Friday, April 28, 2006
While consious of the honour a little background is due. I have, on a number of occasions, attempted to add to the Wikipedia entries on Franjo Tudjamn & the Srebrenica Massacre. The former is a virtually verbatim reprint of a Croatian government hagiography excluding all reference to his WW2 Nazi service & public commitment to genocide, downplays his Holocaust denial & while admitting that his declaration of independence violated the constituional guarantees to Serbs in Croatia said that only "Serbs & their apologists" care about law. The latter had a small section covering the claim that the massacre of Moslem soldiers is a fiction & that the only real massacre was of Serb civilians but this was entirely written by its opponents. I attempted to to add a number of undisputed facts to these which the moderator deleted, accusing me of "vandalism". It appears therefore that the definition of Croatiaphobia is "a concern for the truth & disapproval of genocide even when carried out by Croatian Nazis".
The previous paragraph will be added to the Wikipedia page - it will be interesting to see if it gets moderated.
This has been added to the page in question. Let's see how long it takes before the Nazi Wikipedia "moderators" vandalize/remove it.
Q)"if this is not an example of croatophobia what is it?"
A) Nazi/Ustasha/Bosnian Islamo-Fascist SS Handzar massacres of 3,800 Serbian civilian men,women & children in & around Srebrenica-ophobia, Ethnic Cleansing & massacres by the late Izetbegovic of tens of thousands of pro-Fikret Abdic Bosnian Muslims from 1992 to 1995-ophobia, WW2 Genocide of hundreds of thousands of Serbs,Jews,Roma & anti-Nazi Croats in Jasenovac-ophobia,Genocide & Ethnic Cleansing of 600,000 Serbs in Krajina from 1990 to 1995-ophobia & last, bust certainly not least, Holocaust of tens of millions of Slavs & Jews in Eastern Europe & USSR denial-ophobia (see the late Tudjman's 1988/89 book "Wastelands of Historical Reality" aka "Horrors of War" for irrefutable proof of this).
This has NOTHING to do with "Croato-Phobia" (i.e. hating ordinary Croats), but more to do with opposing Nazi/Ustasha/Islamo-Fascist Genocide of Serbs - which of course is ALWAYS invariably DENIED or "spun" as being justified by the overwhelming majority of pro-Tudjman HDZ party Croats & pro-Izetbegovic SDA party "Bosniaks".
Pete Robert North.
An old article from 1998, but a very good one by senior analyst, Mr.George Jatras, of the US Senate Republican Policy Committee on CNN's demonization & disinformation campaign against the Serbs.
Note also how CNN's "perfumed steamroller" and chief female Serbo-phobe Christiane Amanpour, continues in this media whore tradition to this very day.
The "CNN Factor" and Kosovo
Eason Jordan's true failings
by Christopher Deliso
New Hague Testimony Bolsters the Case for CNN's Fraud
In recent witness testimony at the Hague (unsurprisingly, ignored by CNN), three Macedonian medics who worked in 1999 at the Kosovo border refugee singled out Eason Jordan's CNN for being the most intellectually corrupt and deceptive news agency of all those present during the conflict.
Whereas the network (and most of the other foreign press) declared that the Albanian refugees had been driven out of Kosovo by vengeful Serbs, robbed and beaten along the way, only to die in squalor across the Macedonian border, three men who worked day in and day out at the camps – the head of Macedonia's emergency medical services, Dr. Dobre Aleksovski; Goran Stojcic, a driver who worked for the emergency services; and medic Mirko Babic – claimed that the truth was somewhat different. While hundreds of thousands passed through the camps, only 14 had serious injuries: "[O]ne woman cut her finger on a tin can, and some other people slipped and fell on the wet ground, sustaining injuries such as broken bones and twisted ankles; there were also a couple of pregnant women who were sent to the hospital to give birth." (Contrast that with NATO Spokesman Jamie Shea's absurd claim that 100,000 babies were born in the refugee camps).
Further, unlike what most Western media reports stated, the refugees had money, cigarettes, telephones, and some, even guns. According to Dr. Aleksovski's testimony, "the Albanians refused to eat bread that was baked in Skopje. They would only eat bread from [the Albanian-majority city of] Tetovo. Whereas normal refugees would have been grateful for any food they got."
The "CNN Factor" at Work
According to the witnesses, the war-hungry media – led by CNN – turned the refugee camps into a three-ring circus of simulation and journalistic fraud. For his part, Mr. Stojcic "witnessed a CNN camera crew coaching refugees on how to act for the cameras. He eyewitnessed a man cross the border with two children. CNN spoke to the man and sent him back to cross the border so that he could cross again in front of the camera; the second time the man crossed over he had his children crying for the cameras."
Further, Mr. Stojcic "witnessed a group of refugees throwing a child into the mud; a CNN camera crew then filmed the child after it was crying and covered in mud. The witness identified Christiane Amanpour as the CNN reporter who was on the spot in the refugee camps. He said that CNN was the worst media outlet, as it was the most prone to staging scenes for its news broadcasts."
This testimony was supported by the medic, Mirko Babic, who "witnessed a CNN camera crew staging a phony exodus of refugees over a hill. A large group of refugees were gathered together and the camera crew filmed them coming over a muddy hill. The camera crew recruited elderly people and small children to be part of this group. The camera crew separated the children from their parents and then paired them up with the old people who the children did not know. The result was that the children would cry. The CNN crew even went so far as to instruct the old people to pull out their handkerchiefs and act like they were crying too."
According to Babic, CNN and the BBC were the media bodies most prone to "rigging false news footage."
Unfortunately for him, Hague Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice tried to rebut these charges by recourse to old CNN footage that "claimed that eight Albanians had died in the camps for want of medical treatment in one day alone." He could just as well have mentioned the April 6, 1999 CNN report that claimed, without naming sources, that 50 helpless refugees had died. However, according to both medic Babic and Dr. Aleksovski, "only one refugee died in the camps the whole time, and not due to lack of medical care. CNN had lied when it reported that eight refugees died in one day."
For the mainstream media, however, all that's worthy of note here is that the refugee angle "was used to great effect in Kosovo."
Conflicts of Interest, From Amanpour to the Psy-Ops Crew
These shenanigans allowed the vital creation of woeful, heartbreaking images for the viewer back home who might otherwise question the rationale behind war. But above and beyond the work carried out by CNN's hacks in the field, by any reasonable standard the network was guilty on a much higher level of gross conflict of interest, in that its top war correspondent (the aforementioned Ms. Amanpour) was the wife of the State Department's spokesman and official liaison to the KLA at Rambouillet, James Rubin. As Rubin himself put it when imploring budding diplomats toward public service at a Columbia graduation speech on May 19, 1999, "cynicism … is simply not an option." Indeed.
Even had Amanpour not been merely the faithful mouthpiece for the U.S., NATO, and the KLA (which she was), the simple fact that she was truly embedded with one of the parties involved with the war should have prevented her from being allowed to take part in covering it. Nevertheless, for the media establishment and the Peabody Awards, where the CNN gang had been just two days before the Columbia event, award-winner Amanpour represents "all that is good and great in television journalism."
That such conflicts of interest might matter little to the likes of Eason Jordan is attested by an even more blatant connection between CNN and the government's war machine in Kosovo. In a Counterpunch article of March 26, 2000, Alexander Cockburn recounts having received "an angry phone call from Eason Jordan" following his report about how U.S. Army Psy-Ops personnel had been working in CNN's Atlanta headquarters during the Kosovo war, "helping" in "the production of news," according to a U.S. Army Major quoted. However, despite being "full of indignation that [Cockburn] had somehow compromised the reputation of CNN," Jordan admitted that the story was true – though, like the Amanpour conflict, it apparently mattered little to him.
A further telling detail, in light of the recent scandal, is the fact that Eason and CNN had received advance warning from the military about the impending bombing of the Radio Television Serbia building by NATO. Jordan claimed that "CNN used the knowledge to warn off the planned bombing, as journalists from the U.S. and elsewhere would have been in the building at the time." However, "days later, when the Western journalists had gone, the U.S. bombing went ahead, killing 16 Serb journalists."
Thought you might find the additions to your Nazi Wikipedia "fan" page quite interesting (looks like I'm also admired by the Croat Ustasha Nazis as well!! :-) Hardly surprising really, as since my mother is JEWISH ,I just can't help myself and get noticed amongst the Wikipedia Nazi/Ustasha crowd :
Pete Robert North, what you have said above is nothing but conditioning for croatophobia. Not a week passes by when someone does not make a comment to me about my Croatian heritage: ie "right leaning nazi lover", when I wear a black or brown shirt I get comments about the SS, Ustashi and the SA, or if there is any talk about weapons etc. people address me: "well you come from that part of the world you would know" or "your people have been blowing up stuff for ages..". And this is all happening in a democratic western country where I was born and raised.... The constant harping about Croatia's WWI past by yourself, does not have the purpose of advancing the truth but it really shows where Croatia and the Croats stand in your twisted mind. You have only copied references that suit you and your style of thinking, what if every time you read an article about Germany that a short synopsis of their nazi past is pasted in the first 100 words, do that a number of times and you just promote a sterotype of Germans as nazis. Just like jobbo soccer fans taunt the German soccer team with right hand salutes, goose marches, or reminding about the lost wars, or the stupid kraut inspired tiles that are plastered in the British tabloid press. If you extend this then anything German is associated with their WWII past: Volkswagen (a company where slave labourers worked during WWII), Mercerdes-Benz - favorite brand of Adolf Hitler, Siemens, nazi, nazi, nazi, nazi.... How about everyone started to harp about the American genocide of the Native Indian population, the Australian treatment of their indigenous peoples - Aborigines, Canadians of their native population... How would you feel about that, and what would you call that. The Croatian government and the Croatian people do not deny the genocide that happened during WWII, the Jasenovac memorial is still there and the memorial day is broadcasted over national TV and viewable over satellite if you want to subsribe to the service. What has happened recently in the 1990's conflict will only come to light when you and I have passed away, as many things won't surface from the various archieves: US, British, French and others.... Happy blogging to you FrontLine 07:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Comparison to Serbophohia
Hello, To me it would seem that it would make sense to mirror the setup and tone of this page on the Serbophobia page. What do you think?Osli73 14:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't think so, simply because these two terms describe different "realities". Cf. the article on Francophobia is not structured the way the page on Anglophobia is. Mir Harven 16:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Take out the article alltogether or redo it!
I'm not a fan of the "-phobia" articles on Wikipedia in general and this one in particular. I suggest that this article be either considerably reworked or alltogether taken out. Here's why:
1. I've never heard of the word and can't find it in either Britannica or any other English language dictionary.
Britannica is hardly the measuring stick for anything-for instance, there is no "Croatian language" in the 2003. edition of the Britannica. As far as dictionaries are concerned- words come & go. Croatophobia is simply the English translation of a Croatian word used in Croatian texts and contexts. The extent to which it has percolated to the dictionary level is, of necessity, slight. That's what wiki is for: to be quicker than the rest in recognition of the existing realities. Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
So I don't think it exists as a word. A quick Google search only finds one reference to Croatophobia outside of this Wikipedia article - a reference to a Croatian newspaper article about the UK resistance to Croatian EU membership.
So what ? Google is a god ? Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
2. It lists a number of more or less commonly raised objections/prejudices against Croats/Croatia and then combines them all as being expressions of Croatophobia. Labelling them as such seems to be more about POV politics.
No, I'd disagree. It's a list of very frequent prejudices against Croats, prejudices that pop up almost invariably in any discourse that aims to defame Croats as such. Maybe the list should be shorter; maybe it should be organized in a different way. But, it's a compound of stereotypes that perfectly matches the meaning of a "-phobia". Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
3. How is "Denying or dismissing historical and cultural facts about Croatia and Croatians: the non existence of the Croatian language, or claiming that Croatian historical figures were Croatian at all but something else" an example of Croatophobia (ie fear of Croats)?
It's not "fear", but irrational animosity and the clear intent of annihilation of Croathood as such. Maybe "phobia" is a literal term, but, as far as I can see, Francophobia in the US is not "fear of the French", but dislike, animosity, whatever. In this case, it amounts to ethnocide. This would be, I guess-and this is the word I suppose one could hardly find in a Croatian dictionary- attemped "Croatocide". A fierce denial of the existence of an ethnic/national group & its cultural characteristics with the aim of destruction of this group. I could find many examples from the past. Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
To me it seem to be more about contesting a nations cultural heritage. Not nice, but nothing to do with "phobia".
This is not some academic jabber. This is what a Croatian sociologist Slaven Letica calls (and I agree with the term): "pathological Serbian possessiveness". It can be found, in diluted & distorted forms also in parts of Bosnian Muslim circles. As far as I know, it's non-existent in western European nations. Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
4. The article uses words as "Serbian imperialism" and other similar wording which gives the article a very POV tone. References to Serbophilia and harsh treatment of Croats by the EU Commission also come accross as being something more at home in a newspaper article or commentary than in a dictionary.
OK, this can be corrected. Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
So, please give me your arguments for not redoing the article or taking it out alltogether. Osli73 21:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
There are no arguments for "taking it out alltogether", but, I'd agree that peripheral political pieces on the EU talks should be omitted or rephrased, and a much more text on Italian irredentism, its Fascist (from 1920s) treatment of Croats in parts of Croatia occupied by D'Annunzio & the rest, up to the contemporary irredentism of Gianfranco Fini et al. added. Mir Harven 22:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, as I said, my first option would be to delete the article since I can't see that "Croatophobia" is anything but a list of grievances and prejudices about Croats. That it doesn't show up in any other dictionaries, textbooks or anywhere else on the internet (other than a reference of one Croatian newspaper article) adds to my conviction.
However, if you feel that it belongs on Wikipedia my second option would be to at least make it as good as possible. A couple of points/questions come to mind: differences between Croatophobia and anti-Croat sentiments; should the article claim to define what is acceptable criticism of Croats and what is Croatophobia; is it a catch-all phrase for criticism of Croats/Croatia or is it a component of Serbian nationalism?
What is your suggestion for the structure? As anti-Croat sentiments / Croatophobia is either directly or indirectly related to anti-Serbian / Serbophobia I would suggest some kind of coordination of the two. To me it appears that Serbs are the biggest 'Croatophobes' and vice versa with some additional sentiments outside the Balkans based on WWII allegiances/events.Osli73 11:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Equalising both sides is not the proper way, Croats are not the "biggest" serbophobes and the hate is not concentrated on this relation it just one of them there are many others: Bosinaks (quite large), Albanians (quite large feeling just look at any Kosovar discussion board), Macedonians, Montenegrens, Slovenians, Hungarians to some extent, Germans, Austrians also harbour serbophobic feelings. I think that a coordination between the two is not the best option, each of them needs to develop their own way. For instance germanophobia has a different manifestation in let's say England then lets say Serbia, as the Serbs suffered more under the German occupation in both WWI and WWII.
How about anti-Croatian instead of Croatophobia?
Perhaps since I'm not all that comfortable with the whole concept of Croatophobia (or Serbophobia, Albanophobia and Islamophobia either for that matter) I'm not the person to be involved in editing this/these pages. To me, they too often seem to be a way of bundling together criticisms and casting them all as irrational and unfounded. For example, here in Sweden muslim public figures often brand all criticism of Islam and Muslims as Islamophobia.
I see a similar problem with the concepts of Serbophobia and Croatophobia. I would be much more at ease if the term Croatophobia was changed to "Anti-Croatianism" (or similar), analogous to for example anti-semitism or anti-American. Especially since Croatophobia is not found in any English language texts or dictionaries.
If, for example, I were to write an article about anti-Swedish sentiments, I would call it just that and not Swedophobia (even though Catholic churches prayed to be spared from the Swedes during the 30-year war).Osli73 13:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, that could be possible - anti-croatian as many of the criticisms can be moved into there. However the main reason behind croatophobia is the exsistance "irrational" fear about the alleged super nazism and hyper genocidal instinct should be placed somewhere else as anti-croatism would not properly describe it... FrontLine 22:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Croatophobia"
What a po-faced bunch of wankers. They are clearly working themselves up to re-writing it removing what I said.
Added the below to the following Wikipedia page on the Croat Ustasha version of Auschwitz known as "Jasenovac".
Like the previous post attacking you, let's see how long it stays up until it gets removed/vandalized by the Wikipedia Nazi "moderators":
Yeah, that's an interesting interpretation I have to admit. Very nice try. Trouble is, the letter "z" in "Brzica" is pronounced "zh" as in the letter "G" in the English transliteration of the French word "Gendarme". The letter "z" in the Serbo-Croat word "Brz" (meaning "quickly") is pronounced "z" as in the English transliteration "z" for "Zebra". So you cannot claim that your shortened version "brz" of the Croat surname "Brzica" translates to "quickly". Nice try though. As far as "Serb nationalists" trying to "inflate the numbers of victims" as claimed by some Croat writers above, well as a matter of fact it was the Croat Ustasha officials in the NDH Independent State of Croatia themselves who were doing the "inflating" during World War 2:
"Hermann Neubacher,perhaps the most important of Hitler's troubleshooters in the Balkans,reports that although some of the perpetrators of the crime estimated the number of Serbs killed at one million, the more accurate figure is 750,000. One of Hitler's generals, Lothar Rendulic, who was in the area where the crimes were committed, estimates that in the first year of existence of the puppet state of Croatia [i.e. from April 10, 1941 to April 10,1942]at least a half million Orthodox Serbs were massacred, and that many others were killed in subsequent years." Quoted from French Roman Catholic Professor, Edmond Paris' book, "Genocide in Satellite Croatia" [The American Institute for Balkan Affairs,1962,Chicago, Illinois USA].
Take this direct quote for example from Hitler's personal assistant for South East European and Balkan affairs, Herman Neubacher, in his book: "Sonder-Auftrag Suedost 1940-1945: Bericht eines fliegenden Diplomaten" [Goettingen-Berlin-Frankfurt, 1956]. On Page 31 he states:
"The Orthodox recipe of Ante Pavelic, Ustasha leader and Croatian chief, reminds one of the religious wars in their bloodiest aspects: one third must become Catholic, one third must leave the country and one third must die. The last item was executed. When the leading men of the Ustasha movement are stating that they have slaughtered one million Serbs (including infants, children, women and the aged), this in my opinion is a self-serving exaggeration. According to the reports that have reached me, my estimate is that the number of those defenseless slaughtered is some three quarter of a million".
Pete Robert North.
my further responses to the brazen lies of the Wikipedia Nazi crowd on the following page dealing with the Croat version of Auschwitz known as "Jasenovac":
Sir, your WW2 historical claims about the "Chetniks" (Royal Yugoslav Army in the Fatherland) being "on the side of" Nazi Germany is a BLATANT LIE as is your claim that the Royalist Yugoslav Serbs in WW2 (who you refer to as "Chetnici")were somehow equivalent to the Croat Nazi mass murderers known as the "Ustasha" who ran the Jasenovac death camp where hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews, Roma & anti-Nazi Croats were brutally murdered in the most sadistic manner. To equate the Croat Ustasha with the Royalist Yugoslav Serbs [Chetniks] is an example of the highest level of "honesty" one can expect from the pro-Ustasha Nazi crowd here on Wikipedia.
See Baron Avro Manhattan's book: "The Vatican's Holocaust"
See: Sir David Martin's book: "The Web of Disinformation: Churchill's Yugoslav Blunder"
See Sir Michael Lee's book: "The Rape of Serbia"
Pete Robert North.