Jugoinfo
ON IDEOLOGICAL WARS IN AND OUT OF SERBIA
R.K.Kent
For sometime now one has had the opportunity to witness heated
discussions in and out of Serbia about its future. Two positions seem
to predominate. One uses the Serbs as a battering ram with which to pry
open the behind-the-scenes Capitalist conspiracies and prevent them
from having a global success. The other wants the Serbs to stop being
Serbs and ditch even patriotism in favor of becoming "normal" by
adopting a "free market" economy , "entering into Europe" and even
forming a "strategic alliance" with the United States.
The anti-Imperialist Left, best represented in the U.S. by Jared
Israel , wishes the Serbs to stand tall against the current U.S.
Corporate Fascists, bring their drive for the New World Order to an
insurmountable Balkan obstacle, put to shame NATO’s cowardly bomber
leaders and be prepared to suffer beyond the sufferings already
inflicted after eight years of economic sanctions, eleven weeks of
bombings, and the "cleansing" of some million Serbs from other parts of
the ex-Yugoslav space. Slobodan Milosevic remains the point man of this
tendency because he is regarded as a leader who would continue Serb
resistance to the U.S. Imperial domination and stick to a socialist
model of Serb economy.in contrast to the socially and economically
destructive Capitalist incursions through IMF, WTO and the like. The
Opposition to Milosevic has been quite simply bought with dollars and
marks carried in with suitcases. Most of its members, save Kostunuca as
a transient phenomenon, have "betrayed" the Serbs as a whole. To even
think, after being savagely bombed for eleven weeks by NATO, that this
major war crime under the Open Skies ought to be forgiven and forgotten
in favor of ingratiation with the "West," represents an unacceptable
degree of national humiliation.
At the other end of the spectrum one could easily find Zoiran Djindjic
in Serbia itself He advocates policies rooted in the premise that if
"you can’t lick’em join’em." Bust up the Yugoslav centralist
Federation, making Kosovo, Montenegro and Vojvodina Serbia’s co-equal.
Eliminate the position of "Federal" Presidency (out goes Kostunica by
eliminating his job). Become a partner to the U.S. "strategic
interests," with Yugoslavia as a NATO base ready to assist the coming
control of Eurasian Hartland with its vast oil resources. Put through
all of the G17 reform proposals. Let the German and U.S. corporations
take Serbia over. Turn the Serbs into a most desirable work force at
once skilled and cheap. Let them become avid consumers of imported
products many of which amout to no more than conspicuous consumption.
Long Live Capitalism in Serbia and milk and honey will flow. The
"Russkies did not stand with us" anyway, let’s have a new patron, Uncle
Sam, with maybe an insatiable Fritz der Katze right behind him. There
will be no more sanctions, no more suffereing. Period. The Serb people
want to join Europe. That is why they revolted.
(2)
If the choice were a simple one, trading the current suffering for a
period of immediate relief and some prosperity against a possibly less
comfortable economic future (without a certain date) , any logical
person would accept temporary relief against an uncertain future. Large
numbers of the unemployed with families to feed spell an irresistible
attraction not to think about new types of social and economic
dislocations. With a million refugees, with a per capita income fallen
to a pitiful level "The Economy Stupid" takes precedence over other
considerations. Who wants to go on forever resisting the remaining
super-Power when it is willing to reward dependency and punish
iundependence? No need to opt again for the "Heavenly Kingdom" through
repeated defeats as in 1389. Let’s go for the "Kingdom on the Earth"
this time and maybe, just maybe we will be laughing on our way to some
real banks.Fortunately , neither of the two action scenarios for the
future (Jared/Zoran} is full-proof and, as historians know only too
well from the study of history, predicting the future with accuracy
is, at best, a matter of luck and not of science.
As the finger- pointing goes on in Belgrade as to who is who’s "agent,"
it is necessary to mention a few cardinal facts. While the punitive and
basically cowardly NATO attacks came about and went on, Milosevic’s
refusal to knuckle under and yell "Uncle" makes him at once an
anti-Imperialist hero and a defender of the Serbs. If the second role
were unquestionably true no one in his right mind should fault him on
the former. Where one falls on this issue is of basic importance. Did
everything he has done really "defend the Serbs" or has he used this
role to maintain himself in power The basic facts are simple. His
amassing of power involved, inter alia, the stabbing in the back of his
mentor and friend, Stambolic. Until Yugoslavia started to break-up
Milosevic did not have the pedigree of an ardent Serb Nationalist.
After assuring the Serbs of Krajina and Bosnia of his unflagging support
not to live under Franjo Tudjman’s neo-Fascist Croatia or in Alija
Izetbegovic’s Islamic Republic he did not follow through. At Dayton, he
accepted the NATO occupation of Bosnia as well. Did he or did he not
have much choice once the U.S. joined the side of Croatia and the
Bosnian Muslims? Only fine historical tuning, with the proper chronology
and full documentation (written and oral) can provide the definitive
answer. But, the feeling among the Serb refugees from Krajina and Bosnia
is that Milosevic had abandoned them.
After 78 days of bombings he accepted the NATO occupation of Kosovo, an
integral part of Serbia and truncated Yugoslavia. Unprotected , despite
the presence of NATO troops and a U.N. Administration under a prominent
French Serbophobe, the Serbs were and are ethnically cleansed by
Albanian terror. Less than 100,000 remain today, encapsulated in ghettos
with a quasi-KFOR protection. No true Serb leader could have turned
Kosovo over to a NATO protectorate and an Albanian Colony of the United
States(now with its second bastion in Europe at Camp Bondsteel) without
losing support of his own people. Kostunica’s recent statement that
independence for Kosovo would destabilize the region reveals a profound
understanding of the problems involved precisely because he is a Serb
defender, a patriot as Kostunica describes himself. His request for the
return to Kosovo of Serb and other refugees turns the tables properly on
the NATO forces and puts him on the same moral pedestal occupied for so
long by Western Humanitarians who demanded everywhere the return of
refugees except those Serbs expelled from Kosovo via "justifiable
retribution." The Nationalist cacoon around Milosevic was crafted
(3)
to shield and perpetuate his hold on power , nothing much more. When the
anti-Imperialists find it necessary to line-up behind Milosevic (without
saying so openly) they are doing the same thing that the Imperialists
have done by constantly using him as a substitute for Serbs as a
whole.In short, Milosevic has never been nor is he now to be equated
with the Serbs as a people.
Throughout the years of punishments that hurt mainly the Serb people,
leaders of NATO, spearheaded by a pontificating U.S. Secretary of State
and the hysterical evangelist of 10 Downing Street, claimed repeatedly
that they are not "against the Serb people" but only against
"Milosevic." Now that he has fallen from power two major demands are
already throwing doubt
on this claim. To be eligible for re-inclusion into the Human Race the
Serbs must stop denying the atrocities committed by the Serb miliary and
para-military. They must not complain at the same time about what was
done to them to incite such atrocities. Moreover, they must deliver
Milosevic and other Serb "war criminals" to the Hague Tribunal. The only
division between the U.S. "strategists" and those of Western Europe
involves timing. The Europeans are for greater patience. Neither will
easily admit that the Hague Tribunal is a sham until and unless it
becomes increasingly painful and counterproductive to use it again and
again to "punish the Serbs." Its contention that the Serbs were mainly
indicted because they committed the earliest and numerically most
significant atrocities cannot withstand serious scrutiny.
This provides a rare opportunity for the new Serb Government to do
something that needs to be done. Yes, we are prepared to abandon the
denials but would you be willing to admit that the78 days of bombing
civilian targets constitute a war crime and a crime against humanity,
always assuming that you do regard the Serbs as humans? Next, all of
the accusations come from the NATO members. For example, the third
market-place massacre at Sarajevo, immediately attributed to the Serbs,
led, within hours, to the NATO bombings of Bosnian Serb positions. In
the same sense, the massacre attributed to the Serbs at Racak,
"galvanized" NATO to go into its "air war" over Yugoslavia. Now, it is a
known fact that a U.N. report in situ exculpated the Serbs for the third
-market- place massacre but the text was ordered into the "Secret" U.N.
file by the then Ambassador Mdeleine Albright. It is still there. At
Racak, the Serb police notified actually the U.S. special envoy Walker
that an attack will be launched on Racak as a KLA stronghold. The next
day, there were 47 bodies in an open mass-grave to which Mr. Walker and
the TV cameras were brought by the KLA. He declared at once. "this is a
masacre." After being routinely accused of re-burying bodies to hide
their massacres, the Serb suddenly did not even bury the bodies.
Moreover, the bodies had been moved as there were no spent cartridges at
the site. Ambassadsor Walker has a long record of involvement with
bodies and real massacres in Latin America
Items of this nature and their obvious proximity to acts of war against
the Serbs cannot condone a passive Serb acceptance of claims made by the
very people that bombed them Minimal fairness and logic would require
that the Serbs themselves undertake an investigation of claims made by
the NATO sources. If they prove to be accurate, no denials are in order.
The perpetrators should
(4)
be arrested and tried in Serbia’s courts without undue delays. At the
option of Serb judiciary, the guilty parties, sentenced at home ,
could be given the same range of sentences applicable to the Hague
Tribunal and up to 20 years. If the accusations prove to be unprovable
or yet false NATO owes the Serbs some apologies in these two particular
cases. Even Srebrenica requires a mixed fact-finding commission as there
are a host of questions never answered and a context never kicked -in.
How can a Democratic West refuse the right to the Serbs to investigate
its allegations against the Serbs before abandoning the denials, as
requested?
The men and women behind the 78 days of destruction from the air over
Yugoslavia know that they have committed a war crime and a crime against
humanity but will never admit to have so done. They know that the
bombing of Serbia took off the Imperial mask and earned a lot of
resentment around the globe. They are aware that a host of Citizens’
Tribunals in Europe and North America have found them guilty. The power
of these mini-Tribunals is entirely moral. They have no funds and no
chance for legal redress. In order to pull the moral rug from under them
and still justify their crimes as a "virtuous war" they are not likely
to be stupid enough to jump on "the Serbs" with a list of immediate
demands that simply restate all the Serbophobic desiderata before the
fall of Milosevic. A recently proposed Congressional bill by the
"two Joes," Biden and Lieberman wanted to do just that but was derailed
for the time being.
After a decade of structured, deliberate cerebral terror against them
the Serbs must be aware that thousands of men and women in the West, at
all levels, are infected with Serbophobia and make a good living through
Serb bashings. The Serbs still face the tyranny of scribal and
audio-visual clerks. It is the hardest kind of tyranny to cope with Many
people in the Western media not so infected simply parrot the same
unproven allegations without even knowing what they read or caring about
their adverse impact. Adverse first at home by promoting ethnic hate and
adverse
in the effect they continue to have on the bruised Serb psyche. There
has to be a counter attack in this area. Serbs in the diaspora must
amass by donations funds to engage a Public Relations Firm (other than
Ruder Finn) to go after the Serbophobes, clerks and all. Americans of
both Serb and other descents must be willing to bring class action suits
against any one or group engaged in hate-mongering against the Serbs as
a people. A number of laws already on books can help in that endeavor.
Congress should be urged to ban donations to its members by ethnicities
which promote hate-mongering and military interventions against other
ethnicities, as the Albanian PAC have done in the U.S., along with
Croatian and Bosnian Mulsim lobbies before them. Characteristically, no
Serb PAC donations came into play. The Public Relation firm of Ruder
Finn ,which sigle-handedly persuaded many Americans of Jewish faith that
the Serbs are neo-Nazi butchers, once proposed to defend the Serbs from
a poor image abroad but it was turned down.
The time has come to stop ideological struggles and accusations. Let us
concentrate on three basic goals. Getting substantial Reconstruction aid
from the West to undo the physical damage caused by NATO to the tune of
$100 billion should be one priority. Lifting all the sanctions
(5)
without delay instead of incrementally is the very next priority. Both
of these measures were firmly promised once Milosevic steps down, no ifs
and buts.It is delivery time. While the claim that Serbia under
Milosevic has had a socialist economy is at best a bad joke, let us all
work for a humane alleviation of Serbia’s economic woes while opposing
rapacious globalization.The Serbs have been traumatised enough. It is
healing time.The third basic goal must be the dissolution of the Hague
Tribunal for Yugoslavia. A substantial literature revealing its origins,
practices and nature should assist this endeavor but the American People
willhave to be informed about the truth in some very wide ways. They
need to be told that the only sure way to avoid future tragedies in the
ex-Yugoslav space is to help each of the major ethnicities to punish its
own "defenders" who did, in fact, commit war crimes and crimes against
humanity.
Apart from his devotion to the fight against U.S. Imperialism, Jared
Israel is admirable in his indefatigable digging for documentation. More
than anyone else, he has warned everyone that the Serbs are far from
being out of the Imperialist "drang nach Osten." This writer would like
to conclude on a note about Jared’s recovery of Milosevic’s "infamous"
Kosovo speech. After doing historical research for over three decades in
archival (and other) sources, if anything can be learned about written
documents it is that these almost invariably show how interpretations
and claims about their real contents seldom even approach what is in the
texts..But, to arrive at the value of any written source it must be
placed in its context. The Milosevic speech did not incite
hate-mongering against Kosovo’s Albanians.He did not make a fiery
nationalist speech meant to incite Serb revenge. He played the "Yugoslav
card"instead.
Equally, Milosevic did not abolish Kosovo’s autonomy as has been
constantly claimed. He suspended it in 1989, pending a return to some
sort of a pre-1974 modus vivendi between the Albanian ethnic majority
and all the other minorities at Kosovo. Just under a decade later, this
act was twisted so that Albanian separatists and the international drug
cartel that supports them could have the pretext for a guerrilla war
Their inspiration and hope for U.S. support came from the patronage of
Bob Dole but even more from Dayton. Since the constitutional revision
of 1974 the Kosovo Albanians used it to terrorize local Serbs and
induce them to leave Kosovo in ever greater numbers. But, that has been
the real practice since World War II as well as during Tito’s rule. It
even has much older antecedents which explain why a predominantly Serb
area, the birth-place of its culture and state. with an overwhelming
Serb majority, was gradually cleansed to reduce the Serbs to a minority
in their own home. It is a pity that the baby-boomers in the U.S. are
innocent of the true historical sequence of events at Kosovo. Yet, it is
far worse that they do not even care to know when they walk into a
situation as if nothing existed beforehand..
BERKELEY 11 OCTOBER 2000
---
----- Original Message -----
From: "john_peter maher" <jpmaher@...>
To: "john_peter maher" <jpmaher@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 11:20
Subject: to the Guardian: Dubrovnik hoax again
Sir:
Your piece mentions the "...pounding of the beautiful Croatian town of
Dubrovnik in 1991. 'They used ships. Can you believe it?'...
This is a fraud. Who on your staff was bought by Ruder Finn? Since 1991
the press has dozens of times printed the hoax that the Pearl of the
Adriatic was reduced to rubble. Those stories were fakes. That Dubrovnik
has been rebuilt is exponentially fake. On March 25, 1992, I visited
Dubrovnik to see for myself the truth about the war. The Old City of
Dubrovnik was never destroyed. It was barely scratched.
Roof tiles blown off by concussion had all been replaced when I
visited the city TWO YEARS AGO, THREE MONTHS after the "destruction".
Your writer has a poor vocabulary in English. Buildings are "holed."
"Hoardings," which your Yank readers will not understand, is the British
equivalent of American "billboard." "Casing" is also wrong. The right
term would be (protective) "planking". The new tiles are decidedly not
"pink", but red.
Dubrovnik's destruction was an invention of PR companies in the hire of
the war criminals who broke up Yugoslavia without negotiations. The big
bombardment was from PR fakers, not navy guns. -- like the Kuwaiti
incubator babies hoax used by President Bush to stoke up war fever. PR
liars Hill & Knowlton, Ruder Finn, and Waterman Associates have earned
millions in fanning the flames of this war.
The press, that's you, belongs in the war crimes docket with the New
World Order thugs for churning out mendacious "news" stories about Serb
death camps and rape camps, abetting war and mayhem. The story of an
organized Serb rape policy is a racist fraud, like the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, propagated to foment hatred and incite war against the
innocent. Though it's not polite any more to slander Afro-American or
Jews, Serbs are fair game for the lynch mob.
The "Serb-dominated federal navy" off Dubrovnik was commanded by
Admiral Stane Brovet, a Slovene. The target was not the Old City, but
the Napoleonic fort of St. Sergius far above Dubrovnik and hotels
outside the city walls, where Croatian forces were billeted and because
of the presence of refugees, had set up gun positions from which they
fired on the federal forces in order to provoke death and destruction.
Zagreb's aim was to provoke a Western attack on the Serbs. On December
5, 1991, Croatian forces mounted a mortar on a flat bed truck running
up and down the Stradun taking potshots at naval forces in order to
provoke counterfire.
The "Dubrovnik burning" pictures were shot with long lenses. This
compresses perspective, making it look like there is no distance between
objects that are quite separated in real space. Thus, columns of smoke
billowing up from the harbor are superimposed on the walled city. The
photographic effect is as staged as the stabbing of the lady showering
in Hitchcock's movie "Psycho."
That smoke was from the fuel tanks of two pleasure boats burning in the
Old Harbor -- outside, of course, the walls. Dubrovnik's Old City
never burned. Bullet holes along Stradun were from gunfire inside the
walls, at ground level at close range in a fight on the street between
rival Croatian factions. Scaffolding was set up in front of facades in
anticipation of the shooting to come. Video tapes of gunfire along the
ancient walls, run backward, show clearly that the puffs of gun smoke
are from outgoing, not incoming fire. "Western" reporters in Dubrovnik
since they cannot read Serbo-Croatian, do not mention the graffiti
calling for the lynching of Serbs: Srbe na vrbe (literally "[hang] the
Serbs on the willow trees"). My videotapes of Dubrovnik from March 25,
1992, have been aired on Chicago Cable Access TV, Channel 19. Want to
see them?
Croatian city? Tito made a gift of it to his native Croatia after WW II.
Dubrovnik was never before "Croatian."
The Byzantine decoration found by restorators beneath paint in the
Dominican monastery attests the Serbian and Greek origins of Dubrovnik.
This war is the latest chapter in the predation of Orthodox lands by the
Western Church. (I'm RC, by the way.) The only building in the Old City
of Ragusa to be gutted by explosives and fire was the one housing a
priceless collection of medireview manuscripts and icons. It was not
navy
guns that did the damage, but plastique and incendiary devices planted
on the spot by Croatian forces. Enter it on your map, across the street
from the Orthodox church, which you fail to note is Serbian. -- 3,000
Serb and 7,000 Croat refugees from Dubrovnik have taken refuge -- in
Belgrade.
J. P. Maher Ph.D. Emeritus Professor, Chicago
R.K.Kent
For sometime now one has had the opportunity to witness heated
discussions in and out of Serbia about its future. Two positions seem
to predominate. One uses the Serbs as a battering ram with which to pry
open the behind-the-scenes Capitalist conspiracies and prevent them
from having a global success. The other wants the Serbs to stop being
Serbs and ditch even patriotism in favor of becoming "normal" by
adopting a "free market" economy , "entering into Europe" and even
forming a "strategic alliance" with the United States.
The anti-Imperialist Left, best represented in the U.S. by Jared
Israel , wishes the Serbs to stand tall against the current U.S.
Corporate Fascists, bring their drive for the New World Order to an
insurmountable Balkan obstacle, put to shame NATO’s cowardly bomber
leaders and be prepared to suffer beyond the sufferings already
inflicted after eight years of economic sanctions, eleven weeks of
bombings, and the "cleansing" of some million Serbs from other parts of
the ex-Yugoslav space. Slobodan Milosevic remains the point man of this
tendency because he is regarded as a leader who would continue Serb
resistance to the U.S. Imperial domination and stick to a socialist
model of Serb economy.in contrast to the socially and economically
destructive Capitalist incursions through IMF, WTO and the like. The
Opposition to Milosevic has been quite simply bought with dollars and
marks carried in with suitcases. Most of its members, save Kostunuca as
a transient phenomenon, have "betrayed" the Serbs as a whole. To even
think, after being savagely bombed for eleven weeks by NATO, that this
major war crime under the Open Skies ought to be forgiven and forgotten
in favor of ingratiation with the "West," represents an unacceptable
degree of national humiliation.
At the other end of the spectrum one could easily find Zoiran Djindjic
in Serbia itself He advocates policies rooted in the premise that if
"you can’t lick’em join’em." Bust up the Yugoslav centralist
Federation, making Kosovo, Montenegro and Vojvodina Serbia’s co-equal.
Eliminate the position of "Federal" Presidency (out goes Kostunica by
eliminating his job). Become a partner to the U.S. "strategic
interests," with Yugoslavia as a NATO base ready to assist the coming
control of Eurasian Hartland with its vast oil resources. Put through
all of the G17 reform proposals. Let the German and U.S. corporations
take Serbia over. Turn the Serbs into a most desirable work force at
once skilled and cheap. Let them become avid consumers of imported
products many of which amout to no more than conspicuous consumption.
Long Live Capitalism in Serbia and milk and honey will flow. The
"Russkies did not stand with us" anyway, let’s have a new patron, Uncle
Sam, with maybe an insatiable Fritz der Katze right behind him. There
will be no more sanctions, no more suffereing. Period. The Serb people
want to join Europe. That is why they revolted.
(2)
If the choice were a simple one, trading the current suffering for a
period of immediate relief and some prosperity against a possibly less
comfortable economic future (without a certain date) , any logical
person would accept temporary relief against an uncertain future. Large
numbers of the unemployed with families to feed spell an irresistible
attraction not to think about new types of social and economic
dislocations. With a million refugees, with a per capita income fallen
to a pitiful level "The Economy Stupid" takes precedence over other
considerations. Who wants to go on forever resisting the remaining
super-Power when it is willing to reward dependency and punish
iundependence? No need to opt again for the "Heavenly Kingdom" through
repeated defeats as in 1389. Let’s go for the "Kingdom on the Earth"
this time and maybe, just maybe we will be laughing on our way to some
real banks.Fortunately , neither of the two action scenarios for the
future (Jared/Zoran} is full-proof and, as historians know only too
well from the study of history, predicting the future with accuracy
is, at best, a matter of luck and not of science.
As the finger- pointing goes on in Belgrade as to who is who’s "agent,"
it is necessary to mention a few cardinal facts. While the punitive and
basically cowardly NATO attacks came about and went on, Milosevic’s
refusal to knuckle under and yell "Uncle" makes him at once an
anti-Imperialist hero and a defender of the Serbs. If the second role
were unquestionably true no one in his right mind should fault him on
the former. Where one falls on this issue is of basic importance. Did
everything he has done really "defend the Serbs" or has he used this
role to maintain himself in power The basic facts are simple. His
amassing of power involved, inter alia, the stabbing in the back of his
mentor and friend, Stambolic. Until Yugoslavia started to break-up
Milosevic did not have the pedigree of an ardent Serb Nationalist.
After assuring the Serbs of Krajina and Bosnia of his unflagging support
not to live under Franjo Tudjman’s neo-Fascist Croatia or in Alija
Izetbegovic’s Islamic Republic he did not follow through. At Dayton, he
accepted the NATO occupation of Bosnia as well. Did he or did he not
have much choice once the U.S. joined the side of Croatia and the
Bosnian Muslims? Only fine historical tuning, with the proper chronology
and full documentation (written and oral) can provide the definitive
answer. But, the feeling among the Serb refugees from Krajina and Bosnia
is that Milosevic had abandoned them.
After 78 days of bombings he accepted the NATO occupation of Kosovo, an
integral part of Serbia and truncated Yugoslavia. Unprotected , despite
the presence of NATO troops and a U.N. Administration under a prominent
French Serbophobe, the Serbs were and are ethnically cleansed by
Albanian terror. Less than 100,000 remain today, encapsulated in ghettos
with a quasi-KFOR protection. No true Serb leader could have turned
Kosovo over to a NATO protectorate and an Albanian Colony of the United
States(now with its second bastion in Europe at Camp Bondsteel) without
losing support of his own people. Kostunica’s recent statement that
independence for Kosovo would destabilize the region reveals a profound
understanding of the problems involved precisely because he is a Serb
defender, a patriot as Kostunica describes himself. His request for the
return to Kosovo of Serb and other refugees turns the tables properly on
the NATO forces and puts him on the same moral pedestal occupied for so
long by Western Humanitarians who demanded everywhere the return of
refugees except those Serbs expelled from Kosovo via "justifiable
retribution." The Nationalist cacoon around Milosevic was crafted
(3)
to shield and perpetuate his hold on power , nothing much more. When the
anti-Imperialists find it necessary to line-up behind Milosevic (without
saying so openly) they are doing the same thing that the Imperialists
have done by constantly using him as a substitute for Serbs as a
whole.In short, Milosevic has never been nor is he now to be equated
with the Serbs as a people.
Throughout the years of punishments that hurt mainly the Serb people,
leaders of NATO, spearheaded by a pontificating U.S. Secretary of State
and the hysterical evangelist of 10 Downing Street, claimed repeatedly
that they are not "against the Serb people" but only against
"Milosevic." Now that he has fallen from power two major demands are
already throwing doubt
on this claim. To be eligible for re-inclusion into the Human Race the
Serbs must stop denying the atrocities committed by the Serb miliary and
para-military. They must not complain at the same time about what was
done to them to incite such atrocities. Moreover, they must deliver
Milosevic and other Serb "war criminals" to the Hague Tribunal. The only
division between the U.S. "strategists" and those of Western Europe
involves timing. The Europeans are for greater patience. Neither will
easily admit that the Hague Tribunal is a sham until and unless it
becomes increasingly painful and counterproductive to use it again and
again to "punish the Serbs." Its contention that the Serbs were mainly
indicted because they committed the earliest and numerically most
significant atrocities cannot withstand serious scrutiny.
This provides a rare opportunity for the new Serb Government to do
something that needs to be done. Yes, we are prepared to abandon the
denials but would you be willing to admit that the78 days of bombing
civilian targets constitute a war crime and a crime against humanity,
always assuming that you do regard the Serbs as humans? Next, all of
the accusations come from the NATO members. For example, the third
market-place massacre at Sarajevo, immediately attributed to the Serbs,
led, within hours, to the NATO bombings of Bosnian Serb positions. In
the same sense, the massacre attributed to the Serbs at Racak,
"galvanized" NATO to go into its "air war" over Yugoslavia. Now, it is a
known fact that a U.N. report in situ exculpated the Serbs for the third
-market- place massacre but the text was ordered into the "Secret" U.N.
file by the then Ambassador Mdeleine Albright. It is still there. At
Racak, the Serb police notified actually the U.S. special envoy Walker
that an attack will be launched on Racak as a KLA stronghold. The next
day, there were 47 bodies in an open mass-grave to which Mr. Walker and
the TV cameras were brought by the KLA. He declared at once. "this is a
masacre." After being routinely accused of re-burying bodies to hide
their massacres, the Serb suddenly did not even bury the bodies.
Moreover, the bodies had been moved as there were no spent cartridges at
the site. Ambassadsor Walker has a long record of involvement with
bodies and real massacres in Latin America
Items of this nature and their obvious proximity to acts of war against
the Serbs cannot condone a passive Serb acceptance of claims made by the
very people that bombed them Minimal fairness and logic would require
that the Serbs themselves undertake an investigation of claims made by
the NATO sources. If they prove to be accurate, no denials are in order.
The perpetrators should
(4)
be arrested and tried in Serbia’s courts without undue delays. At the
option of Serb judiciary, the guilty parties, sentenced at home ,
could be given the same range of sentences applicable to the Hague
Tribunal and up to 20 years. If the accusations prove to be unprovable
or yet false NATO owes the Serbs some apologies in these two particular
cases. Even Srebrenica requires a mixed fact-finding commission as there
are a host of questions never answered and a context never kicked -in.
How can a Democratic West refuse the right to the Serbs to investigate
its allegations against the Serbs before abandoning the denials, as
requested?
The men and women behind the 78 days of destruction from the air over
Yugoslavia know that they have committed a war crime and a crime against
humanity but will never admit to have so done. They know that the
bombing of Serbia took off the Imperial mask and earned a lot of
resentment around the globe. They are aware that a host of Citizens’
Tribunals in Europe and North America have found them guilty. The power
of these mini-Tribunals is entirely moral. They have no funds and no
chance for legal redress. In order to pull the moral rug from under them
and still justify their crimes as a "virtuous war" they are not likely
to be stupid enough to jump on "the Serbs" with a list of immediate
demands that simply restate all the Serbophobic desiderata before the
fall of Milosevic. A recently proposed Congressional bill by the
"two Joes," Biden and Lieberman wanted to do just that but was derailed
for the time being.
After a decade of structured, deliberate cerebral terror against them
the Serbs must be aware that thousands of men and women in the West, at
all levels, are infected with Serbophobia and make a good living through
Serb bashings. The Serbs still face the tyranny of scribal and
audio-visual clerks. It is the hardest kind of tyranny to cope with Many
people in the Western media not so infected simply parrot the same
unproven allegations without even knowing what they read or caring about
their adverse impact. Adverse first at home by promoting ethnic hate and
adverse
in the effect they continue to have on the bruised Serb psyche. There
has to be a counter attack in this area. Serbs in the diaspora must
amass by donations funds to engage a Public Relations Firm (other than
Ruder Finn) to go after the Serbophobes, clerks and all. Americans of
both Serb and other descents must be willing to bring class action suits
against any one or group engaged in hate-mongering against the Serbs as
a people. A number of laws already on books can help in that endeavor.
Congress should be urged to ban donations to its members by ethnicities
which promote hate-mongering and military interventions against other
ethnicities, as the Albanian PAC have done in the U.S., along with
Croatian and Bosnian Mulsim lobbies before them. Characteristically, no
Serb PAC donations came into play. The Public Relation firm of Ruder
Finn ,which sigle-handedly persuaded many Americans of Jewish faith that
the Serbs are neo-Nazi butchers, once proposed to defend the Serbs from
a poor image abroad but it was turned down.
The time has come to stop ideological struggles and accusations. Let us
concentrate on three basic goals. Getting substantial Reconstruction aid
from the West to undo the physical damage caused by NATO to the tune of
$100 billion should be one priority. Lifting all the sanctions
(5)
without delay instead of incrementally is the very next priority. Both
of these measures were firmly promised once Milosevic steps down, no ifs
and buts.It is delivery time. While the claim that Serbia under
Milosevic has had a socialist economy is at best a bad joke, let us all
work for a humane alleviation of Serbia’s economic woes while opposing
rapacious globalization.The Serbs have been traumatised enough. It is
healing time.The third basic goal must be the dissolution of the Hague
Tribunal for Yugoslavia. A substantial literature revealing its origins,
practices and nature should assist this endeavor but the American People
willhave to be informed about the truth in some very wide ways. They
need to be told that the only sure way to avoid future tragedies in the
ex-Yugoslav space is to help each of the major ethnicities to punish its
own "defenders" who did, in fact, commit war crimes and crimes against
humanity.
Apart from his devotion to the fight against U.S. Imperialism, Jared
Israel is admirable in his indefatigable digging for documentation. More
than anyone else, he has warned everyone that the Serbs are far from
being out of the Imperialist "drang nach Osten." This writer would like
to conclude on a note about Jared’s recovery of Milosevic’s "infamous"
Kosovo speech. After doing historical research for over three decades in
archival (and other) sources, if anything can be learned about written
documents it is that these almost invariably show how interpretations
and claims about their real contents seldom even approach what is in the
texts..But, to arrive at the value of any written source it must be
placed in its context. The Milosevic speech did not incite
hate-mongering against Kosovo’s Albanians.He did not make a fiery
nationalist speech meant to incite Serb revenge. He played the "Yugoslav
card"instead.
Equally, Milosevic did not abolish Kosovo’s autonomy as has been
constantly claimed. He suspended it in 1989, pending a return to some
sort of a pre-1974 modus vivendi between the Albanian ethnic majority
and all the other minorities at Kosovo. Just under a decade later, this
act was twisted so that Albanian separatists and the international drug
cartel that supports them could have the pretext for a guerrilla war
Their inspiration and hope for U.S. support came from the patronage of
Bob Dole but even more from Dayton. Since the constitutional revision
of 1974 the Kosovo Albanians used it to terrorize local Serbs and
induce them to leave Kosovo in ever greater numbers. But, that has been
the real practice since World War II as well as during Tito’s rule. It
even has much older antecedents which explain why a predominantly Serb
area, the birth-place of its culture and state. with an overwhelming
Serb majority, was gradually cleansed to reduce the Serbs to a minority
in their own home. It is a pity that the baby-boomers in the U.S. are
innocent of the true historical sequence of events at Kosovo. Yet, it is
far worse that they do not even care to know when they walk into a
situation as if nothing existed beforehand..
BERKELEY 11 OCTOBER 2000
---
----- Original Message -----
From: "john_peter maher" <jpmaher@...>
To: "john_peter maher" <jpmaher@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 11:20
Subject: to the Guardian: Dubrovnik hoax again
Sir:
Your piece mentions the "...pounding of the beautiful Croatian town of
Dubrovnik in 1991. 'They used ships. Can you believe it?'...
This is a fraud. Who on your staff was bought by Ruder Finn? Since 1991
the press has dozens of times printed the hoax that the Pearl of the
Adriatic was reduced to rubble. Those stories were fakes. That Dubrovnik
has been rebuilt is exponentially fake. On March 25, 1992, I visited
Dubrovnik to see for myself the truth about the war. The Old City of
Dubrovnik was never destroyed. It was barely scratched.
Roof tiles blown off by concussion had all been replaced when I
visited the city TWO YEARS AGO, THREE MONTHS after the "destruction".
Your writer has a poor vocabulary in English. Buildings are "holed."
"Hoardings," which your Yank readers will not understand, is the British
equivalent of American "billboard." "Casing" is also wrong. The right
term would be (protective) "planking". The new tiles are decidedly not
"pink", but red.
Dubrovnik's destruction was an invention of PR companies in the hire of
the war criminals who broke up Yugoslavia without negotiations. The big
bombardment was from PR fakers, not navy guns. -- like the Kuwaiti
incubator babies hoax used by President Bush to stoke up war fever. PR
liars Hill & Knowlton, Ruder Finn, and Waterman Associates have earned
millions in fanning the flames of this war.
The press, that's you, belongs in the war crimes docket with the New
World Order thugs for churning out mendacious "news" stories about Serb
death camps and rape camps, abetting war and mayhem. The story of an
organized Serb rape policy is a racist fraud, like the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, propagated to foment hatred and incite war against the
innocent. Though it's not polite any more to slander Afro-American or
Jews, Serbs are fair game for the lynch mob.
The "Serb-dominated federal navy" off Dubrovnik was commanded by
Admiral Stane Brovet, a Slovene. The target was not the Old City, but
the Napoleonic fort of St. Sergius far above Dubrovnik and hotels
outside the city walls, where Croatian forces were billeted and because
of the presence of refugees, had set up gun positions from which they
fired on the federal forces in order to provoke death and destruction.
Zagreb's aim was to provoke a Western attack on the Serbs. On December
5, 1991, Croatian forces mounted a mortar on a flat bed truck running
up and down the Stradun taking potshots at naval forces in order to
provoke counterfire.
The "Dubrovnik burning" pictures were shot with long lenses. This
compresses perspective, making it look like there is no distance between
objects that are quite separated in real space. Thus, columns of smoke
billowing up from the harbor are superimposed on the walled city. The
photographic effect is as staged as the stabbing of the lady showering
in Hitchcock's movie "Psycho."
That smoke was from the fuel tanks of two pleasure boats burning in the
Old Harbor -- outside, of course, the walls. Dubrovnik's Old City
never burned. Bullet holes along Stradun were from gunfire inside the
walls, at ground level at close range in a fight on the street between
rival Croatian factions. Scaffolding was set up in front of facades in
anticipation of the shooting to come. Video tapes of gunfire along the
ancient walls, run backward, show clearly that the puffs of gun smoke
are from outgoing, not incoming fire. "Western" reporters in Dubrovnik
since they cannot read Serbo-Croatian, do not mention the graffiti
calling for the lynching of Serbs: Srbe na vrbe (literally "[hang] the
Serbs on the willow trees"). My videotapes of Dubrovnik from March 25,
1992, have been aired on Chicago Cable Access TV, Channel 19. Want to
see them?
Croatian city? Tito made a gift of it to his native Croatia after WW II.
Dubrovnik was never before "Croatian."
The Byzantine decoration found by restorators beneath paint in the
Dominican monastery attests the Serbian and Greek origins of Dubrovnik.
This war is the latest chapter in the predation of Orthodox lands by the
Western Church. (I'm RC, by the way.) The only building in the Old City
of Ragusa to be gutted by explosives and fire was the one housing a
priceless collection of medireview manuscripts and icons. It was not
navy
guns that did the damage, but plastique and incendiary devices planted
on the spot by Croatian forces. Enter it on your map, across the street
from the Orthodox church, which you fail to note is Serbian. -- 3,000
Serb and 7,000 Croat refugees from Dubrovnik have taken refuge -- in
Belgrade.
J. P. Maher Ph.D. Emeritus Professor, Chicago
> http://www.egroups.com/message/crj-mailinglist/528
* ON IDEOLOGICAL WARS IN AND OUT OF SERBIA
R.K.Kent, professor
BERKELEY 11 OCTOBER 2000
* to "The Guardian": Dubrovnik hoax again
J. P. Maher Ph.D. Emeritus Professor,
Chicago October 11, 2000
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/library/hot_releases/October_5_2000_1.html
* "I have said before, the opposition candidate who,according to all
unbiased reports,clearly won the election,obviously also has strong
differences with us. This is not a question of whether he agrees with us."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/library/hot_releases/October_5_2000_1.html
Dr. Kostunica, a constitutional lawyer, translated "Federalist Papers"
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm into Serbian.
And "strong differences"?
http://www.cato.org/cgi-bin/Web_store/web_store.cgi?page=ruleoflaw.html&cart
THE� ROCKFORD� INSTITUTE
http://www.rockfordinstitute.org
SERBS AND THE WEST: THE ROAD AHEAD
by Dr.Vojislav Kostunica
http://www.rockfordinstitute.org/NewsST101000.htm
> http://news.beograd.com/english/articles_and_opinion/djurdjevic/001010_dumbing_$New World Order
* Bob Djurdjevic, Oct 10, 2000
New World Order and the Serbs - Part LVI
Dumbing Down of America
> http://www.computec-int.com/bsc/war/editor1.htm
* The Bad Serb Club
Una eccezionale collezione di articoli di fonte varia sulla
aggressione NATO e la disinformazione strategica (in lingua inglese)
> http://www.michaelparenti.org/MediaAtrocities.html
* 'For the better part of a decade the U.S. public has been bombarded with a
media campaign to demonize the Serbian people and their elected leaders.
During that time, the U.S. government has pursued a goal of breaking up
Yugoslavia into a cluster of small, weak, dependent, free-market
principalities. Yugoslavia was the only country in Eastern Europe that would
not dismantle its welfare state and public sector economy. It was the only
one that did not beg for entry into NATO. It was -- and what's left of it,
still is -- charting an independent course not in keeping with the New World
Order.'
http://www.michaelparenti.org/MediaAtrocities.html
http://www.michaelparenti.org/radioPR.html
> http://www.starfarm.it/casd/home/html/body_a75-eng.htm
* Italian Interests and Policies
in Central-Eastern Europe and in the Balkans
Lieutenant General Carlo Jean
> http://www.iacenter.org/yugo_rc.htm
Crisis in Yugoslavia:
Interview with
Ramsey Clark
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunit�:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad190521/www.ecircle.it
* ON IDEOLOGICAL WARS IN AND OUT OF SERBIA
R.K.Kent, professor
BERKELEY 11 OCTOBER 2000
* to "The Guardian": Dubrovnik hoax again
J. P. Maher Ph.D. Emeritus Professor,
Chicago October 11, 2000
> http://www.whitehouse.gov/library/hot_releases/October_5_2000_1.html
* "I have said before, the opposition candidate who,according to all
unbiased reports,clearly won the election,obviously also has strong
differences with us. This is not a question of whether he agrees with us."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/library/hot_releases/October_5_2000_1.html
Dr. Kostunica, a constitutional lawyer, translated "Federalist Papers"
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm into Serbian.
And "strong differences"?
http://www.cato.org/cgi-bin/Web_store/web_store.cgi?page=ruleoflaw.html&cart
THE� ROCKFORD� INSTITUTE
http://www.rockfordinstitute.org
SERBS AND THE WEST: THE ROAD AHEAD
by Dr.Vojislav Kostunica
http://www.rockfordinstitute.org/NewsST101000.htm
> http://news.beograd.com/english/articles_and_opinion/djurdjevic/001010_dumbing_$New World Order
* Bob Djurdjevic, Oct 10, 2000
New World Order and the Serbs - Part LVI
Dumbing Down of America
> http://www.computec-int.com/bsc/war/editor1.htm
* The Bad Serb Club
Una eccezionale collezione di articoli di fonte varia sulla
aggressione NATO e la disinformazione strategica (in lingua inglese)
> http://www.michaelparenti.org/MediaAtrocities.html
* 'For the better part of a decade the U.S. public has been bombarded with a
media campaign to demonize the Serbian people and their elected leaders.
During that time, the U.S. government has pursued a goal of breaking up
Yugoslavia into a cluster of small, weak, dependent, free-market
principalities. Yugoslavia was the only country in Eastern Europe that would
not dismantle its welfare state and public sector economy. It was the only
one that did not beg for entry into NATO. It was -- and what's left of it,
still is -- charting an independent course not in keeping with the New World
Order.'
http://www.michaelparenti.org/MediaAtrocities.html
http://www.michaelparenti.org/radioPR.html
> http://www.starfarm.it/casd/home/html/body_a75-eng.htm
* Italian Interests and Policies
in Central-Eastern Europe and in the Balkans
Lieutenant General Carlo Jean
> http://www.iacenter.org/yugo_rc.htm
Crisis in Yugoslavia:
Interview with
Ramsey Clark
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunit�:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad190521/www.ecircle.it
http://www.iacenter.org/yugo_rc.htm
Crisis in Yugoslavia:
Interview with
Ramsey Clark
Founder of the International
Action Center
Former United States
Attorney General
October 6, 2000
New York City, U.S.A.
[This following interview was to be
translated and published in the daily
newspaper Dan in Podgorica,
Montenegro. Dan published a
Serbo-Croatian edition of the IAC's
book, NATO in the Balkans. ]
After the destruction of the
bipolar structure of the
international community the USA
has played the main role on the
world political scene. What is the
essence of their political strategy
towards Europe, and what is the
role of the U.S. in the events now
unfolding in Yugoslavia?
The policies of the U.S., since the end of the Cold War are
complicated
and vast. They involve an intent to dominate and the use of
international
organizations to advance U.S. economic and geopolitical
interests. They
also include the conversion of NATO into a surrogate military
police force
for globalization and U.S. world economic domination.
Which factors were prevailing in the dissolution of
Yugoslavia -
internal or external ones?
The great tragedy of Yugoslavia in the last decade of the 20th
Century has
not been one of individual leadership. It's been the deliberate
dismantling
of Yugoslavia, which is one of the few countries in the world
formed on an
idea. Most are formed on a purely power basis. But the idea of
Yugoslavia
was that with all the diversity, with all the human problems and
poverty,
only in unity--through federation--could you have sovereignty,
and
independent economic development based on local interests rather
than on
foreign exploitation.
Yugoslavia showed it could work, even under extreme difficulty
during the
Cold War and between World War 1 and World War 2. It's probably
the
only thing that can work for the welfare of the people there.
Yugoslavia was deliberately dismantled. It continues to be
further broken
apart by U.S. and other foreign interests who want to divide and
conquer
the country economically. They want to exploit its resources,
its people, its
markets; and the consequences have been a human disaster from
Slovenia
to Macedonia.
What's needed is a larger Balkan federation that includes more
than just
the six former republics. But what you have is the
disintegration of even
those. Ninety percent of trade, commercial and economic activity
of the six
republics was internal in 1990. No republic is sufficient by
itself to survive
as a strong independent sovereign nation or people.
The breaking up of Yugoslavia is a tragedy from many standpoints
and the
tragedy isn't over.
What was the role of the Pentagon in the destabilization and
final
dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
The Pentagon is the military arm of U.S. policy. It doesn't
dictate policy
but implements it. Both policymaking and the means for
implementing it
are considerably bigger than the Pentagon.
One the most direct roles of the Pentagon was the genocidal
bombing of
Yugoslavia. Those were Pentagon planes up there. A few of them
might
have been British or from some other NATO country, but the
Pentagon
was overwhelmingly responsible for the planes and the targets
chosen, as
well as for the destruction and many people killed.
Washington wanted NATO in there as an umbrella to deflect anger
at the
U.S. They wanted young people from the European NATO countries
to be
the enforcers on the ground. The Clinton White House doesn't
want U.S.
soldiers to come in harms way--it could cause protests in the
streets.
Because of this the Pentagon was able to carry out the
aggression against
Yugoslavia and cause great destruction with virtually no U.S.
casualties.
It's easy when your planes are flying so high that it become
hard to get hit.
You don't ever set foot on the soil but you send missiles and
planes that
bomb away overwhelmingly at civilian targets.
It was a staggering disaster for Serbia and Montenegro and the
Kosovo
area of Serbia. It was a disaster for all the peoples there--all
of them
suffered.
There's been a deliberate policy--and the Pentagon played a role
in
this--to set Muslim against Orthodox Christian Serbs. The idea
of having
Slavic peoples and Muslim peoples--even though the Muslims in
Yugoslavia are Slavs--fight each other is something that we've
seen and
its one of the great dangers. When you think about Bosnia the
Muslims and
the Orthodox Serbs suffered terribly, and they didn't benefit at
all in
Kosovo.
This policy has gone a long way. There were 25 million people in
Yugoslavia in 1990 and now within Montenegro and Serbia you have
just
around 11 million. And now within Serbia itself you have
attempts to divide
the nationalities into three or four different sections by
external forces
that are pressing them to divide and spin off.
What do you think about the expansion of the NATO alliance to
the
Eastern European countries and also to the former Soviet
Republics?
NATO itself is one of the most dangerous international
organizations that
exists. Before any expansion into Eastern Europe NATO involved
the
great colonial powers. It involved rich countries and almost
totally white
Caucasian young men who are still a very small part of the
world's
population.
The NATO countries have by far the largest and richest armies
and the
most advanced weaponry and technology, primarily from the U.S.
NATO is
a threat to the vast majority of the population of the
world--the beautiful
darker-skinned people, and others. They seem to be natural born
killers
when you look at the insensitivity with which they unleash their
technology.
I remember a New York Times columnist talking about the bombing
last
year. I think he reflected exactly what the Pentagon or what
NATO was
saying: "Surrender or we'll destroy you. If you want to be
bombed back to
1990, 1750 or 1372 we can do that, pick your date. You'd better
surrender or
we'll level you."
Is there any justification for the aggression of the world?s
most powerful
countries against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
Of course not--not against Yugoslavia or any other country. If
we can't
find countries that will stand up against such aggression our
situation and
our future is going to be a human disaster. Look at how long
it's taken other
countries to begin to stand up for Iraq.
Yugoslavians know better than others what it's like to have a
high tech
all-out aerial bombardment of your country. Iraq was devastated
by
110,000 aerial sorties--88,500 tons of bombs, which was the
equivalent of
7-1/2 Hiroshimas, but most countries didn't really stand up for
Iraq. Only
now within the last few weeks have foreign countries started to
break the
blockade, which has killed a million and a half people.
The blockade against Iraq--though more severe--was the same type
of
sanctions that were imposed on Yugoslavia. U.S. Secretary of
State
Madeline Albright has already said that the sanctions on
Yugoslavia will
not end, even with a change in the government there, until every
demand
of the U.S. is fulfilled
It's been ten death-giving years in Iraq and finally we now see
France, the
Russian Federation, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates flying
food and
doctors and supplies to help relieve the suffering of the Iraqi
people.
We have to reach out to nations everywhere, particularly the
poorer
nations of the world, to unify against this type of aggression.
What is your opinion about the proceedings of the
International
Tribunal for the War Crimes Committed on the territory of
former
Yugoslavia in the Hague?
The indictments of Milosevic and other Yugsolav officials were
before the
same International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia--a body
that is
unlawful. If you want a world based on principle and law it has
to be
abolished.
The U.N. Charter doesn't provide for an international criminal
tribunal
focused on a single country or a number of countries. The
Security Council
has no power to create such a court, which is used primarily by
the U.S. to
pursue its enemies. That's war by other means, pure and simple.
The countries that convened the U.N.--particularly the
victorious nations
from WWII--would never have formed it if they dreamed the U.N.
would
have an international criminal tribunal in which they could be
held
accountable. They don't mind prosecuting others, but they don't
intend to
be prosecuted themselves.
That's why the U.S. refuses to join in the treaty currently in
process. A
treaty is a current agreement--any nation can agree to one. But
if there's
to be an international criminal tribunal the U.N. can't create
it. It has to
be done by the agreement of nations--by a treaty which nations
have the
power to make. The U.S., however, won't sign such a treaty. It
has refused
to even consider it.
Mass public hearings of NATO war crimes against Yugoslavia
have
taken place in cities all over the world. Can you tell us
something more
about the aims of those actions?
The IAC in New York was the sponsor of a wide-ranging series of
evidentiary-gathering hearings all over the world about war
crimes against
Yugoslavia. The U.S. was charged, along with the United Kingdom,
Germany, and other NATO countries that participated in voting
for
NATO's involvement or in providing arms or airbases or other
logistical
support for the assault on Yugoslavia.
The evidence was gathered from all over the world, including
Yugoslavia.
It was considered by judges from many nations--non-governmental
lay
people. All of the defendants were found guilty of all charges.
They
included Nuremberg Principle violations of crimes against peace,
war
crimes and crimes against humanity. They also comprised Geneva
Convention prohibitions against assaults on civilians-- making
civilians
the direct objects of attack--assaults on facilities that are
essential to
civilian lives, and assaults on inherently dangerous facilities.
They were
found guilty of virtually every war crime on the books.
Is there any way to stop the process of international
lawlessness that we
are witnessing today?
There's obviously no easy way, but that doesn't mean the
struggle is
hopeless. There's rarely been in history such a concentration of
power in
the hands of such a comparatively small part of the world's
population,
particularly the U.S. There's never been such a concentration of
power
and monopoly of military technology and sophisticated weaponry.
This
includes nuclear arms and the capacity to destroy whole
populations.
There's also never been such a monopoly of the means of
communication.
The U.S. government's control of the international media is in
fact
unprecedented. This can be devastating because people don't know
what to
think--they're not encouraged to think, they're not given the
facts. The
U.S. can reach into a country and brainwash people everywhere.
Someone can be demonized without being heard in their own
defense, and
the truth can never be found by looking at a television screen.
So we live
under this terrible monopoly of power and communications, and
economic
power too with the rich getting richer and the poor getting
poorer.
It's going to take enormous courage and sacrifice, as well as
great
imagination and discipline in forms of organizing and unifying.
We have to
struggle with all our might to unite worldwide resistance to
domination and
exploitation. Power is in the people. The question is one of
will,
understanding, courage, commitment and sacrifice. If the people
can unify
we will overcome.
What was the role of the media in the Yugoslav crisis?
The U.S./NATO bombing of Yugoslavia was devastating, but the
function of
the Western media has probably been more harmful. The power of
the
big-business media to shape opinion internationally--in the
U.S., in
Western Europe and other parts of the world--is just astounding
in how
effectively it was used to demonize Slavic peoples, especially
the Serbs of
Yugoslavia.
It takes a long time to unlearn prejudices. Once they are
implanted they
become hard to root out. We implanted huge racial prejudices in
the U.S.
to justify slavery, and we still find it's a lot harder than
weeding the garden
to get the racists out.
People of African descent in our country have been demonized
like the
Serbs, and the racists are still everywhere. The media create
prejudices
and "demons" by simply repeating stories night after night on
television
and radio, in the newspapers and magazines, and every place
else.
Within Serbia and Montenegro you can see how divisive the media
was and
how demoralizing it can be to see what others are saying about
you. Before
the bombing I was there. I could see the effects of the
sanctions, coupled
with the effect on the people of seeing on foreign television
the prejudices
being stirred up against them.
It makes you feel like you're alone in the world and nobody
loves you. But
many many people love Yugoslavia. We love the people there; we
remember how courageous you've been. We know and are inspired by
your
fierce courage and strength, how you resisted the Nazis and what
a price
you paid for it. The media can make you doubt even your own soul
and
inner strength, but that doesn't mean their divisive tactics
will always
continue to work.
How do you evaluate the role of the United Nations in
the framework of the so-called new world order?
We hope that the U.N. will become independent and act more
objectively,
since we need it. Right now it's pretty much the captive of the
U.S., but it
doesn't always have to be that way.
It's harmful to every human being on earth for the U.N. to be
that way,
including the people of the U.S. This is true because when you
realize what
your country has done, and continues to do around the world, it
destroys
your own spirit if you don't resist. It also puts you in
jeopardy since it's
getting harder for U.S. citizens to travel abroad. We're not
received with
open arms in many parts of the world.
We have to work to make the U.N. more effective even though, as
we saw
with Yugoslavia, it was more independent than NATO. The U.S., in
fact,
didn't go to the U.N. because it could not, as it did with Iraq,
unite that body
to support the aggression on your country.
It did that easily with NATO, but in doing so it caused NATO to
violate not
only the North Atlantic Treaty but also the U.N. Charter.
Nevertheless,
the U.N. should not have permitted that. We need an independent
reformed U.N. that abolishes the Security Council and that
empowers
self-financing. As long as the U.N. is dependent on
contributions from
countries like the U.S. it will be hard to function since it
will never know
whether its going to get its money or not.
How would you define the policy of sanctions and complete
international
isolation of those countries that want to find their own way
to the future,
and what are its consequences?
Comprehensive general sanctions that impact on the economy of a
nation
need to be seen as a weapon of mass destruction. They hit poor
people
hardest and first, and they're genocidal.
If that can't be seen from the history of Iraq then we can't see
anything.
Sanctions have killed more than a million and a half people
there--mostly children. The second largest age group was the
elderly. The
people who are most vulnerable to sickness and weakness and who
need
nutrition are the ones who die first.
Control through the threat of sanctions exceeds any control
achieved by
the actual application since you can terrorize a country just by
threatening
sanctions. This is because people don't want to suffer as
they've seen
others suffer.
It's therefore imperative that we abolish the use of economic
sanctions.
When you think about it, you can't sanction a rich country
because they'll
laugh all the way to the bank. They'll have plenty of food, oil,
soap
powder--whatever is needed. You can't sanction a country that
has the
physical power to transport the goods and services that it needs
from other
places. Only "weak" countries--those that can't resist
militarily or
compete economically--will be victimized by sanctions.
(1. continua)
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunita:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad187941/www.ecircle.it
Crisis in Yugoslavia:
Interview with
Ramsey Clark
Founder of the International
Action Center
Former United States
Attorney General
October 6, 2000
New York City, U.S.A.
[This following interview was to be
translated and published in the daily
newspaper Dan in Podgorica,
Montenegro. Dan published a
Serbo-Croatian edition of the IAC's
book, NATO in the Balkans. ]
After the destruction of the
bipolar structure of the
international community the USA
has played the main role on the
world political scene. What is the
essence of their political strategy
towards Europe, and what is the
role of the U.S. in the events now
unfolding in Yugoslavia?
The policies of the U.S., since the end of the Cold War are
complicated
and vast. They involve an intent to dominate and the use of
international
organizations to advance U.S. economic and geopolitical
interests. They
also include the conversion of NATO into a surrogate military
police force
for globalization and U.S. world economic domination.
Which factors were prevailing in the dissolution of
Yugoslavia -
internal or external ones?
The great tragedy of Yugoslavia in the last decade of the 20th
Century has
not been one of individual leadership. It's been the deliberate
dismantling
of Yugoslavia, which is one of the few countries in the world
formed on an
idea. Most are formed on a purely power basis. But the idea of
Yugoslavia
was that with all the diversity, with all the human problems and
poverty,
only in unity--through federation--could you have sovereignty,
and
independent economic development based on local interests rather
than on
foreign exploitation.
Yugoslavia showed it could work, even under extreme difficulty
during the
Cold War and between World War 1 and World War 2. It's probably
the
only thing that can work for the welfare of the people there.
Yugoslavia was deliberately dismantled. It continues to be
further broken
apart by U.S. and other foreign interests who want to divide and
conquer
the country economically. They want to exploit its resources,
its people, its
markets; and the consequences have been a human disaster from
Slovenia
to Macedonia.
What's needed is a larger Balkan federation that includes more
than just
the six former republics. But what you have is the
disintegration of even
those. Ninety percent of trade, commercial and economic activity
of the six
republics was internal in 1990. No republic is sufficient by
itself to survive
as a strong independent sovereign nation or people.
The breaking up of Yugoslavia is a tragedy from many standpoints
and the
tragedy isn't over.
What was the role of the Pentagon in the destabilization and
final
dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
The Pentagon is the military arm of U.S. policy. It doesn't
dictate policy
but implements it. Both policymaking and the means for
implementing it
are considerably bigger than the Pentagon.
One the most direct roles of the Pentagon was the genocidal
bombing of
Yugoslavia. Those were Pentagon planes up there. A few of them
might
have been British or from some other NATO country, but the
Pentagon
was overwhelmingly responsible for the planes and the targets
chosen, as
well as for the destruction and many people killed.
Washington wanted NATO in there as an umbrella to deflect anger
at the
U.S. They wanted young people from the European NATO countries
to be
the enforcers on the ground. The Clinton White House doesn't
want U.S.
soldiers to come in harms way--it could cause protests in the
streets.
Because of this the Pentagon was able to carry out the
aggression against
Yugoslavia and cause great destruction with virtually no U.S.
casualties.
It's easy when your planes are flying so high that it become
hard to get hit.
You don't ever set foot on the soil but you send missiles and
planes that
bomb away overwhelmingly at civilian targets.
It was a staggering disaster for Serbia and Montenegro and the
Kosovo
area of Serbia. It was a disaster for all the peoples there--all
of them
suffered.
There's been a deliberate policy--and the Pentagon played a role
in
this--to set Muslim against Orthodox Christian Serbs. The idea
of having
Slavic peoples and Muslim peoples--even though the Muslims in
Yugoslavia are Slavs--fight each other is something that we've
seen and
its one of the great dangers. When you think about Bosnia the
Muslims and
the Orthodox Serbs suffered terribly, and they didn't benefit at
all in
Kosovo.
This policy has gone a long way. There were 25 million people in
Yugoslavia in 1990 and now within Montenegro and Serbia you have
just
around 11 million. And now within Serbia itself you have
attempts to divide
the nationalities into three or four different sections by
external forces
that are pressing them to divide and spin off.
What do you think about the expansion of the NATO alliance to
the
Eastern European countries and also to the former Soviet
Republics?
NATO itself is one of the most dangerous international
organizations that
exists. Before any expansion into Eastern Europe NATO involved
the
great colonial powers. It involved rich countries and almost
totally white
Caucasian young men who are still a very small part of the
world's
population.
The NATO countries have by far the largest and richest armies
and the
most advanced weaponry and technology, primarily from the U.S.
NATO is
a threat to the vast majority of the population of the
world--the beautiful
darker-skinned people, and others. They seem to be natural born
killers
when you look at the insensitivity with which they unleash their
technology.
I remember a New York Times columnist talking about the bombing
last
year. I think he reflected exactly what the Pentagon or what
NATO was
saying: "Surrender or we'll destroy you. If you want to be
bombed back to
1990, 1750 or 1372 we can do that, pick your date. You'd better
surrender or
we'll level you."
Is there any justification for the aggression of the world?s
most powerful
countries against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
Of course not--not against Yugoslavia or any other country. If
we can't
find countries that will stand up against such aggression our
situation and
our future is going to be a human disaster. Look at how long
it's taken other
countries to begin to stand up for Iraq.
Yugoslavians know better than others what it's like to have a
high tech
all-out aerial bombardment of your country. Iraq was devastated
by
110,000 aerial sorties--88,500 tons of bombs, which was the
equivalent of
7-1/2 Hiroshimas, but most countries didn't really stand up for
Iraq. Only
now within the last few weeks have foreign countries started to
break the
blockade, which has killed a million and a half people.
The blockade against Iraq--though more severe--was the same type
of
sanctions that were imposed on Yugoslavia. U.S. Secretary of
State
Madeline Albright has already said that the sanctions on
Yugoslavia will
not end, even with a change in the government there, until every
demand
of the U.S. is fulfilled
It's been ten death-giving years in Iraq and finally we now see
France, the
Russian Federation, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates flying
food and
doctors and supplies to help relieve the suffering of the Iraqi
people.
We have to reach out to nations everywhere, particularly the
poorer
nations of the world, to unify against this type of aggression.
What is your opinion about the proceedings of the
International
Tribunal for the War Crimes Committed on the territory of
former
Yugoslavia in the Hague?
The indictments of Milosevic and other Yugsolav officials were
before the
same International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia--a body
that is
unlawful. If you want a world based on principle and law it has
to be
abolished.
The U.N. Charter doesn't provide for an international criminal
tribunal
focused on a single country or a number of countries. The
Security Council
has no power to create such a court, which is used primarily by
the U.S. to
pursue its enemies. That's war by other means, pure and simple.
The countries that convened the U.N.--particularly the
victorious nations
from WWII--would never have formed it if they dreamed the U.N.
would
have an international criminal tribunal in which they could be
held
accountable. They don't mind prosecuting others, but they don't
intend to
be prosecuted themselves.
That's why the U.S. refuses to join in the treaty currently in
process. A
treaty is a current agreement--any nation can agree to one. But
if there's
to be an international criminal tribunal the U.N. can't create
it. It has to
be done by the agreement of nations--by a treaty which nations
have the
power to make. The U.S., however, won't sign such a treaty. It
has refused
to even consider it.
Mass public hearings of NATO war crimes against Yugoslavia
have
taken place in cities all over the world. Can you tell us
something more
about the aims of those actions?
The IAC in New York was the sponsor of a wide-ranging series of
evidentiary-gathering hearings all over the world about war
crimes against
Yugoslavia. The U.S. was charged, along with the United Kingdom,
Germany, and other NATO countries that participated in voting
for
NATO's involvement or in providing arms or airbases or other
logistical
support for the assault on Yugoslavia.
The evidence was gathered from all over the world, including
Yugoslavia.
It was considered by judges from many nations--non-governmental
lay
people. All of the defendants were found guilty of all charges.
They
included Nuremberg Principle violations of crimes against peace,
war
crimes and crimes against humanity. They also comprised Geneva
Convention prohibitions against assaults on civilians-- making
civilians
the direct objects of attack--assaults on facilities that are
essential to
civilian lives, and assaults on inherently dangerous facilities.
They were
found guilty of virtually every war crime on the books.
Is there any way to stop the process of international
lawlessness that we
are witnessing today?
There's obviously no easy way, but that doesn't mean the
struggle is
hopeless. There's rarely been in history such a concentration of
power in
the hands of such a comparatively small part of the world's
population,
particularly the U.S. There's never been such a concentration of
power
and monopoly of military technology and sophisticated weaponry.
This
includes nuclear arms and the capacity to destroy whole
populations.
There's also never been such a monopoly of the means of
communication.
The U.S. government's control of the international media is in
fact
unprecedented. This can be devastating because people don't know
what to
think--they're not encouraged to think, they're not given the
facts. The
U.S. can reach into a country and brainwash people everywhere.
Someone can be demonized without being heard in their own
defense, and
the truth can never be found by looking at a television screen.
So we live
under this terrible monopoly of power and communications, and
economic
power too with the rich getting richer and the poor getting
poorer.
It's going to take enormous courage and sacrifice, as well as
great
imagination and discipline in forms of organizing and unifying.
We have to
struggle with all our might to unite worldwide resistance to
domination and
exploitation. Power is in the people. The question is one of
will,
understanding, courage, commitment and sacrifice. If the people
can unify
we will overcome.
What was the role of the media in the Yugoslav crisis?
The U.S./NATO bombing of Yugoslavia was devastating, but the
function of
the Western media has probably been more harmful. The power of
the
big-business media to shape opinion internationally--in the
U.S., in
Western Europe and other parts of the world--is just astounding
in how
effectively it was used to demonize Slavic peoples, especially
the Serbs of
Yugoslavia.
It takes a long time to unlearn prejudices. Once they are
implanted they
become hard to root out. We implanted huge racial prejudices in
the U.S.
to justify slavery, and we still find it's a lot harder than
weeding the garden
to get the racists out.
People of African descent in our country have been demonized
like the
Serbs, and the racists are still everywhere. The media create
prejudices
and "demons" by simply repeating stories night after night on
television
and radio, in the newspapers and magazines, and every place
else.
Within Serbia and Montenegro you can see how divisive the media
was and
how demoralizing it can be to see what others are saying about
you. Before
the bombing I was there. I could see the effects of the
sanctions, coupled
with the effect on the people of seeing on foreign television
the prejudices
being stirred up against them.
It makes you feel like you're alone in the world and nobody
loves you. But
many many people love Yugoslavia. We love the people there; we
remember how courageous you've been. We know and are inspired by
your
fierce courage and strength, how you resisted the Nazis and what
a price
you paid for it. The media can make you doubt even your own soul
and
inner strength, but that doesn't mean their divisive tactics
will always
continue to work.
How do you evaluate the role of the United Nations in
the framework of the so-called new world order?
We hope that the U.N. will become independent and act more
objectively,
since we need it. Right now it's pretty much the captive of the
U.S., but it
doesn't always have to be that way.
It's harmful to every human being on earth for the U.N. to be
that way,
including the people of the U.S. This is true because when you
realize what
your country has done, and continues to do around the world, it
destroys
your own spirit if you don't resist. It also puts you in
jeopardy since it's
getting harder for U.S. citizens to travel abroad. We're not
received with
open arms in many parts of the world.
We have to work to make the U.N. more effective even though, as
we saw
with Yugoslavia, it was more independent than NATO. The U.S., in
fact,
didn't go to the U.N. because it could not, as it did with Iraq,
unite that body
to support the aggression on your country.
It did that easily with NATO, but in doing so it caused NATO to
violate not
only the North Atlantic Treaty but also the U.N. Charter.
Nevertheless,
the U.N. should not have permitted that. We need an independent
reformed U.N. that abolishes the Security Council and that
empowers
self-financing. As long as the U.N. is dependent on
contributions from
countries like the U.S. it will be hard to function since it
will never know
whether its going to get its money or not.
How would you define the policy of sanctions and complete
international
isolation of those countries that want to find their own way
to the future,
and what are its consequences?
Comprehensive general sanctions that impact on the economy of a
nation
need to be seen as a weapon of mass destruction. They hit poor
people
hardest and first, and they're genocidal.
If that can't be seen from the history of Iraq then we can't see
anything.
Sanctions have killed more than a million and a half people
there--mostly children. The second largest age group was the
elderly. The
people who are most vulnerable to sickness and weakness and who
need
nutrition are the ones who die first.
Control through the threat of sanctions exceeds any control
achieved by
the actual application since you can terrorize a country just by
threatening
sanctions. This is because people don't want to suffer as
they've seen
others suffer.
It's therefore imperative that we abolish the use of economic
sanctions.
When you think about it, you can't sanction a rich country
because they'll
laugh all the way to the bank. They'll have plenty of food, oil,
soap
powder--whatever is needed. You can't sanction a country that
has the
physical power to transport the goods and services that it needs
from other
places. Only "weak" countries--those that can't resist
militarily or
compete economically--will be victimized by sanctions.
(1. continua)
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eCircle ti offre una nuova opportunita:
Il tuo sondaggio sul web sugli argomenti che preferisci
Facile da gestire e con rappresentazioni grafiche dei risultati.
E' facile, veloce e gratuito!
Da oggi su
http://www.ecircle.de/ad187941/www.ecircle.it
Does FR Yugoslavia, consisting of Serbia and
Montenegro, fit into the new political concept of the
so-called international community regarding relations
in Southeastern Europe?
Yugoslavia, consisting of Serbia and Montenegro fits into the
geopolitical
plans of the U.S., and to a lesser degree NATO countries,
because it's
there, strategically located, and this has to be addressed.
U.S./NATO plans involve the division and subjugation of
countries in the
region. Dividing them makes them more easily controlled and
exploited,
and the future will be greater poverty.
The per capita income of the six former republics of the SFRY is
today
less than half of what it was ten years ago. They're half as
well off
collectively. Serbia and Montenegro are even worse than that.
The same is generally true though with most of Eastern Europe,
so we
shouldn't be mislead. Bulgaria today is worse off economically.
Poland
seems to be doing better to many people, but per capita income
there is
40% of what it was, maybe less. The Russian Federation has
around 30%
less per capita income than in 1990. This has been a real human
disaster.
It's clear that the new concept for the Balkans is to divide,
exploit and
further impoverish. The idea that there will be more real aid
once a
country conforms to the demands of the U.S. and its
International
Monetary Fund is contrary to everything that's ever happened
after they
intervened. This is true whether it's little Grenada, Panama,
Viet Nam,
Nicaragua, or any other country. They have been continuously
harassed, or
kept under direct and/or indirect sanctions and further
impoverished.
How do you see the demands of the leadership of
Montenegro for a "redefinition of relations? in the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
Basically, only the people directly involved can decide the
details of their
relationship. What I passionately believe is that without a
strong
federation not only of Montenegro and Serbia but of the six
former
republics and beyond that, the region will remain poor. It will
remain
foreign dominated and become more so economically.
It will be afflicted with violence particularly between Muslims
and Slavs.
There are more than a 300 million Slavs in the world, and we've
seen the
deliberate fomenting of violence between Slavs and Muslims who
number
one billion. We've seen it in Afghanistan, Dagistan and Chechnya
and in
some of the larger predominantly Muslim republics on the
southern tier of
the former Soviet Union, and of course in Bosnia, Kosovo and
throughout
the Balkans.
Without unity, as we said in our revolutionary war, "we'll
either hang
together or we'll hang separately," even though, since then, we
have gotten
"too big for our britches." [Transcriber's note: this could be
translated as
being too big and arrogant. Britches mean, literally,
"pants."--PC]
The problem of Kosovo as a factor of destabilization of
Yugoslavia -
has it had, in the last two years, an internal character or
was it created
by the USA and Germany?
The entire disintegration of Yugoslavia has been caused
overwhelmingly
by external forces. They are numerous, but the two principal
violators are
Germany and the United States, and the consequences for the
region have
been a human disaster.
Kosovo itself, which is now under NATO occupation, had every
opportunity
to expect to live in peace, grow in prosperity and develop its
peoples and
resources for its own good. This was true until foreign
influences set the
people against themselves, and today you can't find anyone who
has
benefited.
You may think at the moment if you're KLA that you might be on
top, but
on top of what and at what cost? How many members of your
families did
you loose? How many homes did your friends loose? How long will
it take
you to get back to where you were if you ever do, and is this a
humanely
acceptable way to do it even if you could?
Tens of thousands of Serbs, Roma and others have been ethnically
cleansed from Kosovo, under the watchful eyes of the mighty
occupation
armies. This shows that NATO didn't intervene there for
humanitarian
reasons and that this claim is hypocritical.
Was the Rambouillet agreement an acceptable solution
for the Kosovo problem? Do you think that by accepting
it, FR Yugoslavia could have prevented the aggression
against it? What is the main effect of the Dayton
agreement? Has it solved the problems in the Balkans
or has it meant the establishment of U.S. domination
on the territories of the former Yugoslavia?
It's sad to see countries or peoples bullied into agreements
that are on
their face moral outrages.
When I think of the Oslo Accords and the Palestinian people who
are
suffering from violence today even more than the Yugoslavs, it
breaks my
heart. Since the Oslo Accords there's been nothing but
deterioration
politically, socially, and economically for the Palestinians.
Yet a coalition
of powerful interests forced them into it just as they forced
Yugoslavia into
the Dayton Accords. These accords, including the Rambouillet
scheme,
were unnatural "agreements" that would foment violence. They
also
violated the idea of peoples' independence and the sovereignty
of their
nations.
Any country that has a large foreign military population on its
soil is not
free--that is a truism. And both of those accords contemplated
foreign
troops on Yugoslav soil. But they ought to be out of there, just
as U.S.
money ought to be out of politics there. If the future of
Yugoslavia is to be
determined by the financing of political parties by the United
States, then
you might as well give up and deed the country over to General
Motors,
Coca Cola and Burger King.
What was the role of the USA in the military strenghtening of
Croatia,
in Operation Storm, which had as a consequence a massive
exodus of
Serbian people from Krajina?
In time we'll know a lot more, but we know from Richard
Holbrook's
autobiographical account of that period that while Washington
was saying
to Croatia "don't do it," Holbrook and others in Zagreb were
saying "drive
the Serbs out." How much protest did you hear internationally in
what was
the biggest single ethnic cleansing in the last 50 years in the
Balkans?
None! The cleansing from Krajina of the Serb population was in
fact
ignored or applauded internationally. So it's another interplay
between
media presentation and the use of force for the West to have its
way.
The Twentieth Century has been marked by many different
ideas, but a
majority of them have not been confirmed by history. Why do
you think?
Populations everywhere are manipulated by ideas that often have
no
validity. There's a French saying that I've always liked,
"Nothing is so
cruel on Earth as the murder of a beautiful idea by a brutal
gang of facts."
If we look at the facts you'll see that many of the fictions
that have been
imposed on people are false and harmful.
Let's talk about democracy, which is a difficult concept. People
think the
U.S. is the greatest example of democracy. But the U.S. is not a
democracy
at all; it's a pure plutocracy--a government of wealth.
Elections here
have nothing to do with the will of the people. They are in fact
a minor
contest between representatives of the plutocracy vying for
power; the
poor of the country are left out.
I'm not talking about just the billions of dollars that have
been spent on
political campaigns. The U.S. has spent almost as much on the
election
campaign in Yugoslavia as it has on its own presidential
campaign this
year. That's an economic fact that ought to be investigated.
You're not free
if a foreign power is buying your elections. The same is true of
us in the
U.S.; we can't be free as long as rich capitalists continue to
buy our
elections, and of course that's exactly what they do.
You might not have heard of the presidential candidate Ralph
Nader. He
has worked in the interests of consumers, poor people, and the
ecology for
years. But he doesn't get to participate in the debates, and he
won't get a
significant vote. If by democracy you mean government should
follow the
needs and interests of the people then the U.S. is not a
democracy even
with elections held here periodically.
Washington has, moreover, used elections to take over other
countries.
They basically stole Nicaragua from the Sandinista government by
pumping in money to the opposition, unifying it, and sending in
death squad
terrorists--not unlike the KLA. They were trained and financed
to destroy
villages and kill Nicaraguans. The U.S. then told them that if
they wanted
peace and "prosperity" they had to elect the opposition. In the
meantime,
the media was given over to the opposition and they were given
money and
other communications resources. It worked, the opposition won,
and now
the Nicaraguans are living in abject poverty.
We also tried to steal Angola through the ballot box--through an
abuse of
democracy. We told the Dos Santos government that they had to
have an
election. Then we told them they couldn't hold the voting until
they
dismantled two-thirds of the army. They did it and the
government won at
the polls. But the U.S.-backed opposition led by Jonas Savimbi
immediately attacked with an enormous military force and overran
two-thirds of the country, which the government is still
fighting to win
back.
We're told that there's only one idea in economic life that
works and that's
capitalism. Every country has to convert to capitalism and do
what the
World Bank and the IMF says. You've got to privatize--open up to
"free
trade." But the countries that have done that have been
absolutely
devastated.
In the former Soviet Union, for example, the people there had
jobs, homes,
medical care, education, a decent economy, but now they've lost
all of that.
They have no health care system, and their schools are falling
apart. They
have few jobs, lost their homes. They have had to sell their
private
possessions just to make out. The country is an economic basket
case.
The Ukraine is worse, and the same is true of countries in the
Western
Hemisphere. We take a country like Peru and we tell it to borrow
money
from the IMF and privatize--to do what the World Bank says. But
the
poor have gotten poorer there, and President Fujimori sits on
the necks of
the people with his economic policies, and police and military
power
backed by Washington.
We have to examine these ideas for ourselves and decide what's
best for
the children. But we have to do it in the face of a media that
tries to tell us
there's only one way--and with nuclear intimidation and the
threat of
starvation from sanctions hanging over our heads.
When the U.S. government can't manipulate elections--and they
are
masters at it--they'll instigate a military coup like they did
in Guatemala
in the 1950s, in Chile in the 1970s and in Haiti in 1991, to
name a few
places.
What did the 20th Century bring in terms of the
development of human civilization, especially for the
peoples of the Balkans?
The 20th Century has brought the most uncivilized and violent
acts of
human history. There has never been before such disasters caused
by
human conduct. There were the two world wars, and the Cold War
arms
race, which impoverished people. There were also the bloody
fights that
came from the neo-colonial drive to divide and conquer Africa,
Asia and
the Balkans.
The Balkans had many problems in the 1900s. But the culture was
still
intact in most places despite the history of oppression by the
Ottoman
Empire, the Austrio-Hungary Empire and all the rest. These were
rich
cultures; people knew what and who they were. They loved their
traditions,
had their own art, music, literature, meaning to life, religious
faiths. They
had their own philosophy, and could sit around in the evenings
or on a
bridge across the Drina to talk about life and love and things.
Today there's chaos, the disintegration of institutions, random
violence,
impoverishment and insecurity. But you have your strength, your
people
and your history of resistance. If you unite you have a part of
the earth
that's beautiful, that provides abundant food, natural resources
and other
essentials of life. If you organize it can be used for your own
well being.
Your future is largely in your hands, but without unity you will
be turned
against each other.
What can we expect in the 21st Century?
What we're seeing is the spread of fomented violence by those
who want to
divide and weaken. Just look at India, with all its history and
more than a
billion people, with the Tamils in the south and the terrible
violence that's
going on there. This 70-million strong population of Tamils is
struggling
for survival from Sri Lanka up into southern India.
If you go north you find the Casmiris and Pakistanis and the
Indian
government fighting in some of the most spectacularly beautiful
countries
in the world. It's hard to find a region there where you don't
have conflicts
between Muslims and Hindus, Tamils and Buddhists. You can see
conflicts
all over the world.
In South Africa we hope there will be unity. The government
there still
faces terrible risks, but under the current leadership--with its
many heroic
figures--they've been able to hold their country together.
In West Africa you see bloodletting everywhere much of which is
promoted
from abroad. We all know about Rwanda and the Hutus and the
struggle
for the Congo.
It must be recognized that if you let foreign governments choose
your
leaders you will be in for bad times. That's exactly what has
been
happening in the last half of the 20th Century.
The U.S. chose the Shah for Iran; he was literally imposed. The
CIA said
it was their greatest accomplishment. The Shah reigned for 25
years, but
the people finally rose up and threw him out when they couldn't
stand it
any more. Over 35,000 people were killed by the Shah's
U.S.-trained
soldiers and secret police. That's what letting the U.S. choose
their leader
did for the Iranis after a democratically-elected government was
overthrown.
In the Congo, a huge country with enormous natural resources,
Patrice
Lumumba was elected after independence from a colonial power.
But he
was soon murdered. His body was found in the trunk of a CIA car.
Mobutu
was then put in power, and from 1962 until 1997 the people of
the Congo
were ravaged. Today, you have armed soldiers from 12 different
countries
fighting in the Congo, some of them in the interests of U.S. big
business.
In our hemisphere Salvadore Allende was elected president of
Chile. He
was a medical doctor who wanted to heal the sick in a country
that never
had a rural health care program. He started to install them and
to make
other progressive changes when the U.S. overthrew him in a coup
that led
to his death. Allende was replaced by General Augusto Pinochet,,
one of
the major petty tyrants of recent history. More than 5,000
Chileans were
killed under the U.S.-backed dictator.
Then there was the elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in
Guatemanala,
who was overthrown by the U.S. government. Tens of thousands
died as a
result, many of them indigenous people of Mayan descent.
It's imperative that people overcome the differences in their
communities
and regions and unite to protect themselves from foreign
domination,
which will only mean more violence, suffering and poverty.
What would you like to say to the people of Yugoslavia at
this moment?
This time is critical to the future of the heroic peoples of the
former
Yugoslavia and the entire region. You are peoples with deep and
rich
cultures who are being eaten up by foreign powers that are
skilled at
fomenting internal and external violence.
The imperative need for your children and the survival of all
that your
predecessors and ancestors brought to you depends on the ability
to unite
and resist foreign intrusion and domination.
It's an extremely difficult time, but you have to resist with
all your
strength the efforts by rich countries to control your destiny,
such as the
U.S., Germany, and some of your richer neighbors in Europe.
Stronger ties are needed with your immediate neighbors and the
poorer
countries in eastern Europe as well as the Slavic people who
resisted the
U.S. in the Cold War and who today remain the enemy of the U.S.
and
other NATO powers.
With such unity you can triumph and inspire us all.
posted 9 Oct 2000
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
web: www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
(2. fine; fonte: http://www.iacenter.org/yugo_rc.htm )
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Da oggi su eCircle - Filesharing.
Puoi disporre in ogni gruppo di 20 MB
per documenti, file musicali, films e foto.
Condividili con i soci della tua communita!
http://www.ecircle.de/ad187852/www.ecircle.it
Montenegro, fit into the new political concept of the
so-called international community regarding relations
in Southeastern Europe?
Yugoslavia, consisting of Serbia and Montenegro fits into the
geopolitical
plans of the U.S., and to a lesser degree NATO countries,
because it's
there, strategically located, and this has to be addressed.
U.S./NATO plans involve the division and subjugation of
countries in the
region. Dividing them makes them more easily controlled and
exploited,
and the future will be greater poverty.
The per capita income of the six former republics of the SFRY is
today
less than half of what it was ten years ago. They're half as
well off
collectively. Serbia and Montenegro are even worse than that.
The same is generally true though with most of Eastern Europe,
so we
shouldn't be mislead. Bulgaria today is worse off economically.
Poland
seems to be doing better to many people, but per capita income
there is
40% of what it was, maybe less. The Russian Federation has
around 30%
less per capita income than in 1990. This has been a real human
disaster.
It's clear that the new concept for the Balkans is to divide,
exploit and
further impoverish. The idea that there will be more real aid
once a
country conforms to the demands of the U.S. and its
International
Monetary Fund is contrary to everything that's ever happened
after they
intervened. This is true whether it's little Grenada, Panama,
Viet Nam,
Nicaragua, or any other country. They have been continuously
harassed, or
kept under direct and/or indirect sanctions and further
impoverished.
How do you see the demands of the leadership of
Montenegro for a "redefinition of relations? in the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia?
Basically, only the people directly involved can decide the
details of their
relationship. What I passionately believe is that without a
strong
federation not only of Montenegro and Serbia but of the six
former
republics and beyond that, the region will remain poor. It will
remain
foreign dominated and become more so economically.
It will be afflicted with violence particularly between Muslims
and Slavs.
There are more than a 300 million Slavs in the world, and we've
seen the
deliberate fomenting of violence between Slavs and Muslims who
number
one billion. We've seen it in Afghanistan, Dagistan and Chechnya
and in
some of the larger predominantly Muslim republics on the
southern tier of
the former Soviet Union, and of course in Bosnia, Kosovo and
throughout
the Balkans.
Without unity, as we said in our revolutionary war, "we'll
either hang
together or we'll hang separately," even though, since then, we
have gotten
"too big for our britches." [Transcriber's note: this could be
translated as
being too big and arrogant. Britches mean, literally,
"pants."--PC]
The problem of Kosovo as a factor of destabilization of
Yugoslavia -
has it had, in the last two years, an internal character or
was it created
by the USA and Germany?
The entire disintegration of Yugoslavia has been caused
overwhelmingly
by external forces. They are numerous, but the two principal
violators are
Germany and the United States, and the consequences for the
region have
been a human disaster.
Kosovo itself, which is now under NATO occupation, had every
opportunity
to expect to live in peace, grow in prosperity and develop its
peoples and
resources for its own good. This was true until foreign
influences set the
people against themselves, and today you can't find anyone who
has
benefited.
You may think at the moment if you're KLA that you might be on
top, but
on top of what and at what cost? How many members of your
families did
you loose? How many homes did your friends loose? How long will
it take
you to get back to where you were if you ever do, and is this a
humanely
acceptable way to do it even if you could?
Tens of thousands of Serbs, Roma and others have been ethnically
cleansed from Kosovo, under the watchful eyes of the mighty
occupation
armies. This shows that NATO didn't intervene there for
humanitarian
reasons and that this claim is hypocritical.
Was the Rambouillet agreement an acceptable solution
for the Kosovo problem? Do you think that by accepting
it, FR Yugoslavia could have prevented the aggression
against it? What is the main effect of the Dayton
agreement? Has it solved the problems in the Balkans
or has it meant the establishment of U.S. domination
on the territories of the former Yugoslavia?
It's sad to see countries or peoples bullied into agreements
that are on
their face moral outrages.
When I think of the Oslo Accords and the Palestinian people who
are
suffering from violence today even more than the Yugoslavs, it
breaks my
heart. Since the Oslo Accords there's been nothing but
deterioration
politically, socially, and economically for the Palestinians.
Yet a coalition
of powerful interests forced them into it just as they forced
Yugoslavia into
the Dayton Accords. These accords, including the Rambouillet
scheme,
were unnatural "agreements" that would foment violence. They
also
violated the idea of peoples' independence and the sovereignty
of their
nations.
Any country that has a large foreign military population on its
soil is not
free--that is a truism. And both of those accords contemplated
foreign
troops on Yugoslav soil. But they ought to be out of there, just
as U.S.
money ought to be out of politics there. If the future of
Yugoslavia is to be
determined by the financing of political parties by the United
States, then
you might as well give up and deed the country over to General
Motors,
Coca Cola and Burger King.
What was the role of the USA in the military strenghtening of
Croatia,
in Operation Storm, which had as a consequence a massive
exodus of
Serbian people from Krajina?
In time we'll know a lot more, but we know from Richard
Holbrook's
autobiographical account of that period that while Washington
was saying
to Croatia "don't do it," Holbrook and others in Zagreb were
saying "drive
the Serbs out." How much protest did you hear internationally in
what was
the biggest single ethnic cleansing in the last 50 years in the
Balkans?
None! The cleansing from Krajina of the Serb population was in
fact
ignored or applauded internationally. So it's another interplay
between
media presentation and the use of force for the West to have its
way.
The Twentieth Century has been marked by many different
ideas, but a
majority of them have not been confirmed by history. Why do
you think?
Populations everywhere are manipulated by ideas that often have
no
validity. There's a French saying that I've always liked,
"Nothing is so
cruel on Earth as the murder of a beautiful idea by a brutal
gang of facts."
If we look at the facts you'll see that many of the fictions
that have been
imposed on people are false and harmful.
Let's talk about democracy, which is a difficult concept. People
think the
U.S. is the greatest example of democracy. But the U.S. is not a
democracy
at all; it's a pure plutocracy--a government of wealth.
Elections here
have nothing to do with the will of the people. They are in fact
a minor
contest between representatives of the plutocracy vying for
power; the
poor of the country are left out.
I'm not talking about just the billions of dollars that have
been spent on
political campaigns. The U.S. has spent almost as much on the
election
campaign in Yugoslavia as it has on its own presidential
campaign this
year. That's an economic fact that ought to be investigated.
You're not free
if a foreign power is buying your elections. The same is true of
us in the
U.S.; we can't be free as long as rich capitalists continue to
buy our
elections, and of course that's exactly what they do.
You might not have heard of the presidential candidate Ralph
Nader. He
has worked in the interests of consumers, poor people, and the
ecology for
years. But he doesn't get to participate in the debates, and he
won't get a
significant vote. If by democracy you mean government should
follow the
needs and interests of the people then the U.S. is not a
democracy even
with elections held here periodically.
Washington has, moreover, used elections to take over other
countries.
They basically stole Nicaragua from the Sandinista government by
pumping in money to the opposition, unifying it, and sending in
death squad
terrorists--not unlike the KLA. They were trained and financed
to destroy
villages and kill Nicaraguans. The U.S. then told them that if
they wanted
peace and "prosperity" they had to elect the opposition. In the
meantime,
the media was given over to the opposition and they were given
money and
other communications resources. It worked, the opposition won,
and now
the Nicaraguans are living in abject poverty.
We also tried to steal Angola through the ballot box--through an
abuse of
democracy. We told the Dos Santos government that they had to
have an
election. Then we told them they couldn't hold the voting until
they
dismantled two-thirds of the army. They did it and the
government won at
the polls. But the U.S.-backed opposition led by Jonas Savimbi
immediately attacked with an enormous military force and overran
two-thirds of the country, which the government is still
fighting to win
back.
We're told that there's only one idea in economic life that
works and that's
capitalism. Every country has to convert to capitalism and do
what the
World Bank and the IMF says. You've got to privatize--open up to
"free
trade." But the countries that have done that have been
absolutely
devastated.
In the former Soviet Union, for example, the people there had
jobs, homes,
medical care, education, a decent economy, but now they've lost
all of that.
They have no health care system, and their schools are falling
apart. They
have few jobs, lost their homes. They have had to sell their
private
possessions just to make out. The country is an economic basket
case.
The Ukraine is worse, and the same is true of countries in the
Western
Hemisphere. We take a country like Peru and we tell it to borrow
money
from the IMF and privatize--to do what the World Bank says. But
the
poor have gotten poorer there, and President Fujimori sits on
the necks of
the people with his economic policies, and police and military
power
backed by Washington.
We have to examine these ideas for ourselves and decide what's
best for
the children. But we have to do it in the face of a media that
tries to tell us
there's only one way--and with nuclear intimidation and the
threat of
starvation from sanctions hanging over our heads.
When the U.S. government can't manipulate elections--and they
are
masters at it--they'll instigate a military coup like they did
in Guatemala
in the 1950s, in Chile in the 1970s and in Haiti in 1991, to
name a few
places.
What did the 20th Century bring in terms of the
development of human civilization, especially for the
peoples of the Balkans?
The 20th Century has brought the most uncivilized and violent
acts of
human history. There has never been before such disasters caused
by
human conduct. There were the two world wars, and the Cold War
arms
race, which impoverished people. There were also the bloody
fights that
came from the neo-colonial drive to divide and conquer Africa,
Asia and
the Balkans.
The Balkans had many problems in the 1900s. But the culture was
still
intact in most places despite the history of oppression by the
Ottoman
Empire, the Austrio-Hungary Empire and all the rest. These were
rich
cultures; people knew what and who they were. They loved their
traditions,
had their own art, music, literature, meaning to life, religious
faiths. They
had their own philosophy, and could sit around in the evenings
or on a
bridge across the Drina to talk about life and love and things.
Today there's chaos, the disintegration of institutions, random
violence,
impoverishment and insecurity. But you have your strength, your
people
and your history of resistance. If you unite you have a part of
the earth
that's beautiful, that provides abundant food, natural resources
and other
essentials of life. If you organize it can be used for your own
well being.
Your future is largely in your hands, but without unity you will
be turned
against each other.
What can we expect in the 21st Century?
What we're seeing is the spread of fomented violence by those
who want to
divide and weaken. Just look at India, with all its history and
more than a
billion people, with the Tamils in the south and the terrible
violence that's
going on there. This 70-million strong population of Tamils is
struggling
for survival from Sri Lanka up into southern India.
If you go north you find the Casmiris and Pakistanis and the
Indian
government fighting in some of the most spectacularly beautiful
countries
in the world. It's hard to find a region there where you don't
have conflicts
between Muslims and Hindus, Tamils and Buddhists. You can see
conflicts
all over the world.
In South Africa we hope there will be unity. The government
there still
faces terrible risks, but under the current leadership--with its
many heroic
figures--they've been able to hold their country together.
In West Africa you see bloodletting everywhere much of which is
promoted
from abroad. We all know about Rwanda and the Hutus and the
struggle
for the Congo.
It must be recognized that if you let foreign governments choose
your
leaders you will be in for bad times. That's exactly what has
been
happening in the last half of the 20th Century.
The U.S. chose the Shah for Iran; he was literally imposed. The
CIA said
it was their greatest accomplishment. The Shah reigned for 25
years, but
the people finally rose up and threw him out when they couldn't
stand it
any more. Over 35,000 people were killed by the Shah's
U.S.-trained
soldiers and secret police. That's what letting the U.S. choose
their leader
did for the Iranis after a democratically-elected government was
overthrown.
In the Congo, a huge country with enormous natural resources,
Patrice
Lumumba was elected after independence from a colonial power.
But he
was soon murdered. His body was found in the trunk of a CIA car.
Mobutu
was then put in power, and from 1962 until 1997 the people of
the Congo
were ravaged. Today, you have armed soldiers from 12 different
countries
fighting in the Congo, some of them in the interests of U.S. big
business.
In our hemisphere Salvadore Allende was elected president of
Chile. He
was a medical doctor who wanted to heal the sick in a country
that never
had a rural health care program. He started to install them and
to make
other progressive changes when the U.S. overthrew him in a coup
that led
to his death. Allende was replaced by General Augusto Pinochet,,
one of
the major petty tyrants of recent history. More than 5,000
Chileans were
killed under the U.S.-backed dictator.
Then there was the elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in
Guatemanala,
who was overthrown by the U.S. government. Tens of thousands
died as a
result, many of them indigenous people of Mayan descent.
It's imperative that people overcome the differences in their
communities
and regions and unite to protect themselves from foreign
domination,
which will only mean more violence, suffering and poverty.
What would you like to say to the people of Yugoslavia at
this moment?
This time is critical to the future of the heroic peoples of the
former
Yugoslavia and the entire region. You are peoples with deep and
rich
cultures who are being eaten up by foreign powers that are
skilled at
fomenting internal and external violence.
The imperative need for your children and the survival of all
that your
predecessors and ancestors brought to you depends on the ability
to unite
and resist foreign intrusion and domination.
It's an extremely difficult time, but you have to resist with
all your
strength the efforts by rich countries to control your destiny,
such as the
U.S., Germany, and some of your richer neighbors in Europe.
Stronger ties are needed with your immediate neighbors and the
poorer
countries in eastern Europe as well as the Slavic people who
resisted the
U.S. in the Cold War and who today remain the enemy of the U.S.
and
other NATO powers.
With such unity you can triumph and inspire us all.
posted 9 Oct 2000
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
web: www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT THE NEW SITE www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
(2. fine; fonte: http://www.iacenter.org/yugo_rc.htm )
---
Bollettino di controinformazione del
Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'"
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma vengono
fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al solo scopo di
segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only")
Per contributi e segnalazioni: jugocoord@...
*** QUESTO SERVIZIO E' ANCORA IN FASE SPERIMENTALE ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Da oggi su eCircle - Filesharing.
Puoi disporre in ogni gruppo di 20 MB
per documenti, file musicali, films e foto.
Condividili con i soci della tua communita!
http://www.ecircle.de/ad187852/www.ecircle.it
