Informazione
Milosevic "trial" synopses, October 1-15, 2003:
TRIBUNAL ATTEMPTS TO HIDE ITS SHAMEFUL FARCE FROM THE PUBLIC
---
An important LINK:
Dutch TV documentary on the Hague process, in two parts:
http://info.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/index.shtml?7738514+7738518+8048024
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100703.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 7, 2003
After nearly a 3 week break taken due to the continued illness of
President Milosevic the Hague Tribunal again resumed the so-called
"trial." President Milosevic is still ill, his blood pressure today
was measured to be 160 over 110 mm Hg.
The "trial" started off with Mr. Nice announcing that they would not
be hearing from Maj. Russo of the Canadian Armed Forces, because he
had decided not to come to the tribunal. According to Mr. Nice the
Office of the Prosecutor arranged his flight but when it came time to
leave, he simply decided not to get on the plane.
Then the so-called "presiding judge" Mr. May made a ruling regarding
the prosecution's September 23rd submission. The prosecution was
seeking to videotape examinations in chief on days when President
Milosevic is unable to attend due to illness. The so-called "trial
chamber" denied this request. The Prosecution had also sought to have
defense counsel imposed on President Milosevic, the "court" didn't
rule one way or the other on that. They simply said that they would
keep it under consideration.
The witness today was a Ms. Eva Tabo. Ms. Tabo is a demographer, and
an employee of the Office of the Prosecutor. She has worked for the
Prosecution since December of 2000.
Ms. Tabo wrote two reports. One report was on the displacement of
persons in the so-called "Milosevic case area." This report focused on
47 municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and highlighted 7
municipalities as case-studies. The other report dealt with the
so-called "Siege of Sarajevo" and the war-related mortalities in the
Sarajevo area.
President Milosevic denounced Ms. Tabo's reports as "a malicious
manipulation of statistics," and when one looks at the methods and
sources that she employed in order to write her reports it is obvious
that she is in fact making malicious manipulations of fact. Her
objective is clearly to demonize the Serbs, and to paint them as
aggressors against their own country.
First of all, in her report on displacement, she arrives at her
conclusions by taking the 1991 census and comparing it with OSCE voter
registration lists from 1997 and 1998. She concludes that anybody who
was in a different location in 1997-98 than they were in 1991 is a
refugee or an IDP.
It is useful at this point to remind ourselves of what a refugee is.
According to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
(the Refugee Convention), Article 1A(2), the term refugee is applied
to a person who owing to well founded fear of being persecuted for
reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular
social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his(/her)
nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to
avail himself (/herself) of the protection of his(/her) country; or
who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of
his(/her) former habitual residence as a result of such events, is
unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
In her report, Ms. Tabo counted migrant migrant workers as "refugees."
She counted citizens who were working abroad before the war in 1991,
and who were still working abroad in 1997-98 as refugees.
Her objective here can only be to falsely inflate the number of
refugees emanating from the so-called "Milosevic case area."
Even Mr. Robinson had trouble accepting that persons such as migrant
workers who were working abroad before the war even started could be
considered to be refugees. Mr. Robinson asked her if she was even
aware of what constitutes a refugee.
Ms. Tabo sheepishly responded by saying that she wasn't using any
"legal definition" to define refugees, but that for the purposes of
her report she was using a statistical definition of her own making.
Ms. Tabo eventually admitted that her report did not take into account
any of the reasons why her so-called "refugees" had left the country,
which means that according to the definition of a refugee used by
everybody else she has no basis for calling these people refugees.
As President Milosevic observed, if one employed Ms. Tabo's
definition, a tourist could be called a refugee.
Another problem is the question of IDPs. Ms. Tabo defined an IDP as
anybody who was living in one place at the time of the 1991 census and
was living in another place when they registered to vote in 1997-98.
A problem arises here because the information she is using is not
limited to the period of the war. People who moved before the war in
1991-92 and after the war between 1995 and 1997-98 are counted as IDP's
(or as refugees if they moved out of the country).
President Milosevic pointed out that there were massive migrations of
persons that took place after Dayton. He pointed to the example of the
Sarajevo Serbs, where 150,000 Serbs left Sarajevo after the end of the
war.
Ms. Tabo's data is not limited to the period of the war, nor does it
take into account any of the reasons why her so-called "refugees" or
"IDPs" moved from one place to the other. Many people moved solely
because of economic reasons yet in her reports they are considered to
be some sort of refugee or IDP.
Ms. Tabo, in her crusade to Satanize the Serbs, referred in court,
almost exclusively to municipalities in the Republika Srpska where the
Muslim declined and the Serb populations increased. The truth about
Bosnia is that 88.2% of the pre-war Serb population has left the B-H
Federation, and 95.5% of the pre-war Muslim population has left the
R.S. The differences in their respective migrations is less than 8%,
and not even Ms. Tabo's report, as misleading as it is, makes an
attempt to hide that, in fact that statistic is contained in her
report.
Ms. Tabo also grudgingly admitted to President Milosevic, during
cross-examination, that Serbia gave safe heaven to 70,000 Muslim
refugees from Bosnia.
Ms. Tabo's other report dealt with the so-called "Siege of Sarajevo"
and it's war related mortalities. For her data sources she extensively
relied on Muslim sources. She took the International Red Cross's
reports into account in her report and used them as one of 7 data
sources, but the other 6 sources were Muslim sources.
She admitted that because of her extensive reliance on Muslim sources
that her statistics could be prejudiced by any biases that the Muslims
had when collecting the data. Such as in the case of one of her
sources known as the "Household Survey," conducted by Muslim
researchers, in which Serbs were referred to simply as "the
aggressors."
Even though she extensively used Muslim sources she still had to admit
that the "vast majority of casualties in Sarajevo were combatants" and
not civilians. But because she relied so heavily on Muslim sources,
information about casualties among Serb civilians was not sufficiently
dealt with in her report.
At the end of the proceedings President Milosevic learned of a new
practice that will be employed by the prosecution. The appeals chamber
changed the rules and now the prosecution has the option of not
conducting the examination-in-chief.
This new practice goes even further than 92-bis. The prosecution
compiles a witness statement, then the prosecution writes the
witness's testimony for the witness, at that point the witness signs
his pre-written testimony and that counts as the evidence in chief. So
essentially the witness only has to come to court to be cross-examined.
This new practice is scandalous. First of all, it allows the
prosecution to present more "evidence" in less time. Essentially
meaning that the prosecution is producing "evidence" faster than the
defense can refute it. This practice is like to pouring water into
somebody's mouth, not allowing them to breathe, and waiting for them
to choke.
Secondly, it makes it extremely difficult for the public to follow the
"trial" because we won't have any idea what exactly it is that the
defense is trying to refute or accomplish while it is cross-examining
the witness. If we don't know what the evidence in chief is we won't be
able to understand what point defense is trying to make.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100803.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 8, 2003:
TRIBUNAL ATTEMPTS TO HIDE IT'S SHAMEFUL FARCE FROM THE PUBLIC
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
A new procedure was initiated at the Hague Tribunal today. Prosecution
witnesses can now give their examination-in-chief in whole or in part
via statements written for them by the prosecutor.
The witness doesn't write the statement that is used for his
evidence-in-chief, the prosecutor writes it, and it is treated as
"evidence" by the so-called "trial chamber."
This so-called "trial" is secretive enough already. The extensive use
of so-called "closed sessions" already hides vast portions of the
"trial" from public scrutiny. The use of so-called "protected
witnesses" keeps the public into the dark as to who the witness even
is, thus making it impossible for the public to judge the credibility
of a witness.
As for the secret witnesses, there have been occasions when these
witnesses have divulged enough information about themselves, such as
the position they held at a given time that one can figure out who
they are, or at least who they are pretending to be. For example, the
secret witness known as "B-24" claimed to have been a member of the
crisis staff in of Zvornik from the inception of the crisis staff
until 12 April 1992, while serving in the crisis staff “B-24” said
that he was the commander of the police station. “B-24” also claimed
that he was a member of the SDS, and president of the local government
in Zvornik from February 1993 until September 1993.
Based on the information that "B-24" divulged about himself during his
open-session testimony one can conclude that "B-24" is Dragan
Spasojevic, or that he is somebody who is pretending to be Dragan
Spasojevic. You can conclude this by just looking through media
reports to see who held the positions that he claimed to hold at the
times he claimed to have held them. His identity was revealed to me
simply by using public information that I obtained from the information
media. Anybody who wanted to could figure out who he was.
Armed with the identity of "B-24" one is able to find out that Dragan
Spasojevic was threatened with an EU travel ban, due to his links with
organized crime, but was able to avoid the ban because of cooperation
with the Hague Tribunal. Spasojevic is accused of war crimes himself,
he is alleged to have participated in the massacre of some 750
Muslims. On top of this, Mr. Spasojevic has a hatred for Milosevic,
Spasojevic told the May 16, 1993 edition of The Sunday Times that "We
[the Bosnian Serbs] have been betrayed by Milosevic."
With this additional information (that the tribunal wants to keep
hidden from you) you can see all sorts of things. Since Spasojevic is
accused by the Muslims of taking part in the alleged massacre of 750
of them it is possible that the "tribunal" told him that if he
testified against Milosevic, who he hated anyway that they would let
him off the hook and not prosecute him for his alleged war crimes.
Another possibility is that the "tribunal" offered Spasojevic a new
identity in exchange for his testimony. A new identity could come in
handy for a criminal couldn't it? It would allow him to avoid the E.U.
travel ban and continue his criminal activities unhindered.
No doubt many of you have figured out the identity of certain secret
witnesses yourselves. When the identity of the tribunal's secret
witnesses is ascertained you can almost always figure out why their
identity is kept a secret. If the witness is a criminal they become a
"protected witness" and their identity is hidden from the public so
that the public won't know that they are a criminal.
This new invention of admitting written statements that have been
prepared by the prosecutor as "evidence", only hides the so-called
"judicial" process even further. The examination-in-chief is
practically abolished, and the point of the alleged "evidence" is lost
as far as the public is concerned.
Mr. Nice even admitted that this new practice hides the "trial" from
the public. Nice wants all witnesses to be dealt with in this fashion.
Nice says that even witnesses whose testimony would be particularly
damning to Milosevic should be dealt with in this fashion, and that he
was willing to lose the advantage that publicly hearing these witnesses
would give to the OTP in the eyes of the public. I hate to break it to
you Mr. Nice, but in the over 250 witnesses that you have called not
one of them has had any testimony that was damning in the least to
President Milosevic.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees
the right to a public trial, but this is apparently something that the
Hague Tribunal feels doesn't apply to it. The "tribunal" regularly
hides its "trials" from the public. One has to wonder what they are so
ashamed of? After all, if they had a case wouldn't they want the
public to see that?
This new practice of using written testimony is based on Rule 89(f)
which reads: A Chamber may receive the evidence of a witness orally
or, where the interests of justice allow, in written form.
President Milosevic categorically objected to this new practice.
President Milosevic's argument is that it is clearly not in the
interests of justice to hide the proceedings from the public in this
way, he also argued that Rule 89(f) says "A Chamber may receive," not
must receive, evidence in written form when the interests of justice
allow.
President Milosevic rightly argued that it can not possibly be in the
interests of justice for evidence to be given against him where he is
not present. He argued that witnesses must give their evidence live,
in front of him, in front of the "trial chamber," and ultimately in
front of the public.
President Milosevic correctly argued that it is definitely not in the
interests of justice if evidence is only given in the prosecutors
office. Who knows what sort of important information that the
prosecutor might decide to omit from the "evidence" if it doesn't fit
its case.
President Milosevic also argued that this is a way for the prosecutor
to present more evidence than the defense can prepare for and deal
with in the time allotted for cross-examination. The situation is bad
enough already, President Milosevic is frequently denied the
opportunity to complete his cross-examination. Because "judge" May's
primary concern is the clock, and not conducting any sort of fair
trial cross-examination is frequently cut short when the time limit
imposed by Mr. May has expired.
President Milosevic pointed out that witness statements that are
already prepared by the prosecution in much the same fashion as will
be employed with this new practice are frequently inaccurate, with
witnesses frequently claiming in court that they never said the things
that the prosecution put into their statements.
The other side argued that there are safe-guards that ensure that this
new process doesn't jeopardize the "fair trial" (which is a joke
coming from them anyway). They say that the witness will be
cross-examined, and they say that the witness will have to sign the
written "testimony" and attest to its truthfulness after taking the
solemn declaration.
Another point raised by Mr. Nice is that if the witness says something
different in court than what is contained in his pre-written
testimony, Mr. Nice says that the witness will be exposed to sanction.
So essentially what we have here is witnesses who are testifying from
a script that has been written for them by the prosecutor, and if they
deviate from the prosecution's script they will be punished.
In yet another slap to the face of justice, the trial chamber ruled
that this new practice is acceptable, and it was applied to the
witness Milan Milanovic.
The interesting thing here is that Milan Milanovic doesn't speak
English. His testimony was written for him in English by the
prosecution. No Serbian version was available. Milanovic none the less
signed his pre-written English "testimony", and attested to its
truthfulness while under the solemn declaration.
The question here is how can Mr. Milanovic possibly sign a document
and attest to its truthfulness if he doesn't even understand it?
President Milosevic, and the Amicus Mr. Kay both raised this point,
but the prosecutor and the "judges" didn't seem to give a damn.
This exposes this new procedure as a scam right out of the box. The
Hague Tribunal has sunk to a new low. Secret witnesses, closed
sessions, and now scripted testimony.
As for Mr. Milanovic the prosecution spent the last 2 sessions of the
day asking him about things that weren't in his script. Apparently his
claim is that the VJ was active in the Krajina, and that President
Milosevic knew something about this. The most time was spent showing
the witness documents and asking him if he recognized them as authentic.
Mr. Milanovic will be cross-examined sometime in the future,
apparently a General Smith will be testifying tomorrow, but maybe not.
At the end of the day Mr. Nice asked for a closed session to discuss
when Milanovic would return and who was going to testify tomorrow.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100903.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 9, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The Hague "tribunal" heard testimony from the retired British Army
General Sir Rupert Smith today. Smith was the UNPROFOR (United Nations
Protection Force) commander in Bosnia in 1995, and he was the Deputy
Supreme Allied Commander of NATO from 1998 until 2001.
Immediately the objectivity of Smith is called into question. It was
General Smith who "turned the key" on behalf of the UN to unleash NATO
air strikes on the Bosnian Serbs after the so-called "Markale Market
Massacre." It is also this same General Smith who was the Deputy Allied
Commander of NATO at the time of NATO's criminal aggression against
Yugoslavia in 1999.
So we can see right off the bat that General Smith has an interest in
painting the Serbs as mad killers in order to justify his own criminal
aggression against the Serbs.
To begin with General Smith clings to the notion that the Bosnian
Serbs perpetrated the so-called "Markale Market Massacre" in Sarajevo
in August 1995, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. This is not
surprising since it was this alleged act by the Bosnian Serbs that lit
the fuse for the NATO air strikes against them that General Smith
personally authorized on behalf of the UN.
The UNMOs (UN Military Observers) issued a report stating that the
deadly mortars were fired from inside the Muslim lines, a group of
French engineers also conducted an investigation and they too concluded
that the mortars had come from inside of the Muslim lines. The
Sarajevo sector UNPROFOR commander also believed that the shells had
emanated from inside of the Muslim lines. He even went on television
and said that there was only a one in a million chance that the Serbs
could have hit that spot.
In spite of the fact that all of the evidence indicated that the
Muslims had massacred their own civilians. General Smith none the less
dismissed all of the evidence in the first UN report, issued a second
report stating that the Serbs did it, and authorized the air strikes.
General Mladic even contacted Smith and asked that a joint
investigation be carried out with the participation of Serb, Muslim,
and UN investigators, but Smith who was apparently intent on waging
war against the Serbs declined.
If the Muslims massacred their own civilians in order to get NATO to
attack the Serbs, then the trick worked, because that is precisely
what did happen.
The strategy of the prosecution is shameful. Mr. Nice and General
Smith were observing examples when Milosevic negotiated the freeing UN
personnel taken as hostages by the VRS, and when Milosevic negotiated
the peace agreement at Dayton as being proof of his alleged "control"
over the Bosnian Serbs. So here is President Milosevic working for
peace, and this is used against him as some sort of "proof" that he is
a war criminal. However, when Milosevic pressed Smith on this point;
Smith was forced to admit that he didn't see any indication that
Milosevic had any direct control over the VRS.
A meeting was also mentioned at which Mladic, Milosevic, Bildt,
Stoltenberg, Akashi, and Smith were all present. This was seen as some
sort of sinister conspiracy because here are Mladic and Milosevic at
the same meeting together. Smith was however forced, under
cross-examination, to admit that Mladic's attendance at the meeting
was Carl Bildt's idea, and not any sort of a plan between General
Mladic and President Milosevic.
Another interesting piece of information came when Smith was speaking
about the Muslim enclaves in Eastern Bosnia (Srebrenica, Zepa,
Gorazde, etc...) According to Smith the Muslims would use these
enclaves, these so-called "safe areas" established by the UN, to
launch attacks against the surrounding Serb areas.
President Milosevic asked if UNPROFOR had done anything to
demilitarize the so-called "safe areas." Smith attempted to evade the
question, and so President Milosevic asked Smith if he considered that
it was the UNPROFOR's responsibility to demilitarize the "safe areas,"
and Smith said that it wasn't UNPROFOR's job to demilitarize it's own
"safe areas."
So here we have UNPROFOR knowing that the Muslims are using it's "safe
areas" as military bases from which to attack the Serbs from, and
UNPROFOR doing nothing about it. But when the VRS is forced to protect
it's people by retaliating against these attacks the VRS is accused of
genocide.
Srebrenica was a matter of particular discussion. President Milosevic
cited the April 2001 report issued by the Dutch Government which
categorically stated that there was no political or military connection
between Belgrade and the events in Srebrenica. General Smith then
confirmed that he had no knowledge that would indicate that anybody
from either Serbia or Yugoslavia had any involvement in any of the
events at Srebrenica.
The Dutch Government report is of particular importance because
Dutchbat soldiers were at Srebrenica when the enclave fell, and they
saw nothing that could indicate Belgrade's involvement, and now we have
the UNPROFOR commander saying the same thing.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg101403.htm
MILOSEVIC “TRIAL” SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 14, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The prosecution finished its abbreviated examination-in-chief of Milan
Milanovic today. Milanovic served as the Deputy Defense Minister for
the Republika Srpska Krajina, and he was the leader of the Serb
negotiating team when the Erdut agreement was signed.
The Erdut Agreement
[http://www.usip.org/library/pa/croatia/croatia_erdut_11121995.html%5d
was signed on November 12, 1995. It guarantees Serbs living in Eastern
Slavonia, Baranja and Western Srem the right to form a joint council
of municipalities, it provides for the return of refugees, and for the
restoration of refugee’s property. Unfortunately, the Croatian side has
to this day failed to implement its end of the agreement. The refugees
have not returned and some even left after the signing of the
agreement, and no joint council of municipalities exists.
Mr. Milanovic claimed that President Milosevic’s associates would
harass him because he signed the Erdut Agreement. However, Mr.
Milanovic said that when he met with Milosevic that he was supportive
of him for signing the agreement. Milanovic says that Milosevic even
asked him if any of his associates were giving him a hard time, and
Milanovic told him that they weren’t.
Another allegation raised by the prosecution was that the VJ was
active in Krajina. Under cross-examination this turned out not to be
true. According to Milanovic the VJ was only active on the territory
of the FRY. There were times when the VJ was on the border of the FRY,
but it never crossed into Krajina.
The witness admitted that Belgrade had no direct command over the VRS
or the Serbian Army of Krajina.
This witness was frequently confused by names. He would refer to the
JNA as the “Yugoslav Army”, in stead of by its proper name which is of
course the Yugoslav People’s Army. The Yugoslav Army on the other hand
is the VJ, but that isn’t what the witness meant. The witness was also
confused and repeatedly referred to the Vance Plan as the “Vance-Owen
Plan.” The Vance Plan was of course for Croatia, and the Vance-Owen
Plan was for Bosnia. But like I said, the witness was confused.
The prosecution exploited the new practice of Rule 89(F). The
prosecution submitted various exhibits which had no relevance at all.
It is obvious that the prosecution is only trying to waste time.
President Milosevic and his associates have to go through all of this
so-called “evidence” and for the prosecutor to be dumping all of these
piles of pointless exhibits into the evidence pool only wastes time,
because the documents have to be read and the witness has to be
questioned about them.
The strategy of the prosecution is clear. They want to drown the
defense in a sea of irrelevant documents that it will have to deal
with, and then the prosecutor hopes that time will expire on the
defense before it can ask the witness about everything. They want to
bog down the defense in pointless documents in the hopes that they
won’t have time to refute some important point.
For example documents were produced about a Krajina Government office
that was in Belgrade. This office would arrange accommodation for
Serbian citizens who wished to volunteer to assist the Krajina Serbs.
This was totally the endeavor of the Krajina Government, nobody in
Serbia was forced to volunteer, but these documents were none the less
presented as “evidence” against Milosevic. Evidence of what you ask;
well as far as Milosevic is concerned nothing. I only regard this sort
of “evidence” as evidence of the prosecution’s plan that I outlined
above.
A point raised by the prosecution was the presence of Radovan
Stojicic “Badza” in Krajina. Badza was a commander in the Serbian MUP,
and he came to Krajina with 15 other members of the MUP of Serbia.
They were integrated into the T.O. and were suborned to the JNA. Badza
was promoted to the T.O. command by Goran Hadzic, and not by anybody
from Serbia.
These men, by virtue of the fact that they were suborned to the JNA,
were obviously volunteers, but the witness tried to deny that and say
that they were something else. None the less, the witness said that
neither Badza, nor any of the men who came with him committed any
crimes.
Badza came to Krajina to help the JNA liberate Vukovar. In Vukovar the
ZNG (Croatian National Guard) attacked JNA columns. The ZNG blockaded
and laid siege on the JNA barracks in Vukovar, killing and wounding
several JNA soldiers.
It was only after the ZNG’s barbaric attacks that the JNA engaged in
operations to rid Vukovar of the ZNG. The JNA was defending itself on
its own territory. Vukovar, whether the Croats liked it or not, was at
that time, part of the SFRY and the JNA was the national army of the
SFRY.
Badza and the men who accompanied him may have been from the republic
of Serbia, but Serbia and Vukovar were both part of the SFR
Yugoslavia. Badza was only volunteering to help his country’s army at
a time when it was being attacked inside of its own territory. Quite
honestly, I can’t imagine what could be wrong with that. I don’t see
what the prosecution is trying to prove here. What kind of patriot
could just stand by and watch his country’s army being attacked on its
own territory?
The witness did give some useful evidence about the origins of the war
in Croatia. According to the witness tensions started in 1990 and
1991, when elections were held and the HDZ and Tudjman were coming to
power.
The Serbian people in Croatia voted for the League of Communists,
because that party was against war and favored the preservation of
Yugoslavia. The Croats, on the other hand, voted for the HDZ and for
the destruction of Yugoslavia.
Once the HDZ attained power in 1991 they removed the Serbian people as
a constituent people from the Croatian constitution. The Croats began
illegally importing arms, formed paramilitary formations, and fired
Serbs from their jobs en masse. The Croats resurrected the symbols
used by the Ustasha (Croatia’s Nazi puppet regime) during the 2nd
World War, such as the checkerboard emblem that appears to this day on
the Croatian flag.
All of these actions by the Croats caused discomfort and fear among
the Serbs who were living in Croatia. The fears of the Serbs were
proven to be justified when on May 2, 1991 Croatian policemen entered
Borovo Selo, the largest Serbian settlement in the Vukovar
municipality. When the Croatian police rolled into Borovo Selo they
opened fire on Serbian houses in the center of Borovo Selo, killing
several civilians.
The witness spoke about the Vance Plan and how the Serbs abided by the
agreement, but that the Croats violated the agreement when they
stormed UN Protected Areas such as the Miljevac Plateau and the Medak
Pocket. These attacks were completely unprovoked. The Serbs did not
launch a single attack after the UNPAs were set-up, but the Croats
attacked them anyway.
The witness went all through the war. He confirmed that the Croats had
formed camps for Serbs, and that the war ultimately culminated in the
Croat operations Storm and Flash, in which many Serbs were killed, and
hundreds of thousands were expelled from Croatia.
The witness also spoke of a time when a ZDF news crew from Germany
came to his village of Polaca. When the ZDF crew was there they filmed
as Croats from Laslovo came and attacked the Serbs living in Polaca,
but when ZDF aired the tape they said that it was Serbs from Polaca
who were attacking the Croats in Laslovo.
This is only one of many examples where the international media lied.
ZDF reported the exact opposite of the truth. ZDF turned the victim
into the aggressor, and the aggressor into the victim.
This witness will conclude his testimony tomorrow. The troika has
granted Slobodan Milosevic 50 more minutes to conclude his
cross-examination.
===
http://slobodan-milosevic.ihostsites.net/news/smorg101503.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 15, 2003
The witness Milan Milanovic finished his testimony today. President
Milosevic used this occasion to expose the strategy of the prosecutor.
President Milosevic showed the witness documents that were submitted
by the prosecutor as evidence in conjunction with his testimony.
Among the documents were invoices from the Zastava Promot Company in
Sombor. The Krajina T.O. had purchased items for their uniforms from
that company, belts, t-shirts, berets, etc… They paid for the items,
and they were shipped.
President Milosevic asked the witness what that was supposed to prove?
He wondered was there anything illegal about a company selling
merchandise to somebody? The witness had no explanation as to why
these documents were exhibited as evidence in conjunction with his
testimony. He couldn’t see anything illegal.
In addition to vast lists of bank accounts were submitted. Bank
account information for bowling clubs, cinemas, butcher shops, and
even the Red Cross was submitted as “evidence” with this witness by
the prosecution. Again the witness didn’t know how to explain this.
Again today we can see that the prosecution is abusing Rule 89(F). The
prosecution has no case and so they are abusing Rule 89(F) in order to
overwhelm the defense with piles of irrelevant documents.
The prosecutor has even submitted obviously forged documents as
evidence. One example came today with a document from a Dusko Babic
that was stamped as received the day before it was ever sent.
This witness has proven nothing against Milosevic. On the contrary,
his testimony only proves what President Milosevic has been saying.
The witness said that Milosevic contacted him and advised him to sign
the Erdut peace agreement. The witness signed the agreement, and
claimed that Milan Martic, Milan Babic and Goran Hadzic were all angry
with him for signing it.
If the whole Krajina leadership was angry with the witness for signing
an agreement that Milosevic supported, then this clearly proves that
they were not under the control of Milosevic. All this proves is that
President Milosevic used his influence to achieve peace, and it proves
that all he had was influence and not any sort of control outside of
Serbia.
After Milan Milanovic withdrew a secret witness codenamed “B-1115”
took the witness stand. B-1115 was a 92-bis witness, and the gist of
his “testimony” was that the Serbs attacked his unarmed Muslim village
for no reason took him prisoner and then abused the prisoners.
B-1115 was allegedly from Doboj. B-1115 was a member of what he called
a “reserve police unit” which consisted of 36 armed Muslims.
Milosevic however viewed this 36 man unit as a paramilitary formation,
and the real police had seen it the same way. Milosevic produced the
documents proving that B-1115 and his so-called “reserve police” were
all arrested by the real police and charged with armed insurrection
under article 124 of the penal code; so much for B-1115’s claim about
being the innocent unarmed civilian.
B-1115 also claimed to have seen Montenegrin Red Berets training the
VRS at a base near Doboj while he was allegedly being held prisoner.
The problem with this is that there has never been any such thing as
Montenegrin Red Berets. They are a figment of B-1115’s imagination.
So B-1115 was a member of a Muslim paramilitary group that was
engaging in armed insurrection, yet he claimed to be an unarmed
civilian living in a village where no armed conflicts were taking
place. B-1115 claimed to be the Serb’s prisoner, but at the times he
was allegedly being held he saw things that never existed. He is very
typical for the sorts of witness’s that the prosecution likes to bring.
After B-1115 finished another secret witness testifying under the
pseudonym of “B-1445” took the stand.
B-1445 was a member of the B-H parliament from Doboj and one of the
founders of the SDA.
According to B-1445 the attack on Doboj took place on May 3, 1992.
B-1445 said that he witnessed the attack and that members of Arkan’s
Tigers and Seselj’s White Eagles took part in the attack. Of course
B-1445 didn’t actually see Tigers and White Eagles taking part in the
attack he only heard about that later on from some other people.
B-1445, who claimed to have witnessed the attack, said that he fled
Doboj on the afternoon of May 3, 1992. This is interesting since the
previous secret witness (B-1115) said that the attack didn’t begin
until 5 PM, so how could B-1445 have witnessed the attack if he wasn’t
even there when it happened?
Because B-1445 was an SDA MP and one of the founders of the party,
President Milosevic asked him whether or not it was true that the SDA
was the first party formed on an ethnic basis. B-1445 confirmed that
the SDA had been founded before the SDS and the HDZ.
B-1445 also confirmed that in 1992 the Bosnian constitution explicitly
stated that decisions had to be made on the basis of consensus of
Bosnia’s 3 constituent peoples: the Serbs, the Croats, and the Muslims.
Because B-1445 had admitted that decisions had to be made on the basis
of consensus of all 3 peoples, he put himself in a very uncomfortable
position. President Milosevic asked him if he was aware that the
Serbian people had been against succession, but that the decision was
none the less made to separate from Yugoslavia against the will of the
Serbian people?
Because he had admitted what the law was, B-1445 was stuck, and so he
decided to lie and say that the Serbs were not against succession. I
don’t know what sort of Serbs that B-1445 has been talking to, but I
have certainly never met the Serb who favored the succession of
Bosnia-Herzegovina from Yugoslavia.
President Milosevic asked B-1445 if Alija Izetbegovic favored the
establishment of an Islamic state. B-1445 said that Izetbegovic didn’t
want any such thing. However Alija Izetbegovic’s “Islamic Declaration”
indicates something quite different.
President Milosevic began to ask B-1445 about the presence of Arab
mujahedeens in Bosnia. It was at this point that the so-called “judge”
May had to intervene and save the witness. May prohibited Milosevic
from pursuing this line of questioning.
President Milosevic observed that the first killing that took place
after the illegal referendum on succession was the killing of a Serb
by four Muslims at a Serbian wedding celebration in Sarajevo.
President Milosevic then asked if this killing caused tensions to
increase.
The witness’s explanation was that murders happened all of the time in
Sarajevo, this was nothing remarkable, and besides the Serb who got
killed provoked his Muslim killers.
President Milosevic was clearly shocked that this witness had the gall
to claim that killings are something that is routine and that the
victim deserved to be murdered because he had allegedly provoked his
killer, and it was on that note that the proceedings ended. President
Milosevic will cross-examine the witness for 70 more minutes tomorrow.
TRIBUNAL ATTEMPTS TO HIDE ITS SHAMEFUL FARCE FROM THE PUBLIC
---
An important LINK:
Dutch TV documentary on the Hague process, in two parts:
http://info.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/index.shtml?7738514+7738518+8048024
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100703.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 7, 2003
After nearly a 3 week break taken due to the continued illness of
President Milosevic the Hague Tribunal again resumed the so-called
"trial." President Milosevic is still ill, his blood pressure today
was measured to be 160 over 110 mm Hg.
The "trial" started off with Mr. Nice announcing that they would not
be hearing from Maj. Russo of the Canadian Armed Forces, because he
had decided not to come to the tribunal. According to Mr. Nice the
Office of the Prosecutor arranged his flight but when it came time to
leave, he simply decided not to get on the plane.
Then the so-called "presiding judge" Mr. May made a ruling regarding
the prosecution's September 23rd submission. The prosecution was
seeking to videotape examinations in chief on days when President
Milosevic is unable to attend due to illness. The so-called "trial
chamber" denied this request. The Prosecution had also sought to have
defense counsel imposed on President Milosevic, the "court" didn't
rule one way or the other on that. They simply said that they would
keep it under consideration.
The witness today was a Ms. Eva Tabo. Ms. Tabo is a demographer, and
an employee of the Office of the Prosecutor. She has worked for the
Prosecution since December of 2000.
Ms. Tabo wrote two reports. One report was on the displacement of
persons in the so-called "Milosevic case area." This report focused on
47 municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and highlighted 7
municipalities as case-studies. The other report dealt with the
so-called "Siege of Sarajevo" and the war-related mortalities in the
Sarajevo area.
President Milosevic denounced Ms. Tabo's reports as "a malicious
manipulation of statistics," and when one looks at the methods and
sources that she employed in order to write her reports it is obvious
that she is in fact making malicious manipulations of fact. Her
objective is clearly to demonize the Serbs, and to paint them as
aggressors against their own country.
First of all, in her report on displacement, she arrives at her
conclusions by taking the 1991 census and comparing it with OSCE voter
registration lists from 1997 and 1998. She concludes that anybody who
was in a different location in 1997-98 than they were in 1991 is a
refugee or an IDP.
It is useful at this point to remind ourselves of what a refugee is.
According to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees
(the Refugee Convention), Article 1A(2), the term refugee is applied
to a person who owing to well founded fear of being persecuted for
reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular
social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his(/her)
nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to
avail himself (/herself) of the protection of his(/her) country; or
who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of
his(/her) former habitual residence as a result of such events, is
unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
In her report, Ms. Tabo counted migrant migrant workers as "refugees."
She counted citizens who were working abroad before the war in 1991,
and who were still working abroad in 1997-98 as refugees.
Her objective here can only be to falsely inflate the number of
refugees emanating from the so-called "Milosevic case area."
Even Mr. Robinson had trouble accepting that persons such as migrant
workers who were working abroad before the war even started could be
considered to be refugees. Mr. Robinson asked her if she was even
aware of what constitutes a refugee.
Ms. Tabo sheepishly responded by saying that she wasn't using any
"legal definition" to define refugees, but that for the purposes of
her report she was using a statistical definition of her own making.
Ms. Tabo eventually admitted that her report did not take into account
any of the reasons why her so-called "refugees" had left the country,
which means that according to the definition of a refugee used by
everybody else she has no basis for calling these people refugees.
As President Milosevic observed, if one employed Ms. Tabo's
definition, a tourist could be called a refugee.
Another problem is the question of IDPs. Ms. Tabo defined an IDP as
anybody who was living in one place at the time of the 1991 census and
was living in another place when they registered to vote in 1997-98.
A problem arises here because the information she is using is not
limited to the period of the war. People who moved before the war in
1991-92 and after the war between 1995 and 1997-98 are counted as IDP's
(or as refugees if they moved out of the country).
President Milosevic pointed out that there were massive migrations of
persons that took place after Dayton. He pointed to the example of the
Sarajevo Serbs, where 150,000 Serbs left Sarajevo after the end of the
war.
Ms. Tabo's data is not limited to the period of the war, nor does it
take into account any of the reasons why her so-called "refugees" or
"IDPs" moved from one place to the other. Many people moved solely
because of economic reasons yet in her reports they are considered to
be some sort of refugee or IDP.
Ms. Tabo, in her crusade to Satanize the Serbs, referred in court,
almost exclusively to municipalities in the Republika Srpska where the
Muslim declined and the Serb populations increased. The truth about
Bosnia is that 88.2% of the pre-war Serb population has left the B-H
Federation, and 95.5% of the pre-war Muslim population has left the
R.S. The differences in their respective migrations is less than 8%,
and not even Ms. Tabo's report, as misleading as it is, makes an
attempt to hide that, in fact that statistic is contained in her
report.
Ms. Tabo also grudgingly admitted to President Milosevic, during
cross-examination, that Serbia gave safe heaven to 70,000 Muslim
refugees from Bosnia.
Ms. Tabo's other report dealt with the so-called "Siege of Sarajevo"
and it's war related mortalities. For her data sources she extensively
relied on Muslim sources. She took the International Red Cross's
reports into account in her report and used them as one of 7 data
sources, but the other 6 sources were Muslim sources.
She admitted that because of her extensive reliance on Muslim sources
that her statistics could be prejudiced by any biases that the Muslims
had when collecting the data. Such as in the case of one of her
sources known as the "Household Survey," conducted by Muslim
researchers, in which Serbs were referred to simply as "the
aggressors."
Even though she extensively used Muslim sources she still had to admit
that the "vast majority of casualties in Sarajevo were combatants" and
not civilians. But because she relied so heavily on Muslim sources,
information about casualties among Serb civilians was not sufficiently
dealt with in her report.
At the end of the proceedings President Milosevic learned of a new
practice that will be employed by the prosecution. The appeals chamber
changed the rules and now the prosecution has the option of not
conducting the examination-in-chief.
This new practice goes even further than 92-bis. The prosecution
compiles a witness statement, then the prosecution writes the
witness's testimony for the witness, at that point the witness signs
his pre-written testimony and that counts as the evidence in chief. So
essentially the witness only has to come to court to be cross-examined.
This new practice is scandalous. First of all, it allows the
prosecution to present more "evidence" in less time. Essentially
meaning that the prosecution is producing "evidence" faster than the
defense can refute it. This practice is like to pouring water into
somebody's mouth, not allowing them to breathe, and waiting for them
to choke.
Secondly, it makes it extremely difficult for the public to follow the
"trial" because we won't have any idea what exactly it is that the
defense is trying to refute or accomplish while it is cross-examining
the witness. If we don't know what the evidence in chief is we won't be
able to understand what point defense is trying to make.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100803.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 8, 2003:
TRIBUNAL ATTEMPTS TO HIDE IT'S SHAMEFUL FARCE FROM THE PUBLIC
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
A new procedure was initiated at the Hague Tribunal today. Prosecution
witnesses can now give their examination-in-chief in whole or in part
via statements written for them by the prosecutor.
The witness doesn't write the statement that is used for his
evidence-in-chief, the prosecutor writes it, and it is treated as
"evidence" by the so-called "trial chamber."
This so-called "trial" is secretive enough already. The extensive use
of so-called "closed sessions" already hides vast portions of the
"trial" from public scrutiny. The use of so-called "protected
witnesses" keeps the public into the dark as to who the witness even
is, thus making it impossible for the public to judge the credibility
of a witness.
As for the secret witnesses, there have been occasions when these
witnesses have divulged enough information about themselves, such as
the position they held at a given time that one can figure out who
they are, or at least who they are pretending to be. For example, the
secret witness known as "B-24" claimed to have been a member of the
crisis staff in of Zvornik from the inception of the crisis staff
until 12 April 1992, while serving in the crisis staff “B-24” said
that he was the commander of the police station. “B-24” also claimed
that he was a member of the SDS, and president of the local government
in Zvornik from February 1993 until September 1993.
Based on the information that "B-24" divulged about himself during his
open-session testimony one can conclude that "B-24" is Dragan
Spasojevic, or that he is somebody who is pretending to be Dragan
Spasojevic. You can conclude this by just looking through media
reports to see who held the positions that he claimed to hold at the
times he claimed to have held them. His identity was revealed to me
simply by using public information that I obtained from the information
media. Anybody who wanted to could figure out who he was.
Armed with the identity of "B-24" one is able to find out that Dragan
Spasojevic was threatened with an EU travel ban, due to his links with
organized crime, but was able to avoid the ban because of cooperation
with the Hague Tribunal. Spasojevic is accused of war crimes himself,
he is alleged to have participated in the massacre of some 750
Muslims. On top of this, Mr. Spasojevic has a hatred for Milosevic,
Spasojevic told the May 16, 1993 edition of The Sunday Times that "We
[the Bosnian Serbs] have been betrayed by Milosevic."
With this additional information (that the tribunal wants to keep
hidden from you) you can see all sorts of things. Since Spasojevic is
accused by the Muslims of taking part in the alleged massacre of 750
of them it is possible that the "tribunal" told him that if he
testified against Milosevic, who he hated anyway that they would let
him off the hook and not prosecute him for his alleged war crimes.
Another possibility is that the "tribunal" offered Spasojevic a new
identity in exchange for his testimony. A new identity could come in
handy for a criminal couldn't it? It would allow him to avoid the E.U.
travel ban and continue his criminal activities unhindered.
No doubt many of you have figured out the identity of certain secret
witnesses yourselves. When the identity of the tribunal's secret
witnesses is ascertained you can almost always figure out why their
identity is kept a secret. If the witness is a criminal they become a
"protected witness" and their identity is hidden from the public so
that the public won't know that they are a criminal.
This new invention of admitting written statements that have been
prepared by the prosecutor as "evidence", only hides the so-called
"judicial" process even further. The examination-in-chief is
practically abolished, and the point of the alleged "evidence" is lost
as far as the public is concerned.
Mr. Nice even admitted that this new practice hides the "trial" from
the public. Nice wants all witnesses to be dealt with in this fashion.
Nice says that even witnesses whose testimony would be particularly
damning to Milosevic should be dealt with in this fashion, and that he
was willing to lose the advantage that publicly hearing these witnesses
would give to the OTP in the eyes of the public. I hate to break it to
you Mr. Nice, but in the over 250 witnesses that you have called not
one of them has had any testimony that was damning in the least to
President Milosevic.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees
the right to a public trial, but this is apparently something that the
Hague Tribunal feels doesn't apply to it. The "tribunal" regularly
hides its "trials" from the public. One has to wonder what they are so
ashamed of? After all, if they had a case wouldn't they want the
public to see that?
This new practice of using written testimony is based on Rule 89(f)
which reads: A Chamber may receive the evidence of a witness orally
or, where the interests of justice allow, in written form.
President Milosevic categorically objected to this new practice.
President Milosevic's argument is that it is clearly not in the
interests of justice to hide the proceedings from the public in this
way, he also argued that Rule 89(f) says "A Chamber may receive," not
must receive, evidence in written form when the interests of justice
allow.
President Milosevic rightly argued that it can not possibly be in the
interests of justice for evidence to be given against him where he is
not present. He argued that witnesses must give their evidence live,
in front of him, in front of the "trial chamber," and ultimately in
front of the public.
President Milosevic correctly argued that it is definitely not in the
interests of justice if evidence is only given in the prosecutors
office. Who knows what sort of important information that the
prosecutor might decide to omit from the "evidence" if it doesn't fit
its case.
President Milosevic also argued that this is a way for the prosecutor
to present more evidence than the defense can prepare for and deal
with in the time allotted for cross-examination. The situation is bad
enough already, President Milosevic is frequently denied the
opportunity to complete his cross-examination. Because "judge" May's
primary concern is the clock, and not conducting any sort of fair
trial cross-examination is frequently cut short when the time limit
imposed by Mr. May has expired.
President Milosevic pointed out that witness statements that are
already prepared by the prosecution in much the same fashion as will
be employed with this new practice are frequently inaccurate, with
witnesses frequently claiming in court that they never said the things
that the prosecution put into their statements.
The other side argued that there are safe-guards that ensure that this
new process doesn't jeopardize the "fair trial" (which is a joke
coming from them anyway). They say that the witness will be
cross-examined, and they say that the witness will have to sign the
written "testimony" and attest to its truthfulness after taking the
solemn declaration.
Another point raised by Mr. Nice is that if the witness says something
different in court than what is contained in his pre-written
testimony, Mr. Nice says that the witness will be exposed to sanction.
So essentially what we have here is witnesses who are testifying from
a script that has been written for them by the prosecutor, and if they
deviate from the prosecution's script they will be punished.
In yet another slap to the face of justice, the trial chamber ruled
that this new practice is acceptable, and it was applied to the
witness Milan Milanovic.
The interesting thing here is that Milan Milanovic doesn't speak
English. His testimony was written for him in English by the
prosecution. No Serbian version was available. Milanovic none the less
signed his pre-written English "testimony", and attested to its
truthfulness while under the solemn declaration.
The question here is how can Mr. Milanovic possibly sign a document
and attest to its truthfulness if he doesn't even understand it?
President Milosevic, and the Amicus Mr. Kay both raised this point,
but the prosecutor and the "judges" didn't seem to give a damn.
This exposes this new procedure as a scam right out of the box. The
Hague Tribunal has sunk to a new low. Secret witnesses, closed
sessions, and now scripted testimony.
As for Mr. Milanovic the prosecution spent the last 2 sessions of the
day asking him about things that weren't in his script. Apparently his
claim is that the VJ was active in the Krajina, and that President
Milosevic knew something about this. The most time was spent showing
the witness documents and asking him if he recognized them as authentic.
Mr. Milanovic will be cross-examined sometime in the future,
apparently a General Smith will be testifying tomorrow, but maybe not.
At the end of the day Mr. Nice asked for a closed session to discuss
when Milanovic would return and who was going to testify tomorrow.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg100903.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 9, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The Hague "tribunal" heard testimony from the retired British Army
General Sir Rupert Smith today. Smith was the UNPROFOR (United Nations
Protection Force) commander in Bosnia in 1995, and he was the Deputy
Supreme Allied Commander of NATO from 1998 until 2001.
Immediately the objectivity of Smith is called into question. It was
General Smith who "turned the key" on behalf of the UN to unleash NATO
air strikes on the Bosnian Serbs after the so-called "Markale Market
Massacre." It is also this same General Smith who was the Deputy Allied
Commander of NATO at the time of NATO's criminal aggression against
Yugoslavia in 1999.
So we can see right off the bat that General Smith has an interest in
painting the Serbs as mad killers in order to justify his own criminal
aggression against the Serbs.
To begin with General Smith clings to the notion that the Bosnian
Serbs perpetrated the so-called "Markale Market Massacre" in Sarajevo
in August 1995, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. This is not
surprising since it was this alleged act by the Bosnian Serbs that lit
the fuse for the NATO air strikes against them that General Smith
personally authorized on behalf of the UN.
The UNMOs (UN Military Observers) issued a report stating that the
deadly mortars were fired from inside the Muslim lines, a group of
French engineers also conducted an investigation and they too concluded
that the mortars had come from inside of the Muslim lines. The
Sarajevo sector UNPROFOR commander also believed that the shells had
emanated from inside of the Muslim lines. He even went on television
and said that there was only a one in a million chance that the Serbs
could have hit that spot.
In spite of the fact that all of the evidence indicated that the
Muslims had massacred their own civilians. General Smith none the less
dismissed all of the evidence in the first UN report, issued a second
report stating that the Serbs did it, and authorized the air strikes.
General Mladic even contacted Smith and asked that a joint
investigation be carried out with the participation of Serb, Muslim,
and UN investigators, but Smith who was apparently intent on waging
war against the Serbs declined.
If the Muslims massacred their own civilians in order to get NATO to
attack the Serbs, then the trick worked, because that is precisely
what did happen.
The strategy of the prosecution is shameful. Mr. Nice and General
Smith were observing examples when Milosevic negotiated the freeing UN
personnel taken as hostages by the VRS, and when Milosevic negotiated
the peace agreement at Dayton as being proof of his alleged "control"
over the Bosnian Serbs. So here is President Milosevic working for
peace, and this is used against him as some sort of "proof" that he is
a war criminal. However, when Milosevic pressed Smith on this point;
Smith was forced to admit that he didn't see any indication that
Milosevic had any direct control over the VRS.
A meeting was also mentioned at which Mladic, Milosevic, Bildt,
Stoltenberg, Akashi, and Smith were all present. This was seen as some
sort of sinister conspiracy because here are Mladic and Milosevic at
the same meeting together. Smith was however forced, under
cross-examination, to admit that Mladic's attendance at the meeting
was Carl Bildt's idea, and not any sort of a plan between General
Mladic and President Milosevic.
Another interesting piece of information came when Smith was speaking
about the Muslim enclaves in Eastern Bosnia (Srebrenica, Zepa,
Gorazde, etc...) According to Smith the Muslims would use these
enclaves, these so-called "safe areas" established by the UN, to
launch attacks against the surrounding Serb areas.
President Milosevic asked if UNPROFOR had done anything to
demilitarize the so-called "safe areas." Smith attempted to evade the
question, and so President Milosevic asked Smith if he considered that
it was the UNPROFOR's responsibility to demilitarize the "safe areas,"
and Smith said that it wasn't UNPROFOR's job to demilitarize it's own
"safe areas."
So here we have UNPROFOR knowing that the Muslims are using it's "safe
areas" as military bases from which to attack the Serbs from, and
UNPROFOR doing nothing about it. But when the VRS is forced to protect
it's people by retaliating against these attacks the VRS is accused of
genocide.
Srebrenica was a matter of particular discussion. President Milosevic
cited the April 2001 report issued by the Dutch Government which
categorically stated that there was no political or military connection
between Belgrade and the events in Srebrenica. General Smith then
confirmed that he had no knowledge that would indicate that anybody
from either Serbia or Yugoslavia had any involvement in any of the
events at Srebrenica.
The Dutch Government report is of particular importance because
Dutchbat soldiers were at Srebrenica when the enclave fell, and they
saw nothing that could indicate Belgrade's involvement, and now we have
the UNPROFOR commander saying the same thing.
===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg101403.htm
MILOSEVIC “TRIAL” SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 14, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
The prosecution finished its abbreviated examination-in-chief of Milan
Milanovic today. Milanovic served as the Deputy Defense Minister for
the Republika Srpska Krajina, and he was the leader of the Serb
negotiating team when the Erdut agreement was signed.
The Erdut Agreement
[http://www.usip.org/library/pa/croatia/croatia_erdut_11121995.html%5d
was signed on November 12, 1995. It guarantees Serbs living in Eastern
Slavonia, Baranja and Western Srem the right to form a joint council
of municipalities, it provides for the return of refugees, and for the
restoration of refugee’s property. Unfortunately, the Croatian side has
to this day failed to implement its end of the agreement. The refugees
have not returned and some even left after the signing of the
agreement, and no joint council of municipalities exists.
Mr. Milanovic claimed that President Milosevic’s associates would
harass him because he signed the Erdut Agreement. However, Mr.
Milanovic said that when he met with Milosevic that he was supportive
of him for signing the agreement. Milanovic says that Milosevic even
asked him if any of his associates were giving him a hard time, and
Milanovic told him that they weren’t.
Another allegation raised by the prosecution was that the VJ was
active in Krajina. Under cross-examination this turned out not to be
true. According to Milanovic the VJ was only active on the territory
of the FRY. There were times when the VJ was on the border of the FRY,
but it never crossed into Krajina.
The witness admitted that Belgrade had no direct command over the VRS
or the Serbian Army of Krajina.
This witness was frequently confused by names. He would refer to the
JNA as the “Yugoslav Army”, in stead of by its proper name which is of
course the Yugoslav People’s Army. The Yugoslav Army on the other hand
is the VJ, but that isn’t what the witness meant. The witness was also
confused and repeatedly referred to the Vance Plan as the “Vance-Owen
Plan.” The Vance Plan was of course for Croatia, and the Vance-Owen
Plan was for Bosnia. But like I said, the witness was confused.
The prosecution exploited the new practice of Rule 89(F). The
prosecution submitted various exhibits which had no relevance at all.
It is obvious that the prosecution is only trying to waste time.
President Milosevic and his associates have to go through all of this
so-called “evidence” and for the prosecutor to be dumping all of these
piles of pointless exhibits into the evidence pool only wastes time,
because the documents have to be read and the witness has to be
questioned about them.
The strategy of the prosecution is clear. They want to drown the
defense in a sea of irrelevant documents that it will have to deal
with, and then the prosecutor hopes that time will expire on the
defense before it can ask the witness about everything. They want to
bog down the defense in pointless documents in the hopes that they
won’t have time to refute some important point.
For example documents were produced about a Krajina Government office
that was in Belgrade. This office would arrange accommodation for
Serbian citizens who wished to volunteer to assist the Krajina Serbs.
This was totally the endeavor of the Krajina Government, nobody in
Serbia was forced to volunteer, but these documents were none the less
presented as “evidence” against Milosevic. Evidence of what you ask;
well as far as Milosevic is concerned nothing. I only regard this sort
of “evidence” as evidence of the prosecution’s plan that I outlined
above.
A point raised by the prosecution was the presence of Radovan
Stojicic “Badza” in Krajina. Badza was a commander in the Serbian MUP,
and he came to Krajina with 15 other members of the MUP of Serbia.
They were integrated into the T.O. and were suborned to the JNA. Badza
was promoted to the T.O. command by Goran Hadzic, and not by anybody
from Serbia.
These men, by virtue of the fact that they were suborned to the JNA,
were obviously volunteers, but the witness tried to deny that and say
that they were something else. None the less, the witness said that
neither Badza, nor any of the men who came with him committed any
crimes.
Badza came to Krajina to help the JNA liberate Vukovar. In Vukovar the
ZNG (Croatian National Guard) attacked JNA columns. The ZNG blockaded
and laid siege on the JNA barracks in Vukovar, killing and wounding
several JNA soldiers.
It was only after the ZNG’s barbaric attacks that the JNA engaged in
operations to rid Vukovar of the ZNG. The JNA was defending itself on
its own territory. Vukovar, whether the Croats liked it or not, was at
that time, part of the SFRY and the JNA was the national army of the
SFRY.
Badza and the men who accompanied him may have been from the republic
of Serbia, but Serbia and Vukovar were both part of the SFR
Yugoslavia. Badza was only volunteering to help his country’s army at
a time when it was being attacked inside of its own territory. Quite
honestly, I can’t imagine what could be wrong with that. I don’t see
what the prosecution is trying to prove here. What kind of patriot
could just stand by and watch his country’s army being attacked on its
own territory?
The witness did give some useful evidence about the origins of the war
in Croatia. According to the witness tensions started in 1990 and
1991, when elections were held and the HDZ and Tudjman were coming to
power.
The Serbian people in Croatia voted for the League of Communists,
because that party was against war and favored the preservation of
Yugoslavia. The Croats, on the other hand, voted for the HDZ and for
the destruction of Yugoslavia.
Once the HDZ attained power in 1991 they removed the Serbian people as
a constituent people from the Croatian constitution. The Croats began
illegally importing arms, formed paramilitary formations, and fired
Serbs from their jobs en masse. The Croats resurrected the symbols
used by the Ustasha (Croatia’s Nazi puppet regime) during the 2nd
World War, such as the checkerboard emblem that appears to this day on
the Croatian flag.
All of these actions by the Croats caused discomfort and fear among
the Serbs who were living in Croatia. The fears of the Serbs were
proven to be justified when on May 2, 1991 Croatian policemen entered
Borovo Selo, the largest Serbian settlement in the Vukovar
municipality. When the Croatian police rolled into Borovo Selo they
opened fire on Serbian houses in the center of Borovo Selo, killing
several civilians.
The witness spoke about the Vance Plan and how the Serbs abided by the
agreement, but that the Croats violated the agreement when they
stormed UN Protected Areas such as the Miljevac Plateau and the Medak
Pocket. These attacks were completely unprovoked. The Serbs did not
launch a single attack after the UNPAs were set-up, but the Croats
attacked them anyway.
The witness went all through the war. He confirmed that the Croats had
formed camps for Serbs, and that the war ultimately culminated in the
Croat operations Storm and Flash, in which many Serbs were killed, and
hundreds of thousands were expelled from Croatia.
The witness also spoke of a time when a ZDF news crew from Germany
came to his village of Polaca. When the ZDF crew was there they filmed
as Croats from Laslovo came and attacked the Serbs living in Polaca,
but when ZDF aired the tape they said that it was Serbs from Polaca
who were attacking the Croats in Laslovo.
This is only one of many examples where the international media lied.
ZDF reported the exact opposite of the truth. ZDF turned the victim
into the aggressor, and the aggressor into the victim.
This witness will conclude his testimony tomorrow. The troika has
granted Slobodan Milosevic 50 more minutes to conclude his
cross-examination.
===
http://slobodan-milosevic.ihostsites.net/news/smorg101503.htm
MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" SYNOPSIS: OCTOBER 15, 2003
The witness Milan Milanovic finished his testimony today. President
Milosevic used this occasion to expose the strategy of the prosecutor.
President Milosevic showed the witness documents that were submitted
by the prosecutor as evidence in conjunction with his testimony.
Among the documents were invoices from the Zastava Promot Company in
Sombor. The Krajina T.O. had purchased items for their uniforms from
that company, belts, t-shirts, berets, etc… They paid for the items,
and they were shipped.
President Milosevic asked the witness what that was supposed to prove?
He wondered was there anything illegal about a company selling
merchandise to somebody? The witness had no explanation as to why
these documents were exhibited as evidence in conjunction with his
testimony. He couldn’t see anything illegal.
In addition to vast lists of bank accounts were submitted. Bank
account information for bowling clubs, cinemas, butcher shops, and
even the Red Cross was submitted as “evidence” with this witness by
the prosecution. Again the witness didn’t know how to explain this.
Again today we can see that the prosecution is abusing Rule 89(F). The
prosecution has no case and so they are abusing Rule 89(F) in order to
overwhelm the defense with piles of irrelevant documents.
The prosecutor has even submitted obviously forged documents as
evidence. One example came today with a document from a Dusko Babic
that was stamped as received the day before it was ever sent.
This witness has proven nothing against Milosevic. On the contrary,
his testimony only proves what President Milosevic has been saying.
The witness said that Milosevic contacted him and advised him to sign
the Erdut peace agreement. The witness signed the agreement, and
claimed that Milan Martic, Milan Babic and Goran Hadzic were all angry
with him for signing it.
If the whole Krajina leadership was angry with the witness for signing
an agreement that Milosevic supported, then this clearly proves that
they were not under the control of Milosevic. All this proves is that
President Milosevic used his influence to achieve peace, and it proves
that all he had was influence and not any sort of control outside of
Serbia.
After Milan Milanovic withdrew a secret witness codenamed “B-1115”
took the witness stand. B-1115 was a 92-bis witness, and the gist of
his “testimony” was that the Serbs attacked his unarmed Muslim village
for no reason took him prisoner and then abused the prisoners.
B-1115 was allegedly from Doboj. B-1115 was a member of what he called
a “reserve police unit” which consisted of 36 armed Muslims.
Milosevic however viewed this 36 man unit as a paramilitary formation,
and the real police had seen it the same way. Milosevic produced the
documents proving that B-1115 and his so-called “reserve police” were
all arrested by the real police and charged with armed insurrection
under article 124 of the penal code; so much for B-1115’s claim about
being the innocent unarmed civilian.
B-1115 also claimed to have seen Montenegrin Red Berets training the
VRS at a base near Doboj while he was allegedly being held prisoner.
The problem with this is that there has never been any such thing as
Montenegrin Red Berets. They are a figment of B-1115’s imagination.
So B-1115 was a member of a Muslim paramilitary group that was
engaging in armed insurrection, yet he claimed to be an unarmed
civilian living in a village where no armed conflicts were taking
place. B-1115 claimed to be the Serb’s prisoner, but at the times he
was allegedly being held he saw things that never existed. He is very
typical for the sorts of witness’s that the prosecution likes to bring.
After B-1115 finished another secret witness testifying under the
pseudonym of “B-1445” took the stand.
B-1445 was a member of the B-H parliament from Doboj and one of the
founders of the SDA.
According to B-1445 the attack on Doboj took place on May 3, 1992.
B-1445 said that he witnessed the attack and that members of Arkan’s
Tigers and Seselj’s White Eagles took part in the attack. Of course
B-1445 didn’t actually see Tigers and White Eagles taking part in the
attack he only heard about that later on from some other people.
B-1445, who claimed to have witnessed the attack, said that he fled
Doboj on the afternoon of May 3, 1992. This is interesting since the
previous secret witness (B-1115) said that the attack didn’t begin
until 5 PM, so how could B-1445 have witnessed the attack if he wasn’t
even there when it happened?
Because B-1445 was an SDA MP and one of the founders of the party,
President Milosevic asked him whether or not it was true that the SDA
was the first party formed on an ethnic basis. B-1445 confirmed that
the SDA had been founded before the SDS and the HDZ.
B-1445 also confirmed that in 1992 the Bosnian constitution explicitly
stated that decisions had to be made on the basis of consensus of
Bosnia’s 3 constituent peoples: the Serbs, the Croats, and the Muslims.
Because B-1445 had admitted that decisions had to be made on the basis
of consensus of all 3 peoples, he put himself in a very uncomfortable
position. President Milosevic asked him if he was aware that the
Serbian people had been against succession, but that the decision was
none the less made to separate from Yugoslavia against the will of the
Serbian people?
Because he had admitted what the law was, B-1445 was stuck, and so he
decided to lie and say that the Serbs were not against succession. I
don’t know what sort of Serbs that B-1445 has been talking to, but I
have certainly never met the Serb who favored the succession of
Bosnia-Herzegovina from Yugoslavia.
President Milosevic asked B-1445 if Alija Izetbegovic favored the
establishment of an Islamic state. B-1445 said that Izetbegovic didn’t
want any such thing. However Alija Izetbegovic’s “Islamic Declaration”
indicates something quite different.
President Milosevic began to ask B-1445 about the presence of Arab
mujahedeens in Bosnia. It was at this point that the so-called “judge”
May had to intervene and save the witness. May prohibited Milosevic
from pursuing this line of questioning.
President Milosevic observed that the first killing that took place
after the illegal referendum on succession was the killing of a Serb
by four Muslims at a Serbian wedding celebration in Sarajevo.
President Milosevic then asked if this killing caused tensions to
increase.
The witness’s explanation was that murders happened all of the time in
Sarajevo, this was nothing remarkable, and besides the Serb who got
killed provoked his Muslim killers.
President Milosevic was clearly shocked that this witness had the gall
to claim that killings are something that is routine and that the
victim deserved to be murdered because he had allegedly provoked his
killer, and it was on that note that the proceedings ended. President
Milosevic will cross-examine the witness for 70 more minutes tomorrow.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO310B.html
---
Regime Rotation in America
by Michel Chossudovsky
Wesley Clark, Osama bin Laden and the 2004 Presidential Elections
www.globalresearch.ca 22 October 2003
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO310B.html
---
Has General Wesley Clark joined the ranks of the 9/11 "conspiracy
theorists"?
Clark has not only accused George W. of "possible manipulation of
intelligence", he is also calling for an investigation "into possible
'criminal' conduct in the drive to war." (Daily Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/04/
wclark04.xml 4 October 2003)
Strong words from the front-runner Democratic candidate in the
presidential race:
"Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than
consciously to make a case for war based on false claims... We need to
know if we were intentionally deceived... This administration is trying
to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a
democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority...
That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy and very poor lighting."
(quoted in Daily Telegraph, 4 October 2003)
General Clark's statement hints to a cover-up in the 9/11 joint
Senate-House inquiry, regarding Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, which he
identifies as "terrorist sponsors". In other words, the Retired Four
Star General tacitly acknowledges the insidious role played by
Washington's indefectible ally, the military government of President
Pervez Musharraf, which is known to have supported Al Qaeda and the
Taliban.
It is important that we understand the political motivations behind
Wesley Clark's position.
While his observations regarding the Bush administration are accurate,
his own record is tainted.
During his stint as NATO Supreme Commander (1997-2000), Wesley Clark
was in permanent liaison with the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). Under
Wesley Clark's command, NATO directly sponsored a terrorist
paramilitary army, with links to Al Qaeda and the trans-Balkan
narcotics trade.
About turn: a former "terrorist sponsor" (to use his own words) under
NATO auspices is now accusing the Bush administration of "seizing on
the Sept. 11 attacks for justification [to wage war]" (San Francisco
Chronicle, 2 October 2003).
In an utterly twisted logic, an individual who is recognized as a war
criminal is seeking the support of the anti-war movement. In the words
of the Palestine Chronicle:
"Enthusiastic support for front-running Democratic presidential
contenders Wesley Clark and Howard Dean from liberals and some
progressives reveals the dismal state of oppositional politics in
America. Decades of unremitting right wing assaults on every sphere of
American life has so jerked the political landscape to the right, that
instead of clamoring for sweeping or even revolutionary changes as in
days long past, the main battle-cry coming from 'the left' is ``Anybody
But Bush'".(Sunil Sharma and Josh Frank,Two Measures of American
Desperation: Wesley Clark and Howard Dean, 17 October 2003,
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/story.php?sid=20031017175449217 )
Filmmaker and antiwar critic Michael Moore supports the candidacies of
Wesley Clark and Howard Dean: "We need a doctor [Dean] because there
are 43 million of us without health care and we need a general to kick
Bush's ass."
(http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/10/15/
3f8ce93feca0a 15 October 2003).
Regime Rotation in America
Clark's Bush bashing and antiwar stance, supported by Hollywood and
Wall Street, is not meant to reverse the tide of war. Quite the
opposite. It provides a phony legitimacy to the war agenda in the name
of "peace building" and democracy.
It perpetuates "the big lie".
What this bipartisan mud-slinging achieves is "regime rotation" in
America. The "war on terrorism" which underlies the national security
agenda remains functionally intact.
Ironically, during the Clinton administration, it was the Republicans
who were accusing Bill Clinton of having links to the Islamic Militant
Network in Bosnia and Kosovo. In a carefully 1999 document prepared by
the Senate Republican Party Committee, the GOP blatantly accused
Clinton of supporting terrorism in Kosovo:
"By the time the NATO air strikes began, the Clinton Administration's
partnership with the KLA was unambiguous... Such an effusive embrace by
top Clinton Administration officials of an organization that only a
year ago one of its own top officials labeled as "terrorist" is, to say
the least, a startling development. Even more importantly, the new
Clinton/KLA partnership may obscure troubling allegations about the KLA
that the Clinton Administration has thus far neglected to address."
(Senate Republican Party Committee, The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does
Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties?
http://www.kosovo.com/rpc.html , Washington, March 31, 1999)
A previous 1997 document emanating from the House Republican Party
Committee entitled "Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn
Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base", accused Clinton of working hand in
glove with Al Qaeda in Bosnia:
"The Clinton administrationís hands-on involvement with the Islamic
network's arms pipeline included inspections of missiles from Iran by
U.S. government officials... [T]he Third World Relief Agency (TWRA), a
Sudan-based, phoney humanitarian organization ... has been a major link
in the arms pipeline to Bosnia... TWRA is believed to be connected with
such fixtures of the Islamic terror network as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman
(the convicted mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing)
and Osama bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi ÈmigrÈ believed to bankroll
numerous militant groups." (Congressional Press Release, Republican
Party Committee (RPC), U.S. Congress, Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms
Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, Washington DC,
16 January 1997, available on the website of the Centre of Research on
Globalisation (CRG) at http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html .)
Needless to say, the Republicans and the Democrats are complicit. They
accuse one another of having links to Al Qaeda. Yet successive
Democratic and Republican administrations have been involved from the
outset of the Soviet Afghan war in 1979 (during the Presidency of Jimmy
Carter) in developing Al Qaeda as a US sponsored "intelligence asset".
These Congressional briefs, however, are not meant to be read by the
broader public. They are used to score political points in a
longstanding bipartisan ritual, while providing the illusion of a
functioning Legislature, where political leaders are said to be held
accountable.
If the Democrats were to win the 2004 presidential elections,
continuity in US foreign policy would be maintained. More importantly,
the "war on terrorism" and the lies concerning Al Qaeda and 9/11 would
also be maintained.
Bin Laden and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)
The role of the Kosovo Liberaiton Army (KLA) as a terrorist
organization is amply documented by Congressional transcripts.
According to Frank Ciluffo of the Globalized Organised Crime Program,
in a testimony presented to the House of Representatives Judicial
Committee:
"What was largely hidden from public view was the fact that the KLA
raise part of their funds from the sale of narcotics. Albania and
Kosovo lie at the heart of the "Balkan Route" that links the "Golden
Crescent" of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the drug markets of Europe.
This route is worth an estimated $400 billion a year and handles 80
percent of heroin destined for Europe." (House Judiciary Committee, 13
December 2000)
The relationship between the KLA and Osama bin Laden is confirmed by
Interpol's Criminal Intelligence division:
"The U.S. State Department listed the KLA as a terrorist organization,
indicating that it was financing its operations with money from the
international heroin trade and loans from Islamic countries and
individuals, among them allegedly Usama bin Laden . Another link to bin
Laden is the fact that the brother of a leader in an Egyptian Jihad
organization and also a military commander of Usama bin Laden, was
leading an elite KLA unit during the Kosovo conflict." (US Congress,
Testimony of Ralf Mutschke of Interpol's Criminal Intelligence
Division, to the House Judicial Committee, 13 December 2000).
The evidence regarding the KLA contained in Congressional transcripts,
news reports and intelligence documents directly implicates General
Wesley Clark.
During his stint as NATO Supreme commander (1997-2000). Clark had close
personal ties with KLA Chief of Staff Commander Brigadier Agim Ceku and
KLA Leader Hashim Thaci (see photo below ).
Agim Ceku, who directly collaborated with NATO during the 1999 Kosovo
campaign is recognized by the Hague ICTY Tribunal "for alleged war
crimes committed against ethnic Serbs in Croatia between 1993 and
1995." ( AFP 13 Oct 1999)
Hashim Thaci had ordered the political assassination of his opponents
in Ibrahim Rugova's nationalist Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) (See
November 2000 BBC Report at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1037302.stm ). According to The
Boston Globe (2 August 1999):
"Terrorists with ties to Osama bin Laden running around with AK-47s and
anti-tank weapons is bad enough. Worse, Thaci's boys aren't just
killers and kleptos, but mafioso who are neck deep in the drug trade.
(During the war, the Washington Times quoted an unnamed U.S. drug
enforcement official commenting on the KLA, 'They were drug dealers in
1998 and now, because of politics, they're freedom fighters.')"
In the wake of the 1999 Kosovo campaign, under NATO regency, these acts
of political assassination--ordered by the self-proclaimed Provisional
Government of Kosovo (PGK)-- were carried out in a totally permissive
environment. The leaders of the KLA rather than being arrested by NATO
for war crimes, were granted KFOR protection. According to one report
of the Foreign Policy Institute (published during the 1999 bombings:
"...the KLA have [no] qualms about murdering Rugova's collaborators,
whom it accused of the "crime" of moderation...(Michael Radu, "Don't
Arm the KLA", CNS Commentary from the Foreign Policy Research
Institute, 7 April, 1999).
In course of the bombing campaign, Fehmi Agani, one of Rugova's closest
collaborators in the Kosovo Democratic League (KDL) was executed on the
orders of the r Hashim Thaci.(Tanjug Press Dispatch, 14 May 1999): "If
Thaci actually considered Rugova a threat, he would not hesitate to
have Rugova removed from the Kosovo political landscape." (Stratfor
Comment, "Rugova Faced with a Choice of Two Losses", Stratfor, 29 July
1999). In turn, the KLA has abducted and killed numerous professionals
and intellectuals.
And who was behind the 29 year old KLA leader Hashim Thaci: Madeleine
Albright and Wesley Clark. (see photos below ).
NATO, the KLA and Al Qaeda
According to a US Department of Defense briefing, so-called "initial
contacts" between the KLA and NATO took place in mid-1998, during the
first part of General Clark's mandate as NATO Commander in Chief:
"...the realization has come to people [in NATO] that we [NATO led by
Wesley Clark] have to have the UCK [acronym for KLA in Albanian]
involved in this process because they have shown at least the potential
to be rejectionists of any deal that could be worked out there with the
existing Kosovo parties. So somehow they have to be brought in and
that's why we've made some initial contacts there with the group,
hopefully the right people in the group, to try and bring them into
this negotiating process." (US Department of Defense, Background
Briefing, July 15, 1998)
["Hopefully the right group" means "we deal with people who obey
orders."]
While these "initial contacts" were acknowledged by NATO officially
only in mid-1998, the KLA had (according to several reports) been
receiving "covert support" and training from the CIA and Germany's
Bundes Nachrichten Dienst (BND) since the mid-nineties. These covert
operations were known and approved by NATO. (Michel Chossudovsky,
Kosovo `Freedom Fighters' Financed by Organised Crime, Covert Action
Quarterly, 2000)
The development and training of KLA forces was part of NATO planning,
directly led by General Wesley Clark. In the words of former Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) secret agent Michael Levine, writing
at the height of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia:
"Ten years ago we were arming and equipping the worst elements of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan - drug traffickers, arms smugglers,
anti-American terroristsÖNow we're doing the same thing with the KLA,
which is tied in with every known middle and far eastern drug cartel.
Interpol, Europol, and nearly every European intelligence and
counter-narcotics agency has files open on drug syndicates that lead
right to the KLA, and right to Albanian gangs in this country." (New
American Magazine, May 24, 1999)
The KLA acted as a paramilitary force, present on the ground in Kosovo.
It was integrated by US and British SAS Special Forces and remained in
close liaison with NATO. The KLA was also used by NATO High Command to
acquire intelligence on bombing targets during the 1999 Kosovo campaign.
Confirmed by British military sources, the task of arming and training
of the KLA had been entrusted in 1998 to the US Defence Intelligence
Agency (DIA) and Britain's Secret Intelligence Services MI6, together
with "former and serving members of 22 SAS [Britain's 22nd Special Air
Services Regiment], as well as three British and American private
security companies". (The Scotsman, Glasgow, 29 August 1999)
"The US DIA approached MI6 to arrange a training program for the KLA,
said a senior British military source. `MI6 then sub-contracted the
operation to two British security companies, who in turn approached a
number of former members of the (22 SAS) regiment. Lists were then
drawn up of weapons and equipment needed by the KLA.' While these
covert operations were continuing, serving members of 22 SAS Regiment,
mostly from the unit's D Squadron, were first deployed in Kosovo before
the beginning of the bombing campaign in March [1999]." (Ibid)
While British SAS Special Forces in bases in Northern Albania were
training the KLA, military instructors from Turkey and Afghanistan
financed by the "Islamic jihad" were providing the KLA with guerilla
and diversion tactics:
"Bin Laden had visited Albania himself. He was one of several
fundamentalist groups that had sent units to fight in Kosovo, ... Bin
Laden is believed to have established an operation in Albania in 1994
... Albanian sources say Sali Berisha, who was then president, had
links with some groups that later proved to be extreme
fundamentalists." (Sunday Times, London, 29 November 1998.)
In the Wake of the 1999 Bombing of Yugoslavia
In the wake of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO under Wesley
Clark's command, supported the extension of the terrorist activities of
the KLA into Southern Serbia and Macedonia.
Meanwhile, the KLA --renamed the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC)-- was
elevated to United Nations status, implying the granting of
"legitimate" sources of funding through United Nations as well as
through bilateral channels, including direct US military aid.
In other words, a terrorist paramilitary force supported by Al Qaeda
and linked to organized crime becomes a legitimate "civilian" National
Guard, directly supported by NATO and the UN.
And barely two months after the official inauguration of the KPC under
UN auspices (September 1999), KPC-KLA commanders - using UN resources
and equipment - were already preparing the assaults into Macedonia, as
a logical follow-up to their terrorist activities in Kosovo. In this
endeavour they had the full support of NATO and the US military, not to
mention the so-called "international community" symbolised by the UN
Mission to Kosovo (UNMIK), headed by France's former Minister of Health
Bernard Kouchner:
According to the Skopje daily Dnevnik, the KPC had established a "sixth
operation zone" in Southern Serbia and Macedonia:
"Sources, who insist on anonymity, claim that the headquarters of the
Kosovo protection brigades [i.e. linked to the UN sponsored KPC] have
[March 2000] already been formed in Tetovo, Gostivar and Skopje. They
are being prepared in Debar and Struga [on the border with Albania] as
well, and their members have defined codes." (Macedonian Information
Centre Newsletter, Skopje, 21 March 2000, published by BBC Summary of
World Broadcast, 24 March 2000)
According to the BBC, "Western special forces were still training the
guerrillas" meaning that they were assisting the KLA in opening up "a
sixth operation zone" in Southern Serbia and Macedonia. (BBC, 29
January 2001, at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1142000/
1142478.stm )
Ironically the United Nations in a confidential February 2000 report to
Secretary General Kofi Annan acknowledged that the KPC, was responsible
for "criminal activities . . . killings, ill-treatment (and) torture,
illegal policing, abuse of authority, intimidation, breaches of
political neutrality and hate-speech.". These occurred at the height
of Bernard Kouchner's "humanitarian" mandate as the UN Interim
Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) (15 July 1999 to 12 January
2001).
And in this regard, Kouchner, whose mandate was to channel humanitarian
aid under UN auspices, worked closely with NATO officials including
Wesley Clark in providing support to Kosovo's terrorist paramilitary
army. (See photo below ). Let us not forget that Bernard Kouchner was
the Founder of "Doctors without Borders".(MÈdecins sans frontiËres)
According to the London Observer, "the grim message to the U.N.
secretary-general is that his own organization [led by UNMIK Head
Bernard Kouchner] is paying the salaries of many of the offenders"
(Observer, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/031400-03.htm , 14
March 2000)
The 2004 Presidential Elections
What choices for the US Electorate?
The evidence presented above confirms that both the Democrats and the
Republicans have links to Al Qaeda and are complicit in the "war on
terrorism".
In a bitter irony, the very same terrorist organization (Al Qaeda)
which were supported by successive administrations, is heralded in both
the Republican and Democratic election platforms as "an enemy of
America". (See Michel Chossudovsky, Expose the Links between Al Qaeda
and the Bush Administration, Centre for Research on Globalization,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO303D.html , 15 March 2003).
Ironically, Osama bin Laden has become part of the election ritual,
providing all the necessary buzz-words for a stylized debate on
"Homeland Security", which is a central feature of the election
platform of both political parties. . .
Republicans or Democrats: The war agenda remains intact . The Democrats
do not oppose President Bush's request to Congress to allocate $87
billion to finance Iraq's occupation and "reconstruction." :
"The consent on financing the occupation and the reconstruction of
Iraq are strong indications that there will be no substantial change in
the U.S. policy in the region, at least until the strategic goal of the
war is achieved." (Salameh Nematt, Bin Laden and the U.S. Elections,
Salameh Nematt Al-Hayat, 11 September 2003,
http://english.daralhayat.com/OPED/09-2003/Article-20030911-9082bea7-
c0a8-01ed-002a-cc14f6dc4d75/story.html )
The Republicans led the first Gulf war, the Democrats led the wars in
the Balkans leading to the military occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina
under the Dayton Accords in 1995 and the invasion of Kosovo in 1999.
The Democrats were in office during the devastating wars in Rwanda and
the Congo, leading to more than 3 million deaths. The Democrats and the
Republicans joined hands in enforcing the "No Fly Zone" (1991-2003) and
a twelve year program of economic sanctions and bombing of Iraq.
The Clinton-led wars in the Balkans were a stage of the "road-map".
They were part of a broader US led-war extending from the Balkans into
the Middle East and Central Asia.
Republicans present a consistent team dominated by the Neo-cons
including former Iran Contra officials of the Reagan administration.
The GOP's war agenda is defined in terms of "multiple and simultaneous
theater wars" as contained in the Project for the New American Century
(PNAC). (See http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAC304A.html ). The
PNAC also foresaw the triggering of a so-called "Pearl Harbor Event" to
mobilize public opinion in support of the war agenda. (Ibid).
While there are substantive differences between the Neo-Cons and
leading Democrats, Bush's National Security doctrine is, in many
regards, a continuation of that formulated by Clinton in 1995, which
was based on a "strategy of containment of rogue states".
There are significant differences. The NeoCons are more reckless than
the Democrats, particularly with regard to nuclear policy. The
Democrats under the Clinton adminstration were more skillful in using
the UN system and multilateral framework to their advantage to
effectively pursue their war agenda.
It is worth mentioning, however, that US Central Command (USCENTCOM)
had already, during the Clinton administration, formulated "in theater
war plans" to invade Iraq and Iran. And the stated objective of these
1995 war plans was oil::
"The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the
President's National Security Strategy (NSS) [President Clinton] and
the Chairman's National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of
the United States Central Command's theater strategy. The NSS directs
implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of
Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests,
to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual
containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region
without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM's theater strategy
is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement,
as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States' vital interest
in the region - uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf
oil."(USCENTCOM,
http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/
stratgic.htm#USPolicy )
In fact, broadly the same concepts of Homeland Defense, preventive
war, etc. are contained in Clinton's 1999 and 2000 National Security
Strategy documents.(See
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/national/ )
In other words, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq under the Bush
administration were part of the bipartisan road-map to Empire, --i.e. a
continuation of a war agenda which had already been decided upon well
in advance of Bush's accession to the White House in January 2001. This
should come as no surprise since many of the people in charge of these
war plans, including CIA director George Tenet,had been appointed
during the Clinton administration.
Increasingly, the military-intelligence establishment (rather than the
State Department, the White House and the US Congress) call the shots
on US foreign policy , with the Texas oil giants, the defense
contractors and Wall Street operating discretely behind the scenes.
Ultimately, the war agenda and "Homeland Security" (including the
ongoing militarisation of civilian police and judicial institutions)
are determined by powerful economic interests. Party politics largely
serves as a smokescreen.
It is, therefore, unlikely that the Democrats would undo either the War
agenda or the Patriot Act.
Totalitarian State in America: De facto Military Dictatorship
The backbone of this system is militarisation, including territorial
conquest and military occupation. Behind the democratic facade and the
bipartisan ritual, a de facto military dictatorship prevails.
Militarisation in turn endorses and enforces the global "free market"
on behalf of dominant economic and financial interests.
In other words, the underlying political and economic power structures
will not be fundamentally modified through "regime rotation" and the
ritual of presidential and Congressional elections.
To effectively build their "legitimacy", both the Democrats and
Republicans need to uphold the falsehoods behind the "war on terrorism".
Sustaining the "freedom and democracy rhetoric" is not only part of
this bipartisan ritual, it is part of the process of building a
totalitarian State in America under the disguise of a functioning
democracy.
Let us be under no illusion: the 2004 presidential elections will not
result in a significant change of direction.
To reverse the tide of war, military bases must be closed down, the war
machine namely the production of advanced weapons systems (WMDs) must
be dismantled, the evolving police state must be dismantled, etc.
To achieve these broad objectives, it is essential to break the
legitimacy of the military and political actors who rule in our name.
The falsehoods which sustain the legitimacy of the bipartisan ritual
must be unraveled.
Both parties share the same war agenda. There are war criminals in
both political parties. Both parties are complicit in the 9/11
cover-up.
The evidence points to what is best described as "the criminalization
of the State", which also includes the Judiciary and the bipartisan
corridors of the US Congress.
In the words of Andreas van Buelow, former German Minister of Defense
and author of The CIA and September 11: "If what I say is right, the
whole US government should end up behind bars,"
---
Photo:
1999 War Criminals Join Hands (Kosovo 1999).
From Left to Right:
Hashim Thaci, Head of the KLA, closely linked to Osama bin Laden's Al
Qaeda. Hashim Thaci had ordered political assassinations directed
against the Party of Ibrahim Rugova. Thaci was a protÈgÈ of Madeleine
Albright (see photo below).
Bernard Kouchner, Head of United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) in
Kosovo (July 1999- January 2001), instrumental in elevating the KLA to
UN status.
General Michael Jackson, Commander of KFOR Troops in Kosovo.
General Agim Ceku, Military Commander of the KPC, investigated by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) "for
alleged war crimes committed against ethnic Serbs in Croatia between
1993 and 1995." ( AFP 13 Oct 1999)
General Wesley Clark, NATO Supreme Commander.
[The only person missing in the photo is Osama bin Laden.]
---
Photos:
Madeleine Albright greets KLA Hashim Thaci
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke (appointed by President Clinton) with a
KLA Commander, Summer 1998
Source of pictures: Senate Republican Party Committee,
http://www.kosovo.com/rpc.html
---
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of War and Globalisation, the Truth
behind Septmber 11 , 2003. For details click here .
Recent writings by Michel Chossudovsky
© Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, CRG 2003 For fair use only/ pour
usage Èquitable seulement .
---
Regime Rotation in America
by Michel Chossudovsky
Wesley Clark, Osama bin Laden and the 2004 Presidential Elections
www.globalresearch.ca 22 October 2003
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO310B.html
---
Has General Wesley Clark joined the ranks of the 9/11 "conspiracy
theorists"?
Clark has not only accused George W. of "possible manipulation of
intelligence", he is also calling for an investigation "into possible
'criminal' conduct in the drive to war." (Daily Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/04/
wclark04.xml 4 October 2003)
Strong words from the front-runner Democratic candidate in the
presidential race:
"Nothing could be a more serious violation of public trust than
consciously to make a case for war based on false claims... We need to
know if we were intentionally deceived... This administration is trying
to do something that ought to be politically impossible to do in a
democracy, and that is to govern against the will of the majority...
That requires twisted facts, silence, secrecy and very poor lighting."
(quoted in Daily Telegraph, 4 October 2003)
General Clark's statement hints to a cover-up in the 9/11 joint
Senate-House inquiry, regarding Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, which he
identifies as "terrorist sponsors". In other words, the Retired Four
Star General tacitly acknowledges the insidious role played by
Washington's indefectible ally, the military government of President
Pervez Musharraf, which is known to have supported Al Qaeda and the
Taliban.
It is important that we understand the political motivations behind
Wesley Clark's position.
While his observations regarding the Bush administration are accurate,
his own record is tainted.
During his stint as NATO Supreme Commander (1997-2000), Wesley Clark
was in permanent liaison with the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). Under
Wesley Clark's command, NATO directly sponsored a terrorist
paramilitary army, with links to Al Qaeda and the trans-Balkan
narcotics trade.
About turn: a former "terrorist sponsor" (to use his own words) under
NATO auspices is now accusing the Bush administration of "seizing on
the Sept. 11 attacks for justification [to wage war]" (San Francisco
Chronicle, 2 October 2003).
In an utterly twisted logic, an individual who is recognized as a war
criminal is seeking the support of the anti-war movement. In the words
of the Palestine Chronicle:
"Enthusiastic support for front-running Democratic presidential
contenders Wesley Clark and Howard Dean from liberals and some
progressives reveals the dismal state of oppositional politics in
America. Decades of unremitting right wing assaults on every sphere of
American life has so jerked the political landscape to the right, that
instead of clamoring for sweeping or even revolutionary changes as in
days long past, the main battle-cry coming from 'the left' is ``Anybody
But Bush'".(Sunil Sharma and Josh Frank,Two Measures of American
Desperation: Wesley Clark and Howard Dean, 17 October 2003,
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/story.php?sid=20031017175449217 )
Filmmaker and antiwar critic Michael Moore supports the candidacies of
Wesley Clark and Howard Dean: "We need a doctor [Dean] because there
are 43 million of us without health care and we need a general to kick
Bush's ass."
(http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/10/15/
3f8ce93feca0a 15 October 2003).
Regime Rotation in America
Clark's Bush bashing and antiwar stance, supported by Hollywood and
Wall Street, is not meant to reverse the tide of war. Quite the
opposite. It provides a phony legitimacy to the war agenda in the name
of "peace building" and democracy.
It perpetuates "the big lie".
What this bipartisan mud-slinging achieves is "regime rotation" in
America. The "war on terrorism" which underlies the national security
agenda remains functionally intact.
Ironically, during the Clinton administration, it was the Republicans
who were accusing Bill Clinton of having links to the Islamic Militant
Network in Bosnia and Kosovo. In a carefully 1999 document prepared by
the Senate Republican Party Committee, the GOP blatantly accused
Clinton of supporting terrorism in Kosovo:
"By the time the NATO air strikes began, the Clinton Administration's
partnership with the KLA was unambiguous... Such an effusive embrace by
top Clinton Administration officials of an organization that only a
year ago one of its own top officials labeled as "terrorist" is, to say
the least, a startling development. Even more importantly, the new
Clinton/KLA partnership may obscure troubling allegations about the KLA
that the Clinton Administration has thus far neglected to address."
(Senate Republican Party Committee, The Kosovo Liberation Army: Does
Clinton Policy Support Group with Terror, Drug Ties?
http://www.kosovo.com/rpc.html , Washington, March 31, 1999)
A previous 1997 document emanating from the House Republican Party
Committee entitled "Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn
Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base", accused Clinton of working hand in
glove with Al Qaeda in Bosnia:
"The Clinton administrationís hands-on involvement with the Islamic
network's arms pipeline included inspections of missiles from Iran by
U.S. government officials... [T]he Third World Relief Agency (TWRA), a
Sudan-based, phoney humanitarian organization ... has been a major link
in the arms pipeline to Bosnia... TWRA is believed to be connected with
such fixtures of the Islamic terror network as Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman
(the convicted mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing)
and Osama bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi ÈmigrÈ believed to bankroll
numerous militant groups." (Congressional Press Release, Republican
Party Committee (RPC), U.S. Congress, Clinton-Approved Iranian Arms
Transfers Help Turn Bosnia into Militant Islamic Base, Washington DC,
16 January 1997, available on the website of the Centre of Research on
Globalisation (CRG) at http://globalresearch.ca/articles/DCH109A.html .)
Needless to say, the Republicans and the Democrats are complicit. They
accuse one another of having links to Al Qaeda. Yet successive
Democratic and Republican administrations have been involved from the
outset of the Soviet Afghan war in 1979 (during the Presidency of Jimmy
Carter) in developing Al Qaeda as a US sponsored "intelligence asset".
These Congressional briefs, however, are not meant to be read by the
broader public. They are used to score political points in a
longstanding bipartisan ritual, while providing the illusion of a
functioning Legislature, where political leaders are said to be held
accountable.
If the Democrats were to win the 2004 presidential elections,
continuity in US foreign policy would be maintained. More importantly,
the "war on terrorism" and the lies concerning Al Qaeda and 9/11 would
also be maintained.
Bin Laden and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA)
The role of the Kosovo Liberaiton Army (KLA) as a terrorist
organization is amply documented by Congressional transcripts.
According to Frank Ciluffo of the Globalized Organised Crime Program,
in a testimony presented to the House of Representatives Judicial
Committee:
"What was largely hidden from public view was the fact that the KLA
raise part of their funds from the sale of narcotics. Albania and
Kosovo lie at the heart of the "Balkan Route" that links the "Golden
Crescent" of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the drug markets of Europe.
This route is worth an estimated $400 billion a year and handles 80
percent of heroin destined for Europe." (House Judiciary Committee, 13
December 2000)
The relationship between the KLA and Osama bin Laden is confirmed by
Interpol's Criminal Intelligence division:
"The U.S. State Department listed the KLA as a terrorist organization,
indicating that it was financing its operations with money from the
international heroin trade and loans from Islamic countries and
individuals, among them allegedly Usama bin Laden . Another link to bin
Laden is the fact that the brother of a leader in an Egyptian Jihad
organization and also a military commander of Usama bin Laden, was
leading an elite KLA unit during the Kosovo conflict." (US Congress,
Testimony of Ralf Mutschke of Interpol's Criminal Intelligence
Division, to the House Judicial Committee, 13 December 2000).
The evidence regarding the KLA contained in Congressional transcripts,
news reports and intelligence documents directly implicates General
Wesley Clark.
During his stint as NATO Supreme commander (1997-2000). Clark had close
personal ties with KLA Chief of Staff Commander Brigadier Agim Ceku and
KLA Leader Hashim Thaci (see photo below ).
Agim Ceku, who directly collaborated with NATO during the 1999 Kosovo
campaign is recognized by the Hague ICTY Tribunal "for alleged war
crimes committed against ethnic Serbs in Croatia between 1993 and
1995." ( AFP 13 Oct 1999)
Hashim Thaci had ordered the political assassination of his opponents
in Ibrahim Rugova's nationalist Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) (See
November 2000 BBC Report at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1037302.stm ). According to The
Boston Globe (2 August 1999):
"Terrorists with ties to Osama bin Laden running around with AK-47s and
anti-tank weapons is bad enough. Worse, Thaci's boys aren't just
killers and kleptos, but mafioso who are neck deep in the drug trade.
(During the war, the Washington Times quoted an unnamed U.S. drug
enforcement official commenting on the KLA, 'They were drug dealers in
1998 and now, because of politics, they're freedom fighters.')"
In the wake of the 1999 Kosovo campaign, under NATO regency, these acts
of political assassination--ordered by the self-proclaimed Provisional
Government of Kosovo (PGK)-- were carried out in a totally permissive
environment. The leaders of the KLA rather than being arrested by NATO
for war crimes, were granted KFOR protection. According to one report
of the Foreign Policy Institute (published during the 1999 bombings:
"...the KLA have [no] qualms about murdering Rugova's collaborators,
whom it accused of the "crime" of moderation...(Michael Radu, "Don't
Arm the KLA", CNS Commentary from the Foreign Policy Research
Institute, 7 April, 1999).
In course of the bombing campaign, Fehmi Agani, one of Rugova's closest
collaborators in the Kosovo Democratic League (KDL) was executed on the
orders of the r Hashim Thaci.(Tanjug Press Dispatch, 14 May 1999): "If
Thaci actually considered Rugova a threat, he would not hesitate to
have Rugova removed from the Kosovo political landscape." (Stratfor
Comment, "Rugova Faced with a Choice of Two Losses", Stratfor, 29 July
1999). In turn, the KLA has abducted and killed numerous professionals
and intellectuals.
And who was behind the 29 year old KLA leader Hashim Thaci: Madeleine
Albright and Wesley Clark. (see photos below ).
NATO, the KLA and Al Qaeda
According to a US Department of Defense briefing, so-called "initial
contacts" between the KLA and NATO took place in mid-1998, during the
first part of General Clark's mandate as NATO Commander in Chief:
"...the realization has come to people [in NATO] that we [NATO led by
Wesley Clark] have to have the UCK [acronym for KLA in Albanian]
involved in this process because they have shown at least the potential
to be rejectionists of any deal that could be worked out there with the
existing Kosovo parties. So somehow they have to be brought in and
that's why we've made some initial contacts there with the group,
hopefully the right people in the group, to try and bring them into
this negotiating process." (US Department of Defense, Background
Briefing, July 15, 1998)
["Hopefully the right group" means "we deal with people who obey
orders."]
While these "initial contacts" were acknowledged by NATO officially
only in mid-1998, the KLA had (according to several reports) been
receiving "covert support" and training from the CIA and Germany's
Bundes Nachrichten Dienst (BND) since the mid-nineties. These covert
operations were known and approved by NATO. (Michel Chossudovsky,
Kosovo `Freedom Fighters' Financed by Organised Crime, Covert Action
Quarterly, 2000)
The development and training of KLA forces was part of NATO planning,
directly led by General Wesley Clark. In the words of former Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) secret agent Michael Levine, writing
at the height of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia:
"Ten years ago we were arming and equipping the worst elements of the
Mujahideen in Afghanistan - drug traffickers, arms smugglers,
anti-American terroristsÖNow we're doing the same thing with the KLA,
which is tied in with every known middle and far eastern drug cartel.
Interpol, Europol, and nearly every European intelligence and
counter-narcotics agency has files open on drug syndicates that lead
right to the KLA, and right to Albanian gangs in this country." (New
American Magazine, May 24, 1999)
The KLA acted as a paramilitary force, present on the ground in Kosovo.
It was integrated by US and British SAS Special Forces and remained in
close liaison with NATO. The KLA was also used by NATO High Command to
acquire intelligence on bombing targets during the 1999 Kosovo campaign.
Confirmed by British military sources, the task of arming and training
of the KLA had been entrusted in 1998 to the US Defence Intelligence
Agency (DIA) and Britain's Secret Intelligence Services MI6, together
with "former and serving members of 22 SAS [Britain's 22nd Special Air
Services Regiment], as well as three British and American private
security companies". (The Scotsman, Glasgow, 29 August 1999)
"The US DIA approached MI6 to arrange a training program for the KLA,
said a senior British military source. `MI6 then sub-contracted the
operation to two British security companies, who in turn approached a
number of former members of the (22 SAS) regiment. Lists were then
drawn up of weapons and equipment needed by the KLA.' While these
covert operations were continuing, serving members of 22 SAS Regiment,
mostly from the unit's D Squadron, were first deployed in Kosovo before
the beginning of the bombing campaign in March [1999]." (Ibid)
While British SAS Special Forces in bases in Northern Albania were
training the KLA, military instructors from Turkey and Afghanistan
financed by the "Islamic jihad" were providing the KLA with guerilla
and diversion tactics:
"Bin Laden had visited Albania himself. He was one of several
fundamentalist groups that had sent units to fight in Kosovo, ... Bin
Laden is believed to have established an operation in Albania in 1994
... Albanian sources say Sali Berisha, who was then president, had
links with some groups that later proved to be extreme
fundamentalists." (Sunday Times, London, 29 November 1998.)
In the Wake of the 1999 Bombing of Yugoslavia
In the wake of the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO under Wesley
Clark's command, supported the extension of the terrorist activities of
the KLA into Southern Serbia and Macedonia.
Meanwhile, the KLA --renamed the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC)-- was
elevated to United Nations status, implying the granting of
"legitimate" sources of funding through United Nations as well as
through bilateral channels, including direct US military aid.
In other words, a terrorist paramilitary force supported by Al Qaeda
and linked to organized crime becomes a legitimate "civilian" National
Guard, directly supported by NATO and the UN.
And barely two months after the official inauguration of the KPC under
UN auspices (September 1999), KPC-KLA commanders - using UN resources
and equipment - were already preparing the assaults into Macedonia, as
a logical follow-up to their terrorist activities in Kosovo. In this
endeavour they had the full support of NATO and the US military, not to
mention the so-called "international community" symbolised by the UN
Mission to Kosovo (UNMIK), headed by France's former Minister of Health
Bernard Kouchner:
According to the Skopje daily Dnevnik, the KPC had established a "sixth
operation zone" in Southern Serbia and Macedonia:
"Sources, who insist on anonymity, claim that the headquarters of the
Kosovo protection brigades [i.e. linked to the UN sponsored KPC] have
[March 2000] already been formed in Tetovo, Gostivar and Skopje. They
are being prepared in Debar and Struga [on the border with Albania] as
well, and their members have defined codes." (Macedonian Information
Centre Newsletter, Skopje, 21 March 2000, published by BBC Summary of
World Broadcast, 24 March 2000)
According to the BBC, "Western special forces were still training the
guerrillas" meaning that they were assisting the KLA in opening up "a
sixth operation zone" in Southern Serbia and Macedonia. (BBC, 29
January 2001, at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/newsid_1142000/
1142478.stm )
Ironically the United Nations in a confidential February 2000 report to
Secretary General Kofi Annan acknowledged that the KPC, was responsible
for "criminal activities . . . killings, ill-treatment (and) torture,
illegal policing, abuse of authority, intimidation, breaches of
political neutrality and hate-speech.". These occurred at the height
of Bernard Kouchner's "humanitarian" mandate as the UN Interim
Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) (15 July 1999 to 12 January
2001).
And in this regard, Kouchner, whose mandate was to channel humanitarian
aid under UN auspices, worked closely with NATO officials including
Wesley Clark in providing support to Kosovo's terrorist paramilitary
army. (See photo below ). Let us not forget that Bernard Kouchner was
the Founder of "Doctors without Borders".(MÈdecins sans frontiËres)
According to the London Observer, "the grim message to the U.N.
secretary-general is that his own organization [led by UNMIK Head
Bernard Kouchner] is paying the salaries of many of the offenders"
(Observer, http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/031400-03.htm , 14
March 2000)
The 2004 Presidential Elections
What choices for the US Electorate?
The evidence presented above confirms that both the Democrats and the
Republicans have links to Al Qaeda and are complicit in the "war on
terrorism".
In a bitter irony, the very same terrorist organization (Al Qaeda)
which were supported by successive administrations, is heralded in both
the Republican and Democratic election platforms as "an enemy of
America". (See Michel Chossudovsky, Expose the Links between Al Qaeda
and the Bush Administration, Centre for Research on Globalization,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO303D.html , 15 March 2003).
Ironically, Osama bin Laden has become part of the election ritual,
providing all the necessary buzz-words for a stylized debate on
"Homeland Security", which is a central feature of the election
platform of both political parties. . .
Republicans or Democrats: The war agenda remains intact . The Democrats
do not oppose President Bush's request to Congress to allocate $87
billion to finance Iraq's occupation and "reconstruction." :
"The consent on financing the occupation and the reconstruction of
Iraq are strong indications that there will be no substantial change in
the U.S. policy in the region, at least until the strategic goal of the
war is achieved." (Salameh Nematt, Bin Laden and the U.S. Elections,
Salameh Nematt Al-Hayat, 11 September 2003,
http://english.daralhayat.com/OPED/09-2003/Article-20030911-9082bea7-
c0a8-01ed-002a-cc14f6dc4d75/story.html )
The Republicans led the first Gulf war, the Democrats led the wars in
the Balkans leading to the military occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina
under the Dayton Accords in 1995 and the invasion of Kosovo in 1999.
The Democrats were in office during the devastating wars in Rwanda and
the Congo, leading to more than 3 million deaths. The Democrats and the
Republicans joined hands in enforcing the "No Fly Zone" (1991-2003) and
a twelve year program of economic sanctions and bombing of Iraq.
The Clinton-led wars in the Balkans were a stage of the "road-map".
They were part of a broader US led-war extending from the Balkans into
the Middle East and Central Asia.
Republicans present a consistent team dominated by the Neo-cons
including former Iran Contra officials of the Reagan administration.
The GOP's war agenda is defined in terms of "multiple and simultaneous
theater wars" as contained in the Project for the New American Century
(PNAC). (See http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAC304A.html ). The
PNAC also foresaw the triggering of a so-called "Pearl Harbor Event" to
mobilize public opinion in support of the war agenda. (Ibid).
While there are substantive differences between the Neo-Cons and
leading Democrats, Bush's National Security doctrine is, in many
regards, a continuation of that formulated by Clinton in 1995, which
was based on a "strategy of containment of rogue states".
There are significant differences. The NeoCons are more reckless than
the Democrats, particularly with regard to nuclear policy. The
Democrats under the Clinton adminstration were more skillful in using
the UN system and multilateral framework to their advantage to
effectively pursue their war agenda.
It is worth mentioning, however, that US Central Command (USCENTCOM)
had already, during the Clinton administration, formulated "in theater
war plans" to invade Iraq and Iran. And the stated objective of these
1995 war plans was oil::
"The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the
President's National Security Strategy (NSS) [President Clinton] and
the Chairman's National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of
the United States Central Command's theater strategy. The NSS directs
implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of
Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests,
to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual
containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region
without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM's theater strategy
is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement,
as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States' vital interest
in the region - uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf
oil."(USCENTCOM,
http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/
stratgic.htm#USPolicy )
In fact, broadly the same concepts of Homeland Defense, preventive
war, etc. are contained in Clinton's 1999 and 2000 National Security
Strategy documents.(See
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/national/ )
In other words, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq under the Bush
administration were part of the bipartisan road-map to Empire, --i.e. a
continuation of a war agenda which had already been decided upon well
in advance of Bush's accession to the White House in January 2001. This
should come as no surprise since many of the people in charge of these
war plans, including CIA director George Tenet,had been appointed
during the Clinton administration.
Increasingly, the military-intelligence establishment (rather than the
State Department, the White House and the US Congress) call the shots
on US foreign policy , with the Texas oil giants, the defense
contractors and Wall Street operating discretely behind the scenes.
Ultimately, the war agenda and "Homeland Security" (including the
ongoing militarisation of civilian police and judicial institutions)
are determined by powerful economic interests. Party politics largely
serves as a smokescreen.
It is, therefore, unlikely that the Democrats would undo either the War
agenda or the Patriot Act.
Totalitarian State in America: De facto Military Dictatorship
The backbone of this system is militarisation, including territorial
conquest and military occupation. Behind the democratic facade and the
bipartisan ritual, a de facto military dictatorship prevails.
Militarisation in turn endorses and enforces the global "free market"
on behalf of dominant economic and financial interests.
In other words, the underlying political and economic power structures
will not be fundamentally modified through "regime rotation" and the
ritual of presidential and Congressional elections.
To effectively build their "legitimacy", both the Democrats and
Republicans need to uphold the falsehoods behind the "war on terrorism".
Sustaining the "freedom and democracy rhetoric" is not only part of
this bipartisan ritual, it is part of the process of building a
totalitarian State in America under the disguise of a functioning
democracy.
Let us be under no illusion: the 2004 presidential elections will not
result in a significant change of direction.
To reverse the tide of war, military bases must be closed down, the war
machine namely the production of advanced weapons systems (WMDs) must
be dismantled, the evolving police state must be dismantled, etc.
To achieve these broad objectives, it is essential to break the
legitimacy of the military and political actors who rule in our name.
The falsehoods which sustain the legitimacy of the bipartisan ritual
must be unraveled.
Both parties share the same war agenda. There are war criminals in
both political parties. Both parties are complicit in the 9/11
cover-up.
The evidence points to what is best described as "the criminalization
of the State", which also includes the Judiciary and the bipartisan
corridors of the US Congress.
In the words of Andreas van Buelow, former German Minister of Defense
and author of The CIA and September 11: "If what I say is right, the
whole US government should end up behind bars,"
---
Photo:
1999 War Criminals Join Hands (Kosovo 1999).
From Left to Right:
Hashim Thaci, Head of the KLA, closely linked to Osama bin Laden's Al
Qaeda. Hashim Thaci had ordered political assassinations directed
against the Party of Ibrahim Rugova. Thaci was a protÈgÈ of Madeleine
Albright (see photo below).
Bernard Kouchner, Head of United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) in
Kosovo (July 1999- January 2001), instrumental in elevating the KLA to
UN status.
General Michael Jackson, Commander of KFOR Troops in Kosovo.
General Agim Ceku, Military Commander of the KPC, investigated by the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) "for
alleged war crimes committed against ethnic Serbs in Croatia between
1993 and 1995." ( AFP 13 Oct 1999)
General Wesley Clark, NATO Supreme Commander.
[The only person missing in the photo is Osama bin Laden.]
---
Photos:
Madeleine Albright greets KLA Hashim Thaci
Ambassador Richard Holbrooke (appointed by President Clinton) with a
KLA Commander, Summer 1998
Source of pictures: Senate Republican Party Committee,
http://www.kosovo.com/rpc.html
---
Michel Chossudovsky is the author of War and Globalisation, the Truth
behind Septmber 11 , 2003. For details click here .
Recent writings by Michel Chossudovsky
© Copyright Michel Chossudovsky, CRG 2003 For fair use only/ pour
usage Èquitable seulement .
INTERVENTO DELLO STORICO ANGELO DEL BOCA, ORATORE UFFICIALE
ALLA COMMEMORAZIONE DEL 50° ANNIVERSARIO DELL'ECCIDIO DI FONDOTOCE
Cari Amici!
sono passati quasi sessant'anni da quel terribile 20 giugno 1944 ed
ancora oggi si stenta a credere che un popolo civile come quello
tedesco che ha dato i natali a kant, a Goethe, a Schiller, a Thomas
Mann, possa essersi macchiato di questo e di altre migliaia di crimini,
in Italia e in Europa. Sembra impossibile che un paese che ha ascoltato
la predicazione di un geniale riformatore religioso come Martin Lutero,
che si scagliava contro il mercato delle indulgenze per proclamare il
primato della fede, abbia perso completamente la fede in Dio e negli
uomini, per ritornare ai riti pagani di Odino e del Walhalla, e per
sprofondare nella peggiore barbarie, nella quale sarebbe stato
possibile concepire persino l'Olocausto. Eppure ciò è accaduto. Qui. in
questa vasta sana affossata. ai confini tra il Verbano e l’Ossola, la
generazione educata da Hitler ha voluto darci un esempio di come si può
creare l'inferno in terra, con tutti i suoi gironi, ì suoi tormenti, i
suoi spasimi.
Se noi ripercorriamo la via crucis dei 43 partigiani, che ha inizio
dalle cantine dell'Asilo infantile di Malesco, ci accorgiamo che i
nazisti intendono inscenare uno spettacolo, il più odioso e macabro
possibile, per ricordare alle popolazioni della regione, che hanno
osato sfidare il soldato tedesco, che esso è intoccabile ed impunibile,
in quanto appartiene ad una
razza superiore, destinata a governare l'Europa e forse, col tempo,
anche l'intero pianeta. Che egli appartenga al popolo eletto,
all'Herrenvolk, lo scandisce la precisa disposizione del
feldmaresciallo Albert Kesserling: per ogni tedesco ucciso debbono
pagare con la vita dieci italiani.
Sono le ore 15 del 20 giugno quando un reparto di SS preleva dalla
cantina di Villa Caramona, ad Intra, i quarantatrè partigiani delle
formazioni "Mario Flaim", "Cesare Battisti" e "Giovine Italia"
rastrellati in VaI Grande. E subito ha inizio lo spettacolo, secondo
una regia malvagia. In testa alla colonna vengono posti il tenente Ezio
Rizzato, dal volto "orribilmente tumefatto per le percosse ricevute"
riferirà un testimone;
Cleonice Tomassetti, che si è attirata l'odio degli aguzzini per aver
invitato compagni a morire con dignità; e due altri partigiani che
reggono un cartello, che recita: "Sono questi i liberatori d'Italia
oppure sono banditi?". Seguono gli altri condannati; a morte, sotto 'la
stretta sorveglianza dei nazisti. È una giornata particolarmente afosa
e il cammino da Intra a Fondotoce è lungo, sembra infinito. Quasi tutti
i partigiani recano i segni delle violenze e delle torture subite a
Malesco e a Intra. Alcuni hanno il viso coperto di sangue,
irriconoscibile. Altri camminano a stento per le percosse ricevute agli
arti inferiori. La colonna lascia Intra, attraversa Pallanza, poi Suna
ed infine l'abitato della frazione di Fondotoce. Se i nazisti contavano
su di uno spettacolo ammonitore, tale da ricordare per secoli il furore
tedesco, debbono ricredersi. Le strade sono
deserte. I cascinali sbarrati. Le finestre chiuse. La nostra gente
osserva si il corteo dei morituri, ma di nascosto, Soffre e prega. La
marcia della morte dura tre lunghissime ore. Alle 18 la colonna giunge
sul greto del canale che allaccia il lago di Mergozzo al lago Maggiore.
E il luogo scelto dai nazisti per la strage. Qui i quarantatrè
partigiani vengono avviati al plotone di esecuzione tre per volta.
Tutti si comportano in modo
ammirevole, a cominciare dall'umile Cleonice Tomassetti, che cade
gridando "Viva l'Italia libera". il tragico cerimoniale dura un'ora.
Poi i colpi di grazia. Dai quali si salva Carlo Suzzi, seppure ferito
in più parti.
Di questo episodio, uno dei più gravi dell'occupazione tedesca,
dobbiamo conservare per sempre la memoria. Senza dimenticare un solo
particolare, una sola brutalità, un solo gesto dì riscatto.
Ci aiutano a ricordare i versi, bellissimi, di Dante Strona:
Fondotoce / una parola lunga, come respiro / per un sonno di pace / su
cuscini d'alghe / sul muro dei fucilati / il capelvenere dei vent’anni
/ al tramonto, l'onda si colora / I come quel giorno.
Degli aguzzini del 20 giugno 1944, ed erano tanti, si sono perse
ovviamente le tracce. Molto probabilmente la storia del loro crimine è
contenuta in uno dei 695 fascicoli gelosamente custoditi per decenni
nell"'armadio della vergogna". Come è noto, pochissimi processi furono
celebrati nel dopoguerra
contro i criminali nazisti. I generali von Mackensen e Maltzer,
incriminati per la strage delle Fosse Ardeatine, furono condannati alla
pena capitale, presto commutata nell'ergastolo. Ma nel 1952, tanto von
Mackensen che
Kesserling, venivano rimessi in libertà. E noi, oggi, sappiamo anche il
perché. Come hanno riferito gli storici Filippo Focardi e Lutz
Klinkhammer, la diplomazia e il Governo italiani decisero di limitare
le rivendicazioni nei confronti dei criminali di guerra tedeschi per
paura che un'azione energica contro i tedeschi si ritorcesse a danno
dell'Italia, impegnata a proteggere i propri cittadini reclamati per
crimini di guerra da Stati esteri (in prima fila, dalla Jugoslavia)".
Mai baratto fu più odioso ed immondo. Ma non era che il principio. Chi
è avanti negli anni, come chi vi parla, ricorderà benissimo che nei
primi anni del dopoguerra furono istruiti moltissimi processi contro i
partigiani, mentre una sciagurata amnistia mandava assolti migliaia di
criminali. fascisti e nazisti. Non mancarono
neppure i tentativi per abbattere la Repubblica nata dalla Resistenza.
Il più clamoroso fu quello del governo Tambroni, d'intesa con i
neofascisti del Movimento Sociale Italiano, per fare dell'Italia una
copia della Grecia dei colonnelli.
Falliti i golpe contro la Repubblica (non va dimenticato quello di
Junio Valerio Borghese, già comandante della X° Flottiglia MAS e
alleato di Hitler nei seicento giorni di Salò), sì tentava di nuocere
all’epopea della Resistenza con mezzi più subdoli e malvagi. Ad
esempio, riducendone il valore sotto il profilo militare, sminuendo il
suo apporto alla vittoria finale, anche se il primo a riconoscerlo e ad
apprezzarlo era lo stesso generale americano Mark Clark, comandante in
capo delle forze alleate in Italia.
Per chi le ha dimenticate, le sue parole di elogio, pronunciate il 30
aprile subito dopo la sua entrata nella Milano liberata dalle forze
partigiane, vogliamo oggi ricordarle:
"Patrioti ora che la guerra è finita, sento il dovere di rivolgere a
voi che con la vostra azione avete tanto contribuito al conseguimento
della vittoria, il mio profondo compiacimento. Siete stati degni delle
nobili tradizioni lasciate in retaggio dai martiri e dagli eroi del
Risorgimento. Avete dato alla causa della civiltà democratica tutto
quanto era in vostro potere. Ciò non sarà dimenticato".
Non sono parole di circostanza. E neppure dettate dall'emozione. Uomo
di guerra, abituato a muovere sui vari fronti centinaia di migliaia di
uomini ed a valutare le perdite nella fornace di una guerra moderna, il
generale Clark sa perfettamente che cosa significano 44.720 partigiani
uccisi e
21.168 invalidi. Sa che è stata una guerra di popolo, una guerra di
liberazione dallo straniero, che ha mobilitato 364.773 fra partigiani
combattenti e patrioti. Ossia il più vasto e spontaneo movimento
popolare che la storia d'Italia ricordi.
Il generale Clark è anche in grado di valutare lo straordinario apporto
della Resistenza nelle operazioni di antisabotaggio e nella difesa
dell'apparato produttivo. Le centrali idroelettriche dell'Ossola
vengono poste in salvo grazie ai partigiani. E sono ancora i partigiani
a salvare il porto di Genova, che genieri del generale Gunther Meinhold
avevano minato. Questi fatti, queste cifre, vengono troppo spesso
dimenticati. O addirittura
contestati, contro ogni evidenza.
Un altro modo di denigrare il movimento partigiano è quello di
enfatizzarne le supposte fratture e rivalità. L'eccidio di Porzus, ad
esempio, viene spesso usato a questo scopo, dimenticando che
l'increscioso episodio di Porzus è un caso isolato e scontato in una
guerra per bande che ha coinvolto alcune centinaia di migliaia di
combattenti di tutte le estrazioni sociali. Per fare un paragone si
pensi alla guerra di liberazione dell'Algeria, che ha mobilitato meno
dì un terzo delle forze partigiane italiane e che ha causato, per
dissidi interni al Fronte di Liberazione Nazionale e relative purghe,
ben 13 mila morti.
Ma il compito del revisionismo storico, che da mezzo secolo infuria nel
nostro paese, con la pretesa dì ristabilire la verità su quel periodo
storico, è proprio quello di offuscare e dì distruggere l'immagine
radiosa della Resistenza con limitazioni e calunnie. "Ma quando una
causa è stata difesa con così possente lotta di popolo - scriveva Cino
Moscatellì nel
1958 - questa causa non muore. Lo spirito garibaldino non muore. Esso
animerà sempre i figli migliori della terra nostra finché ci siano
tenebre da fugare, servitù da abbattere, ingiustizie da vincere".
Da qualche tempo si assiste anche ad una nuova manovra, altrettanto
subdola e da respingere con fermezza. Si tratta della pretesa di
equiparare i partigiani ai militi di Salò, e ciò in base alla
considerazione che entrambi gli schieramenti hanno combattuto per la
stessa patria e molti, nei due campi, si sono sacrificati per essa. Il
risultato di questa equiparazione - si sostiene a destra, ma non
soltanto a destra - è la
riconciliazione fra i partigiani e i "ragazzi di Salò" una
riconciliazione che dovrebbe porre fine a sessant'anni di polemiche, di
scontri, di incomprensioni. Anche se sono passati sessant'anni dai
giorni della Resistenza e i nostri animi sono sicuramente più inclini
al perdono e alla comprensione, una tale proposta non può che essere
respinta. Perché si tratta di una proposta insostenibile, antistorica e
soprattutto ingiusta.
Non si può porre sullo stesso piano i partigiani, che si sono battuti
per cacciare dall'Italia il tedesco invasore e per riportare nel paese
le istituzioni democratiche abbattute dalla dittatura fascista, e i
"ragazzi di Salò" e i loro padri, che hanno combattuto per ridare fiato
al fascismo e per mantenere l'Europa sotto il tallone nazista. Non si
può mettere sullo stesso piano vittime e carnefici, combattenti per la
libertà ed alleati dei
creatori dei lager di sterminio
Con quale coraggio si propone oggi una riconciliazione quando ogni
giorno si verificano in Italia episodi di intolleranza, di teppismo, di
antisemitismo. Soltanto negli ultimi mesi sono state profanate le tombe
e le lapidi commemorative di partigiani a Torino, Modena, Genova,
Coreglia Ligure, Mira
Taglio, Cernobbio e al sacrario della Benedicta. Per non parlare delle
scritte di matrice neofascista e delle svastiche apparse a Roma,
Milano, Treviso, Pistoia, Cesena, Lucca, Ameglia, Montebelluno di
Treviso e in altre decine di località. E lungo sarebbe l'elenco delle
aggressioni neofasciste, culminate a Milano, il 17 marzo, con
l'uccisione del giovane antifascista Davide "Dax" Cesare e il ferimento
di Antonino Alesi. Ma non basta. Don Gianni Baget Bozzo noto
consigliere del premier Berlusconi, e alcuni parlamentari di Forza
Italia e di Alleanza Nazionale hanno in animo di presentare una
proposta di legge per abolire la festa del 25 aprile, con l'assurda
giustificazione che la lotta di liberazione non sarebbe stata un
movimento popolare ed avrebbe anzi diviso la coscienza nazionale. La
proposta non è ancora arrivata in parlamento, ma ciò che è accaduto il
25 aprile scorso e nella vigilia sembra una prova generale per la sua
abolizione. Per cominciare, a Treviso, il vecchio partigiano Agostino
Pavan è stato bersagliato dai leghisti con monetine mentre teneva il
discorso ufficiale. A Roma, il portavoce di Forza Italia, Sandro Bondi,
ha sostenuto che la responsabilità delle stragi naziste, quella di
Marzabotto in testa, ricade sui partigiani "che hanno radicalizzato lo
scontro con i nazisti in ritirata". Per finire, all'invito del
presidente Ciampi di recarsi in Quirinale a festeggiare il 25 aprile,
il Premier Berlusconi ha disertato la
cerimonia con la scusa banale che aveva problemi ad una mano. Non c'è
alcun dubbio. E ormai chiaro che si tende a tagliare il legame tra
antifascismo, Resistenza e Costituzione. Anche se la proposta di
abolire la ricorrenza del 25 aprile non dovesse passare, per la decisa
opposizione delle forze
democratiche del paese, è comunque evidente l'intento di seppellire,
anno dopo anno, questa gloriosa data sotto un velo di neutralità, sino
a renderla insignificante. Ma noi siamo convinti che esistono ancora
nel nostro paese forze sufficienti per impedire quest'ultimo oltraggio.
E vorremmo che oggi, qui, in questo luogo che ha visto il sacrificio di
42 eroici partigiani,
prendessimo tutti insieme l'impegno di difendere la memoria della lotta
di liberazione, quella lotta che, come ha precisato l'ex capo dello
Stato Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, non può, nè deve essere riscritta, perché
in essa affondano le radici della nostra democrazia.
Vorremmo concludere questo intervento citando un brano del manifesto
che il capitano Filippo Maria Beltrami fece affiggere in Omegna
nell'ultima notte dell'anno 1943. Dice il testo:
"E allora il popolo ha il diritto di gridare, deve gridare: BASTA!
Basta con queste infamie, basta con questi massacri. E questo grido che
già gonfia i petti sia raffica di vento che tutto spazzi, tutto
distrugga davanti a sé. Terribile diventi la nostra ira, l'ira di tutta
la nostra gente martoriata ed oppressa. Viva l'Italia!"
Quando il "capitano" stila questo manifesto, mancano soltanto 34 giorni
alla sua morte gloriosa a Megolo. E si può capire la sua ira, le sue
parole di fuoco, l'invito a gridare: BASTA! Oggi la situazione nel
nostro paese è sicuramente meno drammatica. Non c'è alcuna guerra in
corso. Non c'è alcun nemico straniero che occupa le nostre contrade.
Non ci sono avvisaglie di una guerra civile. E tuttavia ci sono troppe
anomalie nel nostro paese, troppi attentati alla Costituzione, troppo
disprezzo per le regole fondamentali della democrazia, perché si possa
vivere nella serenità e nella fiducia nell'avvenire. C'è in molti di
noi che hanno partecipato alla guerra di Liberazione, una profonda
inquietudine, una sconfinata amarezza, un senso
di impotenza che ci opprime. Ed anche - lo confessiamo - un poco di
quell'ira che il capitano Beltrami avvertiva. Una sana, giustificata,
troppo a lungo repressa ira. Ed anche la voglia prepotente di gridare:
BASTA!
Angelo Del Boca
(Fonte: COMITATO DI UNITÀ ANTIFASCISTA E ANTIMPERIALISTA - OLEGGIO
Fotocop. in proprio Via S. Maria, 11- 28047 OLEGGIO (NO)
e diffuso sulla lista: Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli. )
ALLA COMMEMORAZIONE DEL 50° ANNIVERSARIO DELL'ECCIDIO DI FONDOTOCE
Cari Amici!
sono passati quasi sessant'anni da quel terribile 20 giugno 1944 ed
ancora oggi si stenta a credere che un popolo civile come quello
tedesco che ha dato i natali a kant, a Goethe, a Schiller, a Thomas
Mann, possa essersi macchiato di questo e di altre migliaia di crimini,
in Italia e in Europa. Sembra impossibile che un paese che ha ascoltato
la predicazione di un geniale riformatore religioso come Martin Lutero,
che si scagliava contro il mercato delle indulgenze per proclamare il
primato della fede, abbia perso completamente la fede in Dio e negli
uomini, per ritornare ai riti pagani di Odino e del Walhalla, e per
sprofondare nella peggiore barbarie, nella quale sarebbe stato
possibile concepire persino l'Olocausto. Eppure ciò è accaduto. Qui. in
questa vasta sana affossata. ai confini tra il Verbano e l’Ossola, la
generazione educata da Hitler ha voluto darci un esempio di come si può
creare l'inferno in terra, con tutti i suoi gironi, ì suoi tormenti, i
suoi spasimi.
Se noi ripercorriamo la via crucis dei 43 partigiani, che ha inizio
dalle cantine dell'Asilo infantile di Malesco, ci accorgiamo che i
nazisti intendono inscenare uno spettacolo, il più odioso e macabro
possibile, per ricordare alle popolazioni della regione, che hanno
osato sfidare il soldato tedesco, che esso è intoccabile ed impunibile,
in quanto appartiene ad una
razza superiore, destinata a governare l'Europa e forse, col tempo,
anche l'intero pianeta. Che egli appartenga al popolo eletto,
all'Herrenvolk, lo scandisce la precisa disposizione del
feldmaresciallo Albert Kesserling: per ogni tedesco ucciso debbono
pagare con la vita dieci italiani.
Sono le ore 15 del 20 giugno quando un reparto di SS preleva dalla
cantina di Villa Caramona, ad Intra, i quarantatrè partigiani delle
formazioni "Mario Flaim", "Cesare Battisti" e "Giovine Italia"
rastrellati in VaI Grande. E subito ha inizio lo spettacolo, secondo
una regia malvagia. In testa alla colonna vengono posti il tenente Ezio
Rizzato, dal volto "orribilmente tumefatto per le percosse ricevute"
riferirà un testimone;
Cleonice Tomassetti, che si è attirata l'odio degli aguzzini per aver
invitato compagni a morire con dignità; e due altri partigiani che
reggono un cartello, che recita: "Sono questi i liberatori d'Italia
oppure sono banditi?". Seguono gli altri condannati; a morte, sotto 'la
stretta sorveglianza dei nazisti. È una giornata particolarmente afosa
e il cammino da Intra a Fondotoce è lungo, sembra infinito. Quasi tutti
i partigiani recano i segni delle violenze e delle torture subite a
Malesco e a Intra. Alcuni hanno il viso coperto di sangue,
irriconoscibile. Altri camminano a stento per le percosse ricevute agli
arti inferiori. La colonna lascia Intra, attraversa Pallanza, poi Suna
ed infine l'abitato della frazione di Fondotoce. Se i nazisti contavano
su di uno spettacolo ammonitore, tale da ricordare per secoli il furore
tedesco, debbono ricredersi. Le strade sono
deserte. I cascinali sbarrati. Le finestre chiuse. La nostra gente
osserva si il corteo dei morituri, ma di nascosto, Soffre e prega. La
marcia della morte dura tre lunghissime ore. Alle 18 la colonna giunge
sul greto del canale che allaccia il lago di Mergozzo al lago Maggiore.
E il luogo scelto dai nazisti per la strage. Qui i quarantatrè
partigiani vengono avviati al plotone di esecuzione tre per volta.
Tutti si comportano in modo
ammirevole, a cominciare dall'umile Cleonice Tomassetti, che cade
gridando "Viva l'Italia libera". il tragico cerimoniale dura un'ora.
Poi i colpi di grazia. Dai quali si salva Carlo Suzzi, seppure ferito
in più parti.
Di questo episodio, uno dei più gravi dell'occupazione tedesca,
dobbiamo conservare per sempre la memoria. Senza dimenticare un solo
particolare, una sola brutalità, un solo gesto dì riscatto.
Ci aiutano a ricordare i versi, bellissimi, di Dante Strona:
Fondotoce / una parola lunga, come respiro / per un sonno di pace / su
cuscini d'alghe / sul muro dei fucilati / il capelvenere dei vent’anni
/ al tramonto, l'onda si colora / I come quel giorno.
Degli aguzzini del 20 giugno 1944, ed erano tanti, si sono perse
ovviamente le tracce. Molto probabilmente la storia del loro crimine è
contenuta in uno dei 695 fascicoli gelosamente custoditi per decenni
nell"'armadio della vergogna". Come è noto, pochissimi processi furono
celebrati nel dopoguerra
contro i criminali nazisti. I generali von Mackensen e Maltzer,
incriminati per la strage delle Fosse Ardeatine, furono condannati alla
pena capitale, presto commutata nell'ergastolo. Ma nel 1952, tanto von
Mackensen che
Kesserling, venivano rimessi in libertà. E noi, oggi, sappiamo anche il
perché. Come hanno riferito gli storici Filippo Focardi e Lutz
Klinkhammer, la diplomazia e il Governo italiani decisero di limitare
le rivendicazioni nei confronti dei criminali di guerra tedeschi per
paura che un'azione energica contro i tedeschi si ritorcesse a danno
dell'Italia, impegnata a proteggere i propri cittadini reclamati per
crimini di guerra da Stati esteri (in prima fila, dalla Jugoslavia)".
Mai baratto fu più odioso ed immondo. Ma non era che il principio. Chi
è avanti negli anni, come chi vi parla, ricorderà benissimo che nei
primi anni del dopoguerra furono istruiti moltissimi processi contro i
partigiani, mentre una sciagurata amnistia mandava assolti migliaia di
criminali. fascisti e nazisti. Non mancarono
neppure i tentativi per abbattere la Repubblica nata dalla Resistenza.
Il più clamoroso fu quello del governo Tambroni, d'intesa con i
neofascisti del Movimento Sociale Italiano, per fare dell'Italia una
copia della Grecia dei colonnelli.
Falliti i golpe contro la Repubblica (non va dimenticato quello di
Junio Valerio Borghese, già comandante della X° Flottiglia MAS e
alleato di Hitler nei seicento giorni di Salò), sì tentava di nuocere
all’epopea della Resistenza con mezzi più subdoli e malvagi. Ad
esempio, riducendone il valore sotto il profilo militare, sminuendo il
suo apporto alla vittoria finale, anche se il primo a riconoscerlo e ad
apprezzarlo era lo stesso generale americano Mark Clark, comandante in
capo delle forze alleate in Italia.
Per chi le ha dimenticate, le sue parole di elogio, pronunciate il 30
aprile subito dopo la sua entrata nella Milano liberata dalle forze
partigiane, vogliamo oggi ricordarle:
"Patrioti ora che la guerra è finita, sento il dovere di rivolgere a
voi che con la vostra azione avete tanto contribuito al conseguimento
della vittoria, il mio profondo compiacimento. Siete stati degni delle
nobili tradizioni lasciate in retaggio dai martiri e dagli eroi del
Risorgimento. Avete dato alla causa della civiltà democratica tutto
quanto era in vostro potere. Ciò non sarà dimenticato".
Non sono parole di circostanza. E neppure dettate dall'emozione. Uomo
di guerra, abituato a muovere sui vari fronti centinaia di migliaia di
uomini ed a valutare le perdite nella fornace di una guerra moderna, il
generale Clark sa perfettamente che cosa significano 44.720 partigiani
uccisi e
21.168 invalidi. Sa che è stata una guerra di popolo, una guerra di
liberazione dallo straniero, che ha mobilitato 364.773 fra partigiani
combattenti e patrioti. Ossia il più vasto e spontaneo movimento
popolare che la storia d'Italia ricordi.
Il generale Clark è anche in grado di valutare lo straordinario apporto
della Resistenza nelle operazioni di antisabotaggio e nella difesa
dell'apparato produttivo. Le centrali idroelettriche dell'Ossola
vengono poste in salvo grazie ai partigiani. E sono ancora i partigiani
a salvare il porto di Genova, che genieri del generale Gunther Meinhold
avevano minato. Questi fatti, queste cifre, vengono troppo spesso
dimenticati. O addirittura
contestati, contro ogni evidenza.
Un altro modo di denigrare il movimento partigiano è quello di
enfatizzarne le supposte fratture e rivalità. L'eccidio di Porzus, ad
esempio, viene spesso usato a questo scopo, dimenticando che
l'increscioso episodio di Porzus è un caso isolato e scontato in una
guerra per bande che ha coinvolto alcune centinaia di migliaia di
combattenti di tutte le estrazioni sociali. Per fare un paragone si
pensi alla guerra di liberazione dell'Algeria, che ha mobilitato meno
dì un terzo delle forze partigiane italiane e che ha causato, per
dissidi interni al Fronte di Liberazione Nazionale e relative purghe,
ben 13 mila morti.
Ma il compito del revisionismo storico, che da mezzo secolo infuria nel
nostro paese, con la pretesa dì ristabilire la verità su quel periodo
storico, è proprio quello di offuscare e dì distruggere l'immagine
radiosa della Resistenza con limitazioni e calunnie. "Ma quando una
causa è stata difesa con così possente lotta di popolo - scriveva Cino
Moscatellì nel
1958 - questa causa non muore. Lo spirito garibaldino non muore. Esso
animerà sempre i figli migliori della terra nostra finché ci siano
tenebre da fugare, servitù da abbattere, ingiustizie da vincere".
Da qualche tempo si assiste anche ad una nuova manovra, altrettanto
subdola e da respingere con fermezza. Si tratta della pretesa di
equiparare i partigiani ai militi di Salò, e ciò in base alla
considerazione che entrambi gli schieramenti hanno combattuto per la
stessa patria e molti, nei due campi, si sono sacrificati per essa. Il
risultato di questa equiparazione - si sostiene a destra, ma non
soltanto a destra - è la
riconciliazione fra i partigiani e i "ragazzi di Salò" una
riconciliazione che dovrebbe porre fine a sessant'anni di polemiche, di
scontri, di incomprensioni. Anche se sono passati sessant'anni dai
giorni della Resistenza e i nostri animi sono sicuramente più inclini
al perdono e alla comprensione, una tale proposta non può che essere
respinta. Perché si tratta di una proposta insostenibile, antistorica e
soprattutto ingiusta.
Non si può porre sullo stesso piano i partigiani, che si sono battuti
per cacciare dall'Italia il tedesco invasore e per riportare nel paese
le istituzioni democratiche abbattute dalla dittatura fascista, e i
"ragazzi di Salò" e i loro padri, che hanno combattuto per ridare fiato
al fascismo e per mantenere l'Europa sotto il tallone nazista. Non si
può mettere sullo stesso piano vittime e carnefici, combattenti per la
libertà ed alleati dei
creatori dei lager di sterminio
Con quale coraggio si propone oggi una riconciliazione quando ogni
giorno si verificano in Italia episodi di intolleranza, di teppismo, di
antisemitismo. Soltanto negli ultimi mesi sono state profanate le tombe
e le lapidi commemorative di partigiani a Torino, Modena, Genova,
Coreglia Ligure, Mira
Taglio, Cernobbio e al sacrario della Benedicta. Per non parlare delle
scritte di matrice neofascista e delle svastiche apparse a Roma,
Milano, Treviso, Pistoia, Cesena, Lucca, Ameglia, Montebelluno di
Treviso e in altre decine di località. E lungo sarebbe l'elenco delle
aggressioni neofasciste, culminate a Milano, il 17 marzo, con
l'uccisione del giovane antifascista Davide "Dax" Cesare e il ferimento
di Antonino Alesi. Ma non basta. Don Gianni Baget Bozzo noto
consigliere del premier Berlusconi, e alcuni parlamentari di Forza
Italia e di Alleanza Nazionale hanno in animo di presentare una
proposta di legge per abolire la festa del 25 aprile, con l'assurda
giustificazione che la lotta di liberazione non sarebbe stata un
movimento popolare ed avrebbe anzi diviso la coscienza nazionale. La
proposta non è ancora arrivata in parlamento, ma ciò che è accaduto il
25 aprile scorso e nella vigilia sembra una prova generale per la sua
abolizione. Per cominciare, a Treviso, il vecchio partigiano Agostino
Pavan è stato bersagliato dai leghisti con monetine mentre teneva il
discorso ufficiale. A Roma, il portavoce di Forza Italia, Sandro Bondi,
ha sostenuto che la responsabilità delle stragi naziste, quella di
Marzabotto in testa, ricade sui partigiani "che hanno radicalizzato lo
scontro con i nazisti in ritirata". Per finire, all'invito del
presidente Ciampi di recarsi in Quirinale a festeggiare il 25 aprile,
il Premier Berlusconi ha disertato la
cerimonia con la scusa banale che aveva problemi ad una mano. Non c'è
alcun dubbio. E ormai chiaro che si tende a tagliare il legame tra
antifascismo, Resistenza e Costituzione. Anche se la proposta di
abolire la ricorrenza del 25 aprile non dovesse passare, per la decisa
opposizione delle forze
democratiche del paese, è comunque evidente l'intento di seppellire,
anno dopo anno, questa gloriosa data sotto un velo di neutralità, sino
a renderla insignificante. Ma noi siamo convinti che esistono ancora
nel nostro paese forze sufficienti per impedire quest'ultimo oltraggio.
E vorremmo che oggi, qui, in questo luogo che ha visto il sacrificio di
42 eroici partigiani,
prendessimo tutti insieme l'impegno di difendere la memoria della lotta
di liberazione, quella lotta che, come ha precisato l'ex capo dello
Stato Oscar Luigi Scalfaro, non può, nè deve essere riscritta, perché
in essa affondano le radici della nostra democrazia.
Vorremmo concludere questo intervento citando un brano del manifesto
che il capitano Filippo Maria Beltrami fece affiggere in Omegna
nell'ultima notte dell'anno 1943. Dice il testo:
"E allora il popolo ha il diritto di gridare, deve gridare: BASTA!
Basta con queste infamie, basta con questi massacri. E questo grido che
già gonfia i petti sia raffica di vento che tutto spazzi, tutto
distrugga davanti a sé. Terribile diventi la nostra ira, l'ira di tutta
la nostra gente martoriata ed oppressa. Viva l'Italia!"
Quando il "capitano" stila questo manifesto, mancano soltanto 34 giorni
alla sua morte gloriosa a Megolo. E si può capire la sua ira, le sue
parole di fuoco, l'invito a gridare: BASTA! Oggi la situazione nel
nostro paese è sicuramente meno drammatica. Non c'è alcuna guerra in
corso. Non c'è alcun nemico straniero che occupa le nostre contrade.
Non ci sono avvisaglie di una guerra civile. E tuttavia ci sono troppe
anomalie nel nostro paese, troppi attentati alla Costituzione, troppo
disprezzo per le regole fondamentali della democrazia, perché si possa
vivere nella serenità e nella fiducia nell'avvenire. C'è in molti di
noi che hanno partecipato alla guerra di Liberazione, una profonda
inquietudine, una sconfinata amarezza, un senso
di impotenza che ci opprime. Ed anche - lo confessiamo - un poco di
quell'ira che il capitano Beltrami avvertiva. Una sana, giustificata,
troppo a lungo repressa ira. Ed anche la voglia prepotente di gridare:
BASTA!
Angelo Del Boca
(Fonte: COMITATO DI UNITÀ ANTIFASCISTA E ANTIMPERIALISTA - OLEGGIO
Fotocop. in proprio Via S. Maria, 11- 28047 OLEGGIO (NO)
e diffuso sulla lista: Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli. )
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/albania/albania.shtml
MADRE TERESA: CONTESA TRA ALBANIA E MACEDONIA / ANSA
(di Carlo Bollino) (ANSA) - TIRANA, 16 OTT - L'Albania si
prepara a festeggiare in grande stile la beatificazione di Madre
Teresa che avverra' domenica in Vaticano. Celebrazioni organizzate
non soltanto per celebrare l'evento, ma anche per sottolineare
l'origine albanese della prossima beata, che in verita' era nata in
Macedonia. Anche a Skopje l'evento e' particolarmente sentito, sia
pur per ragioni in un certo senso opposte a quelle albanesi: i
macedoni rivendicano infatti Madre Teresa come propria connazionale
aprendo con Tirana una disputa che e' lontana dal trovare una
soluzione. Madre Teresa, al secolo Gonxhe Agnese Bojaxhiu, nacque
il 26 agosto 1910 a Skopje da una famiglia cattolica di origine
albanese. Per i macedoni e' chiaro: la nascita su un territorio deve
bastare a chiarire la nazionalita'. Gli storici albanesi pero'
contestano questa conclusione, e ricordano che nel 1910 la Macedonia
non esisteva ancora come Stato poiche' l'intera regione faceva parte
dell'Impero ottomano, quindi quel che conta e' l'appartenenza etnica.
Da Skopje rispondono con un libro pubblicato dal giornalista
Stojan Trencevski, che ricostruisce nei dettagli l'infanzia e
l'adolescenza di Madre Teresa. ''Secondo l'archivio ottomano a
Costantinopoli, la sua famiglia dalle lunghe tradizioni artigiane e
commerciali viveva a Skopje dalla meta' del Settecento - annota
Trencevski - era proprietaria di un alberghetto, con annessa scuderia
per i cavalli, nel quale alloggiavano commercianti e viaggiatori che
arrivavano nei giorni del mercato''. Il bisnonno Lazar combino' il
matrimonio fra il figlio Nicola e Drane Bernai, figlia di un suo
abituale cliente e ricco signore d'affari di Novo Selo, in Kosovo.
Dalla loro unione nacquero Age, Lazar e Gonxhe: la futura Madre
Teresa venne battezzata nella chiesa cattolica del Cuore di Gesu', a
Skopje. Il parroco del tempo, Zef Ramai, la registro' pero' con il
nome di Agnese. Solo nel 1928 la ragazza, ormai diciottenne e dopo
aver preso i voti, lascio' Skopje per andare prima a Dublino ed
infine a Calcutta, dove fondo' la missione. Il giornalista
macedone attribuisce a Madre Teresa una frase apparentemente decisiva
sulla sua origine: ''Io appartengo a Dio - avrebbe detto - amo tutti
gli uomini del mondo ma sono nata a Skopje. Io sono cittadina di
Skopje''. Cittadina di Skopje, replicano gli studiosi di Tirana,
non macedone. E citano a loro volta una frase pronunciata da Madre
Teresa nel 1979 quando, ritirando il premio Nobel per la pace, nel
corso di un breve discorso avrebbe indicato l'Albania (e non la
Macedonia) come sua nazione. Dall'archivio di Stato e' poi uscito un
manoscritto inviato da Madre Teresa nel 1989 all' allora presidente
comunista Ramiz Alia, al quale chiedeva il permesso di far visita
alle tombe della madre e della sorella, vissute e morte a Tirana: nel
testo originale, scritto in inglese, la suora parlava ad Alia della
''nostra Albania'', mentre nella versione tradotta in albanese si
legge un piu' esplicito ''la mia Albania''. A sostegno
dell'origine albanese c'e' infine il nome originale della suora:
Gonxhe e' una parola albanese che vuol dire ''bocciolo'' cosi' come
Bojaxhiu, che invece significa ''imbianchino''. Ma a complicare
la ricerca sono intervenuti altri studi a ricordare che a quel tempo
nella zona vivevano valachi e zingari, e che la famiglia di Madre
Teresa abitava in un quartiere valacco della vecchia Skopje. Dai
valacchi discende la minoranza arumena che vive tuttora anche in
Albania e i cui antenati diedero origine all'attuale Romania. ''I
dubbi sulla appartenenza di Madre Teresa pero' persistono''
sottolineano i ricercatori, lasciando persino intendere come non sia
possibile escludere che l'origine della suora sia zingara.(ANSA).
BLL-COR 16/10/2003 19:14
MADRE TERESA: ALBANIA CELEBRA SUA PRIMA EROINA CATTOLICA
(di Carlo Bollino) (ANSA) - TIRANA, 19 OTT - Ormai incurante del suo
passato ateo e dell'essere oggi un paese a maggioranza musulmana,
l'Albania ha celebrato con entusiasmo e solennita' la beatificazione
di Madre Teresa, prima eroina cattolica della nazione. Mentre una
delegazione partita da Tirana con i piu' alti vertici dello Stato (il
solo rimasto in patria e' stato il primo ministro Fatos Nano)
assisteva in Vaticano alla cerimonia officiata da Giovanni Paolo II,
nella capitale si e' celebrato l'evento con manifestazioni sportive,
concerti e la collocazione di una simbolica statua della neo-beata
sulla vetta del monte Korabi, il piu' alto del paese. La giornata
di oggi e' stata proclamata festa nazionale e da domani decorre il
primo ''anno di Madre Teresa'' che sara' scandito, dicono le
autorita', da manifestazioni e iniziative in onore della suora nata a
Skopje ma che era di origine albanese. Sembrano lontani un secolo
i tempi del rigido ateismo di Stato imposto dal regime comunista, e
del quale la stessa Madre Teresa aveva fatto le spese: la mamma e la
sorella erano venute infatti a vivere a Tirana nel 1947 e da allora
la suora, emigrata in India, non ebbe mai piu' il diritto di
incontrarle. Solo nel 1989, quando ormai il regime filo-stalinista
era agonizzante, Madre Teresa giunse in Albania per far visita alle
loro tombe su invito di Nexhmje Hoxha, moglie dell'ormai defunto
dittatore. In quella che fu una vera e propria visita di Stato, la
suora ebbe in dono un tappeto che ha poi conservato nella sua stanza
a Calcutta e che ora e' custodito come preziosa reliquia nella
cattedrale ''San Paolo'' di Tirana. Fra le iniziative svolte oggi
nella capitale, la piu' seguita e' stata la prima edizione della
''Maratona dei popoli'' aperta dal presidente della Regione Lazio,
Francesco Storace (fra i patrocinanti dell'iniziativa insieme alla
Regione Puglia) e vinta, per la cronaca, da un emigrante marocchino
residente nel Leccese, Ritnani Marsali, che ha coperto i 21
chilometri e 95 metri di percorso cittadino (si trattava tecnicamente
di una ''mezza maratona'') in 1 ora, 6 minuti e 15 secondi.
''Madre Teresa e' nei cuori di tutti noi, sia cattolici che
musulmani'' ha commentato l'atleta al termine della gara. La fiaccola
simbolo della maratona, benedetta dal Papa, era giunta di prima
mattina nel porto di Durazzo a bordo della nave ''Pantelleria'' della
marina militare sulla quale avevano viaggiato anche 200 atleti. Un
tedoforo delle forze armate italiane l'ha poi consegnata nella piazza
di Tirana dedicata a Madre Teresa alle autorita' locali, che hanno
dato il via alla competizione. Gli albanesi hanno seguito in
diretta televisiva la cerimonia di beatificazione mentre i
telecronisti si affannavano nel dover spiegare i vari passaggi del
rituale cattolico che qui sono ancora in gran parte sconosciuti. La
cultura religiosa in Albania presenta tuttora profonde lacune
lasciate dai 50 anni di ateismo comunista: e se alla prima messa
celebrata a Scutari nel 1991 in molti si chiedevano cosa fosse quel
''biscottino'' che il prete porgeva in bocca ai fedeli, oggi un
importante quotidiano di Tirana non ha esitato a titolare in prima
pagina ''la figlia del Papa scrive di madre Teresa'' avendo confuso
la parola ''omelia'' con il nome di una ragazza.(ANSA) TF
19/10/2003 19:58
MADRE TERESA: CONTESA TRA ALBANIA E MACEDONIA / ANSA
(di Carlo Bollino) (ANSA) - TIRANA, 16 OTT - L'Albania si
prepara a festeggiare in grande stile la beatificazione di Madre
Teresa che avverra' domenica in Vaticano. Celebrazioni organizzate
non soltanto per celebrare l'evento, ma anche per sottolineare
l'origine albanese della prossima beata, che in verita' era nata in
Macedonia. Anche a Skopje l'evento e' particolarmente sentito, sia
pur per ragioni in un certo senso opposte a quelle albanesi: i
macedoni rivendicano infatti Madre Teresa come propria connazionale
aprendo con Tirana una disputa che e' lontana dal trovare una
soluzione. Madre Teresa, al secolo Gonxhe Agnese Bojaxhiu, nacque
il 26 agosto 1910 a Skopje da una famiglia cattolica di origine
albanese. Per i macedoni e' chiaro: la nascita su un territorio deve
bastare a chiarire la nazionalita'. Gli storici albanesi pero'
contestano questa conclusione, e ricordano che nel 1910 la Macedonia
non esisteva ancora come Stato poiche' l'intera regione faceva parte
dell'Impero ottomano, quindi quel che conta e' l'appartenenza etnica.
Da Skopje rispondono con un libro pubblicato dal giornalista
Stojan Trencevski, che ricostruisce nei dettagli l'infanzia e
l'adolescenza di Madre Teresa. ''Secondo l'archivio ottomano a
Costantinopoli, la sua famiglia dalle lunghe tradizioni artigiane e
commerciali viveva a Skopje dalla meta' del Settecento - annota
Trencevski - era proprietaria di un alberghetto, con annessa scuderia
per i cavalli, nel quale alloggiavano commercianti e viaggiatori che
arrivavano nei giorni del mercato''. Il bisnonno Lazar combino' il
matrimonio fra il figlio Nicola e Drane Bernai, figlia di un suo
abituale cliente e ricco signore d'affari di Novo Selo, in Kosovo.
Dalla loro unione nacquero Age, Lazar e Gonxhe: la futura Madre
Teresa venne battezzata nella chiesa cattolica del Cuore di Gesu', a
Skopje. Il parroco del tempo, Zef Ramai, la registro' pero' con il
nome di Agnese. Solo nel 1928 la ragazza, ormai diciottenne e dopo
aver preso i voti, lascio' Skopje per andare prima a Dublino ed
infine a Calcutta, dove fondo' la missione. Il giornalista
macedone attribuisce a Madre Teresa una frase apparentemente decisiva
sulla sua origine: ''Io appartengo a Dio - avrebbe detto - amo tutti
gli uomini del mondo ma sono nata a Skopje. Io sono cittadina di
Skopje''. Cittadina di Skopje, replicano gli studiosi di Tirana,
non macedone. E citano a loro volta una frase pronunciata da Madre
Teresa nel 1979 quando, ritirando il premio Nobel per la pace, nel
corso di un breve discorso avrebbe indicato l'Albania (e non la
Macedonia) come sua nazione. Dall'archivio di Stato e' poi uscito un
manoscritto inviato da Madre Teresa nel 1989 all' allora presidente
comunista Ramiz Alia, al quale chiedeva il permesso di far visita
alle tombe della madre e della sorella, vissute e morte a Tirana: nel
testo originale, scritto in inglese, la suora parlava ad Alia della
''nostra Albania'', mentre nella versione tradotta in albanese si
legge un piu' esplicito ''la mia Albania''. A sostegno
dell'origine albanese c'e' infine il nome originale della suora:
Gonxhe e' una parola albanese che vuol dire ''bocciolo'' cosi' come
Bojaxhiu, che invece significa ''imbianchino''. Ma a complicare
la ricerca sono intervenuti altri studi a ricordare che a quel tempo
nella zona vivevano valachi e zingari, e che la famiglia di Madre
Teresa abitava in un quartiere valacco della vecchia Skopje. Dai
valacchi discende la minoranza arumena che vive tuttora anche in
Albania e i cui antenati diedero origine all'attuale Romania. ''I
dubbi sulla appartenenza di Madre Teresa pero' persistono''
sottolineano i ricercatori, lasciando persino intendere come non sia
possibile escludere che l'origine della suora sia zingara.(ANSA).
BLL-COR 16/10/2003 19:14
MADRE TERESA: ALBANIA CELEBRA SUA PRIMA EROINA CATTOLICA
(di Carlo Bollino) (ANSA) - TIRANA, 19 OTT - Ormai incurante del suo
passato ateo e dell'essere oggi un paese a maggioranza musulmana,
l'Albania ha celebrato con entusiasmo e solennita' la beatificazione
di Madre Teresa, prima eroina cattolica della nazione. Mentre una
delegazione partita da Tirana con i piu' alti vertici dello Stato (il
solo rimasto in patria e' stato il primo ministro Fatos Nano)
assisteva in Vaticano alla cerimonia officiata da Giovanni Paolo II,
nella capitale si e' celebrato l'evento con manifestazioni sportive,
concerti e la collocazione di una simbolica statua della neo-beata
sulla vetta del monte Korabi, il piu' alto del paese. La giornata
di oggi e' stata proclamata festa nazionale e da domani decorre il
primo ''anno di Madre Teresa'' che sara' scandito, dicono le
autorita', da manifestazioni e iniziative in onore della suora nata a
Skopje ma che era di origine albanese. Sembrano lontani un secolo
i tempi del rigido ateismo di Stato imposto dal regime comunista, e
del quale la stessa Madre Teresa aveva fatto le spese: la mamma e la
sorella erano venute infatti a vivere a Tirana nel 1947 e da allora
la suora, emigrata in India, non ebbe mai piu' il diritto di
incontrarle. Solo nel 1989, quando ormai il regime filo-stalinista
era agonizzante, Madre Teresa giunse in Albania per far visita alle
loro tombe su invito di Nexhmje Hoxha, moglie dell'ormai defunto
dittatore. In quella che fu una vera e propria visita di Stato, la
suora ebbe in dono un tappeto che ha poi conservato nella sua stanza
a Calcutta e che ora e' custodito come preziosa reliquia nella
cattedrale ''San Paolo'' di Tirana. Fra le iniziative svolte oggi
nella capitale, la piu' seguita e' stata la prima edizione della
''Maratona dei popoli'' aperta dal presidente della Regione Lazio,
Francesco Storace (fra i patrocinanti dell'iniziativa insieme alla
Regione Puglia) e vinta, per la cronaca, da un emigrante marocchino
residente nel Leccese, Ritnani Marsali, che ha coperto i 21
chilometri e 95 metri di percorso cittadino (si trattava tecnicamente
di una ''mezza maratona'') in 1 ora, 6 minuti e 15 secondi.
''Madre Teresa e' nei cuori di tutti noi, sia cattolici che
musulmani'' ha commentato l'atleta al termine della gara. La fiaccola
simbolo della maratona, benedetta dal Papa, era giunta di prima
mattina nel porto di Durazzo a bordo della nave ''Pantelleria'' della
marina militare sulla quale avevano viaggiato anche 200 atleti. Un
tedoforo delle forze armate italiane l'ha poi consegnata nella piazza
di Tirana dedicata a Madre Teresa alle autorita' locali, che hanno
dato il via alla competizione. Gli albanesi hanno seguito in
diretta televisiva la cerimonia di beatificazione mentre i
telecronisti si affannavano nel dover spiegare i vari passaggi del
rituale cattolico che qui sono ancora in gran parte sconosciuti. La
cultura religiosa in Albania presenta tuttora profonde lacune
lasciate dai 50 anni di ateismo comunista: e se alla prima messa
celebrata a Scutari nel 1991 in molti si chiedevano cosa fosse quel
''biscottino'' che il prete porgeva in bocca ai fedeli, oggi un
importante quotidiano di Tirana non ha esitato a titolare in prima
pagina ''la figlia del Papa scrive di madre Teresa'' avendo confuso
la parola ''omelia'' con il nome di una ragazza.(ANSA) TF
19/10/2003 19:58
FACCIAMO SENTIRE LA NOSTRA PROTESTA CONTRO LA REPRESSIONE DEL MOVIMENTO
PER LA PACE E ANTI-NATO
www.solidnet.org
Dal Partito Comunista di Grecia, lunedì 20 ottobre 2003
http://www.kke.gr , mailto:cpg@...
Cari compagni,
Come probabilmente sapete, 5 attivisti anti-NATO greci sono stati
chiamati a rispondere in tribunale lo scorso novembre 2002 per le loro
azioni (aver impedito il passaggio delle truppe NATO) durante
l’aggressione della NATO contro la Jugoslavia. Sono stati tutti assolti.
Ma ora, con l’intervento di un pubblico ministero, gli attivisti della
pace saranno sottoposti ad un nuovo processo a Salonicco il 29 ottobre.
Tra essi Nikos Christanis, membro del Comitato Centrale del nostro
Partito.
Di seguito, troverete l’appello che l’organizzazione del PCG di
Salonicco ha lanciato in questa occasione, chiamando alla solidarietà e
alla protesta.
Saluti da compagni.
La sezione internazionale del Partito Comunista di Grecia
FERMIAMO LA CONDANNA PENALE DELLE LOTTE POLITICHE E CONTRO LA GUERRA
La stragrande maggioranza del popolo greco ha opposto resistenza alla
sporca guerra della NATO, degli USA e dell’Unione Europea in
Jugoslavia, che fu scatenata nel 1999.
A quel tempo, il movimento pacifista greco intensificò le sue azioni
per oltre due mesi, cercando di sbarrare la strada alle truppe NATO,
che transitavano in violazione dell’articolo 27 della Costituzione
Greca.
Per la loro attiva partecipazione a queste mobilitazioni, 5 combattenti
per la pace sono stati rinviati a giudizio il 26 novembre 2002. Il
tribunale li ha assolti da tutte le accuse.
Malgrado questa prima decisione della corte, con l’intervento del
pubblico accusatore, gli attivisti della pace dovranno subire un nuovo
processo a Salonicco il 29 ottobre 2003.
L’azione della corte, il particolare periodo scelto, destano in noi
molte preoccupazioni. Questa azione è una provocazione per il popolo
greco.
E’ frutto dell’incoraggiamento dell’isteria antiterrorista, che trama
contro le libertà e le conquiste popolari e che costituisce un passo in
avanti verso la colpevolizzazione del sindacato e dell’attività
politica.
E’ parte dello sforzo teso ad imporre il silenzio dei cimiteri, nel
momento in cui la situazione nei Balcani, in Palestina, in Iraq diventa
sempre più pericolosa, e richiede una risposta di massa dei popoli
contro i piani degli USA, della NATO e dell’Unione Europea.
LA PERSECUZIONE DEVE CESSARE ORA
LE LOTTE PER LA PACE E LE LIBERTA’ NON DEVONO ESSERE INCRIMINATE
Facendo affidamento sui vostri sentimenti contro la guerra e
democratici, ci sarebbero molto graditi vostri messaggi di solidarietà.
I messaggi di solidarietà con gli attivisti della pace incriminati
verranno anche letti nella manifestazione che si svolgerà il 29 ottobre
all’esterno delle aule del tribunale.
Potete inviare messaggi a
cpg@...
e
kkethess@...
Potete anche indirizzare lettere di protesta al primo ministro della
Grecia
mail@...
e segnalarcele agli indirizzi e-mail sopra indicati
Traduzione dall’inglese di Mauro Gemma
Spett. Redazione
"L’UNITA’ ", Roma
Leggo l’articolo "Muore Izetbegovic, l’eroe dell’assedio di Sarajevo",
del 20 ottobre. L’articolo non è firmato, dunque deve essere il frutto
del "pensiero unico" di tutta la redazione, e non solo dei soliti o
solite "Boschero" (l'autrice dell’articolo su Ceca Raznatovic Arkan,
che contestai a suo tempo).
Atteniamoci pure alla buona regola di "non parlare male dei morti", ma
andiamo almeno a guardare ai fatti: da questo punto di vista il Vs
articolo abbonda di falsità storiche e di faziosità. Definendo Alija
Izetbegovic "eroe dell’assedio di Sarajevo" e "grande vecchio dei
Balcani" voi "non chiamate le cose col loro nome", e dunque "seminate
disgrazie tra la gente" - per dirla con le parole di A. Camus. Di
"Grande dei Balcani", e "Vecchio" nel senso di saggio, ce n'e' stato
uno solo nella storia recente, e non certo Izetbegovic, ma un altro,
del quale voi con questa vostra continua disinformazione infangate la
memoria e tradite gli ideali antifascisti, di pace e fratellanza.
Izetbegovic dovreste ricordarlo piuttosto, voi italiani, come probabile
mandante dell’omicidio di Gabrielle Moreno Lucatelli. Per la
popolazione musulmano-bosniaca Izetbegovic passerà alla storia come
colui il quale mando' al macello la gente due volte sulla piazza di
Markale, nell'ambito di una criminale strategia della tensione
smascherata dalla stessa ONU in rapporti che voi avete zelantemente
censurato.
Piu' in generale Izetbegovic sara' ricordato come "padre" della guerra
fratricida di secessione, guerra nella quale peri' la sua stessa gente
(tanto lui li rimpiazzava con "islamisti doc" e tagliagole... lo si
deduce anche dal Vs articolo, ma Voi usate tutti quei: "presunti",
"secondo"... Sull’appartenenza ai Giovani Musulmani collaborazionisti
delle SS, sulla "Dichiarazione islamica", eccetera).
Un particolare voglio aggiungere: personalmente sono stato nella
"Sarajevo assediata", e precisamente nel quartiere serbo di Nedjarici:
quello si che era assediato, da tre parti – dagli uomini di
Izetbegovic!
Ivan Pavicev. – Istrijan
Roma, 22 ottobre ‘03
"L’UNITA’ ", Roma
Leggo l’articolo "Muore Izetbegovic, l’eroe dell’assedio di Sarajevo",
del 20 ottobre. L’articolo non è firmato, dunque deve essere il frutto
del "pensiero unico" di tutta la redazione, e non solo dei soliti o
solite "Boschero" (l'autrice dell’articolo su Ceca Raznatovic Arkan,
che contestai a suo tempo).
Atteniamoci pure alla buona regola di "non parlare male dei morti", ma
andiamo almeno a guardare ai fatti: da questo punto di vista il Vs
articolo abbonda di falsità storiche e di faziosità. Definendo Alija
Izetbegovic "eroe dell’assedio di Sarajevo" e "grande vecchio dei
Balcani" voi "non chiamate le cose col loro nome", e dunque "seminate
disgrazie tra la gente" - per dirla con le parole di A. Camus. Di
"Grande dei Balcani", e "Vecchio" nel senso di saggio, ce n'e' stato
uno solo nella storia recente, e non certo Izetbegovic, ma un altro,
del quale voi con questa vostra continua disinformazione infangate la
memoria e tradite gli ideali antifascisti, di pace e fratellanza.
Izetbegovic dovreste ricordarlo piuttosto, voi italiani, come probabile
mandante dell’omicidio di Gabrielle Moreno Lucatelli. Per la
popolazione musulmano-bosniaca Izetbegovic passerà alla storia come
colui il quale mando' al macello la gente due volte sulla piazza di
Markale, nell'ambito di una criminale strategia della tensione
smascherata dalla stessa ONU in rapporti che voi avete zelantemente
censurato.
Piu' in generale Izetbegovic sara' ricordato come "padre" della guerra
fratricida di secessione, guerra nella quale peri' la sua stessa gente
(tanto lui li rimpiazzava con "islamisti doc" e tagliagole... lo si
deduce anche dal Vs articolo, ma Voi usate tutti quei: "presunti",
"secondo"... Sull’appartenenza ai Giovani Musulmani collaborazionisti
delle SS, sulla "Dichiarazione islamica", eccetera).
Un particolare voglio aggiungere: personalmente sono stato nella
"Sarajevo assediata", e precisamente nel quartiere serbo di Nedjarici:
quello si che era assediato, da tre parti – dagli uomini di
Izetbegovic!
Ivan Pavicev. – Istrijan
Roma, 22 ottobre ‘03
http://chiffonrouge.org/resistance/article.php3?id_article=281
Devoir de mémoire : le croissant et la croix gammée
Alija Izetbegovic : grand recruteur des SS de Bosnie à Sarajevo
Ce que les médias taisent sur l'ex président de la FBiH
lundi 20 octobre 2003.
A 78 ans, Alija Izetbegovic vient de décéder. Présenté par les médias
occidentaux comm un "homme de paix" et un musulman modéré", il fut très
tôt engagé dans l'islamisme radical allant jusqu'à collaborer avec
l'Allemagne hitlérienne. Retour sur un passé honteux caché par les
"bien-pensants" et intellectuels autoproclamés.
A 78 ans, Alija Izetbegovic, l'ex président de la fédération de
Bosnie-Herzégovine, vient de décéder. La plupart des médias occidentaux
ont salué « l'homme de paix » et « le musulman modéré » en taisant
volontairement ce que fut Alija Izetbegovic lors de la seconde guerre
mondiale. C'est l'occasion de le rappeler.
Au service de l'Ordre noir
Au printemps 1943, au plus fort de la guerre des partisans dans les
Balkans, le SS-Führerhauptamt (office supérieur des SS à Berlin)
d'Heinrich Himmler décide de lever une nouvelle division de Waffen-SS
destinée à renforcer en Bosnie, et en Yougoslavie en général, les
unités de lutte anti-partisans. Ce sera la division de montagne
Handschar. A Sarajevo, ce sont les Jeunes musulmans de Bosnie, dirigés
par Alija Izetbegovic, qui mènent à bien le recrutement de ces
volontaires musulmans de la Waffen-SS. A 18 ans, le jeune Alija
Izetbegovic s'est déjà fait une réputation de dur de l'islam
balkanique. A ce titre, en avril 1943, c'est lui qui organise dans la
capitale de la Bosnie, la visite officielle du grand mufti de
Jérusalem, Hadj Amine El-Husseini. Cette visite intervient dans le
cadre d'un accord officiel avec Hitler. En effet, Husseini, ami
personnel du Führer, doit jouer le rôle de pilier
islamo-national-socialiste dans les Balkans pour appeler ses frères
musulmans au Jihad. Il édicte même à cet effet une fatwa stipulant que
l'enrôlement des quelque 4,5 millions de musulmans des Balkans dans les
forces du Reich est une « obligation religieuse » (1).
Comme les Frères musulmans d'Egypte, Adj Hamine El-Husseini prône la
guerre sainte contre les Juifs, présentée comme étant « le combat sacré
sur le chemin de Dieu » (2). Aussi, Alija Izetbegovic met-il en place
des bureaux (appelés Ersatzkommando der Waffen-SS) pour faire enrôler
les milices musulmanes jusqu'alors soumises à l'Etat indépendant de
Croatie d'Ante Pavelic. Ce qui ne va pas sans créer quelques frictions
avec les Ustaci. Les miliciens de Nasid Topci, les Cadres verts du
major Muhammad Hadziefendic ainsi que de nombreux éléments de la Légion
islamique d'Huska Miljkovic en Bosnie orientale (3), comptent parmi
les premiers volontaires pour la division Handschar. La haine
antichrétienne et antijuive d'Alija Izetbegovic et de ces Jeunes
musulmans n'a rien à envier à l'antisémitisme de l'extrême-droite
croate. C'est lui qui organise la réception officielle à Sarajevo lors
de la visite d'inspection d'Himmler à la division Handschar en avril
1944. Pourtant, Izetbegovic ne s'engagea jamais sous l'uniforme des
Waffen-SS, préférant laisser le don du sang à d'autres.
Chassez le naturel...
En 1946, Alija Izetbegovic est condamné à trois ans de prison pour
« nationalisme et islamisme » par le pouvoir communiste yougoslave. En
1970, il publie à Sarajevo une première version de la Déclaration
islamique, brûlot destiné à jeter les bases d'une grande Bosnie
musulmane et ethniquement purifiée sur les principes de la Charia. Il
se rapproche alors des islamistes iraniens. Il est condamné en 1984 à
14 ans de prison (non effectuées dans leur totalité) pour
« nationalisme musulman visant à faire de la Bosnie un Etat
ethniquement pur ». Ce qui ne l'empêche pas de faire une deuxième
édition de son ouvrage en 1990. De 1992 à 1995, il dirige la lutte
armée contre les Serbes et les Croates avec l'aide des pays musulmans
du Golfe persique, de l'Union européenne, des USA et de l'OTAN.
Pratiquant la purification ethnique, il est alors perçu par les
extrémistes islamistes comme un chef de guerre musulman à soutenir. Il
devient ainsi la coqueluche des médias occidentaux politiquement
corrects et des « intellectuels » autoproclamés. En 1995, après s'être
momentanément allié aux ultra-nationalistes croates (Ustaci), il édifie
une entité musulmane au sein de la Fédération de Bosnie-Herzégovine
(FBiH) sur des bases islamistes. Il est devenu depuis le président de
cette FBiH avant de se retirer à la fin des années 1990.
Notes :
(1) La correspondance entre le Grand Mufti et le SS-Führer-Haupthamt,
qui est conservée aux archives yougoslaves (Sarajevo et Belgrade) et
aux archives militaires allemandes, est particulièrement explicite à ce
sujet : AVII (archives yougoslaves) - Na - NAV-T-120 - r.2908 - Berlin
12. Mai 1943 - An das SS-Haupthamt Z. Hd v. SS-Obersturmmbannführer Dr.
Reiding - E 464782 et AVII - Na - NAV-T-120 - r.2908 - Berlin 18. Mai
1943 - An das Auswärtige Amt - Betr. Vorschläge des Grossmufti -
SS-Gruppenführer G. Berger - E 464779-464780. BA/MA (archives
militaires allemandes de Fribourg en Brisgau), RS 3-13/3-5 : 13. SS
Division Handzar et archives de l'Oberbefehlshaber Südost, KTB (journal
de marche) : BA/MA, RW 40/81.
(2) Hadj Hamine El-Husseini est né à Jérusalem dans une riche famille
palestinienne. Il part étudier au Caire à l'université El-Azhar où il
en ressort diplômé d'un doctorat de théologie. Cadet à l'académie
militaire d'Istambul, il devient officier d'artillerie dans l'armée
ottomane avant de devenir mufti après le conflit. C'est là qu'il se lie
avec les Frères musulmans égyptiens avant d'être élu président du
Congrès islamique mondial à La Mecque. Cheville ouvrière de l'agitation
pan-arabe et anti-britannique, Adj Hamine El-Husseini est l'inspirateur
des insurrections de Jaffa et Jérusalem. Mais, c'est l'échec : il
s'enfuie en Syrie, gagne l'Irak, puis Téhéran. En 1937, on le retrouve
aux côtés de l'Italie fasciste avant de se rapprocher du IIIème Reich
pour la formation d'un islamisches zentral Institut à Berlin, puis la
Ligue des volontaires arabes. Il étend alors son influence dans les
Balkans à partir de 1942 grâce à l'appui de milieux derviches. Puis,
c'est après une première entrevue avec Ante Pavelic à Zagreb qu'il
entame une tournée en Bosnie.
(3) Il s'agit de la tristement célèbre Huskina Milicija ou Huskina
Legija, formation comptant 11 bataillons et quelque 3 000 volontaires
dirigés par Hussein Miljkovic à partir de novembre 1943.
Gordana Kostic
Toute reproduction est autorisée à condition de citer la source.
http://chiffonrouge.org/resistance/
Devoir de mémoire : le croissant et la croix gammée
Alija Izetbegovic : grand recruteur des SS de Bosnie à Sarajevo
Ce que les médias taisent sur l'ex président de la FBiH
lundi 20 octobre 2003.
A 78 ans, Alija Izetbegovic vient de décéder. Présenté par les médias
occidentaux comm un "homme de paix" et un musulman modéré", il fut très
tôt engagé dans l'islamisme radical allant jusqu'à collaborer avec
l'Allemagne hitlérienne. Retour sur un passé honteux caché par les
"bien-pensants" et intellectuels autoproclamés.
A 78 ans, Alija Izetbegovic, l'ex président de la fédération de
Bosnie-Herzégovine, vient de décéder. La plupart des médias occidentaux
ont salué « l'homme de paix » et « le musulman modéré » en taisant
volontairement ce que fut Alija Izetbegovic lors de la seconde guerre
mondiale. C'est l'occasion de le rappeler.
Au service de l'Ordre noir
Au printemps 1943, au plus fort de la guerre des partisans dans les
Balkans, le SS-Führerhauptamt (office supérieur des SS à Berlin)
d'Heinrich Himmler décide de lever une nouvelle division de Waffen-SS
destinée à renforcer en Bosnie, et en Yougoslavie en général, les
unités de lutte anti-partisans. Ce sera la division de montagne
Handschar. A Sarajevo, ce sont les Jeunes musulmans de Bosnie, dirigés
par Alija Izetbegovic, qui mènent à bien le recrutement de ces
volontaires musulmans de la Waffen-SS. A 18 ans, le jeune Alija
Izetbegovic s'est déjà fait une réputation de dur de l'islam
balkanique. A ce titre, en avril 1943, c'est lui qui organise dans la
capitale de la Bosnie, la visite officielle du grand mufti de
Jérusalem, Hadj Amine El-Husseini. Cette visite intervient dans le
cadre d'un accord officiel avec Hitler. En effet, Husseini, ami
personnel du Führer, doit jouer le rôle de pilier
islamo-national-socialiste dans les Balkans pour appeler ses frères
musulmans au Jihad. Il édicte même à cet effet une fatwa stipulant que
l'enrôlement des quelque 4,5 millions de musulmans des Balkans dans les
forces du Reich est une « obligation religieuse » (1).
Comme les Frères musulmans d'Egypte, Adj Hamine El-Husseini prône la
guerre sainte contre les Juifs, présentée comme étant « le combat sacré
sur le chemin de Dieu » (2). Aussi, Alija Izetbegovic met-il en place
des bureaux (appelés Ersatzkommando der Waffen-SS) pour faire enrôler
les milices musulmanes jusqu'alors soumises à l'Etat indépendant de
Croatie d'Ante Pavelic. Ce qui ne va pas sans créer quelques frictions
avec les Ustaci. Les miliciens de Nasid Topci, les Cadres verts du
major Muhammad Hadziefendic ainsi que de nombreux éléments de la Légion
islamique d'Huska Miljkovic en Bosnie orientale (3), comptent parmi
les premiers volontaires pour la division Handschar. La haine
antichrétienne et antijuive d'Alija Izetbegovic et de ces Jeunes
musulmans n'a rien à envier à l'antisémitisme de l'extrême-droite
croate. C'est lui qui organise la réception officielle à Sarajevo lors
de la visite d'inspection d'Himmler à la division Handschar en avril
1944. Pourtant, Izetbegovic ne s'engagea jamais sous l'uniforme des
Waffen-SS, préférant laisser le don du sang à d'autres.
Chassez le naturel...
En 1946, Alija Izetbegovic est condamné à trois ans de prison pour
« nationalisme et islamisme » par le pouvoir communiste yougoslave. En
1970, il publie à Sarajevo une première version de la Déclaration
islamique, brûlot destiné à jeter les bases d'une grande Bosnie
musulmane et ethniquement purifiée sur les principes de la Charia. Il
se rapproche alors des islamistes iraniens. Il est condamné en 1984 à
14 ans de prison (non effectuées dans leur totalité) pour
« nationalisme musulman visant à faire de la Bosnie un Etat
ethniquement pur ». Ce qui ne l'empêche pas de faire une deuxième
édition de son ouvrage en 1990. De 1992 à 1995, il dirige la lutte
armée contre les Serbes et les Croates avec l'aide des pays musulmans
du Golfe persique, de l'Union européenne, des USA et de l'OTAN.
Pratiquant la purification ethnique, il est alors perçu par les
extrémistes islamistes comme un chef de guerre musulman à soutenir. Il
devient ainsi la coqueluche des médias occidentaux politiquement
corrects et des « intellectuels » autoproclamés. En 1995, après s'être
momentanément allié aux ultra-nationalistes croates (Ustaci), il édifie
une entité musulmane au sein de la Fédération de Bosnie-Herzégovine
(FBiH) sur des bases islamistes. Il est devenu depuis le président de
cette FBiH avant de se retirer à la fin des années 1990.
Notes :
(1) La correspondance entre le Grand Mufti et le SS-Führer-Haupthamt,
qui est conservée aux archives yougoslaves (Sarajevo et Belgrade) et
aux archives militaires allemandes, est particulièrement explicite à ce
sujet : AVII (archives yougoslaves) - Na - NAV-T-120 - r.2908 - Berlin
12. Mai 1943 - An das SS-Haupthamt Z. Hd v. SS-Obersturmmbannführer Dr.
Reiding - E 464782 et AVII - Na - NAV-T-120 - r.2908 - Berlin 18. Mai
1943 - An das Auswärtige Amt - Betr. Vorschläge des Grossmufti -
SS-Gruppenführer G. Berger - E 464779-464780. BA/MA (archives
militaires allemandes de Fribourg en Brisgau), RS 3-13/3-5 : 13. SS
Division Handzar et archives de l'Oberbefehlshaber Südost, KTB (journal
de marche) : BA/MA, RW 40/81.
(2) Hadj Hamine El-Husseini est né à Jérusalem dans une riche famille
palestinienne. Il part étudier au Caire à l'université El-Azhar où il
en ressort diplômé d'un doctorat de théologie. Cadet à l'académie
militaire d'Istambul, il devient officier d'artillerie dans l'armée
ottomane avant de devenir mufti après le conflit. C'est là qu'il se lie
avec les Frères musulmans égyptiens avant d'être élu président du
Congrès islamique mondial à La Mecque. Cheville ouvrière de l'agitation
pan-arabe et anti-britannique, Adj Hamine El-Husseini est l'inspirateur
des insurrections de Jaffa et Jérusalem. Mais, c'est l'échec : il
s'enfuie en Syrie, gagne l'Irak, puis Téhéran. En 1937, on le retrouve
aux côtés de l'Italie fasciste avant de se rapprocher du IIIème Reich
pour la formation d'un islamisches zentral Institut à Berlin, puis la
Ligue des volontaires arabes. Il étend alors son influence dans les
Balkans à partir de 1942 grâce à l'appui de milieux derviches. Puis,
c'est après une première entrevue avec Ante Pavelic à Zagreb qu'il
entame une tournée en Bosnie.
(3) Il s'agit de la tristement célèbre Huskina Milicija ou Huskina
Legija, formation comptant 11 bataillons et quelque 3 000 volontaires
dirigés par Hussein Miljkovic à partir de novembre 1943.
Gordana Kostic
Toute reproduction est autorisée à condition de citer la source.
http://chiffonrouge.org/resistance/
RAPPORTI CLIENTELARI
(Ovvero: ecco perche' non sentirete mai piu' parlare dello scandalo
della "Missione Arcobaleno")
«L'altro giorno», riferiscono le cronache, il Pm di Bari Michele
Emiliano, «ha firmato l'avviso di conclusione delle indagini
preliminari sulla missione "Arcobaleno"», con il rinvio a giudizio di
una serie di persone che lavorarono nel contesto di quell'azione
umanitaria promossa in Albania dal governo-D'Alema, compreso l'allora
sottosegretario Franco Barberi («Uno scandalo inventato», ebbe a
definirlo D'Alema: «manovre di politica da bassa cucina»).
Seconda notizia: «Pochi giorni fa il magistrato ha incontrato a Roma il
presidente dei Ds, Massimo D'Alema. La riunione si è tenuta in via
Dell'Arancio, sede della Fondazione Italiani-Europei: l'incontro è
durato mezz'ora». Oggetto dell'incontro: la ratifica da parte del
leader diessino della candidatura a sindaco di Bari di Emiliano,
considerato «l'unica strada praticabile per provare a contrastare lo
strapotere della Casa delle Libertà».
Fonte: Don Pancrazio (donpancrazio@email. it) su
"Liberazione" del 19 Ottobre 2003 (http://www.liberazione.it/)
(Ovvero: ecco perche' non sentirete mai piu' parlare dello scandalo
della "Missione Arcobaleno")
«L'altro giorno», riferiscono le cronache, il Pm di Bari Michele
Emiliano, «ha firmato l'avviso di conclusione delle indagini
preliminari sulla missione "Arcobaleno"», con il rinvio a giudizio di
una serie di persone che lavorarono nel contesto di quell'azione
umanitaria promossa in Albania dal governo-D'Alema, compreso l'allora
sottosegretario Franco Barberi («Uno scandalo inventato», ebbe a
definirlo D'Alema: «manovre di politica da bassa cucina»).
Seconda notizia: «Pochi giorni fa il magistrato ha incontrato a Roma il
presidente dei Ds, Massimo D'Alema. La riunione si è tenuta in via
Dell'Arancio, sede della Fondazione Italiani-Europei: l'incontro è
durato mezz'ora». Oggetto dell'incontro: la ratifica da parte del
leader diessino della candidatura a sindaco di Bari di Emiliano,
considerato «l'unica strada praticabile per provare a contrastare lo
strapotere della Casa delle Libertà».
Fonte: Don Pancrazio (donpancrazio@email. it) su
"Liberazione" del 19 Ottobre 2003 (http://www.liberazione.it/)
ALBANIA: PROTESTE A VALONA CONTRO MANIFESTAZIONI PRO-GRECHE
(ANSA) - TIRANA, 15 OTT - Oltre duecento persone partite da Valona
(Albania meridionale) hanno protestato oggi contro una manifestazione
pro-greca avvenuta domenica in occasione delle elezioni
amministrative, nella vicina citta' di Himara. A Himara vive una
forte minoranza greca che domenica sera, inneggiando al proprio
partito (Pbdnj risultato vincitore) aveva marciato in corteo
sventolando per le vie del centro la bandiera di Atene. Uno degli
attivisti del partito aveva anche urlato davanti alla telecamera di
una televisione di Tirana parole oltraggiose nei confronti
dell'Albania. Il giovane, Niko Kolida, era giunto quella stessa
mattina dalla Grecia insieme ad alcune centinaia di altri emigranti
rientrati ad Himara solo per poter votare. Nei suoi confronti la
procura ha avviato un procedimento penale per incitamento all'odio e
oltraggio ai simboli della nazione. Poche ore prima della
manifestazione nella stessa citta' di Himara un ordigno era stato
fatto esplodere davanti ad un centro elettorale provocando il
ferimento di tre persone fra cui un agente di polizia. In
risposta all'incidente di domenica, criticato da tutta la stampa
locale, questa mattina un'autocolonna di manifestanti partita da
Valona ha cercato di entrare ad Himara ma la polizia glielo ha
impedito per evitare possibili scontri. I dimostranti avevano
ricoperto le auto con le bandiere albanesi e scandivano lo slogan
''Himara e' albanese''. La manifestazione si e' conclusa dopo alcune
ore in modo pacifico. Anche nelle due precedenti elezioni Himara e'
stata teatro di conflitti a sfondo nazionalista. Politici greci hanno
partecipato in passato anche alle campagne elettorali in favore del
Pbdnj e solo quest'anno il ministero degli esteri di Atene li ha
invitati ad astenersi dall'intervenire nelle questioni interne
dell'Albania. (ANSA) BLL-COR 15/10/2003 18:15
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/albania/albania.shtml
(ANSA) - TIRANA, 15 OTT - Oltre duecento persone partite da Valona
(Albania meridionale) hanno protestato oggi contro una manifestazione
pro-greca avvenuta domenica in occasione delle elezioni
amministrative, nella vicina citta' di Himara. A Himara vive una
forte minoranza greca che domenica sera, inneggiando al proprio
partito (Pbdnj risultato vincitore) aveva marciato in corteo
sventolando per le vie del centro la bandiera di Atene. Uno degli
attivisti del partito aveva anche urlato davanti alla telecamera di
una televisione di Tirana parole oltraggiose nei confronti
dell'Albania. Il giovane, Niko Kolida, era giunto quella stessa
mattina dalla Grecia insieme ad alcune centinaia di altri emigranti
rientrati ad Himara solo per poter votare. Nei suoi confronti la
procura ha avviato un procedimento penale per incitamento all'odio e
oltraggio ai simboli della nazione. Poche ore prima della
manifestazione nella stessa citta' di Himara un ordigno era stato
fatto esplodere davanti ad un centro elettorale provocando il
ferimento di tre persone fra cui un agente di polizia. In
risposta all'incidente di domenica, criticato da tutta la stampa
locale, questa mattina un'autocolonna di manifestanti partita da
Valona ha cercato di entrare ad Himara ma la polizia glielo ha
impedito per evitare possibili scontri. I dimostranti avevano
ricoperto le auto con le bandiere albanesi e scandivano lo slogan
''Himara e' albanese''. La manifestazione si e' conclusa dopo alcune
ore in modo pacifico. Anche nelle due precedenti elezioni Himara e'
stata teatro di conflitti a sfondo nazionalista. Politici greci hanno
partecipato in passato anche alle campagne elettorali in favore del
Pbdnj e solo quest'anno il ministero degli esteri di Atene li ha
invitati ad astenersi dall'intervenire nelle questioni interne
dell'Albania. (ANSA) BLL-COR 15/10/2003 18:15
http://www.ansa.it/balcani/albania/albania.shtml
New Book of Belgrade Forum: Development Strategy in unstable conditions
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/reakcije_citalaca/2003-10-21.html
BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD OF EQUALS
Belgrade, 21 October 2003
NEW BOOKS:
Development Strategy in unstable conditions
Authors: Kosta Mihailovic,Mihailo Markovic, Oskar Kovac, Vladislav
Jovanovic,Radovan Radinovic, Dragutin Zelenovic, Zivadin Jovanovic,
Rade Drobac.
For any state, any nation, the Development Strategy is the most
essential issue. In the midst of the "Customs War" with Austro -
Hungaria, at the begining of the last century, Serbia managed to
establish a distinct policy of industrial development which lead to
doubling of the number of the industrial enterprises as well as the
number of industrial employees in only five years.
At the beginning of seventies of the last century when the interest for
the common development strategy of Yugoslavia disappeared - the fate of
the state was decided. Today it is, more or less, the same. The
provisional State (Serbia and Montenegro) does not have any common
development strategy and the consequences are - there is no solution
for the enormous social, economic and political problems of the country.
Certain objectives of the Development Strategy represent universal
values, such as freedom, human rights, including socio - economic
rights, overall free development and personal dignity. These values
include also equality of opportunities, equal rights for social
security. These basic values can be achived only if instrumental
objectives are set up, such as - GNP growth, rise of employment, living
standards, garanty for equal chances and rights in education, health
security and environment protection. Such society can not be achieved
without soveregnity of the State , division of power ( legislative,
executive, judiciary), rule of law, sustainable democracy, freedom of
the press and public communication.
Today even big countries coexist in conditions of mutual
interdependance, not to mention those which found themselves in
continuous fragmentation. For this reason it is impossible to create
absolutly isolated , independent development strategies. There are
external limits stemming from international and geopolitical position
of Serbia. Indeed, Serbia is now in the midst of the newly-awakened
strategic interest of USA and EU. Serbia can not solve the relations
between big powers and regions, but certainly can and must advance and
defend her own interests.Serbia is entitled to equal participation in
all european multilateral organisations and institutions, to integrate
itself in EU under the same conditions as any other sovereign country.
Serbia should negotiate about american and european interests on its
own territory and under the authority of its own state organs. A good
example are the trans - european corridors North - South and the Danube
which Serbia should develop recognising the interest of EU and
demanding participation of EU. Common interests in these projects are
beyond any doubt.
A development strategy could be defined in spite of the existing
external limitations provided that consensus on the minimum of the
state and national interests is reached. It is no secret what should be
the content of such a strategy.
One of the key issues would certainly be: what kind of economic
structure Serbia must have , what course of specialisation to take in
the international division of labour? On the other hand, there is the
issue of technological sustainability of the serbian economy for the
implementation of a development strategy.
In regard to these issues there are some prejudices in the public. It
is usually thought that , after a decade of external destruction of the
state and economy, Serbia does not have the necessary level of
productivity and technological ability to maintain any sort of
competitive production. This, of course, is nonsense. It will never be
that all countries have the same level of productivity but this is not
obstacle for competitive production and mutual trade.
Concrete researches have shown that , in spite of enormous imposed
losses, the technological quality of the equipment , human resources
and organisation of production in Serbia, make possible efficient
production in many sectors of industry and agriculture. The fact that
many domestic enterprises have been donated to foreign subjects should
not be obstacle for adoption and imlementation of the national
development strategy . Such enterprises have national treatment , are
subjects to domestic laws, to domestic economic policy.
In closing, all depends on the crucial issue - does Serbia have
sufficient wisdom and responsibility to formulate the minimum of
consensus on the state and national interests, can she constitute a
government capable to really care about soveregnity of the state and
wellbeing of its citizens. And to be responsible to them?
This book (available only in Serbian) may be ordered from:
Belgrade Forum for the world of equals
Belgrade, Misarska 6,
tel/fax: 3245 - 601, e - mail: beoforum@...
Pages 144, Price 300 dinars/5 Euros ( plus posting expenses).
---
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
11000 Beograd, Mi{arska 6/II, Jugoslavija
tel/Fax: (++381 11) 3245601
E-Mail: beoforum@...
www.belgrade-forum.org
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/reakcije_citalaca/2003-10-21.html
BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD OF EQUALS
Belgrade, 21 October 2003
NEW BOOKS:
Development Strategy in unstable conditions
Authors: Kosta Mihailovic,Mihailo Markovic, Oskar Kovac, Vladislav
Jovanovic,Radovan Radinovic, Dragutin Zelenovic, Zivadin Jovanovic,
Rade Drobac.
For any state, any nation, the Development Strategy is the most
essential issue. In the midst of the "Customs War" with Austro -
Hungaria, at the begining of the last century, Serbia managed to
establish a distinct policy of industrial development which lead to
doubling of the number of the industrial enterprises as well as the
number of industrial employees in only five years.
At the beginning of seventies of the last century when the interest for
the common development strategy of Yugoslavia disappeared - the fate of
the state was decided. Today it is, more or less, the same. The
provisional State (Serbia and Montenegro) does not have any common
development strategy and the consequences are - there is no solution
for the enormous social, economic and political problems of the country.
Certain objectives of the Development Strategy represent universal
values, such as freedom, human rights, including socio - economic
rights, overall free development and personal dignity. These values
include also equality of opportunities, equal rights for social
security. These basic values can be achived only if instrumental
objectives are set up, such as - GNP growth, rise of employment, living
standards, garanty for equal chances and rights in education, health
security and environment protection. Such society can not be achieved
without soveregnity of the State , division of power ( legislative,
executive, judiciary), rule of law, sustainable democracy, freedom of
the press and public communication.
Today even big countries coexist in conditions of mutual
interdependance, not to mention those which found themselves in
continuous fragmentation. For this reason it is impossible to create
absolutly isolated , independent development strategies. There are
external limits stemming from international and geopolitical position
of Serbia. Indeed, Serbia is now in the midst of the newly-awakened
strategic interest of USA and EU. Serbia can not solve the relations
between big powers and regions, but certainly can and must advance and
defend her own interests.Serbia is entitled to equal participation in
all european multilateral organisations and institutions, to integrate
itself in EU under the same conditions as any other sovereign country.
Serbia should negotiate about american and european interests on its
own territory and under the authority of its own state organs. A good
example are the trans - european corridors North - South and the Danube
which Serbia should develop recognising the interest of EU and
demanding participation of EU. Common interests in these projects are
beyond any doubt.
A development strategy could be defined in spite of the existing
external limitations provided that consensus on the minimum of the
state and national interests is reached. It is no secret what should be
the content of such a strategy.
One of the key issues would certainly be: what kind of economic
structure Serbia must have , what course of specialisation to take in
the international division of labour? On the other hand, there is the
issue of technological sustainability of the serbian economy for the
implementation of a development strategy.
In regard to these issues there are some prejudices in the public. It
is usually thought that , after a decade of external destruction of the
state and economy, Serbia does not have the necessary level of
productivity and technological ability to maintain any sort of
competitive production. This, of course, is nonsense. It will never be
that all countries have the same level of productivity but this is not
obstacle for competitive production and mutual trade.
Concrete researches have shown that , in spite of enormous imposed
losses, the technological quality of the equipment , human resources
and organisation of production in Serbia, make possible efficient
production in many sectors of industry and agriculture. The fact that
many domestic enterprises have been donated to foreign subjects should
not be obstacle for adoption and imlementation of the national
development strategy . Such enterprises have national treatment , are
subjects to domestic laws, to domestic economic policy.
In closing, all depends on the crucial issue - does Serbia have
sufficient wisdom and responsibility to formulate the minimum of
consensus on the state and national interests, can she constitute a
government capable to really care about soveregnity of the state and
wellbeing of its citizens. And to be responsible to them?
This book (available only in Serbian) may be ordered from:
Belgrade Forum for the world of equals
Belgrade, Misarska 6,
tel/fax: 3245 - 601, e - mail: beoforum@...
Pages 144, Price 300 dinars/5 Euros ( plus posting expenses).
---
BEOGRADSKI FORUM ZA SVET RAVNOPRAVNIH
11000 Beograd, Mi{arska 6/II, Jugoslavija
tel/Fax: (++381 11) 3245601
E-Mail: beoforum@...
www.belgrade-forum.org
[Diffondiamo questo articolo, del quale non conosciamo gli autori, in
quanto contiene molte informazioni utili, benche' certi toni e luoghi
comuni (su "regimi", "satrapi" e "cannibali") ci trovino in completo
disaccordo. CNJ]
http://www.clorofilla.it/articolo.asp?articolo=3359
Lo storico leader e presidente bosniaco, si è spento domenica
pomeriggio a Sarajevo a settantotto anni, dopo un mese di terapia
intensiva. Lottava da tempo con una grave insufficienza cardiaca, la
stessa che lo aveva costretto a dimettersi dalla presidenza della
martoriata repubblica nel 2000 ed affrontare complicati operazioni
chirurgiche in Arabia Saudita ed in Slovenia
E' morto Izetbegovic, signore della guerra legato all'Iran e a Bin Laden
di red
Alija Izetbegovic, lo storico leader e presidente bosniaco, si è
spento domenica pomeriggio a Sarajevo a settantotto anni, dopo un mese
di terapia intensiva [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3123984.stm%5d.
Lottava da tempo con una grave insufficienza cardiaca, la stessa che lo
aveva costretto a dimettersi dalla presidenza della martoriata
repubblica nel 2000 ed affrontare complicate operazioni chirurgiche in
Arabia Saudita ed in Slovenia. Il grande fondatore della piccola
Bosnia, come amava definirlo Oslobodjenje
[http://www.oslobodjenje.com.ba/%5d, lascia la moglie Halida e tre figli,
ma soprattutto abbandona alle sue spalle una scomoda eredità di
interrogativi irrisolti in merito al suo ruolo di signore della guerra
nei sanguinosi conflitti balcanici di fine secolo.
La biografia ufficiale vuole che Alija Izetbegovic fosse nato a
Bosanski Samac l’8 agosto del 1925, divenuto in giovanissima età
cittadino adottivo di Sarajevo, quindi laureato in giurisprudenza e
profondo conoscitore dell’Islam.
I bosniaci musulmani coniarono per lui l’affettuoso appellativo di
“Dedo”, il nonno, e l’Occidente identificò in lui l’interlocutore
moderato con cui dialogare nei terribili giorni del macello jugoslavo.
La stampa mondiale costruì a tavolino l’immagine di un presidente
tollerante e mansueto, un moderno musulmano, un riluttante guerriero
poco incline alla guerra: la verità è che sul passato di Izetbegovic si
stendono lunghe ombre sinistre.
Appena sedicenne, nel 1940, Alija si unì ai Giovani Islamici di
Sarajevo, un'organizzazione che predicava l'unità degli stati musulmani
nel mondo ed aveva come obiettivo dichiarato la creazione di una lega
islamica mondiale. Sebbene i Giovani Islamici di Bosnia non avessero
spiccate inclinazioni naziste, molti appartenenti all’organizzazione in
quegli anni collaborarono attivamente con lo stato ustascia croato
macchiandosi di crimini che il trionfante regime titino non avrebbe
facilmente amnistiato: allo stesso Izetbegovic nel 1946 fu inflitta una
condanna a tre anni di carcere per "incitamento all'odio etnico".
Nel 1949, una serie di rivolte popolari fomentate dai Giovani Islamici
di Bosnia costrinsero il governo jugoslavo al pugno di ferro, e ai
principali fautori delle sommosse toccò la pena capitale.
Da quel momento, il movimento filoislamico in Bosnia scivolò in una
resistente clandestinità, nella quale Izetbegovic si ritagliò il ruolo
di guida spirituale e di maitre à penser.
Il suo percorso di ricercatore e promulgatore islamico raggiunse
l’apice nel 1970, quando diede alle stampe la sua “Dichiarazione
Islamica”
[http://www.islambosna.com/stranica.php?view_id=647&kategorija=5]
destinata a divenire, vent’anni più tardi, il manifesto della
secessione bosniaca. Nel pamphlet, somigliante agli abituali inviti
alla guerra santa ed all’orgoglio musulmano che circolano nei paesi
islamici, ma unico nel suo genere in un paese socialista e laico come
la ex-Jugoslavia, Izetbegovic auspicava una rinascita dei costumi
religiosi e morali maomettani, ed esortava all'unità su scala
internazionale degli stati islamici "dal Marocco all'Indonesia" nel
nome di un panislamismo necessario alla sopravvivenza della fede in
Allah, ed alla realizzazione degli obiettivi che non escludesse affatto
il ricorso "alla lotta armata, in particolar modo in quei paesi in cui
i musulmani fossero in maggioranza numerica o in grado di sovvertire
l'ordine costituito e di istituire un nuovo potere islamico".
Lungi dall'essere una pubblicazione equilibrata per toni e contenuti, e
davvero poco menzionata dallo stuolo di diplomatici europei che negli
anni '90 vollero (far) vedere in Izetbegovic un personaggio
tranquillizzante e con una credibilità democratica spendibile in sede
di contrattazioni e negoziati, la “Dichiarazione Islamica” racchiudeva
chiarissimi indizi di intolleranza religiosa e politica, le avvisaglie
del pericolo che una società forzatamente multietnica quale la Bosnia
correva: "non c'è possibile pace né coesistenza pacifica fra i seguaci
dell'Islam e le istituzioni non islamiche, siano esse di stampo
capitalista o marxista", scriveva Izetbegovic.
Opinioni ribadite nel suo successivo “L’Islam fra l’Occidente e
l’Oriente” [http://www.angelfire.com/dc/mbooks/izetbegovicbook.html%5d,
pubblicato nel 1984 in Turchia e negli Stati Uniti, in cui il futuro
presidente dell’SDA sviluppò la sua visione di una “superiorità
islamica sulle altre religioni, filosofie ed ideologie”: a causa di
tanto e tale fervore maomettano, Izetbegovic venne nuovamente arrestato
nel 1983 per "attività sovversive volte a minare la sicurezza dello
stato", e condannato a quattordici anni di carcere.
In realtà, il crollo dell’ormai agonizzante socialismo jugoslavo gli
permise di uscire di prigione dopo soli sei anni di reclusione, e nel
1990 -alla vigilia dello smembramento della confederazione voluta da
Tito- il "saggio" Izetbegovic fu la risposta patriottarda bosniaca ai
nuovi bellicosi capipopolo esaltati (ed eletti) nelle altre repubbliche.
La “Dichiarazione Islamica” venne ripubblicata: a dimostrazione che il
suo audace autore non aveva affatto cambiato opinione nel ventennio
trascorso. Agli estremismi serbo-ortodossi che inneggiavano alla
guerriglia di liberazione dai nemici del popolo slavo, ed ai fanatismi
croato-cattolici che magnificavano una ricostruzione dello stato
nazista di Ante Pavelic [http://www.pavelicpapers.com/index.html%5d,
all’inizio degli anni ‘90 si contrapposero i pruriti fondamentalisti
dei musulmani di Bosnia capitanati dal buon vecchio Izetbegovic.
L’Occidente però, più interessato a rinforzare un movimento d’opinione
antiserba ed a sottrarre alla vista del pubblico i suoi ininterrotti
traffici illeciti di armi e finanze da e per i Balcani che a
scoperchiare il terribile vaso di Pandora jugoslavo, non volle
riconoscere la triade dei signori della guerra al completo, e permise
di fatto ad Alija Izetbegovic di condurre i suoi mujaheddins
[http://public.srce.hr/zatocenici/jihad.htm%5d in trincea senza
accorgersi che la creazione di uno stato islamico nel cuore dell’Europa
avrebbe rappresentato un problema di non facile risoluzione a conflitto
archiviato.
Cosa accadde a Sarajevo a cavallo fra gli anni ottanta e novanta e
quali furono i legami di Izetbegovic e del suo SDA con gli ayatollah
iraniani
[http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/papers/civil_war/
iran_springboard.html] prodighi di finanziamenti è divenuto oggetto di
inchiesta nel recente presente, quando il maligno Osama Bin Laden è
servito agli occidentali per simbolizzare la figura del male che
giustificasse le guerre americane preventive e perpetue.
In realtà, lo spettro di Osama, affiancato ad altri minacciosi mullah
e biechi fiancheggiatori della Jihad, emerge prepotente nella biografia
del defunto Izetbegovic, che garantì personalmente allo sceicco un
passaporto diplomatico [http://www.balkanpeace.org/wtb/wtb11.html%5d
rilasciato dall’ambasciata bosniaca a Vienna nel 1993, con il
beneplacito dei governanti dell’ovest.
La notizie venne battuta da France Press il 24 settembre del ‘99.
Richard Holbrooke, nel suo “To end a war”
[http://www.spectator.co.uk/
article.php3?table=old§ion=current&issue=2003-09-
13&id=3499&searchText=], lo chiamava “il patto con il diavolo”: quel
patto che portò gli occidentali ad armare i talebani in Afghanistan ed
in seguito li fece guardare di buon occhio la Bosnia ipocritamente
liberale di Izetbegovic. Le indagini, condotte su più fronti,
rimbalzate sulle maggiori testate giornalistiche internazionali, dal
bosniaco Dani [http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/69/sadrzaj.shtml%5d alla Bbc
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/840241.stm%5d, dal Washington
Post [http://www.balkanpeace.org/wtb/wtb12.shtml%5d al rapporto Ceer
Wiebes [http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,688327,00.html%5d,
presentano piuttosto una Bosnia impelagata in turpi movimenti d’affari
con il medioriente: un mostro bifronte che esibiva di sé solo il lato
‘bisognoso d’aiuti umanitari’, in cui il nonno Izetbegovic, mitizzato
come padre della patria e dell’indipendenza, accolse ed organizzò i
combattenti islamici [http://www.balkanpeace.org/temp/tmp13.html%5d
provenienti da mezzo mondo per farne la Settima Brigata di Zenica
[http://www.cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/reporter/reporter143.html%5d.
E a Zenica, nel cuore di un paese ancor oggi incapace di sviluppo
sociale e sempre più asfissiato dall’idea islamica contrapposta alla
modernità infedele, i mujaheddin di nonno Alija sono rimasti
[http://www.analisidifesa.it/numero20/com-D-bosnia.htm%5d, accasandosi
grazie ai documenti largamente elargiti dall’SDA, ed adoprando Sarajevo
e dintorni come testa di ponte per dar modo al terrorismo di matrice
islamica di spingersi in Europa e nei Balcani con facilità.
I mujaheddins di Alija Izetbegovic li ritroveremo, difatti, nel Kosovo
[http://www.kosovo.com/erpkim01oct03.html%5d dell’Uck sovvenzionato ed
ammaestrato dalla Cia per giustificare la “guerra umanitaria” del ‘99,
e nei ripetuti assalti terroristici nella valle di Presevo
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1348542.stm%5d ed in Macedonia,
infine riciclati sotto la bandiera dell’Aksh/Ana, il “movimento di
liberazione per la Grande Albania”.
La morte di Alija Izetbegovic porta con sé buona parte delle speranze
che nutriamo di conoscere la verità sul conflitto più sanguinoso
dell’Europa del dopo-Auschwitz. Della triade dei signori della guerra
civile jugoslava, l'unico a pagare il conto di crimini e misfatti alla
fine sarà Slobodan Milosevic, il grande capro espiatorio fra gli
imputati dell’Aja, dove né Tudjman né Izetbegovic siederanno mai
accanto al loro “compare” per raccontare ai giudici l’altra faccia
della medaglia, ossia gli sporchi combini che costarono alla
ex-Jugoslavia decine di migliaia di morti di tutte le etnie, da
Srebrenica venduta alle bombe morali su Belgrado. Franjo Tudjman, il
“supremo” della Croazia, è deceduto per primo nel dicembre ’99,
glorificato da solenni funerali a Zagrabria
[http://www.wgoddard.com/Tudjframe.html%5d, prima che i fantasmi delle
nefandezze belliche perpetrate per conquistare il potere lo
raggiungessero, e non pagherà per i trecentomila serbi ripuliti dalle
Krajine, né per aver ricostruito nel cuore della mitteleuropa uno stato
fascista, né per le violenze ben poco cristiane a danno dei musulmani
di Mostar e dintorni.
Per secondo e penultimo, domenica pomeriggio, si è spento anche il
lider maximo bosniaco, Alija Izetbegovic il musulmano: l’uomo che
spalancò le porte di Sarajevo al terrorismo islamico diretto nel
vecchio continente, e che certamente nei prossimi giorni verrà
rammentato con orazioni in sua lode e corone di fiori. Resta all’Aja il
grigio satrapo Milosevic, incaricato ormai di saldare da solo il conto
del banchetto cannibale.
I suoi commensali, anime belle occidentali incluse, che delle guerre
jugoslave furono fiancheggiatori e corresponsabili, saranno tutti a
Sarajevo questa settimana a rendere omaggio alla salma del buon nonno
devoto ad Allah, ed a fingere che sia venuto a mancare un paladino
dell’indescrivibile tolleranza balcanica.
a cura di Exju.org
(lunedì 20 ottobre 2003)
quanto contiene molte informazioni utili, benche' certi toni e luoghi
comuni (su "regimi", "satrapi" e "cannibali") ci trovino in completo
disaccordo. CNJ]
http://www.clorofilla.it/articolo.asp?articolo=3359
Lo storico leader e presidente bosniaco, si è spento domenica
pomeriggio a Sarajevo a settantotto anni, dopo un mese di terapia
intensiva. Lottava da tempo con una grave insufficienza cardiaca, la
stessa che lo aveva costretto a dimettersi dalla presidenza della
martoriata repubblica nel 2000 ed affrontare complicati operazioni
chirurgiche in Arabia Saudita ed in Slovenia
E' morto Izetbegovic, signore della guerra legato all'Iran e a Bin Laden
di red
Alija Izetbegovic, lo storico leader e presidente bosniaco, si è
spento domenica pomeriggio a Sarajevo a settantotto anni, dopo un mese
di terapia intensiva [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3123984.stm%5d.
Lottava da tempo con una grave insufficienza cardiaca, la stessa che lo
aveva costretto a dimettersi dalla presidenza della martoriata
repubblica nel 2000 ed affrontare complicate operazioni chirurgiche in
Arabia Saudita ed in Slovenia. Il grande fondatore della piccola
Bosnia, come amava definirlo Oslobodjenje
[http://www.oslobodjenje.com.ba/%5d, lascia la moglie Halida e tre figli,
ma soprattutto abbandona alle sue spalle una scomoda eredità di
interrogativi irrisolti in merito al suo ruolo di signore della guerra
nei sanguinosi conflitti balcanici di fine secolo.
La biografia ufficiale vuole che Alija Izetbegovic fosse nato a
Bosanski Samac l’8 agosto del 1925, divenuto in giovanissima età
cittadino adottivo di Sarajevo, quindi laureato in giurisprudenza e
profondo conoscitore dell’Islam.
I bosniaci musulmani coniarono per lui l’affettuoso appellativo di
“Dedo”, il nonno, e l’Occidente identificò in lui l’interlocutore
moderato con cui dialogare nei terribili giorni del macello jugoslavo.
La stampa mondiale costruì a tavolino l’immagine di un presidente
tollerante e mansueto, un moderno musulmano, un riluttante guerriero
poco incline alla guerra: la verità è che sul passato di Izetbegovic si
stendono lunghe ombre sinistre.
Appena sedicenne, nel 1940, Alija si unì ai Giovani Islamici di
Sarajevo, un'organizzazione che predicava l'unità degli stati musulmani
nel mondo ed aveva come obiettivo dichiarato la creazione di una lega
islamica mondiale. Sebbene i Giovani Islamici di Bosnia non avessero
spiccate inclinazioni naziste, molti appartenenti all’organizzazione in
quegli anni collaborarono attivamente con lo stato ustascia croato
macchiandosi di crimini che il trionfante regime titino non avrebbe
facilmente amnistiato: allo stesso Izetbegovic nel 1946 fu inflitta una
condanna a tre anni di carcere per "incitamento all'odio etnico".
Nel 1949, una serie di rivolte popolari fomentate dai Giovani Islamici
di Bosnia costrinsero il governo jugoslavo al pugno di ferro, e ai
principali fautori delle sommosse toccò la pena capitale.
Da quel momento, il movimento filoislamico in Bosnia scivolò in una
resistente clandestinità, nella quale Izetbegovic si ritagliò il ruolo
di guida spirituale e di maitre à penser.
Il suo percorso di ricercatore e promulgatore islamico raggiunse
l’apice nel 1970, quando diede alle stampe la sua “Dichiarazione
Islamica”
[http://www.islambosna.com/stranica.php?view_id=647&kategorija=5]
destinata a divenire, vent’anni più tardi, il manifesto della
secessione bosniaca. Nel pamphlet, somigliante agli abituali inviti
alla guerra santa ed all’orgoglio musulmano che circolano nei paesi
islamici, ma unico nel suo genere in un paese socialista e laico come
la ex-Jugoslavia, Izetbegovic auspicava una rinascita dei costumi
religiosi e morali maomettani, ed esortava all'unità su scala
internazionale degli stati islamici "dal Marocco all'Indonesia" nel
nome di un panislamismo necessario alla sopravvivenza della fede in
Allah, ed alla realizzazione degli obiettivi che non escludesse affatto
il ricorso "alla lotta armata, in particolar modo in quei paesi in cui
i musulmani fossero in maggioranza numerica o in grado di sovvertire
l'ordine costituito e di istituire un nuovo potere islamico".
Lungi dall'essere una pubblicazione equilibrata per toni e contenuti, e
davvero poco menzionata dallo stuolo di diplomatici europei che negli
anni '90 vollero (far) vedere in Izetbegovic un personaggio
tranquillizzante e con una credibilità democratica spendibile in sede
di contrattazioni e negoziati, la “Dichiarazione Islamica” racchiudeva
chiarissimi indizi di intolleranza religiosa e politica, le avvisaglie
del pericolo che una società forzatamente multietnica quale la Bosnia
correva: "non c'è possibile pace né coesistenza pacifica fra i seguaci
dell'Islam e le istituzioni non islamiche, siano esse di stampo
capitalista o marxista", scriveva Izetbegovic.
Opinioni ribadite nel suo successivo “L’Islam fra l’Occidente e
l’Oriente” [http://www.angelfire.com/dc/mbooks/izetbegovicbook.html%5d,
pubblicato nel 1984 in Turchia e negli Stati Uniti, in cui il futuro
presidente dell’SDA sviluppò la sua visione di una “superiorità
islamica sulle altre religioni, filosofie ed ideologie”: a causa di
tanto e tale fervore maomettano, Izetbegovic venne nuovamente arrestato
nel 1983 per "attività sovversive volte a minare la sicurezza dello
stato", e condannato a quattordici anni di carcere.
In realtà, il crollo dell’ormai agonizzante socialismo jugoslavo gli
permise di uscire di prigione dopo soli sei anni di reclusione, e nel
1990 -alla vigilia dello smembramento della confederazione voluta da
Tito- il "saggio" Izetbegovic fu la risposta patriottarda bosniaca ai
nuovi bellicosi capipopolo esaltati (ed eletti) nelle altre repubbliche.
La “Dichiarazione Islamica” venne ripubblicata: a dimostrazione che il
suo audace autore non aveva affatto cambiato opinione nel ventennio
trascorso. Agli estremismi serbo-ortodossi che inneggiavano alla
guerriglia di liberazione dai nemici del popolo slavo, ed ai fanatismi
croato-cattolici che magnificavano una ricostruzione dello stato
nazista di Ante Pavelic [http://www.pavelicpapers.com/index.html%5d,
all’inizio degli anni ‘90 si contrapposero i pruriti fondamentalisti
dei musulmani di Bosnia capitanati dal buon vecchio Izetbegovic.
L’Occidente però, più interessato a rinforzare un movimento d’opinione
antiserba ed a sottrarre alla vista del pubblico i suoi ininterrotti
traffici illeciti di armi e finanze da e per i Balcani che a
scoperchiare il terribile vaso di Pandora jugoslavo, non volle
riconoscere la triade dei signori della guerra al completo, e permise
di fatto ad Alija Izetbegovic di condurre i suoi mujaheddins
[http://public.srce.hr/zatocenici/jihad.htm%5d in trincea senza
accorgersi che la creazione di uno stato islamico nel cuore dell’Europa
avrebbe rappresentato un problema di non facile risoluzione a conflitto
archiviato.
Cosa accadde a Sarajevo a cavallo fra gli anni ottanta e novanta e
quali furono i legami di Izetbegovic e del suo SDA con gli ayatollah
iraniani
[http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/papers/civil_war/
iran_springboard.html] prodighi di finanziamenti è divenuto oggetto di
inchiesta nel recente presente, quando il maligno Osama Bin Laden è
servito agli occidentali per simbolizzare la figura del male che
giustificasse le guerre americane preventive e perpetue.
In realtà, lo spettro di Osama, affiancato ad altri minacciosi mullah
e biechi fiancheggiatori della Jihad, emerge prepotente nella biografia
del defunto Izetbegovic, che garantì personalmente allo sceicco un
passaporto diplomatico [http://www.balkanpeace.org/wtb/wtb11.html%5d
rilasciato dall’ambasciata bosniaca a Vienna nel 1993, con il
beneplacito dei governanti dell’ovest.
La notizie venne battuta da France Press il 24 settembre del ‘99.
Richard Holbrooke, nel suo “To end a war”
[http://www.spectator.co.uk/
article.php3?table=old§ion=current&issue=2003-09-
13&id=3499&searchText=], lo chiamava “il patto con il diavolo”: quel
patto che portò gli occidentali ad armare i talebani in Afghanistan ed
in seguito li fece guardare di buon occhio la Bosnia ipocritamente
liberale di Izetbegovic. Le indagini, condotte su più fronti,
rimbalzate sulle maggiori testate giornalistiche internazionali, dal
bosniaco Dani [http://www.bhdani.com/arhiva/69/sadrzaj.shtml%5d alla Bbc
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/840241.stm%5d, dal Washington
Post [http://www.balkanpeace.org/wtb/wtb12.shtml%5d al rapporto Ceer
Wiebes [http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,688327,00.html%5d,
presentano piuttosto una Bosnia impelagata in turpi movimenti d’affari
con il medioriente: un mostro bifronte che esibiva di sé solo il lato
‘bisognoso d’aiuti umanitari’, in cui il nonno Izetbegovic, mitizzato
come padre della patria e dell’indipendenza, accolse ed organizzò i
combattenti islamici [http://www.balkanpeace.org/temp/tmp13.html%5d
provenienti da mezzo mondo per farne la Settima Brigata di Zenica
[http://www.cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/reporter/reporter143.html%5d.
E a Zenica, nel cuore di un paese ancor oggi incapace di sviluppo
sociale e sempre più asfissiato dall’idea islamica contrapposta alla
modernità infedele, i mujaheddin di nonno Alija sono rimasti
[http://www.analisidifesa.it/numero20/com-D-bosnia.htm%5d, accasandosi
grazie ai documenti largamente elargiti dall’SDA, ed adoprando Sarajevo
e dintorni come testa di ponte per dar modo al terrorismo di matrice
islamica di spingersi in Europa e nei Balcani con facilità.
I mujaheddins di Alija Izetbegovic li ritroveremo, difatti, nel Kosovo
[http://www.kosovo.com/erpkim01oct03.html%5d dell’Uck sovvenzionato ed
ammaestrato dalla Cia per giustificare la “guerra umanitaria” del ‘99,
e nei ripetuti assalti terroristici nella valle di Presevo
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1348542.stm%5d ed in Macedonia,
infine riciclati sotto la bandiera dell’Aksh/Ana, il “movimento di
liberazione per la Grande Albania”.
La morte di Alija Izetbegovic porta con sé buona parte delle speranze
che nutriamo di conoscere la verità sul conflitto più sanguinoso
dell’Europa del dopo-Auschwitz. Della triade dei signori della guerra
civile jugoslava, l'unico a pagare il conto di crimini e misfatti alla
fine sarà Slobodan Milosevic, il grande capro espiatorio fra gli
imputati dell’Aja, dove né Tudjman né Izetbegovic siederanno mai
accanto al loro “compare” per raccontare ai giudici l’altra faccia
della medaglia, ossia gli sporchi combini che costarono alla
ex-Jugoslavia decine di migliaia di morti di tutte le etnie, da
Srebrenica venduta alle bombe morali su Belgrado. Franjo Tudjman, il
“supremo” della Croazia, è deceduto per primo nel dicembre ’99,
glorificato da solenni funerali a Zagrabria
[http://www.wgoddard.com/Tudjframe.html%5d, prima che i fantasmi delle
nefandezze belliche perpetrate per conquistare il potere lo
raggiungessero, e non pagherà per i trecentomila serbi ripuliti dalle
Krajine, né per aver ricostruito nel cuore della mitteleuropa uno stato
fascista, né per le violenze ben poco cristiane a danno dei musulmani
di Mostar e dintorni.
Per secondo e penultimo, domenica pomeriggio, si è spento anche il
lider maximo bosniaco, Alija Izetbegovic il musulmano: l’uomo che
spalancò le porte di Sarajevo al terrorismo islamico diretto nel
vecchio continente, e che certamente nei prossimi giorni verrà
rammentato con orazioni in sua lode e corone di fiori. Resta all’Aja il
grigio satrapo Milosevic, incaricato ormai di saldare da solo il conto
del banchetto cannibale.
I suoi commensali, anime belle occidentali incluse, che delle guerre
jugoslave furono fiancheggiatori e corresponsabili, saranno tutti a
Sarajevo questa settimana a rendere omaggio alla salma del buon nonno
devoto ad Allah, ed a fingere che sia venuto a mancare un paladino
dell’indescrivibile tolleranza balcanica.
a cura di Exju.org
(lunedì 20 ottobre 2003)
Svakog utorka, od 14,00 do 14,30 sati, na Radio Città Aperta, i valu FM
88.9 za regiju Lazio, "JUGOSLAVENSKI GLAS".
Emisija je u direktnom prijenosu. Moze se pratiti i preko Interneta:
http://www.radiocittaperta.it
Kratke intervencije na telefon (0039) 06 4393512. Emisija je
dvojezicna, po potrebi i vremenu na raspolaganju.
Podrzite taj slobodni i nezavisni glas, kupujuci knjige, video kazete,
brosure, koje imamo na raspolaganju.
Pisite nam na Jugocoord@..., ili fax +39 06 4828957.
Trazimo zainteresirane za usvajanje na daljinu, t.j. djacke stipendije
za djecu prognanika.
---
Ogni martedì dalle ore 14,00 alle 14,30, "VOCE JUGOSLAVA" su Radio
Città Aperta, FM 88.9 per il Lazio. Essa si può seguire, come del resto
anche le altre trasmissioni della Radio, in diretta via Internet:
http://www.radiocittaperta.it
La trasmissione è bilingue (a seconda del tempo disponibile e della
necessità). La trasmissione è in diretta. Potete telefonare per brevi
interventi allo 06 4393512.
Sostenete questa voce libera ed indipendente acquistando video
cassette, libri, bollettini a nostra disposizione. Sono possibili
adozioni a distanza (borse di studio). Scriveteci all'indirizzo:
Jugocoord@..., tel/fax 06 4828957.
---
Program - programma 21. 10. 2003
1. Jucer, danas sutra, datumi ... da se ne zaboravi.
Kragujevac i Kraljevo, pokolj 1941. - barbarska agresija NATO 1999.
2. Kratke vijesti "od Triglava do Vardara..." i ne samo.
3. Razno
1. Ieri, oggi, domani, date... per non dimenticare; la strage di
Kragujevac e Kraljevo nel 1941, e la barbara aggressione NATO 1999
2. "Dal monte Triglav al fiume Vardar...", e non solo.
3. Varie
88.9 za regiju Lazio, "JUGOSLAVENSKI GLAS".
Emisija je u direktnom prijenosu. Moze se pratiti i preko Interneta:
http://www.radiocittaperta.it
Kratke intervencije na telefon (0039) 06 4393512. Emisija je
dvojezicna, po potrebi i vremenu na raspolaganju.
Podrzite taj slobodni i nezavisni glas, kupujuci knjige, video kazete,
brosure, koje imamo na raspolaganju.
Pisite nam na Jugocoord@..., ili fax +39 06 4828957.
Trazimo zainteresirane za usvajanje na daljinu, t.j. djacke stipendije
za djecu prognanika.
---
Ogni martedì dalle ore 14,00 alle 14,30, "VOCE JUGOSLAVA" su Radio
Città Aperta, FM 88.9 per il Lazio. Essa si può seguire, come del resto
anche le altre trasmissioni della Radio, in diretta via Internet:
http://www.radiocittaperta.it
La trasmissione è bilingue (a seconda del tempo disponibile e della
necessità). La trasmissione è in diretta. Potete telefonare per brevi
interventi allo 06 4393512.
Sostenete questa voce libera ed indipendente acquistando video
cassette, libri, bollettini a nostra disposizione. Sono possibili
adozioni a distanza (borse di studio). Scriveteci all'indirizzo:
Jugocoord@..., tel/fax 06 4828957.
---
Program - programma 21. 10. 2003
1. Jucer, danas sutra, datumi ... da se ne zaboravi.
Kragujevac i Kraljevo, pokolj 1941. - barbarska agresija NATO 1999.
2. Kratke vijesti "od Triglava do Vardara..." i ne samo.
3. Razno
1. Ieri, oggi, domani, date... per non dimenticare; la strage di
Kragujevac e Kraljevo nel 1941, e la barbara aggressione NATO 1999
2. "Dal monte Triglav al fiume Vardar...", e non solo.
3. Varie
Jugocoord su Telegram
Jugocoord su Facebook