Kurdistan!

[Gondorian]

nato stopped NO genocide. On the contrary, they enabled a genocide of Christian Serbs as well as an ethnic cleansing of Serbs. If you look at the territories involved, while Serb controlled territory is multi-ethnic, all the states supported by nato have been ethnically cleansed of Serbs and other minorities. I will provide further documentation on the absurdity of your lies regarding Yugoslavia. Serbs/Milosevic NEVER EVER tried to commit genocide on anyone. You are the morally bankrupt one, you twist everything around and accuse others of what you do yourself. Nothing new in the way liars always behave. Jooboian never said anything about approving killing children and furthermore, you have done NOTHING to prove that children were ever deliberately targeted.

Reported, how dare you openly deny a genocide that happened to Muslims on an Armenian Genocide Forum.

I do not care what religion or ethnicity people who commit genocide are, and so I do not care that the Serbs who commited Genocide against the Bosnians and Albanians happened to be christian, a christian life is no more important then a non christian life, there are niether jew, nor greek, nor man, nor woman before God.

[imported_Sensei]

Reported, how dare you openly deny a genocide that happened to Muslims on an Armenian Genocide Forum.

How DARE you say that. I will NOT nor will I ever support LIES and fabrications and I will say it again: THERE WAS NO GENOCIDE COMMITTED BY SERBS/MILOSEVIC against any muslims or anyone else. NO GENOCIDE, NO GENOCIDE, NO GENOCIDE. Got it???? You are a slanderer and a false accuser. But I am not in the least bit surprised. I can also think of no better place to insist that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth be stated by everyone who expects that Armenians are to be believed when talking about the Armenian Genocide.


Also, weren't you the one crying about your "free speech" to tell LIES, but evidently you don't want it for anyone else, truth be damned, right?

Besides I have the right to criticize whoever I want, I can even go off ranting and criticize Robert Kocharain if I so wished, how dare you go after my freedom of speech simply because I criticized an enemy of Turkey.

I do not care what religion or ethnicity people who commit genocide are, and so I do not care that the Serbs who commited Genocide against the Bosnians and Albanians happened to be christian, a christian life is no more important then a non christian life, there are niether jew, nor greek, nor man, nor woman before God.

I am obviously talking to a brick wall, somebody who hasn't got a full deck upstairs, somebody who is a freakin' robot incapable of independent thought who has been so brainwashed as to become egregiougsly arrogant in your ignorance. Obviously, you don't come to forums to learn anything, only to thoughtlessly vomit by rote what you've been told.

I will post the information for the benefit of thinking people rather than you.

It had nothing to do with the fact that the liars/fabricators of the lies are muslims, BTW. Stop pretending.

[imported_Sensei]

http://www.swans.com/library/art12/ga205.html

Slobodan Milosevic, 1941-2006
A Cursed, Blasted Statesman
by Gilles d'Aymery

(Swans - March 13, 2006) Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of the sorely missed Yugoslavia, and later, of Serbia, died in his prison cell in Scheveningen, Netherlands, on March 11, 2006. He had long been suffering from chronic heart ailments and high blood pressure. His condition was worsening. He had requested to be allowed safe passage to Russia to get treatment. The Russian government had assured the authorities at The Hague Tribunal that once treated he would be sent back to the Netherlands. The Russians were ignored. The request was denied. He is dead.

His death is a blessing for the kangaroo court, known as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), that, although almost entirely financed by the U.S., has been functioning under the umbrella of the United Nations. For four years, and going strong despite his health ailments, Milosevic was running circles around his prosecutors and the judges who were so intent to condemn him. He would not let the prefabricated lynching happen without a fight for the truth. He was so successful in his endeavor that the main media never, ever, reported on the actual deliberations of the court, as they were busily dealing with other demons to assail...Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, Hugo Chávez, Assad of Syria, Hamas in Palestine...the list is long -- so many terrorists among us, the losing and struggling-to-survive people of this world.

He is dead.

The official "truth" is being distilled, not like moonshining in the Southern Appalachian Mountains in the years of Prohibition but in the open corrals of Texan rodeos. It's rough, as tough as it goes. He was a "figure of beguiling charm and cunning ruthlessness" says the Associated Press. He was a "ruler of exceptional ruthlessness always ready to use force in a series of wars, from Croatia in 1991 to Kosovo in 1999," according to Roger Cohen of the New York Times. He was a dictator, the "butcher of the Balkans," a new Hitler. He was responsible for all the mayhem that befell that Southern part of Europe. The Serbo-French novelist, Vidosav Stevanovic, talks of a "mythical monster, a deceitful king." He was "a devil who learnt Serbo-Croat to betray the Serbs." He was an enemy and a criminal. A loser. His father committed suicide. So did his mother, and his uncle, and his wife's mother. "Who could be curious about the childhood of a man without childhood," wonders Stevanovic. Who could be interested, pursues Stevanovic, in "the youth of a man without youth, a man neither handsome nor ugly, of middle size, unable to run more than 100 meters?" Who, he ponders, "the intellectually curious, the experts, a few readers?" No, his "victims" who "if you add to the dead all the mutilated, the transferred refugees through ethnic cleansing, people forced to emigrate, ruined, lied to, deceived," can be accounted in the millions. In typical Serb subconsciousness, Stevanovic sees in Milosevic a "unique case" in a region where "destruction is almost a natural predisposition to public life." ("Portrait d'un dictateur inachevé," Le Monde, October 2000.)

Americans, of course, are less poetic, and never self-indulge in sorrow. Milosevic's passing will be in the news for a couple of days at most. He will be pilloried. His demise will allow the pundits to remind the gullible idiots who cannot even find their own country on a geographical map that the Serbs got what they deserved; and they will move on to demonize the enemy du jour in order to add another military outpost to the Freedom and Democracy construct made of raw materials and consumerism. Kosovo yesterday. Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Iraq today. Iran Tomorrow. Life moves on.

Who cares that the actual ethnic cleansing targeted the Serbs, whether in Croatia or in Kosovo, now almost Serbless? Who cares that Serbia is the most multi-ethnic country in the Balkans? No one does.

Milosevic was no superman. He, and many along side, tried to keep Yugoslavia whole. He also, in the wake of the Soviet Union's dismemberment, tried to hold to a socialist, humane idea of life. As he was confronted with forces much, much more powerful (neo-liberal globalization, overwhelming military power), he tried to defend Serb interests. He struggled on behalf of a different human construct, far from what we have become subservient to.

He was demonized, and the rest is history, written by the victors.

But, like Allende, Mossadegh, and many others who were crushed by the forces of greed, Slobodan Milosevic will not be forgotten.

I'm proud to stand today, in the lonesome company of people like Edward S. Herman and Diana Johnstone. To be dismissed, ignored, and vilified, does not make us wrong.

[imported_Sensei]

Milosevic: Test your Media

by Michel Collon

March 16, 2006
MichelCollon.info

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index....&articleId=2110

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

It becomes a little less difficult to determine whether we have been informed correctly about Yugoslavia. Did they have a right to present the Nato war as "humanitarian"? Did the Great Powers have secret strategies? Were there media lies told and war propaganda spread?

We recommend that you take this brief Media test in order to have a clear view, and to test how your medias are going to inform you in the coming hours.

MEDIA QUIZ

How good is our information
on the destruction of Yugoslavia?

1 Did the war begin in 1991 with the secessions of Slovenia and Croatia?
O Yes O No O Don't know

2 Did Germany deliberately provoke the civil war?
O Yes O No O Don't know

3 Did the US really remain 'passive and disinterested' during this war?
O Yes O No O Don't know

4 Did the World Bank and the IMF help destroying this country?
O Yes O No O Don't know

5 Did the media give a phony image of 'our friends' Tudjman & Izetbegovic?
O Yes O No O Don't know

6 Did the media hide the essential history and geography of Bosnia?
O Yes O No O Don't know

7 Was the topic 'Serb aggressors, Croat and Muslim victims' correct?
O Yes O No O Don't know

8 Did Serbia initiate a program of ethnic cleansing?
O Yes O No O Don't know

9 Did the media correctly report on Srebrenica?
O Yes O No O Don't know

10 Were the first victims of the war killed by the Serbs?
O Yes O No O Don't know

11 Was the famous image of the 'concentration camps' false?
O Yes O No O Don't know

12 Were we given the true stories on the three large massacres in Sarajevo?
O Yes O No O Don't know

13 Was the largest ethnic cleansing of the war committed by the Croat Army?
O Yes O No O Don't know

14 Did the US use depleted uranium weapons also in Bosnia?
O Yes O No O Don't know

15 Was the war against Yugoslavia the US's 'only good war'?
O Yes O No O Don't know


ANSWERS:

1 1991 OR EARLIER?
Did the war begin in 1991 with the secessions of Slovenia and Croatia?

NO. In 1979, the BND (German CIA) sent a team of secret agents to Zagreb. Mission: to support Franjo Tudjman, a racist who actively promoted ethnic hatred and did all he could toward the break-up of Yugoslavia. Germany supported and financed this Croatian Le Pen, and sent him arms before the war.

To what end? Berlin never acknowledged the existence of the unified Yugoslav state which had courageously resisted German aggression in the two world wars. By once more breaking Yugoslavia into easily dominated mini-states, Germany sought to control the Balkans. An economic zone it could annex in order to remove it from local authority, to export German products to it, and to dominate it as a market. And a strategic route toward the oil and gas of the Middle East and the Caucasus. In 1992, the Bavarian Interior Minister declared: "Helmut Kohl has succeeded where neither Emperor Guillaume nor Hitler could." (see the parallel maps 'Yugoslavia in 1941--in 1991', Liars' Poker, pp 68-69)

2 GERMAN WILL?
Did Germany deliberately provoke the civil war?

YES. At the beginning of the Maastricht Summit in 1991, German Chancellor Kohl was alone in wanting to break up Yugoslavia and precipitously to recognize the 'independence' of Slovenia and Croatia, in defiance of both International Law and the Yugoslav Constitution. But the rise of German power would impose this madness on all its partners. Paris and London fell right in line.

According to The Observer of London: "Prime Minister Major paid dearly for supporting German policies toward Yugoslavia which all observers said precipitated the war." In effect, all the experts had warned that this 'recognition' would provoke a civil war. Why? 1. Nearly every Yugoslav Republic was a mix of diverse nationalities. Separating the territories was as absurd as dividing Paris or London into ethnically pure municipal districts. 2. By favoring the neo-fascist Tudjman and the Muslim nationalist Izetbegovic (who had in his youth collaborated with Hitler), it was certain that panic would be provoked among the important Serb minorities who had lived for centuries in Croatia and Bosnia. Every Serb family had lost at least one member to the horrible genocide committed by the fascist Croats and Muslims, agents of Nazi Germany in 1941-45.

Only Tito's Yugoslavia had been able to bring about peace, equality and coexistence. But Berlin, then Washington, wanted once and for all to break this country they saw as being 'too far to the Left' (see question 4).

3 A PASSIVE USA?
Did the US remain 'passive and disinterested' during this war?

NO. Lord Owen, special European Union envoy to Bosnia, and later a well-placed observer, wrote in his memoirs: "I greatly respect the United States. But in recent years (92-95) this nation's diplomacy has been guilty of needlessly prolonging the war in Bosnia."

What was its aim? While the Germans were busy taking control of Slovenia, Croatia and, eventually, Bosnia, Washington put pressure on Izetbegovic, the Muslim nationalist leader in Sarajevo: "Don't sign any peace agreements proposed by the Europeans. We will win the war for you on the ground." Washington then prolonged for two years the horrible suffering inflicted on all the people of Bosnia.

By what means? 1. Setting aside all the advantages Berlin had gained in this strategic region of the Balkans. 2. Dividing and weakening the European Union. 3. Installing NATO as the Continental European policeman. 4. Restricting all Russian access to the Mediterranian Sea. 5. Imposing its military and political leadership on all the other wars being prepared.

Because the war against Yugoslavia was at the same time a non-declared war against Europe. After the fall of the Berlin wall, US strategies were geared toward stopping, at all costs, the emergence of a European superpower. So everything was done to weaken Europe militarily and politically.

4 WORLD BANK & IMF
Did the World Bank and the IMF help destroying this country?

YES. In December 1989, the IMF imposed draconian conditions on Yugoslavia which forced liberal prime minister Markovic to beg for aid from George Bush Sr. This 'help' was aimed at destabilizing and bankrupting all large state-owned businesses. The World Bank dismantled the banking system, laid off 525,000 workers in one year, then ordered the immediate elimination of two out of every three jobs. The quality of life fell dramatically.

These policies and the growing incidence of work stoppages in solidarity with displaced workers in all the Republics heightened the contradictions among the leaders of the various Republics to whom Belgrade could no longer provide financing. To get themselves out of this mess, the leaders had to resort to divisive tactics and invested greatly in nationalist hatreds. This war was ignited from abroad. Like so many others.

The war against Yugoslavia was a war of globalization. All the great Western powers sought to liquidate the Yugoslav economic system which they found too Leftist: with a strong public sector, important social rights, resistance to the multinationals... The real reason for these various wars against Yugoslavia can be read in this reproach (this threat?) from the Washington Post: "Milosevic was unable to grasp the political message of the fall of the Berlin wall. Other Communist politicians accepted the Western model, but Milosevic went the other way." (4 August 1996).

5 "OUR FRIENDS"
Did the media give a phony image of 'our friends' Tudjman & Izetbegovic?

YES. The hyper-nationalist Croat and Muslim leaders were presented as the pure victims, great anti-racist democrats. But their past as much as their present should have alerted us:

When he took power, Franjo Tudjman declared: "I'm happy my wife isn't a Jew or a Serb." He hurriedly renamed the streets that had carried the names of antifascist partisans, reinstated the money and the flag of the old genocidal fascist regime, and changed the Constitution in order to run off the Serbs.

During his 1990 electoral campaign, Izetbegovic reissued his 'Islamic Declaration': "There can be neither peace nor coexistence between the Islamic religion and those social and political institutions that are non-Islamic." He set up a corrupt and mafia-ridden regime based primarily on the lucrative black market and the hijacking of funds from international aid. He called for assistance, with Washington's blessings, from Islamic mercenaries, most notably from al Qaeda.

Once the war had started, serious crimes were committed by all three camps, but by hiding these histories, the situation was rendered incomprehensible.

6 HISTORY & GEOGRAPHY
Did the media hide the essential history and geography of Bosnia?

YES. We were made to believe that the Serbs were the aggressors, that they had invaded Bosnia from outside its borders. In reality, three national groups had been living in Bosnia for a long time: the Muslims (43%), the Serbs (31%), the Croats (17%). And one should not forget that 7% of 'Yugoslavs' were born of mixed marriages or preferred to eschew narrow national identities.
Dividing Bosnia according to nationalities, as the EU did, was absurd and dangerous. Because this diverse population was completely intermingled: the Muslims lived primarily in the cities while the Serbs and Croats made up the peasantry and were dispersed throughout the sub-regions. Bosnia could not be divided without civil war.

In fact, the Serbs of Bosnia did not fight to invade the territories of 'others', but to save their own lands and establish corridors of communication between them. It was an absurd and bloody situation, with all the ravages of a civil war, but this civil war was provoked by the great powers.

7 "GOOD GUYS" AND "BAD GUYS"
Was the presumption of "Serb aggressors, Croat and Muslim victims" correct?

NO. In command of the UN forces in Bosnia from July 1993 to January 1994, Belgian general Briquemont was well placed to declare: "The disinformation is total (...) Television needs a scapegoat. For the moment, there is complete unanimity in condemning the Serbs, and that in no way facilitates the search for a solution. I don't think one can view the problem of ex-Yugoslavia and of Bosnia-Herzegovina only from the anti-Serb angle. It is much more complicated than that. One day in the middle of the Croat-Muslim war, we gave some information on the massacres committed by the Croatian army. An American journalist said to me: 'If you give out that sort of information, the American public won't understand anything.'"
It is not a question of denying the crimes committed by the Serb forces. The ideology one finds in the writings of Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic is extremely right wing. But in reality, after the break-up of Yugoslavia, on all sides, certain criminal and political forces used the methods of war to seize territory and riches. In the three camps - Croat, Muslim and Serb - militias committed grave crimes. To the detriment of all the people. Thus, in August 1994, the Muslim nationalist leader in Sarajevo, Izetbegovic, attacked the Muslim region of Bihac, controlled by Fikret Abdic, who had distanced himself from Izetbegovic and wanted to live in harmony with his Serb and Croat neighbors. In this offensive, Izetbegovic was aided by six US generals.

Remaining silent to the crimes of 'our friends' but demonizing whoever resists us is classic war propaganda. Numerous media lies were totally fabricated by a US public relations firm, Ruder Finn. Colleagues of the famous Hill & Knowlton, who created the media lie about Kuwaiti incubators stolen by the Iraqis.

8 "ETHNIC CLEANSING"?
Did Serbia initiate a program of ethnic cleansing?

NO. If one believes that ethnic cleansing was actually the program of 'the dictator Milosevic', one has to admit that this program was sadly ineffective. Because throughout the war years and still today, one of every five inhabitants of Serbia is a non-Serb. In Belgrade there are and have always been many minorities living without any difficulty: Muslims, Gypsies, Albanians, Macedonians, Turks, Hungarians, Gorans . . .

In reality, contrary to the image given by the press, Serbia is today the only state of the ex-Yugoslavia, along with Macedonia, that remains 'multinational'. On the other hand, all the NATO protectorates - Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo - practiced an almost total ethnic purification.

Milosevic objected to the excesses committed by the Serb militias in Bosnia. His wife made several declarations against them. An embargo was even applied by Serbia against Karadzic. Certainly, part of Serb public opinion was influenced by racist nationalism. But this was due precisely to Germany and the great powers having plunged the country into civil war and thus into hatred.

[imported_Sensei]

Ii.

9 SREBRENICA
Did the media correctly report on Srebrenica?

NO. First element. Even if it's a matter of condemning abominable crimes, historical truth - necessary for reconciliation - is not served by the propagandistic processes that unreflexively use the term 'genocide', by the obfuscation of the fact that that some of the victims died in combat or by the systematic exaggeration of the numbers. Inquests have determined that many of the 'victims' were found some months later voting in subsequent elections or even taking part in other battles with Izetbegovic's army. This information was and remains obscured. We won't here go into the argument over numbers which only serious historians will be able to sort out definitively.

Second element. Why did the media hide the events essential to an understanding of this drama? In the beginning, this region was inhabited by Muslim AND Serbs. The latter were run off in 1993 by an ethnic cleansing committed by the Muslim nationalist troops of Izetbegovic. French general Morillon, who commanded the UN force there, charges: "On the night of the Orthodox Christmas, the holy night of January 1993, Nasser Oric led raids on Serb villages. . . . There were heads cut off, abominable massacres committed by the forces of Nasser Oric in all the neighboring villages." (Documents of information from the French National Assembly, Srebrenica, t 2, pp. 140-154) The desire for vengeance does not excuse the crimes committed later. But why systematically hide the crimes of 'our friends'?

Third element. Like other so-called demilitarized 'safe havens', Srebrenica was in reality an area used by the forces of Izetbegovic to regroup, the UN protecting them from total defeat. Astonishingly, Oric's troops retreated from Srebrenica just a week before the massacre. French general Germanos: "Oric had widely declared that they had abandoned Srebrenica because they'd wanted Srebrenica to fall. The 'they' was Izetbegovic."

And why? It is interesting to return to a curious UN report, written a year and a half earlier by Kofi Annan: "Izetbegovic had learned that a NATO intervention into Bosnia was possible. But it would happen only if the Serbs forced their way into Srebrenica and massacred at least 5,000 people [sic]." A massacred predicted a year and a half before it happened! (UN Report of 28-29 November)

General Morillon also informed us that "It is Izetbegovic's people who opposed the evacuation of all those who had asked to be taken out, and there were many." His conclusion: "Mladic fell into a trap at Srebrenica."

10 FIRST VICTIMS
Were the first victims of the war killed by Serbs?

NO. June 28, 1991, the Slovenian police executed (at least) two unarmed soldiers of the Yugoslav national army who had surrendered at Holmec, a post on the Austrian border. This was acknowledged by the newspaper Slovenske Novice. It has also been 'established from the very beginning' that three soldiers of this same Yugoslav army were executed at a post on the Italian border after surrendering themselves. (Facts and testimony reported to the ICY at The Hague, cfr Forgotten Crimes, Igor Mekina, AIM Ljubljana, 11/02/99).

11 CONCENTRATION CAMPS?
Was the famous image of the 'concentration camps' false?

YES. Fabricated by Bernard Kouchner and Médecins du Monde, this image showed some 'prisoners' held, seemingly, behind barbed wire. One of them had terribly protruding ribs. Kouchner had pasted beside the photo a guard tower from Auschwitz and the accusation 'mass extermination'. To hammer home the message "Serbs = Nazis". He thus abetted a campaign of demonization launched by the US public relations firm Ruder Finn.

But the whole thing was faked and taken from a report by British TV channel ITN. The trickery became obvious when one viewed the footage shot at the same time by a local TV news crew. In reality, the British camera had been deliberately placed behind the two lonely strands of barbed wire that formed a fence surrounding an old enclosure for farming equipment. The 'prisoners' were on the 'outside' of the barbed wire. Free because they were refugees in this camp to escape the war and the militias who would force them to fight. In the complete film, the only prisoner who speaks English declares to the ITN journalist three times that they are being well treated and are safe. The man with the protruding ribs (gravely ill) was called to the foreground when all his mates looked to be in too good a shape. Kouchner's montage was a gross falsehood. (Cfr Liars' Poker, p. 34)

There certainly were camps in Bosnia. Not for extermination, but rather for the preparation of prisoner exchanges. Violations of Human Rights were committed here. But why were the UN reports on this subject hidden from us? They accounted for six Croat camps, two Serb camps and one Muslim camp.

12 SARAJEVO
Were we given the true stories on the three large massacres in Sarajevo?

NO. Three times Western public opinion was shocked by these terrible images: dozens of victims blown to bits in front of a bakery or in the marketplace of Sarajevo. Immediately the Serbs were accused of having killed civilians by bombarding the city. This despite numerous contradictions in official communications.

But never was the public informed of the results of inquiries made outside the UN. Nor of the reports which accused the forces of president Izetbegovic. Furthermore, high Western officials knew about them but kept them carefully hidden. It was only much later that the editor-in-chief of the Nouvel Observateur, Jean Daniel, admitted: "Today I have to say it. I heard, in succession, Edouard Balladur (French Prime Minister at the time), François Léotard (Minister of the Army), Alain Juppé (Foreign Minister) and two 'high-ranking' generals, whose confidence I will not betray by naming them, tell me (. . .) that the shell fired on the marketplace was itself also from the Muslims! They would have brought carnage upon their own people! Was I afraid of this observation? Yes, the Prime Minister answered me without hesitating... "(Nouvel Observateur, August 21, 1995)

Why these manipulations? As if by chance, each massacre took place just before an important meeting to justify some Western measures: an embargo against the Serbs (92), a NATO bombing (94), a final offensive (95). NATO and Izetbegovic applied an essential principle of war propaganda: justify the offensive with a media lie, a 'massacre' to shock public opinion.

The official version of the siege of Sarajevo hides several points: 1. The Serb forces certainly committed serious crimes. But the civilians who wanted to flee through a tunnel that permitted them to leave the city were stopped by the Izetbegovic regime. He wanted to maximize the clientele for his black market, hijacking international aid money. 2. It was especially important to present a black and white image of a victim people and their aggressors. In reality, even in Sarajevo, Izetbegovic's snipers regularly killed the inhabitants of Serb sections of the city without anyone ever speaking of it. 3. Some equally grave atrocities went down, for example, at Mostar. But here they were due to fighting between the Croat and Muslim forces who had long before run off all the Serbs.

[imported_Sensei]

Iii.

13 THE LARGEST "CLEANSING"
Was the largest ethnic cleansing of the war committed by the Croat army?

YES. On August 4, 1995, a hundred thousand Croat soldiers, a hundred and fifty tanks, two hundred troop transports, more than three hundred pieces of artillery, and forty missile launchers attacked the Serb population of the Krajina. More than 150,000 Serbs were forced to leave this region which they had inhabited for centuries. The worst atrocities of the war were committed: the Croat forces killed the elderly who could not flee, and burned 85% of the abandoned houses.

Clinton called the offensive 'useful'. His Secretary of State said: "The retaking of the Krajina could lead to a new strategic situation which might be favorable for us." Worse yet: the United States advised Croatia in carrying out its offensive, according to an admission by the Croatian foreign minister. Furthermore, it was Washington that took charge of the 'democratic' training of this army. (Liars' Poker, pp. 193-194)

14 URANIUM BOMBS
Did the US use depleted uranium weapons also in Bosnia?

YES. At an international conference, "Uranium, the victims speak", organized in Brussels in March 2001, a Bosnian doctor presented a Bosnian Serb forest ranger, a victim like many others of multiple atypical and fast moving cancers. after having been exposed to DU in areas of US bombardment.

A Bosnian health official laid out some statistics : the population of a Serb neighbourhood of Sarajevo bombed by US planes in 1995, (a population later expelled from that city), showed a five-fold increase in various types of cancer.
The weapons using depleted uranium allowed the US - but also France and Great Britain - to get rid of waste materials from their nuclear plants. These by-products seriously pollute the earth as well as the underground water table, causing cancer, leukemia and monstrous birth defects (including babies born to contaminated GIs). In short, use of these depleted uranium arms transformed several countries into nuclear waste dumps for eternity. (video and brochure "Uranium, the victims speak").

15 THE ONLY "GOOD WAR"
Was the war against Yugoslavia the US's only good war?

NO. The United States tried to make believe that it had fought a humanitarian war. And to present itself, for once, as a defender of Muslims. But in reality Washington and Berlin provoked this war. Deliberately. In the selfish interest of conquering certain strategic objectives: the economic colonization of the Balkans, gaining control of the routes for transporting oil, and the fight for world domination.

The USA has never fought a humanitarian war. And it was not the fireman in this war against Yugoslavia, it was the firebug. It was the most guilty of inflicting suffering on all the people. The USA can not be, on the one hand, the friend of the Muslims in the Balkans, and, on the other, their worst enemy in Palestine and Iraq. The US is the Muslims' enemy everywhere.

And the most dangerous enemy of all the people of the world. It threatens Syria, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and some day even China. Because its war strategy has no other goal than to maintain an unjust economic order, to dominate and exploit every country on earth to the end of further enriching a small handful of super - billionaires.

This is why it is so important to unmask all the media lies and to make the truth known about the war against Yugoslavia: It was a war of aggression.



In conclusion. An appeal.

We will not give you a 'score' to evaluate the degree to which you have suffered from media manipulations. That would be indecent. During this decade, too many innocents suffered and suffer still because of the disinformation orchestrated by the great powers in order to advance their imperialist domination.

And other people, closer to you, or yourself perhaps, have suffered another injury: knowing what was traumatizing you behind these orchestrated lies, but not being able to do anything about it. Such was the powerful indoctrination of the public consciousness.
The answers that we set forth here are the results of long research, which took a great deal of time and required detailed investigation to break out the truth. We would like only to show you that it is possible for each of you to escape the media's hypnotic spell meant to make us accept the unacceptable.

What to do? It's not enough, after the lies of each conflict, to say: "Never again!" We must search without ceasing to understand what is truly at stake economically and strategically in each war. To yank the curtain on the puppeteers who pull the strings from off-stage. To organize collectively, to investigate more rapidly. And to spread more widely the results of these 'media quiz'.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...&articleId=2110

[imported_Sensei]

nato Committed Act of War on China to Assassinate FRY Leader

1999 CHINESE EMBASSY BOMBING WAS INTENDED TO KILL MILOSEVIC

US Strike on PRC Embassy Was "Decapitation Attempt"

Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy. Alexandria: Nov/Dec 2005.Vol.33, Iss. 11/12; pg. 3, 1 pgs

Highly-placed NATO sources have confirmed the reason behind the US air strike - with three Tomahawk cruise missiles - against the Embassy of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in Belgrade, (then) Yugoslavia, on May 7, 1999. The then-Clinton Government of the United States said at the time that the strike was accidental, due to faulty maps and intelligence, but this has been disproven by the NATO sources.

The NATO sources told Defense & Foreign Affairs that the attack was based on intelligence that then Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic was to have been in the Embassy at the time of the attack. The attack, then, was deliberately planned as a "decapitation" attack, intended to kill Milosevic.

The London Observer, on October 19, 1999, had said that the attack had been deliberate, noting: "... Politiken newspaper in Denmark and Ed Vulliamy cites senior military and intelligence sources in Europe and the US stating that the embassy was bombed after its NATO electronic intelligence (ELINT) discovered it was being used to transmit Yugoslav army communications.

"Supportive evidence is provided by three other NATO officers - a flight controller operating in Naples, an intelligence officer monitoring Yugoslav radio traffic from Macedonia and a senior headquarters officer in Brussels.

"All three say they knew in April that the Chinese embassy was acting as a "rebro" (rebroadcast) station for the Yugoslav army. The embassy was also suspected of monitoring NATO's cruise missile attacks on Belgrade, with a view to developing effective countermeasures."

The Clinton Administration blamed the attack on inaccurate intelligence information provided by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), alleging that the three missiles, which landed in one corner of the PRC embassy block, had been meant to target the Yugoslav Federal Directorate for Supply and Procurement (FDSP). US Defence secretary William Cohen said at the time: "One of our planes attacked the wrong target because the bombing instructions were based on an outdated map." Sources within the US National Imagery and Mapping Agency reacted with anger at the allegation that their mapping had been at fault.

Moreover, it was clear that Clinton appointee George Tenet, the CIA Director at the time, was involved in the deception operation built around the failed assassination attack.

There was widespread disbelief of the US Clinton Administration claim that the attack was "accidental", but no accurate background information as to why the attack against the Embassy was scheduled. The rationale cited by The Observer was not the true cause of the targeting.

In July 1999, then-CIA Director Tenet testified in Congress that out of the 900 targets struck by NATO during the three-month bombing campaign, only one was developed by the CIA: the PRC Embassy.

Copyright International Strategic Studies Association Nov/Dec 2005

[Reincarnated Am]

Reincarnated AM

The fact that all of your sources are ectremely biased against Israel and/or neo-nazi websites proves their irrelevance, innacuracy, and your stupidity and ignorance.

I have debated you before and have proven you to be an ordinary anti-semite, nothing more.

Correction, you have proved nothing so far, all you did was directly insult me and call me names. If that’s your definition of “proof” then you’re playing a child’s game. And you can only impress these kind of people:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2005/071205perspective.htm

Brain washed zombies as I always say.

[Jooboian]

Reincarnated AM

The fact that all of your sources are ectremely biased against Israel and/or neo-nazi websites proves their irrelevance, innacuracy, and your stupidity and ignorance.

You have proven to be the stupid ignorant one here. You haven't provide a single thing to back up your idiotic claims and you attack the messenger because you can't attack the message.

I have debated you before and have proven you to be an ordinary anti-semite, nothing more.

An anti-semite LOL! Buddy, that idiotic term of a misnomer is way outdated.

First why the name Joobian? can you answer me that? I chose the name Gondorian because I am a LOTR Nut.

Well I knew you were some kind of a nut.

NATO stopped a genocide in the FORMER Yugoslavia that was lead by the late Slobadon Milosovich. Had NATO not stepped in every Bosnian, Albanian, and other Yugoslav Minority would be in their graves today. Someone like you who doesn't consider bombing the government infrastructure of a government commiting genocide ok,

They stopped a genocide? You don't realize how stupid what you wrote really is. They went in and bombed Yugoslavia because the Serbs "allegedly" commited a genocide with reports of 100,000 albanians dead or missing.

but sees nothing wrong with PKK slaughtering Turkish Children can not be described without using the term Morally Bankrupt.

Can you show us exactly when and where I said such a thing?

Joobian no matter what your small time teacher from Montclair says he/she (You where not kind enough to give a link to this proffessors name, I saw it nowhere in your article) can not change the fact that the genocide commited was commited by Pol Pot, and that Pol Pot was infact the culprit. No respectable source disputes that, considering you can not see the difference between accidently killing civilians (collateral damage) and killing them on purpose (terrorism), and the fact that you defend scum like the government of Milosovich already did indicate morale backwardsness though.

Pol Pot, Pol Shmot is neither here nor there and you colletera BS is really getting old. If the US bombing of Cambodia was "collatera damage" then so was 9/11. Melosevich? What happened to your "innocent until proven guilty" philosophy? HYPOCRITE!

As for your next post I can sue you in Belgium, Britain, France, or Canada for war crimes right now. That is why countries like the ones I mention have a thing called a JUDGE, and a TRIAL, you know the ancient concept of innocent untill proven guilty. Unfortunately to you the fact that a nut filled the law suit is enough to prove guilt.

Innocent until proven guilty? Then why was Melosevic gulty until proven innocent and don't deny it because tou did just that right in this thread and I know you must have done it many times before?

No I would not call that collateral damage because it was not done by accident. Please stop using strawmen, and stop lying about what collateral damage is. I condemn that massacre fully, however perhaps you should learn how to read things you don't want to see, I will quote from your article there.

You're the onle who is lying about "collateral damage". The whole purpose of the term was to cover up their purposely targetting civilians.

It does not seem like something the US Military or government ordered, or something support by the American People seeing as to how the officer that commited the massacre was brought to justice. However That just is not so of the terrorists.

Obviously you

What I really see in common about almost all of your articles though is that as it stands today right now they are all unsubstantiated.

Although what you say isn't true about most of what I posted, tt's still much better than your allegations which are not only unsubstantiated, but indeed discredited.

For example with one from Amnesty International which you think proves Nato=Nazi Germany. The Amnesty International Article itself admits it is not substantiated, yet you post it as proving your point?

I don't need Amnesty International to know that nato is far worse than Nazi Germany was. Anyway, at least I provide some documentation wheras you have provided none. Your only source of information seems to be CNN or some other form of jew owned media.

I will not go through everything you wrote here, you simply wrote too much for me to go through and have time to do anything else.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you don't have the time, then don't waste mine.

The fact still stands that you don't seem to see anything wrong with 9-11 or Beslan, afterall civilian killing ok?

Fact? What fact? I don't condone killing any civilians, but you do.

You are a morally bankrupt person, you can not see the difference between when rogues kill innocent people without any support, and when terrorists kill with full support.

You're the morally bankrupt one because you condone killing civilians in some instances whereas I don't condone killing any civilians.

At the end of the day you do not have to support terrorist scum in order to be against Turkish Occupation of Kurdistan.

My position has nothing to do with who I'm for or against, but yours has everything to do with who you support and that's why in your book some terrorists are freedom fighters and freedom fighters are terrorists. The one supporting scum here, is you.

However you do have to oppose Kurdish Killing of Turkish Children in order to oppose Azeri Killing of Armenian Children without being a blatant hypocrite.

Unlike you, I oppose the killing of any children. You're the one trying to sanitize the killing of civilians including the killing of children and all for it if it's done by those you support. Hypocrite!

[Gondorian]

You have proven to be the stupid ignorant one here. You haven't provide a single thing to back up your idiotic claims and you attack the messenger because you can't attack the message.

I have significantly better things to do then go around the internet to get links to shut up neo-nazis like yourself. I have used facts that you can find in any reliable history book, or in the records from the time about the subjects I talk about here.

An anti-semite LOL! Buddy, that idiotic term of a misnomer is way outdated.

No it is not outdated, and the proof is the fact that you and people like you still exist.

Well I knew you were some kind of a nut.

Some stories about good vs evil are worth reading about very often.

They stopped a genocide? You don't realize how stupid what you wrote really is. They went in and bombed Yugoslavia because the Serbs "allegedly" commited a genocide with reports of 100,000 albanians dead or missing.

Add 200,000 Bosnians killed by Serb Scum to that.

Can you show us exactly when and where I said such a thing?

Everyone just read earlier in this thread, you will find the context of this scoundrel very easily.

Pol Pot, Pol Shmot is neither here nor there and you colletera BS is really getting old. If the US bombing of Cambodia was "collatera damage" then so was 9/11. Melosevich? What happened to your "innocent until proven guilty" philosophy? HYPOCRITE!

Bombings that go after legitimate military targets where civilians are accidently killed qualify as collateral damage. However very few PKK bombings are against Military Targets. The Twin Towers where not a military target, and Al Queda contrary to what you believe is not a Nation, it is an organization, to fight a war you need a Nation behind you. As for Milosovich there is no doubt that had he lived he would have been found guilty, you sure have a nack for spin, too bad you don't use that energy to visit Srebrenica.

Obviously you

So the person who does not see mass murder of Albanians and Bosnians, and who regularly posts defences for terrorists and denies there is a difference between accidently killing someone and doing it on purpose is calling me a terrorist, well I guess I am going to have to support Abdullah Occalan killing Turks now the way he does

Although what you say isn't true about most of what I posted, tt's still much better than your allegations which are not only unsubstantiated, but indeed discredited.

Everything I have said is proven. The fact is even Israel recognizes the Bosnian Genocide.

I don't need Amnesty International to know that nato is far worse than Nazi Germany was. Anyway, at least I provide some documentation wheras you have provided none. Your only source of information seems to be CNN or some other form of jew owned media.

Well the fact that you can't refrain from anti-semitic comments,, even as you try to deny what you are shows your character. Of course an anti-semite does not see Nazi Germany as bad.

Nato prevented the annhialation of the Bosnians and Albanians, I understand that to rascists like yourself feel that is the worse thing that ever happened to the world.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you don't have the time, then don't waste mine.

You are a waste of space.

Fact? What fact? I don't condone killing any civilians, but you do.

No I don't, I just don't consider ACCIDENTALLY killing people to be on par with PURPOSELY killing them. Every Legal System distinguishes between murder one and manslaughter one, as does every religion.

My position has nothing to do with who I'm for or against, but yours has everything to do with who you support and that's why in your book some terrorists are freedom fighters and freedom fighters are terrorists. The one supporting scum here, is you.

Freedom Fighters fight battles with armies, they don't cowardly run after women and children the way the PKK does which makes the PKK terrorist, not freedom fighters.

Unlike you, I oppose the killing of any children. You're the one trying to sanitize the killing of civilians including the killing of children and all for it if it's done by those you support. Hypocrite!

No I am not, if you do not know the difference between an accident and doing something on purpose I suggest you justs top wasting everybody's time here. What you are is a total hypocrite who supports terrorists and terrorism, and you have not countered any of my points.

Sensie I don't care if the Bosnians where marching with Swasticas and screaming Hiel Hitler, Genocide is never justified, so you wasted your time trying to Villify the Bosnians, who where infact the victims.