Click to get your own widget

Thursday, June 29, 2006


This is part of a discussion on the blog of US economist Brad de Long . He has on a couple of occasions been severely critical of Noam Chomsky's fairly mild (by my standards) criticsm of the US government's criminality in Yugoslavia. Being somewhat annoyed about this I posted in fairly strong terms. The surprising thing is that in a blog which often gets up to 100 comments from often very well informed & intellectual Americans nobody has felt able to seriously dispute my evidence that their former President is indeed guilty of genocide. Since this thread is about to go into archive on his blog I decided to paste Brad's article, comments from the writer of the article referred, my comments & responses to it.

Michael Berube Is Shrill
No, he is not shrill because of the Bush administration--not right now. He is shrill because Noam Chomsky says that those primarily responsible for the Srebenica Massacre are... the Dutch government:

Michael Berube: My friend Danny Postel, senior editor of OpenDemocracy, calls my attention to this recent interview with Noam Chomsky in the New Statesman. Specifically, to this passage:

"Remember, the Milosevic Tribunal began with Kosovo, right in the middle of the US-British bombing in late '99 . . . Now if you take a look at that indictment, with a single exception, every charge was for crimes after the bombing.

"There's a reason for that. The bombing was undertaken with the anticipation explicit [that] it was going to lead to large-scale atrocities in response. As it did. Now there were terrible atrocities, but they were after the bombings. In fact, if you look at the British parliamentary inquiry, they actually reached the astonishing conclusion that, until January 1999, most of the crimes committed in Kosovo were attributed to the KLA guerrillas.

"So later they added charges [against Milosevic] about the Balkans, but it wasn't going to be an easy case to make. The worst crime was Srebrenica but, unfortunately for the International Tribunal, there was an intensive investigation by the Dutch government, which was primarily responsible--their troops were there--and what they concluded was that not only did Milosevic not order it, but he had no knowledge of it. And he was horrified when he heard about it. So it was going to be pretty hard to make that charge stick."

OK, this kind of thing really has to stop. Now.

For three reasons: one, because it is a pack of lies, and as a wise man once said, the job of the intellectual is to tell the truth and expose lies.

Two, because the defend-Milosevic crew has been getting more and more outlandish and bizarre every year, and, like unto loony LaRouchies, they have sometimes been discovered messing with legitimate progressive organizations. If real progressions don't speak out on this, it won't be long before we'll be hearing that poor Slobodan cried bitter tears of sorrow when he heard about the massacre of Srbrenica, even though it never really happened in the first place. And, insult upon injury, we'll be hearing about this from so-called "leftists."...

Posted by Brad DeLong on June 22, 2006 at 08:02 AM in Moral Responsibility | Permalink

You know, when I first read the interview, I read this just as Charles and Tom do: Chomsky, I thought, was claiming that the Dutch were responsible for the investigation, not for the massacre. Then I recalled that there was, indeed, a report in 2002 that blamed the Dutch government for failing to prevent the massacre:

It was quite a controversial report, with regard to both the Dutch peacekeepers and the alleged innocence of Milosevic. But it seems quite clear to me that Chomsky is citing this report with full approval, not only to clear Milosevic's name but also to insist that there were no Serbian atrocities prior to the NATO bombing.

Posted by: Michael Berube | June 22, 2006 at 09:47 AM

Michael McIntyre writes:

"One of the sources Michael [Berube] links addresses this issue. Here's what it has to say:

'Whether Milosevic knew that his police were sent to participate in the attack on the town is unclear. If he did, then the document will play a key role in proving genocide charges. If he didn't, it will still provide important evidence of crimes against humanity. For the former, intent has to be established; for the latter responsibility is enough.'"

That's not all it has to say, though. I can't imagine why Mr. McIntyre decided to quote the fifth paragraph and ignore the first three:

"Slobodan Milosevic had a hand in the Srebrenica massacre in July 1995, Europe's worst atrocity since World War II, according to a copy of an official Bosnian Serb document which IWPR has obtained. Up to now, it had been widely assumed that by the summer of 1995 Serbia had cut off ties with the Bosnian Serb leadership and that the former's forces had not taken part in the Srebrenica operation.

"The document, dated July 10, 1995, is an order from Bosnian Serb minister of interior Tomislav Kovac instructing his subordinates to move a unit that included members of Serbia's interior ministry police, MUP, which were fighting around Sarajevo, to eastern Bosnia to participate in the Srebrenica operation.

"Under the Serbian constitution, the president of Serbia, a post that Milosevic held at the time, is directly responsible for the actions taken by his republic's police force."

Posted by: Michael Berube | June 22, 2006 at 01:09 PM

"OK, this kind of thing really has to stop. Now."

Sounds more like somebody interested in stopping the constant uncovery of facts than one interested in the truth. One can see why.

FACT The initial genocide in Srebrenica was the genocide of thousands of Serbian villagers by the Molsem militia. Some of it carried out while the Dutch troops were present.

FACT 7,000 of what was initially claimed to be a Moslem garrison of 7,500 reached Moslem lines & the Moslem leaders pretended they hadn't (the garrison has officially been incresed to 15,000 post mortem).

FACT The Moslem President was quite open that he had been told that a massacre of at least 5,000 soldiers at Srebrenica would be required to justify intervention.

FACT Most of the bodies found were not near the site of the alleged massacre of Moslems nor of the sites of mass graves originaly identified by the US but very near the villages where the primary genocide took place.

FACT Prior to NATO's bombing the majority of murders in Kosovo were racist murders of Serbs by our KLA friends, a not dissimilar number were of Albanian's murdered by our KLA for not being racist enough.

FACT At least the ratio murders of Serbs was proveably known to NATO at the time & the KLA was accepted as a terorist group.

FACT The claims made throughout the war of Yugoslav murders (500,000 according to the very highest standard of honesty of the State Dept) were in no way truthful.

FACT Milosevic went to great lengths, certainly far more than Nixon ever did, to ensure his forces didn't commit atrocities.

FACT the only evidence that Milosevic was involved in the Srebrenica massacre is that Wesley Clark said on oath that Milosevic had taken him aside & for unexplained reasons, confeesed to him. Clark then said, still on oath, that there was no link between NATO & the KLA.

FACT Wesley Clark had previously said there was.

FACT Under the NATO occupation of Kosovo the, officially disarmed, KLA have been given police uniforms & allowed to ethnicly cleanse 350,000 people, murder at least 6,000 & kidnap for sale, thousands of schoolgirls.

FACT William Clinton, Democratic President of the USA sent US officers to assist the Croatian Nazis in the Krajina Holocaust.

FACT 250,000 of the 580,000 Croatian Serbs are still unaccounted for.

FACT Milosevic's blood test revealed that, in custody, he had been poisoned by Rifampicine, a difficult to detect prescription drug.

FACT Former British Foreign Secretary Lord Owen went, of his own volition to Milosevic's "trial to say that he was the "only leader who was sincerely interested in peace" & "a man to whom any form of racism was anathema".

FACT Under the rules we susbcribed to at Nuremeberg there is a clear prima faci case that Clinton & all his accessories are guilty of war crimes & arguably of crimes against humanity.

If these facts lead to the conclusion that Milosevic was a very fine non-racist person indeed & Clinton, Albright, Wesley Clark, Gore & Clinton as well as most other NATO leaders are obscene lying Nazis guilty of genocide compared to whom Mr Dahmer was decent I would not dispute it.

Posted by: Neil Craig | June 23, 2006 at 10:13 AM


Could you cite sources for these facts?

Posted by: Martin Bento | June 23, 2006 at 10:58 AM

Martin: Of course he can't. it's the same pack of lies that Berube referenced in his post, and they are all rebutted in the links.

Posted by: Marc | June 23, 2006 at 02:19 PM

You can find them on or among others.

Since doing a 20,000 word post here on all of the above would be redundant pick a fact whose non-reporting you find particularly incompatible with an assumption our media have not lied & censored in the Nazi cause & I will cite.

Your choice.

At which point Marc may apologise.

Posted by: Neil Craig | June 24, 2006 at 05:25 AM


OK, fair enough. But I would like a few of them. What is the support for the following claims:

FACT 250,000 of the 580,000 Croatian Serbs are still unaccounted for.

FACT William Clinton, Democratic President of the USA sent US officers to assist the Croatian Nazis in the Krajina Holocaust.

(By the way, I think "Croatian Nazis" and "Krajina Holocaust" are very bad rhetoric. Yes, Krajina was ethnic cleansing and yes, the Croats had sided with the Nazis against the Serbs in WW2. But I don't think this is a continuation of that conflict, and using such terminology will just cause people to shut their ears to you.)

FACT Prior to NATO's bombing the majority of murders in Kosovo were racist murders of Serbs by our KLA friends, a not dissimilar number were of Albanian's murdered by our KLA for not being racist enough.

FACT...Clark then said, still on oath, that there was no link between NATO & the KLA.

FACT Wesley Clark had previously said there was [such a link].

Posted by: Martin Bento | June 24, 2006 at 08:43 AM


1 DISAPPEARING PEOPLE Try you will see a table there which, including not only those who registered as Serbs but also as Yugoslavs (mixed race, urban Serbian intellectuals etc now missing from the census) you find a shortfall of 750,000 however all this is apparently accounted for by 150,000 Serb refugees in Bosnia, 150,000 - 400,000 in Serbia & 100,000 elsewhere.

However that happy picture doesn't tie into the OSCE (a distinctly pro NATO Group, who say of Serb refugees from Croatia only "some 200,000 of whom now live in neighbouring Serbia & Bosnia" a discrepancy of between 100,000 & 300,000. The "elsewhere" is also particularly dubious since not only is there no noticeable vast numbers of Krajina refugees in other European countries but obviously gegraphically escaping from the only line of retreat from Krajina, etc leads only to Bosnia & Serbia. Taken together this leaves us 2-400,000 unaccounted for, with no noticeable urgency on our part to trace them. I hope that the euphemist "unaccounted for" rather than those merely genuinely unaccounted for are somewhat smaller.
2 CLINTON'S ROLE- "the Pentagon contracted Military Professional Resources, Inc (MPRI) to train the Croatian military.(16) According to a Croatian officer, MPRI advisors "lecture us on tactics and big war operations on the level of brigades, which is why we needed them for Operation Storm when we took the Krajina." Croatian sources claim that U.S. satellite intelligence was furnished to the Croatian military. (17) Following the invasion of Krajina, the U.S. rewarded Croatia with an agreement "broadening existing cooperation" between MPRI and the Croatian military. (18) U.S. advisors assisted in the reorganization of the Croatian Army. Referring to this reorganization in an interview with the newspaper Vecernji List, Croatian General Tihomir Blaskic said, "We are building the foundations of our organization on the traditions of the Croatian home guard" - pro-Nazi troops in World War II. "

& many other sources. Until these US officers went to Croatia for what was officially called "democracy training" the Croatian forces were merely a militia. The Krajina attack involved a speedy coordinated 3 pronged night attack with very close artillery support reminiscent of the better organised parts of Hitler's blitzkreig. Anybody with any militaryknowledge will confirm that this requires well trained & armed troops with a very experienced general staff. The only practical possibility is that, whatever the legal line of command held by Mr Gotovina (now on trial for war crimes) the Krajina Holocaust was trained for, organised & commanded by US officers.

(By the way Holocaust means "complete destruction" & I do not think any lesser term can reasonably be applied to what happened to the Krajina Republic. It is clear from the last sentence of the above quote that, whatever you think, the Croatians believe it is. The fact that they chose the same flag, same name for the currency & a leader who, according his PR flack James Harff of Ruder & Finn, had been "careless" in saying such things as "Hitler's New European Order can be justified by the need to be rid of the Jews" also suggest it is. When Saddam Hussein & Milosevic "a man to whom any form of racism is anathema" can repeatedly be described as "another Hitler" but the term Nazis cannot be used of the racist Croatians we are living in an Alice in Wonderland world.)
3) KLA MAIN MURDERERS & WE KNEW IT Statement from British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook (a different one from the one who testified for Milosevic) to Parliament
"18 Jan 1999 : Column 567

On its part, the Kosovo Liberation Army has committed more breaches of the ceasefire, and until this weekend was responsible for more deaths than the security forces" If the British government knew this then, since their intelligence services are interlinked,Clinton & his Nazi cabinet did also.

As to how the KLA treated & are treating Kosovo Albanians under our authority:
" You said many Albanians fled the KLA, the gangs. Do you know how many?

Cedda: Tens of thousands. 15,000 went to Vojvodina, 30,000 to Belgrade, many more"
4 CLARK'S STATEMENT ON OATH (actually only the end is by Clark - the bit before, since it deals with a picture of the KLA displaying severed heads has been left in to show what the KLA do & how very keen the allegedly impartial NATO funded "judge" was to keep out anything embarassing to NATO)
1 JUDGE MAY: That is unnecessary. Remove that picture, please.

2 This is nothing to do with the evidence. Return the picture, please, to

3 the accused.

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. May, these men in KLA uniforms,

5 I mean, this man is holding two Serb heads that had been cut off. Is that

6 confirmation? I mean, are these allies of General Clark's infantry in

7 Kosovo?

8 JUDGE MAY: Now, let us deal with this in a way which is relevant.

9 The picture is not relevant. You can give evidence in due course about

10 it. You can call the witness, and you can produce these photographs if

11 there is relevance of them, providing you establish that, but we have to

12 deal with the general's evidence.

13 Now, there hasn't been any dispute that you made these comments to

14 him.

15 MR. NICE: Your Honour, if the Chamber's concerned about the

16 production of that photograph and the effect it may have unsupported by

17 any relevance, it could give consideration to redacting that part of the

18 transcript. It's a matter entirely for the Chamber. We don't press you

19 one way or the other.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 JUDGE MAY: We'll consider that.

22 Yes, Mr. Milosevic. What is the point that you're trying to

23 establish as far as the witness's evidence is concerned? You can ask

24 other witnesses, you can call other evidence about the behaviour of the

25 KLA, and indeed you've done so. I seem to remember a very great deal of

Page 30502

1 cross-examination about it already. If you wish, you can call some

2 evidence, relevant evidence during the case, but I don't think we're going

3 to take it any further with this witness.

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, the KLA was a terrorist group.

5 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

6 Q. Isn't that right, General Clark? Is that in dispute or is that

7 not in dispute?

8 JUDGE MAY: It may be a matter for us, but it's not a matter that

9 arises from the witness's evidence.

10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The witness is talking about

11 measures of repression against the KLA, and you see what kind of killers

12 they are. I have yet another photograph here, a group of 15 of them, with

13 severed heads. This is also not relevant for you; is that right, Mr. May?

14 JUDGE MAY: That is quite right. Quite right. You can call all

15 this evidence in due course. We are just dealing with a part of the

16 evidence which is given by the general. The generalised evidence about

17 the behaviour of the KLA, if it's relevant, you can give it in due course.

18 Now, time is limited. If you want to ask him about the

19 conversations, of course you can.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The general -- well, I mean the

21 general is speaking in general terms about the KLA, and you did not allow

22 me to show a picture yesterday of the three Musketeers where he is like

23 D'Artagnan with the leaders of these terrorists.

24 MR. MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation]

25 Q. General, you actually commanded these formations, these units that

Page 30503

1 cut off Serb heads.

2 JUDGE MAY: Now, time is very limited. You're plainly not

3 following instructions you've been given. Your cross-examination is

4 limited to what the witness has given in evidence. The behaviour of the

5 KLA is not relevant to that. What you said about the KLA most certainly

6 is relevant. You've asked questions about it and what other things you've

7 said about it, you've said to the general, that is relevant, and you can

8 ask and indeed you should. If you challenge it, you should deal with it,

9 as you did with the general, General Naumann.

10 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, may I just have -- ask the permission

11 of the Court to clarify that I did not command the KLA. We never gave

12 assistance to the KLA. We did not direct the KLA. We did not assist its

13 formation.
5 WESLEY CLARK'S IGNORANCE OF LINKS TO THE KLA I regret to say that I have been unable to find the original article by somebody who interviewd where he admitted knowing of the NASTO/KLA connection. However this on Clark:

"But he was more coy about whether the CIA had, as has been widely reported, trained the KLA in 1998-99 at top-secret bases in Northern Albania.

"I don't know about the CIA," he demurred. "US and the CIA weren't very well coordinated."

may be read, perhaps cynically, as suggesting that he knew perfectly well what the CIA were doing & this from his website (even mass murderers have websites now) is even more open:

"Despite public denials throughout the war, the CIA worked closely with the KLA to glean intelligence about the disposition of Yugoslav troops in Kosovo"

The official position remains that the KLA managed to build up from zero to 25,000 heavily armed men, armed often with "stolen" NATO equipment entirely on their own. Indeed NATO maintained a fleet in the Adriatic to police mandatory UN weapons sanctions. Unfortunately despite hundreds of "gun smuggling" trips NATO were able to intercept zero of them since they had taken the precaution of using speedboats. NATO, despite what, if Clinton & co are not NAZI war criminals, must be taken as sincere attempts, have so far been unable even to identify the country on the western coast of the Adriatic where these speedboats came from.

I trust this satisfies Marc.

Posted by: Neil Craig | June 26, 2006 at 10:55 AM

Neil, thanks for compiling that for me. I'll be looking at the sources as I get time. One thing that jumps out at me, however, is that the site listed as "Wesley Clark's website" is hosted in Russia. Someone in Clark's position is obviously going to host neither a personal nor a professional website in Russia. Clicking around, the authorship is credited to some Russian woman. Most of the material seems taken from other sources, so perhaps "web design" would be more precise than "authorship", but still, one cannot fairly call this "Wesley Clark's website"; it is a website about Wesley Clark.

Posted by: Martin Bento | June 27, 2006 at 04:19 AM

Thanks Martin I hadn't noticed the hosting of the site. It appears the quote I mentioned is actually a reprint from the Washington Post. I suspect it still reflects actuality.

Posted by: Neil Craig | June 27, 2006 at 05:21 AM

To quote from the article this thread was started on:

"as a wise man once said, the job of the intellectual is to tell the truth and expose lies"

Since this article will shortly be passing below the horizon it appears that what I have said is literally indisputable. Considering that, even when I disagree with him, Brad's blog is certainly intellectual I regard that, perhaps immodestly, as a significant matter.

Should someone wish to discuss it afterwards I hope they will contact me or visit my site.

That the conclusion was logically derived from the evidence seems also undisputed. That "these facts lead to the conclusion that Milosevic was a very fine non-racist person indeed & Clinton, Albright, Wesley Clark, Gore & Clinton as well as most other NATO leaders are obscene lying Nazis guilty of genocide"

I would also say that the fact that all this could be almost entirely censored by the mass media for 16 years should deeply worry anybody inclined to think that it doesn't matter because the Serbs are merely a small country of which we know little.

Why oh why do we have politicians & press corps who lie & thieve - perhaps because we have let them away with far far worse crimes.

Posted by: Neil Craig | June 29, 2006 at 05:30 AM

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.