Some from the Serbian government’ establishment „don’t like“ Russians, but „Russians are coming“- be ready to deal with it, or „turn your tail and run“…
30 November 2013, SERBian FBReporter
@Darko Trifunović „Such idiot. How he can interfere in internal affairs of Serbia? Is that brotherhood approach of big Russian brother? I do not want Russian ambassador or any others to tell me what to do! Get out hand of Serbia!“(comment of Dr Darko Trifunovic (Secretary of Institute for „State security“ @ „Faculty of internal affairs“ in Belgrade) on Blic’ article: http://english.blic.rs/In-Focus/10057/Russian-ambassadors-threat-to-Serbia-NATO-red-line ) –
You, Mr. Trifunovic, as a secretary of an „strategic“ government institution, should know better then to use such profane language to describe an diplomatic official who comes from one of the friendliest country to Serbia. And nowadays there are not to many such Serbian friends, as the honorable Russian ambassador Mr. Aleksandr Chepurin…
If you have read carefully through the above Blic’ text, you would notice comment from your colleague Predrag Simic, who made remark that nothing is strange for Russia meddling into Serbian internal affairs, because until now South Africa (this is of course satiric comment) was the only country not to interfere into the „submissive to West, and politically castrated“, corrupted Serbian government.
You know to well, that since 2000 all important Serbian government’ decisions were done inside the walls of major Western embassies in Belgrade (beside Brussels and Washington).
As you stated that- you „do not want Russian ambassador or any others to tell me what to do! Get out hand of Serbia!“ – Now I expect from you nothing less, but to issue the same public warning to all Western ambassadors and EU envoys, that at present time openly meddling (and blackmailing our country) into Serbian internal affairs. Or maybe you are to afraid to do so, because at the end of the day, you are (in)directly on their payroll !?
To conclude this „replica“- In my personal belief: Russian’ concern with NATO taking militarily over country- where Russians are investing multimillion (in your favorite currency- dollars) projects, which will be for the benefits of, not only Russians, but for Serbian nation as well- is fully justified.
If we, as a nation and government wish to be honest in this relationship with Russia, we should at least remain militarily neutral (or, if we are forced to chose, than we have to side only with our historical, natural, cultural and proven „brotherly friends“… And such friends of Serbia, today certainly are not in the imperialistic West, but rather on the East – where they always used to be…
Miodrag Novakovic, FBR editor
Excerpt from the discussion within Facebook group „UNMIK“- https://www.facebook.com/groups/422786171118022/
One of the prominent figures of the past week was the former Bosnian Serb military leader Ratko Mladic. The Hague Themis is trying to punish him for all the atrocities committed during the war in Bosnia. But for many, he remains a hero who did not allow bin Laden to destroy his people. He also interfered with the plans of the U.S. and the EU to separate the Serbs. As a result, Mladic became the enemy of both bin Laden and the West.
The reason behind his hunger strike was questioning of a witness at the trial. The details are not clear, but it seems to have to do with the crimes in the Bosnian town of Rogatica. The witness has allegedly suffered abuse, but Mladic openly laughed listening to his story, and then he was taken out of the courtroom. The defendant decided to go on a hunger strike.
Mladic is accused of violating the laws of war during the Bosnian massacre of 1992-1995. He is charged with crimes committed during the siege of Sarajevo as well as the genocide of Muslims in Srebrenica. The General did not acknowledge his fault, and President of Serbia Tomislav Nikolic agreed with him. „There was no genocide in Srebrenica. There were individual cases of war crimes,“ said the politician. He added that he did not consider Mladic a war criminal.
Who is Ratko Mladic, one of the most wanted persons in the world for over 15 years, whose trial attracted so much attention? He is one of the main protagonists of the war in the former Yugoslavia. Perhaps, his biography has the answers to the questions about his behavior during the events in Bosnia and Herzegovina 20 years ago.
Mladic was born on March 12, 1943 in the village of Bozhinovichi in Bosnia and Herzegovina. At the time it was a member of the Independent State of Croatia that was allied with the Nazi Germany. Ustaša Croats and Bosnian Muslims were among the supporters of the occupiers who were destroying the local Serbs even harder than the Germans. Mladic’s father was killed in a battle with the Ustaša and their Muslim associates. He had every reason to hold a grudge against the Muslims and Croats.
Until the summer of 1991, when a large-scale war broke out in Yugoslavia, Mladic was building an ordinary military career in the Yugoslav People’s Army (YPA). In the summer of that year he was transferred to Croatia, where the Croats and Serbs were killing each other. Mladic distinguished himself in the battles with the Croats striving for independence. In the spring of 1992 he was granted a rank of lieutenant general in Belgrade and was sent to his native Bosnia.
By that time the war spread to Bosnia. The YPA was no longer a combat-ready unit. Using this, the local Muslim groups one by one captured Serbian villages and mercilessly massacred their residents. In their ranks there were many mercenaries from Islamic countries who got to Bosnia with the assistance of Osama bin Laden. The late leader of the Bosnian Muslims Alija Izetbegovic granted bin Laden Bosnian citizenship.
The goal of bin Laden and Izetbegovic was to build an Islamic state in Bosnia where there would be no room for the Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats. Thinking back to the actions of Muslim troops during the World War II and looking at the atrocities of Islamic mercenaries in Serbian villages (which the U.S. and the EU turned a blind eye to), Mladic left the YPA. In mid-1992, he took command of the scattered Bosnian Serbs troops and became the self-proclaimed commander of the army of Republika Srpska in Bosnia.
Since late 1992, the military initiative was in the hands of the Serbs. They displaced Muslims from most of the territory they occupied. Gradually, 70 percent of the territory of Bosnia was shifted under Mladic’s control. Of course, it was hardly without violence against the Muslims, some of whom were committing atrocities in the Serbian villages, while others were not to blame.
The West believed that the Serbs had to display greater humanism than all the rest. In 1993 „blue helmets“ of the UN took under their defense the Muslim towns of Srebrenica and Zepa that were cleared from the Serbs prior to that. Bosnia, where Muslims, Serbs and Croats lived intermingled, has never had ethnically clean cities. Srebrenica and Zepa during 1992 became purely Muslim. However, the U.S. and the EU did not question it.
Mladic surrounded Srebrenica and Zepa, but did not want to seize them for a long time because of the presence of the UN troops. The Muslim troops who committed attacks on Serbian positions took advantage of this situation. Mladic has repeatedly drawn the world’s attention to this, but no one would listen. Finally, in July of 1995, he decided to put an end to the enclaves.
By late 1995, the war in Bosnia was over. Mladic, along with a Bosnian Serb, political leader Radovan Karadzic, was awaited in The Hague. They were wanted for over 10 years – bin Laden is perhaps the only other person who had been on the wanted list for that long. In 2008, Serbia managed to detain Karadzic.
In May of 2011, in the village of Lazarevo a person was detained with a passport in the name of Milorad Komadicha. Later it turned out that it was Mladic, who in years of wandering had become a hero for many Serbs. Former President Boris Tadic, who was eager to join the EU, was not hiding his joy. He said then that he was very proud of this operation as it would open all doors for joining the European Union.
Since then Mladic has been held in The Hague, and the trial commenced in the spring of 2012. However, the trial looks more like judgment. The General and other Serbs are being made responsible for the massacre where both Muslims and Croats participated. The leaders of the EU and the U.S. have done a lot to make the war in Bosnia a bloody one. Yet, not one of the leaders of the Bosnian Muslims has been charged.
He fought for his people who would not be treated right in the Islamic state of bin Laden and Izetbegovic. He thought that the Bosnian Serbs must live within their national state, Serbia. It is not surprising that for many Serbs (even pro-Western ones), he remains a national hero. The West had other plans in this regard and made Mladic the worst enemy to be trialed at the Hague Tribunal.
Weekend Edition October 5-7, 2012
by PATRICK FOY
What if the White House were deliberately misleading America and the world about a major foreign policy issue involving war and peace, would it not be something worth investigating? What if, on top of that, the US Congress and Senate were going along with the subterfuge, remaining silent and not questioning it in the slightest? Wouldn’t that phenomenon be remarkable?
What if the mainstream news media, both television and print, were also enabling the same White House campaign of misrepresentation? Would this not be even more shocking? Should not a free press be checking the facts, asking basic questions, instead of blindly parroting a government party line which could be little more than war propaganda?
If you guessed I am describing Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program, hyped at every opportunity by the Obama White House and the Congress and by the Republicans and Mitt Romney, you would be on target. The nonstop campaign of harassing and demonizing Tehran, premised upon the existential threat supposedly posed by an Iranian atomic bomb, is a determined bipartisan affair in Washington.
Every Tom, Dick and Jane has a stake in the game, the only difference being the extent to which a particular Tom, Dick and Jane is willing to proclaim his or her outrage and commit the United States to punitive action, ranging from ruinous economic sanctions to a bunker-busting military assault in tandem with our dauntless nuclearized ally, Israel.
True, this scenario has been in place for years and is becoming tedious, but we now seem to have arrived at a new plateau of mass hysteria thanks to the 2012 U.S. Presidential campaign. Why? In a word, leverage. The leverage to determine who gets elected in Washington and under what conditions. I am referring in part to a foreign leader who is acting in concert with his American lobbyists and financial backers.
As part of this electioneering process, extravagant commitments have been extracted from craven American officials to further the interests and expand the greater territorial ambitions of the nuclear-armed foreign entity at issue, in exchange for campaign contributions and votes. Nothing new here, but I am getting ahead of myself.
Let me dramatize the problem with a recent example. I have not spoken with John McLaughlin in over ten years, but I believe we remain on good terms. I watch his weekly Washington-based show, the McLaughlin Group, to hear in particular what Patrick Buchanan has to say about the week’s events. The Group remains informative and a partial antidote to the mainstream media. McLaughlin often wanders off the MSM reservation, but never too far.
Last Friday, September 28th, something occurred on the program which blew this fake Iranian crisis sky high. Issue One was, naturally, the interminable and largely irrelevant 2012 Presidential campaign. Issue Two was Iran and Bibi Netanyahu’s speech the day before, at the UN General Assembly, in which he explained why the world must set “red lines” to Iran’s enrichment of uranium to halt its quest for an atomic bomb.
Two days prior to Bibi’s speech, President Barack Obama had proclaimed from the same dais: “…America wants to resolve this issue through diplomacy…there is still time and space to do so. But that time is not unlimited… Make no mistake: a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained… And that is why the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” Where’s the daylight between the two?
John McLaughlin turned to Mort Zuckerman for a comment. Zuckerman repeated the party line that the development of an Iranian nuclear bomb would be an existential threat to Israel which must be stopped. As in all such pronouncements, just like those of Barack and Bibi at the UN, the indisputable assumption was that the Iranians are, of course, working to build The Bomb. Then Buchanan weighed in with this bombshell:
“But John, Iran has no nuclear weapons program. There is no nuclear weapons program according to 16 United States intelligence agencies in 2007, reaffirmed in 2011. Even the Israelis are now saying we think the Americans were right. They don’t have a nuclear weapons program. The Ayatollah [Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei] has said nuclear weapons on Iran’s part would be immoral, unjust and un-Islamic. So why are we now considering talking about a war on a country to deprive it of weapons of mass destruction it does not have?
So I’m thinking, whoa, we have arrived at the Emperor-has-no-clothes moment. It is out in the open at last. Buchanan has challenged the undeniable: the premise that Tehran has a program underway to build The Bomb. What’s more, he has done it by pointing to the conclusions of the U.S. Government itself, as embodied in its 16 intelligence agencies. Buchanan did not rely upon his own research or idle speculation. He cited the best available conclusions of the U.S. intelligence community.
All right, this is not new information. I wrote an article about it in 2007 for Taki’s Magazine when the news first broke regarding the National Intelligence Estimate. The NIE was a true revelation back then as well as a wake-up call. It demonstrated that Dick Cheney and G.W. Bush and their Neoconservative foreign-policy brain trust were actively deceiving their fellow-Americans by attempting to entice the country into yet another war, on top of Iraq, under false premises.
It was assumed at the time that the NIE ended this deceit and that the project to smack Iran could not go forward. How could it? There were no nuclear weapons in Iran and no program underway to develop them, just like there had been no WMD in Iraq when Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched at the beginning of 2003. Now we knew. The 2007 NIE was reaffirmed in a 2011 NIE update. The Neoconservatives had a cow. Where was the threat needed to start another conflict and continue their undertaking to remake the Middle East?
Please note, however, that during the interim since Peace Prize Obama was handed the torch in 2008, no one in the Executive Branch–not Obama or Hillary Clinton, and no one on Capitol Hill–dares mention these NIE conclusions. It is as if they do not exist. Only the disinformation from misguided and suborned office-holders matters. At the end of the day, only that counts, not reality. In essence, Peace Prize Obama and the Democrats have continued, under different packaging, the same Neoconized foreign policy of Dick Cheney and the Republicans. The question you might ask yourself is, why?
What was the reaction to Buchanan’s assertions? For me, the reaction of his fellow panelists was more interesting and eye-opening than what Buchanan actually said. You could have expected the Group to react in horror at Buchanan’s denial of what everyone else in Washington was taking for granted. But no, that is not what happened. No one challenged Buchanan. No one challenged the veracity of his pronouncement.
Not Mort Zuckerman, a former chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. Zuckerman is one of the top Zionists in the country and a personal friend of Netanyahu. Not Rich Lowry, the editor of the Neoconservative outlet, National Review, which competes with the Weekly Standard and Commentary for warmongering and American exceptionalism. And not the liberal columnist and professional Democrat, Eleanor Clift, who idolizes Obama. And not the former Jesuit priest and host, John McLaughlin.
All of them simply ignored what Buchanan had said, did not address it, even though its implications blew the legs out from under long-standing U.S. foreign policy and reduced the speeches of Barack and Bibi at the UN to nonsense.
The only reason I can think of why Zuckerman, Lowry, Clift and McLaughlin did not confront Buchanan is that they knew what Buchanan had said was the truth. To enter into a discussion with Buchanan would be to acknowledge the possibility that his view might be correct. This would reveal that a colossal con game was underway in which both political parties and the press were enablers.
The principal con man in this game would be the President of the United States, followed by his Secretary of State. The victims of the con game would be the American people, just like they were under Bush and Cheney. And of course the Iranians, who now must cope with crippling economic sanctions for no legitimate reason. The larger question remains, why is this happening? Why is the deception continuing from one Administration to the next? Cui bono?
PATRICK FOY is an essayist and short story writer as well as a former altar boy. He graduated from Canterbury School in New Milford, Connecticut and from Columbia University in New York City, where he studied English literature, European history and American diplomatic history. His work can be found at http://www.PatrickFoyDossier.com.