Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Radovan Karadzic arrested!!!
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 131415
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Radovan Karadzic arrested!!!
    Posted: 17-Aug-2008 at 20:39
What court did NATO establish? I am pretty sure that War Criminals are tried at the International COurt of Justice located at the Hague, Netherlands. This court was not set-up by NATO but the UN. If you are talking about ICTY this is also set up by the UN, so where does NATO come into play for establishing courts? From my understanding NATO only attacked after UN safe areas were attacked, so this was an act of defense.1 I may not be up to date on the actions of NATO in the Balkans but from what I have read in the last sentences of you past post you have engaged in the dissemination of disinformation.
Back to Top
Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
General
General

BANNED

Joined: 06-Jun-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 884 		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Aug-2008 at 23:25

Professor Raju G. C. Thomas,
Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI:

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Just for Record

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor of International Law speaks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The US is violating a number of international laws in attacking Serbia over Kosovo which is part of a sovereign independent state.

 It is a violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter that prohibits the use of force against a sovereign state where it has not committed aggression on other states. Serbia did not attack any neighboring states outside its sovereign borders. The Security Council did not sanction the use of force here. If the issue had been submitted to the Security Council, it would certainly have been vetoed by Russia and China. NATO knows it and therefore bypassed it.

 It is a violation of NATO's own Charter which claims it is a defensive organizations and is only committed to force if one of its members is attacked. No member of NATO was attacked.

 The so-called Rambouillet "Agreement" (there was no "agreement" by Serbia ) is a violation of the 1980 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which forbids coercion and force to compel any state to sign a treaty or agreement. Serbia is being asked to sign this "Agreement" through NATO bombs and missiles.

 It is a violation of the Helsinki Accords Final Act of 1975 which guarantees the territorial frontiers of the states of Europe. What this so-called peace plan offers is (a) the severance of Kosovo through NATO bombing with immediate effect; or (b) the severance of Kosovo through NATO occupation three years later.

 If the sequel to the bombing is recogntion of Kosovo as an independent state, this will violate international law that prohibits recognition of provinces that unilaterally declare independence against the wishes of the federal authorities.

These unlawful actions will set precedents that will undermine stability elsewhere in the world.

Professor Raju G. C. Thomas

March 24, 1999

Milwaukee, Wisconsin.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Look at the following fact: At the beginning of the crisis, Sunday New York Times (April 4, 1999) "World Bolsters...", Page A7, said (quote):

A broad spectrum of [Western] legal scholars agree that there is currently no simple, straightforward or obvious LEGAL BASIS for the bombing of Serbian targets to be found in treaties, the United Nations' Charter or binding resolutions or ANY OTHER WRITTEN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL CODE.

There you have it: Spectrum of legal scholars could find NO WAY; no excuse for the WAR CRIME Clinton and the gang are committing.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 02:40
Are you going to answer the questions I posed re: NATO and courts? Or are you just going to ignore the questions? (To see/read the questions another time please see my post which is the first post on this page.)
Back to Top
Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
General
General

BANNED

Joined: 06-Jun-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 884 		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 02:49
Albright chose almost all of the members of the courts. Really if you just read back you could find the information already posted. It's vexing to repeat it all.
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1366 		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 03:11
All you have stated is that Albright made the choices for the members of the courts. You have not provided any cites for that claim, that I have been able to see. You just keep repeating it as if that makes it true. In reality the ICTY judges are picked by the UN General Assembly, that's not NATO nor is it Albright. So please enlighten as to how the Hague is an illegal political court?
Back to Top
Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
General
General

BANNED

Joined: 06-Jun-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 884 		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 03:42
http://4international.wordpress.com/2008/04/05/usnato-owned-hague-icty-kangaroo-court-frees-kla-mass-murderer-ramush-haradinaj/
 
 
  • It was established by the UN Security Council instead of the UN General Assembly. Milošević's claim that the court has no legal authority rested on the distinction that, as a result, it had not been created on a broad international basis. It was established on the basis of the Chapter VII of the UN Charter; relevant portion of the charter reads "the Security Council can take measures to maintain or restore international peace and security"; it is disputed whether a tribunal could be considered a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security. The suggestion to utilize Chapter VII was initially made in a report from the Secretary-General to the Security Council. The legal criticism has been succinctly stated in a Memorandum issued by Austrian Professor Hans Köchler, which was submitted to the President of the Security Council in 1999.
  • NATO spokesman Jamie Shea said the following about the court:
    • NATO countries are those that have provided the finance to set up the Tribunal, we are amongst the majority financiers, and of course to build a second chamber so that prosecutions can be speeded up so let me assure that we and the Tribunal are all one on this, we want to see war criminals brought to justice and I am certain that when Justice Arbour goes to Kosovo and looks at the facts she will be indicting people of Yugoslav nationality and I don't anticipate any others at this stage.
    The Tribunal has never prosecuted the citizens of any NATO countries as a result of NATO's involvement in the Kosovo conflict.
    • The ICTY budget is not entirely financed by the UN, but also by private entities; 14% being privately funded and the remainder being provided by the UN (2001).[1]. This private co-financing might prove a problem concering the Tribunal's independence and impartiality.
     
    random google copy and paste that you could easily have done for yourself. Bankotsu also posted very good articles in the last page. Again it's already been talked about in this thread.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 03:52
    Article 32 states that the expenses of the Tribunal shall be borne by the regular budget of the United Nations.

    The Tribunal has received substantial funds from individual States, private foundations and corporations in violation of Article 32 of its Charter.

    In 1994/95, the United States provided $700,000 in cash and $2,300,000 worth of equiptment. That same year the Open Society Institute, a foundation established by George Soros, contributed $150,000, and the Rockefeller family, through the Rockefeller foundation, contributed $50,000 and there have been donations from Time-Warner and Disney.

    Karadic has been kidnapped...the court is illegal, in violation of it's own Charter...it's a Mickey Mouse court.

    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/In...nal_Hague.html

    http://globalresearch.ca/articles/TAL307A.html
    Back to Top
    Kerimoglu View Drop Down
    Consul
    Consul
    Avatar

    Joined: 05-Oct-2006
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 313     		  Quote Kerimoglu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 08:51
    Yes, sure. Saddam Hussein was kidnapped as well. 
    History is a farm. Nations are farmers. What they planted before will show what is going to grow tomorrow!
    Back to Top
    King John View Drop Down
    Chieftain
    Chieftain
    Avatar

    Joined: 01-Dec-2006
    Location: United States
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 1366     		  Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 16:34
    Financing a court and establishing a court are two different things. When one finances a court one only provides money for the operation of the court not founding the court. When you establish a court you give it jurisdiction and allow it to function as a judicial institution. The establishment as you have said was by the UN, thus making it not established by NATO even if NATO gave ICTY a lot of money.

    Your post three above this one again says nothing about how Albright has chosen the Judges for ICTY.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 17:24
    "Yes, sure. Saddam Hussein was kidnapped as well." 
    Red herring?
     
    "Financing a court and establishing a court are two different things. When one finances a court one only provides money for the operation of the court not founding the court. When you establish a court you give it jurisdiction and allow it to function as a judicial institution. The establishment as you have said was by the UN, thus making it not established by NATO even if NATO gave ICTY a lot of money.
    "
     
    Right, whatever the case you see why it is illegal and with a little bit of google searching or even looking back several pages will show you more.
     
    "Your post three above this one again says nothing about how Albright has chosen the Judges for ICTY. "
     
    I think Bankotsu actually posted at least one article concerning this. Go look for it.


    Edited by Carpathian Wolf - 18-Aug-2008 at 17:25
    Back to Top
    Guests View Drop Down
    Guest
    Guest
    		  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 19:02
    Originally posted by Al Jassas

    Hello Carpathian

    Good god man, I am screaming at a brick wall all this time. Summary executions are prohibited by every body of war laws in existance and considered a war crime and what happened is Srebrenica was a war crime regarless if these guys were guilty or not.  

    Second, only a due process can determine if these people were guilty or not, not cherrypicking people and saying this guy is guilty and this is not. Again, where is the due process? we are talking about human life not imprisonment and nobody has the right to strip a guy of life without a trial. These people were unarmed civilians and the Serbs to this day failed to prove otherwise.
     
    Third, there were 8000 men and boys killed in Srebrenica, the Srpska accepted that number and these are'nt western puppets, the Republic of serbia accepted that number and all the world accept that number.
    even milosociv accepted what happened
    What do you have against Bosnians I do not know but if you really don't want to accept hard facts don't argue.
     
     
    Fourth, till beginning of 2006 there were 42 mass graves belonging to Srebrenica victims have been located. some 2100 bodies have been identified and reburied and another 1000 bodies were exhumed in August of 2006 and 7000 unidentified remains are still in the process. this means that the 8000 figuere might actually be an undercount rather than an overestimation. Anyway, here are links from the BBC to the burials of some of the victims with age range:
    the total is roughly 2300 and many left to come, the total number of bodies positively discover is three times that number.
     
    I don't know if es_bih can provide you with names and pictures of those massacred so that you are convinced but I will look for them and if I find something I will post it.
     
    Fifth, About the Oric problem, well, here is what the ICTY said about it and it proves that Serbs failed to provided more than 624 names of people massacred. Another side claimed than most were actually soldiers and died in fighting:
     
    Finally, please try to read what I posted and not respond to a thing you didn't even read.
     
    Al-Jassas


    To add when they made that "new"ultra-nationalist movie two years ago about anti-Serbian crimes, several images including that of a little boy shot down in Sarajevo by Serb snipers were mentioned to be victims of anti-Serb agression.

    CW your arguments sound like that of a hardcore neo-Nazi trying to justify what happened instead of rationalizing and seeing that a wrong is a wrong no matter who does it. I can bet that if it it only were Croats and Bosnians in the court and there were no Serb bias, etc... but a clear bias toward the other two you would not be screaming oh they are kidnapped but hang the bloody criminals. Just a few posts ago you thought that young men tied up forced to digg their grave and shot on video as provided by Theodore was "justified."

    I am not sure what body of law you follow, but anything aside from Medieval ordeals prohibits such action as a crime.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 21:56
    Originally posted by es_bih

    Originally posted by Al Jassas

    Hello Carpathian

    Good god man, I am screaming at a brick wall all this time. Summary executions are prohibited by every body of war laws in existance and considered a war crime and what happened is Srebrenica was a war crime regarless if these guys were guilty or not.  

    Second, only a due process can determine if these people were guilty or not, not cherrypicking people and saying this guy is guilty and this is not. Again, where is the due process? we are talking about human life not imprisonment and nobody has the right to strip a guy of life without a trial. These people were unarmed civilians and the Serbs to this day failed to prove otherwise.
     
    Third, there were 8000 men and boys killed in Srebrenica, the Srpska accepted that number and these are'nt western puppets, the Republic of serbia accepted that number and all the world accept that number.
    even milosociv accepted what happened
    What do you have against Bosnians I do not know but if you really don't want to accept hard facts don't argue.
     
     
    Fourth, till beginning of 2006 there were 42 mass graves belonging to Srebrenica victims have been located. some 2100 bodies have been identified and reburied and another 1000 bodies were exhumed in August of 2006 and 7000 unidentified remains are still in the process. this means that the 8000 figuere might actually be an undercount rather than an overestimation. Anyway, here are links from the BBC to the burials of some of the victims with age range:
    the total is roughly 2300 and many left to come, the total number of bodies positively discover is three times that number.
     
    I don't know if es_bih can provide you with names and pictures of those massacred so that you are convinced but I will look for them and if I find something I will post it.
     
    Fifth, About the Oric problem, well, here is what the ICTY said about it and it proves that Serbs failed to provided more than 624 names of people massacred. Another side claimed than most were actually soldiers and died in fighting:
     
    Finally, please try to read what I posted and not respond to a thing you didn't even read.
     
    Al-Jassas


    To add when they made that "new"ultra-nationalist movie two years ago about anti-Serbian crimes, several images including that of a little boy shot down in Sarajevo by Serb snipers were mentioned to be victims of anti-Serb agression.

    CW your arguments sound like that of a hardcore neo-Nazi trying to justify what happened instead of rationalizing and seeing that a wrong is a wrong no matter who does it. I can bet that if it it only were Croats and Bosnians in the court and there were no Serb bias, etc... but a clear bias toward the other two you would not be screaming oh they are kidnapped but hang the bloody criminals. Just a few posts ago you thought that young men tied up forced to digg their grave and shot on video as provided by Theodore was "justified."

    I am not sure what body of law you follow, but anything aside from Medieval ordeals prohibits such action as a crime.
     
    The Serbian sniper bit is non sense. Serb/Croat/Muslim were all present in Sarajevo (though many non Bosniaks were forced out by Izetbegovic) so I doubt Serbian snipers would just take shots at children not knowing who they were. And even if they did how can you prove they were snipping on purpose for civilians? This is an example of propaganda. You state something that can be confirmed and make a whole boogey man scenario out of it. I heard stories of Serbs killing civilians with sniper rifles for money. But how do you confirm the kill. Have any of you shot a sniper rifle in a city such as Sarajevo through all the buildings much less try to ID someone? It isn't easy. This like this no one can confirm.
     
    We can confirm however Bosniaks shooting artillery on their own people according to the French and Canadian investigators. Such tactics aren't anything new but none the less disgusting.
     
    Actually what I said about the video is that it can't be confirmed how old the people being executed were. What I said is that if you don't wear a uniform and you fight, you are a non uniformed combatant and exempt from the protection of the Geneva Convention. The UN and the Yugoslav government had documentation on the war crimes and war criminals in Srebrenica for some 3 years.
     
    You calling me a neo nazi is really ironic. Your style of arguementation is ignoring my questions, points and putting words in my mouth when it is obvious you can do nothing else. I have already stated that before researching the topic I was firmly anti-Serb myself. But I came to see the war for what it was, a western war of aggression which used the sick ideaologies of the Croatian Ustashe and Bosniak Ustashe mentality to commit horrible crimes upon the Serbs, and though the Serbs sometimes retaliated with crimes of their own and they were not right to do so, they are overly exagirated while the Bosniak/Croat crimes are almost completely ignored.
     
    Here's an example, even if Srebrenica was true, Serbs came in, rounded up 8,000 innocent civilians, all of them old men and young boys, made them dig their hole and shot them, it's a drop in the bucket compared to what the Serbs faced in Krajina. And i'm not saying Srebrenica (if true which it isn't) is justified by what the Croats did in Krajina but I compared the media coverage of one over the other.
    Back to Top
    Guests View Drop Down
    Guest
    Guest
    		  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Aug-2008 at 23:31
    Yes Serbianna is clearly a legitamate new source and yes they did check videos of the war. ;). Serbian snipers shot down civilians constantly while going to food convoys or water pick up. People could barely move through streets when it came under sniper fire, civilians were the prime target. The highest number of civilian casulties is on the muslim side and that is due to lack of slection in targets. Serb families were taken in by countless muslims. My family and otehers cared for seeveral after they had been displaced by war. You definetly have aa warped view of reality and never called you a neo naazi made a comparison between your reasoning and something a neo nazi would conclude. Comparisons are valid points of argument. Aside ypu change your story every time you are proven wrong or asked a frontal question.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2008 at 00:39
    Until I came here I don't believe I have ever seen Serbianna.
     
    The sniper story is a croc of unproved merde. Please spare us all.
     
    BTW those "food supply convoys" often carried weaponry and ammo to prolong the siege.
     
    The highest number of casualties is bosniaks probably because they had the crappiest military force out of both Croat and Serb forces. Once the Croat/Bosniak alliance was made, and the west provided weaponry more directly that changed. I don't believe there was a calculated campaign of targeting civilians and such orders are unproven even by ICTY/Hague.
     
    Where did I change my story? I always said Orthodox clergy do not bless to do any killing. Even in that video we all saw that the Priest didn't bless those soldiers to kill anybody. We have no such ritual/service. Please cut the crap and again stop trying to invent an Orthodox version of Islamic jihad/Mujehadeen extremism. Only sadiq Al-Jassas is interested.
    Back to Top
    red clay View Drop Down
    Administrator
    Administrator
    Avatar
    Tomato Master Emeritus

    Joined: 14-Jan-2006
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 10226     		  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2008 at 04:49
     Aside ypu change your story every time you are proven wrong or asked a frontal question.
     
     
    He's right you know.  And 70% of the time you get away with it, which isn't bad.  No where's near Pinguin's level but respectable. Big%20smile 
     
    Your doing it now.  Your also making claims that you don't support with credible sources.
     
    Have a nice day.
    "Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
    Unknown.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Aug-2008 at 05:16
    Awesome. You could have just posted "ya huh" and had the same weight posting since you didn't bother to give an example or anything. But gj doing that much.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Aug-2008 at 17:57

    Dutch Soldiers from Srebrenica Battalion Offer to Testify in Karadzic's Defense

    Some 15 Dutch soldiers of the former Netherlands battalion stationed in Srebrenica during the Bosnian civil war came to Belgrade on Wednesday, offering to testify in the Hague tribunal on behalf of Dr. Karadzic, a member of Radovan Karadzic's defense team Milivoje Ivanisevic told Vecernje Novosti.

    "We talked about their possible testimony. They stressed that the Serbs did not commit war crimes against the Muslim civilians when they were passing through several dozen of their villages [in Srebrenica municipality] the Dutch soldiers were securing. They came over at their own expense and said they will testify and invite more of their fellow soldiers to testify too. They left Belgrade on Thursday," Ivanisevic said.

    To see how relevant their testimonies would be, Ivanisevic talked to each Dutch soldier who came to Belgrade, individually, about when and where he was and what was he doing. Asked by Vecernje Novosti why haven't they showed up before to say what really happened in Srebrenica, Ivanisevic said he didn't pose that question, but added that Dutch soldiers complained there is a complete repression against them in Holland that had lasted for the past 10 years because they are blamed for allegedly "failing to protect Srebrenica".

    "Perhaps the things are finally getting ripe now", Ivanisevic said. "They told me they came here in apprehension and worried, because they expected to be hated in Serbia just like back home. They said in Srebrenica at the time they had to protect themselves from the Muslims, rather than protect Muslims from the Serbs. Serb Army, according to them, was helping the Muslim women and their children, bringing them food and water", Ivanisevic conveyed the conversation he had with Dutch soldiers who were stationed in Srebrenica in 1995.

    Orie Out

    On Thursday, Radovan Karadzic received another good news -- Serbophobic judge Alphons Orie has been removed from the post of the head judge in the case against him. The decision was brought by the tribunal's president Fausto Pocar who ordered that the case is assigned to another council of judges.

    The Hague staff rushed to assure the media Pocar's decision was not a result of Dr. Karadzic's request to exempt Orie from his case due to bellicose Serbophobia Orie had exhibited on numerous occasions. But Pocar's reasons for removing Orie from the process against Republic of Srpska first president are entirely irrelevant, as long as the goal has been achieved.
    Back to Top
    Carpathian Wolf View Drop Down
    General
    General

    BANNED

    Joined: 06-Jun-2008
    Online Status: Offline
    Posts: 884     		  Quote Carpathian Wolf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Aug-2008 at 18:58
    What the top UN American official to Bosnia had to say:
     
    Serbophobia Prevents Reaching the Truth
    Interview with Phillip Corwin by Cathrin Schütz, Junge Welt
    American Phillip Corwin was the highest UN official in Bosnia from spring to summer of 1995, serving as Civil Affairs Coordinator and Delegate of the Special Representative for the UN Secretary General. Previously, from 1994 to the spring of 1995 he held the same office for the region of Eastern Slavonia in Croatia. Duke University Press published his memoirs: Dubious mandates - A Memoir of the UN in Bosnia, Summer 1995.
    Q: Richard Holbrooke, Paddy Ashdown and many other Western representatives who were involved in the Yugoslav tragedy, unanimously assessed the arrest of Radovan Karadzic's as the capture of one of the most brutal war criminals of our time. What is your opinion?
    PC: Holbrooke and Ashdown used the wars in former Yugoslavia to build their careers. Their phrases like "one of the most brutal" and "good Nazi" -- that's how Holbrooke characterized Dr. Karadzic just now in the Spiegel interview -- remind us of their terrible bias and the severe harm that they caused as so-called diplomats. They foment the Serbophobia even now, making a fair process against Dr. Karadzic in The Hague impossible.
    Q: What do you expect from the trial of the former president of Republika Srpska in Bosnia before the ad hoc tribunal in The Hague?
    PC: In any criminal process the question of the intent is of central importance. Based on my personal contacts with Bosnian Serbs, including with Dr. Karadzic, I can only say that I am convinced the issue with Bosnian Serbs was to protect the Serbs, not to kill Muslims or Croats. Incidentally, the Gypsies allied with the Serbs -- they probably still remember all too well the treatment they were given during the Second World War by the "good Nazis" on the Croat and Muslim side. The Serbs were never threatened by the Gypsies and vice versa, the Serbs never undertook anything against the Gypsies. As always in the Hague, Dr. Karadzic can't expect a fair trial. He will be accused of participating in a 'conspiracy' and they will blame him for the deeds of soldiers in the field, whom he didn't know and to whom he never issued any orders.
    Srebrenica Takeover: 700 Muslims Killed at Worst
    Q: One of the main charges is Karadzic's alleged responsibility for the genocide of 8,000 Muslim males from Srebrenica. At the time Srebrenica was taken over by the Bosnian Serb Army in July 1995 you were the highest civilian official of the UN in Bosnia. What really happened?
    PC: What happened on July 11 1995 in Srebrenica is part of a greater tragedy and cannot and must not be taken out of the context. Those who do are clearly doing it with intention to twist things to the detriment of one of the warring parties. What happened in Srebrenica was not a single massacre Serbs committed against the Muslims, but a series of bloody attacks and counterattacks during three years and escalating in 1995. The number of Muslims killed most probably was not higher than the number of the Serbs killed in the region during the previous years in the assaults of the Bosnian Muslim war commander Naser Oric. The number of missing Bosnian Muslims is also exaggerated. All this shows that the official reports are of purely political nature.
    In May 1995, two months before the last battle for Srebrenica, the Croat army led the Operation Lightning in which 90 percent of the Serbs who lived in western Slavonia were expelled, i.e. they conducted the ethnic cleansing. A month after Srebrenica, 200,000 Serbs were expelled from their ancestral land in Krajina region [also in Croatia]. The international community remained silent in both cases! Srebrenica must be viewed in the context of events. If there really was a massacre -- and it seems realistic to speak about 700 victims -- then this is a war crime and the perpetrators must be held accountable. But the difference between the 700 and the commonly referred to 8,000 is not numerical -- it is political.
    Back to Top
     Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 131415

    Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

    Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
    Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

    This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.