Milosevic "Trial" Synopsis, Dec. 5--16 , 2003
1. News: Jovanovic refused to plea guilty or not guilty before Hague
tribunal / "Trial" Session cancelled on Dec. 9th
2. PHONY INTERCEPTS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
3. HAGUE "TRIBUNAL" BANS PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC FROM SPEAKING TO THE
OUTSIDE WORLD
THE SHAME OF WESLEY CLARK'S SECRET TESTIMONY:
4. Protest set to greet Gen. Clark at the Hague tribunal
5. STOP WAR CRIMINAL WESLEY CLARK FROM TESTIFYING IN SECRET - Statement
of the International Action Center 12/15/03
=== 1 ===
Jovanovic refused to plea guilty or not guilty before Hague tribunal
Tanjug - December 5, 2003
17:31 THE HAGUE , Dec 5 (Tanjug) - Editor-in-chief of the Podgorica
daily Dan Dusko Jovanovic, who had been accused of disrespect of The
Hague-based International War Crimes Tribunal, on Friday faced the
hearing of The Hague tribunal court council, but refused to plea
guilty or not guilty.
In my case, there is an objective responsibility having in mind my post
(of editor-in-chief), but I had no intention of making any offence to
The Hague tribunal, said Jovanovic who, according to the tribunal's
regulations, has another 30 days to plea guilty or not guilty.
---
Press Advisory . Avis pour information
(Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document)
The Hague, 8 December 2003
P.I.S./PA146
MILOSEVIC CASE:
Please be informed that the Milosevic Trial is cancelled for tomorrow,
Tuesday 9 December, and will commence on Wednesday 10 December at 9am
in Courtroom I, due to Judge Robinson’s absence for medical reasons.
For further information please call: +31 (70) 512-5343 or 512-5356.
Copyright 2003 ICTY P.I.S.
Posted for Fair Use only.
=== 2 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg121003.htm
PHONY INTERCEPTS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL: MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" DECEMBER 10,
2003
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - December 10, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
In its only hearing this week the so-called “tribunal” sat for an
extended period, and over the course of the day 2 secret witnesses and
one open witness were heard from.
Before I deal with the witnesses I would like to discuss the matter of
intercepts which was discussed today.
At this so-called “trial” the prosecution has exhibited 245
intercepts. The origins of the intercepts are unclear although it was
revealed today that they came from the intelligence services of
unnamed governments that are hostile towards Serbia.
It was also revealed that no steps have been taken to authenticate the
intercepts. No technicians have been charged with the task of
verifying the integrity or the authenticity of the recordings. The
“tribunal” isn’t even following its own rules here. Rule 89(E)
requires the authentication of evidence.
Neither President Milosevic nor his associates has been given access
to the original recordings. In fact, all the OTP has are copies. The
intelligence services maintain possession of the originals.
President Milosevic contends that the intercepts are forgeries. He
says that the tapes have been doctored by the same hostile governments
that produced them for the prosecution. He says that these governments
forged the tapes in order to justify their own actions and policies
against Serbia.
President Milosevic’s assertion is not beyond the realm of
possibility. I have heard some of these intercepts played in “court.” I
am a technician at a television station, and I have some experience
with audio mixing, and it is very possible that these tapes are forged.
First of all, on every intercept I’ve heard, the background noise
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/b/background_noise.htm%5d is very high,
and the audio quality is quite degraded. This could be the result of
generation loss [http://www.atis.org/tg2k/_generation_loss.html%5d.
Intentionally re-copying the same tape over and over again will
degrade the sound quality and it can help to cover-up the subtle
details that a technician would have to look for in order to determine
the authenticity of a recording.
The excessive background noise may be artificial, intentionally added
using a mixer [http://www.webref.org/acoustics/m/mixer.htm%5d to mask
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/m/masking.htm%5d the original background
noise. A tell tale sign of a forged tape is subtle changes in the
background noise. Different recordings will have a different noise
floor [http://www.webref.org/acoustics/n/noise_floor.htm%5d. If a single
recording is spliced together from multiple recordings, then you
should be able to detect small changes in the amount of background
noise, because of the changes in the noise floor generated by the
recording equipment, and the amount of ambient noise
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/a/ambient_noise.htm%5d that may be
present on the different recordings.
If you add artificial background noise to a recording you can cover-up
the original background noise provided that the artificial background
noise is at a sufficiently high level to mask the original background
noise. Thus, the artificial background noise will be consistent and
evidence of splicing of different recordings can be eliminated.
In my view, the extremely poor sound quality of the intercepts raises
the distinct possibility that they are forged, and given the hostile
nature of the sources the tapes come from it is clear that no such
tapes can be treated as any sort of evidence.
Recordings of such poor sound quality as these intercepts are can not
be conclusively authenticated by a legitimate technician. In spite of
this fact I would still suggest that technicians analyze the
intercepts. A technician can prove a forgery, but he can not provide
authentication, and if a forgery is proved then it can indicate a
malicious intent by the prosecution.
Enough with the technical explanations though. The first witness to
testify was a secret witness codenamed “B-1011.” B-1011 professed to
be a Muslim from Brcko.
According to B-1011 Serb forces attacked Brcko on April 31, 1992.
Obviously, nobody consulted a calendar because there is no such date as
April 31st, but this is a minor point.
B-1011 claims to have been arrested by Captain Dragan. B-1011
described Captain Dragan as being tall thin man with brown hair.
Unfortunately for the witness, Captain Dragan is a short man with gray
hair.
B-1011 claimed that Captain Dragan spoke with an English accent, and
in particular B-1011 identified it as being an Australian accent.
B-1011 does not speak English, so how he could manage to identify an
Australian accent is rather a mystery.
Captain Dragan doesn’t even speak English with an Australian accent.
You can see Captain Dragan speaking in both English and Serbian for
yourself by watching the first segment of this Dutch television
documentary
[http://info.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/
index.shtml?7738514+7738518+7738520+14130404]. Captain Dragan is the
short gray haired man who appears at approximately the 5 minute mark.
In spite of what he claimed in court, B-1011 was obviously not
arrested by Captain Dragan. B-1011 claimed that “Captain Dragan” was
wearing sunglasses, blue jeans, and a military shirt, and that
“captain Dragan” was going around Brcko carrying out arrests along
with 30 other men, none of whom were wearing the same uniform.
B-1011 claimed that he was taken to a hotel in Brcko, and that it was
guarded by Captain Dragan’s men. At this point B-1011 claimed that
Captain Dragan’s men all wore dark blue uniforms.
If we believe B-1011 then the only one among Captain Dragan’s men who
didn’t have a proper uniform was Captain Dragan himself.
While at the Hotel, B-1011 claimed that he saw four dead bodies when
he went to use the toilet. He was at the hotel for 40 minutes before
he went to the toilet, but he didn’t hear any shots, nonetheless he
concluded that the men had been shot recently since there was steam
emanating from the corpses.
This is the 4th of May, it is spring time, and we are supposed to
believe that it was cold enough outside for dead bodies to be
emanating steam.
In his statement B-1011 claimed that a Serbian commander named Goran
Jelisic was upset because some of his men had been killed by the
Muslims. When Milosevic asked if these bodies could have been precisely
those dead Serbs, B-1011, in spite of the fact that he couldn’t
identify the bodies, said that they most certainly were not the bodies
of those dead Serbs.
The next witness to testify was Mehmed Mojsic, a Muslim from the
Sarajevo municipality of Hajici. He claims to have been captured by the
Bosnian Serbs on June 20, 1992 and held in custody until November 5,
1992 when he was exchanged.
While in custody Mojsic alleged that he was the victim of some
mistreatment. He gave three statements about the mistreatment that he
allegedly suffered.
He gave his first statement to the B-H authorities in April 1993, he
gave his next statement to the ICTY investigators in June of 1997, and
he gave his last statement to the B-H Authorities in February 1998.
Mojsic’s testimony ran into two problems. Mr. Kwon asked a question
that should be asked about each witness. Mr. Kwon asked the prosecutor,
Ms. Pack: “What relevance does this witness’s evidence have to the
indictment?” Ms. Pack was at a loss for an answer, and so she
confessed that there was no relevance.
The next problem was that Mojsic had made these three statements and
they didn’t jive with one another.
Mojsic explained that he had given the statements by the process of
recounting events as he remembered them, not by the process of
answering questions which nicely eliminated the “they never asked me”
excuse.
In subsequent statements Mr. Mojsic claimed that he was mistreated by
the members of the Red Berets, the JNA, and by Arkan’s men. In his
first statement of April 1993 he never mentions the Red Berets, the JNA
or Arkan’s men at all.
When President Milosevic confronted Mojsic on this point the witness
became irate. First he tried to accuse President Milosevic of lying,
but that didn’t work because Milosevic challenged the witness to show
him where in the first statement he mentions the JNA, Arkan’s men, or
the Red Berets.
Mojsic replied by telling President Milosevic to find those references
for himself. To which Milosevic replied “I can’t find them, which is
why I am asking you to find them.”
Of course President Milosevic was right and no mention ever was found
of the JNA, Arkan’s men, or the Red Berets in Mojsic’s first statement.
Another “minor detail” that never made it into Mojsic’s first
statement was the death of his own brother. In subsequent statements he
said that his brother was killed in a JNA detention facility, and that
he was forced to carry his own dead brother through an obstacle course
where JNA soldiers along with Arkan’s men shot at them.
Maybe this is something that he just forgot. I imagine that a “minor
detail” like being shot at while carrying your dead brother is an easy
thing to forget. When Mr. Tapuskovic asked Mr. Mojsic why he didn’t
mention any of this in his first statement, he angrily snapped back
saying “What have I got to explain to you?”
Maybe I misunderstand the purpose behind a witness appearing in a
court. I thought that they come to court to answer questions and
explain things. But what the Hell? This isn’t a real court it’s the
Hague Tribunal, and besides by Ms. Pack’s own admission this witness’s
testimony is completely irrelevant to the indictment anyway.
Ms. Pack’s re-examination was a comical display indeed. She only asked
one question. She said that President Milosevic and Mr. Tapuskovic had
indicated that Mr. Mojsic was making events up, because he didn’t
mention them in his first statement and only came up with them five
years later in his subsequent statements. Based on this premise she
asked him the following question, “Did you tell us the truth, or have
you been making things up?”
Of course Mojsic said that he was telling the truth, and perish the
thought that he would lie. With that Ms. Pack’s re-examination was
over with.
The final witness was a secret witness codenamed “B-1770.” B-1770 was
caught swimming across the Drina River into Serbia.
He was trying to sneak into Serbia illegally, but he wasn’t sneaky
enough. The VJ was waiting for him on the other bank and he was
arrested and sent to the Mitrovica detention facility where a Muslim
brigade was being held after they had fled from Bosnian territory.
Although, B-1770 claims that he was not part of the brigade.
B-1770 said that he ran away from Bosnia, leaving his wife and
children behind, because he wanted to get away from the Serbs. Of
course he went to the most logical place that anybody seeking to get
away from the Serbs would go. He went to Serbia.
B-1770 claims that he was mistreated in Serbia. He admits that he was
monitored by the International Red Cross, and the UNHCR throughout the
time he was in Serbia. He has no medical records to prove that he was
mistreated, and he can’t identify the perpetrators of his alleged
mistreatment.
The Red Cross, who monitored the detention facility on a regular
basis, did not even file one report that there was mistreatment, and by
the witness’s own admission they saw him twice a week.
He claimed that he lost a lot of weight while in custody, but
apparently on his passport that was issued right after his release, but
which we can’t see because he is a secret witness; it says that he is
a healthy weight and in his picture he doesn’t look emaciated at all.
B-1770 tried to explain that away by saying that they “fattened him
up” before his release.
Of course what B-1770 is saying is absurd. The media and the
diplomatic corps visited that facility all the time. Nobody was being
beaten there, not the witness, and not anybody else.
B-1770 was the last witness of the day, and the so-called “tribunal”
adjourned until next Monday. I will not be able to provide you with
any details about next Monday or Tuesday’s proceedings because the
Perfumed Prince, Wesley Clark, will be occupying the witness stand,
and he gets to testify in secret, and after his secret testimony the
U.S. Government will censor the transcripts.
I suppose it’s no great loss that we can’t see Clark testify. All
he’ll do is lie anyway. The unfortunate thing is that we won’t get the
pleasure of watching Slobo expose Wesley Clark for the lying terrorist
that he is.
=== 3 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg121203.htm
HAGUE "TRIBUNAL" BANS PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC FROM SPEAKING TO THE OUTSIDE
WORLD
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - December 12, 2003
The Hague Tribunal has made a decision
[http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/ictymilosevicban121203.htm%5d to
essentially cut President Milosevic off from the outside world because
he made a speech which allegedly threatened peace and security in the
Former Yugoslavia.
President Milosevic's speech
[http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/milosevic120303.htm%5d did not
threaten anybody's peace and security. This communication ban that the
so-called "tribunal" has imposed comes at an interesting time. It
comes right before Wesley Clark is due to testify.
Under the decision the following restrictions will be imposed on
President Milosevic by the registrar of the ICTY:
(i) Prohibit communication, via telephone between the Accused with
any person(s) (particularly with the media), such prohibition shall
not apply to telephone communication with his immediate family,
legal counsel (where applicable), diplomatic or consular
representatives on condition that this facility shall not be used in
any manner to contact the media;
(ii) All authorised telephone conversations, except for
communications with recognised legal representatives (if any) and
diplomatic or consular representatives, shall be monitored, in
accordance with current Detention Unit practices;
(iii) Prohibit all visits between the Accused with any person(s)
(particularly with the media), such prohibition shall not apply to
visits with his immediate family, legal counsel (where applicable),
diplomatic or consular representatives;
(iv) All authorised visits shall be supervised by the Commanding
Officer of the Detention Unit or an official he designates.
(v) The aforesaid restrictions will not apply to written
communications wherein the current practices shall be maintained and
the Detention Unit’s regulations concerning the import and export of
mail shall be adhered to.
See how afraid this so-called "tribunal" is. Look at how keen they are
to control the information that the media gets. The prosecutor is
allowed to speak to the media, in fact the ICTY provides facilities
that the prosecutor can use to call press conferences. But, the person
who is being accused by the "tribunal" can't even use the telephone if
it is thought that a reporter could hear about the contents of the
telephone conversation.
The Hague "tribunal" regularly conducts closed-door hearings, in spite
of President Milosevic's vehement objections. They also conceal the
identity of many of their witnesses. According to an ICTY press
release dated December 2, 2003 only 60% of ICTY witnesses testify
openly, which means that 40% of the witnesses are heard behind closed
doors, or else their identity is kept a secret.
The witnesses don't even write their own witness statements. The
prosecutor writes them, and then turns around and submits their
version of what the witness said as "evidence" under their Rule 89(F).
As if that wasn't bad enough President Milosevic isn't even allowed to
cross-examine all of the witnesses who's testimony is being used
against him. Under Rule 92-bis testimony from other "trials" can be
used against him, and he has no right to cross-examine.
Now with Wesley Clark the so-called "tribunal" has decided that
President Milosevic must apply to the American Government in advance
about which topics and questions he will ask. The testimony will take
place behind closed doors, out of the public view. After Clark
testifies the U.S. Government will get 48 hours to redact the
transcripts and edit the video of the testimony, and only then will
the public be allowed to see what went on. Unfortunately, it will only
be the version of events that the U.S. Government censors allow you to
see.
It is beyond belief that anybody could take the verdicts of the Hague
Tribunal seriously. The Hague Tribunal is a kangaroo court. The sole
purpose of the Hague Tribunal is to retroactively legitimize Western
aggression against Yugoslavia, and to silence the voice of anybody who
is in a position to expose the nature of that aggression.
The ICTY is a propaganda tool that acts on the whims of bureaucrats in
Washington and Brussels. The "trials" are conducted in a secretive
manner because the verdicts are pre-fabricated to meet the propaganda
needs of NATO. The information coming out of the "tribunal" is strictly
controlled so that only the prosecutor's voice is heard by the public.
God forbid that some reporter, after speaking with someone who is on
"trial", would report something that was unfriendly to the propaganda
goals of NATO. That right there is why it is so important to the
"tribunal" that persons who are on "trial" not be allowed to speak to
the media.
This decision to restrict President Milosevic's ability to communicate
with the outside world has nothing to do with any concern for the
peace and security of the former Yugoslavia, and everything to do with
NATO's desire to manipulate the public and hide the truth about their
criminal aggression against Yugoslavia.
=== 4 ===
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/milosevic1218.php
Protest set to greet Gen. Clark at the Hague tribunal
By John Catalinotto
Organizations in the Netherlands and around the world plan to protest
the appearance of Gen. Wesley Clark before the tribunal in The Hague on
Dec. 15. He is scheduled to be a prosecution witness in the trial of
former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic.
Clark was commander of NATO when, beginning on March 24, 1999, it waged
a 78-day bombing campaign against Yugo slavia. The current U.S.
presidential candidate was himself tried and convicted in Belgrade of
war crimes. On June 10, 2000, right here in the United States, a
people's tribunal found General Clark, along with then-President Bill
Clinton and other U.S. and NATO leaders, guilty of war crimes.
A call for the protest distributed by the International Committee for
the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic (ICDSM) expressed outrage over how
the trial is being conducted:
"More clearly than ever before now the direct influence of the U.S.
regime comes to the surface. It is the U.S. that literally dictated to
the tribunal the terms under which Wesley Clark will testify. Following
the direct conditions from Washington, no public and no media will be
allowed inside. The only people who will observe the proceedings will
be two representatives of the U.S. government. And not only this: the
U.S. government has the authority to decide which parts of the
testimony will remain secret. The other parts will be presented to the
U.S. government, which will then have a time period of 48 hours to
censor also this part."
The New Communist Party of the Netherlands has organized a protest for
8 a.m. in front of the tribunal building. At 9 a.m. there will be a
press conference of the ICDSM in the Hotel Bel Air next to the
tribunal. Canadian attorney Tiphaine Dickson, lawyer for the ICDSM,
will speak to the media.
ICDSM chapters in other countries are also protesting General Clark's
secret testimony. For information on the activity of the U.S. section,
see www.icdsm-us.org.
Reprinted from the Dec. 18, 2003, issue of Workers World newspaper
(Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and
distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not
allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY,
NY 10011; via email: ww@.... Subscribe
wwnews-on@.... Unsubscribe wwnews-off@.... Support
independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
=== 5 ===
STOP WAR CRIMINAL WESLEY CLARK
FROM TESTIFYING IN SECRET
Statement of the International Action Center 12/15/03
The International Action Center (IAC) protests the appearance
before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) of U.S. General Wesley Clark, former NATO commander
and current presidential candidate.
The IAC especially protests the acquiescence of the ICTY to
Washington’s demands that General Clark’s testimony be given in
secret. We would ask, “What are they hiding?” but we already know the
answer. General Clark is a war criminal and both he and the U.S.
government fear being exposed as such.
General Clark commanded the 78-day NATO bombing campaign against
Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999. During that campaign, which was
directed mainly against civilian targets in Serbia, killed several
thousand Serbian civilians, destroyed or damaged schools and hospitals
as well as much of the industrial infrastructure of the country,
General Clark was responsible for ordering war crimes.
Indeed, General Clark admitted in his book, “Fighting Modern War,”
that the NATO powers opted for warfare as a political weapon. The
Kosovo war, he writes, "was coercive diplomacy, the use of armed
forces to impose the political will of the NATO nations on the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia, or more specifically, on Serbia. The NATO
nations voluntarily undertook this war." This means General Clark
collaborated in a crime against peace, the most serious of all war
crimes.
According to the public record, General Clark argued for bombing
civilian targets in order to force the Yugoslav leadership to
retreat and allow NATO troops to occupy Kosovo. This is a war crime.
At least three initiatives recognized General Clark’s
responsibility for these crimes by naming him along with other
NATO political and military leaders in war crimes indictments.
In 1999 a group of lawyers and legal academics, including Toronto
Professors Michael Mandel and David Jacobs, drafted a Request that
the Prosecutor for the ICTY investigate and indict named persons
including General Clark for war crimes in connection with the attack on
Yugoslavia. They presented what they called “overwhelming evidence
that the attack was unlawful and that the conduct of the attack on
civilian objects,” breaching the Geneva Conventions. The
Prosecution has laid no charges to date and has refused to indict
any U.S. forces for crimes committed during the war on Yugoslavia.
On June 10, 2000, a People’s Tribunal organized by the
International Action Center and others held its final hearing in
New York and found the same NATO leaders, including General Clark,
guilty of war crimes. Individuals from about 20 countries
presented evidence to prove a thorough indictment prepared a year
before by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark accusing
Wesley Clark and others of crimes against peace, war crimes and
crimes against humanity.
In a major war-crimes case, a Belgrade court found him and the
other leaders guilty on Sept. 22, 2000.
Considering the skill Slobodan Milosevic has shown in
cross-examining witnesses during almost two years of defending
himself before the ICTY, the Yugoslav leader could easily expose
General Wesley Clark as a war criminal of the worst sort. That,
and not the phony “national interests” excuse from Washington, is
why the U.S. government has demanded secrecy.
According to a Nov. 19 ICTY announcement, the public gallery of
the ICTY will be closed during the course of Clark's testimony. In
addition, "the broadcast of the testimony [will] be delayed for a
period of 48 hours to enable the U.S. government to review the
transcript and make representations as to whether evidence given
in open session should be redacted in order to protect the
national interests of the U.S."
That the ICTY has acquiesced in this matter to U.S. demands is the
final proof, if any was needed, that this court is a U.S. tool
created as part of the overall U.S. and NATO campaign to destroy
Yugoslavia.
Protests were reported to have been carried out at The Hague on
the morning of Dec. 15 against General Clark1s secret testimony
and there were other protests in different capitals.
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
En Espanol: iac-cai@...
web: http://www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT SITE http://www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
To make a tax-deductible donation,
go to http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org
1. News: Jovanovic refused to plea guilty or not guilty before Hague
tribunal / "Trial" Session cancelled on Dec. 9th
2. PHONY INTERCEPTS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL
3. HAGUE "TRIBUNAL" BANS PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC FROM SPEAKING TO THE
OUTSIDE WORLD
THE SHAME OF WESLEY CLARK'S SECRET TESTIMONY:
4. Protest set to greet Gen. Clark at the Hague tribunal
5. STOP WAR CRIMINAL WESLEY CLARK FROM TESTIFYING IN SECRET - Statement
of the International Action Center 12/15/03
=== 1 ===
Jovanovic refused to plea guilty or not guilty before Hague tribunal
Tanjug - December 5, 2003
17:31 THE HAGUE , Dec 5 (Tanjug) - Editor-in-chief of the Podgorica
daily Dan Dusko Jovanovic, who had been accused of disrespect of The
Hague-based International War Crimes Tribunal, on Friday faced the
hearing of The Hague tribunal court council, but refused to plea
guilty or not guilty.
In my case, there is an objective responsibility having in mind my post
(of editor-in-chief), but I had no intention of making any offence to
The Hague tribunal, said Jovanovic who, according to the tribunal's
regulations, has another 30 days to plea guilty or not guilty.
---
Press Advisory . Avis pour information
(Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document)
The Hague, 8 December 2003
P.I.S./PA146
MILOSEVIC CASE:
Please be informed that the Milosevic Trial is cancelled for tomorrow,
Tuesday 9 December, and will commence on Wednesday 10 December at 9am
in Courtroom I, due to Judge Robinson’s absence for medical reasons.
For further information please call: +31 (70) 512-5343 or 512-5356.
Copyright 2003 ICTY P.I.S.
Posted for Fair Use only.
=== 2 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg121003.htm
PHONY INTERCEPTS AT THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL: MILOSEVIC "TRIAL" DECEMBER 10,
2003
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - December 10, 2003
Written by: Andy Wilcoxson
In its only hearing this week the so-called “tribunal” sat for an
extended period, and over the course of the day 2 secret witnesses and
one open witness were heard from.
Before I deal with the witnesses I would like to discuss the matter of
intercepts which was discussed today.
At this so-called “trial” the prosecution has exhibited 245
intercepts. The origins of the intercepts are unclear although it was
revealed today that they came from the intelligence services of
unnamed governments that are hostile towards Serbia.
It was also revealed that no steps have been taken to authenticate the
intercepts. No technicians have been charged with the task of
verifying the integrity or the authenticity of the recordings. The
“tribunal” isn’t even following its own rules here. Rule 89(E)
requires the authentication of evidence.
Neither President Milosevic nor his associates has been given access
to the original recordings. In fact, all the OTP has are copies. The
intelligence services maintain possession of the originals.
President Milosevic contends that the intercepts are forgeries. He
says that the tapes have been doctored by the same hostile governments
that produced them for the prosecution. He says that these governments
forged the tapes in order to justify their own actions and policies
against Serbia.
President Milosevic’s assertion is not beyond the realm of
possibility. I have heard some of these intercepts played in “court.” I
am a technician at a television station, and I have some experience
with audio mixing, and it is very possible that these tapes are forged.
First of all, on every intercept I’ve heard, the background noise
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/b/background_noise.htm%5d is very high,
and the audio quality is quite degraded. This could be the result of
generation loss [http://www.atis.org/tg2k/_generation_loss.html%5d.
Intentionally re-copying the same tape over and over again will
degrade the sound quality and it can help to cover-up the subtle
details that a technician would have to look for in order to determine
the authenticity of a recording.
The excessive background noise may be artificial, intentionally added
using a mixer [http://www.webref.org/acoustics/m/mixer.htm%5d to mask
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/m/masking.htm%5d the original background
noise. A tell tale sign of a forged tape is subtle changes in the
background noise. Different recordings will have a different noise
floor [http://www.webref.org/acoustics/n/noise_floor.htm%5d. If a single
recording is spliced together from multiple recordings, then you
should be able to detect small changes in the amount of background
noise, because of the changes in the noise floor generated by the
recording equipment, and the amount of ambient noise
[http://www.webref.org/acoustics/a/ambient_noise.htm%5d that may be
present on the different recordings.
If you add artificial background noise to a recording you can cover-up
the original background noise provided that the artificial background
noise is at a sufficiently high level to mask the original background
noise. Thus, the artificial background noise will be consistent and
evidence of splicing of different recordings can be eliminated.
In my view, the extremely poor sound quality of the intercepts raises
the distinct possibility that they are forged, and given the hostile
nature of the sources the tapes come from it is clear that no such
tapes can be treated as any sort of evidence.
Recordings of such poor sound quality as these intercepts are can not
be conclusively authenticated by a legitimate technician. In spite of
this fact I would still suggest that technicians analyze the
intercepts. A technician can prove a forgery, but he can not provide
authentication, and if a forgery is proved then it can indicate a
malicious intent by the prosecution.
Enough with the technical explanations though. The first witness to
testify was a secret witness codenamed “B-1011.” B-1011 professed to
be a Muslim from Brcko.
According to B-1011 Serb forces attacked Brcko on April 31, 1992.
Obviously, nobody consulted a calendar because there is no such date as
April 31st, but this is a minor point.
B-1011 claims to have been arrested by Captain Dragan. B-1011
described Captain Dragan as being tall thin man with brown hair.
Unfortunately for the witness, Captain Dragan is a short man with gray
hair.
B-1011 claimed that Captain Dragan spoke with an English accent, and
in particular B-1011 identified it as being an Australian accent.
B-1011 does not speak English, so how he could manage to identify an
Australian accent is rather a mystery.
Captain Dragan doesn’t even speak English with an Australian accent.
You can see Captain Dragan speaking in both English and Serbian for
yourself by watching the first segment of this Dutch television
documentary
[http://info.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/
index.shtml?7738514+7738518+7738520+14130404]. Captain Dragan is the
short gray haired man who appears at approximately the 5 minute mark.
In spite of what he claimed in court, B-1011 was obviously not
arrested by Captain Dragan. B-1011 claimed that “Captain Dragan” was
wearing sunglasses, blue jeans, and a military shirt, and that
“captain Dragan” was going around Brcko carrying out arrests along
with 30 other men, none of whom were wearing the same uniform.
B-1011 claimed that he was taken to a hotel in Brcko, and that it was
guarded by Captain Dragan’s men. At this point B-1011 claimed that
Captain Dragan’s men all wore dark blue uniforms.
If we believe B-1011 then the only one among Captain Dragan’s men who
didn’t have a proper uniform was Captain Dragan himself.
While at the Hotel, B-1011 claimed that he saw four dead bodies when
he went to use the toilet. He was at the hotel for 40 minutes before
he went to the toilet, but he didn’t hear any shots, nonetheless he
concluded that the men had been shot recently since there was steam
emanating from the corpses.
This is the 4th of May, it is spring time, and we are supposed to
believe that it was cold enough outside for dead bodies to be
emanating steam.
In his statement B-1011 claimed that a Serbian commander named Goran
Jelisic was upset because some of his men had been killed by the
Muslims. When Milosevic asked if these bodies could have been precisely
those dead Serbs, B-1011, in spite of the fact that he couldn’t
identify the bodies, said that they most certainly were not the bodies
of those dead Serbs.
The next witness to testify was Mehmed Mojsic, a Muslim from the
Sarajevo municipality of Hajici. He claims to have been captured by the
Bosnian Serbs on June 20, 1992 and held in custody until November 5,
1992 when he was exchanged.
While in custody Mojsic alleged that he was the victim of some
mistreatment. He gave three statements about the mistreatment that he
allegedly suffered.
He gave his first statement to the B-H authorities in April 1993, he
gave his next statement to the ICTY investigators in June of 1997, and
he gave his last statement to the B-H Authorities in February 1998.
Mojsic’s testimony ran into two problems. Mr. Kwon asked a question
that should be asked about each witness. Mr. Kwon asked the prosecutor,
Ms. Pack: “What relevance does this witness’s evidence have to the
indictment?” Ms. Pack was at a loss for an answer, and so she
confessed that there was no relevance.
The next problem was that Mojsic had made these three statements and
they didn’t jive with one another.
Mojsic explained that he had given the statements by the process of
recounting events as he remembered them, not by the process of
answering questions which nicely eliminated the “they never asked me”
excuse.
In subsequent statements Mr. Mojsic claimed that he was mistreated by
the members of the Red Berets, the JNA, and by Arkan’s men. In his
first statement of April 1993 he never mentions the Red Berets, the JNA
or Arkan’s men at all.
When President Milosevic confronted Mojsic on this point the witness
became irate. First he tried to accuse President Milosevic of lying,
but that didn’t work because Milosevic challenged the witness to show
him where in the first statement he mentions the JNA, Arkan’s men, or
the Red Berets.
Mojsic replied by telling President Milosevic to find those references
for himself. To which Milosevic replied “I can’t find them, which is
why I am asking you to find them.”
Of course President Milosevic was right and no mention ever was found
of the JNA, Arkan’s men, or the Red Berets in Mojsic’s first statement.
Another “minor detail” that never made it into Mojsic’s first
statement was the death of his own brother. In subsequent statements he
said that his brother was killed in a JNA detention facility, and that
he was forced to carry his own dead brother through an obstacle course
where JNA soldiers along with Arkan’s men shot at them.
Maybe this is something that he just forgot. I imagine that a “minor
detail” like being shot at while carrying your dead brother is an easy
thing to forget. When Mr. Tapuskovic asked Mr. Mojsic why he didn’t
mention any of this in his first statement, he angrily snapped back
saying “What have I got to explain to you?”
Maybe I misunderstand the purpose behind a witness appearing in a
court. I thought that they come to court to answer questions and
explain things. But what the Hell? This isn’t a real court it’s the
Hague Tribunal, and besides by Ms. Pack’s own admission this witness’s
testimony is completely irrelevant to the indictment anyway.
Ms. Pack’s re-examination was a comical display indeed. She only asked
one question. She said that President Milosevic and Mr. Tapuskovic had
indicated that Mr. Mojsic was making events up, because he didn’t
mention them in his first statement and only came up with them five
years later in his subsequent statements. Based on this premise she
asked him the following question, “Did you tell us the truth, or have
you been making things up?”
Of course Mojsic said that he was telling the truth, and perish the
thought that he would lie. With that Ms. Pack’s re-examination was
over with.
The final witness was a secret witness codenamed “B-1770.” B-1770 was
caught swimming across the Drina River into Serbia.
He was trying to sneak into Serbia illegally, but he wasn’t sneaky
enough. The VJ was waiting for him on the other bank and he was
arrested and sent to the Mitrovica detention facility where a Muslim
brigade was being held after they had fled from Bosnian territory.
Although, B-1770 claims that he was not part of the brigade.
B-1770 said that he ran away from Bosnia, leaving his wife and
children behind, because he wanted to get away from the Serbs. Of
course he went to the most logical place that anybody seeking to get
away from the Serbs would go. He went to Serbia.
B-1770 claims that he was mistreated in Serbia. He admits that he was
monitored by the International Red Cross, and the UNHCR throughout the
time he was in Serbia. He has no medical records to prove that he was
mistreated, and he can’t identify the perpetrators of his alleged
mistreatment.
The Red Cross, who monitored the detention facility on a regular
basis, did not even file one report that there was mistreatment, and by
the witness’s own admission they saw him twice a week.
He claimed that he lost a lot of weight while in custody, but
apparently on his passport that was issued right after his release, but
which we can’t see because he is a secret witness; it says that he is
a healthy weight and in his picture he doesn’t look emaciated at all.
B-1770 tried to explain that away by saying that they “fattened him
up” before his release.
Of course what B-1770 is saying is absurd. The media and the
diplomatic corps visited that facility all the time. Nobody was being
beaten there, not the witness, and not anybody else.
B-1770 was the last witness of the day, and the so-called “tribunal”
adjourned until next Monday. I will not be able to provide you with
any details about next Monday or Tuesday’s proceedings because the
Perfumed Prince, Wesley Clark, will be occupying the witness stand,
and he gets to testify in secret, and after his secret testimony the
U.S. Government will censor the transcripts.
I suppose it’s no great loss that we can’t see Clark testify. All
he’ll do is lie anyway. The unfortunate thing is that we won’t get the
pleasure of watching Slobo expose Wesley Clark for the lying terrorist
that he is.
=== 3 ===
http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg121203.htm
HAGUE "TRIBUNAL" BANS PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC FROM SPEAKING TO THE OUTSIDE
WORLD
www.slobodan-milosevic.org - December 12, 2003
The Hague Tribunal has made a decision
[http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/ictymilosevicban121203.htm%5d to
essentially cut President Milosevic off from the outside world because
he made a speech which allegedly threatened peace and security in the
Former Yugoslavia.
President Milosevic's speech
[http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/milosevic120303.htm%5d did not
threaten anybody's peace and security. This communication ban that the
so-called "tribunal" has imposed comes at an interesting time. It
comes right before Wesley Clark is due to testify.
Under the decision the following restrictions will be imposed on
President Milosevic by the registrar of the ICTY:
(i) Prohibit communication, via telephone between the Accused with
any person(s) (particularly with the media), such prohibition shall
not apply to telephone communication with his immediate family,
legal counsel (where applicable), diplomatic or consular
representatives on condition that this facility shall not be used in
any manner to contact the media;
(ii) All authorised telephone conversations, except for
communications with recognised legal representatives (if any) and
diplomatic or consular representatives, shall be monitored, in
accordance with current Detention Unit practices;
(iii) Prohibit all visits between the Accused with any person(s)
(particularly with the media), such prohibition shall not apply to
visits with his immediate family, legal counsel (where applicable),
diplomatic or consular representatives;
(iv) All authorised visits shall be supervised by the Commanding
Officer of the Detention Unit or an official he designates.
(v) The aforesaid restrictions will not apply to written
communications wherein the current practices shall be maintained and
the Detention Unit’s regulations concerning the import and export of
mail shall be adhered to.
See how afraid this so-called "tribunal" is. Look at how keen they are
to control the information that the media gets. The prosecutor is
allowed to speak to the media, in fact the ICTY provides facilities
that the prosecutor can use to call press conferences. But, the person
who is being accused by the "tribunal" can't even use the telephone if
it is thought that a reporter could hear about the contents of the
telephone conversation.
The Hague "tribunal" regularly conducts closed-door hearings, in spite
of President Milosevic's vehement objections. They also conceal the
identity of many of their witnesses. According to an ICTY press
release dated December 2, 2003 only 60% of ICTY witnesses testify
openly, which means that 40% of the witnesses are heard behind closed
doors, or else their identity is kept a secret.
The witnesses don't even write their own witness statements. The
prosecutor writes them, and then turns around and submits their
version of what the witness said as "evidence" under their Rule 89(F).
As if that wasn't bad enough President Milosevic isn't even allowed to
cross-examine all of the witnesses who's testimony is being used
against him. Under Rule 92-bis testimony from other "trials" can be
used against him, and he has no right to cross-examine.
Now with Wesley Clark the so-called "tribunal" has decided that
President Milosevic must apply to the American Government in advance
about which topics and questions he will ask. The testimony will take
place behind closed doors, out of the public view. After Clark
testifies the U.S. Government will get 48 hours to redact the
transcripts and edit the video of the testimony, and only then will
the public be allowed to see what went on. Unfortunately, it will only
be the version of events that the U.S. Government censors allow you to
see.
It is beyond belief that anybody could take the verdicts of the Hague
Tribunal seriously. The Hague Tribunal is a kangaroo court. The sole
purpose of the Hague Tribunal is to retroactively legitimize Western
aggression against Yugoslavia, and to silence the voice of anybody who
is in a position to expose the nature of that aggression.
The ICTY is a propaganda tool that acts on the whims of bureaucrats in
Washington and Brussels. The "trials" are conducted in a secretive
manner because the verdicts are pre-fabricated to meet the propaganda
needs of NATO. The information coming out of the "tribunal" is strictly
controlled so that only the prosecutor's voice is heard by the public.
God forbid that some reporter, after speaking with someone who is on
"trial", would report something that was unfriendly to the propaganda
goals of NATO. That right there is why it is so important to the
"tribunal" that persons who are on "trial" not be allowed to speak to
the media.
This decision to restrict President Milosevic's ability to communicate
with the outside world has nothing to do with any concern for the
peace and security of the former Yugoslavia, and everything to do with
NATO's desire to manipulate the public and hide the truth about their
criminal aggression against Yugoslavia.
=== 4 ===
http://www.workers.org/ww/2003/milosevic1218.php
Protest set to greet Gen. Clark at the Hague tribunal
By John Catalinotto
Organizations in the Netherlands and around the world plan to protest
the appearance of Gen. Wesley Clark before the tribunal in The Hague on
Dec. 15. He is scheduled to be a prosecution witness in the trial of
former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic.
Clark was commander of NATO when, beginning on March 24, 1999, it waged
a 78-day bombing campaign against Yugo slavia. The current U.S.
presidential candidate was himself tried and convicted in Belgrade of
war crimes. On June 10, 2000, right here in the United States, a
people's tribunal found General Clark, along with then-President Bill
Clinton and other U.S. and NATO leaders, guilty of war crimes.
A call for the protest distributed by the International Committee for
the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic (ICDSM) expressed outrage over how
the trial is being conducted:
"More clearly than ever before now the direct influence of the U.S.
regime comes to the surface. It is the U.S. that literally dictated to
the tribunal the terms under which Wesley Clark will testify. Following
the direct conditions from Washington, no public and no media will be
allowed inside. The only people who will observe the proceedings will
be two representatives of the U.S. government. And not only this: the
U.S. government has the authority to decide which parts of the
testimony will remain secret. The other parts will be presented to the
U.S. government, which will then have a time period of 48 hours to
censor also this part."
The New Communist Party of the Netherlands has organized a protest for
8 a.m. in front of the tribunal building. At 9 a.m. there will be a
press conference of the ICDSM in the Hotel Bel Air next to the
tribunal. Canadian attorney Tiphaine Dickson, lawyer for the ICDSM,
will speak to the media.
ICDSM chapters in other countries are also protesting General Clark's
secret testimony. For information on the activity of the U.S. section,
see www.icdsm-us.org.
Reprinted from the Dec. 18, 2003, issue of Workers World newspaper
(Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and
distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not
allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY,
NY 10011; via email: ww@.... Subscribe
wwnews-on@.... Unsubscribe wwnews-off@.... Support
independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
=== 5 ===
STOP WAR CRIMINAL WESLEY CLARK
FROM TESTIFYING IN SECRET
Statement of the International Action Center 12/15/03
The International Action Center (IAC) protests the appearance
before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) of U.S. General Wesley Clark, former NATO commander
and current presidential candidate.
The IAC especially protests the acquiescence of the ICTY to
Washington’s demands that General Clark’s testimony be given in
secret. We would ask, “What are they hiding?” but we already know the
answer. General Clark is a war criminal and both he and the U.S.
government fear being exposed as such.
General Clark commanded the 78-day NATO bombing campaign against
Yugoslavia in the spring of 1999. During that campaign, which was
directed mainly against civilian targets in Serbia, killed several
thousand Serbian civilians, destroyed or damaged schools and hospitals
as well as much of the industrial infrastructure of the country,
General Clark was responsible for ordering war crimes.
Indeed, General Clark admitted in his book, “Fighting Modern War,”
that the NATO powers opted for warfare as a political weapon. The
Kosovo war, he writes, "was coercive diplomacy, the use of armed
forces to impose the political will of the NATO nations on the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia, or more specifically, on Serbia. The NATO
nations voluntarily undertook this war." This means General Clark
collaborated in a crime against peace, the most serious of all war
crimes.
According to the public record, General Clark argued for bombing
civilian targets in order to force the Yugoslav leadership to
retreat and allow NATO troops to occupy Kosovo. This is a war crime.
At least three initiatives recognized General Clark’s
responsibility for these crimes by naming him along with other
NATO political and military leaders in war crimes indictments.
In 1999 a group of lawyers and legal academics, including Toronto
Professors Michael Mandel and David Jacobs, drafted a Request that
the Prosecutor for the ICTY investigate and indict named persons
including General Clark for war crimes in connection with the attack on
Yugoslavia. They presented what they called “overwhelming evidence
that the attack was unlawful and that the conduct of the attack on
civilian objects,” breaching the Geneva Conventions. The
Prosecution has laid no charges to date and has refused to indict
any U.S. forces for crimes committed during the war on Yugoslavia.
On June 10, 2000, a People’s Tribunal organized by the
International Action Center and others held its final hearing in
New York and found the same NATO leaders, including General Clark,
guilty of war crimes. Individuals from about 20 countries
presented evidence to prove a thorough indictment prepared a year
before by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark accusing
Wesley Clark and others of crimes against peace, war crimes and
crimes against humanity.
In a major war-crimes case, a Belgrade court found him and the
other leaders guilty on Sept. 22, 2000.
Considering the skill Slobodan Milosevic has shown in
cross-examining witnesses during almost two years of defending
himself before the ICTY, the Yugoslav leader could easily expose
General Wesley Clark as a war criminal of the worst sort. That,
and not the phony “national interests” excuse from Washington, is
why the U.S. government has demanded secrecy.
According to a Nov. 19 ICTY announcement, the public gallery of
the ICTY will be closed during the course of Clark's testimony. In
addition, "the broadcast of the testimony [will] be delayed for a
period of 48 hours to enable the U.S. government to review the
transcript and make representations as to whether evidence given
in open session should be redacted in order to protect the
national interests of the U.S."
That the ICTY has acquiesced in this matter to U.S. demands is the
final proof, if any was needed, that this court is a U.S. tool
created as part of the overall U.S. and NATO campaign to destroy
Yugoslavia.
Protests were reported to have been carried out at The Hague on
the morning of Dec. 15 against General Clark1s secret testimony
and there were other protests in different capitals.
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@...
En Espanol: iac-cai@...
web: http://www.iacenter.org
CHECK OUT SITE http://www.mumia2000.org
phone: 212 633-6646
fax: 212 633-2889
To make a tax-deductible donation,
go to http://www.peoplesrightsfund.org