There’s more news on Bosnia’s former grand mufti, reis-ul-ulema Mustafa Ceric, currently president of the World Bosniak Congress. The Bosnian-Serb news agency RTRS (Radio Televizija Republike Srpske) reported last week that Austria’s secret services have published some documents revealing that Ceric — whom I first heard of in 2006 from an “interfaith dialogue” at a Birmingham synagogue, of all things — founded the terrorist network that our NATO allied itself with in 1990s Bosnia and then Kosovo (where some of the foreign fighters were reassigned).

Below is a not very good Google translation from Bosnia’s Kurir. In the meantime, thanks, Austria. It’s long past time you started coming clean.

PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS OF AUSTRIAN SERVICES: Mufti Ceric created terrorist network in Bosnia and Herzegovina
BiH 05/24/2016

The main Bosnian Mufti Mustafa Ceric [was] the creator of the terrorist network in Bosnia and Herzegovina, according to the documents [of] Intelligence Service of Austria.

Banja Luka media published portions of documents of the Austrian Association for the Protection of the constitutional order in which as the creator of the terrorist network in BiH Mustafa Ceric [was] marked….

It was stated, namely, that in November 1992 [was] launched a project to stamp Serbs as a genocidal nation, which is Ceric, informed Alija Izetbegovic, who is from Saudi King Fahd received 400 million US dollars, reports RTRS who published the list of phone calls between members of the “El Mujahedin” with leading international terrorists.

Ceric, it is said, even in November 1992 an international conference on the protection of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina with the secretariat in Vienna. It brings together about a hundred representatives from more than thirty Islamic countries led by prominent figures of the Islamic world, after the leaders of extremist Islamist organizations.

The report furnished to the then President of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina Alija Izetbegovic, whose facsimile was published on the portal RTRS, states that the aim of this conference was that the Muslim world is familiar with the destructions of war, especially Muslims, and investment effort to urgently help the “right thing to BiH “. And in this regard is, as mentioned, the conference passed a 13 decision.

The Conference elected the Executive Committee and the Secretariat, and the first president of that board is elected Ceric.

Expert in the fight against terrorism Dzevad Galijašević …said that Ceric using the power of these organizations became reis-ul-ulema, or that can be directly linked to the first terrorist attacks in BiH.

“Shortly after the organization of this international conference we will have [had] virtually the first terrorist attack on the Council of the Islamic community, the murder of four persons, wounding Secretary Omerdić, killing former in-law and unika Reis Hadžiavdić, of course, since that time, the war will all be attributed to Serbian stray shells,” says Galijašević.

The Executive Board of the newly established Islamist organizations after the first meeting in Zagreb, again [met] in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. With Ceric [leading], Salih Sabic [the] personal representative of Muslim leaders in Bosnia and Herzegovina[,] Alija Izetbegovic and renowned Islamic scholar Sheikh Mohammed al-Ghazali, it was agreed that the goal of this organization is spreading the truth about the genocide against Bosnian Muslims.

Saudi King Fahd supported [the] Ceric project with 400 million US dollars, with 20 million [from] Qatar and the Emirates. “It is important to point out that in October 1992 the three cities mentioned genocide against Bosnian Muslims, although by then we did not have any serious war conflicts. Even then [it could be seen] that the project stamping Serbs [had] started and that it is pushed to the highest level [of the] Islamist [elite,]” says Galijašević.

The Islamist elite, in his words, launched a strong chain of support and pressure on terrorist groups during the war [and they] began to come in[to] BiH. The first one, [he] recalls, came Sheikh Abdelaziz[,] called Barbarossa - the first commander of the mujahideen in Bosnia.

The document [shows phone calls of the] military intelligence war administration [of the] BH Army…[T]here are phone numbers and faxes to members of the “El Mujahedin” [regarding] sending items. Among them are the phone numbers of Abu Musab al - Zarqawi and Osama Bin Laden. Communication is conducted over the phone registered in the UK, Italy and the United States, said the RTRS.

This information comes on the heels of another Ceric revelation, which many may not have seen because I added it to the bottom of an earlier blog as an “update.” So I’ll reprint it here:

******UPDATE******

It seems that just this past December another witness — a protected witness in the Mladic trial — testified that the marketplace bombing, specifically in February 1994, was not only perpetrated by the Muslim side, but ordered by President Izetbegovic himself. The item below is from Balkan Insight, Dec. 16, 2015, and notice the word choice in the headline “Mladic Witness Claims,” as opposed to the more commonly used (when reporting from judicial settings) “testifies.” Notice also the integral role played by a certain West-beloved cleric named Ceric. And for the first time, we have names offered up of the actual men behind the attack: Mladic Witness Claims Bosniaks Staged Market Attack

Protected witness GRM-116, who testified in Mladic’s defence at the Hague Tribunal on Tuesday, claimed that the attack on the market that killed 66 civilians in February 1994 was approved by the then Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic.

The witness said that as a member of the Biseri special security unit from 1992 to 1994, he worked on security at the Bosnian presidency building.

He said that during that time he could hear what Izetbegovic and others said during meetings.

According to the witness, Izetbegovic’s main goal was to ensure Western intervention to help the Bosniaks “by creating mass suffering in Sarajevo and Srebrenica”.

He said that Izetbegovic was heavily influenced by Islamic community leader Mustafa Ceric. According to the witness, Ceric convinced Izetbegovic that “losses must be suffered”.

Speaking about the attack on the Markale market, GRM-116 testified that was “Ceric’s idea, which was carried out by generals Sefer Halilovic and Mustafa Hajrulahovic, alias ‘the Italian’”.

“I was there when Alija [Izetbegovic] approved this,” he said.

At the next meeting, the witness said that Halilovic reported the first attempt was a failure because the mortar hit the roof of the market.

“Alija told them to try again. They went and soon we heard what happened with Markale,” he said.

Izetbegovic, who died in 2003, said after the attack that it was a “black and terrible day for the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina”.

As commander of the Bosnian Serb Army, Ratko Mladic is charged with terrorising the population of Sarajevo during wartime with a campaign of shelling and sniping.

According to the charges, the mortar which killed 66 citizens at the Markale market on February 5, 1994 was fired from Bosnian Serb positions. […]

******UPDATE******

Not really an update, but since we’re on Austria, I wanted to add this other Austria/Balkans item, which you don’t exactly hear every day:

“I believe that admitting Kosovo to international organizations at this point would create more problems than it would solve.”

– Austrian presidential candidate Norbert Hofe, from the far-right Freedom Party FPO, to Tanjug, May 20th.

How did I ever live without Sputnik News before? Anyway, we know the end goals of the late “moderate” Kosovo president Ibrahim Rugova were no different from those of the violent radicals we backed in the KLA, but just to humor the rest of the world and pretend there was a big difference, let’s now also feign shock at the following. He may be Rugova’s son, but he’s still Albanian:

Busted: Son of Former Kosovo President Sold Illegal Schengen Visas (Sputnik News, AFP, May 20, 2016)

An EU prosecutor in Kosovo filed charges against 20 people, including the son of Ibrahim Rugova, former president of Kosovo from 2002-2006, for allegedly selling illegal Schengen visas between 2011 and 2014 for thousands of euros.

The case was opened back in February 2014, when police detained ten men, including Ukë Rugova, the deputy of the Kosovo Parliament and son of the ex-president of Kosovo. He was arrested after a search of his house exposed a few hundred photocopies of passports, visa forms, domestic passport copies, photographs and other documents.

Rugova was sent to a preliminary detention center for several months and was then kept under house arrest.

According to the police inspectors, customers were paying from 2,700 to up to 3,500 euros for a Schengen visa, although the standard price for a visa is around 60 euros.

The visa package consisted of false documents to be submitted and even had the approval of the Italian Embassy, where the criminals had their own people, including, as reported by the newspaper, one of the former ambassadors.

In addition, Rugova and his team are suspected of having links to organized crime and the trafficking of illegal migrants.

The kid is just trying to fit in.

In addition to the Huffington Post letter, I wrote a letter to an old acquaintance after the recent Jerusalem Post article ran (re Pope Francis stalling Cardinal Stepinac’s sainthood). It follows below.

Dear Dimitri,

In 2010, after my Jerusalem Post article about WWII Croatia, you sent me a 23-page paper on Cardinal Stepinac by a Croatian Jewish woman [Ester Gitman]. While you never heard back from me, I did read the entire pro-Stepinac work. Which was written by someone who was understandably eternally grateful to Stepinac for what he did for some Croatian Jews to help them survive WWII.

The reason you never heard back from me is that I started an email to you, but it kept growing and growing, until it became a monstrosity that required a lot of time and attention. I promised myself I’d get back to it as soon as I could make the time. Well, I never found the time, and only kept adding to it over the years. The email still sits in my “drafts” folder.

To remind you, in your email you wrote the words, “I think you’ve been deceived.” Leaving aside the little credit this gives me — someone whose writings you respected as they were in line with your perspective on all the usual issues — you meant, presumably, deceived by the Serbian Orthodox.

That would be the side whose history has been suppressed for 70+ years, while their slaughterers got to write the history of the region for the ever gullible West, and today enjoy mainstream acceptance including EU membership, while their demonized eternal victims, the Serbs, still await accession. (Though you and I, as conservatives and Euroskeptics, know that’s a blessing in disguise.)

The reason I’m writing you — briefly for now — is that while the unfinished 2010 email still awaits my attention, I thought the J-Post article below by a Croatian journalist would be a good start for you as a compass. Perhaps after reading it you might at least begin to reevaluate who really has been deceived here: Me, or — like the rest of the world — you.

Regardless, I hope you’re thriving in life. Certainly more than some almost-been who’s allowed her life to be ruined for noticing the greatest collective injustice in the history of the world. Which somehow still remains invisible to most.

Yours,
Julia

Just wanted to share an email I sent last week to editors at Huffington Post (Danielle Crittenden, Devon Murphy, Stuart Whatley, Angelina Chapin, and Arianna Huffington):

Dear Danielle, Devon, Stuart, Angelina and Arianna,

In late 2012, you pulled an article of mine that subsequently appeared in Connecticut Jewish Ledger. It was about Croatian Catholic Archbishop Alojsije (Aloysius) Stepinac, who presided over the little-known WWII genocide of the Christian Orthodox. Your co-religionsists, Arianna, if I’m not mistaken.

As you can see from Tuesday’s Jerusalem Post, the pope has taken the unprecedented step of halting the outrageous yet little debated canonization of the very same Stepinac. Francis wouldn’t do this lightly. Clearly, he has been convinced that Stepinac’s record requires further review. My hastily nixed article objected to Canadian former immigration minister Jason Kenney proudly telling Croatian audiences (viewable on video) that he keeps a photo of Stepinac on his desk. Meanwhile, the constituency that he thereby endears himself to suffers from a fascist nostalgia that has become increasingly difficult to ignore in the three years since Croatia entered the EU.

While I’d become accustomed to the appalling treatment of contributors at HuffPo (editors whose communication style — present company excluded — ranged from non-existent, to dismissive, to irritable), I was still taken aback when not one of you even told your contributor (me) what the “inaccuracies” and “potentially libelous” parts of my article were. (Those were the words used in Danielle Crittenden’s brief email, by way of an “explanation.”) Even after I inquired. Instead, my login simply stopped working, though I tried to resist the logical conclusion that it was related.

While I regretted using the phrase “oversaw genocide” when I meant “presided over genocide,” I didn’t know what else could be considered “factually inaccurate,” and worthy of erasure rather than a one-word fix. Hence, your reticence led me to believe that your Canadian site (where the piece was published) was perhaps ‘gotten to’ by Kenney’s people. And that HuffPo caved. No questions asked. Not that any North Americans would know what questions to ask in the first place, given that the subject sits atop 75 years of buried history. Interestingly, when the article appeared on a U.S. newspaper’s website, no one was “gotten to” about any “inaccuracies” or “libel.” (Did you guys even check the purported inaccuracies against my previous, related article which HuffPo did not unpublish?)

I wasn’t the only one who suspected that Canadian ‘free speech,’ such as it is, had been compromised by the government there. A left-leaning blogger wrote at the time:

Huffington Post deep-sixes Kenney criticism, By Dr.Dawg on November 14, 2012

… An article about Minister of Immigration Jason Kenney’s University of Haifa doctorate by conservative commentator Julia Gorin has mysteriously disappeared from the pages of the Huffington Post without explanation….here’s what appears at HuffPo now…

Does part of [Kenney’s] image-making include political pressure to vapourize articles that are unkind to him? Is this self-censorship by HuffPo (if that’s what it was) related to other incidents recently reported of direct and indirect political pressure on our so-called free press? The Huffington Post editors owe us an explanation. And so might the Harper government.

Arianna, have you done anything since speaking out in 1999, the year of our history-obliterating war, to raise awareness of the evil that the high-minded Western powers have continued to visit upon your co-religionists in the ever expendable Balkans? Those ‘great’ powers that decided that violent jihadists, unrepentant fascists, and mobsters are preferable to Christian Slavs, and treat them accordingly? Understandably, the pull of celebrity, inclusion, and political correctness is more tempting than righting a historical wrong, but your ever-rising star precisely puts you in a position to influence people in power. At the very least, HuffPo could refrain from obstructing a lone blogger who has ruined her life trying to get the truth out.

Forgive the presumptuousness of my tone, but life’s been tough and HuffPo didn’t make it any easier, even when (admittedly) Arianna tried. I’ll close with an excerpt from Tuesday’s JPost article:

[Francis] touched the heart of Croatian nationalism when he suspended the canonization process of the Zagreb Archbishop, Cardinal Aloysius Stepinac. In response, numerous Croatian Catholics have written him off…What made him do it?

…Namely, in 1938, Pope Pius XI planned to publish an encyclical criticizing Nazi racial theories. He appointed the American Jesuit John LaFarge to prepare the text, and advised him to visit and consult the young Archbishop of Zagreb. Stepinac had drawn attention to himself by helping Jews….

The encyclical was…never promulgated because Pius XI died three days before it was to be published, and his successor, the controversial Pope Pius XII, held it back and locked it away. In his memoirs, LaFarge describes Stepinac as someone who clearly understood the dangers of nacism and racism. How is it then possible that only three years later, when the Croatian puppet state, the Independent State of Croatia (NDH) was founded and the Ustasha leader was installed by Hitler and Mussolini, the same Stepinac embraced this fascist construction which was not only clearly founded on a racist interpretation of the Croatian nation, but also sought to promote racial laws which were instrumental for the genocide against Serbs, Jews, Roma and others?

…Stepinac spoke with Pope Pius XII on various occasions asking – begging – him to recognize and support the NDH…Although Stepinac knew about Jasenovac and all the other death camps, he advocated for the recognition and support of the NDH…

Those who claim that Pope Francis has succumbed to provocations from the Orthodox need to be reminded that Pope Francis has also decided to stop the beatification process of Pius XII…There is no doubt that Stepinac tried to help Jews, at least those who were in Zagreb, during the Second World War. But what continues to be controversial are his words. He never clearly condemned the race laws. In his letters to the Ustasha leaders he merely asks that Jews be treated “humanely” in the camps. Yad Vashem has twice denied petitions to give Stepinac the title “Righteous Among the Nations.” And they are right in doing so.

However, when analyzing Stepinac’s attitude toward Serbs and the Serbian Orthodox Church his position becomes very difficult: Stepinac did not like Serbs or Orthodoxy. In his diary he wrote that “…Orthodoxy is Europe’s greatest curse, almost greater than Protestantism…”

Stepinac serves as a national and political saint, strengthening “Croatianness” and in the struggle against the communist regime – which ceased to exist a long time ago. However, according to Pope Francis, when someone is canonized a role model of the Christian life is created which gives direction to the politics of the Church; saints are guides who show us the right way.

I am aware that there are those who will consider me a national traitor for saying this, but I believe that the beatification process and the sanctification of Aloysius Stepinac are a great and unnecessary burden for the Church. It is a process which should never even have started….

The author mentions that Francis has established a Vatican-Serbian-Croatian commission to discuss the Stepinac case and analyze historical documents, which will also shed light on Pius XII. This will be a historic opportunity for journalism. Though I expect few among its ranks will seize it.

Your excommunicated contributor,
Julia Gorin

Actually, when does she look into his eyes? Search for “Google Images Hillary Putin,” and these are among the first five photos to show up. One can’t help but notice that, while Putin looks Hillary directly in the eye, she avoids his.

Why can’t she look him in the eye, or at least hold her gaze more than momentarily? Could it be:

a) She knows he’s the real thing and she isn’t;

b) She knows he knows that she’s nothing;

c) She’s planning to attack his country;

d) All of the above.

In contrast, real leaders look each other in the eye:

George W. Bush had famously said that he looked into Putin’s eyes and saw a soul there. Perhaps this is what Hillary fears. Seeing something she doesn’t recognize.

I submitted the following letter to Los Angeles Times a week ago. If I haven’t heard back by now, I’m assuming they’re not going to publish. But I at least wanted to get the point out, so I’m posting it below.

Madeleine Albright as Commencement Speaker: Not at All Bright

Dear Editor:

It seems everyone has missed the real problem with Madeleine Albright as commencement speaker, including Meghan Daum (“Scripps College’s baffling crusade for simple thinking,” May 12), and Rosanna Xia (“War criminal or role model?” May 9). While both articles shrugged at Albright’s record, and student objections took on standard PC tones, the reason Albright is no role model goes even deeper down the rabbit hole than war criminality.

Let’s recall that, more than anyone else, Albright pushed for a universal military attack against Yugoslavia, such that it was dubbed “Maddie’s War” (remember her in full combat regalia on the cover of TIME). But it’s the spoils of war that make Albright particularly contemptible. Few know that her firm, Albright Capital Management, had aggressively bid for — and was shortlisted to win — privatization of Kosovo’s state telecom company PTK (which wouldn’t be up for grabs without her war to wrest Kosovo from Serbia in the first place). Never mind that the same year (2012) Kosovo’s privatization chief Dino Asanaj had been stabbed 11 times ( “suicide” in Ameri-Kosovospeak), and that a sister company, Albright Stonebridge Group, already owned shares in PTK’s only competitor — which could have “destroyed all market competition in the fledgling [non]nation,” Nathan Wellman wrote last February.

It was only eventually, after being advised how icky it all looked, that Albright — that paragon of female achievement — bowed out of this grubby profiteering. (Yet when Kosovo opposition parties had dared to try to deny Albright her spoils, U.S. officialdom accused them of the one thing we’re taught Albanians by definition just can’t be: anti-American.)

Three months earlier, there was a bizarre and telling incident in the Czech Republic. In late October 2012, Albright was signing books at a Prague bookstore when she was confronted by some Czech anti-war activists holding photos of the devastation she visited upon Yugoslavian civilians and their infrastructure — targets unprecedented in the history of traditional warfare. “Get out!” she screamed repeatedly, and followed up with, “Disgusting Serbs.” The video is still available on YouTube.

Is it proper statecraft, when taking one’s country to war in an outside ethno-territorial conflict, for a high official to harbor hatred and perhaps even a vendetta against one of the sides?

Indeed, Albright’s having achieved being the first female secretary of State is regarded as a virtue in and of itself. Rarely is it considered that this ‘accomplishment’ — facilitated by a nod from Hillary to husband Bill — could be an eternal disgrace to womankind. Hillary voters, take note.

If you ever have the misfortune of stumbling onto a site called Prishtina Insight (a contradiction in terms), spare yourself the agony of reading even a single article. It appears to be a collection of Albanian “thinkers” pondering why things like visa liberalization don’t move faster for Kosovo (never mind that it’s not even a country yet, and was never supposed to be in the first place). A writer named Besa Shahini “analyzes” the “discrimination” against Kosovo on this front, while fellow columnist Gezim Krasniqi cheers “Kosovar sport’s fight for international recognition and glory” — despite international sports bodies generally only accepting membership of actual countries. Like EU membership itself. Yet in both cases, as always, rules are made up special for Kosovo as we go, and it muscles its way into all kinds of memberships, thanks to its Washington enforcers. An excerpt from Krasniqi’s May 11th article:

This month has been an exceptionally good one for Kosovo and its citizens. After a very long delay and a month after the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) between the European Union and Kosovo entered into force, the European Commission recommended visa liberalisation for Kosovo passport holders for visa-free travel within the Schengen Area…Equally important…was Kosovo’s dramatic breakthrough in European and World Football associations, UEFA and FIFA respectively. On 3 May, the Football Federation of Kosovo (FFK) was admitted as the 55th member of UEFA….This brought a quarter of a century of international isolation of Kosovo football to an end and at the same time paved the way for admission into FIFA ten days later. With fast-track support from FIFA, Kosovo is expected to begin participating in World Cup qualifying matches in September.

“After a very long delay,” he says! Never mind the never-promised statehood that was fast-tracked in a tidy eight years (which itself wasn’t moving fast enough for Albanians, so they had to help it along with pogroms and other violence).

But let’s move on to Jusuf Thaci, who warns, “If the current Demarcation Agreement with Montenegro is ratified without being based on principles of international law, then Serbia must be behind it.”

As usual, “Serbia is behind (fill in the blank),” while suddenly Albanians are interested in principles of international law — unlike when they were seizing their Kosovo. Check it out:

Kosovo’s border demarcation with Montenegro: a Serbian Trojan horse (May 16)

On April 25, 2016, professor and former head of the Constitutional Court Enver Hasani published a research paper entitled “The demarcation of Kosovo’s borders is mostly an issue of international law.” Hasani, who is currently on trial for abuse of office and falsifying documents, presented a surprising paper which has [gone] mostly unnoticed by the general public.

Laws, norms and principles of international law that have to do with border demarcations between counties exist precisely to ensure an accurate and fair process so that neither party is negatively affected, intentionally or inadvertently. This is why international arbitration and courts exist in the first place.

Of all mythical creatures, a Kosovar — admonishing others about law and order! No wonder EULEX had such an easy time in Kosovo and was so welcome. Not.

In the case of Kosovo and Montenegro, these principles, norms, rules, laws and precedents (of international arbitration and courts) have been completely disregarded, seeing how almost everything is based on local legal documents (predominantly cadastral) and flawed local expertise (mainly that of geographers, topographers and surveyors), which in no way guarantees an accurate and fair border demarcation between Kosovo and Montenegro.

Ah, so when cutting corners isn’t a win for Kosovo, cutting corners is bad.

…If Kosovo ratifies the existing Agreement for the Border Demarcation with Montenegro, which is not based on norms, rules, laws and precedents of international law that guarantee an accurate and fair demarcation, it will be the first ex-Yugoslav country that exclusively uses cadastral data as the only basis for demarcation (and not delimitation).

Through this, Kosovo would create a precedent that would obligate the country to use the same method for the border demarcation with Serbia (since Serbia itself will insist on it). This is extremely dangerous for Kosovo because Kosovar authorities (the now independent state of Kosovo) did not have control over cadastral books from 1989 until February 17, 2008 (when Kosovo declared independence).

Furthermore, almost every cadastral book of Kosovo’s territory (certainly not unintentionally) was taken by Serbia towards the end of the Kosovo war in 1999, and for years to come Kosovo did not have access to these documents. Even today, many cadastral books are not available to Kosovo because they are in Serbia. Simply put, the territory of the state of Kosovo in the original cadastral books is exactly how Serbia determined it [imagine a country determining its own regional borders!], completely outside the control, access and awareness of Kosovo institutions. When this is coupled with the fact that Serbia has territorial claims and is hostile towards Kosovo, then we can imagine how much territory Kosovo would lose in the demarcation of the border with Serbia, which spans hundreds of kilometres.

According to my personal judgment, if it is insisted that the current Agreement for the Border Demarcation between Kosovo and Montenegro is ratified and come into force the way it currently is, then Serbia must be behind this.

In conclusion, Kosovo’s state institutions in cooperation and agreement with Montenegro’s state institutions and mediated by the United States of America and European Union need to agree on cancelling the existing deal for the Border Demarcation between Kosovo and Montenegro and agree that the demarcation should be done through an international arbitration in full compliance with the principles, norms and rules of international law….It would subsequently protect us from a dangerous precedent, which would result in Kosovo losing swathes of territory during the demarcation of the border with Serbia. In other words, Kosovo needs to protect its territory based on international law.

Ba-dum-bum.

DANGER! Danger of Albanians getting even an inch less than the entirety of what they stole. What they stole by way of visiting actual danger on life and limb of non-Albanians aged one to 80, and on non-cooperative Albanians. Moreover, the state created by flouting and trampling international law must now invoke international law to preserve the ‘territorial integrity’ that the West broke every law to rob Yugoslavia of.

Finally, we get to an April 22nd column by Shpend Kursani, whose summary paragraph at the top is a paraphrasing of Council of Europe’s Dick Marty’s conclusion from December 2010, when he released the results of his investigation of how ill-gotten Kosovo was. That is, it’s not a new take. Did Kursani miss it six years ago?

Fasten your seat belts, this one gets rich quick. Oh yes, the West failed Kosovo. Never mind that it was the Kosovo public’s KLA heroes that the West propped up.

How the West failed Kosovo

By seeking stability over rule of law through their missions in Kosovo, the West has created a fragile state in the heart of Europe, argues Capussela in his latest book translated recently in Albanian.

In his recently published book whose Albanian translation was promoted on April 21, “State-building in Kosovo: Democracy, Corruption and the EU in the Balkans”…[Andrea] Capussela asks “Why has the West created a fragile state in the heart of Europe’s least stable region?” …Capussela’s general conclusion is that the West (pretty much the Quint – The US, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy) was not committed to actually building a just state based on modern democracy and rule of law beyond making it look as such on paper (Constitution, laws, etc.), but has intentionally allowed the main political elite (criminal groups) to accumulate as much power as they can so to keep the region stable. This means that the West’s cooperation with these gangs was necessary for their interest in short term stability.

…The actors are willing to pay any price, including ensuring that criminal groups remain in power and sidelining any well-intended political actors who view Kosovo differently from these gangs.

But why? According to Capussela, this has been the case because despite its capabilities and abilities, the West, through its massive military presence, did not fully and properly establish an international monopoly of force while KFOR (NATO) and UNMIK were fully in charge of administering Kosovo. This means that the West did not disarm those who later turned out to be criminals leading the state and their future interlocutors. This has allowed these armed elites to always have the ability to threaten the West with the potential instability.

“…those who LATER TURNED OUT to be criminals leading the state”? Mr. Kursani, your KLA heroes didn’t “turn out” to be anything. They were what they always had been. As you know, the very genesis of the KLA was as a criminal organization. Its criminality continued and worsened into and through the war, so why should it have changed once they were crowned? Do stop playing dumb.

But let’s review: We have here an Albanian admission that the threat of violence is what kept us giving Albanians what they wanted — and we’re supposed to believe the Albanians had no idea this was how it worked. And again, Mr. Kursani is talking, after all, about his and the rest of the Albanians’ KLA heroes. That’s whom they cheered. That’s who was put in charge. He knows that.

This leads Capussela to argue throughout his book that “violence works,” and this is one of his strongest convictions.

Was the West capable of establishing the necessary international monopoly of force? According to Capussela, yes. He says that:

“[t]his was not inevitable, because immediately after the 1999 conflict the social order was still malleable and the elite had not yet entrenched itself. […] It could count on deterrent effect of NATO’s presence, on Kosovo’s near-complete dependence from international political and financial support, and on the fact that achieving independence entirely depended on the goodwill of the international community” (p.34)

Good point. And let me add that, once again, Kosovo serves as a microcosm of how the West manages — or rather, doesn’t manage — Islam in general. When we were still in the earliest post-9/11 years, we had the moral upper hand and the opportunity to make them come to us. Not the other way around. Make the Muslims decide what side they’re on, and prove themselves the way every other now-assimilated ethnic, national or religious group has always done, fair or not. Let them sweat their image, not us ours. Let them keep their heads down awhile, not us. Instead, our officials multiplied immigration from the Middle East, extolled Islam’s virtues, staffed themselves to the neck with Muslims, decried the First Amendment, and helped marginalize thinkers and artists who noticed the emperor had no clothes, rather than encourage more such dissent, which would have spread the risk around, thereby making it less dangerous to speak out. But back to where it all started. Kosovo, and Kursani:

He supports such arguments with compelling evidence…through his first-hand experience while directly involved in post-independence state-building processes in Kosovo as the head of the economics unit of the International Civilian Office…Studies on EULEX have mushroomed recently, and much like a few other critical studies on EULEX, Capussela shows how the EU mission intentionally dropped organized crime cases in which high profile elites were involved. Some of the cases which he reported to EULEX were simply sidelined and the mission was simply incapable of implementing its mandate. Capussela still believes that an externally driven rule of law mission can be successful with the right resources and, let’s say, under the right circumstances. I personally believe that a genuinely functioning rule of law has a chance to thrive mainly through indigenously-driven factors, possibly with some “discursive assistance” from the important international actors in Kosovo.

(Yet another Albanian who doesn’t know Albanians very well. Then again, who can argue with “belief”?)

…The reader of the book may get the impression that upon discussing organized criminal activities of many of the Western supported bandits in power, Capussela at times burdens such a discussion with an ethnic cloak. In other words, the discussion on organized crime seems to be laden, more than necessary, with ethnic adjectives, such as “Albanian criminal groups” and other Albanianization of such phenomena. This is my impression, and it may…not have been the author’s intention. With my experience in studying, dealing with, and observing political events in Kosovo and the region, such adjectives are not necessary as they are quite equally distributed among ethnicities, including within Kosovo itself. On the other hand and to his credit, Capussela successfully manages to dispel the usual rhetoric on corruption as cultural, drawing some comparative examples to other European cases. It is enough to read his section on EULEX to understand this perfectly.

So, once again, we see that, having wrested their “independence” based on ethnic identity, Albanians don’t want that identity identified. Meanwhile, here for once we have a Westerner with the courage to call our favored and propped-up nationality by its name, and it’s once too many for Albanians. As for the negative ‘political events’ that shouldn’t have the adjective “Albanian” — as for those being “equally distributed among ethnicities” in Kosovo, what can one say when the population is 95% Albanian? Certainly the writer could be speaking proportionally — that is, that the Serb, Roma and other almost-gone ethnicities of Kosovo have the same level of criminal groups in proportion to their numbers, but it’s still a pretty asinine thing to say. And one would still have to point out that the “Western-supported bandits in power” just aren’t Serb or Roma. And then one still would have to wonder what-all falls under Mr. Kursani’s “criminal” rubric, given that it’s been criminalized to be Serb in Kosovo, leading to creative survival tactics that include subverting Kosovo’s subversive statehood by cooperating with those who cooperate with Belgrade — and not with the thuggery that won Kosovo. Which Mr. Kursani himself now complains of. Finally, if the argument is that every ethnic group has its fair share of criminals, then tabloids around the world — and Interpol itself — must just be picking on Albanians, given the prevalence of that particular ethnic identifier in regard to so many drug, prostitution, weapons-trafficking, human-trafficking, domestic violence, and ISIS rings around the world.

It is interesting, however, that Capussela still remains optimistic about Kosovo. He believes that it cannot go like this for very long, and that there is a potential for non-elite groups and civil society to actually crack the gap…and penetrate the system and remove the bandits from power. [Though where does it leave us when that “civil society” is more politically radical than the thugs in power?]…However, as long as the well-established democracies of the West continue to support these bandits in power, I believe penetrating that gap will remain difficult….

The book should be particularly enlightening for Kosovo’s 50,000 plus students who have unfortunately been brainwashed through the elite controlled education system to believe that whatever the West does in Kosovo, especially when it supports these gangs, is best for Kosovo.

One imagines Mr. Kursani doesn’t have a problem with the same strong-arm tactics being used to further Kosovo’s statehood and the trappings of it. Such as visa liberalization, sports memberships, and EU, UN and NATO membership. All of which Washington twists arms to achieve, alternating between bribes and threats.

One also has to pause at this earlier sentence in the article:”…achieving independence entirely depended on the goodwill of the international community.” That’s of course accurate, and I notice that Mr. Kursani doesn’t take exception to it. But if Kosovo independence is lawful, legal, and consistent with international norms — as Albanians want you to think — then why would it “entirely depend on the goodwill of the international community”?

Lastly, an aside. While Mr. Kursani complains about the thugs in power, one tries not to be too distracted by the fact that his fellow columnists share the thugs’ names (Thaci, Krasniqi and, the woman’s first name is Besa, for crying out loud. The blood code itself). They’re all really the same brood, just favoring different tactics to achieve the same crime.

Give up the innocent act, guys.

So here’s a sad sight.


Xhangyle Ilijazi, chief of the board for Kosova-Israel Friendship Association, talks to a group of Multinational Battle Group-East Soldiers about the history of Kosovo families during a Holocaust Remembrance luncheon at Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, April 30.

Set aside the irony of these poor tools — used to create an ethnically clean Albanian Kosovo — earnestly trying to learn about the Holocaust.

And consider the source they’re “learning” about it from. Why, from the Axis side, of course.

Yes, Righteous Albanians saved Jews. But today’s Albanians — including descendants of the Righteous — are using WW2 Righteousness to buy political capital for today’s evildoing side (in the Serbian-Albanian conflict). Notice you don’t see American soldiers being plopped in front of any Serbs talking about Serbs who saved Jews. (And died doing it.) No, that would make too much sense, given that those saviors were not on the Axis side.

Which would then unmake sense of what side we’re on today.

Anyway, here’s the unrelenting pabulum:

News: Soldiers remember the Holocaust

Multinational Battle Group - East (KFOR)
Story by Ardian Nrecaj

CAMP BONDSTEEL, Kosovo - The Holocaust is one of the darkest times of human history, and in that darkness there was a small light shining from a small region and community, an area in Europe occupied by Nazi forces.

Part of that community was Arsllan Rezniqi, who helped save and shelter 42 Jewish families in his home during World War II.

Leke Rezniqi, chief executive officer of Kosova-Israel Friendship Association “Dr. Haim Abravanel” and a successor of Arsllan, talked to a group of Multinational Battle Group-East Soldiers about his family history during a Holocaust Remembrance luncheon at Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo, April 30.

“My great grandfather [Arsllan] was one of the leading members of the Nazi resistance in Kosovo, and he devoted six years of his life to saving Jews,” said Rezniqi. “My grandfather Mustafa Rezniqi, an adolescent during the war, assisted him and he carried on the history of our family’s role in rescuing Jews during the Holocaust.”

Rezniqi said that as word spread about his family’s sanctuary, other families came asking for help.

“Soon more than 40 families from Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bulgaria and Serbia were sheltered in our house, until my family was able to organize a safe passage for them to Albania,” added Rezniqi.

Rezniqi explained that shedding light into this part of the history of Kosovo Albanian families that sheltered and helped transport Jews safely to Albania is more complex than it might seem.

“One of the goals of our association is to identify the families that saved Jews during World War II, and so far we have identified 30 families,” said Rezniqi. “It is hard, because we are doing this 70 years later, but we continue to work with Yad Vashem.”

Yad Vashem is Israel’s official memorial to the victims of the Holocaust.

Staff Sgt. Jason Sansom, an equal opportunity leader for Task Force Medical with MNBG-E, native of Cleveland, Ohio, organized the event.

“When people think of World War II they think of Nazi persecution in Europe, but they do not know what exactly happened here [Kosovo] and how families supported the Jewish migration through,” said Sansom.

“We are fortunate to have members of the association here sharing their personal and family experiences,” added Sansom. “They have direct ties with families who participated in the liberation of Jews through Albania, Kosovo and Balkans; it was great having them.”

Xhangyle Ilijazi, chief of the board for Kosova-Israel Friendship Association, said the main reason Kosovo Albanians sheltered Jewish families is “Besa” an Albanian cultural concept that means “to keep the promise” and “word of honor”.

Ilijazi explained that almost all the Jews that made it to Albania survived.

“Before World War II in Albania lived more than 200 Jews, but in the end of the war there were 2,000 Jews living in Albania, and this is official data from Albanian state archive,” said Ilijazi.

Mustafa Rezniqi, received a Righteous Among Nations award from Yad Vashem. The award is given to honor non-Jews who risked their lives, liberty or positions to save Jews during the Holocaust.

Further to the theme of our American lads learning all their Balkans history from Albanians, eBritic and InSerbia cited a Sputnik News article last month about Bondsteel. Two noteworthy paragraphs:

The administration at Bondsteel tries to ensure soldiers don’t get homesick and keeps shops in which personnel could buy clothes and food from the United States. There is also a souvenir shop where one could buy souvenirs from many countries across the world, except Serbia, the author said.

The personnel serving at Bondsteel have an opportunity to attend history lessons on the statehood of Kosovo, as most soldiers have a vague idea where they’re actually serving. However, since all teachers at the camp are Albanians, they only tell their version of history. The Serbian perspective is ignored.

Included is a photo of the base chapel, where a sign reads “Peacekeeper’s Chapel, Pro Deo et Patria.” That is, “For God and Country.”

Remind me how either is served in all this?

Columnist David P. Goldman (a.k.a. Spengler) had an article in Asia Times this month (”To be kind is to be cruel, to be cruel is to be kind,” Apr. 14), citing a recent migrant incident in Europe, first reported by UK Daily Mail:

The 240ft Monica had been spotted in international waters during the night. When Italian coastguard boats drew alongside, the crews were shocked to see men and women on board begin dangling the infants over the side. The refugees – mostly Kurds and many said to be heading for Britain – calmed down only when they were assured they would not be turned away from Italy.

Goldman remarked:

What kind of people threaten to murder their own babies? The normal response would be to arrest them and put them in prison for endangering children. Instead, the British newspaper reported, “The Archbishop of Catania, Luigi Bommarito, was at the dockside to greet the Monica in what he called ‘a gesture of solidarity’. He said: ‘I’m here to appeal to people not to close their hearts and doors to people trying to survive. We mustn’t forget that in the last century many immigrants also left Italy.’”

The Monica incident is multiplied ten thousand-fold at the diplomatic level. Turkey’s President and de facto dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan last October threatened European officials with 10,000 to 15,000 drowned migrants….Erdogan demanded 6 billion Euros up front and 3 billion Euros a year to stop the refugee flow….The leader of a prominent Muslim country who claims to speak for the Muslim world threatened the Europeans with 10,000 or 15,000 Muslim deaths. When in world history has one side in negotiations threaten[ed] to kill its own people in order to gain leverage?

Here I started getting antsy, yelling at the computer screen, “When in world history? When? Try the ’90s!” That is, when Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic followed through on Bill Clinton’s suggestion that he needed to cough up at least 5,000 dead bodies if he wanted a NATO intervention on his side of a turf war against Serbs.

But Goldman didn’t disappoint, and made clear that words like ‘when’ and ‘first time’ refer to the current era, inclusive of several decades. First, he appropriately enough brought up the Gaza example:

The same grisly farce has played out for years in Gaza, where Hamas fires rockets at Israeli population centers from civilian locations, including schools and hospitals, and then complains of human rights violations when the Israelis respond and on occasion kill civilians. Col. Richard Kemp, the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan…observes that the Gaza civilians are not human shields, for their purpose is not to shield anything. Rather, they are human sacrifices, intentionally set to die.

This is the first time in the entire history of warfare that a combatant intentionally set out to maximize civilian casualties on its own side, the better to gain diplomatic leverage…In an Oct. 15, 2015 essay, Times of Israel analyst Haviv Rettig Gur…quoted the Palestinian journalist Mohammed Daraghmeh: “Palestine is an international issue. [The issue] won’t be decided in a flurry of knives or acts of martyrdom, or in protests or demonstrations. It will end only when the world understands it has a duty to intervene and to draw borders and lines, as it did in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in Kosovo…

So once again I must point out that there are no illusions about Bosnia/Kosovo among the Arab world. The jihadists who fought in the Balkans know what it was, and Palestinians — seemingly in that separate conflict packaged as “Israel-Palestine” — know what it was. And they know it was a ground-breaking model. Only the West — whose leaders made the very deal — is in denial.

Goldman concludes:

The West has not imposed a “solution” on Israel only because Americans respond to weaponized horror differently than the UN bureauracy, the Vatican, or the government of Sweden. Fully half of Americans support a ban on all Muslim immigration to the US…Perversely, the United States created a monster when the Clinton administration went to war with Serbia in 1998 in order to rescue the Kosovo Liberation Army — a dodgy band of Albanian hoodlums engaged in drug and human trafficking — from the harsh response of the Serbs to their provocations. Muslims like Mohammed Daraghmeh learned that at least some in the West would take their side in order to stop humanitarian disasters, even if the Muslims themselves set those disasters in motion. The Pope, the U.N. Secretary General and Sen. Sanders encourage the creation of such disasters by responding according to script.

Ergo, Goldman’s title “To be kind is to be cruel, to be cruel is to be kind.” He’s actually quoting an ancient midrash, one that I’ve on occasion extended to mean that being kind to the cruel is being cruel to his victim. Adding a whole new layer of evil to the “humanitarian interventions” of the Balkans. And of course illuminating how our well-insulated public officials play with our lives:


The utilization of the rabbinic idiom cited in this contemporary context is that he (the government) who acts compassionately, in others words, benevolently, towards cruel people…ultimately will become cruel to [”the compassionate,”] the general public, which is forced to pay the price of additional casualties for the government’s irresolute behavior.

“My permanent fight to preserve the peace, prevent the war and decrease the sufferings of everyone regardless of religion were an exemplary effort deserving respect rather than persecution.”

–Radovan Karadzic to Balkan Insight, ahead of his March 24, 2016 Guilty verdict

“Through relentless propaganda efforts, “Srebrenica” has become a synonym for “genocide,” as Serbs stand accused of killing some 7,000 Muslim men – military personnel who refused to surrender – who fled the town. The fact that they gave safe passage, food, and water to the women and children left behind – hardly a hallmark of “genocide” – is ignored.”

Nebojsa Malic, 2005

If one thinks that the 40-year sentence handed down last month to former Bosnian-Serb president Radovan Karadzic has nothing to do with oneself or with our collective future, then one hasn’t been paying attention. Not that anyone thinks about it one way or the other. Certainly not Americans in the throes of a presidential election year, and so who would bother paying attention to the fate of some former president, from some other, unthought-about country, for something that happened 20 years ago? Never mind that the American co-president from that era may be our president again next year.

Fact is, the American election pales in relevance to what just happened, yet again, at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

The Karadzic verdict in March was preceded in February by the death from “unknown causes” of yet another Serb in Hague custody. (Belgrade’s requests for treatment leave for the ailing Zdravko Tolimir — whose trial saw two judges go off the reservation with dissenting opinions that devastate the evidence of “genocide” in Srebrenica — were ignored.) Three months earlier, in October, a defense witness for Ratko Mladic died suddenly at a Hague hotel. That’s without mentioning the other six, starting with Croatian-Serb mayor Slavko Dokmanovic in 1998 and the back-to-back deaths of Milan Babic and Slobodan Milosevic in 2006. If these events all seem somehow marginal, then one has somehow missed that we are all Serbs now. No less for finding ourselves at the mercy of the “migrants” in our midst, whom our governments are intent on risking our hides to make welcome.

For the Serbs were the designated white man, and the designated Christian, to be sacrificed for the greater Muslim good. And, we thought, for the greater Western good, given the appreciation that would surely come our way from the Muslim world for punishing the infidels who dared fight back. Symbiotically, while Yugoslavia was being targeted by jihad, it was also targeted by the New World Order, as a test case, with the Serbian nation marked for extinction as an identity. The death of the “nation-state” as such would follow, as we are now seeing.

There is a reason that America exempts itself from the jurisdiction of an international court (at least until Hillary Clinton becomes president again). The U.S. is concerned about the potential for political prosecutions. That is, show trials. Of American leaders, generals, servicemen, and so on. That’s understandable. But it is more than a little vile to exempt oneself from such an Orwellian institution — while exploiting those very characteristics of it against others, something that not one American politician speaks out against.

But back to Karadzic. A few headlines, for background:

Radovan Karadzic found guilty of genocide, sentenced to 40 years

Radovan Karadzic, nicknamed the “Butcher of Bosnia,” was sentenced to 40 years….over his responsibility for the Srebrenica massacre, in which more than 7,000 [sic] Bosnian Muslim men and boys were executed [sic] by Bosnian Serb forces under his command…Prosecutor Serge Brammertz said in a statement that the verdict and sentence “will stand against continuing attempts at denying the suffering of thousands and the crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia.”

Note here that the prosecutor has let slip the real, political purpose of the trial: to preclude “genocide denial” vis-a-vis the still-not-established facts of Srebrenica. And he has carefully worded the much bandied-about “genocide” as general “suffering of thousands,” something no one has ever denied. The rest of the CNN excerpt:

…In a statement, the tribunal said it found Karadzic had committed the crimes through his participation in four “joint criminal enterprises,” including an overarching plot from October 1991 to November 1995 “to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb-claimed territory.”

The Croatian government hailed the verdicts Thursday — which came at the end of an eight-year trial — as welcome but long overdue, calling them “the minimum, for which the victims and their families unfortunately waited too long.” […]

In contrast, a verdict that wasn’t so hailed by Croatia came a week later, when Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Seselj was uncharacteristically acquitted — after a 13-year stint in Hague custody during the proceedings — in a sort of balancing act the Court started practicing in recent years (when it noticed that people started noticing its Serb hunt). BBC on the Seselj verdict:

[P]residing Judge Jean-Claude Antonetti said the prosecution “had failed to prove…that there was a widespread and systematic attack against the non-Serb civilian population in large areas of Croatia and Bosnia. The evidence tendered and considered establishes instead that there was an armed conflict between enemy military forces with civilian components.”

Prosecutors had argued Mr Seselj was criminally responsible for the murder, torture and deportation of non-Serbs as part of his project to create a “Greater Serbia”. They had accused him of raising an army of volunteers who committed “unspeakable crimes”. But the trial chamber found that there was no “criminal purpose in sending volunteers” — and, moreover, they had not been under Mr Seselj’s command.

“The majority simply notes that it is not satisfied that the recruitment and subsequent deployment of volunteers implies that Vojislav Seselj knew of these crimes on the ground, or that he instructed or endorsed them,” it said.

The verdict also concluded that the “Greater Serbia” plan Mr Seselj had supported was not a “criminal”, but “political”, project.

Croatian Prime Minister Tihomir Oreskovic criticised the outcome as “a defeat for the Hague tribunal and the prosecution”.

More:

“This verdict is an embarrassment for the Hague Tribunal…” Oreskovic told media in the eastern Croatian town of Vukovar… “He’s the man who is burning the flags of Croatia and the EU,” Oreskovic said. [Said, mind you, without a hint of irony given not only the Yugo- and Serb-flag-burning that adorned Croatia’s secession, but also the sumptuous headlines that have been coming out of this “model EU member” in the past year alone (Wiesenthal Centre urges Croatia to end pensions to Nazi [veterans]; Wiesenthal Center Shocked by Appointment of Fascist Culture Minister Hasanbegovic; Croatia’s ‘Banal’ Fascism on Display at Israel Match; Croatia faces hardline sanctions over swastika etched on pitch; Croatians chant “Kill a Serb” at concert; and just this weekend: Monument to fascism victims [at site of biggest mass crime in Zagreb, Dotrscina forest] desecrated with fascist graffiti)]

[And] Bosnian lawyer Senad Pecanin called the verdict “scandalous”. […]

Not scandalous to Bosniaks, meanwhile — never mind their own butchers going free — was the guilty verdict in 2012 for the now dead Tolimir: “This is what we expected and we feel better now,” Srebrenica widow Rejha Avdic said. “We hope the court will continue to conduct fair trials.” One supposes the Not Guilty verdict in Seselj makes that trial “unfair.” (See Nebojsa Malic on the verdict: “Prisca Matimba Nyambe, a Zambian judge…calls out the other ‘judges’ for failing to prove even a single charge in the indictment. ‘Without a single piece of evidence adduced during this trial of a written [or stated] plan of a [Joint Criminal Enterprise] to Murder…the Majority relies upon circumstantial evidence to draw conclusions…I am wholly unpersuaded that the Accused is guilty of any of the charges alleged in the Indictment,’ she concluded…[T]he prosecutors — and the judges who sided with them — failed to prove that many of the things in the indictment actually happened, Nyambe argued.”)

More:

Croatia on Thursday banned Šešelj from entering the country after prime minister Tihomir Orešković labelled the verdict “shameful” during a visit to Vukovar, scene of some of the alleged atrocities, where he laid wreaths in memory of war dead.

Šešelj was not at the courtroom in The Hague to hear the verdict…He had been allowed to return to Serbia because of his deteriorating health [which prompted a bizarre letter to the UN Secretary-General from Croatia’s incoming president, saying the humanitarian release undermined the entire purpose of the tribunal]…[T]he ICTY judgment said the prosecution’s case had been full of “confusion” and that “a lot of the evidence shows that [his] collaboration was aimed at defending the Serbs and the traditionally Serb territories or at preserving Yugoslavia, not at committing the alleged crimes”. [Imagine that!]

In the majority ruling, the ICTY’s presiding judge, Jean-Claude Antonetti, said… “The totality of the evidence substantiates the fact that the purpose of sending volunteers was not to commit crimes, but to support the war effort…The [court] by a majority…was unable to find…that, in calling upon the Serbs to “cleanse” Bosnia…Vojislav Šešelj was calling for ethnic cleansing of Bosnia’s non-Serbs. […]

The fairer fate of this least likeable of Serb defendants is interesting. Seselj is an actual nationalist and actually was interested in a “Greater Serbia” — which none of the convicted or dead bigger fish (Karadzic, Milosevic etc) had been. It’s possible Seselj was earmarked for a counterweight purpose. Unlike Milosevic, he was a) allowed health leave; b) the judges acknowledged the prosecution was “full of confusion,” something that judges in the Milosevic trial never acknowledged despite the schizophrenic prosecution there, which had international journalists laughing in the aisles and the judges calling for order; c) the judges chose to also acknowledge here that the evidence pointed not to murderous intent but to war-related aims and preserving the union, despite this defendant actually using the word “cleanse” — which less fortunate Serb defendants never did; and d) here we finally get the ‘bombshell’ admission that, in any case, “Greater Serbia” isn’t a criminal project, but a political one.

Or perhaps Seselj just wasn’t high-profile enough for the crowd-pleasing purposes that other Serb convictions serve, and so the Court felt it could give this one to the Serbs, to show that this too can happen. I asked former Senate Republican foreign policy analyst Jim Jatras for his take on the Seselj acquittal that came a week after the Karadzic conviction. He replied:

My own guess:

1. Springing Seselj shows ICTY’s fairness and impartiality, so that convicting other Serbs (notably Mladic and Karadzic) and exonerating Muslims (Oric, Ceku, Haradinaj, Thaci) is all the more “credible.”
2. Seselj is the perfect candidate to be the “Exhibit A” of “fairness towards Serbs,” since (a) there’s no evidence against him anyway, (b) he’s already “served” many years of a non-sentence for not doing anything, and (c) releasing him “back into the wild” in Serbia will make life difficult and interesting for other politicians, rendering them even more pliable (if that’s possible) [to Brussels and Washington demands].

An even more soberly cynical take came in an email from longtime Hague observer Andy Wilcoxson (links added):

[Serbian state security chiefs Jovica] Stanisic and [Franko] Simatovic were acquitted too, then the prosecutor appealed the verdict — and now the Tribunal is going to put them on trial all over again (double jeopardy). The same thing could happen to Seselj; they could drag this out forever.

If the Tribunal had convicted Seselj, it’s unlikely that they could have sentenced him to more than time served. By acquitting him, they open the door for the prosecutor to appeal the verdict and conduct a double jeopardy trial…I’m not a big fan of Seselj. He describes himself as a Serbian nationalist and he openly espouses the idea of greater Serbia. His party published the “Protocols of Zion,” which was banned by Slobodan Milosevic’s government because it promotes antisemitism.

That said, the charges against him were idiotic. The Serbian Radical Party was in the opposition for the duration of the wars in Croatia and Bosnia. Seselj and the Serbian Radical Party recruited volunteers to join the Bosnian-Serb and Krajina-Serb armed forces….As the president of an opposition political party, Seselj didn’t have the authority to issue orders to anyone. Nor did he he have the responsibility or power to punish anyone who committed war crimes…because the police and the courts didn’t answer to him.

He did make nationalistic speeches and he did make inflammatory statements during the war. He continues to do that to this very day, but that isn’t a crime nor should it be one. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right.

Wilcoxson also allows for the possibility that some sort of deal was struck between Washington/Brussels and the West-subordinated Serbian government. “A deal is possible,” he continued in a follow-up email. “The ICTY would have convicted Seselj if that was what they wanted to do. Not having sufficient evidence to convict has never stopped them from convicting anyone before — especially not a Serb. If he doesn’t hold up his end of the deal they can always grant the prosecutor’s appeal.”

(Or even if he does hold up his end of the deal, as Milosevic and Karadzic found out.)

Malic foreshadowed as much in 2013 (second link added):

The indictment and conviction [e.g. of Croatian, Bosniak, and Kosovo-Albanian defendants] are supposed to create the impression the ICTY is a real, impartial, legitimate court of law — which is then followed by a release on appeal. …Furthermore, as a fellow blogger pointed out, the ICTY has a habit of prosecuting only the alleged crimes against the designated victim groups. Hence, Serbs and (Bosnian) Croats get the (ICTY-written) book thrown at them for killing (Bosnian) Muslims, the few KLA are punished only for killing fellow Albanians, while no one ever gets punished for killing Serbs.

Back to Karadzic, and another telling choice of words, from Reuters:

“[T]hese harrowing images reveal the reasons why he was found guilty of the 1995 massacre and nine other war crimes.” –Gemma Mullin, UK Mirror, March 24, 2016

Think about that sentence a moment. There’s not even an attempt to disguise how international “justice” for the Balkans has worked. The judicial standard is, ‘Why was he convicted? Just look at the pictures.’ Images say he’s guilty, the evidence is irrelevant. A blatant, undisguised appeal to emotion. And they’re saying it themselves: It’s all an image war, Folks, a PR war. The court of public opinion is what counts here, based on inflammatory images devoid of context including the other belligerent’s suffering. Just as they did to secure the war itself, media shoved images in the public’ face to “explain” the verdict, and reinforce what we were told originally.

The images that The Mirror wanted you to base your opinion on, (from the above excerpted article), without mentioning that the trial found some of this bloodshed came from the victims’ own Muslim ranks:





Apparently, we’re still supposed to be moved and even outraged by Muslim suffering. Or, at the very least, be more understanding of their violence directed at us. (Indeed, who is more fanatical — Muslims, or the Westerners who, even as Muslims mow them down, are determined to put Serbs away for life?)

Below, some images you’re *not* supposed to see. Of dead Serbs, which would have only confused the tidy picture being peddled:

Tangentially, here was one of the “read more” links in that Mirror article: “Read more: Taunt of the ‘Butcher’: Former Bosnian Serb general makes throat-slit gesture at his war crimes trial“. It’s another illustration of the West’s immunity to correction when it comes to the Balkans; that the hazy incident happened at all was questionable enough that the AP issued a correction, at my prompting, when it could find no documentation that it took place.

That the ICTY is a political rather than judicial construct is illustrated by a decision that was timed as breathtakingly as the March 24th date of the Karadzic verdict. After a genocide charge (in a set of seven municipalities) was dropped from Karadzic’s trial in the summer of 2012 (”a setback for reconciliation!” the chorus repeated), it was reinstated a year later — announced on July 11, the same date that Srebrenica is commemorated. So dates are sometimes chosen as much to please Muslims as they are to beat up Serbs:

Radovan Karadžić genocide charge reinstated by UN judges (The Guardian, July 11, 2013)

Appeals judges at the United Nations’ Yugoslav war crimes tribunal have reinstated a genocide charge against Radovan Karadžić linked to a campaign of killing and mistreating non-Serbs at the start of the Bosnian war in 1992. The decision reversed the former Bosnian Serb president’s acquittal last year on one of the two genocide charges he faces, but it does not amount to a conviction.

The ruling in The Hague came on the day survivors gathered in Srebrenica to mark the 18th anniversary of the massacre by reburying 409 recently identified sets of remains exhumed from mass graves. […]

In the end, Karadzic was acquitted of, very specifically, “genocide” in the seven municipalities, and only on that count. Srebrenica, on the other hand, is still being asserted as genocide. Without any evidence of intent (in fact, plenty of evidence to the contrary, from the evacuation itself to the explicit orders to not harm civilians and to observe all the laws), and without even a precise number of victims and their causes of death. It’s easy to get confused, however, especially with sentences like this one from an October 2012 Toronto Sun article (emphasis added): “During the trial of Bosnian Serb General Stanislav Galic, the tribunal established that Bosnian Serb forces were responsible for shelling the market place.”

The key word there is that the tribunal “established.” In fact, as with a “genocide” per se happening in Srebrenica, what the tribunal does is not ‘establish’ anything so much as ‘assert’ (Western media consistently dodge the distinction). After the ICTY asserts, the other UN court, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), adopts the assertions, and the institutions are then cited by the Bosniak lobby and wider Muslim mafia as having both “found,” for example, that genocide took place. The “findings” are then duly parroted by governments and media.

There are yet more strands to the M.O. of the Hague-Media-Government Axis. Retired Canadian ambassador James Bissett — who, before Karadzic ever said it, said that Karadzic “did his damnedest to prevent the war” — told me years ago that at the Milosevic trial (2002-2005), he observed NY Times correspondent Marlise Simons lifting her pen only when testimony correlated with the approved version of events. That is, not during the countless bombshells that came out in that trial chamber. And so it has gone with the media in general, something I got a taste of in the early 2000s, when the new New York Sun — revived ostensibly as a thinking “alternative” to The Times — deigned to broach the Balkans. It did so exactly when a set of inflammatory images of dead Muslims was being circulated to coincide with some narrative-reinforcing development in the Milosevic trial. Much the way the Court circulated a video of the execution of six Bosniak soldiers in 2005 (timed to the 10th anniversary of Srebrenica), something that all media including the “alternative” Fox News obliged in looping, no less as supposed “proof” of “genocide,” of “8,000.”

Below is an excerpt from Diana Johnstone, author of the new Hillary Clinton book Queen of Chaos, from her recent take on the seven-year Karadzic trial. It rounds out several aforementioned points:

The media stayed away from the marathon, and only showed up to report the inevitable “guilty” verdict condemning the bad guy. The verdict reads a bit like, “they said, he said, and we believe them not him.”

The most amazing passage in the rambling verdict by Judge O-Gon Kwan consists of these throw-away lines:

“With respect to the Accused’s argument that the Bosnian Muslim side targeted its own civilians, the Chamber accepts that the Bosnian Muslim side was intent on provoking the international community to act on its behalf and, as a result, at times, engaged in targeting UN personnel in the city or opening fire on territory under its control in order to lay blame on the Bosnian Serbs.”

This is quite extraordinary. The ICTY judges are actually acknowledging that the Bosnian Muslim side engaged in “false flag” operations, not only targeting UN personnel but actually “opening fire on territory under its control”. Except that that should read, “opening fire on civilians under its control”. UN peace keeping officers have insisted for years that the notorious Sarajevo “marketplace massacres”, which were blamed on the Serbs and used to gain condemnation of the Serbs in the United Nations [which led to bombing them], were actually carried out by the Muslim side in order to gain international support.

This is extremely treacherous behavior. The Muslim side was, as stated, “intent on provoking the international community to act on its behalf”, and it succeeded! The ICTY is living proof of that success: a tribunal set up to punish Serbs. But there has been no move to expose and put on trial Muslim leaders responsible for their false flag operations.

The Judge quickly brushed this off: “However, the evidence indicates that the occasions on which this happened pale in significance when compared to the evidence relating to [Bosnian Serb] fire on the city” (Sarajevo).

How can such deceitful attacks “pale in significance” when they cast doubt precisely on the extent of Bosnian Serb “fire on the city”?

[The ICTY] imported from US criminal justice the concept of a “Joint Criminal Enterprise (JCE)”, used originally as a means to indict gangsters. The trick is to identify the side we are against as a JCE, which makes it possible to accuse anyone on that side of being a member of the JCE.

After Slovenia and Croatia broke away from Yugoslavia, the Muslims and Croats of Bosnia voted to secede from Yugoslavia, but this was opposed by Bosnian Serbs who claimed it was unconstitutional. The European Union devised a compromise that would allow each of the three people self-rule in its own territory. However, the Muslim leader, Alija Izetbegovic, was encouraged by the United States to renege on the compromise deal, in the hope that Muslims, as the largest group, could control the whole territory. War thus broke out in April 1992.

Now, if you asked the Bosnian Serbs what their war aims were, they would answer that they wanted to preserve the independence of Serb territory within Bosnia rather than become a minority in a State ruled by the Muslim majority…However, according to ICTY the objective of the Serbian mini-republic was to “permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Serb-claimed territory … through the crimes charged”, described as the “Overarching Joint Criminal Enterprise”, leading to several subsidiary JCEs…The problem here is not that such crimes [expulsions] did not take place – they did – but that they were part of an “overarching civil war” with crimes committed by the forces of all three sides. If anything is a “joint criminal enterprise”, I should think that plotting and carrying out false flag operations should qualify…One of the subsidiary JCEs attributed to Karadzic was the fact that between late May and mid-June of 1995, Bosnian Serb troops fended off threatened NATO air strikes by taking some 200 UN peacekeepers and military observers hostage. It is hard to see why this temporary defensive move, which caused no physical harm, is more of a “Joint Criminal Enterprise” than the fact of having “[lethally] targeted UN personnel”, as the Muslim side did.

Many well informed Western and Muslim witnesses testify to the fact that the Serb takeover [of Srebrenica] was the unexpected result of finding the town undefended. This makes the claim that this was a well planned crime highly doubtful…ICTY’s constant bias (it refused to investigate NATO bombing of civilian targets in Serbia in 1999, and acquitted notorious anti-Serb Bosnian and Kosovo Albanian killers) drastically reduces its credibility.

ICTY reiterated its earlier judgment that the “killings demonstrate a clear intent to kill every able-bodied Bosnian Muslim male from Srebrenica. Noting that killing every able-bodied male of a group results in severe procreative implications that may lead to the group’s extinction, the Chamber finds that the only reasonable inference is that members of the Bosnian Serb Forces orchestrating this operation intended to destroy the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica as such.” In other words, even though women and children were spared, Srebrenica was a unique genocide, due to the “severe procreative implications” of a lack of men…This judgment is widely accepted without being critically examined. Since wars have traditionally involved deliberately killing men on the enemy side, with this definition, “genocide” comes close to being synonymous with war.

As if to make a point, the verdict was announced on the 17th anniversary of the start of NATO bombing of what was left of Yugoslavia, in order to detach Kosovo from Serbia. Just a reminder that it’s not enough for the Serbs to lose the war, they must be criminalized as well.

The verdict is political and its effects are political. First of all, it helps dim the prospects of future peace and reconciliation in the Balkans. Serbs readily admit that war crimes were committed when Bosnian Serb forces killed prisoners in Srebrenica. If Muslims had to face the fact that crimes were also committed by men fighting on their side, this could be a basis for the two peoples to deplore the past and seek a better future together. As it is, the Muslims are encouraged to see themselves as pure victims, while the Serbs feel resentment at the constant double standards. Muslim groups constantly stress that no verdict can possibly assuage their suffering – an attitude that actually feeds international anti-Western sentiment among Muslims. […]

The final recurring theme that I’ll mention here seems to be prosecution documents that don’t make their way to Serb defendants. On March 23rd, the day before the verdict was due, Karadzic defense attorney Peter Robinson tweeted:

@PeterRobinICTY
Just rec’d 208 pages of exculpatory material in #Karadzic case from #ICTY prosecution this afternoon. Seriously, prosecutors?

This recalls a May 17, 2012 item, which the UK Mirror headlined “War Crimes Trial Blunder: Butcher of Bosnia’s genocide case halted after prosecutors’ error“:

The man dubbed the Butcher of Bosnia Ratko Mladic had his war crimes trial dramatically suspended today…because prosecutors failed to disclose thousands of documents to his defence.

Just another “blunder.” And notice how they still can’t seem to decide which one — Mladic or Karadzic — to dub “Butcher of Bosnia,” and so they split it between the two, sometimes calling one “Butcher of the Balkans” and the other “Butcher of Bosnia,” and sometimes applying one or both titles to Milosevic as well, when they remember about him. Also be on the lookout for facts eventually admitted by the Court (such as the Muslim side shelling its own civilians), to continue being reported as outlandish ravings by a desperate despot in denial. (For example, Reuters reporter Thomas Escritt’s “Karadzic denies Bosnia war crimes as he starts defence” was written in 2012, but the Islamic self-bombing that Karadzic claims and the report scoffs at will continue to be attributed to the mere defendants and not as the (reluctant) findings in his case.)

In addition to the Karadzic conviction doing its part for the general goal of justifying the 1990s Western policies and NATO operations that catalyzed worldwide jihad, it also had a more specific endgame, as outlined by Dr. Srdja Trifkovic last month:

Karadzic Sentencing Designed to ‘Delegitimize’ Republika Srpska (SputnikNews.com, Chronicles Magazine, March 26, 2016)

We are going to see the use of this verdict as another building bloc in the political case for the dismantling of the Dayton Agreement, signed in the fall of 1995, which recognized the Republika Srpska as a semi-autonomous entity within Bosnia-Herzegovina. This will be used, together with some previous verdicts, as justification for a sustained attempt to delegitimize its existence and to claim that — having verified the guilt of Karadzic — it is now time to look for another arrangement for the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a more or less unitarized state — in which, by virtue of their members, the Muslims will have predominance.

…The whole show at The Hague Tribunal has the task of providing legal justification for the decisions made by the Western powers in the 1990’s…a tribunal with a clear brief to prove Serbian guilt, as retroactive justification for political decisions made at the time.

…It is up to the Russians in particular to consider the implications of the quasi-legal proceedings at The Hague as a sword of Damocles that can be used against anyone who is politically inconvenient to the powers-that-be, such as the Donbas leaders today or Bashar al-Assad tomorrow.

… For as long as we have [a] political agenda, and in particular the pernicious doctrine of collective command responsibility — the so-called “joint criminal conspiracy [enterprise]” — anyone connected with a political structure that is inconvenient to the Western powers can be criminalized.

It is not a matter of committing real war crimes; it is a matter of collective guilt because you do not belong to the right side of history. In that sense, The Hague is even more politicized than the Moscow processes of 1936-1938.

Attesting to this dynamic was the Nov. 2012 conviction-reversal of two top Croatian generals who had led a homicidal and stated ethnic cleansing campaign against the Serbs of Krajina — just in time to clear NATO member Croatia’s legal slate for its 2013 EU entry. Jatras in November 2012:

[T]o claim guilt on the basis of a “joint criminal enterprise” (JCE) where there is no direct evidence of the accused’s personal participation in a crime does have its legal problems. That said, the fact that the clearing of the Krajinas was a JCE — that its intention was precisely to uproot the Serbian population — is well attested, including by [Croatian wartime president Franjo] Tudjman’s own words. Certainly far better attested than anything that can be demonstrated regarding, say, Srebrenica or Kosovo, where the proof of the JCE is entirely lacking….In short, there’s no way decently to dismiss JCE basis for Croat defendants (much less Muslims and the oh-so-righteous jihad) while rubber-stamping Serb convictions based on JCE.

This only shows that the purpose of ICTY was to criminalize the Serbs and their aspirations as such, netting such individuals as needed…while legitimating those of the Croats and, especially, Muslims (including Albanians).

So the merry game of rock, paper, scissors continues. Serbs are uniformly guilty. Muslims are uniformly innocent. Croats are guilty if their victims are Muslim, innocent if their victims are Serbs.

And this is all without even mentioning the tribunal’s legitimacy to begin with, as Nebojsa Malic reminded us the day after the Karadzic verdict:

The Hague is not bringing peace, reconciliation or closure — but a cynical victor’s justice, an endorsement of ‘might makes right.’ …The very purpose of the ad-hoc tribunal, a brainchild of the Clinton administration’s “human rights interventionists,” was to deny any legal legitimacy to the Serbs, while bestowing it on the US and its regional clients and proxies.

… Yes, [the tribunal] was established…under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, allowing the creation of “measures to maintain or restore international peace and security.” The very inception of the ICTY required stretching the definition of “measures” to include judicial power the UNSC clearly lacked — and therefore could not delegate.

Even if the tribunal were perfectly legitimate to begin with, its pattern of indictments should have been a signal something was amiss. The ICTY and its backers clearly believed any Serb atrocities were systematic and deliberate, while those committed by anyone else were random or incidental. While every single senior Serb official in present-day Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia was hauled before the court, only a few lower-level Croat, Bosnian Muslim or Albanian officials were even indicted — and most of them were acquitted outright, or on appeal. Only Serbs were charged with genocide — by definition, a systematic crime. Only Serbs were accused of a “joint criminal enterprise,” a category specifically constructed for the tribunal by a US jurist. [The gracious contribution of Pittsburgh law professor John Cencich, a Croat-American.]

“NATO countries are those that have provided the finance to set up the Tribunal, we are amongst the majority financiers… so let me assure that we and the Tribunal are all one on this, we want to see war criminals brought to justice and I am certain that when Justice [Louise] Arbour goes to Kosovo and looks at the facts, she will be indicting people of Yugoslav nationality and I don’t anticipate any others at this stage,” NATO spokesman Jamie Shea told reporters on May 17, 1999. Telling enough?

The Dayton-dismantling tool that the Court provides, meanwhile, is understood well enough by Serbian politicians — even those who play ball with the West and shamefully, finally acquiesced this year to formal NATO cooperation:

Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic — who organised a protest rally in 2008 when Karadzic was sent to The Hague — warned on Thursday prior to the verdict that he will not allow the UN court’s verdict to be used to undermine Republika Srpska.

“I warn those who think they can use today’s verdict against the former president of Repubika Srpska for a political or any other kind of attack on Republika Srpska, that in line with Dayton agreement, Serbia cannot, should not and will not allow that,” Vucic said.

A mouse warning a snake. So far, it’s only ever ended one way.

The quote came from a Balkan Insight article titled “Serbian Nationalists Rally Against NATO, Karadzic Verdict“:

Commenting on the verdict, Seselj said that Karadzic “was convicted…because he is [a] Serb who found himself at a decisive and historic moment at the head of Republika Srpska”.

Seselj slammed the Serbian government for agreeing to cooperate with NATO’s Support and Procurement Organisation.

“Those who were bombing us in 1999, who were killing our children, those criminals from NATO, have now got the right voted in by parliament to walk freely across Serbia,” Seselj said.

The cooperation agreement with NATO “guarantees diplomatic immunity and freedom of movement through Serbia for NATO troops,” RT explained. “The troops are to uphold peace and stability in the region in exchange.” That part of the agreement is surely a punch line, as one protester’s words illustrate:

“We think it is hypocrisy to say that NATO will guarantee stability and security to our people in Kosovo and Metohija,” Milica Djurdjevic, spokeswoman for Zavetnici (Oath Keepers), the right-wing Serbian party that organized Sunday’s protest, said.

“Kosovo has had a NATO base for years now. And despite their presence, Serbs were persecuted, some [most] of our holiest and oldest monasteries were burnt, our houses were burnt and people were expelled from their homes.”

She also accused the alliance of breeding global problems [e.g. terrorism and migration] instead of solving them.

“I think what Nato did by bombing Serbia actually precipitated the exodus of the Kosovo Albanians into Macedonia and Montenegro. I think the bombing did cause ethnic cleansing. The whole business in the Balkans has been mismanaged from the start. It was obvious it was going to blow up.”

–Former British Foreign Secretary and NATO Secretary-General Lord (Peter) Carrington, Saga Magazine, Aug. 27, 1999

“Never before have so few lied so thoroughly to so many, as in connection with the Kosovo war.”

–Former Bundestag Member Willy Wimmer, 1999

“I was just a child in 1999 when NATO was destroying my country without any real basis. I swore to myself that I would defeat that same world in my own way and here I am today. That destruction did not destroy me, nor my people. They did not break our soul and we are yet joyful despite our problems. That is victory.”

–Novak Djokovic, March 24, 2016, via Opanak (Facebook)

“Some Serb paramilitary groups caused many sleepless nights to both Mladić and Karadžić. Not all of them were helpful and welcome. Some of them included even criminal elements, psychopaths. The others treated the Croat or Muslim civilians too heavy-handedly, but it could be understood to some extent, but not permitted, [particularly] if some of them had seen their families assassinated by the Muslims or the Croats. President Karadžić issued many orders to protect Muslims from those irregulars. I have seen many relevant documents about it. On the other [hand], some Serb paramilitaries helped a lot the unprepared and undefended Serb settlements that had been at the beginning an easy prey to the organized and trained Croat and Muslim bands, e.g., in northern and eastern Bosnia.”

–Czech university professor Rajko Dolecek, in an account of some conversations with Ratko Mladic, posted Dec. 16, 2009

“I did everything in human power to avoid the war. I succeeded in reducing the suffering of all civilians. I proclaimed numerous unilateral ceasefires and military containment. And I stopped our army many times when they were close to victory.”

–Radovan Karadzic, Opening Defense Statement, Oct. 16, 2012

******UPDATE******

It seems that just this past December another witness — a protected witness in the Mladic trial — testified that the marketplace bombing, specifically in February 1994, was not only perpetrated by the Muslim side, but ordered by President Izetbegovic himself. The item below is from Balkan Insight, Dec. 16, 2015, and notice the word choice in the headline “Mladic Witness Claims,” as opposed to the more commonly used (when reporting from judicial settings) “testifies.” Notice also the integral role played by a certain West-beloved cleric named Ceric. And for the first time, we have names offered up of the actual men behind the attack: Mladic Witness Claims Bosniaks Staged Market Attack

Protected witness GRM-116, who testified in Mladic’s defence at the Hague Tribunal on Tuesday, claimed that the attack on the market that killed 66 civilians in February 1994 was approved by the then Bosnian president Alija Izetbegovic.

The witness said that as a member of the Biseri special security unit from 1992 to 1994, he worked on security at the Bosnian presidency building.

He said that during that time he could hear what Izetbegovic and others said during meetings.

According to the witness, Izetbegovic’s main goal was to ensure Western intervention to help the Bosniaks “by creating mass suffering in Sarajevo and Srebrenica”.

He said that Izetbegovic was heavily influenced by Islamic community leader Mustafa Ceric. According to the witness, Ceric convinced Izetbegovic that “losses must be suffered”.

Speaking about the attack on the Markale market, GRM-116 testified that was “Ceric’s idea, which was carried out by generals Sefer Halilovic and Mustafa Hajrulahovic, alias ‘the Italian’”.

“I was there when Alija [Izetbegovic] approved this,” he said.

At the next meeting, the witness said that Halilovic reported the first attempt was a failure because the mortar hit the roof of the market.

“Alija told them to try again. They went and soon we heard what happened with Markale,” he said.

Izetbegovic, who died in 2003, said after the attack that it was a “black and terrible day for the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina”.

As commander of the Bosnian Serb Army, Ratko Mladic is charged with terrorising the population of Sarajevo during wartime with a campaign of shelling and sniping.

According to the charges, the mortar which killed 66 citizens at the Markale market on February 5, 1994 was fired from Bosnian Serb positions. […]

******UPDATE******

In another recent example of categorizing things that go the Bosniaks’ way as “fair,” professional Srebrenica widow Munira Subasic reacted last June when Switzerland gave precedence to a Bosnian warrant over a Serbian one for Srebrenica warlord Naser Oric, tormentor of fellow Muslims and killer of Serbs: “This is the only fair decision.” (In the Reuters item that carried it, one couldn’t help noticing that Oric was referred to with the innocuous word “defender” of the town, in an all too Balkans-typical grafting by Western press of one side’s self-serving terminology.)

Next Page »