansing was Serbian strategy, that they
> killed leading men, that they were Nazis and shit like that.
Pardon me, I do not think the Serbs are "Nazis and shit like that." The
Serbs are anti-Nazi and have a proud record from WWII. However, a society
can become Fascist, or fascistic, while remaining anti-Nazis.
The Nazis were Fascists in Germany and Germany alone. The Croatian Ustashe of
WWII allied itself with the Nazis and can be fairly said to be a form of
clerical authoritarianism or even Fascism, but they were not Nazis. For one
thing, Naziism is an athiestic philosophy whereas most Croatian fascists were
Roman Catholics.
> And me... well,
> I am just poor Bosnian that doesn't know much about these theories Muslims
> and leftists sold to you, but I sure know what is happening here since 1990.
Sounds, then, that the truth lies somewhere between what you say and my
theories. However, the reason I stress these strange theories is that I
have, since the end of the Vietnam war, seen the same SORT of strange things
here in the USA that I read about in Serbia. Basically, I see schizophrenia.
On one level people hate their leaders, but on another level, the leader has
only to start a war, or refer to the real suffering of ordinary people (a
suffering not shared by the leaders, who are either high-level military men
"in the rear with the gear" or else draft-dodgers like Clinton), and the
people rally behind the big man.
>
> We are talking about Bosnia, why are you mentioning Serbia all the time?
> I am really getting sick of discussions with people who know almost nothing,
> but they imagine a lot.
The leadership in Pale simply NEVER showed any difference of interests from
the Belgrade leadership, and by definition two really distinct countries are
going to have clashing interests. I regard Pale therefore as a puppet
government.
> There was no war among Bosnians and Serbians but there was war among
> Bosnians, Serbs, Croats and Muslims.
> If that embargo was obeyed, Muslims would be defeated in few months. Instead
> of that they fought war for three years against Serbs AND Croats. Do think a
> bit, please.
They survived for as long as they did for something of the same reason the
Viet Cong survived, and that was because they were fighting for their homes.
>
> So, Serbs hadn't infantry and that is why Muslims did not lose? Is this what
> are you saying?
Serbs had infantry, but did not use it sufficiently.
> And about massacres.... funny thing, but they always caused some major
> intervention, bombing Serbs, embargo to Yugoslavia.... how convenient.
> Serbs liked more to massacre civilians then to fight with infantry? What a
> ridicilous idea? (sorry for the spelling).
No, the sequence of events was (1) Serbs bomb innocent civilians, (2) West
intervenes, (3) Serbs take hostages, (4) West backs down. The only absurdity
here is the complete immorality of what the Serbs did (1 and 3 are violations
of international law.)
> Do you know how does artillery weapons look like? Do you think they have
> little snipers on them so crews can see where is bread line and shoot it? No
> man, nothing similar.
Sarajevo is, apparently, in a valley and many civilian areas were therefore
completely visible from Serbian artillery positions. And modern artillery
can of course be targeted with pinpoint precision. In some cases, possibly
drunken Serbian arty men engaged in random shots against areas where
civilians were known to live, and this in itself is a violation of
international law, that goes all the way up the military and political chain
of command, since the bigshots allowed it.
>
> hahahahahahaha............... why I am laughing, well, I remembered some of
> my Muslim friends with whom I was drinking alcohol before war and eating
> pork (it is forbided to Muslims too).
I am aware that many Bosnian Moslems drink alcohol and eat pork. I was not
referring to cultural customs in peacetime, but to a possible Serbian policy
which gave alcohol to troops and caused the unnecessary deaths of civilians.
Furthermore, the very fact that Bosnian Moslems violate Islamic dietary laws
means, probably, that they are not the "fanatical Mujhadeen" that Serbia
claims to be defending itself against.
This is, in other words, more "kettle logic" (I did not take your kettle and
it was dirty anyway.) Arguments aren't artillery barrages where the more
crap you fire, the better: "the Bosnians are Moslem fanatics, AND the
Bosnians drink alcohol and eat pork, AND they are "really" Eastern Orthodox
anyhow who converted for land in the 13th century" may SOUND like an
effective argument because you've fired three "salvos." But the three
rounds, taken together, are a logical contradiction which I simply do not
accept.
> Serbs were drunk and Muslims were sober, so WHOLE SERBIA (your theory is
> that Serbia attacked Bosni?) couldn't find enough of sober troops to fight
> poor unarmed Muslims? And Serbian soldiers are not capable of fight without
> alcohol?
No, it is possible that the top men authorized the misuse of alcohol so that
reluctant draftees would fight. They'd discovered early on (in Slovenia in
1991) that modern youths tend to be justifiably cynical about fighting so old
men like Slobbo can stay in power.
> What am I doing here talking with you?
I have no idea.
>
> >I do understand that the mortar strike in the Sarajevo market of Feb MAY
> not
> >have been a deliberately targeted strike because mortars are hard to target
> >precisely: I DO NOT believe Serbian claims that this was a land mine or a
> >Moslem strike.
>
> Exactly. You know shit, you just believe for some reason, unknown to me.
I do not believe that it was a land mine because the canopy showed evidence
of damage that would be caused by a shell coming from overhead. There is
only the Serbian CLAIM that the Moslems directly targeted their own folk in
order to get sympathy, and because it is in Serbia's self-interest to make
this claim, it can be dismissed (and would be dismissed in an American
court.) Furthermore, the news videos from Sarajevo clearly show, prior to
the market bombing, puffs of artillery smoke from the Serbian-occupied hills
ringing Sarajevo, followed by visual evidence of the result of that
targeting, showing civilians in open squares who have been obviously hit by
the Serbian fire. The Serbian intent and behavior was well-established by
the time of the market bombing in Feb 1994, and this is why the world will
not believe any "land mine" or "Moslems did it to their own people" claims.
The deep irony is that Oliver Stone himself came very close to an accurate
description of epistemological insanity (where "epistemology" means "how do
we know what we know?") in his movie JFK. The United States government wants
the American people to buy the so-called "single bullet" theory and
consequently the idea that a "lone, crazed man" killed Kennedy. Oliver
Stone's Jim Garrison points out that although some "fancy physics" in a
government lab had "proven" that a pristine bullet had killed Kennedy and
wounded Texas governor Connaly, "science can prove anything." Garrison in
the film, as did the real prosecutor Jim Garrison, says that people have in
addition to the authoritative claims of "science" their common sense.
Garrison implicitly makes the argument that (1) it was in the interest of the
United States government to claim that a lone crazed nut killed JFK, but that
(2) post-Enlightenment citizens on a jury of their peers in a post-
Enlightenment nation have not only the RIGHT to use common sense, and put one
and one together (in this case, the obvious interest of the government in
putting out the single bullet story, and the physical absurdity of a single
bullet): they have the DUTY.
In America, when there is a possible crime, a jury of people with no proven
interest in the outcome reviews facts presented by attorneys who HAVE such
interest and are expected to fight hard for their interest. In other legal
systems, including that of Greece (as shown in the 1972 movie Z about the
investigation of a political killing), a single man prosecutes the case. In
both systems, these people have not only the RIGHT but also the DUTY to hold
to the truth as shown by science and common sense and mere logic.
This means that either a Greek (or French) investigator working under his
legal tradition, or an American jury, would have to immediately reject any
claims that "the Moslems did the market bombing"...even if fancy physics at
the Belgrade university could establish that they did under highly
specialised circumstances, as long as this was the ONLY evidence.
This is why it is astonishing that Oliver Stone should make a film that
espouses the same lazy and cowardly skepticism that he so denounces in JFK.
>
> It was quite hard to shot that market in Sarajevo with mortar because it is
> surrounded by high buildings, it is near Tito's street, surrounded by
> buildings.
> Believe what you want.
You don't need a clear line of sight to fire a mortar: a mortar is targeted by
determining a parabolic trajectory. I am not familiar with the details of
modern mortars such as would be possessed by the JNA. However, it would
surprise me if they did not automate the simple calculation of this trajectory
so that the operator could feed in the coordinates of Tito's street where he
KNEW civilians would be.
But over and above these technical details, soldiers under international law
have the DUTY (not the right, not the permission) to do "positive
identification, friend, foe or civilian" and at the very least this was
neglected by the Serbs in 1994 EVEN IF they were firing crude bottle rockets.
>
> What Serbia again? So you claim Serbia was fighting Bosnian Muslims, not
> local Serbs?
> Well, tell me than, how come well armed army of people of ten million had so
> much problems to defeat unarmed army of people of two million?
> They were drunk?
> Oh God, what am I doing here discussing such stupid things.
Because the evil of the Serbian LEADERS (not the Serbian PEOPLE) was matched
by their stupidity, and Milosevic's stupidity is such that all he can think
of today is to beat heads in Kosovo. The United States lost in Vietnam for
something of the same reason. Waging war successfully requires not only
brute courage but also a few brain cells, and believing logical
contradictions seems to destroy brain cells.
>
> Your impressions are your problem. You didn't answer me, were these
> 150-200.000 men in Muslim army unarmed? If not, how come if we know there
> was arms embargo on Muslims? If yes, how come Serbs failed to conquer them?
But they did lose. Bosnia as constituted in 1991 no longer exists, and
instead there is a crazy federation.
>started this bestiality and did so as a matter of policy, when it sent
> >Moslems from Banja Luka to a camp in August 1992 in Omarska.
>
> From Banja Luka? Were those people from Banjaluka?
Yes.
>
> Crimes were Serbian policy and Muslims did it occasionaly. Bullshit. Spare
> me of that. And not a single proof.
I would prefer a "single" valid proof to an artillery barrage of contradictory
proofs. Unfortunately, I have only texts which indicate planning of ethnic
cleansing by Serbian top leaders starting in 1991.
>
> >“All sides are guilty” ignores the fact that Serbia pushed SE Europe back
> to
> >bestiality as a matter of policy BEFORE other sides responded with
> >equivalent bestiality.
>
> Bullshit. But I'd like to hear why do you think it was like that.
1987: "they shall never beat you"
1991: destruction of Vukovar and Dubrovnik
1992: Moslem occupants of Banja Luka sent to Omarska
1994: Market square bombing
1998/9: Kosovo
>
> Yep, Serbs caused it. But what about Muslim crimes from 1991 and 1992.?
> Village Sijekovac near Bosanski Brod, Serbs were slaughtered for no reason.
But in some sense it is WORSE to slaughter with reason if the "reason" is
that your commanding officer orders you, on pain of your own death, to engage
in the slaughter. In this, if Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's book HITLER'S WILLING
EXECUTIONERS is correct, the Serbian military was worse than the German
military, since German soldiers could choose not to participate in murdering
Jews.
The Serbian press wants to whip up Serbian fear of individual, visualised,
out- of control "Muhajdeen" but to me quiet men in offices who write orders
are WORSE.
The phrasing "for no reason" implies that it is better to slaughter with a
reason, whether that be anti-Nazi or for Greater Serbia.
>
> I am really pissed of with your not knowing nothing about situation. But
> please tell me about war between Serbia and Slovenia, it is totally new to
> me. Serbia attacked Slovenia before war in Croatia, right? So, where Serbian
> forces came from? Hungary? Italy? Austria? Their Croat allies let them pass?
At the time Slovenia separated, Yugoslavia still existed, so this war was
between a Serb-dominated JNA which still had the right to go through what is
now Croatia.
The leaders of Serbia, and the movie Savior, do not present a narrative. Thus
people can forget simple facts like the fact that Slovenia separated, not from
Serbia, but from a still existing Yugoslavia. This is a war on memory.
You claim I know nothing but it appears that I am feeding you basic
chronological facts, such that Yugoslavia still existed at the time of the
separation of Slovenia. The frightening possibility is that the end of
Communism is not the end of the Orwellian world which ALSO exists here under
capitalism in the states (the "Orwellian world" was portrayed by George
Orwell's book 1984.)
In the world of 1984, it is "thoughtcrime" to use complex words, to think
complex thoughts, or to place events in a narrative. At one point in this
novel, the state (Oceania, a sort of nightmare socialist Britain) goes to war
with East Asia, and it is emphasized by the media that "Oceania HAD ALWAYS
been at war with East Asia."
It would be convenient for Milosevic if Serbia HAD ALWAYS been at war with
the Mujhadeen and Tito's Yugoslavia, it appears, was only (as a version of
1984) a rough draft for SlobboLand. Tito did suppress the memory of Serbian
nationalism (along with any other sort of ethnocentric narratives) but his
very recognition of the need for policies that gave people rights as members
of groups (whether Serb, or ethnic Albanian, or whatever) had at least to
preserve some sort of memory. Whereas Slobbo wants to renarrate the history
of Yugoslavia more thoroughly, so that a group that dominated the armed
forces of Yugoslavia and many other institutions (the Serbs) can be portrayed
as victims.
>
> >The fact that Serbia initiated the targeting of civilians, the destruction
> of
> >archeological and artistic treasures,
>
> Ok, like what? Dubrovnik? So, what was destroyed in Dubrovnik by planned
> targeting of treasures? Or drunken Serbs missed again?
Sure looks planned to me. And I have a problem with armies that destroy
libraries and art, because those armies tend to go on to the women and then to
murder. Even Johnny Turk left Hagia Sophia in Constantinople standing, but in
1991 Billy Serb destroyed mosques, churches and libraries apparently
indiscriminantly.
>
> >the forced movement of non-Serbs and
> >their physical liquidation beginning in 1992
>
> Did they prove all these things and I was asleep?
Perhaps. The press in Belgrade is controlled.
>
> >I'd be interested to know if you could post some non-fabricated,
> large-scale
> >incidents where Bosnia interned Serbs PRIOR to August 1992.
>
> Why prior to August 1992.? Why the heck should I? What does that proves?
It shows that the Serbs started the killing and destruction and accounts for
non-Serb behavior.
> >silent, mostly because he's dead. We need to hear from societies of camp
> >prisoners but at the same time remember that 150,000 people cannot form
> >such societies.
>
> 150,000?!?!?!?!?!?!
> Shameless lying.
This is the total apparent body count, and my point happened to be that
positive evidence has IN ALL CASES to be formed by groups with self-interest,
from Ruder and Finn to prisoner's groups. The French philsopher simply asks
us to remember that there are many people who CANNOT participate in this
process.
>
> Milosevic could not part people along ethnic lines. He could help developing
> of Serbian nationalism as Serbia's president. But in Croatia Tudjman was
> ruling, and he had all the same power over Croatia as Milosevic over Serbia.
> But they had little influence on each others republic. It takes two to
> fight.
However, Serbian nationalism (hooray for da Serbs) MEANS second-class
citizenship for everybody else (boo for da Croats.)
>
> Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't believe
> it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
One American writer on this policy (Catherine MacKinnon), which is proven to
exist by Prof. Bassiouni's data base, points out like Lyotard that a victim
silent on her victimization is still a victim. Serbia knew well that Islamic
women would not for the most part speak up. Therefore, the existence of men
commanded to rape as part of ethnic cleansing is more important than some
probably fabricated number.
To MacKinnon, the silence of an abused or raped woman itself sends a message,
but one that is not contained necessarily on a police report.
> But anyway, it was never provec, neither was anyone accused for mass rapings
> by Hague tribunal. How come?
The silence of many of the victims. And it is again contradictory to dismiss
findings of the Hague when they do not suit you and to want to use them when
they seem to fit.
> What a bullshit again. But I'll give you chance to explain how Milosevic did
> it?
He's in charge and he excluded Albanians from civil society in Kosovo starting
in 1991.
>
> And they got their information from...........?
> Guess what, western press was situated in Sarajevo and Zagreb. Never in
> Knin, Pale or Banjaluka. Think.
Part of the "public relations offensive" of the Moslems was openness
(*glasnost*) to the extent that journalists were able to film, for example,
the Feb 1994 market bombing right after it happened. Whereas the Serbs
carefully controlled access to their areas. While it is true that the
Moslems may have been treating the press nicely in order to get them on their
side, it is also true that the Serbians, according to believable reports of
people interned, had far more to hide.
>
> Ok, what PR agencies Serbs were using during the war? Although there was a
> UN ebmargo on Serbia? You have data some PR agencies were violating this
> embargo?
An individual lawyer here in Chicago has done work for the Serbs without
violating the embargo. In addition, Serb spokesmen can do effective PR by
telling Western journalists what they like, and by presenting Mrs Plavsic as a
"good Serb" (which is especially tragic since, as indicated by the extended
quote from Theodore Adorno in a related post, representation of Mrs Plavsic
triumphs over what is represented: there are many "good" Serbs who are
unsupported by the West since the West don't think they'll win.)
Canadian forces general Lewis MacKenzie is another example of how Serbia can
get around the UN embargo.
In other words, engaging a PR firm does not mean that the other side does not
do PR as well, either by its own press releases or by using figures like
MacKenzie. This is how information on political affairs gets out to the
world. The question remains, who is RIGHT, not who uses PR.
> Savior is D production US movie, what kind of victory is that?
No similar film was sponsored by Bosnia, nor is it likely that one can be
sponsored, since Bosnia as founded in 1992 has effectively ceased to exist.
>
> >There is NO ONE AUTHORITATIVE TEXT on the 1991..1995 wars. But it
> >oversimplifies to then say, lazily, that “all sides are equally guilty.”
> >Instead of one authoritative text, there are multiple comparative readings
> >(which would use official sources and Web pages) and the more complex and
> >differentiated the reading is, the better it probably is.
>
> All sides are guilty.
This is Serbian public relations, and it manages to be true and nonsense at
the same time (texts that describe crazy situations sometimes get a little
crazy themselves.) Suppose, for starters, I refuse to see "sides": after
all, socialists don't see "sides", they see the owners and the workers in all
of the countries of the former Yugoslavia. Serbia cannot present itself as
innocent, so the PR man selects the next least bad alternative.
>
> Nothing similar. I just refuse to buy pathetic Muslim propaganda. Ruder &
> Finn got some award for representating Muslims and Croats, find what their
> official said about forming view on Bosnia. You'd feel stupid if you see how
> they are playing with you.
One of the mechanisms of the "higher" PR, however, is to convince the ordinary
person that the "lower" PR is for saps (American slang for dumb person.) Thus
in America, the sophisticate buys Lawrence Eagleburger's complete nonsense
about how the US would have responded if Tito had shelled Dubrovnik (when it
did not respond in Czechoslovakia in 1968 despite tanks from Russia) and has
been trained to look down upon the statements of lower-level apparatchiks as
mere PR.
Sources as diverse as the New York Times, Westview press, and Penguin books
are subject to pressures from various different information sources in turn,
but not by a single Bosnian PR film: the real naivety is to pretend without
investigation (and, in Belgrade today, without even the possibility of
investigation) that one is "above" such sources.
>
> >UN soldiers and journalists
> >were present at Srebenica and saw what happened: from Srebenica, Record
> >of a
> >War Crime (Jan Willem Honig and Norbert Both, Penguin, 1997):
> >"Dutch soldiers witnessed many bodies being removed in an odd assortment of
> >pick-up trucks, tractors with carts and vehicles with shovels. A UN
> >Commission report described the experience of a Dutch soldier who had been
> >captured in the early stage of Srebenica…'he saw a row of the shoes and
> >rucksacks of 100 men.'".
>
> So what happenned to other 7900? Maybe some war crimes did happen, I never
> denied that.
But you did. You responded to criticism of Savior by saying that this was
anti- Serb propaganda and made the implicit claim that all side's guilt means
in some sense that all sides should be forgiven. In getting to this absurd
claim you called for the arraignment of Alia Izetbegovic and Tudjman as war
criminals, which implies that the opposing side were not war criminals.
>
> No it isn't. Everybody does it and we think it is not fair to declare war
> crimes as exclusive Serbian invention. Not to mention theory that Serbs are
> guilty even for crimes Muslims and Croats did. What would you say if I say
> that all Serbian crimes are done as revenge for genocide in WW2 when some
> 700.000 Serbs were killed?
> But fact that war crimes sure are not Serbian invention, we do not claim
> that crimes are allowed to Serbs to do either. All criminals must be
> punished. I disgust using crimes in political purposes, what is strategy of
> Muslims during whole war.
Here is another deep problem which surfaced in America during the Vietnam war.
In America now we share your hatred of the politicians and this dislike of
politics. But what I dislike worse (having seen some evidence of it first-
hand) is comfortable men in offices without honor who USE the fact that their
people are anti-political to commit crimes and to avoid punishment.
The Moslems had of necessity to use crimes of Serbs for political ends.
>
> >of ethnic Albanians from 1991..1998 from schooling? It was a beating.
>
> What exclusion?
From 1991 until now, the Albanians had to create their own school systems
because the Serbians kicked them out, as a matter of top-level policy, from
schools and universities. This was in revenge for what was NOT done as top-
level policy in the 1980s.
>
> Lie. Ethnic Albanians live freely, terrorists are being beaten.
Doesn't appear to be the case if an ethnic Albanian farmer tells Timothy
Garton Ash (in this week's New York Review of Books) that "if the Americans
were not here, the police would beat us up." He did not say that youths
would, he said the police would, and it appears that they would do so acting
under orders.
>
> >Even after Serbia showed in 1991 that it was ready to bombard civilians
> >(Dobrovnik and Vukovar) to gain its ends,
>
> It was war. Allies bombed Germany, USA bombed Japan, nuked. It happens in
> war. Not bombing civilians but enemy cities.
Enemy cities contain civilians and in Yugoslavia those civilians were NOT able
to get out (when it was clear that the Serbs were going to enter Srebenica in
1995, Moslem mothers simply tossed their own children on UN trucks, and dared
the soldiers to toss them back.)
> If Serbs bombed civilians in Vukovar and Dubrovnik, why did not they just
> entered it? Was drunk?
The fact that Serbian troops were unwilling to fight as infantry had been
already found in Slovenia. Therefore, starting in Vukovar and continuing
until today, the Serbs have replaced infantry attacks with artillery during
large scale engagements, and police actions during small scale engagements.
Urban fighting is a job not for draftees at all but for highly trained elite
units: one of the reasons the US military doesn't want to get involved in the
former Yugoslavia is that there would be so much urban fighting. You have no
idea what lies around the next corner and every moment takes nerves of steel.
>
> Albanian separatism was first non-violent, I mean there was no terrorism.
> Now KLA uprised and separatists are fighting. And they are beaten, they are
> criminals. What is so hard to understand here?
Seven years of nonviolent resistance received no overtures and no conciliation
from the Serbs, instead a preview of what would happen to ethnic Albanians
occured in Bosnia. There is a sign in an American zoo: "warning: this animal
is dangerous: when attacked it fights back."
On the one hand, you say "this is war, people get hurt, there is injustice
and all sides are guilty." The KLA, however, has decided that "this is war,
people will get hurt" and you treat this as justifying an extreme and
military response. You cannot just rise above the field (like, perhaps, a
blackbird?) and speak in these lofty tones which ask for forgiveness, and
then approve of a continuation of the same that is happening right now in
Kosovo.
The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes points out that it may not be "just"
for a man to fight for himself when his opponents propose his death but it is
fact. I suppose this could be used to justify Serbia's conduct of the wars.
However, Hobbes does prefix this claim with an interesting qualification,
that the man should have exhausted peaceful means first. Similarly, the
founders of America pointed out that they'd tried to appeal to King George by
peaceful means before taking up arms against him.
The ethnic Albanians seemed to have passed both tests but I can simply think
of NO situation where Serbians in Yugoslavia tried to use peaceful means,
apart from rhetorical appeals TO SERBS starting in 1981, to get what they
wanted. Rhetorical appeals were made in a form of preaching to the choir
(American expression, means trying to convert the already converted.) That
is, the ONLY speech the Serbian leaders used before going to war was
addressed to Serbs.
Whereas the American colonists refer to attempts to convince King George that
were ignored as a justification. The Albanian's nonviolent resistance (now
ending) is a recognized way of "speaking", not in terms of whipping up ethnic
enthusiasm, but to one's oppressor, and in this case the oppression got worse.
>
> Maybe in your head. Albanians in Kosovo lived peacefuly with minor human
> rights violations until KLA uprised and took over territory. They asked for
> war and got the war. How manny of Albanians were beaten before KLA appeared?
> How manny of them are beaten in police controlled cities in Kosovo
Complete exclusion from jobs and schooling is not a minor matter at all.
> >No, you seem as an ethnic group to be miserable SOBs.
>
> What's a SOB? Wait, sons of a bitch?
> What a fucken lunatic you are. Totally crazy.
The American expression "miserable SOB" is not an insult. It implies that a
person is at once a victim and a victimizer. I am sorry, however, if you were
offended.
>
> What a idiocy, for God's sake! What a idiocy. What a stupid American shit
> knowing blabering. Serbs colectively beat women and their crying is heard
> all over Pale?
> What kind of a moron you are?
I qualified this carefully since it was from but one source. However, it is
backed up, both by a whole chapter on how sexism works in Serbia in Sabrina
Petra Ramet's book Balkan Babel and even by Savior itself.
>
> It would be interesting to compare numbers of family violence, child abuse
> and run aways in USA and Serbia.
This would ignore under-reporting of same and would prove nothing. Because of
under-reporting you have instead to take into account the fact that military
training often produces violence against women.
>
> In Balkans we are used of politicians saying one thing and doing another. I
> am not interested in analyzing Izetbegovic whatsoever.
> If he created democratic, multi-ethnic or whatever Bosnia, why did he
> ignored Serbian rights and Serbian will (Bosnian Serbs', one of three equal
> Bosnian peoples according to constitution)?
> Why did he refused Lisboa plan? Why did he said he'd sacrifice peace for
> souveregnity?
(1) The Bosnian Serbs do not speak for all Serbs in Bosnia. It instead
appears that they were started by allies of Milosevic as a puppet government
that will be taken over by Serbia. There were mixed and full blood Serbs who
served in the Bosnian army against the Bosnian Serbs, and these people are
not represented by Srpska.
(2) Alia opposed partitioning and ethnic cantonization because partitions and
cantons cause communal violence and forced relocation of people
(3) Because a peace which involved second-class citizenship and probably
annhilation for Moslems and people of mixed ethnicity was no more acceptable
to the Bosnians than it would be to Serbs
>
> Not necessary. It was way to divide Bosnia peacefuly so all peoples could
> run their destiny instead of Muslim domination.
> Major idiot had proposals Bosnian Croats and Serbs liked and that could
> prevent war and Muslim hegemonic wishes. Genius Alija refused them and
> caused bloody war. What was Alija's right to refuse plan Serbs and Croats
> liked?
Moslems have always lost in partitioning and in cantonization because the
Western powers who administer partitions and cantons regard Moslems as funny
brown men. Thus, in Pakistan in 1948, hundreds of thousands of Moslems lost
their homes and their lives because one of John Major's British predecessors,
Lord Mountbatten, divided India into modern India and Moslem Pakistan. The
West Bank was created by the West in Israel with the result that Jewish
settlers have American-style homes whereas Palestinean Moslems crowd into one-
room hovels. I would not deny that Alia is sufficiently Moslem to fear Yet
Another "fair" partition that makes him a leader of a West Bank statelet.
Moslems have simply never gotten a fair chance to operate post-Enlightenment
states with equal rights for all because the West interprets their religious
convictions as intolerant of other faiths. This is despite the fact that
other faiths, including Judaism and Christianity, likewise say they are
"true" and others "false." But if a religiously inclined leader subscribes
as a Christian or a Moslem or a Jew to the religion of his fathers, this
simply does not mean that he has to "kill the unbeliever."
Bill Clinton is a member of a Christian faith which says that to be saved one
must have faith in Jesus but in no way does Bill Clinton tell Moslems in
America that they must convert. There are a number of Islamic states,
notably Turkey, most of whose people are Moslems and whose leaders are
Moslems, but which actively oppose political Moslem fundamentalism. It
appears that given the very laxness of Bosnian Moslems (the very fact that as
you admit they drink alcohol) would argue that they would be what Alia said
in 1992 they wanted to be, which was a state guaranteeing, according to the
UN declaration of human rights, religious and cultural freedom to all.
By definition, the idiot schemes of ethnic cantonization would allow the
cantons to define citizenship religiously and this is why Alia's government
opposed them.
>
> >Serbia supported ethnic cantonization which means it is
> >responsible for most forced relocations.
>
> Idiotic statement.
No argument.
>
> >The long answer is that the above statement is less a move in a rational
> >debate than a symptom of collective post-traumatic stress, a symptom seen
> >in the USA after Vietnam.
>
> So, if someone disagree with you, he is demented?
No, for it is possible to have various mental disorders and still be quite
rational. Indeed, the Romantic literary period in the West found that the
disorder itself could be "healthy" in some sense by teaching the "sanity" a
thing or two about its own limitations.
Thug communism, on the other hand, pioneered the idea of the mentally
disordered dissident during the Brezhnev period in the Soviet Union.
Radovan himself, truly a "normal lunatic", a man with a profession, a career,
troops of friends, and a nice office, who nonetheless in some sense is
clinically insane, is ONE AT THE SAME TIME "normal" and out of his fucking
mind. Similarly, the common person's definition of sanity (has nice office
and speaks nice) applies to Slobo himself, a man whose parents both killed
themselves.
I short: I don't have some simple definition of demented and indeed had I
thought that you were crazy like that I would not be wasting my time.
Instead, I feel that an entire society can go in some sense nuts, and when it
does so sufficiently, what is nuts will seem normal.
>
> What has personal pain as consequence of leaders deeds to do with cousins
> forcibly relocated by the Muslims?
If those cousins were forcibly relocated AFTER the decision to create a
federated Bosnia, a form of cantonization supported by Milosevic, then it has
everything to do.
> >West and its ideals were being confronted by "real men" from the farm and
> >that for this reason, Serbs should be given whatever they wanted.
>
> Ufff...........after reading so much bullshit, here comes something I could
> think about it. I could agree to some point. As I said above, he was showing
> his determination, at some level of consciouseness. Very nicely said.
> Yes, Ratko is determined man. So what?
There is nothing wrong with determined men. However, there is everything
wrong with men who determine to do good and those who determine to do evil.
Ratko wanted to portray Dutch soldiers, who have a REAL tradition of
resistance to tyranny that goes all thge way back to the 16th century and
which includes fighting the Germans, as some sort of effete, urbanized
idealistic do-gooders who would be terrorised and offended by the slaughter
of an animal. Whereas he was literally, with respect to the actual fighting,
in the rear with the gear, and even his men were apparently afraid to engage
in infantry combat. The Serbs, in other words, have the mistaken idea that
being modern, and civilized, and what we call in America "politically
correct" makes one unwilling to fight.
In a sense this is true and in a sense this is false. For one thing, a
Dutch- Jewish philosopher, Spinoza, points out that the mental act of
choosing a cowardly course of action is just as painful as choosing a brave
act and if the pain of the chooser indicates that we should admire him, then
braveness and cowardice are the same. The Dutch peacekeepers and their
generals conducted themselves far more honorably than Ratko precisely because
they balanced their primitive anger against being used as hostages against
the central interests of their Queen and state. It was simple, and cowardly,
for Ratko to boil everything down into giving Pale whatever it wanted,
including the ability to represent Serbs unsympathetic to a puppet
government.
This is going to be my last post on this subject. I have said what I think
has needed to be said. The Serbs are successfully leading SE Europe back to
the Dark Ages which is where so many apparently normal but actually fucked up
people want to live. He who makes himself a beast relieves himself of the
pain of being a man.
peterpan
"Duga" in 1991 by Maja
Zrnic entitled "Geca Kajmakcalanac":
"The question of Milosevic's house in Dedinje
suddenly became a live issue when Serbian
Renewal Party member Zoran Horvanused the
parliamentary rostrum for the statement that in
a genuinely democratic milieu there would be good
grounds for resignation in the fact that fifty
years after the Nazi program the President of the
Republic (of Serbia - author) had acquired
the villa and estate in Dedinje once owned by Geca
Kon, the biggest Serbian publisher".
Geca Kon was a renowned Belgrade publisher and book
shop owner, and with five thousand
titles was the biggest publisher between the first
and second world wars in Yugoslavia. As a
member of the Jewish people he was killed in 1941,
but there is no reliable information about
his death. According to some, he was shot with the
first Jews in Belgrade, while others say
that he was killed in the concentration camp in
Graz, as Maja Zrnic claims in the "Duga"
article.
This article seems to have strayed by accident into
the powerful propaganda machine with its
carefully worked out theses according to which there
are no dark corners in the history of the
Serbs, who are the only "historically guiltless"
nation in the world. As a result of this, the
Serbian propaganda machine managed to convince at
least a part of world opinion that the
history of Serbia was characterized by entirely
amicable relations with the Jewish people. If
this were really the case, it would have been
impossible for there to have appeared in the
official mouthpiece of the Serbia Orthodox Church,
"Orthodoxy" (Pravoslavlje) on January 15,
1992, an article entitled "The Hebrews once again
crucify Christ" in which the following can be
read:
"Christianity, the only religion that really came
into being in Jerusalem will soon, as it seems,
be completely driven out of Israel. Many Israelis
hate Christianity to such a degree that it is
almost sick. Among ordinary people this hatred is
quite open. Politicians are more devious
and work covertly. They known - the Christian
countries gave them a state... All Israel
town-planners often have tremendous problems; not a
single road junction is allowed to have
the shape of a cross. Take a look at the plans of
the cities! Few, very few, Jews will admit
this, with sneers and indignation... In their
struggle against Christianity, the Jews assisted the
Persians so that they could more easily conquer
Jerusalem".
These excerpts from the article are written in a
tone quite similar to that found in a work of
bishop Nikolaj 49 years earlier. Bishop Nikolaj
received a decoration from Hitler. Testimony as
to this decoration was given by Nikolaj
Velimirovic's close relative, a nephew, in a statement
to the Belgrade press, which presented him to its
readers in this way:
"Nikolaj's nephew, Tiosav Velimirovic, the well
known Belgrade lawyer and judge, and once a
colleague of ours, a journalist in 'Politika', now
retired".
In an interview of some length Tiosav made the
following statement:
"While he was Bishop of Ochrid, Nikolaj undertook
various tasks for the nation and the
church. He ordered, alongside the Serbian, a grave
for the German soldiers in Bitola, which
Hitler decorated him for in 1934.
Actually, the decoration that uncle got from Hitler
was in the form of a cross, and honorary,
given for civil, and not for any state, political or
military services. The bishop never showed the
decoration to anyone."
Bishop Nikolaj had enjoyed writing 49 years earlier
in the following way: "... During the course
of ages, they who crucified the Messiah, the Lord
Jesus, the Son of God, made Europe into
the chief battle ground for the devil and against
God. And it is today the chief battle-ground of
the Jews and of the devil the father of the Jews...
Europe does not know this, and here lies all
the desperation of its fate, the entire dark tragedy
of its peoples. Above all it does not know
whom it belongs to. It knows nothing but that which
the Jews have ordered it to believe. It can
judge of the value of nothing until the Jews have
set up their balance for the measurement of
value. Its politicians like sleepwalkers in their
delirium talk of the equality (ignorance) of all
beliefs and non-beliefs, that is, that which the
Jews want and desire, because it is necessary
for them to have legal equality with Christians, so
that they can then drive out Christianity and
have Christianity made non-believers, and place
their foot on their necks.
All the modern catch-words of Europe have been
composed by the Jews who crucified Christ,
including democracy, and strikes, and socialism, and
atheism and the toleration of all
religions, and pacifism and universal revolution and
capitalism and communism.
All these are the invention of Jews, or of the
devil, the father of the Jews. But the wonder is
that the Europeans, baptized and anointed, should
have surrendered so totally to the Jews
that they think with Jewish heads, accept Jewish
programmes, adopt Jewish anti-Christianity,
receive Jewish lies as truth, welcome Jewish
catch-words as their own, walk along the Jewish
road and serve Jewish aims. This is the thing to
wonder at in our time, and nothing else in the
world.
Everything else is less important or unimportant.
But the most important thing is how
Christian Europe managed to become the serving maid
of the Jews... Think on these things,
brother Serbs..." thundered Bishop Nikolaj in "Words
to the Serbian people through the prison
window from the Camp of Dachau". He spent a short
period at Dachau, from the beginning of
September to December, 1944. (Teodor Musiol, "Dachau
1939- 1945", Katowiche, 1968) as it
was necessary for the Germans towards the end of the
war for propaganda purposes. This
book was published by the Serbian bishopric in West
Germany in 1985. At that time the head
of this bishopric was the present bishop of Sabac,
Lavrentije.
That there is no need to doubt that Nikolaj spent
time in Dachau, or that he was housed in
comfortable quarters, we are informed by the "Herald
of the Serbian Orthodox Church" in
1945, and by an orthodox priest in the article
"Priests in the concentration camp of Dachau":
"An order was issued that the priests of all nations
and confessions... should be used only for
labour in the camp. (...)
An exception was made for His Holiness the patriarch
of Serbia Gavrilo, for His Reverence
Bishop Nikolaj... who were, until they were taken
from the camp with other prominent figures
to the Tyrol, housed separately from us in the so
called 'bunkers of honour'". A high wall
divided us from them, and we were forbidden to see
them or meet them. They were allowed to
wear their own clothing, they were neither shaved
not cropped, and they were not driven out to
work. There were about 50 or 60 of such prominent
people, the high officials of various
countries, who were living in the "bunkers of
honour".
It is certainly difficult to estimate the level of
racist consciousness (where anti-semitism is but
one form of that awareness) in the present
population of Serbia. But the "The Hebrews once
again crucify Christ" article certainly does not
argue for any great contemporary Serbian
philo-semitism. Nor does the existence of the
Serbian-Jewish Friendship Society, which
came into being with the sole purpose of submitting
to the world public "arguments about the
fascism and anti- semitism of Croatia", according to
which the Jewish people in Croatia were
once again being exposed to genocide.
Just one of a whole series of examples of the
current manipulation of this theme by Serbian
politics was the "case" of the seventy year old
Croatian woman Ankica Konjuh from Petrinja.
This unfortunate woman died in unexplained
circumstances during the course of the Greater
Serbian aggressor's war against Croatia in Petrinja
on September 13, 1991. Almost all the
papers in Belgrade announced to the public that the
first "Jewish victim had fallen" in Croatia.
The Secretary of the "Serbian-Jewish Friendship
Society called a Press Conference at which
she announced, in spite of the quite opposing views
of the Jews in Croatia themselves, that
"The position of Jewish communities is very
difficult. We are not sure what is going on in
Zagreb... In everything that is going on, the
position of the Jews is also extraordinarily
difficult... In Zagreb armed Nazis are terrorizing
the Jews, who have no recourse to the police
for protection."
At the time when this statement was made, Croatian
Jews were sitting with the Croats in
shelters during the air-raids, and having to suffer
Serbian aggression against Croatia. On the
other hand, the Belgrade "Duga" No. 498, for March
27 - April 4, 1993, in the "Testimonies"
section, carries an article by Milomir Maric, called
"All the plots against the Serbs", in which
Maric talks with the organizer of an anti- Masonic
exhibition held in Belgrade between
October 22, 1941 and January 19, 1942. In "Duga",
the caption under photographs from the
anti-Masonic exhibition, in which were exhibited
caricatures making mock of Geca Kon, runs:
"Symbols of fighters fallen in the battle against
communists, Masons and Jews: the
Anti-Masonic exhibition in Belgrade, '41/42". The
subtitle reads as follows: "During the last
half a century, the one time confidential colleague
of Milan Stojadinovic and Dragisa Cvetkovic
and Nedic's propaganda chief, Dr Lazar Prokic has
forgotten himself to such an extent that he
has given up his own Christian name. As a journalist
working in the German radio station
Dojce Vele (Deutsche Welle) ...he never had an
inkling that in today's Serbia those ideas that
he had unsuccessfully propagated during the second
world war at the behest of the Germans
would be so completely adopted and made so
thoroughly at home. Still, he now feels a little
robbed, when all the Serbs have finally understood
that the international powers had really set
themselves against poor forsaken Serbia in pursuance
of the implementation of that hellish
Masonic-Jewish plot against everything Serbian and
Orthodox".
Organizer Lazar Prokic gives this as his excuse for
the arrangement of the exhibition:
"...And the fact that there were among the killed
and captured partisans in Serbia a fair
number of Jews resulted in the exhibition having
simultaneously an anti-Masonic, anti-Jewish
and anti-communist character, which completely
fitted in with the basics of German Nazi
ideology ... In truth we could not complain about
our Belgrade Jews. For the most part they
were loyal, in spite of the fact that there were
quite a lot of them in the ranks of the
partisans... The Serbian State was then only
assisting in the organization of the anti-Masonic
exhibition, that is the State Propaganda Department
and I myself... When I was offered this, I
accepted at once, because I was at the First Boys'
Gymnasium in Belgrade, at which at least
a third of the pupils were of Jewish origin. I was
friendly with them and made love with their
girls. Now I was only put out by the fact that there
were so many of them with the partisans
while there were hardly any of them with Draza
(Mihailovic, i.e. chetniks - author) ... I took
upon myself the whole of the propaganda for the
anti-Masonic exhibition in Belgrade in the
name of the Nedic government..."
In this article, Prokic states that some of the
elements of the new order of things had been
"predicted by us Serbs when Europe was still looking
for itself, when there was neither a
great Germany nor a great France.
For the foundations of statehood in Europe were
first laid by Stevan Nemanja, the foundations
of modern nationalism in Europe first were laid by
St. Sava, and the universal fight against
communists was begun by us in the persecution of the
Bogumils, while as for Jews we knew
almost nothing of them right up to the time of
Prince Milos, who forbade them to live in
Belgrade".
The author of the article, setting out Prokic's
biography, says: "Dr Prokic's career not only
progressed rapidly... but he also got stuck in jail
because of his pronouncedly pro- German
writing in 'Signal', advertised as the only paper
that called upon Yugoslavs to fight against
marxism, masonry, Jewry and democracy, because they
all polluted the racial purity of the
Serbian national soul..."
In principle, concludes the author of the piece, "Dr
Prokic has stood unwaveringly behind what
he has during his lifetime spoken, written and done
in public, working from the premise that
the watchwords of the French bourgeois revolution
glorifying liberty, equality and fraternity
were fatal errors that the Jews and the Masons
forced on credulous, so as to rule over the
whole of humanity and in future to lay waste as they
wished, for their own benefit inciting
wars, political conflicts and massacres".
"They had taken everything from us, exploited our
workers, debauched our daughters, violated
our sisters, corrupted our politicians and public
servants.
We put yellow bands round their arms, but we allowed
them to take them off themselves..."
On Friday, April 2, 1993, Croatian Radio broadcast
in the news for the broadcast "To Croats
in Backa, Banat and Srijem" the following worrying
news from its correspondent in Budapest,
Ivo Kujundzic:
"On the political scene in Serbia at the moment
popularity is enjoyed by people like the
president of the Serbian Royalist Movement, Sinisa
Vucinic, the leader of the para-military
terrorist organization called "Serbian Falcons"
(Srpski sokolovi). "The Duke", as he calls
himself, stated that he is proud of being a fascist,
and said on Radio B-92 that all members of
ethnic minorities in Serbia are second rate citizens
and should be forbidden any kind of
political organization".
Stating that he hated Jews, Muslims, Croats, blacks,
pacifists and communists, this Chetnik
leader offered a recipe for compensating the
customers of the "Jugoskandik" bank: Serbia
should openly begin to "Seize the property of rich
Jews and communists so as to help the
afflicted people".
peterpan
>
> But still I'd be more relaxed if I had few glasses of vodka before I go
> shooting someone. hehe
> Never had plans spending life drunk.. war? maybe
action is allowed alcohol of any kind!
Misha
Goran
Misha wrote in message <368FBD60...@beer.com>...
>But still I'd be more relaxed if I had few glasses of vodka before I go
>shooting someone. hehe
Relaxed... if necessary. Drunk..... terrible for moral, discipline. We lost
number of battles in Bosnia thanks to drunk soldiers. And if drunk, you
could easily get killed. Also, nobody asks you to watch in their eyes while
killing, just shoot, don't think too much.
>Never had plans spending life drunk.. war? maybe
Not a good idea. It is not safe to drive drunk, not to talk about fighting a
war. But who knows....
Johnny Byrne
> Moving people out of a war zone can be anything from ethnic
> cleansing to a humanitarian act. I have been trying to put the focus
> on initial decisions made by the top men and three things make the
> Serbian leadership responsible for most forced relocations, even of
> Serbs.
--------
Rambling exercise on the Art Of The Sweeping Assumption snipped...
We owe Spinoza our thanks. In these exchanges, he regurgitates every
crude distortion, half-truth and outright lie that's ever been used by
the enemies and demonisers of the Serbs, especially that breed of posturing
American moral nerd, of which he is an outstanding example, and the batty,
man hating feminist harpie, MacKinnon.
It just goes to prove that educate an moron, and all you get is
an educated moron.
His lies and stupidities are too numerous to address here, but if I have time
I'll come back to them. Meanwhile, more figures for him to factor into
his matrix of Serb evil. They take us back to the beginning of this disgusting
and unnecessary civil war, for which his country, America, along with
Germany, must one day pay the price for helping to incite it, and - to this
very day - relentlessly prolonging it.
Who remembers (or cares now) cares about the official UN report by Boutros
Boutros-Ghali which stated that more than 250,000 Serbs had been
ethnically cleansed from Croatia, and thousand killed during the military
actions 1991/1992? Or the hundreds of villages burnt and their occupants
slaughtered - usually with gruesome savagery - or cleansed during the
various Bosnian Muslim offensives? Here is part of a document which
details the toll around Spring 1992. It gives names and places and on
one sheet contrasts the % of the surviving Serbs against that of the
official census of 1991. This is what it looked like in the Spring of
1992.
Municipality Bos Serbs 1991 B/Serbs 1992
Morica 33% NONE.
Tuzla 15.5% 4.5%
Zivinice 5% NONE
Kladanj 26% NONE
Banovici 14% NONE
Kalesija 18% NONE
Travnik 11% NONE
Bugojno 18.9% 5.%
Derventa 40.8% 5.%
B.Brod 33.8% NONE
Jajce 19.3% 4.%
Sarajevo 33% 7.%%
Bihac 7,000 About 500
Livno 2,800 837 (all in concentration camp)
Duvno 1000 400 (all in a concentration camp)
Mostar 20,000 about 1000
As I say, that was the reported situation in Spring '92, when a total of
around 300,000 Serbs had already been ethnically cleansed at this very
early stage of the conflict. Yet according to the myth this was also the
time when only `genocidal nazi Serbs' indulged in ethnic cleansing.
Watch this space.
- Johnny Byrne
Goran
>> people. Full stop.
>Moving people out of a war zone can be anything from ethnic cleansing to a
>humanitarian act.
New term for Muslim done ethnic cleansing? How come they were human mostly
to the Serbs? How come they formed human concentration camp, did torturing,
killings and rapings? Shameless.
>I have been trying to put the focus on initial decisions
>made by the top men and three things make the Serbian leadership
>responsible for most forced relocations, even of Serbs.
>(1) The forced relocations were initiated by Serbia in Banja Luka in 1992
Initiated? If someone does ethnic cleansing, it means all other must do the
same. Stupidity. Also, I am not sure that such things started in Banjaluka,
what do you say about Johny Byrne posting on the ethnic cleansed Serbs?
>(2) In the initial relocations, the people were taken to internment camps
>rather than to safe areas by the Serbian leadership
Things that are mostly not investigated. One thing, Serbs allowed foreign
press to visit such camps, mostly prison camps.
>(3) The Serbian leadership enthusiastically supported ethnic
cantonization,
It might prevent the war and was only way to stop Muslim domination. Nothing
wrong about it.
>and I have already shown that this is responsible, for the most part, for
>forced relocation.
No you havent.
>The Bosnian leadership was opposed to ethnic cantonization.
No they weren't. But Muslim leadership wanted to ensure it's domination.
>> Serbia was not fighting a war in Bosnia, it was local Serbs, local
militias
>> that are later organized in Bosnian Serbs Army.
>These units, according to the several authorities I have used, were not
>independent of Belgrade
They was mostly independent from anything but their muncipal leadership in
the begining. Later they war responsible to Republic of Srpska authorities.
But I'd love to see some of your sources.
>and were armed using heavy weapons from Serbia.
Bullshit. Heavy weapon remained after retreating of JNA from Bosnia.
>The
>Srpska Republika is a puppet government, as was the Serb statelet in the
>Krajina.
Nothing similar. Srpska Republika was leaded by assembley and persons who
were elected in 1991. elections before the war.
>This is shown by the simple fact that neither government ever
>departed in the slightest from Milosevic's line.
Now this is rubbish. In 1993. Milosevic accepted Vance-Owen plan, and
Bosnian Serbs refused it. Milosevic made embargo to them. UN envoys were in
Drina river controlling this. Just one example, of disagreement and of your
ignorance.
>> There was no Bosnian strategy because Bosnians were fighting civil war
>> among each other. But Muslim strategy was to conquer whole Bosnia.
>Its claim was the mediaeval Bosnian kingdom was distinct religiously from
>Serbia because before the Western and the Eastern Christian churches split
in
>the 11th century, this state was part of the Roman church, and later on was
>dominated by heretics (the so-called Bogomils) who gave allegiance neither
to
>the Pope in Rome nor to the Patriarch in Constantinople.
Number of Bogumils could never be exactly determined and it leaves a lot of
space for speculations for Muslims. But first Bosnian king was crowned in
Orthodox monastery of Mileseva, because of his relations with Nemanjic
dinasty of Serbia. Serbian aereas were divided then in manny smaller
divisions. (Bosnia, Knez Lazar's aerea, Nikola Altomanovic aerea, Brothers
Balsic aerea, Despot Dejan aerea, Despot Oliver.....).
>These Bogomils, it
>appears, were willing because of their already-existing tradition of
>nonconformism to convert to Islam after 1389.
Because of tradition of nonconformism, they accepted occupator's religion?
This is a bit not clear to me. BTW 1389. is year that have to do most with
southern Serbian lands, as Kosovo and surrounding. As in 1871. in Marica
battle king Vukasin and his brothers lost Macedonia. Although Bosnian king
Tvrtko sent duke Vlatko Vukovic to fight Turks together with his countrymen,
this defeat had no major influence on Bosnia at the time.
Bullshit about bogumils has aim to deny Serbian and Croat origins of today
Bosnian Muslims, which is stupid, because same as islamized Bulgarians in
Rodop mountains or islamized Albanians, islamized Serbs and Croats could
become just of peoples present in Bosnia before. Number of Bogumils was not
so large as Muslims like to believe, and they were more present in Bulgaria
then in Bosnia. So, this large number of Muslims could only appear of most
numerous peoples in Bosnia at the time, Serbs. Claim about Bogumils is
mostly bullshit and it is not possible to determine what percentage of
todays Muslims had origins from them. Not much, as manny of Muslims today
still have Serbian surnames, and there was no some larger Bogumil population
in Bosnia.
>When Bosnia was recreated in 1991,
It wasn't recreated in 1991. but in 1944. Again, you know nothing.
>it claimed the borders of this state,
Wrong. Also, medieval Bosnian state's borders varied through history.
>which were repeated in both
>Turkish and Austrian divisions, as well as divisions in Tito's Yugoslavia.
Tell us more about that borders? Besides, Bosnia was even once divided in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, two separated villayets. Little test for you: when?
>It provided a formal guarantee of ethnic equality to all groups, which it
>may
>have violated at times because of fears that Serbs and Croats would
>undercut its authority.
Who's authority?
It provided only formal guarantee of ethnic equality because there was a way
for two peoples to cooperate and decide ignoring third people. In communist
Bosnia there was no need for such mechanism because communist dictature was
in charge. But later when large decisions were to be made, it caused the
war.
>Therefore it is senseless to say that the "Moslems wanted to conquer whole
>Bosnia".
???????
They wanted to rule over all Bosnia and to decide in behalf of whole Bosnia
ignoring Serbs.
>This is also shown by Serbia's territorial ambitions, which it has
>satisfied by using ethnic cleansing and terror.
There was no Serbia's territorial ambitions. Local population wanted to
decide of it's future and not to listen Muslims and Croats.
>Serbia wanted all of what has
>been Serbia proper, PLUS what it could snatch in Krajina and in Bosnia.
Serbia is secondary here, they wanted nothing, they were just helping Serbs
occasionaly same as Malaysia, Iran, Turkey or Saudi Arabia helped Muslims or
Croatia helped Croats.
>The Sarajevo government, on the other hand, restricted its claim to
traditional
>Bosnia.
Honey, babe, you can not speak about Serbia vs. Bosnia. It was civil war
among Bosnian Serbs, Croats and Muslims, equal Bosnian nations.
Sarajevo MUSLIM government (Serbs had Republic of Srpska, capital Pale, and
Croats had Herceg-Bosna, i am not sure if they had capital, it was Zagreb),
so Sarajevo MUSLIM government wanted to rule over whole Bosnia, over Serbian
and Croat territories. That is why they fought war against Serbs all the
time and against Croats occasionaly.
>Milosevic's goal: to create greater Serbia, which would occupy the
>territory of Srpksa and Krajina.
Milosevic was just supporting local Serbs there, same as Tudjman supported
local Croats.
>> But we can talk about "Serbian occupation of territory where ethnic Serbs
>> lived". Do you have any example for that? I know what was it like in my
>> hometown, Sarajevo, in a middle of Bosnia, far away from Serbia. But yet,
>> you might know better.
>I mean the occupation of territory by either Serbia or the Srpska
>Republica,
There was no territory occupated by Serbia. If you know better, give me
example.
>and I do not believe that they are independent entities.
They are. Often cooperating, but much more independent then Croatia and
Herceg-Bosna.
>> Ufff.... is this that story how Muslims who did crimes are also victims?
>Yes, and seeing that there are levels of criminality and victimhood, and
>not
>simplistic notions of good guys and bad guys, is I think the road to peace.
Seeing that Muslims doing crimes are victims is nothing but bullshit hombre,
and I don't see what else could I do, cause I don't want to comment such
idiotic claim.
>> >But Serbian forced relocation in Bosnia was the most serious since it
>> > forced people out of their homes as part of strategy.
>> I know that theory, but why do you think it was part of strategy?
>(1) It ensured that people so relocated would not be able to return and
>cause trouble
What "it"?
>(2) It ensured that different ethnic groups would no longer be able to
>unite on common projects...such as the overthrow of Milosevic
Bullshit. Common projects? Milosevic is president of Serbia, only Serbian
peoples can overthrow, Bosnians (Serbs, Croats, Muslims) can do nothing
about it. Another sample of your ignorance.
>> >Serbians who fled the Krajina
>> >district in fear of Croatia in 1995 were not as seriously victimized as
>> >Moslems expelled from Banja Luka.
>> Define victimized.
>The Croatians allowed the Serbians in Krajina to escape to Serbia,
Ok.
>whereas it
>appears that the leading Moslem men and the men of draft age in Banja Luka
>were sent to internment camps and murdered, and the women were
>systematically raped.
Lie. Last Muslims were expelled from Banjaluka in 1995. It couldn't happen
that some of them were expelled and some not. If such thing happen, it means
Serbs did not do it systematically.
This mass raping is another propaganda bullshit story, never proved single
thing about it, not even somebody was accused for it.
>> But when talking about strategy, when was most Muslims and Croats
>>expelled from Banjaluka? Was it in 1995.?
>It was in 1992.
It was in 1995. too. Some left until 1995., WHOLE WAR. So, Serbs weren't so
systematic then? Banjaluka catholic bishop Komarica complied about this.
>The important thing is it was at the beginning of the war, and equally bad
>responses on the part of Moslems and Croats can be blamed in part on
>anger and fear at the behavior of the Serbians.
Justifying things that can not be justified. And lies. No comment.
>> >>About arms embargo, it was not obeyed man.
>> >Nonetheless, it resulted in only a small number of arms going to Bosnia,
>> So how the heck Muslims organized 150.000 men army?!
>Many of them were armed with personal weapons, and as I have already
>mentioned many were members of the Sarajevo Mafia.
Sarajevo mafia was then stronger then Chinese Triade, it had 150.000 armed
men across Bosnia.
>Some of them, according to
>some sources, drilled and trained without any weapons at all.
And they also fought without any weapons at all. Get real.
>> >whereas the heavy weapons of the former JNA went to Serbia.
>> Most of it. Some was left behind to local Serbs in Krajina and Bosnia.
>Other pieces were GIVEN to local Serbs by Belgrade,
Left behind. Same thing.
>and for a reason. It is
>disingenuous (polite American word for lie) to say that the Srpska people
>were independent of Belgrade when starting in 1987 Milosevic spoke openly
>about the need for unity among the Serbs.
So, that is proof that there was no independency from Belgrade? No it is
not, it is simplificaton. A stupid one.
>> Hm, I presume you are talking about our discussion?
>> Well, here is difference as I see it. You have large theories, well
>> developes (somewhere), and mostly know a little about what happened in
>> Bosnia. You "know" that ethnic cleansing was Serbian strategy, that they
>> killed leading men, that they were Nazis and shit like that.
>Pardon me, I do not think the Serbs are "Nazis and shit like that." The
>Serbs are anti-Nazi and have a proud record from WWII. However, a society
>can become Fascist, or fascistic, while remaining anti-Nazis.
Ok. Still nothing to do with Serbs.
>The Nazis were Fascists in Germany and Germany alone. The Croatian Ustashe
of
>WWII allied itself with the Nazis and can be fairly said to be a form of
>clerical authoritarianism or even Fascism, but they were not Nazis. For
>one
>thing, Naziism is an athiestic philosophy whereas most Croatian fascists
>were Roman Catholics.
I see. Agree.
>> And me... well,
>> I am just poor Bosnian that doesn't know much about these theories
>>Muslims
>> and leftists sold to you, but I sure know what is happening here since
>>1990.
>Sounds, then, that the truth lies somewhere between what you say and my
>theories.
Truth is not somewhere between lie (or ignorance) and truth. It is
compromise, but it is not truth.
>However, the reason I stress these strange theories is that I
>have, since the end of the Vietnam war, seen the same SORT of strange
>things here in the USA that I read about in Serbia.
I already said that I dislike comparations. If you are talking about
Balkans, talk about Balkans, don't just project things from USA to Balkans.
>Basically, I see schizophrenia.
> On one level people hate their leaders, but on another level, the leader
has
>only to start a war, or refer to the real suffering of ordinary people (a
>suffering not shared by the leaders, who are either high-level military men
>"in the rear with the gear" or else draft-dodgers like Clinton), and the
>people rally behind the big man.
Well, some similarity does exist. But there is problem. USA are not really
endangeroud. When Clinton wants to distract attention from his blow jobs, he
bombs some God-forsaken (is that the term?) country, as Afghanistan, Sudan
or Iraq. And he made up some stories about evil terrorists making baby food
or chicken pots.
We, the Serbs, have REAL enemies. Croats, that wanted to rule over Serbs or
expell them all (which they did), Muslims and Croats in Bosnia allied
against Serbs wanting to rule over us, and Albanians in Kosovo killing real
people, Serbs, Albanians, Gypsies that do not support them. Milosevic uses
such things, but he doesn't make up troubles in North Korea. He just uses
problems to stay in power, but problems exist anyway.
>> We are talking about Bosnia, why are you mentioning Serbia all the time?
>> I am really getting sick of discussions with people who know almost
>>nothing, but they imagine a lot.
>The leadership in Pale simply NEVER showed any difference of interests
>from the Belgrade leadership,
1993.
>and by definition two really distinct countries
>are going to have clashing interests.
Not necessaryily at all. Stupid thing to say. See USA and UK ie, USA and
Canada i.e.
>I regard Pale therefore as a puppet government.
Republic of Srpska was ruled by people elected in democratic elections in
1991. in Bosnia, allied but different from Serbia.
>> There was no war among Bosnians and Serbians but there was war among
>> Bosnians, Serbs, Croats and Muslims.
>> If that embargo was obeyed, Muslims would be defeated in few months.
Instead
>> of that they fought war for three years against Serbs AND Croats. Do
think a
>> bit, please.
>They survived for as long as they did for something of the same reason the
>Viet Cong survived, and that was because they were fighting for their
>homes.
Viet Cong fought for their homes? Weren't they just commie guerrilla, most
of them came to South Vietnam from North Vietnam. They were mostly not
fighting real but guerrila war. But Bosnian Muslims had territories they
controlled and front lines they controlled whole war.
Willing to fight means NOT ability to fight, it is simplistic and pathetic
view. Is it that American shit called "think positive"?
>> So, Serbs hadn't infantry and that is why Muslims did not lose? Is this
>> what are you saying?
>Serbs had infantry, but did not use it sufficiently.
We didn't want to win? We weren't capable? Serbian army was often commanded
by former regular JNA officers, and they didn't know how to use it?
Nonsence.
>> And about massacres.... funny thing, but they always caused some major
>> intervention, bombing Serbs, embargo to Yugoslavia.... how convenient.
>> Serbs liked more to massacre civilians then to fight with infantry? What
>> a ridicilous idea? (sorry for the spelling).
>No, the sequence of events was (1) Serbs bomb innocent civilians, (2) West
>intervenes, (3) Serbs take hostages, (4) West backs down. The only
>absurdity here is the complete immorality of what the Serbs did (1 and 3
>are violations of international law.)
(1) Serbs bombed cities. In city of Sarajevo were some.... cca at least
35000 soldiers. Therefore, it is not civilian.
(3) Immorality was supporting of one side in war and bombing other. Serbs
had to defend themselves as they could. Nothing happened to these hostages.
>> Do you know how does artillery weapons look like? Do you think they have
>> little snipers on them so crews can see where is bread line and shoot it?
>> No man, nothing similar.
>Sarajevo is, apparently, in a valley and many civilian areas were therefore
>completely visible from Serbian artillery positions.
VISIBLE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Have you ever been to some of that hills? You can
see buildings hombre, but to see people buying bread in Vaso Miskin street
or in Markale marketplace is totally impossible. Sarajevo was highly urban
aerea and you couldn't possibly see what is happening in the ground. Another
ignorant simplified theory.
>And modern artillery
>can of course be targeted with pinpoint precision.
It can, but nobody can see people buying bread to target them, hello!
>In some cases, possibly
>drunken Serbian arty men engaged in random shots against areas where
>civilians were known to live, and this in itself is a violation of
>international law,
"Civilians were known to live"? It was city, people lived everywhere, some
random shot could always hit them. C'est la guerre.
>that goes all the way up the military and political
>chain of command, since the bigshots allowed it.
In what way? I only heard about Karadzic's orders to obey Geneva convention.
And random shots are accident, nothing else.
>> hahahahahahaha............... why I am laughing, well, I remembered some
of
>> my Muslim friends with whom I was drinking alcohol before war and eating
>> pork (it is forbided to Muslims too).
>I am aware that many Bosnian Moslems drink alcohol and eat pork. I was not
>referring to cultural customs in peacetime, but to a possible Serbian
policy
>which gave alcohol to troops and caused the unnecessary deaths of
>civilians.
"Possible Serbian policy which gave alcohol to troops"?!?!
Lie. Speculation, excuse me, but also stupid one.
>Furthermore, the very fact that Bosnian Moslems violate Islamic dietary
laws
>means, probably, that they are not the "fanatical Mujhadeen" that Serbia
>claims to be defending itself against.
Most of Bosnian Muslims are not Islamic fanatics, so much about ordinary
people and soldiers.
But their leadership is Islamic, connected with ulema and stuff like that.
And it is not ordinary people that create politics.
But Muslim fundamentalism has not much to do with Bosnian war, it was simply
civil war about controling land on which all sides had right. Background of
this sides is secondary.
>This is, in other words, more "kettle logic" (I did not take your kettle
>and
>it was dirty anyway.) Arguments aren't artillery barrages where the more
>crap you fire, the better: "the Bosnians are Moslem fanatics,
Mostly not, but it is not important.
>AND the Bosnians drink alcohol and eat pork,
Why the heck someone should fire on someone for this? Hello!
>AND they are "really" Eastern Orthodox
>anyhow who converted for land in the 13th century"
Truth.
>may SOUND like an
>effective argument because you've fired three "salvos." But the three
>rounds, taken together, are a logical contradiction which I simply do not
>accept.
Where did you came up with this three stuff anyway? It was war, Muslims were
our enemies. Full stop.
>> Serbs were drunk and Muslims were sober, so WHOLE SERBIA (your theory is
>> that Serbia attacked Bosni?) couldn't find enough of sober troops to
fight
>> poor unarmed Muslims? And Serbian soldiers are not capable of fight
>> without alcohol?
>No, it is possible that the top men authorized the misuse of alcohol so
that
>reluctant draftees would fight. They'd discovered early on (in Slovenia in
>1991) that modern youths tend to be justifiably cynical about fighting so
>old men like Slobbo can stay in power.
Theory, a stupid one. Who'd be crazy to make his army drunk? But as I said,
this is just a very stupid theory. Serbis couldn't fight well because they
were drunk for three years. Please get serious.
About draftees, they were attacked by separatists in the begining of the
war. After JNA retreated from Bosnia, Bosnian Serbs army was consisted of
all draft age people, from 18 (even less) to 65 (or more). Not just young
draftees, but local Serbs, fighting not for Slobo, but, same as Bosnian
Muslims, for their homes. See, my home was 800 meters from front line.
>> >I do understand that the mortar strike in the Sarajevo market of Feb MAY
>> not
>> >have been a deliberately targeted strike because mortars are hard to
target
>> >precisely: I DO NOT believe Serbian claims that this was a land mine or
a
>> >Moslem strike.
>> Exactly. You know shit, you just believe for some reason, unknown to me.
>I do not believe that it was a land mine because the canopy showed evidence
>of damage that would be caused by a shell coming from overhead. There is
>only the Serbian CLAIM that the Moslems directly targeted their own folk in
>order to get sympathy, and because it is in Serbia's self-interest to make
>this claim, it can be dismissed (and would be dismissed in an American
>court.) Furthermore, the news videos from Sarajevo clearly show, prior to
>the market bombing, puffs of artillery smoke from the Serbian-occupied
hills
>ringing Sarajevo, followed by visual evidence of the result of that
>targeting, showing civilians in open squares who have been obviously hit by
>the Serbian fire. The Serbian intent and behavior was well-established by
>the time of the market bombing in Feb 1994, and this is why the world will
>not believe any "land mine" or "Moslems did it to their own people" claims.
There were also claims from UN officials and Yasushi Akasi too. Muslims
could do it, and maybe they did. But anyway, it is just an terrible
accident.
So, US policy is "Bad guys did very bad thing and they have to be punished".
Something bad has to happen so action can be justified. They did not try to
prove who fired mortar, what was it.... they just bombed Serbs. Something
fishy there. They just made good explanation why they are doing it, an
excuse. But a good one. They killed 60 people, or how much it was. (much
less).
About single shot theory, well, investigator couldn't reject any claims, but
to seek proofs for any theory that sounds realistic. And when prove
something he can say what happened, he can not say "probably Serbs did it".
In JFK case it would look like this "These CIA bastards are doing shit all
the time, they probably killed Kennedy also, let us execute every
motherfucken one of them".
>> It was quite hard to shot that market in Sarajevo with mortar because it
>>is surrounded by high buildings, it is near Tito's street.
>> Believe what you want.
>You don't need a clear line of sight to fire a mortar: a mortar is targeted
>by
>determining a parabolic trajectory. I am not familiar with the details of
>modern mortars such as would be possessed by the JNA. However, it would
>surprise me if they did not automate the simple calculation of this
>trajectory
>so that the operator could feed in the coordinates of Tito's street where
>he KNEW civilians would be.
Markale marketplace is between large buildings. It needs large precision to
hit marketplace and not the buildings, and a mortar would fall most possibly
in the corner of the plateau, not in a middle of it. It was very hard to hit
and kill so much people. But we are not experts, so our discussion on that
topic is pointless.
>But over and above these technical details, soldiers under international
law
>have the DUTY (not the right, not the permission) to do "positive
>identification, friend, foe or civilian" and at the very least this was
>neglected by the Serbs in 1994 EVEN IF they were firing crude bottle
>rockets.
That is what for gunman, no matter who is, could be guilty about.
>> Well, tell me than, how come well armed army of people of ten million had
so
>> much problems to defeat unarmed army of people of two million?
>> They were drunk?
>> Oh God, what am I doing here discussing such stupid things.
>Because the evil of the Serbian LEADERS (not the Serbian PEOPLE) was
>matched
>by their stupidity, and Milosevic's stupidity is such that all he can think
>of today is to beat heads in Kosovo. The United States lost in Vietnam for
>something of the same reason. Waging war successfully requires not only
>brute courage but also a few brain cells, and believing logical
>contradictions seems to destroy brain cells.
Your explanation is Serbian leadership stupidity? Grow up.
>> Your impressions are your problem. You didn't answer me, were these
>> 150-200.000 men in Muslim army unarmed? If not, how come if we know there
>> was arms embargo on Muslims? If yes, how come Serbs failed to conquer
>>them?
>But they did lose. Bosnia as constituted in 1991 no longer exists, and
>instead there is a crazy federation.
They didn't loose. They just failed to conquer whole Bosnia.
> >started this bestiality and did so as a matter of policy, when it sent
>> >Moslems from Banja Luka to a camp in August 1992 in Omarska.
>> From Banja Luka? Were those people from Banjaluka?
>Yes.
Source?
Btw, how do you explain non-Serbs expelled from Banjaluka in 1995.?
>> Crimes were Serbian policy and Muslims did it occasionaly. Bullshit.
>> Spare me of that. And not a single proof.
>I would prefer a "single" valid proof to an artillery barrage of
>contradictory
>proofs. Unfortunately, I have only texts which indicate planning of ethnic
>cleansing by Serbian top leaders starting in 1991.
I have no reason to believe that texts.
>> >“All sides are guilty” ignores the fact that Serbia pushed SE Europe
back
>> to
>> >bestiality as a matter of policy BEFORE other sides responded with
>> >equivalent bestiality.
>> Bullshit. But I'd like to hear why do you think it was like that.
>
>1987: "they shall never beat you"
Terrible thing to say.
>1991: destruction of Vukovar and Dubrovnik
Compare damages in Vukovar and Dubrovnik. Nothing similar. And in Vukovar,
it was war.
>1992: Moslem occupants of Banja Luka sent to Omarska
Exact data and source?
>1994: Market square bombing
Bomb felt in market. Proofs what?
>1998/9: Kosovo
KLA terrorists uprised. AFTER that Serbian actions came.
You was talking about Serbian bestiality BEFORE all other. Now you mention
things from whole war.
>> Yep, Serbs caused it. But what about Muslim crimes from 1991 and 1992.?
>> Village Sijekovac near Bosanski Brod, Serbs were slaughtered for no
>> reason.
>But in some sense it is WORSE to slaughter with reason if the "reason" is
>that your commanding officer orders you, on pain of your own death, to
engage
>in the slaughter. In this, if Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's book HITLER'S
WILLING
>EXECUTIONERS is correct, the Serbian military was worse than the German
>military, since German soldiers could choose not to participate in
>murdering Jews.
Fuck them and his insults about Serbs worse then Nazi.
About "reason" and "no reason" I ment: they attacked vilage and slaughtered
inhabitants just for being Serbs. Reason would be fightings, or something
like that. Capisc?
>The Serbian press wants to whip up Serbian fear of individual, visualised,
>out- of control "Muhajdeen" but to me quiet men in offices who write orders
>are WORSE.
>The phrasing "for no reason" implies that it is better to slaughter with a
>reason, whether that be anti-Nazi or for Greater Serbia.
Reason would be in combat, to defend or to take over. Got it now?
>> I am really pissed of with your not knowing nothing about situation. But
>> please tell me about war between Serbia and Slovenia, it is totally new
to
>> me. Serbia attacked Slovenia before war in Croatia, right? So, where
Serbian
>> forces came from? Hungary? Italy? Austria? Their Croat allies let them
>>pass?
>At the time Slovenia separated, Yugoslavia still existed, so this war was
>between a Serb-dominated JNA which still had the right to go through what
>is now Croatia.
Excuse me then, was it Serbia or federal army?
>The leaders of Serbia, and the movie Savior, do not present a narrative.
Thus
>people can forget simple facts like the fact that Slovenia separated, not
from
>Serbia, but from a still existing Yugoslavia. This is a war on memory.
>You claim I know nothing but it appears that I am feeding you basic
>chronological facts, such that Yugoslavia still existed at the time of the
>separation of Slovenia.
See, that was rethoric question, I do have basic information at least. So,
it was not Serbia who attacked Slovenia but federal army?
>The frightening possibility is that the end of
>Communism is not the end of the Orwellian world which ALSO exists here
>under
>capitalism in the states (the "Orwellian world" was portrayed by George
>Orwell's book 1984.)
Orwellian world exists in west more then in any part of the world. That is
because people have to be lied in democratic societies. Chomsky was writing
about it. In dictatorship you can think whatever you want, nobody cares
whayt do you think. But in democracy people have to be persuaded.
>In the world of 1984, it is "thoughtcrime" to use complex words, to think
>complex thoughts, or to place events in a narrative. At one point in this
>novel, the state (Oceania, a sort of nightmare socialist Britain) goes to
>war
>with East Asia, and it is emphasized by the media that "Oceania HAD
>ALWAYS been at war with East Asia."
Ok.
>It would be convenient for Milosevic if Serbia HAD ALWAYS been at war with
>the Mujhadeen and Tito's Yugoslavia, it appears, was only (as a version of
>1984) a rough draft for SlobboLand. Tito did suppress the memory of
Serbian
>nationalism (along with any other sort of ethnocentric narratives) but his
>very recognition of the need for policies that gave people rights as
members
>of groups (whether Serb, or ethnic Albanian, or whatever) had at least to
>preserve some sort of memory. Whereas Slobbo wants to renarrate the
history
>of Yugoslavia more thoroughly, so that a group that dominated the armed
>forces of Yugoslavia and many other institutions (the Serbs) can be
>portrayed as victims.
Nice theory. But what does it says about our discussion?
>> >The fact that Serbia initiated the targeting of civilians, the
destruction
>> of
>> >archeological and artistic treasures,
>> Ok, like what? Dubrovnik? So, what was destroyed in Dubrovnik by planned
>> targeting of treasures? Or drunken Serbs missed again?
>Sure looks planned to me. And I have a problem with armies that destroy
>libraries and art, because those armies tend to go on to the women and then
to
>murder. Even Johnny Turk left Hagia Sophia in Constantinople standing, but
in
>1991 Billy Serb destroyed mosques, churches and libraries apparently
>indiscriminantly.
But not Dubrovnik. Some mosques yes, some catholic churches maybe, but there
was no need to destroy libraries.
>> >the forced movement of non-Serbs and
>> >their physical liquidation beginning in 1992
>> Did they prove all these things and I was asleep?
>Perhaps. The press in Belgrade is controlled.
Not all is.
>> >I'd be interested to know if you could post some non-fabricated,
>> large-scale
>> >incidents where Bosnia interned Serbs PRIOR to August 1992.
>> Why prior to August 1992.? Why the heck should I? What does that proves?
>> It shows that the Serbs started the killing and destruction and accounts
>> for non-Serb behavior.
EVEN IF Serbs did wrong things first (and same as you, I don't have data,
but you again believe) it justifies noone for doing bad things.
>> >silent, mostly because he's dead. We need to hear from societies of
camp
>> >prisoners but at the same time remember that 150,000 people cannot form
>> >such societies.
>> 150,000?!?!?!?!?!?!
>> Shameless lying.
>This is the total apparent body count, and my point happened to be that
>positive evidence has IN ALL CASES to be formed by groups with
self-interest,
>from Ruder and Finn to prisoner's groups. The French philsopher simply
asks
>us to remember that there are many people who CANNOT participate in this
>process.
I am sorry about it.
But PR agency can not be compared with society of people who were in camps.
>> Milosevic could not part people along ethnic lines. He could help
developing
>> of Serbian nationalism as Serbia's president. But in Croatia Tudjman was
>> ruling, and he had all the same power over Croatia as Milosevic over
Serbia.
>> But they had little influence on each others republic. It takes two to
>> fight.
>However, Serbian nationalism (hooray for da Serbs) MEANS second-class
>citizenship for everybody else (boo for da Croats.)
Nope. Serbs couldn't possibly make Croats or Muslims second-class citizens
in Croatia or Bosnia.
>> Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't
believe
>> it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
>One American writer on this policy (Catherine MacKinnon), which is proven
to
>exist by Prof. Bassiouni's data base, points out like Lyotard that a victim
>silent on her victimization is still a victim.
Agree.
>Serbia knew well that Islamic
>women would not for the most part speak up.
Serbia knew? What a stupid way of saying, no matter what you wanted to say.
>Therefore, the existence of men
>commanded to rape as part of ethnic cleansing is more important than some
>probably fabricated number.
Existence where? Where they are? What would we achieve with mass mureders?
It is problem that PR agencies needed to make feminists support Muslims, and
they did a great job.
>To MacKinnon, the silence of an abused or raped woman itself sends a
>message, but one that is not contained necessarily on a police report.
The only problem is: abused or raped woman has to exist first. Especially
mass raping.
>> But anyway, it was never provec, neither was anyone accused for mass
>> rapings by Hague tribunal. How come?
>The silence of many of the victims. And it is again contradictory to
dismiss
>findings of the Hague when they do not suit you and to want to use them
>when they seem to fit.
The problem is Hague wouldn't hide any Serbian guilt, that is for sure. And
still they accused noone.
And, if one woman is raped and she is quiet about it, I can understand,
shame I presume.
But there were MASS RAPINGS (alleged) and ALL VICTIMS ARE SILENT. Get real.
>> What a bullshit again. But I'll give you chance to explain how Milosevic
>> did it?
>He's in charge and he excluded Albanians from civil society in Kosovo
>starting in 1991.
He did nothing similar. Albanians, SOME of them, boycott Serbia. That is
all. Ask any of them, do they vote, do they go to public schools (only
schools in Serbia), and if not - why not.
>> And they got their information from...........?
>> Guess what, western press was situated in Sarajevo and Zagreb. Never in
>> Knin, Pale or Banjaluka. Think.
>Part of the "public relations offensive" of the Moslems was openness
>(*glasnost*) to the extent that journalists were able to film, for example,
>the Feb 1994 market bombing right after it happened.
Convenient, but there was always a TV crew to see massacre when needed.
>Whereas the Serbs
>carefully controlled access to their areas. While it is true that the
>Moslems may have been treating the press nicely in order to get them on
>their
>side, it is also true that the Serbians, according to believable reports of
>people interned, had far more to hide.
Muslims were controlling most urban centres, including capital. That is
reason why press was situated there. And was under Muslim influence, they
saw what Muslims wanted them to see. They visited other parts of Bosnia, but
who explained them what they see? Muslims again. CNN once showed funeral of
Serbs killed near Vlasenica and said that were Muslim funeral. And graves
were with crosses, with cyrillic names on it.
>> Ok, what PR agencies Serbs were using during the war? Although there was
a
>> UN ebmargo on Serbia? You have data some PR agencies were violating this
>> embargo?
>An individual lawyer here in Chicago has done work for the Serbs without
>violating the embargo.
Same as PR agency, a lawyer.
>In addition, Serb spokesmen can do effective PR by
>telling Western journalists what they like,
Yes. But press situated in Sarajevo.... can they hear Serbs? Or who is
telling western journalists what they like in Sarajevo? Think.
>and by presenting Mrs Plavsic as a
>"good Serb" (which is especially tragic since, as indicated by the extended
>quote from Theodore Adorno in a related post, representation of Mrs Plavsic
>triumphs over what is represented: there are many "good" Serbs who are
>unsupported by the West since the West don't think they'll win.)
This is another subject.
>Canadian forces general Lewis MacKenzie is another example of how Serbia
>can get around the UN embargo.
He was decent man, so propaganda made him Serb lover at once.
>In other words, engaging a PR firm does not mean that the other side does
>not
>do PR as well, either by its own press releases or by using figures like
>MacKenzie. This is how information on political affairs gets out to the
>world. The question remains, who is RIGHT, not who uses PR.
And how the heck do you know who is right when you know just what PR told
you? You are selling me sick ideas, like: Muslim criminals are victims,
Muslim ethnic cleansing is human, UN general was seized by the Serbs.....
why should he like Serbs more? And he didn't.
>> Savior is D production US movie, what kind of victory is that?
>No similar film was sponsored by Bosnia, nor is it likely that one can be
>sponsored, since Bosnia as founded in 1992 has effectively ceased to exist.
There were manny such movies, "Welcome to Sarajevo", or some bullshit by
local director Ademir Kenovic.
And yes, they can be sponsored by Muslims even now. Muslims controll manny
parts of federation.
>> All sides are guilty.
>This is Serbian public relations, and it manages to be true and nonsense at
>the same time (texts that describe crazy situations sometimes get a little
>crazy themselves.) Suppose, for starters, I refuse to see "sides": after
>all, socialists don't see "sides", they see the owners and the workers in
>all
>of the countries of the former Yugoslavia. Serbia cannot present itself as
>innocent, so the PR man selects the next least bad alternative.
What Serbian PR? Some agency? It's name is...?
Oh, no, Serbia does present itself as innocent. And it can do so.
I am saying that all sides are guilty.
And you are saying other side is angel.
Good guys, bad guys, no grey. Bullshit. (I am sick of using this word over
and over again, but I have to).
>> Nothing similar. I just refuse to buy pathetic Muslim propaganda. Ruder &
>> Finn got some award for representating Muslims and Croats, find what
their
>> official said about forming view on Bosnia. You'd feel stupid if you see
how
>> they are playing with you.
>
>One of the mechanisms of the "higher" PR, however, is to convince the
ordinary
>person that the "lower" PR is for saps (American slang for dumb person.)
Thus
>in America, the sophisticate buys Lawrence Eagleburger's complete nonsense
>about how the US would have responded if Tito had shelled Dubrovnik (when
it
>did not respond in Czechoslovakia in 1968 despite tanks from Russia) and
has
>been trained to look down upon the statements of lower-level apparatchiks
as
>mere PR.
Spare me, I don't understand this. What Tito shelling Dubrovnik?
Why would USA interfere civil war anyway?
>> >UN soldiers and journalists
>> >were present at Srebenica and saw what happened: from Srebenica, Record
>> >of a
>> >War Crime (Jan Willem Honig and Norbert Both, Penguin, 1997):
>> >"Dutch soldiers witnessed many bodies being removed in an odd assortment
of
>> >pick-up trucks, tractors with carts and vehicles with shovels. A UN
>> >Commission report described the experience of a Dutch soldier who had
been
>> >captured in the early stage of Srebenica…'he saw a row of the shoes and
>> >rucksacks of 100 men.'".
>>
>> So what happenned to other 7900? Maybe some war crimes did happen, I
never
>> denied that.
>But you did. You responded to criticism of Savior by saying that this was
>anti- Serb propaganda and made the implicit claim that all side's guilt
means
>in some sense that all sides should be forgiven. In getting to this absurd
>claim you called for the arraignment of Alia Izetbegovic and Tudjman as war
>criminals, which implies that the opposing side were not war criminals.
Heh, here is what I think: all sides are partly guilty for the war.
For crimes only criminals are responsible (including those who ordered and
who could stop and they didn't).
I do not mix politics with crimes.
>>
>> No it isn't. Everybody does it and we think it is not fair to declare war
>> crimes as exclusive Serbian invention. Not to mention theory that Serbs
are
>> guilty even for crimes Muslims and Croats did. What would you say if I
say
>> that all Serbian crimes are done as revenge for genocide in WW2 when some
>> 700.000 Serbs were killed?
>> But fact that war crimes sure are not Serbian invention, we do not claim
>> that crimes are allowed to Serbs to do either. All criminals must be
>> punished. I disgust using crimes in political purposes, what is strategy
of
>> Muslims during whole war.
>Here is another deep problem which surfaced in America during the Vietnam
war.
>In America now we share your hatred of the politicians and this dislike of
>politics. But what I dislike worse (having seen some evidence of it first-
>hand) is comfortable men in offices without honor who USE the fact that
>their
>people are anti-political to commit crimes and to avoid punishment.
I don't care about any bastard man in offices. Crimes did criminals that are
possible to determine, precisly, name and surname.
>The Moslems had of necessity to use crimes of Serbs for political ends.
Oh? How come?
>> >of ethnic Albanians from 1991..1998 from schooling? It was a beating.
>> What exclusion?
>From 1991 until now, the Albanians had to create their own school systems
>because the Serbians kicked them out, as a matter of top-level policy, from
>schools and universities. This was in revenge for what was NOT done as
>top- level policy in the 1980s.
Nobody excluded them from schools. Just they took Albanian politicians
cnotrol over public schools. That is why Albanians boycott schooling system
of Serbia. They can study in Serbia whenever they want.
>> Lie. Ethnic Albanians live freely, terrorists are being beaten.
>Doesn't appear to be the case if an ethnic Albanian farmer tells Timothy
>Garton Ash (in this week's New York Review of Books) that "if the Americans
>were not here, the police would beat us up." He did not say that youths
>would, he said the police would, and it appears that they would do so
>acting under orders.
Police is not beating people without reason, it is impossible because there
are some million and a half Albanians there. Large forces should be needed
to beat all of them, and we don't have them. But why then police should beat
some single poor farmers? Why didn't they from 1989. to 1998.?
>> >Even after Serbia showed in 1991 that it was ready to bombard civilians
>> >(Dobrovnik and Vukovar) to gain its ends,
>> It was war. Allies bombed Germany, USA bombed Japan, nuked. It happens in
>> war. Not bombing civilians but enemy cities.
>Enemy cities contain civilians and in Yugoslavia those civilians were NOT
able
>to get out (when it was clear that the Serbs were going to enter Srebenica
in
>1995, Moslem mothers simply tossed their own children on UN trucks, and
>dared the soldiers to toss them back.)
They couldn't leave, so what? We had still to fight war ya know.
>> If Serbs bombed civilians in Vukovar and Dubrovnik, why did not they just
>> entered it? Was drunk?
>The fact that Serbian troops were unwilling to fight as infantry had been
>already found in Slovenia.
Serbian? But we agreed it was federal army, not Serbian?
>Therefore, starting in Vukovar and continuing
>until today, the Serbs have replaced infantry attacks with artillery during
>large scale engagements, and police actions during small scale
>engagements.
Nothing similar. Serbian infantry was fighting same as Croat or Muslim one.
>Urban fighting is a job not for draftees at all but for highly trained
elite
>units: one of the reasons the US military doesn't want to get involved in
the
>former Yugoslavia is that there would be so much urban fighting. You have
no
>idea what lies around the next corner and every moment takes nerves of
>steel.
So, Serbian draftees couldn't fight urban fighting and Muslim and Croat ones
could? Stupid.
>> Albanian separatism was first non-violent, I mean there was no terrorism.
>> Now KLA uprised and separatists are fighting. And they are beaten, they
>> are criminals. What is so hard to understand here?
>Seven years of nonviolent resistance received no overtures and no
>conciliation from the Serbs,
Independence is not something we will negotiate over, it is out of the
question. And Albanian leaders want just independence. Their problem.
>instead a preview of what would happen to ethnic Albanians
>occured in Bosnia. There is a sign in an American zoo: "warning: this
>animal is dangerous: when attacked it fights back."
Bosnia has nothing to do with Kosovo.
Yes, Serbs do fight back when attacked, and we are not joking.
>On the one hand, you say "this is war, people get hurt, there is injustice
>and all sides are guilty."
I was talking about Bosnia. All sides did wrong things and are guilty, all
of them fought war.
>The KLA, however, has decided that "this is war,
>people will get hurt" and you treat this as justifying an extreme and
>military response. You cannot just rise above the field (like, perhaps, a
>blackbird?) and speak in these lofty tones which ask for forgiveness, and
>then approve of a continuation of the same that is happening right now in
>Kosovo.
In Kosovo, it is problem of terrorism. No comparations needed.
Albanian leadership wanted independence. They can not get one not peacefuly
not in war. Fact that they were peaceful changes nothing. Now they are not.
Manny people live peacefuly, but they don't get independence for that.
>> Maybe in your head. Albanians in Kosovo lived peacefuly with minor human
>> rights violations until KLA uprised and took over territory. They asked
for
>> war and got the war. How manny of Albanians were beaten before KLA
appeared?
>> How manny of them are beaten in police controlled cities in Kosovo
>Complete exclusion from jobs and schooling is not a minor matter at all.
They boycotted public services and state owned companies (all). They weren't
excluded. They can apply to any school in Serbia and terms for them are same
for any Serb.
>> What a idiocy, for God's sake! What a idiocy. What a stupid American shit
>> knowing blabering. Serbs colectively beat women and their crying is heard
>> all over Pale?
>> What kind of a moron you are?
>I qualified this carefully since it was from but one source. However, it
is
>backed up, both by a whole chapter on how sexism works in Serbia in Sabrina
>Petra Ramet's book Balkan Babel and even by Savior itself.
Man, sexism is one thing, it is same in Serbia as in Romania, Bulgaria,
Bosnia, Croatia, Hungary.... but women abuse occurs same as in any other
part of world, beating, raping or similar. Story that in Serbia you can hear
women crying for being beaten everywhere is totally brainless, absolutly
totally fucken brainless and I don't know how to comment it. We are ordinary
people, same as anywhere. And you give me some bullshit story like we are
some savages. Please don't.
>> It would be interesting to compare numbers of family violence, child
>> abuse and run aways in USA and Serbia.
>This would ignore under-reporting of same and would prove nothing.
>Because of
>under-reporting you have instead to take into account the fact that
>military training often produces violence against women.
Bullshit. That would mean that most of people who was in the army beat their
women? Idiotic, presumption, nothing but idiotic presumption. (Same was done
with mass rapings, it was just calculation without proofs or such things
reported). Stupid presumption token as a fact. For your information, all
male had military training in former YU, military service is compulsory.
You should really come to Serbia once, or to Republic of Srpska to see that
we are not monsters.
>> In Balkans we are used of politicians saying one thing and doing another.
I
>> am not interested in analyzing Izetbegovic whatsoever.
>> If he created democratic, multi-ethnic or whatever Bosnia, why did he
>> ignored Serbian rights and Serbian will (Bosnian Serbs', one of three
equal
>> Bosnian peoples according to constitution)?
>> Why did he refused Lisboa plan? Why did he said he'd sacrifice peace for
>> souveregnity?
>(1) The Bosnian Serbs do not speak for all Serbs in Bosnia. It instead
>appears that they were started by allies of Milosevic as a puppet
government
>that will be taken over by Serbia. There were mixed and full blood Serbs
who
>served in the Bosnian army against the Bosnian Serbs, and these people are
>not represented by Srpska.
The Bosnian Serbs speak for 98% of Serbs in Bosnia. They haven't been
started as Milosevic's puppet gov. but where elected in free elections in
Bosnia, same elections where Muslim and Croat representatives were elected.
There were some Serbs fighting in Muslim army, but so were Muslims in
Serbian army, and Croats too. You have example of Drazen Erdemovic,
convicted for war crimes, who was in Bosnian Serb army and who is a Croat.
This small exclusions say nothing. Most of the Serbs were represented by
Republic of Srpska. Same as MOST of Croats and MOST of Muslims were
representated by their govermentS.
>(2) Alia opposed partitioning and ethnic cantonization because partitions
>and cantons cause communal violence and forced relocation of people
Not necessary. It was not part of a plan at all.
>(3) Because a peace which involved second-class citizenship and probably
>annhilation for Moslems and people of mixed ethnicity was no more
>acceptable to the Bosnians than it would be to Serbs
There was no such thing like second-class citizenship. Today Muslims living
in Republic of Srpska are not second-class citizens, AND these cantons would
be all part of Bosnia.
Alija didn't accept it because then his domination would be endangeroud.
>> Not necessary. It was way to divide Bosnia peacefuly so all peoples could
>> run their destiny instead of Muslim domination.
>> Major idiot had proposals Bosnian Croats and Serbs liked and that could
>> prevent war and Muslim hegemonic wishes. Genius Alija refused them and
>> caused bloody war. What was Alija's right to refuse plan Serbs and Croats
>> liked?
>Moslems have always lost in partitioning and in cantonization because the
>Western powers who administer partitions and cantons regard Moslems as
funny
>brown men. Thus, in Pakistan in 1948, hundreds of thousands of Moslems
lost
>their homes and their lives because one of John Major's British
predecessors,
>Lord Mountbatten, divided India into modern India and Moslem Pakistan. The
>West Bank was created by the West in Israel with the result that Jewish
>settlers have American-style homes whereas Palestinean Moslems crowd into
one-
>room hovels. I would not deny that Alia is sufficiently Moslem to fear Yet
>Another "fair" partition that makes him a leader of a West Bank statelet.
Muslims would get same thing as all other peoples and they would get even
more territory then they have now according to that plan. There was no any
sign that they would be damaged more then any other people.
>Moslems have simply never gotten a fair chance to operate
post-Enlightenment
>states
What is post-Enlightment?
>with equal rights for all because the West interprets their religious
>convictions as intolerant of other faiths. This is despite the fact that
>other faiths, including Judaism and Christianity, likewise say they are
>"true" and others "false." But if a religiously inclined leader subscribes
>as a Christian or a Moslem or a Jew to the religion of his fathers, this
>simply does not mean that he has to "kill the unbeliever."
>Bill Clinton is a member of a Christian faith which says that to be saved
one
>must have faith in Jesus but in no way does Bill Clinton tell Moslems in
>America that they must convert. There are a number of Islamic states,
>notably Turkey, most of whose people are Moslems and whose leaders are
>Moslems, but which actively oppose political Moslem fundamentalism. It
>appears that given the very laxness of Bosnian Moslems (the very fact that
as
>you admit they drink alcohol) would argue that they would be what Alia said
>in 1992 they wanted to be, which was a state guaranteeing, according to the
>UN declaration of human rights, religious and cultural freedom to all.
>By definition, the idiot schemes of ethnic cantonization would allow the
>cantons to define citizenship religiously and this is why Alia's government
>opposed them.
This ideas of west hating Muslims has mostly nothing to do with Bosnia.
Bosnian Muslims were not considered as Bosnian Muslims but simply as
multhiethnic Bosnians. So, all this stuff doesn't apply to them. Plan for
cantonization gave equal rights to Serbs, Muslims and Croats. There was no
way it is better to Croats or Serbs then to Muslims.
>> >Serbia supported ethnic cantonization which means it is
>> >responsible for most forced relocations.
>> Idiotic statement.
>No argument.
No comment. I just said "idiocy".
>> >The long answer is that the above statement is less a move in a rational
>> >debate than a symptom of collective post-traumatic stress, a symptom
seen
>> >in the USA after Vietnam.
>> So, if someone disagree with you, he is demented?
>No, for it is possible to have various mental disorders and still be quite
>rational. Indeed, the Romantic literary period in the West found that the
>disorder itself could be "healthy" in some sense by teaching the "sanity" a
>thing or two about its own limitations.
>Thug communism, on the other hand, pioneered the idea of the mentally
>disordered dissident during the Brezhnev period in the Soviet Union.
>Radovan himself, truly a "normal lunatic", a man with a profession, a
career,
>troops of friends, and a nice office, who nonetheless in some sense is
>clinically insane, is ONE AT THE SAME TIME "normal" and out of his fucking
>mind. Similarly, the common person's definition of sanity (has nice office
>and speaks nice) applies to Slobo himself, a man whose parents both killed
>themselves.
>I short: I don't have some simple definition of demented and indeed had I
>thought that you were crazy like that I would not be wasting my time.
>Instead, I feel that an entire society can go in some sense nuts, and when
>it does so sufficiently, what is nuts will seem normal.
I couldn't possibly agree. If entire society go nuts, it can be defined in
what way it got nuts. And if any member of society got nuts in same way, it
is still able to define in what way he is nuts, no matter of people living
with him. If you see a village where all people are eating cur tires i.e.,
you will know that every single one of them is nuts, although his neighbours
may not think so.
>> What has personal pain as consequence of leaders deeds to do with
>>cousins forcibly relocated by the Muslims?
>If those cousins were forcibly relocated AFTER the decision to create a
>federated Bosnia, a form of cantonization supported by Milosevic, then it
>has everything to do.
Hm, I know what are you talking about, my cousins were relocated after peace
agreement. But what was this story about personal pain about first place?
>> >West and its ideals were being confronted by "real men" from the farm
and
>> >that for this reason, Serbs should be given whatever they wanted.
>> Ufff...........after reading so much bullshit, here comes something I
could
>> think about it. I could agree to some point. As I said above, he was
showing
>> his determination, at some level of consciouseness. Very nicely said.
>> Yes, Ratko is determined man. So what?
>There is nothing wrong with determined men. However, there is everything
>wrong with men who determine to do good and those who determine to do
>evil.
What is wrong about people determined to do good?
>Ratko wanted to portray Dutch soldiers, who have a REAL tradition of
>resistance to tyranny that goes all thge way back to the 16th century and
>which includes fighting the Germans,
And Serbian tradition of fighting tyranny is not REAL?
>as some sort of effete, urbanized
>idealistic do-gooders who would be terrorised and offended by the slaughter
>of an animal. Whereas he was literally, with respect to the actual
fighting,
>in the rear with the gear, and even his men were apparently afraid to
>engage in infantry combat.
Quit this shit about coward Serbs please, it is just not true. Serbs were
brave or not depending on a person, same as any other.
>The Serbs, in other words, have the mistaken idea that
>being modern, and civilized, and what we call in America "politically
>correct" makes one unwilling to fight.
>In a sense this is true and in a sense this is false. For one thing, a
>Dutch- Jewish philosopher, Spinoza, points out that the mental act of
>choosing a cowardly course of action is just as painful as choosing a brave
>act and if the pain of the chooser indicates that we should admire him,
then
>braveness and cowardice are the same. The Dutch peacekeepers and their
>generals conducted themselves far more honorably than Ratko precisely
because
>they balanced their primitive anger against being used as hostages against
>the central interests of their Queen and state. It was simple, and
cowardly,
>for Ratko to boil everything down into giving Pale whatever it wanted,
>including the ability to represent Serbs unsympathetic to a puppet
>government.
We were talking about Ratko slaughtering pig, are you coming to a point
soon?
>This is going to be my last post on this subject.
Heh, why didn't you say this at the begining?
>I have said what I think
>has needed to be said. The Serbs are successfully leading SE Europe back to
>the Dark Ages which is where so many apparently normal but actually fucked
up
>people want to live. He who makes himself a beast relieves himself of the
>pain of being a man.
Serbs are people as any other. Full stop.
Barry S. Marjanovich
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Satan SLOBo's SERVant 'Johnny Byrne' To Be Paid Again In 1999
Yugoslav minister announces media offensive
10:48 a.m. Jan 01, 1999 Eastern
BELGRADE, Jan 1 (Reuters) - Yugoslav Information Minister
Goran Matic accused foreign media on Friday of waging war
against Yugoslavia, and announced a return offensive for 1999.
``We've learned our lessons from previous mistakes in the media
war,'' Matic was quoted as saying by Beta news agency.
``We are ready to respond to all manipulation in the appropriate
way. And we've been more ready by the day because we are
constantly perfecting our instruments.''
.......
He said ``Up to $100 million are being sent to our media through various
channels -- where is that money?''
Johnny Byrne (SERVant)
Stench Of Death Doesn't Shame The Servs
http://www.vido.ldh.org/images/serbia.jpg
Servian Leaders Charged As War Criminals
http://www.bosnet.org/reward.shtml
The Srebrenica Justice Campaign now has a home page at:
http://ds.dial.pipex.com/srebrenica.justice/
satansssssssssssssssssssssssSLOBossssssatan
http://www.sps.org.yu/ljudi/smilosevic.html
http://www.vido.ldh.org/images/serbia.jpg
satansssssssssssssssssssCCCCsssservssssatan
Guide For Milosevic INDICTEMENT
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kosova Updates: http://www.alb-net.com/
B o s N e t Web Page:http://www.bosnet.org/
Arrest Karadzic/Mladic Petition:http://www.bosnet.org/petition/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For a comprehensive list of URLs dealing with Slobodan Milosevic's role
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosova, Croatia, visit:
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
http://www.bosnet.org/petition/milosevic.html-ssi
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Please help indict Satan SLOBo (Slobodan Milosevic) for genocide and
crimes against humanity for his actions in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina
and now Kosova.
Please Sign the Petition for SLOBo's Indiction NOW at:
http://www.radicalparty.org/home.htm
Help save humanity from Satan SLOBo!
--------------------------------------------------------------
'Johnny Byrne' : jby...@cix.compulink.co.uk
http://www.bosnet.org/reward.shtml
http://www.vido.ldh.org/images/serbia.jpg
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Precursor to Servian Agresssion, Atrocities, Massacres and Genocide
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Have you noticed how 'Johnny Byrne' shows up on these newsgroups, all of
sudden, just before the Servs commit new atrocities, massacres and
genocide on their neighbors.
It never fails, 'Johnny Byrne' has faithfully followed his instructions
from Belgrade each time the Servs executed a major massacre in Croatia
(Vukovar), Bosnia (Srebrenica) and now Kosova. Whenever he becomes busy
with his postings you know what will soon follow: rapes, tortures,
murders, 'ethnic cleansing'...genocide.
Brace yourself for what you will soon witness in Kosova. The living will
envy the dead. 'Johnny Byrne' is here again.
'Johnny Byrne' e-mail: jby...@cix.compulink.co.uk
(Say "HELL!" to doktors Srdja Trifkovic and Radovan Karadzic)
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS*EVIL*SSSS*SERVS*SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Johnny Byrne
> Sure looks planned to me. And I have a problem with armies that
> destroy libraries and art, because those armies tend to go on to the women
> and then to murder. Even Johnny Turk left Hagia Sophia in Constantinople
> standing, but in 1991 Billy Serb destroyed mosques, churches and libraries
> apparently indiscriminantly.
To extract just one of the malicious, ill-informed statements made by this paragon
of American moral amnesia. The following is a commentary on just a few of the
Serb Orthodox religious monuments and churches damaged or destroyed before a
shot had been fired in BiH, when more were to follow. How it fits into the matrix
of sole Serb evil in the civil wars of former Yugoslavia, I leave to this character.
However, in order to do so, he'll have to abandon his posie namesake, Spinoza, and
look for inspiration in Rosenberg, philosophical mentor to Goebbels.
What it reveals is deeply tragic, a loss not just to the people of former Yugoslavia,
but to all Europeans and their culture, as is the corresponding loss of Catholic churches
and Mosques also destroyed in the conflict. War and hatred it breeds are the culprits
here, Spinoza, not the simplistic garbage of a unique Serb master plan to destroy
civilisation. On this topic alone, you owe the Serbs an apology.
It's written by Bill Dorich, a published expert on the subject. Dorich is a passionate
defender of his people and is demonised by Croats on account of it. But the facts
he presents below, if challenged, are easily verified.
- Johnny Byrne
'Dogs, Serbs and Jews Not Allowed,'
was the slogan painted on Serbian housesð
by Croats and Muslims in Bosnia in 1992.
A quote by Tin Ujevic, a Croatian poet:
['It is not a problem that Croats lived in Austro-Hungary. The problem
is that Austro-Hungary lives in the Croats.']
The untitled posting on the Internet (Sept. 21, 1996) by Matej Vipotnik
and Boris Petrovcic is very disturbing reading. It illustrated the
depth to which hatred can sink, pulling down all those who dare to
resist. This destruction, by all sides, will not be felt by the people
of Croatia and Bosnia for a few years, until they realize that people
around the world are no longer going to flock to their country because
they have destroyed that which made them unique. At the end of the
posting, after citing the article in the New Republic about the
destruction of historical and religious monuments transcending
individual destiny, I was confident that the next phrase would surely
condemn the perpetrators of cultural genocide, Tudjman, Izetbegovic and
Milosevic, but I was disappointed. Boris Petrovcic, who has been vicious
in his attacks of the Serbs on this net remained silent about inditing
the real criminals in this war.
As you read the following text it is worth mentioning a letter to the
editor of the New York Times, dated December 26, 1994, by a free lance
journalists, Vanni Cappelli. He said: 'Back home, I set down my
experiences in an article that contained my eyewitness accounts of the
aftermath of a Muslim ethnic cleansing campaign directed against the
Croat inhabitants of the Travnik region, systematic profiteering from
internationally donated humanitarian aid by Muslim army commanders in
the city of Zenica. No publication in the United States has wanted to
publish my account. Surely, truth is ill served when what is seen
cannot be told.'
There are 212 Serbian churches destroyed in this war. This is only a
partial list placed in alphabetic order for easier reference.
Batinjani in the Pakrac municipality. The Serbian Orthodox Church of
St. Dimitrius the Martyr was built in 1739 and the iconostasis was
created about 1747. The priest, Fr. Stanoje Popovic, one of the leading
masters of popular fresco painting in the first half of the 18th century
was the painter. In 1991, Croatian terrorists and civilians carried out
the complete destruction of this church.
Belo Berdoð
The Serbian church of St. Nicholas built in 1764 was taken over during
the Second World War and converted to a Roman Catholic church. After
destroying the iconostasis and religious objects, the Croatians returned
the church. In 1991, outside war maneuvers, this church was severely
damages, it artifacts were once again destroyed.
Bjelovarð
The Serbian Cathedral was built in 1784. when the iconostasis of Jovan
Cetirevic Grabovan was relocated, the new iconostasis was painted by
Celestin Medovic and Bela Cikos in 1902. Interior frescos were painted
by I. Tisov and H. Hohnejc. The church was a registered landmark. In
1991 the church was gutted by the Croatian militia along with the parish
center.
Bolc
In the Zagreb-Ljubljana Diocese, the Serbian Orthodox Church of Sts.
Gabriel and Michael the Archangels was built in 1975. Its cultural
goods included a printed venetian Book of Psalms, dated in 1642. The
church was listed as a world-class landmark. In 12991, the church was
damaged and its interior was gutted with explosives. This damage was
done outside war maneuvers.
Brocanac
In the Dalmatian Diocese. The Serbian church of The Apostles Sts. Peter
and Paul was built in the 18th century and was renovated in 1805. In
1991 the church was damaged during war maneuvers. the extent of damage
has not been assessed as the Serbians have been prohibited from seeing
the property.
Brsadin, Croatia
The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Gabriel the Archangel was built in
1750. A new belfry was built by Anton Semper in 1834. The iconostasis
was painted by Marko Peros. The church was renovated in 1983. In 1991,
the belfry was damaged, as was the front facade of the church, destroyed
by dynamite.ð
Dalj, Croatia
In the Karlovac Diocese, the Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Dimitrius
the Martyr, the bishopric cathedral was built in 1799. It was one of
the most monumental late Baroque churches in the Karlovac diocese. The
iconostasis was painted by Pavel Djurkovic, one of the leading
representatives of Serbian classicism-Biedermeier painting. The
iconostasis was concluded in 1822, and the art work was finished in
1824. In 1942, the church was demolished and the iconostasis was
burned. The demolition was led by Roman Catholic priest Josip Astalos.ð
The rebuilt structure was again attacked in 1991, and the church facade
was damaged.
Dalj
The Serbian church of the Dormition of the Most Holy Virgin was built by
Metropolitan Pavle Nenadovic in 1759. The iconostasis was painted by
leading Serbian Baroque masters Vasilije Ostojic and Dimitrije Bacevic.ð
In 1941 this church was the first church of the Osjecko Polje Diocese to
be destroyed in the First Independent State of Croatia. The church
furnishings were destroyed, along with most of the iconostasis, while
only the upper parts were saved. The chapel was renovated in the postwar
period. In 1991, Croatian militia mined the en trace to the church.ð
It has not been possible to confirm the extent of the current damage.
Darda
The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Michael the Archangel was built in
1777. The iconostasis and church furnishings date to the time the
structure was built. In 1991, the Croatian militia damaged the church
facade with shells. The extent of the damage is not fully known.
Derventa
Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1992. Fr. Nikodin Cavic, a retired Serbian Orthodox
priests and lawyer gave testimony that he was in a building surrounded
by Bosnian Muslims who captured him and several local citizens including
a number of children. The Muslims raped children as young as six years
of age, then murdered and dismembered them. Dozens of Serbian children
in the village were slaughtered that day, many of whom were cut into
numerous pieces.
Doljani
In the Slavonia Diocese of Croatia. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St.
Elijah was built in 1805 and renovated in 1904 and 1979. The parapet
tiles of the iconostasis had depictions of Tsar Lazar, Tsarina Milica
and the 9 Jugovics. During the Second World War on August 2, 1943, on
the day the churchbs saintbs day, Croatians destroyed the walls, roof
and structure, belfry window and doors. The wood carved iconostasis,
ceremonial objects, books and the archives were all destroyed; only one
chalice and two candlesticks were saved. The church was completely
restored during the postwar period. In 1991, during war maneuvers, the
church was completely destroyed along with the iconostasis and the
furnishings and ceremonial objects.
Donji Bogicevci
Slavonia Diocese in Croatia. The Serbian church of the Resurrection Of
The Lord was build in the second half of the 18th century. The
iconostasis contained 24 icons from that period. In 12943, the church
was completely destroyed, including all religious objects, leaving walls
of only several meters in height. A new church was constructed on the
old foundation during the postwar period. In 1991, Croatian militia
severely damaged the church. The bell tower was destroyed and the
facade was eliminated. The iconostasis and furnishings were ruined and
only a few small icons survived.
Donji Zemunik
In the Dalmatia Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Sava began
construction just before the Second World War and was completed during
the postwar years. On April 1, 1991, the church was demolished. Icons
and religious objects are missing from the church.
Drnis
Dalmatia Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Dormition of the
Most Holy Virgin was originally built in 1618 and was replaced by a new
building in 1905. During the Second World War, Friar Petar Berkovic led
the desecration of the church-looting it of its religious objects,
particularly the liturgy books. In 1991, the church was considerably
damaged during war maneuvers and the belfry was shelled.
Gabos
The Serbian Orthodox Church of The Birth of the Most Holy Virgin was
built in 1810. The iconostasis belongs to the category of popular naive
art and, according to the records, was painted in 1844. In 1991, during
war operations, the church was shelled and hit four times destroying the
bell tower completely and causing great damage to the structure.
Glina
Gornji Karlovac Diocese. The Serbian church of the Birth of the Most
Holy Virgin was constructed in 1826 in the reigning spirit of
classicism. On August 12, 1941, the Ustashi completely burned the
church with hundreds of Serbian villagers inside. In 1963, a completely
new church was built on the foundation of the old church. In 1991, the
Croatian militia bombed the facade destroying the front half of the
church.
Gornja Obreza
Slavonia Diocese of Croatia. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. John
the Apostle was built in 1747. The iconostasis was painted in the
second half of the 18th century by an unknown fresco painter who
inscribed the icons in Greek letters, indicating his origin. An
inventory compiled in 1874 indicates that the church altar had 5 icons
and the iconostasis contained 50 icons. In 1991, Croatian militia
completely burned and destroyed the church and all of its contents.
Gornji Petrovci
The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Resurrection of the Lord was built in
1769. The iconostasis paintings belong to the popular art from the
first half of the 19th century. There were painted in a fresco style
that can be ascribed to Bogdan Djukic. The altar area and naos walls
contain depictions of saints painted on canvas and blued to the walls.ð
In 1991, the church was shelled and the belfry cap wand naos root
structure were damaged.
Gornji Tovarnik
The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. George the Martyr was built by master
builder Petar Suvakovic in 1797. The walls and the choir loft paintings
were done by Petar Cortanovic, according to the contract signed in
1834. The iconostasis paintings appeared in the mid 19th century. The
Virginbs icon contains the founder's inscription signed in 1853 by Jovan
Isajlovic the Younger. The church was renovated in 1903, at which time
Stevan Todorovic painted two wall compositions as evidenced by the
inscription on the western wall of the church. In 1942, the church was
damaged and looted, and the archives and books were completely
destroyed. The church was restored in postwar periods. In 1991, the
church tower was hit by several shells. The walls are cracked and the
frescoes were damaged. The iconostasis and church furnishings were
ruined.
Gospic
In the Gornji Karlovac Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St.
George was built in 1785. The iconostasis was painted in 1902 and the
work was accomplished by Professor Bauer from Zagreb. In 1942, the
church was burned to the ground with several hundred Serbian villagers
inside. All church furnishings were destroyed. In 19064, the church
was rebuild on the same site. In 1991, the Croatian Ustashi again
destroyed the church-but, since the Serbs were cleansed from the
village, its is not possible to confirm the extent of the current
damage.
Grubisno Polje
In the Zagreb-Ljubljana Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church was built
in 1776 and renovated in 1829. Serbian Orthodox Bishop Sofronije
Jovanovic dedicated the epitaphios in 1750. During the Second World
War, Croatian Ustashi damaged the church and seven old manuscripts were
destroyed. The church was renovated in postwar periods. The Church of
St. George was the first of the Croatian targets during WW II. The
church doors were sealed by Croat special police on august 15, 1991 and
the parish priest was prohibited from moving about without a police
permit. The majority of the Serbian population was cleansed by the
Croatian National Guard, 'Black Shirts' led by Stojan Sustin, a CDU
activist who harassed and eliminated many Serbs. Most fled. Nearly all
of the Serbian homes in the area were dynamited while this area was
supposedly under UNPROFOR protection. The Croats used 16,000 National
Guard troops, 100 artillery weapons and 36 tanks, raiding 20 Serbian
settlements and villages. Nearly 1,200 Serbs fled to Belgrade as
refugees.
Imotski
Dalmatia Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Dormition of the
Most Holy Virgin was built in 1720 and renovated in 1884. On October 9,
1991, Croatian militia bombed the church. The roof collapsed and the
walls cracked. The main doors were blown off, stone floor slabs flew
out of their positions and the windows fell out. The iconostasis and
other church furnishings were destroyed.
Jagodnja
Dalmatia Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Simeon the Stylite
was built in the 18th century and renovated in 1869. During WW II, the
church was partially damaged and the register book and church objects
were damaged. In 1991, the church facade was bombed and damaged. The
extend of interior damage can not be verified at this time.
Kabo Kod Bolca
Zagreb-Ljubljana Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Nicholas
dates from the end of the 18th century and was recently renovated. In
12991, the facade was bombed and damaged with machine-gun fire. There
is no reliable data regarding other damage at this time. The church is
under the control of Croatian forces.
Karlovac
Located along the Korana River, southwest of Zagreb. In the fall of
1990, while the body of His Grace Bishop Simeon lay in state, the
diocesan residence was ransacked several times by Croatian mobs. The
church flag at haft mast was ripped from the flagpole and burned in the
town center. The Serbian clergy was abused. The walls of the St.
Nicholas Church were defaced with profanity. The old church and the
Serbian cathedral were vandalized. The international Red Cross
established a transit center for refugees in this church structure, but
current data about its condition are unavailable. The Karlovac Diocese
Treasury contains icons, books and valuables that were removed from the
Orthodox churches in this diocese during the Second World War. They
were returned to the Serbian Orthodox Church in 1982 by the Vatican and
were displayed in the Serbian Diocese Museum. A large collection of
portraits of Gornji Karlovac Serbian Orthodox bishops is kept in the
diocese residence. In 1991, Croatian militia forces broke into the
diocese residence taking these treasures to an unknown location. The
Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Nicholas Cathedral was built in 1785 by
Karlovac master builder Josip Stiler. The icons were painted by
Arsenije Teodorovic, the most prominent Serbian classicist painter.ð
Dragutin Inkiostri Medenjak decorated the walls. In 1991, the church
was lightly damaged during war maneuvers. However, on January 6th,
1992, on Eastern orthodox Christmas eve, an explosion destroyed the
church and all of its contents.
Konjic
Bosnia-Herzegovina in the north end of the Neretva River valley. Muslim
detention camp in the athletic arena and military camp. On June 15,
1992, 13 Serbs were killed while being detained. They are: Velimir
Cecez, Vlado Cecez, Milos Cecez, Dusan Cecez, Pero Cecez, Mirko Cecez,
Predrag Kuljanin, Tihomir Kuljanin, Rade Ninkovic, Mirko Ninkovic, Stevo
Ninkovic, Novica Zivak and Zeljko Cecez. As the most insulting cultural
genocide that can be perpetrated against the Serbs, the Serbian
Orthodox Church in Konjic was converted into a public toilet.ð
Konjevrate
Dalmatia Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Dimitrius was
built in 1864. In 1991 the church was shelled during military
maneuvers, but the extent of the damage can not be verified.
Koprivna
The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Birth of the Most Holy Virgin was one
of the oldest preserved Serbian Orthodox churches in the Osjecko Polje
Diocese. It was built in the Middle Ages and renovated in 1757. during
WW II, the church was converted into a Roman Catholic Church. At the
time, the iconostasis was destroyed, but the local people saved some of
the individual icons. IN the postwar period the church was returned to
the Serbian Orthodox people. However, many of the icons remain at the
Vatican. In 1991, the church was almost completely destroyed along with
all of its furnishings.
Koprivnica
In the Zagreb-Ljubljana Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of the
Holy Trinity was approved for construction on June 24, 1791 and it took
three years to build. It was dedicated on May 16, 1795. The
iconostasis had 30 icons and dates from the time of the Serbian Orthodox
bishop Kiril Zivkovic and was positioned in 1810. The wood carving was
done by Joakim Djakovic. The church was renovated in 1938. During WW
II, the Ustashi damaged the church which was restored in postwar years.ð
In 1991, the church was again damaged outside of war maneuvers and was
looted.
Kostajnica
Gornji Karlovac Diocese. The Serbian Orthodox Church of Sts Gabriel and
Michael the Archangels was the old cathedral of the former Kostajnica
bishopric built in 1743. It was a representative Baroque structure and
its iconostasis was painted by Ukrainian master, Vasilije Romanovic in
1759. The church was almost completely destroyed in WWII however, some
sections of the old iconostasis were preserved. A new church was built
after the war and the remaining pieces of icons by Vasilije Romanovic
were placed in the church. The remaining sections of icons are among
the most valuable cultural-artistic documents of the Serbian Baroque
period. In 1991, the northwestern side of the church was shelled by the
Croats and the blast damaged these valuable pieces of art.ð
Kukunjevac
The Serbian Orthodox Church of St. Paraskevi was built in 1782 on the
foundation of an older wooden church. The iconostasis was painted in
1896. During WW II, the church was completely burned to the ground with
700 Serbs inside. The church was rebuild along with a memorial center
commemorating the genocide of the Serbs. On October 9, 1991, the
Croatian militia bombed the church and memorial center completely
destroying these structures.
Lovska
The Serbian Orthodox Church of Theodore of Tyron was constructed in 1786
and the iconostasis was painted in 1842. In WW II, the church was
damaged and all the ceremonial items, books and archives were
destroyed. The church was rebuilt in postwar periods. In 1991, the
Croatian militia did considerable damage to the church, bombing it
outside of any war maneuvers.
Mali Zdenci
The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Birth of the Most Holy Virgin was
build with logs and renovated in 1761. In 1942, the church was
partially demolished and most of the church furnishings looted. After
the war, the church was restored and belonged to a list of first
category of landmarks. In 1991, the church was again damaged outside of
any war maneuvers. On October 5, 12991, it was broken into and
demolished. Icons that survived WW II were removed from the iconostasis
and confiscated. The icons destroyed include Christ on the Throne,
painted in 1745, and two smaller icons, the Virgin and Child and one of
Jesus Christ.
Markusica
The Serbian church of the Descent of the Holy Spirit was built in 1810.ð
A monumental single-nave structure with a tall belfry was in the spirit
of classicism. The iconostasis was painted between 1775 and 1777,
ascribed to painter Jovan Isjlovic the Elder. The church was converted
to a Roman Catholic Church during the war and the iconostasis was
dismantled. The icons in the choir loft remained. The rest of the
church furnishings were preserved and returned to the Serbs after the
war. In 1991, the church was hit by several shells and the tower was
showered with machine gun fire. The facade was destroyed along with the
priceless stained glass windows.
Medari
The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord was built
in 1777 and restored in 1834, it was a Baroque structure and was
considered the prettiest parish church in the Pakrac area. During WW
II, the Ustashas set fire to the interior damaging most of the
furnishings. Only a small number of icons were saved. The church was
restored in postwar years. In 1991, Croatian militia struck the church
with several shells, and the northern wall of the naos was damaged and
the bell tower was destroyed. The interior of the church was demolished
with knives and axes.
Mostar
In addition to cleansing 30,000 Serbs from Mostar in 1992, more than
4,000 Serbs were killed or listed as missing. The first victim in
Mostar was the Serbian Orthodox Cathedral of the Holy Trinity, it was
considered one of the most significant Orthodox structures in the
region. It was listed an international historical monument and its
altar was the tallest in the Balkans, a gift from the Russian Czar,
Alexander III. The church of the Virgin Mary, rebuilt in 1833 after it
was destroyed by the Turks was this time destroyed by Muslims and Croats
in 1992. The Mostar bridge built by Suleiman the Magnificent in 1557
was the last historical monument destroyed by the Croats in Mostar.
Munjava
The Serbian Orthodox Church of Sts. Michael and Gabriel the Archangels
was built in 1838. It was completely destroyed in WW II and was rebuilt
in postwar years. In 1991, the Croatian militia bombed the church and
again severely damaged the church.
Narta
The Serbian Orthodox Church dedicated to St. George the Martyr was
constructed in 1694 and was renovated in 1781. The iconostasis dates to
1839. It is listed as a first-class world monument. In 1991, the
church was damaged along with the parish center but the extent of
damage cannot be verify as this property is in the hands of the Croatian
militia.
Nova Gradiska
The Serbian Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity was built in 1736 and
renovated in 1824 and again in 1885. On July 7, 1941 the church was
burned and the remaining structure was declared unfit and ordered razed
by the Ustashi government. Serbs interned in the Ustashi camp, Stara
Gradiska, were brought to demolish what remained of the church as a way
of demoralizing the Serbs. The iconostasis, dating from 1814, according
to archive material, was painted by Italian masters and was destroyed
along with most of the ceremonial objects. A new church was built in
1982, designed by architect Dragomir Tadic and was dedicated on October
3rd of that same year. The archives, old books and a small number of
icons that survived the destruction in WW II were being kept in the
bishopric residence. The clergy was forced to abandon their residence
in 1991 thus the fate of the cultural movable objects is unknown.
Pakrac
The Serbian Orthodox Cathedral and Bishop's residence was totally
destroyed in 1991. The Bishops resident was originally built in 1732 on
the site of an earlier wooden residence. The residence contained a
chapel, the iconostasis of which displayed a true little gallery of
Serbian 18th century art work. The salons displayed a gallery of
portraits of Serbian Orthodox Bishop Stefanovic, who was head of the
diocese from 1721-1743. some of these portraits were painted by the
post prominent Serbian artists; the portrait of Josif Javanovic
Sakabenta was the work of Teodor Ilic Cesljar, and the monumental
portrait of Serbian Orthodox Bishop Kiril Zivkovic was painted by
Arsenije Teodorovic. The residence was declared a landmark of the
highest category. In March, 1991, all the priests were driven out. The
bishop was mistreated by Croat special police and made to stand naked in
public. He was then forced to move to a parish house in Slavanska
Pozega. Executives of the secondary school took over the church lands
for their own use. On April 23, 1991, the Orthodox Religious book store
was destroyed by Croats. Over 4,000 Serbian refugees fled to Belgrade
when the residence of the diocese and the Cathedral church and seminary
were shelled by Croat forces. A machine gun nest was installed inside
the residence by Croat forces.ð
The Serbian Cathedral in Pakrac was built in 1757 and completed in 1769
during the time of Bishop Arsenije Radivojevic. The church was
renovated several times, but the most important renovation was carried
out by Herman Bole in 1898 in the spirit of eclecticism which was
prominent at the time. A new iconostasis and other furnishings were
also placed in the church at the time of this renovation. during the
Second World War, the Ustashi broke into the church and stole valuable
ceremonial equipment and destroyed books and the archives. The interior
of the church was set on fire on September 28, 1991. The iconostasis,
icons, furnishings, were all burned by Croatian militia.
The chapel of the Birth of the Most Holy Virgin in Pakrac was built in
1672. Bishop Petronije Ljubibratic built the old wooden structure and
he was buried in it and since that time it has served as the mausoleum
of the Slavonian Serbian Orthodox Bishops. The church was renovated in
sturdier material by Slovenian Bishop Gavrilo Popovic (1715-1716) and
was nicknamed Gavrinica after him. During WW II, the facade was damaged
and the interior was considerably demolished. the majority of the old
icons were destroyed and only the throne Icons were saved. On September
28, 1991, on the same night that the Cathedral church was burned the
Croatian militia destroyed this chapel, including all the church
furnishings. The iconostasis was preserved, although several icons were
ruined.
The Seminary building in Pakrac, built in 1850 which operated from 1809
to 1871. After this time it was used by the Serbian Teachersb College.ð
It is a one-story building in classicist style located next to the
Serbian Cathedral. On the evening of September 28, 1991, the Croatian
militia burned the structure to the ground.
The Serbian Orthodox Church of Sts. Peter and Paul was built in the
mid-18th century. It was dedicated on May 12, 1752 by the Pakrac bishop
Sofronije Jovanovic. The church was razed to the ground by the Ustashi
in 19042. At that time, the iconostasis and church furnishings were
completely destroyed. A church dedicated to St. Dimitrius was rebuilt
from this foundation in 1969. In 1991, the church was severely damaged
and the parish center was completely destroyed.
Croatian HVO, aided and abetted by 15 retired American generals,
attacked Okucani and Pakrac on May 1st and 2nd, 1995, in which 4,000
Serbians were brutally exterminated. Like the Vietnam War, this was
another My Lai and American fingerprints were all over this atrocity.ð
The Holy Synod of Bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church released a
document on May 19, 1995, signed by Patriarch Pavle. In this document
the Patriarch disclosed that the Diocese of Slavonia which existed
without interruption since the 16th century, met with final
destructiongthe bishop now in exile, his clergy without a single
parish. The document also disclosed that Fr. Sava Pocuca, a Serbian
Orthodox priest, fled in an automobile with a Serbian mother and her 4
children. The children were dragged out of the car by the Croat
military and their throats slashed, before the mother was then shot.ð
Fr. Pocuca was sprayed with 7 bullets when he tried to intercede, he was
left for dead. He spent months in the Banja Luka hospital in critical
condition. He is not just a survivor, he is a witness. He has given a
statement indicating that hundreds of Serbs were dragged from their cars
and off of their wagons and trucks and butchered like animals. He said
it is an appalling lie for the media to report that these Serbs were
killed because they were caught in across fire.b
The document by the Holy Synod of Bishops indicates that on May 11th,
1995, Fr. Lazo Dejanac, a Serbian Orthodox priest who escaped to the
Bosnian Krajina, died of a heart attack because of the hardship he
endured. Fr. Dejanac said he witnessed appalling atrocities of
decapitation, and brutal slaughter. The nuns of the Monastery of St.
Ann were expelled and the monastery was looted. Based on the
testimonies of hundreds of witnesses who managed to escape, the Synod of
Bishops believe that the number of dead was 5,000. The corpses of these
victims were disposed of by cremation, their bloody traces were cleansed
before officials of UNPROFOR and other international humanitarian
organizations were allowed access to the sites of the crimes. One
witness appeared on Belgrade television Studio B and displayed
photographs showing Croatian tanks running over the bodies of women and
children. Robert Fox reported in the Daily Telegraph on May 7th, that:
'While there were no bodies, in Nova Varos, the whiff of decay was
unmistakable despite hasty attempts to expunge it with disinfectant.'ð
A document released by Helsinki Watch, corroborates that 1,100 wounded
Serb soldiers were murdered by the Croats. There were no injured
Serbians in Croatian hospitals. Helsinki Watch discovered the mass
grave of these 1,100 Serbian soldiers and believe that the mass grave
contains the bodies of the 450 victims that the Croats admit to
killing. At a time when the Croats were telling the international
press that Serbs were being treated in a humane manner, it appears that
they were in the process of cleansing more than 10,000 Serbs from the
Slavonia region, destroying more than 150 Serbian villages in their
wake.ð
-----------------------------------------------------------
This posting unfortunately could go on and on endlessly until all 96
Serbian churches destroyed in Croatia in 1991 are cited. These churches
were destroyed before a single person lost their lives in Bosnia, yet no
one lifted a single voice to support the Serbs. When the war started in
Bosnia the cultural genocide continued until more than 120 more Serbian
churches were destroyed. Not a single newspaper in the west reported on
the destruction of these Christian houses of worship!
The one thing that is quite apparent in reading this document, there was
a repetitive nature of this cultural genocide against the Serbs. Serbs
have rebuilt some of these churches three times in the last century only
to see them destroyed yet again. ð
There are those who post on this net who insist that this war is about
aggression, an arrogant term meant to demonize the Serbs who were also
born on the soil that they defend. There are those who insist that this
war is about the political rights to self determination, but the simple
fact that Serbs are denied the same right makes this argument spurious.ð
But the real foundation of this war was and is about religious
domination and forced conversion, by destroying churches and mosques, if
necessary. The Serbs know about this kind of religious intolerance,
they know, too, about forced conversion, or conversion obtained through
special political favors, they suffered under 500 years of that kind of
oppression. Serbs also remember the term 'convert or die' and many did,
only to be killed anyway!
I am saddened that democratic ideas were promoted by the west while all
three sides in this war resorted to cultural genocide to achieve it.ð
Aspiring to freedom and pluralism by building a foundation erected on
the ashes of churches and mosques is a foundation built on sand. Like
the lack of justice 50 years ago in Yugoslavia, the current sands of
morality will be washed away until the next generation acquires a
sufficient amount of intolerance to justify killing their neighbors,
too!
kirill
>
> Spinoza began...
>
> > Moving people out of a war zone can be anything from ethnic
> > cleansing to a humanitarian act. I have been trying to put the focus
> > on initial decisions made by the top men and three things make the
> > Serbian leadership responsible for most forced relocations, even of
> > Serbs.
>
Thanks for this post. Some cold hard numbers instantly
kill any "debate" on the issue. You will notice that
the media and politicians always avoid quoting figures
(except 90% ;)). For opposing "valid" opinions to flourish
and public debate (dividi et impera) to exist there has to be
ignorance. But factual numbers are toxic to these
dearly held opinions and might actually wake people
up to what is really going on.
Misha
человек на ЛСД
Darko Peric
>>
>> Municipality Bos Serbs 1991 B/Serbs 1992
>>
>> Morica 33% NONE.
>> Tuzla 15.5% 4.5%
>> Zivinice 5% NONE
>> Kladanj 26% NONE
>> Banovici 14% NONE
>> Kalesija 18% NONE
>> Travnik 11% NONE
>> Bugojno 18.9% 5.%
>> Derventa 40.8% 5.%
>> B.Brod 33.8% NONE
>> Jajce 19.3% 4.%
>> Sarajevo 33% 7.%%
>> Bihac 7,000 About 500
>> Livno 2,800 837 (all in concentration camp)
>> Duvno 1000 400 (all in a concentration camp)
>> Mostar 20,000 about 1000
>
I was in Livno and Duvno (Tomislavgrad) for two months in 1992 and never
saw nor heard of a concentration camp. There were prisoners of war, but not
concentration camps. As for who was a prisoner of war, it was soldiers
since the Serbs from these two counties fled long beforehand. A few older
Serbs stayed unmolested and five or six Serb men stayed and gought the
Chetniks. Many civilians moved elsewhere and traded homes. My father's
aunt traded her home in Glamoc for one in Livno which was owned by Serbs.
Therefore, you're a liar or your sources are wrong. The closest thing to a
concentration camp in Herceg-Bosna was Dretelj near Capljina. The POWs in
Livno and Duvno were in ordinary gymnasiums and prison cells.
Barry S. Marjanovich
Barry S. Marjanovich
Barry S. Marjanovich
peterpan
YOUR WIFE IN THE EYE AFTER RIDICULING THE EMOTIONALLY DESTROYED AND
EMPTY HUMAN BEINGS, THE WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN RAPED BY THE SADISTIC BANDS
OF DRUNKEN CHETNIK DOGS.
TO YOU THEY DO NOT EXIST BECAUSE YOU ARE PAID TO DESIGN AND PROPAGATE
LIES ON BEHALF OF KILLER MLADIC AND HIS BOSS MURDERER KARADZIC, AND
CHETNIK PIGS. HOWEVER THE TRUTH IS THERE, AND SOME OF THE SCUM WHO ARE
PRESENTLY IN THE HAGUE HAVE ADMITTED TO MASS RAPES AND DEGRADATIONS,
SAVAGES HAVE SUBJECTED THEIR VICTIMS TO!
IF YOU MADE HALF AN EFFORT TO READ THE REPORTS, WRITTEN BY DOZENS OF
HUMAN RIGHTS WORKERS IN THE FIELD IN BOSNIA, THE TRUTH WOULD SHOCK YOU,
BECAUSE IT WAS NOT JUST THE WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN RAPED BY THE FILTHY
CHETNIKS, ALSO VERY YOUNG CHILDREN HAVE BEEN RAPED WHILE THEIR PARENTS
WERE FORCED TO WATCH THE SPECTACLE! DO YOU STILL THINK THAT POL POT OF
CAMBODIA WAS WORSE THAN THE THE CHETNIKS? I DON'T THINK SO!
peterpan
DELIVERED TO YOUR HOLE IN BELFAST? WHY DON'T YOU MAKE AN EFFORT TO READ
THOUSANDS OF TESTIMONIES, YOU SQUANDREL OF THE VICTIMS WHO WERE LUCKY OR
UNLUCKY TO HAVE SURVIVED THE MONSTORSITIES! wHY DO NOT YOU READ HUNDREDS
AND HUNDREDS OF EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS, INCLUDING THE ACCOUNTS COMING FROM
THE SERBIAN PERPETRATORS, ARE THEY LYING, TOO?
THE COURT IS NO GOOD FOR YOU! THE MEDIA IS AGAINST THE SERBS! THE
CROATS HATE SERBS! THE AMERICANS HATE SERBS! THE GERMANS ARE AGAINST
YOU! AND ALL THESE PEOPLE AND COUNTRIES CONSPIRED TO MAKE THE SERBIAN
NAZIS LOOK BAD! YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT, DO YOU. IF YOU DO, YOU ARE
SIMPLY MAD WITH SADISM OF YOUR OWN NATURE AND LOVE TO SEE PEOPLE SUFFER!
iF IT IS THE PROOF YOU WANT YOU SLIMY LYING BASTARD, LOOK FOR PUDDING,
THAT IS WHERE THE PROOF IS! PROOF IS IN THE TESTIMONIES OF THE VICTIMS,
WHO ARE NOT PROUD OF HAVING BEEN RAPED, TORTURED, BEATEN AND DEGRADED BY
THE WORST ANIMALS ON THE FACE OF THIS EARTH! THE SERBIAN NAZI CHETNIK
FILTH! THE VICTIMS JUST WANT TO TELL THE TRUTH AND SEE THEIR TORMENTORS
PUNISHED!
peterpan
peterpan
COUNT 1
Genocide
17. In May 1992, Goran JELISIC, intending to destroy a
substantial or significant part of the Bosnian Muslim people
as a national, ethnical, or religious group, systematically
killed Muslim detainees at the Laser Bus Co., the Brcko
police station and Luka camp. He introduced himself as the
"Serb Adolf", said that he had come to Brcko to kill
Muslims, and often informed the Muslim detainees and others
of the number of Muslims he had killed. In addition to
killing countless detainees, whose identities are unknown,
Goran JELISIC ordered or personally killed the victims
described in paragraphs 18, 20-30, 35 and 38. By these
actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered, committed or
aided and abetted:
Count 1: GENOCIDE, a crime recognized by Article 4(2)(a) of
the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 2-4
Killing of Kemal Sulejmanovic
18. On about 5 or 6 May 1992, Goran JELISIC, accompanied
by several soldiers, entered the Laser Bus Company building
in Brcko and announced to the detainees that he was the
"Serb Adolf." Goran JELISIC took the Muslim detainee Kemal
Sulejmanovic', also known as (hereafter a/k/a) Kemo, from
the building and shot and killed him. By these actions,
Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 2: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute:
Count 3: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 4: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article 5(a)
(murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 5-7
Killing of Sakib Becirevic and four other men
19. On about 5 May 1992, Ranko CESIC went to the Brcko
Partizan Sports Hall where Muslim civilians were being
confined, and took the Muslim detainee Sakib Becirevic
(a/k/a Kibe) and four other men named "Pepa", "Sale" and the
two sons of a man called Avdo outside the hall. Ranko CESIC
lined up and shot and killed the five detainees with bursts
of gunfire. By these actions, Ranko CESIC committed:
Count 5: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 6: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 7: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article 5(a)
(murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 8-10
Killing of unknown male
20. On about 6 or 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC escorted an
unknown male detainee down a street near the Brcko police
station and then shot him in the head with a Scorpion
pistol. By these actions, Goran JELISIC committed:
Count 8: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 9: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 10: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 11-13
Killing of Hasan Jasarevic
21. On about 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC, using a Scorpion
pistol, shot and killed Hasan Jasarevic, a Muslim detainee
who had fled the Brcko police station. By these actions,
Goran JELISIC committed:
Count 11: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2 (a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 12: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 13: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 14-16
Killing of a young man from Sinteraj
22. On about 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC left the Brcko
police station with a young man from the neighborhood of
Sinteraj, whose identity is unknown. Goran JELISIC escorted
the young man away from the police station to an area where
the young man was shot and killed. By these actions, Goran
JELISIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 14: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 15: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 16: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 17-19
Killing of Ahmet Hodzic or Hadzic
23. On about 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC took the Muslim
detainee Ahmet Hodzic (a/k/a Papa), a leader of the Brcko
SDA (Muslim political party) outside the Brcko police
station and beat him with a baton. Together with two guards,
Goran JELISIC took Ahmet Hodzic' to the same place where
Goran JELISIC, earlier that day, had killed a young detainee
from Sinteraj. Goran JELISIC told Ahmet Hodzic that he was
looking at his town for the last time and then killed him.
By these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered,
committed or aided and abetted:
Count 17: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 18: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 19: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute
COUNTS 20-22
Killing of Suad
24. On about 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC took a Muslim
detainee named Suad from the Brcko police station and beat
him with a rifle butt. Goran JELISIC, together with some
soldiers, walked Suad to the same area where Goran JELISIC,
earlier that day, had killed Ahmet Hodzic' and a young man
from Sinteraj. After reaching the area, Suad was shot and
killed. By these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered,
committed or aided and abetted:
Count 20: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 21: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 22: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 23-25
Killing of Amir Novalic
25. On about 7 May 1992, Goran JELISIC shot and killed the
Muslim detainee Amir Novalic' (a/k/a Fric) inside the Brcko
police station. By these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated,
ordered or committed:
Count 23: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 24: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 and of the Tribunal Statute and
Article 3(1) (murder) of Geneva Conventions;
Count 25: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 26-28
Killing of Sead Cerimagic and Jasminko Cumurovic
26. On about 8 May 1992, Goran JELISIC and Ranko CESIC
took the Muslim detainee Sead Cerimagic (a/k/a Cita) and
Jasminko Cumurovic (a/k/a Jasce, Jasmin) from the main
hangar building at Luka camp and shot and killed them. By
these actions, Goran JELISIC and Ranko CESIC instigated,
ordered, committed or aided and abetted:
Count 26: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statue;
Count 27: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 28: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 29-31
Killing of Huso and Smajil Zahirovic
27. On about 8 May 1992, at Luka camp, Goran JELISlC
accused two Muslim brothers from Zvornik, Huso and Smajil
Zahirovic, of fighting for the Muslim resistance. Goran
JELISIC took them outside of the main hangar building where
they were shot and killed. By these actions, Goran JELISIC
instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 29: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 30: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions.
Count 31: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 32-37
Torture and killing of Naza Bukvic
28. On about 9 May 1992, near the main hangar building at
Luka camp, Goran JELISIC, Ranko CESIC and others questioned
the Muslim detainee Naza Bukvic about the whereabouts and
activities of her brother, beat her with police batons and a
shovel and then killed her. By these actions, Goran JELISIC
and Ranko CESIC instigated, ordered, committed or aided and
abetted
Count 32 and 33: GRAVE BREACHES recognized by Articles 2(b)
(torture) and 2(a) (wilful killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 34 and 35: VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (torture) and (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 36 and 37: CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by
Articles 5(f) (torture) and 5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal
Statute.
COUNTS 38-40
Killing of Muharem Ahrnetovic
29. On about 9 May 1992, Goran JELISIC called the Muslim
detainee Muharem Ahmetovic, the father of Naza Bukvic, from
the main hangar building at Luka camp and killed him. By
these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered or
committed:
Count 38: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 39: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by -Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 40: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 41-43
Killing of Stipo Glavocevic
30. On about 9 May 1992, Goran JELISIC brought a Croat
detainee named Stipo Glavocevic' (a/k/a Stjepo), who had at
least one ear cut off and was covered in blood, into the
main hangar building at Luka and forced him to kneel in the
center of the hangar. Goran JELISIC beat Stipo Glavocevic.
Goran JELISIC then directed a guard to shoot and kill Stipo
Glavocevic' just outside the entrance to the main hangar. By
these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered, committed
or aided and abetted:
Count 41: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 42: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 43: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 44-46
Killing of Sejdo
31. On about 9 May 1992, Sejdo, a Muslim fisherman whose
last name is unknown, arrived at Luka camp in the trunk of a
car. Ranko CESIC put Sejdo in a small warehouse, beat him
and then shot and killed him. By these actions, Ranko CESIC
committed:
Count 44: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
~~
Count 45: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 46: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 47-49
Killing of Mirsad Glavovic
32. On about 11 May 1992, Ranko CESIC called the Muslim
policeman Mirsad Glavovic' from the main hangar building at
Luka camp. Ranko CESIC ordered Mirsad Glavovic to say
good-bye and shake hands with the other detainees. Ranko
CESIC then took Mirsad Glavovic' outside the hangar
building, beat him and killed him. By these actions, Ranko
CESIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 47: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 48: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 49: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 50-52
Sexual Assault
33. On about 11 May 1992, at Luka camp, Ranko CESIC
forced, at gunpoint, Muslim detainees A and B, who were
brothers detained there, to beat each other and perform
sexual acts on each other in the presence of others, causing
them great humiliation and degradation. By these actions,
Ranko CESIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 50: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(b) (inhuman
treatment) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 51: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(c) (humiliating and degrading treatment) of the Geneva
Conventions;
Count 52: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(g) (rape, which includes other forms of sexual assault) of
the Tribunal Statute.
~
COUNTS 53-55
Beatings of Zejcir and Resad Osmic
34. Between 10 and 12 May 1992, Goran JELISIC participated
in the interrogation and beating of the Muslim brothers
Zejcir and Resad Osmic. Goran JELISIC beat Zejcir and Resad
Osmic with a baton and cut Resad Osmic's forearms with a
military knife. Both brothers suffered head injuries, and
Resad lost consciousness as a result of the beatings. By
these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered or
committed:
Count 53: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(c)
(wilfully causing great suffering) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 54: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (cruel treatment) of the Geneva Conventions:
Count 55: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(i) (inhumane acts) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 56-58
Killing of Novalija
35. On about 12 May 1992, in the main hangar building at
Luka camp, Goran JELISIC beat Novalija, an elderly Muslim
man, with a metal pipe, shovel, and wooden stick. Novalija
died as a result of the beatings. By these actions, Goran
JELISIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 56: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 57: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 58: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 59-61
Killing of Nihad Jasarevic
36. On about 12 or 13 May 1992, in the main hangar
building at Luka camp, Ranko CESIC and another person beat
the Muslim detainee Nihad Jasarevic with a wooden club that
contained a lead cylinder, killing Nihad Jasarevic. By these
actions, Ranko CESIC instigated, ordered, committed or aided
and abetted:
Count 59: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 60: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 61: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 62-64
Beatings of Muhamed Bukvic
37. On about 13 May 1992, at Luka, Goran JELISIC, used a
baton to beat the Muslim detainee Muhamed Bukvic over his
entire body. By these actions, Goran JELISIC committed:
Count 62: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(c)
(wilfully causing great suffering) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 63: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (cruel treatment) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 64: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(i) (inhumane acts) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 65-67
Killing of Adnan Kucalovic
38. On about 18 May 1992, Goran JELISIC called the Muslim
detainee Adnan Kucalovic from the main hangar at Luka. Goran
JELISIC accused Adnan Kucalovic of having a brother who was
fighting with the Muslim resistance. Goran JELISIC then
participated in the shooting and killing of Adnan Kucalovic.
By these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered,
committed or aided and abetted:
Count 65: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 66: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 67: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute;
COUNTS 68-70
Beatings of Amir Didic
39. Between about 20 May and 28 May 1992, Goran JELISIC
interrogated and regularly beat the Muslim detainee Amir
Didic with a baton, a cable and the nozzle of a fire hose,
causing Amir Didic' to lose consciousness. By these actions,
Goran JELISIC instigated, ordered or committed:
Count 68: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(c)
(wilfully causing great suffering) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 69: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (cruel treatment) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 70: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(i) (inhumane acts) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 71-73
Killing of two unknown males
40. Between about 1 June and 6 June 1992, Ranko CESIC took
four detainees, whose identities are unknown, from the
office building at Luka camp to the paved road in front of
the main hangar building and, with the assistance of two
guards, shot and killed at least two of the detainees. By
these actions, Ranko CESIC instigated, ordered, committed or
aided and abetted:
Count 71: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(a) (wilful
killing) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 72: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (murder) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 73: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(a) (murder) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNTS 74-76
General conditions at Luka Camp
41. From about 7 May to about 28 May 1992, Goran JELISIC,
acting as the commander of Luka, created an atmosphere of
terror by killing, abusing and threatening the detainees,
thereby subjecting them to extreme psychological trauma,
degradation and fear of bodily injury and death. Goran
JELISIC also created and maintained inhumane conditions at
Luka by depriving them of adequate food, water, medical care
and sleeping and toilet facilities. Ranko CESIC assisted
Goran JELISIC in creating the atmosphere of terror and the
inhumane conditions at Luka. By these actions, Goran JELISIC
and Ranko CESIC instigated, ordered, committed or aided and
abetted:
Count 74: a GRAVE BREACH recognized by Article 2(c)
(wilfully causing great suffering) of the Tribunal Statute;
Count 75: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3 of the Tribunal Statute and Article
3(1)(a) (cruel treatment) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count 76: a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognized by Article
5(i) (inhumane acts) of the Tribunal Statute.
COUNT 77
Plunder of private property
42. From about 7 May to about 28 May 1992, Goran JELISIC
participated in the plunder of money, watches and other
valuable property belonging to persons detained at Luka
camp, including Hasib Begic, Zejcir Osmic, Enes Zukic and
Armin Drapic. By these actions, Goran JELISIC instigated,
ordered, committed or aided and abetted:
COUNT 77: a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR
recognized by Article 3(e) (plunder) of the Tribunal
Statute.
/s/Richard J. Goldstone
Prosecutor
Barry S. Marjanovich
Barry S. Marjanovich
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Johnny Byrne (SERVant)
http://www.radicalparty.org/home.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------
'Johnny Byrne' : j...@logos.cix.co.uk
http://www.bosnet.org/reward.shtml
http://www.vido.ldh.org/images/serbia.jpg
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Precursor to Servian Agresssion, Atrocities, Massacres and Genocide
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Have you noticed how 'Johnny Byrne' shows up on these newsgroups, all of
sudden, just before the Servs commit new atrocities, massacres and
genocide on their neighbors.
It never fails, 'Johnny Byrne' has faithfully followed his instructions
from Belgrade each time the Servs executed a major massacre in Croatia
(Vukovar), Bosnia (Srebrenica) and now Kosova. Whenever he becomes busy
with his postings you know what will soon follow: rapes, tortures,
murders, 'ethnic cleansing'...genocide.
Brace yourself for what you will soon witness in Kosova. The living will
envy the dead. 'Johnny Byrne' is here again.
'Johnny Byrne' e-mail: j...@logos.cix.co.uk
Johnny Byrne
> > Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't believe
> > it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
> One American writer on this policy (Catherine MacKinnon), which is proven to
> exist by Prof. Bassiouni's data base, points out like Lyotard that a victim
> silent on her victimization is still a victim. Serbia knew well that Islamic
> women would not for the most part speak up. Therefore, the existence of men
> commanded to rape as part of ethnic cleansing is more important than some
> probably fabricated number.
> To MacKinnon, the silence of an abused or raped woman itself sends a message,
> but one that is not contained necessarily on a police report.
Indeed, but MacKinnon's view is formed by the prevalence of rape in her own
(and your) country, America, where rape is endemic, with some 150,000 reported
cases each year.
As for the above, to moralise on rape victims, you first have to produce them, or, at
least, produce some hard evidence that they are more than just feminist fantasies
dancing around in the mind of disgraced academic harpie like MacKinnon (see separate
post). Likewise more anon on Prof *Sherif* Bassiouni and his famous `Ali Baba'
database.
You agree with the claim that the Serbs preplanned the systematic mass rape
of 60/80000 innocent Muslims and Croat women. Yet offer no hard
evidence of such a monstrous claim, just vapid psychobabble to explain away
their absence from the record. If your are truly for real, then God spare us the
good intentions of American morons.
I'll let you into a secret most of the thinking world already knows - no one
believes these figures any more. Even your pusillanimous UN poodle knows
they are false.
Like the inflated figures for Bosnian killed, they originate with the unindicted M
Muslim criminals who high-jacked the BiH government. Here they almost
overnight added the `missing' to the relatively low numbers of known dead
in order to reach their ghastly total. But the whole sordid business unravelled
when, during elections, thousands of 'dead' Muslims amazingly resurrected
themselves to appear on electoral rolls. Also among these were thousands
of the so called `victims of Srebrenica', another big lie which you seem to
have swallowed wholesale.
To the ghouls of war, apparently low number are not considered sufficient to
justify `real' genocide. Thus the numbers are cooked to create `genocide'
by addition - one of the many newly invented forms of `genocide' which includes
genocide by subtraction, exhortation, declamation and just plain old fashioned lies.
The truth is that the ghoulish sickos of this kind *want* there to be hundreds
of thousands more Muslim dead, *want* there to be 8000/10000/12000
Muslims cold-bloodedly massacred and buried under the fields around
Srebrenica.
And, as with the phoney "systematically" executed numbers, they also *want*
there to be 60/80000 Muslim and Croat women traumatised by violent rape. Instead
of rejoicing in the fact that infinitely less were *not*killed in battle, murdered, or raped,
they *want* thousands more to have been killed in battle, murdered and raped - and
all just to demonise the Serb people and nation.
The truth and tragic realities of destructive civil and sectarian conflict is terrible
enough. But soulless goons, and canting morons like Spinoza who manipulate the
dead, the maimed and the raped for reasons of ideology and politics are among the
most squalid criminals sicked up by this disgusting war.
Meanwhile, here are the best available facts on the subject of rape in
the civil wars of former Yugoslavia. They go back a few years, but they
still stand. The article appeared on Tribunal Watch. Study it and make
up your own mind for a change. Anything has to be better than spewing out
predigested media pap whose only intention is to set the Serbs up for anything
the American government chooses to dump on them.
The full document is available on request from the address at the end of
the article.
- Johnny Byrne
___________________
NORTH AMERICAN NEWS ANALYSIS GROUP
California
RAPES IN YUGOSLAVIA
SEPARATING FACT FROM FICTION
Since November 1992 the media has flooded our homes with stories of
tens of thousands of Muslim rape victims at the hands of Serb
military perpetrators. Sensational interviews, claims and
condemnations have been the rule. Never has any source of this
information explained the methodology by which such numbers have
been determined nor what evidence other than hearsay or partial
government sources were the basis of these reports. The public has
understandably been outraged. This story along with the stories of
the same caliber about "death camps" have resulted in the emotional
outcry driving political demands for military action just to "do
something".
Women's groups, municipalities, state governments etc. have been
lobbied effectively by a number of interest groups -- women's,
Muslim, and Croatian -- to pass resolutions condemning these
outrageous "crimes against humanity" by the Serbian military
violators without any adequate evidence which could support the
scope of the claims. Newspaper articles are mostly cited which
themselves are based on hearsay or on reports which when more
closely examined, are also based on more hearsay without
substantiating evidence. The truth of the matter is that the rape
allegations were introduced to the public via a well orchestrated
media blitz starting in November, received extensive attention and
condemnation at the highest levels of national and international
bodies, were examined by these bodies and, upon review of the
findings resulting from these examinations, modified to reflect
evidence that all military forces, Croat, Muslim and Serb have
perpetrated these violations on a large scale.
Sensationalism, not fact has driven political action on this issue.
An example of this dynamic is resolution AJR 10, in the California
legislature. This resolution was passed unanimously in the Assembly
and then scheduled for a hearing in the Rules Committee before it
was to go to the Senate for final adoption. The North American News
Analysis Group, NANAG, a media watch group committed to truth in
media reporting, has examined this issue since November, traced the
development of the rape story and its demise. NANAG was contacted to
provide the report on its findings to the Rules Committee. In
response, NANAG prepared and made available to the Rules Committee
and the Assemblywoman who authored the report a comment on the
resolution and a copy of the rape report. Unable to dispute the
conclusions drawn from the documentation, the Assemblywoman pulled
the resolution from the agenda of the hearings, amended it and
produced a resolution condemning rapes in general in Yugoslavia.
Since then the _United_Nations_Commission_of_Experts_ has been to
Bosnia to collect _ALL_ of the information in the hands of the Bosnian
Government regarding the issue of rapes and _received_documentation_
_on_126_cases_. To date there has been no evidence to support any of
the claims regarding the "systematic" rape of Muslim women by Serb
forces in the tens of thousands.
The ease with which the anti-Serb stance of the original resolution
was neutralized exemplifies how unfounded such allegations are. In
fact, no group of women was exempt from this violation. Any claim
otherwise is without substantiating evidence.
__________________________
The Evolution of the Rape Story
A Chronology
The North American News Analysis Group has traced the paper trail on
this specific issue to separate fact from fiction, and
sensationalism and propaganda from reality. The chronology of the
development of the story follows and shows how sensationalized
reports generated by the Governments of Croatia and Bosnia &
Hercegovina were picked up by the international community at face
value, and acted upon. After more careful examination these
allegations were later disqualified and modified to reflect more
realistically the rape issue in the Balkan conflict. It is
acknowledged, at least in the international organizations that are
informed, that rape, systematic or not is being perpetrated by all
sides on victims on all sides, Serb, Muslim and Croat.
1992
April, War Breaks out in Bosnia & Hercegovina
April - November, No Reports of Systematic Rape of Muslim Women
Thorough research of press reports and international
documentation during this period shows complete absence of
reports of "systematic rapes" or otherwise greater than average
wartime rape numbers. Refugees had been streaming into Croatia
and other countries and had been interviewed for months with no
indication of such allegations.
November, News Blitz of Muslim Rape Victims
Sudden reports by major press sources of massive numbers of
rapes of Muslim women, without mention of rapes of Serbian
women, provided by such partial sources as government sources
of Croatia and Bosnia & Hercegovina. Numbers of Muslim rape
victims issued by these same sources bounce all over the board,
60,000 to 10,000 casting full doubt on the validity of numbers
or reliability of sources. Press and TV stories of 3-month old
babies flooding hospitals inundate the media; the war started
in earnest in May, 6 months earlier suggesting the rape victims
were giving birth at 3 months of pregnancy -- a veritable
epidemic of premature births.
December, Edinburgh Summit Declaration (Appendix 12)
Based solely on the sensational news reports (and not a single
substantiated report) heads of state attending the European
Summit in Edinburgh passed a declaration condemning the
allegations and authorizing a delegation to investigate
requiring that "this delegation must be allowed free and secure
access to the places of detention in question" and calling upon
the UN to adopt measures to support this mission.
December 14, EC Representatives' Letter to the UN
The Permanent Representatives of Belgium, France and the United
Kingdom submit a letter including a "Declaration on the
treatment of Muslim women in former Yugoslavia" (UN Document
S/24960) where in the first paragraph they "condemn these acts
of unspeakable brutality, which form part of a deliberate
strategy to terrorize the Muslim community in B & H...".
Paragraph 4 requests the UN to adopt measures to support this
mission. No report on the issue accompanies this declaration as
none has yet been completed.
December 18, UN Report on the Rapes of Serbian Women
A UN report s/24991 dated December 18, 1992 is available
documenting testimonies of Serbian rape victims at the hands of
Muslim and Croatian soldiers including brothels of Serbian
girls held by Muslim soldiers in Sarajevo. This report is not
released until January 5, 1993. It is the only international
agency report documenting testimonies of any rape victims
available to the UN at that time.
December, UN Resolution 798 and Condemnation
Based solely on paragraph 4 of the EC Declaration above (UN
Document S/24960, dated December 14, 1992) the UN passed a
resolution condemning "these acts of unspeakable brutality.."
"of reports of the massive, organized and systematic detention
and rape of women, in particular Muslim women, in B&H" and
supports the EC delegation. There are still no reports or
substantiated evidence of thousands of Muslim women raped nor
that it is systematic. The Resolution made no mention of the
rapes of Serbian women. (Attachment V)
December, UN Press Release Condemns Rapes of Muslim Women
The UN issued a press release on the above resolution, no
mention of the only UN report of actual testimonies of rape
victims (Serbian women).
December 18-24, EC Delegation Investigation -- Phase I
The EC delegation headed by Dame Anne Warburton including
Madame Simone Veil (France) and other experts visited Zagreb
where they had no direct contact with the victims "because of
the lack of interpreters" and where they were not permitted to
visit any centers but received instead information from the
Croatian Government, and Geneva where they visited some
international organizations. In their report the delegation
qualified its findings by stating that "The Delegation was also
aware, in examining the issue of rape against muslim women,
that rape and sexual abuse are neither nationality - nor gender
- restricted issues... there are also disturbing reports of
rape of Croat and Serbian women..." Furthermore, "in its ..
discussions with .. international organizations in Geneva, the
Delegation noted "the contrast between the extensive media
coverage of the alleged rapes and the lack of supporting
documentary evidence in the possession of the organizations
concerned".
It further stated, with a major qualifier, that "while a
precise figure for the number of victims involved cannot be
given... the most reasoned estimate suggested to the Delegation
indicated a figure in the region of 20,000 victims." There is
no substantiation of this number, nor reference to its source.
It is safe to say that the source was not an international
organization as they have all stated publicly that it is
impossible to make a valid estimate.
1993
January 19-26, EC Delegation Investigation -- Phase II
This time the Delegation went to Zagreb and Bosnia-Hercegovina
where they met with the leaders of the Catholic and Muslim
communities, field staff of the international agencies and
representatives of both Croatian and Bosnian governmental and
non-governmental organizations. They also conducted "a small
number of in-depth interviews with individual victims." The
combined findings were compiled in a report. Not the first nor
the second delegation ever examined the issue of the rapes
committed by Croatian and Muslim soldiers, nor did the
Government sources of those two states volunteer such
information. Nor did the delegation ever bother to assess the
kind of or the validity of the methodology used by any of the
sources to project these numbers of Muslim women raped.
January, UN Commission on Human Rights Inquiry (Appendix 10-17)
Under the leadership of the Special Rapporteur, Tadeusz
Mazowiecki, and pursuant to Commission on Human Rights
resolution 1992/S-1/1 and 1992/S/2-1 a second commission of
inquiry went to Croatia, Bosnia & Hercegovina and Serbia to
investigate the rape reports under the larger umbrella of a
general human rights investigation. For that investigation an
international team of medical experts was assembled who met
with physicians and examined medical records, making this the
first attempt by an impartial body to seek actual evidence.
Their report was submitted as Annex II of the larger Mazowiecki
report, E/CN.4/1993/50 February 10, 1993. Among their
conclusions the victims are "said to be mainly Muslim but also
Serb and Croat women." ... "Attempts made to locate specific
places where women were allegedly detained and raped have
proved unsucessful to date. Information provided was often too
imprecise. In several cases alleged rape camps were found to be
empty when visited by ICRC delegates".
The study based its findings on actual documented evidence of
rapes, assumed conservative formulas of what percentage the
documented cases represented of the actual cases and concluded
that, based on their evidence, approximately 2,400 women,
Muslim, Serb and Croat had been raped. This also is an estimate
but the only estimate based on any evidence instead of hearsay.
Interestingly enough, it is a far cry from the originial claims
by the Governments of Croatia and Bosnia & Hercegovina of
60,000 Muslim women raped. Curiously enough, the Director of
the Yugoslav Desk at the Foreign Broadcast Information Service,
Washington, D.C. observed that there was a virtual absence of
any reporting of the rapes of Muslim women in the government
controlled Croatian press.
February, EC Declaration on the Warburton Mission (Appendix 1)
The Declaration acknowldges receipt of the report, and
determines that "at a political level, the Community and its
member States will approach the parties to the conflict"
(assumes all parties) "to impress on them the icontrovertible
nature of the evidence and the imperative need to bring these
abhorrent practices to an end." (Attachment X)
February 17-18, EC Committee on Women's Rights Hearings
The hearings were held in Brussels to be based on the findings
of the Warburton EC delegation. Instead, following the reports
of both the EC delegation and the subsequent UN Commission on
Human Rights Report the hearings resulted in the rejection of a
number of the EC Delegation Reports' allegations and in the
elimination of the 20,000 number for Muslim rape victims
because it was deemed that "this European Community delegation
to investigate the rapes of women in former Yugoslavia was
neither given a broad enough remit nor sufficient resources and
support to carry out its task effectively." The other critical
objections as cited in the EC Report (Attachment XI) and notes
on the hearings dated February 23, 1993, "Cahiers
Schriftenreihe Specials," Nr #11 follow:.
o] Simone Veil, a high ranking French politician (and a leading
critic of Serbs) and a delegate member, objected to the EC
Delegation Reports because the delegation had no direct contact
with the victims. The report it drew was therefore only based
on indirect testimony as reported by Croatian and Muslim
government sources, etc., hardly impartial;
o] By its own admission in the Phase II Report, the mandate of
the delegation was limited to Muslim women ignoring that other
women were also victimized by rape at the hands of Croatian and
Muslim soldiers;
o] Ann Howarth of the UN High Commission for Refugees concluded
that "there was lack of independent evidence about rapes";
o] Thierry Germond of the International Red Cross presented the
conclusion "that atrocities, including rape, were being
committed on all sides";
o] Helena Harbraken for Amnesty International stated that
"based on substantiated information, abuses against women,
including rape, have been widespread... and that all sides have
committed the abuses";
o] Fritz Kalshoven, Chairman of the UN Committee on War Crimes
said that while "evidence brought forward up till now may be
sufficient for political bodies like the European Parliament to
make political statements and activate public opinion.. it
would not stand up as sound proof in Court". He also stated
that "it is difficult to prove that the rapists of Bosnian
women are regular Serb soldiers taking orders from their
superiors."
Moreover, Dame Warburton head of the EC Delegation was
conspicuously absent from the hearings. Additionally, the
Serbian women who had been invited by the Commission to testify
were denied visas by the Belgian Government to attend the
hearings. After much criticism by the other participants the
Belgian Government granted visas to only two of the invitees
from Serbia to the hearings. Instead of the intended resolution
citing only Muslim rape victims at the hands of Serbian
soldiers, the Committee on Women's Rights drafted a resolution
citing rape as a violation against all the women, Serb, Croat
and Muslim at the hands of soldiers of each of the three
warring groups, Serb, Croat and Muslim.
March 10, EC Votes for Resolution on Rapes
The European Parliament adopts the recommended resolution on
rapes, which does not single out the Serbian soldiers as the
sole perpetrators of rapes, nor Muslim women as the sole
victims of the same crime.
1994
January 29, Boutros Ghali Reports on Rapes
The Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr. Boutros
Boutros Ghali issued a report on the findings of the Commission
of Experts investigating war crimes in the former Yugoslavia,
A/48/858 (Attachment XIII). In this report he cites that in the
summer of 1993 the "Commission of Experts sent a mission to
Sarajevo ... to conduct several pilot studies, including one on
rape, and to receive the documentation on rape cases that the
War Crimes Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina had promised in
April". In previous announcements the Bosnian Government had
claimed that they had in their possession files on 15,000 cases
of rapes of Muslim women by Serb men. However, the UN report
continues, "During the mission, the Commission of Experts
obtained from the War Crimes Commission all their information
identified as relating to this issue (listing 126 victims, 113
incidents, 252 alleged perpetrators, 73 witnesses and 100
documents)." Thus ALL of the Bosnian Government information
included only 126 cases of rape. This is a far cry from the
15,000 to 60,000 claimed by the same Government. To this date
there has been NO EVIDENCE or reliable information accepted as
legitimate by any international body that substantiates either
that rapes of Muslim women by Serb men were the only cases of
rape, that they were systematic nor that they were in the tens
of thousands as the international political and media
communities have so irresponsibly perpetrated.
==========================================================================
This report is available in its entirety which includes complete
copies of all the international reports cited above. If interested
in receiving the report with all the attachments plea
send your inquiry to:
North American News Analysis Group
San Francisco, California
Phone: (415) 673-6279
Fax: (415) 673-1630
_______________
Johnny Byrne
> > Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't believe
> > it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
Replied Spinoza...
> One American writer on this policy (Catherine MacKinnon), which is proven to
> exist by Prof. Bassiouni's data base, points out like Lyotard that a victim
> silent on her victimization is still a victim. Serbia knew well that Islamic
> women would not for the most part speak up. Therefore, the existence of men
> commanded to rape as part of ethnic cleansing is more important than some
> probably fabricated number.
> To MacKinnon, the silence of an abused or raped woman itself sends a message,
> but one that is not contained necessarily on a police report.
Spinoza draws on the barking feminist academic, Catherine MacKinnon
an expert on the Serbs. Here is his `expert' in action...
> The New York Times, January 2, 1997:
>
> Letters to the Editor
>
> The Dec. 19 letter, taking issue with my reference (letter, Dec. 15)
> to the Serbian three-finger salute as fascist, says Serbian students
> use the salute as "a gesture of Christian defiance" against the rule of
> President Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia. In fact, some students in the
> democratic opposition refuse to use it. Here is some documented
> support for my reference: This salute was used to swear in troops
> of the Nedic-Ljotic Nazi collaborationist regime in Belgrade, Serbia,
> that was complicit in the Holocaust; Vuk Draskovic, a leader in
> today's Serbian opposition, included a photo of this swearing-in
> in his party publication in 1995 to show the salute's historical
> continuity and legitimacy. The salute now adorns his party's
> posters. The gesture is commonly recognized as a sign
> of Serbian supremacy in rallies by supporters of Radovan
> Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb leaders now
> under indictment for genocide, and by soldiers under their
> command. Survivors of that genocide report being forced to
> use the salute during torture, rape and killing by Serbian forces.
> Neo-Nazis in Germany today, denied the Hitler salute by German
> law, use the three-fingered salute in its place. None of these are
> religious practices. When Orthodox Christians cup three fingers to
> make the sign of cross, they are not using the Serbian fascist three-
> finger salute. Nor are those who use it praying.
> C.A. MacKinnon
This garbage was discredited the moment it appeared in
print. MacKinnon, a notorious Serb-hater, illustrates the
depths to which the feminised American academia has sunk in
pursuit of their disgusting PC vendetta against the Serbian
people, their religion and culture.
The lies published by MacKinnon in her letter fall into a different
category - the lowest form of ignorance of the people she elects to judge.
Here are two responses. The qualifications of the respondents need
no elaborating. MacKinnon, unsurprisingly, has not been heard
of in print on this subject since.
- Johnny Byrne
December 17, 1996 Without Permission.
Fair Use Only.
Ms. Catharine A. MacKinnon
Professor
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State Street
924 Legal Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
Re. Your letter to the New York Times Dec. 15
Dear Professor MacKinnon
A friend called my attention to your letter of Dec. 15 to the New York
Times in which you ridiculed the heroic Serbian students who are marching
for freedom and pledging themselves to defend it by invoking Triune God.
This they do, by raising three fingers, representing Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit. By describing this as a Nazi salute, you have blasphemed. I
do not know whether you did this deliberately or not, but for those
students this symbol of God is so sacred that it only can be compared
with the Jewish sense of awe when invoking Yahweh, the name of their
God.
Being myself an academic person, I am ashamed that one of our own has
made herself in the company of Joseph Goebbels - for, that is how he
ridiculed the Jews. You have not only abused 250 million of Orthodox
Christians, but have debased your own employer, the University of
Michigan, not to mention the American legal profession, among whom I have
some distinguished friends and colleagues.
I will say no more, but I am sorry that the New York Times, which could
have spared you from revealing your own gross ignorance, has instead
conspired with, and abetted you in order to humiliate Serbs, its favorite
sport, as its handling of the Bosnian tragedy plainly shows. The New
York Times has shot itself in the foot!
There is a Serbian saying which puts the whole sad affair in proper
perspective: "He who digs a trap for others will fall in it." By being so
full of hate toward the Serbs you have certainly succeeded in making us,
the Serbs, the objects of your profanity. However, this only brings us a
deeper sorrow for what you have done to yourself. A person in your
position should have known better than to be so vulgar to anyone.
Sincerely yours,
Charles B. Ashanin, Ph.D. (Glasgow, Scotland)
Professor of Early Church History, Emeritus.
--__________________________
Professor Catherine A. MacKinnon
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State Street
924 Legal Research
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
tel 313/647-3595
FAX: 313/764-8309
Professor McKinnon:
A few years ago you were guest speaker at a feminist gathering in
Chicago. You spoke of the tens of thousands of rapes by Serbs on Muslim
women. Where are all the babies? What evil genius ran the logistics? How
much was the budget? Where are the babies? How many abortions were
there? Logistics, again?
The CROATIAN FEMINIST VESNA KESIC, in THE FEMINIST MAGAZINE
"Off Our Backs," rebutted you and the rest of the pack, saying your numbers were
fake, and that the whole campaign was designed as a racist pogrom against
the Serbs. By, of course, the neo-Nazi and Islamist enemies and their New
World Order backers.
Now, you again exceed your competence, and your bigotry is matched only
by your ignorance of scholarly data. By now you will have heard of the
Trinitarian symbolism of the Serbs' 3-finger salute. In my opinion, this
is only partly correct, as there is iconographic evidence, Christian and
Classical, for a pre-Christian origin. but it is a fact that it is one of
several variants. Thumb, forefinger, and middle finger feature also in
the Croatian and German oath-taking, whereas in English the palm is
raised. - In your semiotics our court room gesture in swearing an oath
would be a Nazi saute.
Do not embarass yourself further repeating incompetent arguments put in
you ear by coaches whose identity you suppress. Not good scholarly form.
Read, for starters, "Gestures" by Desmond Morris et al., as well as the
article of the same name in the Oxford Classical Dictionary. Get thee to
a library.
Your "Serbian fascist salute" is performed also in oath taking by Croats,
Germans, Poles, and Catholic priests. The Polish military salute also
consists in putting these three fingers to the bill of the cap.
In bestowing benediction, the pope uses precisely those three fingers,
sweeping the right hand in a cruciform pattern. Ante Pavelic swore by
it, too. Open your eyes, and a book or two.
John Peter Maher Ph. D.
Profesor Emeritus of Linguistics
NE Illinois University
Chicago IL
Johnny Byrne
> However, the reason I stress these strange theories is that I have, since
> the end of the Vietnam war, seen the same SORT of
> strange things here in the USA that I read about in Serbia. Basically, I
> see schizophrenia...
You bet, and display it in every morally equivocating syllable.
Read what James Harff has to say. He ran Ruder Finn and, not
that you know it, he wired the circuits which gives the impression
of reasoning to politically correct posturing nerds like yourself.
- Johnny Byrne
_________________________
Manufacturing Serb Hate
BOOK REVIEW:
Jacques Merlino: "Les verites Yougoslaves ne sont pas toutes
bonnes a dire" ("Yugoslav truths are not all good for telling")
Published by: Albin Michel, Paris, 1993, pp. 127-129
ISBN 2-226-06663-2
LANGUAGE: FRENCH
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Mr. Jacques Merlino a leading
journalist of the TV chain France 2
PREFACE
It is permitted to expel one people from the world community.
To define it like a pack of rapists and extremists having nothing
to envy to Nazis. It is permitted to raise the whole planet against
this people, to prepare them tribunal recalling that of Nuremberg,
to elaborate plans for military intervention and strategies for target
bombardments. It is permitted to chase their state from the United
Nations and to submit Serbs to the total economic embargo. This is
permitted because that's what is done.
But, it is also permitted to think this fierceness lacks distinction.
That one people has never been guilty in its ensemble. That one nation
has history and memory. That media manipulations exist. And that the
emotion, overcoming the reason, is really a bad adviser.
This is permitted because it is the object of this text. It goes
against everyone who feeds international public opinion. It is exposed
to the criticism of those who don't want to change their decisions.
It shows usual weaknesses of free and serene reasoning in front of
passion and madness.
To think counter-current is yet another tradition of French thought,
Voltaire's gift which is really precious. To DOUBT, isn't that the
first condition for freedom?
But doubt is worthless if it remains only a mixture of suspicion and
prudence. It has to be overcome. And, that can be fulfilled only by
looking over the received ideas and by restarting the inquiry work
from the facts and crude documents. The task is tough and immense.
It is truly indispensable and urgent, if one is convinced that the
actual outbreaks can provoke a cataclysm overtaking faraway the poor
Balkans.
-----
INTERVIEW WITH HARFF OF RUDER FINN
The excerpt from the book is published in, among others,
the following periodicals.
1. A Monthly Jewish Review - Midstream, New York, April 1994
(Under title: "Stopping the war in Yugoslavia",
Author: Dr. Yohanan Ramati, The Director of the Jerusalem Institute
of Western Defence)
2. Intelligence Digest, Great Britain, February 4, 1994
(Under title: "Manipulating the media")
3. Jewish Chronicle, Great Britain, December 10, 1993
(Under title: "The secret weapon? PR", Author Nora Beloff)
The following introduction to the interview is taken from the
reference #1 (Written by Dr. Yohanan Ramati, Director of the
Jerusalem Institute for Western Defense):
[Quote] The civil war in Yugoslavia continues, with untold suffering
on all sides. The media report the suffering of the Muslims in gruesome
detail. The suffering of Croats at Muslim hands gets little attention.
The suffering of the Serbs is ignored. So it will surprise large sections
of the American public that [by April 1994] some 600,000 refugees from
Croatia and Bosnia have sought refuge in beleaguered Serbia deprived of
food and fuel by UN dictate during the deadly winter. [There were at
least 400,000 more refugees that went to Serbia after NATO cleansing
of Krajina and bombing of Serbs in Bosnia.]
The media in the Western world, the Muslim world and Israel treats us
to a regular dose of tearjacking hate propaganda. We see women and
children in Sarajevo - the Muslim quarters of Sarajevo - with terrible
wounds seeping blood and shattered limbs, to the accompaniment of
shells and small arms fire. We do not see the killing and maiming
of Serb women and children by Muslim fire in Bosnia or by Croat fire
in Croatia. And when Croat women and children are brutally murdered
by Muslims, or vice versa, the media response is sporadic and no
conclusions are drawn.
This organised Anti Serb and pro Muslim propaganda should cause anyone
believibg in democracy and free speech serious concern.
It recalls Hitler's propaganda against Allies in World War II.
Facts are twisted and, when convenient, disregarded. The selectivity
in reporting and comment is far too blatant to be accidental. The
Western governments do not control their media sufficiently to be
responsible for it. So who is? Who is bankrolling and masterminding
the vast effort to destroy a people the United States, England and
France have no reason to hate in order to establish a second Muslim
state in a Balkan province where Muslims are a *minority* ?
Part of the answer is provided by a revealing interview by Mr.
James Harff (director of Ruder & Finn Global Public Affairs)
given to Mr. Jacques Merlino in Paris in October 1993. Ruder &
Finn are public relations company, currently registered as
foreign agents. Here are Harff's statements, slightly abridged.
[End of quote from the periodical and beginning of the quote
from the book:]
Harff: For 18 months, we have been working for the Republics of
Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as for the opposition in
*Kosovo*. (emphasis jb) Throughout this period, we had many successes,
giving us a formidable international image. We intend to make advantage of this
and develop commercial agreements with these countries. Speed is
vital, because items favorable to us must be settled in public
opinion. *The first statement counts*. The retractions have no effect.
Question: What are your methods of operation?
Harff: The essential tools in our work are a card file, a computer,
and a fax. The card file contains a few hundred names of journalists,
politicians, academicians, and representatives of humanitarian
organizations. The computer goes through the card files according
to correlated subjects, coming up with very effective targets.
The computer is tied into a fax. In this way, we can disseminate
information in a few minutes to those we think will react (positively).
Our job is to assure that the arguments for our side will be the first
to be expressed.
Question: How often do you intervene?
Harff: Quantity is not important. You have to intervene at the right
time with the right person... ...
Question: What achievement were you most proud of?
Harff: To have managed to put Jewish opinion on our side. This was
a sensitive matter, as the dossier was dangerous looked from this
angle. President Tudjman was very careless in his book "Wastelands
of Historical Reality". Reading this writings, one could accuse him
of anti- semitism.
In Bosnia, the situation was no better: President Izetbegovic strongly
supported the creation of a fundamentalist Islamic state in his book
"The Islamic Declaration". Besides, the Croatian and Bosnian past
was marked by a real and cruel anti-semitism. Tens of thousands of
Jews perished in Croatian camps. So there was every reason for
intellectuals and Jewish organizations to be hostile towards the Croats
and Bosnians. Our challenge was to reverse this attitude. And we
*succeeded masterfully.*
At the beginning of August 1992, the New York Newsday came out
with the affair of (Serb) concentration camps. We jumped at the
opportunity immediately. We outwitted three big Jewish organizations
- B'Nai Brith Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Committee, and
the American Jewish Congress. We suggested to them to publish an
advertisement in the New York Times and to organize
demonstrations outside the U.N.
This was a tremendous coup. When the Jewish organizations entered
the game on the side of the (Muslim) Bosnians, we could promptly
equate the Serbs with the Nazis in the public mind.
Nobody understood what was happening in Yugoslavia. The great
majority of Americans were probably asking themselves in which
African country Bosnia was situated. But, by a single move, we were
able to present a simple story of good guys and bad guys, which
would hereafter play itself.
We won by targeting Jewish audience. Almost immediately there was
a clear change of language in the press, with the use of words with
high emotional content, such as "ethnic cleansing", "concentration
camps", etc. which evoked images of Nazi Germany and the gas
chambers of Auschwitz. The emotional charge was so powerful that
nobody could go against it.
Question: But when you did all of this, you had no proof that what
you said was true. You only had the article in Newsday!
Harff: Our work is not to verify information. We are not equipped
for that. Our work is to accelerate the circulation of information
favorable to us, to aim at judiciously chosen targets. We did not
confirm the existence of death camps in Bosnia, we just made it
known that Newsday affirmed it.
Question: Are you aware that you took on a grave responsibility?
Harff: We are professionals. We had a job to do and we did it.
*We are not paid to be moral.* (emphasis jb)
Goran
Misha wrote in message <369145B2...@beer.com>...
Johnny Byrne
> THE PROOF YOU WANT YOU LYING FILTHY BASTARD?
> IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT? DELIVERED TO YOUR HOLE
> IN BELFAST? WHY DON'T YOU MAKE AN EFFORT TO
> READ THOUSANDS OF TESTIMONIES, YOU SQUANDREL...
`SQUANDREL' - what's this? More Cairine brothelese from Mona,
the gargantuan Houri of The Florida Everglades?
But amazing how when the truth strikes, the hirsute Ms Wadoud Seredin
jumps like a bee has stung her massive, ground dragging ass.
Ah, well. It takes all kinds. Besides, she can always hire herself out as
the Badyear Blimp.
- Johnny O'Squandrel
Johnny Byrne
Darko, they were probably detention camps, and all that means to
Croats, Muslims and Serbs, who all ran large numbers of them
The words (concentration camps) were in the original text, of which
the figures below formed a part.
- Johnny Byrne
Victor
Johnny Byrne wrote:
> The media in the Western world, the Muslim world and Israel treats us
> to a regular dose of tearjacking hate propaganda. We see women and
> children in Sarajevo - the Muslim quarters of Sarajevo - with terrible
> wounds seeping blood and shattered limbs, to the accompaniment of
> shells and small arms fire. We do not see the killing and maiming
> of Serb women and children by Muslim fire in Bosnia or by Croat fire
> in Croatia. And when Croat women and children are brutally murdered
> by Muslims, or vice versa, the media response is sporadic and no
> conclusions are drawn.
>
> This organised Anti Serb and pro Muslim propaganda should cause anyone
> believibg in democracy and free speech serious concern.
>
> It recalls Hitler's propaganda against Allies in World War II.
> Facts are twisted and, when convenient, disregarded. The selectivity
> in reporting and comment is far too blatant to be accidental. The
> Western governments do not control their media sufficiently to be
> responsible for it. So who is? Who is bankrolling and masterminding
> the vast effort to destroy a people the United States, England and
> France have no reason to hate in order to establish a second Muslim
> state in a Balkan province where Muslims are a *minority* ?
>
Sir,
the parallel between Serbs and Hitler are not only unmistakable but
intentional from the Serb side. Isn't it true that Serbs in this war intentionally
and scientifically used Hitler's theories (verbatim) during the WWII:
1. The first premise of the Serb "movement" was "all serbs in one state":
precursor to attack Croatia and Serbia (and now Kosova).
Hitler: " all Germans in one state" - precursor to attack Chechoslovakia.
2. Racism:
Hitler: create nazi theory that Germans are endangered (species :)) and
due to their glorious history deserve "better" treatment - therefore chose
Jews as a scapegoats - they have never been fighters, they are Semites,
they don't have weapons, they don't have friends (they are not Cristians),
they have always been refugies, they belong to the same class with Gipsies
etc. ->> Mein Kampf.
Serbs: they have glorious history, they are endangered, they can't be minorities
(even in Kosovo where they are only 10% of population), they are fighters
(against unarmed Muslims). The serb fascistic theory was released in the
Memorandum of Serbian Academy of Science.
3. Genocide:
Hitler: arm Germans to exterminate all non-Germans however predominantly
those unprotected: Jews, Gipsies, Slavs. Create conc-camps and let them die
there an mass. In addition torture them to the extent that they will bag to die.
Serbs: organized conc-camps for Muslims (Bosnians) wherever they could to
systematically annihilate them.
4. Slavery:
Hitler: destroy Jewish history, culture, and root, however at the same time
glorify German's culture German individuals German race - so that Jews
genetically feel inferior race. "Jews should bag to serve the Germans".
Serbs: destroy Muslim history, culture, and root. Serb even declared they
are "celestial (nebeski)" people. So they have the God given "right" to destroy,
torture and rape. (Remember even from the fascist poem from Njegosh:
"vuk na ovcu svoje pravo ima...").
5. Destroy (slight difference):
Hitler expelled Jews from their homes, took their possessions, and placed them
to conc-camps. They did it this way because Jews in Germany were reasonable
minority (about 6 mil vs. 50 mil.) Serbs differ since Muslims were the majority
2.2 mil Muslims vs. 1.4 mil serbs. However serbs did the same in Muslim villages
and small towns. In bigger towns like Sarajevo some of the Muslims had small
arms. To avoid a risk they encircled tose cities and shelled and sniped to kill
and
starve to death Muslim civilian population (like Germans did to Petersburgh).
And there is much more - like random killings of prisoners, maiming, gang raping,
all proven by the TV media (two movies I have seen have documentary inserts
which watchfull and familiar spectator can not avoid: "Welcome to Sarajevo", and
"Shot through the heart").
All of the above was the serbian official strategy of aggression in Bosnia and
Croatia
(and at the begining of war they didn't hide it): to anihilate non-serbs in Serb
controlled
areas, and is now (in a slightly refined form) the same strategy in Kosova. Is
there anybody
there which can disapprove the above facts? I mean by facts!
The said above does not mean that ALL Serbs are evils. The same as all Germans
weren't
evils during the WWII (and before).
Misha
Where do they get 90% of Albanians anyway? According to 1981 census there aren't 90% and
Albanians boycotted 1991 census.
Victor wrote:
> Johnny Byrne wrote:
>
> > The media in the Western world, the Muslim world and Israel treats us
> > to a regular dose of tearjacking hate propaganda. We see women and
> > children in Sarajevo - the Muslim quarters of Sarajevo - with terrible
> > wounds seeping blood and shattered limbs, to the accompaniment of
> > shells and small arms fire. We do not see the killing and maiming
> > of Serb women and children by Muslim fire in Bosnia or by Croat fire
> > in Croatia. And when Croat women and children are brutally murdered
> > by Muslims, or vice versa, the media response is sporadic and no
> > conclusions are drawn.
> >
> > This organised Anti Serb and pro Muslim propaganda should cause anyone
> > believibg in democracy and free speech serious concern.
> >
> > It recalls Hitler's propaganda against Allies in World War II.
> > Facts are twisted and, when convenient, disregarded. The selectivity
> > in reporting and comment is far too blatant to be accidental. The
> > Western governments do not control their media sufficiently to be
> > responsible for it. So who is? Who is bankrolling and masterminding
> > the vast effort to destroy a people the United States, England and
> > France have no reason to hate in order to establish a second Muslim
> > state in a Balkan province where Muslims are a *minority* ?
> >
>
--
************************************
We Started New IRC network: LocoNet!
24.226.68.196:6667
PLEASE HELP US GROW!
************************************
kirill
>
> Johnny Byrne wrote:
>
> > to a regular dose of tearjacking hate propaganda. We see women and
> > children in Sarajevo - the Muslim quarters of Sarajevo - with terrible
> > wounds seeping blood and shattered limbs, to the accompaniment of
> > shells and small arms fire. We do not see the killing and maiming
> > of Serb women and children by Muslim fire in Bosnia or by Croat fire
> > in Croatia. And when Croat women and children are brutally murdered
> > by Muslims, or vice versa, the media response is sporadic and no
> > conclusions are drawn.
> >
> > This organised Anti Serb and pro Muslim propaganda should cause anyone
> > believibg in democracy and free speech serious concern.
> >
> > It recalls Hitler's propaganda against Allies in World War II.
> > Facts are twisted and, when convenient, disregarded. The selectivity
> > in reporting and comment is far too blatant to be accidental. The
> > Western governments do not control their media sufficiently to be
> > responsible for it. So who is? Who is bankrolling and masterminding
> > the vast effort to destroy a people the United States, England and
> > France have no reason to hate in order to establish a second Muslim
> > state in a Balkan province where Muslims are a *minority* ?
> >
>
> the parallel between Serbs and Hitler are not only unmistakable but
> intentional from the Serb side. Isn't it true that Serbs in this war intentionally
> and scientifically used Hitler's theories (verbatim) during the WWII:
>
> 1. The first premise of the Serb "movement" was "all serbs in one state":
> precursor to attack Croatia and Serbia (and now Kosova).
> Hitler: " all Germans in one state" - precursor to attack Chechoslovakia.
Tito's PROVINICAL borders weren't INTERNATIONAL you freaking
retard. If Serbs wanted to secede from "Croatia" and "BiH"
they HAD EVERY RIGHT TO. There was no invading Serb army
grabbing NON-SERB lands. Buy a CLUE.
> 2. Racism:
> Hitler: create nazi theory that Germans are endangered (species :)) and
> due to their glorious history deserve "better" treatment - therefore chose
> Jews as a scapegoats - they have never been fighters, they are Semites,
> they don't have weapons, they don't have friends (they are not Cristians),
> they have always been refugies, they belong to the same class with Gipsies
> etc. ->> Mein Kampf.
> Serbs: they have glorious history, they are endangered, they can't be minorities
> (even in Kosovo where they are only 10% of population), they are fighters
> (against unarmed Muslims). The serb fascistic theory was released in the
> Memorandum of Serbian Academy of Science.
Feeble minded attempt to find an isomorphism. Good luck!
Why do Albanians in KosMet (who are there mostly thanks
to Hitler, Mussolini, Tito and ILLEGAL MIGRATION FORM
ALBANIA) have special legal status while Serbs in Krajina,
East and West Slovonia and BiH have NONE. Bugger off you
hypocritical lout.
Please, dear boy, find me the Serb version of Mein Kampf
and identify speaches of Serb leaders demonizing non-Serbs
in the same way that Hitler demonized Jews, Romanies and
Slavs.
And Serbs have every right to fight the infiltration
of Middle Eastern muslim killer lunatics (ever hear
of Osama bin Laden) into ex-Yugoslavia who are
there for the purpose of driving Serbs off their
ancestral lands and setting up fundamentalist states
like Afghanistan.
> 3. Genocide:
> Hitler: arm Germans to exterminate all non-Germans however predominantly
> those unprotected: Jews, Gipsies, Slavs. Create conc-camps and let them die
> there an mass. In addition torture them to the extent that they will bag to die.
> Serbs: organized conc-camps for Muslims (Bosnians) wherever they could to
> systematically annihilate them.
Hello! Anyone home? How many women and children were there
at these POW camps? Why did they bother to separate them
like at Srebrenica, why not just butcher them all. Of course
you ASSUME that there weren't similar POW camps run by Croats
and BiH muslims for Serbs. You fools only respond to visual
stimuli fed you by the media and the Serbs were stupid enough
to allow journalists into their camps while the others didn't
(can't deny this latter fact it was on the CBC and I remember
seeing it).
> 4. Slavery:
> Hitler: destroy Jewish history, culture, and root, however at the same time
> glorify German's culture German individuals German race - so that Jews
> genetically feel inferior race. "Jews should bag to serve the Germans".
> Serbs: destroy Muslim history, culture, and root. Serb even declared they
> are "celestial (nebeski)" people. So they have the God given "right" to destroy,
> torture and rape. (Remember even from the fascist poem from Njegosh:
> "vuk na ovcu svoje pravo ima...").
Quote a source for this. I bet you can't (sorry quotes from
isolated flakes won't do).
> 5. Destroy (slight difference):
> Hitler expelled Jews from their homes, took their possessions, and placed them
> to conc-camps. They did it this way because Jews in Germany were reasonable
> minority (about 6 mil vs. 50 mil.) Serbs differ since Muslims were the majority
> 2.2 mil Muslims vs. 1.4 mil serbs. However serbs did the same in Muslim villages
> and small towns.
There wasn't any of this type of assault on Serb villages, right?
Is lying all you can do? For example, the muslim commander of
Srebrenica, Oric, destroyed Serb villages and murdered their
inhabitants (some of those mass graves that you twits are all
the fult of Serbs). He also killed Srebrenica muslims who
didn't give him enough support.
SERBS FORM THE BIGGEST REFUGEE GROUP IN THE BALKAN CONFLICTS
ACCORDING TO THE UN. Reconcile that you domogogue.
>In bigger towns like Sarajevo some of the Muslims had small
> arms. To avoid a risk they encircled tose cities and shelled and sniped to kill
> and
> starve to death Muslim civilian population (like Germans did to Petersburgh).
You sick bastard comparing the 10,500 dead at Sarajevo
to the over 2 million dead at St. Petersburgh. Sarjevo
was supplied with food, weapons and equipement for
practically the whole BiH war. And again you know
fuck all: there was a front line running through
Sarajevo NOT arround it and there was plenty of
shelling and sniping BY the BiH goverment forces.
> And there is much more - like random killings of prisoners, maiming, gang raping,
>
> all proven by the TV media (two movies I have seen have documentary inserts
> which watchfull and familiar spectator can not avoid: "Welcome to Sarajevo", and
> "Shot through the heart").
Proven by the media! HAHAHAHA. Did they also prove the
existence of mass graves with 8,000 BiH muslim POW's in
them around Srebrenica. Why did 5,000 of those corpses
run away and get captured on film by the NYT. How come
most of the other dead muslims show up at election time
to vote after the war. Do you have any more of these
missing dead stories that prove Serb guilt? Ever hear of
forensics and courts? Or is media hearsay good enough
for you?
> All of the above was the serbian official strategy of aggression in Bosnia and
> Croatia
NATO's war crime was denying Serbs the right to secede
from the PROVINCES of Yugoslavia and spawning the wars.
How can Kansas make foreign agression against North Dakota?
Welcome to NEVENEVER LAND.
> (and at the begining of war they didn't hide it): to anihilate non-serbs in Serb
> controlled
> areas,
By this definition Tudjman and Izetbegovic had exactly
the same policy BEFORE and during the war. Serb behaviour
in BiH and "Croatia" before the wars proves that they
wanted to assert their rights peacefully through the
ballot box. But Tudjman's and Izetbegovic's goons
disrupted this process and started the armed conflict.
No amount of your lying and demonization can hide the
true history of these event.
> and is now (in a slightly refined form) the same strategy in Kosova.
Really? While Bill "Blow Job" Clinton was proclaiming
his "sympathy for Croatian frustrations" during the
ethnic cleansing of 350,000 Serbs form Krajina and
the subsequent murder of 14,000 mostly elderly Serb
civilians, now we have NATO (aka USA) threatening
to bomb Serbia because it is fighting terrorist
infiltrators! This criminal hypocrisy defines NATO
as the new TOTALITARIAN thug on the block (that and
the unquestioning drones that make up its citizenry
that believe all the contradictory crap fed it by
the "free" medias that march in lock step with their
governments).
Serbia could have easily ethnically cleansed ALL of KosMet
over the summer, but they chose to lose police officers
and special forces people in house to hous fighting with
well armed terrorists based in Albania and the Middle
East. For this they are being terrorized by NATO
that wants the KLA to succeed.
Where are those alleged 275,000 displaced Albanians
in KosMet? Why no stories about them freezing and
dying? And some reports indicate destroyed Serb
villages (detail that slipped through the cracks).
>Is
> there anybody
> there which can disapprove the above facts? I mean by facts!
Most of what you wrote is hearsay allegation not facts.
Your consistent neglect of facts about crimes against
Serbs PROVES your malicious intentions.
> The said above does not mean that ALL Serbs are evils. The same as all Germans
> weren't
> evils during the WWII (and before).
Tokenism from a demonizer and liar.
Barry S. Marjanovich
>Memorandum of Serbian Academy of Science.
> And Serbs have every right to fight...
> NATO's war crime was denying Serbs the right to secede...
> No amount of your lying and demonization can hide the
> true history of these event...
> The above does not mean that ALL Serbs are evils...
VISIT VUKOVAR at http://www.vukovar.com
sco...@world.net
Johnny Byrne wrote:
Yep. She's screaming too loud, and I wonder why.
pared...@my-dejanews.com
j...@logos.cix.co.uk wrote:
> spino...@my-dejanews.com () wrote:
>
> > > Systematic rapings? Shameless lie, so naive that even moron wouldn't
believe
> > > it. What was the number, 60 or 80.000 women raped? Get serious.
YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED TO KNOW YOU SLIME BAG! BY DISCREDITING THE TESTIMONIES
OF THOUSANDS OF WOMEN, YOU ARE SIMPLY BECOMING A KILLER AND A RAPIST JUST
LIKE THE SAVAGES-THE CHETNIKS!
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Goran
jebem ti ovaj svijet ko njime vlada.
peterpan
>
> Ko nama Srbima jebe znanje, nedojebane lezbejke.....
> jebem ti ovaj svijet ko njime vlada.
TI STALNO IMAS OVE STVARI U TVOJIM USTIMA, MORA DA SI NELI PEDER!
Dickey Hard %=========> - - $$$$$$$
PA NEKA VAM PAS JEBE ALBANSKU MATER 2X!
--
___________________________________________________________
" ... If somebody makes it idiot proof,
Then somebody else will invent a better idiot ...
"
T. Elam, 1998 $:-$
___________________________________________________________
Joe
Goran <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote in message
news:76rn8s$fff$2...@zevs.beotel.net...
Probaj na KOI8-U ili KOI8-R
SERBKILLER
Michael <bmic...@sprint.ca> wrote in message news:f2_k2.71842$c8.34...@hme2.newscontent-01.sprint.ca...Abortion victim, you wanted that:)Michael.
Bernd Senczuk
SERBKILLER <serbkil...@hotmail.com> schrieb in Nachricht 36948...@d2o9.telia.com...///
peterpan
>
> Shithead, I see you are so stupid you cannot get whom you are talking
> to.
> You even do not have a brain to check addresses. It is understood you
> have IQ less than the number of days in you holly month. I am going to
> check how brave you are.
> Your postings are very "selective". I think you are missing some
> recipients:)
> One more shit from you and I will forward all your postings to all
> moslem NG.
> P.S. And never talk about a dick, one should have one to talk about.
> Michael.
HOW ABOUT KISSING HIS ARSE INSTEAD!
peterpan
AGAINST
Dusko SIKIRICA a/k/a "Sikira"
Damir DOSEN a/k/a "Kajin"
Dragan FUSTAR a/k/a "Fustar"
Dragan KULUNDZIJA a/k/a "Kole"
Nenad BANOVIC a/k/a "Bani"
Predrag BANOVIC a/k/a "Cupo"
Nikica JANJIC
Dusan KNEZEVIC a/k/a "Duca"
Dragan KONDIC
Goran LAJIC
Dragomir SAPONJA
Nedeljko TIMARAC
Zoran ZIGIC a/k/a "Ziga"
INDICTMENT
Richard J. Goldstone, Prosecutor of the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, pursuant to his authority under
Article 18 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (hereinafter "the Statute"), charges:
1. From about 24 May to about 30 August, 1992, Herb forces unlawfully
seized and confined more than 3,000 Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats
from the opstina Prijedor, in the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in
inhumane conditions, under armed guard, in the Keraterm "camp",
located in a former ceramics factory and storage area complex located
just outside the town of Prijedor As set forth below, detainees at
Keraterm camp were killed, sexually assaulted, tortured, beaten, and
otherwise subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment
2. Unless otherwise specified, all acts and omissions set forth in
this indictment took place between 24 May and 30 August 1992.
3. At all times relevant to this indictment, a state of armed
conflict and partial occupation existed in the Republic of
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
4. All acts or omissions set forth as grave breaches recognised by
Article 2 of the Statute and violations of the laws or customs of war
pursuant to Article 3 of the Statute occurred during that armed
conflict and partial occupation.
5. All of the Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Groat detainees at Keraterm
camp, and the Bosnian Muslims and Croats of the opstina Prijedor
referred to in this indictment were, at all relevant times, persons
protected by the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
6. All of the accused in this indictment were required to abide by the
mandate of the laws and customs governing the conduct of armed
conflict, including, the Geneva Conventions of 1949
7. In each paragraph charging torture, the acts were committed by, or
at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of, an
official or person acting in an official capacity, and for one or more
of the following purposes: to obtain information or a confession from
the victim or a third person; to punish the victim for an act the
victim or a third person committed or was suspected of having
committed; to intimidate or coerce the victim or a third person;
and/or for any reason based upon discrimination of any kind.
8. In each paragraph charging crimes against humanity, crimes
recognised by Article 5 of the Statute, the alleged acts or omissions
were part of a widespread or large-scale or systematic attack directed
against a civilian population.
9. The term "Serb" refers to persons of Serbian descent who were
either Bosnian citizens or citizens from any other part of the former
Yugoslavia.
The Accused:
10. The persons accused in this indictment were commanders, guards,
interrogators, and others responsible for the conditions and
mistreatment of detainees in Keraterm camp.
10.1. Dusko SIKIRICA also known as (hereinafter a/k/a) "Sikira." Date
and place of birth (hereinafter DPOB): 23 March 1964, Cirkin Polje,
Opstina Prijedor, Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Cirkin Polje.
He was in charge of Keraterm camp and was in a position of superior
authority to everyone else in the camp.
10.2. The following, three men were shift commanders who each
supervised one of the three shifts of guards that operated the camp.
As shift commanders, when on duty, they were in positions of superior
authority to all persons within the camp, second only to the camp
commander.
(a) Damir DOSEN a/k/a "Kajin"
(b) Dragan FUSTAR a/k/a "Fustar" DPOB: 28 Mar. 1956, Prijedor,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: 1 May Street, No. 41, Prijedor.
(c) Dragan KULUNDZIJA a/k/a "Kole" DPOB: 31 July 1966, Gradina,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Prijedor.
10.3. The accused listed below were among those who acted as guards or
interrogators in the Keraterm camp:
(a) Nenad BANOVIC a/k/a "Bani" DPOB: 28 Oct. 1969, Prijedor,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Skender Kulenovic Street 31,
Prijedor.
(b) Predrag BANOVIC a/k/a "Cupo" DPOB: 28 Oct. 1969, Prijedor,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Skender Kulenovic Street 31,
Prijedor
(c) Goran LAJIC
(d) Dragan KONDIC DPOB: 8 Dec. 1964, Jaruge, Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Current Address: JNA Street b.b., Prijedor.
10.4. In addition to the accused described above who regularly
performed duties in Keraterm camp, others frequently entered the camp
and killed, beat or otherwise abused detainees. while they were in the
camp, they were subject to the authority of Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir
DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan KULUNDZIJA. Among those who entered
the camp were the following:
(a) Nikica JANJIC
Current address: Donji Orlovci, Bosnia-Herzegovina
(c) Dragomir SAPONJA DPOB: 8 June 1965, Prijedor,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Marsala Tita Street 56, Prijedor.
(d) Nedjeljko TIMARAC DPOB: 18 Apr. 1954, Donji Orlovci,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Donji Orlovci.
(e) Zoran ZIGIC a/k/a "Ziga" DPOB: 20 Sept. 1958, Kozarac,
Bosnia-Herzegovina. Current address: Muharem Softic Street 16,
Prijedor; or Military Detention area, Banja Luka
11. Paragraphs 1 through 10 are re-alleged and incorporated into each
of the charges set forth below.
CHARGES:
I. GENOCIDE
ACCUSED: Dusko SIKIRICA
12. Dusko SIKIRICA, intending to destroy, in whole or in part, the
Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat people as national, ethnic, or
religious groups, was complicit in committing GENOCIDE, a crime
recognised by Article 4(3)(e) of the Statute, by participating in, or
being responsible for, the following acts:
Count:
12.1. killing members of the groups from the opstina Prijedor in the
Keraterm camp (Art. 1(2)(a));
Count:
12.2. causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the groups
from the opstina Prijedor in the Keraterm camp (Art. (2)(b)); and
Count:
12.3. deliberate infliction of conditions of life on members of the
groups from the opstina Prijedor in Keraterm camp, calculated to bring
about their physical destruction, in whole or part (Art. 1(2)(c)).
II. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS CAPACITY AS A SUPERIOR AUTHORITY
ACCUSED: Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR. and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA in their capacity as superiors
13.1. During, the operation of Keraterm camp, the vast majority of the
detainees were held in the Keraterm factory building, in what were
previously four storage areas, known as "room 1, room 2, room 3, and
room 4." The overcrowded conditions in the rooms were extreme, to the
extent that on many occasions the detainees could not lie down.
Facilities for personal hygiene were all but non-existent. The toilet
facilities were completely inadequate, so that frequently the toilet
area was awash in urine and feces. The detainees were fed starvation
rations once a day, with little time to eat. The little water they
received was ordinarily foul. Detainees had 110 changes of clothing
and 110 bedding. They received little or no medical care.
13.2. On a regular basis, camp guards and others who came to the camp
to abuse the detainees, all of whom were subordinate to Dusko
SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan KULUNDZIJA, subjected
the detainees to physical violence, constant humiliation, degradation,
inhumane conditions, and fear of death. Hundreds of detainees were
killed by the guards and others. Severe beatings were commonplace. All
manner of weapons were used during these beatings, including wooden
batons, metal rods, baseball bats, lengths of thick industrial cable
that had metal balls affixed to the end, rifle butts, and knives. The
killings, beatings, sexual assaults, and other cruel and humiliating
actions were committed on every shift and were often inflicted in full
view of the other detainees. Many detainees, whose identities are
known and unknown, did not survive. The corpses of detainees were
piled next to a garbage area adjacent to room 4 prior to their removal
from the camp.
13.3. With respect to the acts described above and each act or
omission charged hereafter in this indictment, except those charges
where one or more of these accused is separately charged, Dusko
SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan KULUNDZIJA knew or
had reason to know that persons in positions of subordinate authority
to them were about to commit those acts, or had already committed
those acts, and failed either to take the necessary and reasonable
steps to prevent those acts or to punish the perpetrators after the
acts had been committed.
13.4. Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA are criminally responsible for the killing, of Keraterm
camp detainees by their respective subordinates and others subject to
their authority, including the killings described in paragraphs 14,
15, 17 - 20, 24 and 25, and thereby committed:
Count:
13.1.1. GRAVE BREACHES OF THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 1919 (hereinafter
GRAVE BREACHES), wilful killings, recognised by Articles 2(a) and 7(3)
of the Statute;
Count:
13.4.2. VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised
by Articles 3 and 7(3) of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
13.1.3. CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Articles 5(a)
and 7(3) of the Statute.
13.5. Dusko SIKIRICA is criminally responsible for the torture of
Keraterm detainees by his subordinates and others subject to his
authority, including those described in paragraphs 21, 22, and 30, and
thereby committed:
Count:
13.5.1. a GRAVE BREACH, torture, recognised by Articles 2(b) and 7(3)
of the Statutes;
Count:
13.5.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, torture, recognised
by Articles 3 and 7(3) of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions: and
Count:
13.5.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, torture, recognised by Articles 5(f)
and 7(3) of the Statute.
Count:
13.6. Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA are criminally responsible for the wilful causing of great
suffering to all the Keraterm detainees, including those acts or
omissions described in paragraphs 14, 16, 19, 20, 23, 26 - 29, and 31
- 33, by their respective subordinates and others subject to their
authority and thereby committed GRAVE BREACHES recognised by Articles
2(c) and 7(3) of the Statute.
Count:
13.7. Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA are criminally responsible for the commission of outrages
upon the personal dignity of all the Keraterm detainees, including
those described in paragraphs 14-33, by their respective subordinates
and others subject to their authority, and thereby committed
VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR recognised by Articles 3 and
7(3) of the Statute and Article 3(1)(c) of the Geneva Conventions.
Count:
13.8. Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA are criminally responsible for the acts of their respective
subordinates and others subject to their authority, who subjected the
Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees of Keraterm, including
those described in paragraphs 14 - 33, to persecution on political,
racial, and/or religious grounds, and thereby committed a CRIME
AGAINST HUMANITY recognised by Articles 5(h) and 7(3) of the Statute.
Count:
13.9. Dusko SIKIRICA, Damir DOSEN, Dragan FUSTAR, and Dragan
KULUNDZIJA are criminally responsible for the acts or omissions of
their respective subordinates and others subject to their authority,
in subjecting the detainees of Keraterm, including those described in
paragraphs 14 - 33, to inhumane acts and treatment, and thereby
committed a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY recognised by Articles 5(i) and
7(3) of the Statute.
III. INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY
ACCUSED: Dusko SIKIRICA: Damir DOSEN' Dragan FUSTAR; Dragan
KULUNDZIJA; Nenad BANOVIC; Predrag BANOVIC: Nikica JANJIC; Dusan
KNEZEVIC; Dragan KONDIC; Goran LAJIC; Dragomir SAPONJA; Nedjeljko
TIMARAC; Zoran ZIGIC
14.1. About 20 July 1992, detainees from an area of the opstina
Prijedor known as "Brdo," which included the villages of Hambarine,
Carakovo, Rakovcani, Biscani, and Rizvanovici, were brought to
Keraterm camp. The detainees from the Brdo area were crowded into room
3. The previous occupants of room 3, had earlier been transferred to
other rooms.
14.2. About 24 July 1992, the detainees in room 3 were not allowed out
of the room. During the day and early evening,, machine guns were set
up in front of the rooms. That night soldiers were brought into the
camp and formed a semi circle around room
14.3. Later that night, the guards and soldiers, including Zoran
ZIGIC, began firing into the room with machine guns and heavy calibre
guns. The firing continued off and on over a period of several hours,
alternating between continuous fire and short bursts of fire. The fire
was directed toward room 3. However, some of the bullets went into at
least one of the other rooms. On that evening, Dragan KULUNDZIJA was
the guard shift commander. He gave orders that the other rooms were
not to be fired on. He gave no orders that room 3 was not to be fired
on.
14.4. Dragan KULUNDZIJA, as guard shift commander, Zoran ZIGIC, and
camp guards and others whose identities are unknown, participated in
the murder of at least 140 men from the "Brdo" area detained in room
3, including: Salko CRLJENKOVIC, Senad CRLJENKOVIC, Muharem SIKIRIC,
Fahrudin AVDIC, Halid ALISKOVIC, another man named Halid ALISKOVIC,
Jusuf ALISKOVIC, Kasim FAZLIC, Adem FAZLIC, Besim FAZLIC, Dzemal
FAZLIC, Kemal FAZLIC, Hasan CRLJENKOVIC, Muharem BEGOVIC, Nazmija
BEGOVIC, Mirhad CAUSEVIC, Nihad CAUSEVIC, Suad ZERIC, "Ita" ZERIC,
Cazim MUJADZIC, Hasan MUJADZIC, "Kiba", Mehmed AVDIC, Mehmedalija
SIKIRIC, "Dzole" MEDIC, Nazmija ALISKOVIC, Emsud ALISKOVIC, Sulejman
DZAMASTAGIC, Ferid DZAMASTAGIC, Sefko DZAMASTAGIC, Sulejman
RAMCINOVIC, Karanfil ALISKOVIC, Mehmedalija KARDUMOVIC, Mustafa
FAZLIC, Hasan DZAMASTAGIC, a/k/a Sivi, Damir DZAMASTAGIC, Sejfo
DZAMASTAGIC, Samir KARDUMOVIC, Sakib KARDUMOVIC, Asmir KARDUMOVIC,
Saud CAUSEVIC. Mirhad DURATOVICI a/k/a Mita, Fahrudin AVDIC, Huzeir
RAMULIC, Bego AVDIC, Smail SIKIRIC, Ferid SIKIRIC a/k/a Eka, Fadil
HAMULIC, and Fikret MEDIC a/k/a Jovo. Dragan KULUNDZIJA, by being a
superior responsible for the acts of his subordinates and by direct
participation, and Zoran ZIGIC [hereby committed:
Count:
14.4.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing, recognised by Articles 2(a)
and 7(1) of the Statute, and, with respect to Dragan KULUNDZIJA, also
Article 7(3) of Statute;
Count:
14.4.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised
by Articles 3 and 7(1) of the Statute, and with respect to Dragan
KULUNDZIJA also 7(3) of the Statute, and by Article 3(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
14.4.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Articles 5(a)
and 7(1) of the Statute, and, with respect to Dragan KULUNDZIJA, also
Article 7(3) of the Statute.
14.5. Dragan KULUNDZIJA, Zoran ZIGIC and camp guards, and others whose
identities are unknown, participated in wounding, by gunfire,
approximately 50 men from the "Brdo" area detained in room 3,
including: Safet CRLJENKOVIC, Dervis CRLJENKOVIC, Ramo CRLJENKOVIC,
and Alija HRAPIC. Dragan KULUNDZIJA, as a superior responsible for the
acts of his subordinates and by direct participation, Zoran ZIGIC, and
camp guards and others whose identities are unknown thereby committed:
Count:
14.5.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilfully causing great suffering or serious
injury to body or health, recognised by Articles 2(c) and 7(1) of the
Statute, and, with respect to Dragan KULUNDZIJA, also Article 7(3) of
the Statute;
Count:
14.5.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS OF WAR, cruel treatment,
recognised by Articles 3 and 7(1) and with respect to Dragan
KULUNDZIJA also 7(3) of the Statute, and by Article 3(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
14.5.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts, recognised by
Articles 5(i) and 7(1) of the Statute, and, with respect to Dragan
KULUNDZIJA, also Article 7(3) of the Statute.
15. On or about 25 July 1992, the morning after the attack on room 3,
Dusko SIKIRICA was present with Dragan KUSTAR when FUSTAR told the
surviving detainees of room 3 that six detainees had escaped and that
the organisers of the escapes would be held responsible. Twenty
detainees were then selected, brought outside the room and summarily
executed. By being superiors responsible for the acts of their
subordinates and by direct participation in the killing of 20
detainees, Dusko SIKIRICA and Dragan FUSTAR thereby committed:
Count:
15.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing, recognised by Articles 2(a),
7(1) and 7(3)of the Statute of the Tribunal;
Count:
15.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised by
Articles 3, 7(1) and 7(3) of the Statute of the Tribunal and by
Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
15.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Articles 5(a),
7(1) and 7(3) of the Statute of the Tribunal.
16. Around 25 June 1992, a group of detainees including Redzep GRABIC
were frequently called out of room 2. Damir DOSEN, Dusan KNEZEVIC,
Zoran ZIGIC and others then severely beat the group of detainees from
room 2 including Redzep GRABIC with objects, including wooden clubs
and metal bars. As a result of the beatings, Redzep GRABIC lost
consciousness. Damir DOSEN, by being a superior responsible for [he
acts of his subordinates and by direct participation, Dusan KNEZEVIC
and Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:
Count:
16. 1. a GRAVE BREACH, great suffering, recognised by Articles 2(c),
7(1), and, with respect to Damir DOSEN, also 7(3) of the Statute;
Count :
16.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, cruel treatment,
recognised by Articles 3, 7(1), and, with respect to Damir DOSEN, also
7(3) of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
16.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts, recognised by Articles
5(i), 7(1). and, with respect to Damir DOSEN, also 7(3)of the Statute.
17. During the middle of July, 1992, on one evening Besim HRGIC was
called out of room 4 and severely beaten by Predrag BANOVIC, Dusan
KNEZEVIC, and Nikica JANJIC. HRGIC died of the injuries received
during that beating. By their actions, Predrag BANOVIC, Dusan
KNEZEVIC, and Nikica JANJIC thereby committed:
Count:
17.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing, recognised by Article 2(a) of
the Statute.
Count:
17.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised by
Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and,
Count:
17.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Article 5(a) of
the Statute.
18. On one evening during the middle of July, 1992, a large number of
detainees were called out of the rooms separately, by a group of
guards and others, and severely beaten in turn. Several men died as a
result of those beatings. Among them were: Jasmin IZEJIRI, "Spija"
MESIC, and Drago TOKMANOVIC. Among the group of guards and others who
took part in the beatings and killings were Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad
BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, and Zoran ZIGIC.
Count:
18.1. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC and
Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing of
Jasmin IZEJIRI, recognised by Article 2(a) of the Statute;
Count:
18.2. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC,
and Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing of
"Spija" MESIC, recognised by Article 2(a) of the Statute;
Count:
18.3. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC,
Dusan KNEZEVIC, and Zoran ZIGIC did thereby commit a GRAVE BREACH
wilful killing of Drago TOKMANOVIC, recognised by Article 2(a) of the
Statute;
Count:
18.4. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC and
Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF
WAR, murder of Jasmin IZEJIRI, recognised by Article 3 of the Statute
and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count:
18.5. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC,
and Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS
OF WAR, murder of "Spija" MESIC, recognised by Article 3 of the
Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva Conventions;
Count:
18.6. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC,
Dusan KNEZEVIC, and Zoran ZIGIC did thereby commit a VIOLATION OF THE
LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder of Drago TOKMANOVIC, recognised by
Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions;
Count:
18.7. Predrag BAKOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC and
Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder of
Jasmin IZEJIRI, recognised by Article 5(a) of the Statute:
Count:
18.8. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC,
and Zoran ZIGIC, did thereby commit a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder
of "Spija" MESIC, recognised by Article 5(a) of the Statute;
Count:
18.9. Predrag BANOVIC, Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC,
Dusan KNEZEVIC, and Zoran ZIGIC did thereby commit a CRIME AGAINST
HUMANITY, murder of Drago TOKMANOVIC, recognised by Article 5(a) of
the Statute; or
Count:
18.10. alternatively to paragraphs 18.1 to 18.9, Predrag BANOVIC,
Nenad BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Goran LAJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, and Zoran
ZIGIC did thereby commit a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts,
recognised by Article 5(i) of the Statute.
19. Around the latter part of June, 1992, Predrag BANOVIC, Nikica
JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan KONDIC, Goran LAJIC, Dragomir SAPONJA,
Zoran ZIGIC and others repeatedly called from room 2 a group of
detainees including Emsud BAHONJIC. Predrag BANOVIC, JANJIC, KNEZEVIC,
KONDIC, LAJIC, ZIGIC and others severely beat Emsud BAHONJIC and the
other detainees using their fists and objects. The beatings occurred
frequently over a period lasting approximately ten or more days.
During this period, KNEZEVIC, ZIGIC and others also forced BAHONJIC to
engage in various degrading, humiliating and/or painful acts, such as
lying on broken glass, repeatedly jumping from a truck, and engaging
in fellatio. BAHONJIC died from injuries received during the beatings.
19.1. By participating in the beatings causing the death of Emsud
BAHONJIC, Predrag BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan
KONDIC, Goran LAJIC, Dragomir SAPONJA and Zoran ZIGIC thereby
committed:
Count:
19.1.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing, recognised by Article 2(a) of
the Statute:
Count:
19.1.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised
by Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
19.1.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Article 5(a)
of the Statute; or
Count:
19.1.4. alternatively, a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts,
recognised by Article 5(i) and 7 (1) of the Statute.
19.2. By participating in forcing Emsud BAHONJIC to engage in the
degrading, humiliating and/or painful acts, Dusan KNEZEVIC and Zoran
ZIGIC committed:
Count:
19.2.1. a GRAVE BREACH, great suffering, recognised by Article 2(c) of
the Statute;
Count:
19.2.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, cruel treatment,
recognised by Article 3 of the Statute and Article 3(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
19.2.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts, recognised by Article
5(i) of the Statute.
20. Around the latter part of June, 1992, Predrag BANOVIC, Nikica
JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan KONDIC, Goran LAJIC, Dragomir SAPONJA,
Nedjeljko TIMARAC, Zoran ZIGIC and others frequently took from room 2
a group of detainees including a man called "Car" with a last name of
JUSUFOVIC or JUSUFAGIC. Predrag BANOVIC, JANJIC, KNEZEVIC, KONDIC,
LAJIC, SAPONJA, TIMARAC, ZIGIC, and others severely beat "Car" and the
other detainees using their fists and objects. The beatings occurred
frequently over a period lasting approximately ten or mole days.
During this period KNEZEVIC, ZIGIC, and others also forced "Car" to
engage in various humiliating and/or painful acts, such as running
while carrying, a heavy machine gun and engaging in fellatio. "Car"
died from injuries received during the beatings.
20.1. By participating in the beatings causing the death of ''Car,"
Predrag BANOVIC, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan KONDIC, Goran
LAJIC, Dragomir SAPONJA, Nedjeljko TIMARAC, and Zoran ZIGIC thereby
committed:
Count:
20.1.1. a GRAVE BREACH wilful killing, recognised by Article 2(a) of
the Statute;
Count:
20.1.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised
by Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
20.1.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Article 5(a)
of the Statute; or
Count:
20.1.4. alternatively, a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts,
recognised by Article 5(i) of the Statute;
20.2. By participating in forcing "Car" to engage in humiliating
and/or painful acts, Dusan KNEZEVIC and Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:
Count:
20.2.1. a GRAVE BREACH, great suffering, recognised by Article 2(c) of
the Statute:
Count:
20.2.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF wAR, cruel treatment,
recognised by Article 3 of the Statute and Article 3(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
20.2.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts, recognised by Article
5(i) of the Statute.
21. Between 1 June 1992 and 5 August 1992, Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan
KONDIC, Zoran ZIGIC, and others took out, on repeated occasions,
Jasmir RAMADANOVIC known as "Sengin." KNEZIVIC, KONDIC, ZIGIC and
others accused Jasmir RAMADANOVIC of being a Muslim extremist. They
then beat Jasmir RAMADANOVIC severely As a result of the beatings,
RAMADANOVIC received a large open wound to his head, his body was
severely bruised, and he was unable to eat for approximately ten days.
Dusan KNEZEVIC, Dragan KONDIC and Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:
Count:
21.1. a GRAVE BREACH, torture, recognised by Article 2(b) of the
Statute;
Count:
21.2 a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, torture, recognised
by Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
21.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, torture, recognised by Article 5(f) of
the Statute.
22. Around the first part of June 1992, Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZEVIC,
Dragomir SAPONJA, and Zoran ZIGIC took out Fajzo MUKANOVIC and
questioned him. When MUKANOVIC failed to provide the desired
information, JANJIC, KNEZEVIC, SAPONJA and ZIGIC cut him across the
neck with a knife and brought his wife and child to the camp to
witness the assault. Nikica JANJIC, Dusan KNEZIVIC, Dragomir SAPONJA,
and Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:
Count:
22.1. a GRAVE BREACH, torture, recognised by Article 2(b) of the
Statute;
Count:
22.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR, torture, recognised
by Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
22.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, torture, recognised by Article 5(t) of
the Statute.
23. Around 23 June 1992 Dusan KNEZEVIC and Zoran ZIGIC took out from
room 3 a group of detainees including Faudin HRUSTIC. KNEZEVIC, ZIGIC
and others beat the detainees including Faudin HRUSTIC using objects
including batons, iron bars and wooden baseball bats. Dusan KNEZEVIC
and Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:
Count:
23.1. a GRAVE BREACH, great suffering, recognised by Article 2(c) of
the Statute:
Count:
23.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF CUSTOMS OF WAR, cruel treatment,
recognised by Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the
Geneva Conventions; and
Count:
23.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts, recognised by Article
5(i) of the Statute.
24. On one evening during July, 1992, Predrag BANOVIC called for a
specific prisoner. When he could not find him, BANOVIC then called for
"Cacko," whose name was Fikret AVDIC. BANOVIC and others beat AVDIC
using a baseball bat and also kicked AVDIC. AVDIC was put back into
room 2 and died early the next morning. Predrag BANOVIC thereby
committed:
Count:
24.1. a GRAVE BREACH, wilful killing, recognised by Article 2(a) of
the Statute:
Count:
24.2. a VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF CUSTOMS OF WAR, murder, recognised by
Article 3 of the Statute and by Article (3)(1)(a) of the Geneva
Conventions; and
Count:
24.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, murder, recognised by Article 5(a) of
the Statute of the Tribunal; or
Count:
24.4. alternatively, a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, inhumane acts,
recognised by Article 5(i) of the Statute;
25. Around the latter part of June 1992, Jovo RADOCAJ, a detainee of
Serbian origin, who was married to a Muslim woman and believed to be
a supporter of the Bosnian Muslim Party of De
Valdeath
Dickey Hard %=========> - - $$$$$$$ wrote in message <3693FFBA...@starting-point.com>...
--
Ko je bre tebe stvorio picka ti mater, dr Mengele.
Victor
leader who would respect minority rights would help release tensions which
exist between Serbs and other in general, and between Serbs and different
ethnic groups living within the Serbian borders.
Victor wrote:
> Sir,
> the parallel between Serbs and Hitler are not only unmistakable but
> intentional from the Serb side. Isn't it true that Serbs in this war intentionally
> and scientifically used Hitler's theories (verbatim) during the WWII:
[ ... ]
Thank You,
Your remarks to Mr. Bryne were , in my opinion correct and factual. My
question to you is could you explain why the leader of Serbia, Mr. Milosovic
was not condemned along with other leaders of the genocide that took place
in Bosnia?
Thank You,
Michael Bolwell
sl...@idirect.com
The said above does not mean that ALL Serbs are evils. Just as all Germans
were'nt all evils during the WWII (and before).
Goran
Joe wrote in message <7711kf$mq7$2...@avala.yubc.net>...
Misha
Translation, if understood(I'm not good at Ukranian) right: This ant just doesn't learn.........
Bernd Senczuk wrote:
Ця мурашка просто не варту╨SERBKILLER <serbkil...@hotmail.com> schrieb in Nachricht 36948...@d2o9.telia.com...///You mother fucker, ass hole chetnik chicken! If you are so fucking brave, come then to Kosova, and defend what you stand for! I will surely be there and enjoy killing the chetnik bastards like you. Next month I am going back there, with a huge shipment of weapons, and you will taste my fire in your dirty asses. Death to your fucking animal breed!
Michael <bmic...@sprint.ca> wrote in message news:f2_k2.71842$c8.34...@hme2.newscontent-01.sprint.ca...Abortion victim, you wanted that:)Michael.
--
Joe
Mislim da Misha koristi Cyrillic (windows) ili ove druge
Ako koristish, a koristish Outlook 4 onda imash ono view
message pa language pa gore navedeno.
Nedavno sam preshao na OE5 pa sam malo zaboravio.
Goran <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote in message
news:772m8r$u02$8...@zevs.beotel.net...
>Sta je to?
>
>Joe wrote in message <7711kf$mq7$2...@avala.yubc.net>...
>>
>>Goran <bos...@beotel.yu> wrote in message
>>news:76rn8s$fff$2...@zevs.beotel.net...
>>>Uffff............. I can't see this, I see little boxes.
>>>
>>>Misha wrote in message <369145B2...@beer.com>...
>>>>dL[A]LNDAI E oLNAEEEELN EILRO UADND?UE IDUC? oDERED ?D OIL EEE EDNAA
>>>>TLED?LE IA eoa