Belgrade 2.0
- Blog na srpskom
- This site best viewed from Belgrade (but not with Internet Explorer).
Handke and Serbia
Posted 2007-04-14 19:17 under Off The Record by Cvijus / 31 comments
The Austrian author Peter Handke a highly contraversial personality in the european cultural scene, but mostly criticized for his appearance on the funeral of the former yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic, is also known for his positive attitude for the Serbs.
Nowadays, it mostly very “modern” and “rational” to condemn Serbia and the Serbs for the infamous role during the Yugoslav Wars, however, few european intellectuals tried to have an objective approach on the wars, regarding also the serbian side. Handke has made a visit to Serbia in ’95, at the time when the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina was approaching to an end and Serbia was recupurating from the economically devastating years of ’93-‘94. Even though one could distinguish his yugonostalgic attitude in dealing with the communist era of Yugoslavia in his book “A Journey to the Rivers: Justice for Serbia”, in the foreword he severely criticized the western media for the lack of an objective approach and jurnalistic professionalism. When he directed his criticisms on the western intellectuals and their homophonus anti-Serbian parols, he made a remark in his book which I find worthy of quoting it here:
“When I walked through Kalemegdan, I haven’t noticed any of the older people playing chess, or the young couples having a walk, to be war criminals or genocidical persons”
But his conclusion leaves a taste of communist nostalgia, which for my taste is more than absurde.
However, Handke is still active in “lobbying” for Serbia. When the decision came from the city of Nürnberg to award him the large amount of Euros as an award, he redirected the funds to the Serbian enclaves in Kosovo and Metohija, something Biljana Srbaljanovic (his archenemy) wouldn’t even think of, at least as far as I know. But his most recent comment on the preposition of supervisioned independence was that “it doesn’t make any sense, since this means that the one who gets it is not mature enough, that is something completely new”.
My personal opinion of Handke would be that I regard him as well to be a confusing personality, however, in some things I completely agree with him, in some not. Nobody should be lookened upon in an black and white manner. I’m realy interested to know what do you, the readers, think of Handke and the broad approach to the thoughts of people regarding the tragic past of the Balkans during the ’90s.
For the end I give you a nice quote of Handke with his opinion of the Serbs:
“The Serbs are nation not better nor worse than any other nation”
Nemanja on 14/04/07 09:38 PM
It seems to me that the Serbs will praise just about any fool that has a positive opinion about them. And I don’t find anything moving in the fact that he redirected his prize money to Serbian enclaves in KiM, because, let’s face it, if anyone is to blame for the horrible position those people are in, it’s mr Handke’s departed hero – Slobodan Milošević.
That kind of hypocrisy and intelectual snobism just turns my stomach upside down.
And, belive it or not, it’s his Archenemy that serves as a far better example to the Outside World that Serbia has much more to offer than just “war criminals & genocidal persons”.
michael roloff on 15/04/07 04:29 AM
HERE ARE A NUMBER OF LINKS DEVOTED TO THE WORK OF PETER HANDKE
MICHAEL ROLOFF
714-660-4445
Member Seattle Psychoanalytic Institute and Society
http://www.roloff.freeservers.com/about.html
HANDKE LINKS + BLOGS
SCRIPTMANIA PROJECT MAIN SITE: http://www.handke.scriptmania.com
and 12 sub-sites
INCLUDING:
http://www.handkeyugo.scriptmania.com
http://www.handkelectures.freeservers.com [drama lecture]
http://www.handke.scriptmania.com/realblog.html [pertaining to scriptmania matters]
http://www.kultur.at/lesen/index.htm [dem handke auf die schliche/ prosa
a book of mineabout handke, on line, in German]
http://handke-discussion.blogspot.com/ [controversies & reviews]
http://www.artscritic.blogspot.com the handke milosevic controversy summarized, etc.]
“MAY THE FOGGY DEW BEDIAMONDIZE YOUR HOOSPRINGS!” {J. Joyce}
“Sryde Lyde Myde Vorworde Vorhorde Vorborde” [von Alvensleben]
Estavisti on 15/04/07 06:39 AM
Nemanja, I agree that Serbs often will praise any old fool who doesn’t hate them. Handke is not one of those. I don’t see any evidence that Milosevic is Handke’s “hero”, and even if he were (which I doubt), that doesn’t take away from the fact he’s giving 50,000 euros to charity, to people who have been under extreme pressure for years, who live in ghettoes under constant threat. What have the sons and daughters of communism in Belgrade done for those unfortunate people? Except slap them in the face of course? Why can’t you just accept his extraordinary genrosity for what it is?
I think what really annoys people like Srbljanovic about Handke is that he’s a “European”, an “intellectual” etc (everything they aspire to, think they are, but are insecure about), but he REJECTS them (and who wouldn’t, with their self-hating inferiority complexes?) and EMBRACES a lot of things in Serbia which they are running away from (yet against which they define themselves. Just look at what they call themselves – DRUGA Srbija).
“Не бојим се од вражјега кота, нека га је ка на гори листа, но се бојим од зла домаћега” – Његош
Nemanja on 15/04/07 01:48 PM
Estavisti, I’m sorry, but I simply can’t accept his “extraordinary generosity” for what it is, because I have seen too many similar examples from other Serbian “patriots” (like Arkan and his “Third Child Foundation”) thinking that giving money to charity could somehow compensate for all the misery they have by their actions (directly or indirectly) put upon those same people they are now so generously helping. Those 50.000 euro’s will be spent in a split second, but the crucial problems, most of which came as a result of the rule of rahmetli Slobodan Milošević, will remain undented. Handke doesn’t openly support SM but instead holds that annoying ignoramus et ignorabimus quasi-artistic point of view of his role in our recent violent history: “I don’t know the truth. But I look. I listen. I feel. I remember. This is why I am here today, close to Yugoslavia, close to Serbia, close to Slobodan Milošević.” And that’s it. Handke’s great Hunger for Truth is nothing but an alibi, just his lame excuse for fooling around the Balkans and having a ball acting all Independent & Controversial, while enjoying the status of a national hero almost. It’s all a game to him, that’s what i think, and it’s his rather comfortable position that allows him all that relaxed “agnosticism” in observing things, people and situations in this land “far, far away”.
Ian Cresswell on 15/04/07 02:18 PM
Handke plays the dissident in europe but I think the grenade attack on Dejan Anastasijevic today should remind you what being a dissident really involves. And the risks. Handke is more of a publicity seeking contrarian and risks nothing except perhaps his reputation.
That said, at least some of the attacks on him in europe have been unfair. There was a campaign against him being awarded a literary prize if I remember rightly. His foolish political opinions shouldn’t be relevant to that.
If this “The Serbs are nation not better nor worse than any other nation” was what he really thought then I would not disagree with him. But he seems to have convinced himself that Serbia, quite unlike other nations, never commits crimes or deludes itself.
“When I walked through Kalemegdan, I haven’t noticed any of the older people playing chess, or the young couples having a walk, to be war criminals or genocidical persons”
I’m sure you could say the same if you walked around London or New York but it tells you precisely nothing about the crime taking place in Iraq at this very moment.
Cvijus on 15/04/07 04:14 PM
Nemanja, you’re right that Serbs tent to praise any fool that doesn’t hate them. But they also tend to praise any fool that hates them and convince themselves that they’re absolutely right. From this article I tried to give my objective impression on Peter Handke which isn’t black or white. Sometimes I like what he says, but I was disapointed by his presence at the Milosevic funeral. But on the other side, he hadn’t any intellectual in Serbia to grab on, since Serbia is black and white in such things, and the few that try to view things broader are excluded from any group. I respect that Srbljanovic has positioned herself in Europe, but her arrogance regarding the difficult situation of the KiM Serbs makes me angry. Not to mention her elitism. Maybe on this, Estanisti read my mind.
Ian, the amount on violence imposed on somebody doesn’t define his level of dissidentism. What happened to Anastasijevic is horrible, but this doesn’t make Handke less of a dissident.
For saying about this in kalemegdan actually shows that he considers the notion of collective guilt as a thing of nacism.
I would recomend you to read the book I mentioned since he also mentioned the crimes commited by Serbs. He didn’t deny that, but he was interested in seeing the other side of the story and to build up his opinion which he did. At least he is not like another contrarian Levy who believes that Bosniaks, Albanians and Croats were completely innocent and that eveil Serbs did all the crimes, and then had the arrogance to to Belgrade and pursuade us in that.
Estavisti on 15/04/07 04:32 PM
Nemanja and Ian, I suggest you actually try reading his book Journey to the Rivers.
Re: the prize – they awarded it to him, but before they gave him the money his connection with “the Serbs” was discovered. So for political reasons the prize committee took back the award (pretty fucked up, eh? BUT HE SUPPORTED THE SERBSNAZIMILOSEVIC!!1!!11!!!) But a bunch of other artists/intellectuals with principles and a brain raised the money he would have got as a sort of alternative prize – the 50,000 euros which he donated to Velika Hoca in Kosmet.
Ian Cresswell on 15/04/07 04:48 PM
You’re right that the amount of violence doesn’t decide whether you’re a dissident or not. But it does help show the level of risk one takes in being a dissident which was my point.
I suppose you could call Handke a dissident in that he dissents from mainstream opinion. So do creationists and global warming deniers. I think contrarian is a better phrase.
Did Levy really that? If so, he has fallen for a common fallacy. The fallacy of the superior virtue of the oppressed. And they are oppressed no longer.
To quote Handke
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/aug1999/hand-a11.shtml
“Handke told the Austrian magazine News that Milosevic was the “country’s elected president” and had to “defend his country’s territory”. He added, “Anyone in his position in the last ten years would have acted the same way he did. He was left no choice.”
I’ve read more than my fill of this kind of politics over the years. Life is too short to waste any more of it.
Cvijus on 16/04/07 07:34 PM
Ian, people denying global warming etc. are not dissidents, but fools. But you have to consider that they’re denying what is obvious, not as the recent Balkan Wars whose truth is still vague and as a proof of this you can also consider the judgement of the ICJ which brought a new notion in the perception of the wars. For me Handke is a dissident since he observed the non-mainstream side (the Serbs) and brought a judgement which was non-mainstream, and most important, not politicaly motivated.
As for the article you quoted: what is wrong in it? Yes, unfortunatelly Milosevic was elected (at least legally in the very first elections), and when a country’s territorial integrity is endagered (case of Kosovo-Metohija), every country would do its best to defend it, as we have seen the UK regarding N.Ireland. Now, Milosevic was a fool for provoking such a situation in Kosovo-Metohija and in his fight he used the wrong instruments were in his fight against a terrorist group (KLA) he turned against him a whole ethnic group.
I haven’t heard that any of the domestic “intellectuals” has done anything to help in a practical way any Serbian refugee family, but they go to them and pursuade them that it’s their own fault. Natasa Kandic even used force.
PS – Levy did that.
Blackbird on 17/04/07 03:11 AM
Cvijus,
Kindly clarify exactly what you mean by the “Serbs infamous role during the Yugoslav Wars”. I have seen this same term “infamous” used here before by Serbs about Serbs. Infamous how? Because Serbs have a bad reputation (due to propaganda) or because Serbs deserve a bad reputation?
Viktor on 17/04/07 03:36 AM
If you attend someone’s funeral and hold a speech at it, i presume that you have some sort of respect for the deceased.
Any person having respect for Milosevic can’t have my support or respect – that’s all i have to say regarding Handke. Maybe I’m seeing things black and white, but at least i’m not seeing them all white like Handke does.
Blackbird on 17/04/07 06:34 AM
I wonder if you have any respect for yourself. So much of this site promotes Serbophobia. With “friends” like you Serbia doesn’t need any more enemies.
Slobodan Milosevic was a petty aparachnik opportunist whom I detested for years, but he found himself when he was offered up as so much fodder to the Hague. There he turned into a man, a real person, not a cog in the party machine (the one we can thank that piece of garbage Tito for). There is a lot of absolution for someone who defends Serbdom over and above himself — defends his entire people, all the while knowing fully that he has no chance of being let off because his fate was sealed in advance and no amount of evidence would change that. He kept on only to succumb to being killed for it.
Is it any surprise if Peter Handke doesn’t go out of his way to point out the failings of Serbs when there are so many like you tripping over themselves to do it? Aren’t there enough anti-Serbian propaganda messages around for you without those who supposedly support Serbia adding to the din? Is it even necessary? More than enough true, but even MORE untrue, tales have been spread around about Serbia. The Serbs, at least, have been humble and more than willing to accept that they have committed a sin here and there — what have their enemies done in that regard? Nothing. They still play only one of two cards: victimhood or superiority.
This blog is soiled by the promotion of sites like Balkan Baby’s. Why don’t you just give it up and call this blog what it really is — your pathetic confessional! You should have been born a Catholic and I dare say it’s not too late to convert.
Viktor on 17/04/07 01:39 PM
There are catholic Serbs too, you know.
Nemanja on 17/04/07 05:43 PM
What I find rather amusing about you, Blackbird, is that although you obviously consider yourself a diehard Serbian “patriot” on a mission from God to slay the infernal beast of AntiSerbian Propaganda, you somehow fail to notice how, ironicaly, it’s your boiling comments that do the best job of strengthening all the negative stereotypes some could have about people in Serbia.
With “patriots” like you, and “minders” like Handke, Serbia doesn’t need enemies.
Blackbird on 17/04/07 06:43 PM
Really? Awww…I’m simply wounded by your remarks. I don’t think I can ever get over them….
Blackbird on 17/04/07 06:50 PM
“There are catholic Serbs too, you know.”
Yes, I do know. And all sorts of other religions and cultures, too. Serbia happens to be a highly tolerant country compared to most. It’s kind of one of my points…
“...at least i’m not seeing them all white like Handke does”
He doesn’t. He just doesn’t get his jollies from tearing Serbia down like some do. As I previously indicated, those jobs are filled.
Ano Nonymous on 17/04/07 07:31 PM
Sorry, anonymous comments are off on this blog.Cvijus on 17/04/07 08:32 PM
Well, I don’t think that Handke sees things black and white, judging from what he wrote and states. But I must agree with Viktor on the thing that his appearance on the Milosevic funeral discredits him. However, when asked to be a defence witness on the Milosevic trial in the Hague he refused… that’s another thing.
Blackbird on 17/04/07 08:51 PM
Do you also object to those who came to Tito’s funeral?
Ian Cresswell on 17/04/07 09:03 PM
“Ian, people denying global warming etc. are not dissidents, but fools. But you have to consider that they’re denying what is obvious, not as the recent Balkan Wars whose truth is still vague and as a proof of this you can also consider the judgement of the ICJ which brought a new notion in the perception of the wars.”
Let’s turn to that judgement then. In particular the section on events in northern and eastern Bosnia in spring and summer 1992. They judged it didn’t reach the level of genocide but the events it does describe are appalling. It’s very difficult to pretend that Milosevic was not in control at that time.
Is it really true that anyone would have acted like that? That he had no choice?
The duty of the dissident is to tell truth to power not to pour a bucket of whitewash over it.
Blackbird on 17/04/07 09:42 PM
I find it very interesting, indeed, that Milosevic was helped to die just as his trial was about to enter the Srebrenica phase.
bganon on 18/04/07 06:48 PM
Blackbird the ‘house’ of Serbdom is a very broad church. Variety is a strong point of Serbian society even if it looks like a weakpoint.
Its my view that rather than believe that we here are somewhat treacherous for our views or having certain links, it shows our strength. The ones who are wrong (and with rather less developed socieities in some way) are those offering up the simplistic or one sided viewpoints. I suspect you might have less objections to us if the world were a fairer place and those who work against what we might term the ‘Serbian interest’ gave a more balanced view.
If I’m right about that then surely criticism should be focussed in the direction of the unfair or prejudiced rather than in our direction.
Blackbird on 18/04/07 07:54 PM
Well, sure. But all I see here on a regular basis is Viktor’s self-flagellation and his apparent desire to see the Serbs bend over for more paddlings by the West. I would, just for a friggin’ change, like to see where the real MEN (I use that in a non-gender reference and would be just as happy to see a strong woman) have gone from Serbia.
Because the West is NOT fair, at all, toward Serbia, it is incumbent upon Serbs to STAND UP for the truth and stop saying how bad Serbs are, especially when that’s ALL you say. It simply isn’t true! Anybody who looks at what happened to Yugoslavia with even the most minimal objectivity knows that. Talk about viewing things from a black and white perspective — that’s all I see here with regard to Serbian “guilt.” There is so much of that around, it has to be countered.
Blackbird on 19/04/07 08:31 PM
Article criticizing Handke and an ensuing discussion to ponder…. especially for those who hang onto the coat tails of that Serb hater, George Soros, and willingly accept the accompanying brainwashing and everything else he sponsors.
http://www.theamericanscholar.org/sp07/theapologist-mcdonald.html
http://this-space.blogspot.com/2007/03/peter-handkes-greater-life.html#comment-1514493714274994173
http://handke-discussion.blogspot.com/index.html
Raznici on 29/04/07 10:46 PM
What a bunch of hogwash… A) arguing on the internet is like winning the special Olympics, even if you win, you’re still a retard. B) Classifying Uncle Slobo as a great guy or a dunce is a really hard one. Because of the terrorism problem resulting from the Kosovo situation, the Serb Government dealt with things just like the Americans dealt with it post 9/11, except without the same scale of propaganda. Sure they made some mistakes, but do the Serbs deserve the blame for all the regional problems? That’s like saying that WW1 started ONLY because of Serbian nationalism.
Blackbird on 30/04/07 03:40 AM
What can you expect, Raznici, from people that run a website that promotes Balkan Baby’s blog?
Blackbird on 01/05/07 07:59 PM
Shades of the staged “massacre” at Racak, anyone?
This article has relevance to everything because Srebrenica is the whip that the empire likes to crack over the Serbs and they were planning to do so for a few more decades yet. And it shows the level of deceit that has been used against the Serbs. (As if Bosnian Serb soldiers who ushered the Muslim women and children in Srebrenica into buses to get them out of that dangerous area — anticipating as they were a fire fight — were intent on “genocide” or even “massacre.” What genocidal maniacs spare the women and children of a people they wish to obliterate!??)
If it doesn’t go too much against the grain of people running this site to actually read something that points to the Serbs NOT being guilty of something they have been accused of, then I suggest you straighten out your thinking caps and, at the very least, allow for the POTENTIAL possibility that what you have been told (and have so eagerly accepted without question) about Serbs is simply not as it has been depicted in the propaganda.
World Net Daily
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55467
Was ‘Srebrenica genocide’ a hoax?
Posted: May 1, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Aleksandar Pavic
For more than 10 years, the term “Srebrenica” has been used to denote the slaughter of “innocent Muslims” at the hands of Christians – more specifically, the Bosnian Serb army, alleged to have slaughtered, according to the version currently accepted by most major media, “between 7,000 and 8,000 Muslims” when it captured that small town in eastern Bosnia in mid-July 1995. As the story goes, the Bosnian Serbs captured this “U.N.-protected zone” and proceeded to take away and execute thousands of men, women and children in the space of several days, subsequently burying them in mass graves that are still being dug up almost 12 years later.
Belgrade-based historian and researcher, Milivoje Ivanisevic, who has been documenting Yugoslavian civil war casualties for more than a decade, has recently challenged the claims in a new booklet, “The Srebrenica Identity Card,” which documents hundreds of bodies buried at the Srebrenica Memorial that were not killed in July 1995, when the alleged genocide took place, including cases of people who died natural deaths a full 13 years before the event took place.
The newest evidence offered by Ivanisevic indicates a number of those buried at the Srebrenica Memorial Complex not only were not killed in July 1995, but actually died much earlier, even in the early 1980s – more than 10 years before the civil war in Yugoslavia even started.
According to Ivanisevic, as of March 2007, more than 12 years after the event, a total of 2,442 bodies have been buried at the Memorial. Among those, a total of 914, or over 37 percent, were on the voting lists for the 1996 elections in Bosnia – over a year after the alleged “genocide.” The voting lists themselves were approved and checked by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which supervised the elections.
A second even more significant find involves the fact that “at least 100 people” buried at the Memorial died of natural causes. Ivanisevic claims that the numbers would be even larger if he’d been allowed access to the death books in Srebrenica and the surrounding towns. Nevertheless, several names with dates of birth, death and place of demise are provided: Fetahija (Nazif) Hasanovic, b. 1955 – d. Dec.15, 1996, Srebrenica; Sukrija (Amil) Smajlovic, b.1946 – d. May 2,1996, Zaluzje; Maho (Suljo) Rizvanovic, b.1953 – d. Jan. 3,1993, Glogova; Mefail (meho) Demirovic, b.1970 – d. May 10, 1992, Krasanovici; Redzic (Ahmet) Asim, b.1949 – d. April 22, 1992, Bratunac.
Thirdly, Ivanisevic charges that several hundred soldiers as well as civilians were transferred to the Srebrenica Memorial from other cemeteries and reburied, with Muslim burial rituals. One of these is the body of Hamed (Hamid) Halilovic (1940-1982), transferred from the nearby cemetery in Kazani, who apparently died a full 13 years before the Srebrenica “genocide.” Other bodies transferred from Kazani to the Srebrenica Memorial include those of Osman (Ibro) Halilovic (1912-1989), Nurija (Smajo) Memisevic (1966-1993), Salih (Saban) Alic (1969-1992), Mujo (Hasim) Hadzic (1954-1993), Ferid (Ramo) Mustafic (1975-1993) and Hajrudin (Ismet) Cvrk (1974-1992).
Fourth, using captured records of the Bosnian Muslim Army, Ivanisevic lists more than a dozen names of soldiers whose families were granted housing and social benefits due to families of soldiers killed in action before Nov. 11, 1993, when the documents were captured by Bosnian Serb army forces.
Fifth, on the basis of similarly captured documents, Ivanisevic provides several dozen names of Bosnian Muslim army fighters killed before March 7, 1994.
Ivanisevic goes on to provide names of Bosnian Muslim soldiers buried at the Srebrenica Memorial who were implicated in numerous massacres of Serbian civilians in the vicinity between 1992-1995, in which a total of over 3,000 Serbs were killed. Interestingly, the commander of the Srebrenica Bosnian army forces, Naser Oric, was given a two-year sentence by the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, or ICTY, in June 2006 for his participation in these killings, some of which he captured on video and showed to Washington Post reporter John Pomfret, who visited him inside the “U.N. Safe Zone” in 1994.
During the 1990s, the Clinton administration used the “Srebrenica genocide” claim to enter the Bosnian civil war on the side of the Bosnian Muslims and enforce the subsequent Dayton Peace Agreement for Bosnia-Herzegovina in November 1995, with mutual recognition between Yugoslavia (now Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia). More generally, Clinton’s State Department bureaucracy used the “Srebrenica genocide” – as it has since been referred to as a result of controversial verdicts pronounced by the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia in The Hague – to justify its support for Muslim-dominated political movements not just in Bosnia but in Macedonia and Serbia’s Kosovo region, which is currently seeking independence. And, since most of Clinton’s State Department appointments, headed by Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns, have continued running the U.S. Balkan strategy, the policy has remained intact to this day.
Thus, even as the current Kosovo Albanian independence drive is provided heavy U.S., British and German support, the Bosnian Serbs, unhappy at the prospect of being locked inside a Muslim-dominated Bosnia, are being denied independence, with the “Srebrenica genocide” being used as the chief argument – i.e., that wartime gains achieved through “genocide” cannot be sanctioned. Many observers, including a recent G2 Bulletin analysis, link Western support of Balkan Muslims at the expense of Christians as part of a broader policy of appeasing “moderate” Sunni-controlled regimes in the Middle East, as part of an anti-Iranian Shiite coalition.
Among radical Bosnian Muslim elements, the Srebrenica narrative has been used not only to rally support to the general cause of jihad, to arouse Muslim feelings of having been oppressed and persecuted by non-Muslims, but to build what some have called the “first Muslim shrine in Europe,” a gathering place for Muslims from the world over with anti-Western, anti-European and anti-Christian grievances. The Memorial Complex in Srebrenica now serves as a place of pilgrimage, where Muslims can see firsthand the results of what they believe is an unprecedented atrocity against their fellow believers.
The entire Srebrenica narrative has been provided key support by Western mainstream media, headed by the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal and the mainstream British, German and French media, who have laced their Balkan reporting throughout the years with references to the “Srebrenica genocide,” calling it, among other things, the “worst atrocity in Europe since World War II,” a “stain on the conscience of the West,” etc.
From the very beginning, numerous dissenting voices both in the West and in ex-Yugoslavia have contested both the Western mass media claims and the ICTY Srebrenica-connected verdicts, but have received almost no publicity whatsoever.
In the summer of 2005, on the 10-year anniversary of the event, the “Srebrenica Research Group,” composed of mostly American and British media and academic figures, as well as former U.N. civil officials and military observers with ex-Yugoslavia experience, put up a website in which the entire “Srebrenica massacre” account was reconsidered and demystified. Instead of the 7-8,000 figure, U.N. officials and U.S. Congress experts were quoted giving figures of “700-800,” “the low hundreds,” “about 2,000 Muslims and Serbs total,” etc. Henry Wieland, head of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, who spent days interviewing Srebrenica refugees in July 1995, is quoted as saying that he did not find “anyone who’d seen any atrocity committed with their own eyes.”
The forensic findings were taken to task as well, with claims that the entire process of excavation and identification of bodies was controlled by an organization founded by the late Bosnian Islamist leader, Alija Izetbegovic. And, a Canadian international law professor deconstructed the Srebrenica-connected verdicts at the ICTY, showing, among other things, that Bosnian Serb Gen. Radoslav Krstic, sentenced by the court to a 46-year term, was, in the court’s own verdict, absolved of participation in – or even knowledge of – the alleged massacre, instead being sentenced according to the ICTY’s own construction of “command responsibility.” The prosecution’s star witness, Drazen Erdemovic, a Bosnian Croat who mysteriously appeared in the ranks of the Bosnian Serb army after previously fighting in the Bosnian Muslim army ranks, claimed participation in the execution of 1,200 Srebrenica Muslims, was exempted from cross-examination, deemed by the court itself as “mentally unstable” and, ultimately, given a five-year sentence for his “cooperation.” Yet, the mass media, without exception, have ignored the group’s findings, even those quoting the very same mass media’s own reports from the ground at the time.
The Netherlands Institute for War Documentation issued an extensive report in 2002, “Srebrenica, a ‘Safe’ Area,” detailing, among other things, that Srebrenica, although declared a “U.N. Safe Zone,” was in fact never demilitarized, and that several thousand armed Bosnian Muslim troops were stationed in it between 1992-1995, organizing numerous lethal raids against Serbian villages in the vicinity. This claim was additionally corroborated by the U.N. secretary-general’s report to the U.N. General Assembly of Nov. 15, 1999.
Ivanisevic’s book will soon to be translated into English. It remains to be seen whether the Western corporate mass media will continue ignoring this and other evidence debunking the claim that an anti-Muslim “genocide” took place in Srebrenica in July 1995. Some public figures in the Balkans have called for an international commission on Srebrenica, which would re-examine the evidence and make a new, more balanced and independent assessment of what took place in eastern Bosnia during the last stages of its civil war, in the summer of 1995.
Aleksandar Pavic covers the Balkans for WorldNetDaily.com.
Nemanja on 02/05/07 04:45 AM
Blackbird: “...at the very least, allow for the POTENTIAL possibility that what you have been told (and have so eagerly accepted without question) about Serbs is simply not as it has been depicted in the propaganda.”
About Serbs? Sorry, I’m a Serb but I feel no connection or responsibility for what happened in Srebrenica (and that’s probably why I have no problem accepting the official body count). I am simply revolted, digusted by it. On the other hand, I AM ahsamed of my country for protecting a genocidal maniac, and a significant number of my people for praising him as a national hero. That’s the link between individual and collective responsibility and, believe it or not, it appears to me that it’s actualy our “patriots” who insist on accepting the guilt of our War Lords as the guilt of our people.
And another thing:
“...numerous massacres of Serbian civilians in the vicinity between 1992-1995, in which a total of over 3,000 Serbs were killed.”
You we’re saying something about eagerly accepting information without question? Although it would never cross my mind to question this type of data (it’s simply a matter of decency to me), it’s funny how, in this case, you feel there’s no need for an extensive analyisis – why would a Serb lie about Serbian casualties? But Evil Bosniaks, backed up by the Evil USA & its Evil Mass Media, hmm…
Thank you, after reading this eye-opening article I can’t help wondering why Mladić is still hiding in some cave like a fat bitch when, with all the evidence presented here, overturning the indictment, or at least bringing it into accord with The Truth™, would be a walk in the park.
Blackbird on 02/05/07 07:16 AM
Uh-huh. So the manipulation of numbers and body counts and actual evidence that bodies have been moved to add to, more than ten years later, a mere fraction of supposedly dead people declared to number 8,000 or more is not to be considered, eh? But Naser Oric putting his horrific murderous rampages on video tape and proudly showing them and bragging about them to a Canadian reporter, like a prize to be held high, that’s MORE questionable?
It seems to have made you very angry, just this possibility that Srebrenica is not necessarily as it has been spoon fed to you. What kind of loss is it that you feel at the thought of Serbs maybe not having behaved as they have been depicted? Just what kind of loss is that to you?
The truth is that NOBODY has all the facts about Srebrenica for two reasons: they have not been investigated officially and what might be known has not been exposed – deliberately. Do you never ask yourself why that is? There are more than enough questions about Srebrenica, unaswered questions, to make any decent, logical person stop and say “what gives?” For instance, Serbs putting the Muslim women and children on buses to take them to safety, or the fact that Srebrenica was not demilitarized as we were told, or that a very high number of the supposedly killed Muslim soldiers were on electoral rolls years later, or that the Red Cross announced at that time that 5,000 Muslim men had moved into and through that area, and not least that Izetbegovic was told by Clinton that the U.S. could only continue its involvement in helping the Bosnians Muslims if there would be at least 5,000 Muslims killed by the Serbs. But more than that, there is the fact that Srebrenica has served NATO countries exceedingly well and they pull it out of the bag whenever they think it will make Serbs jump, or better yet — grovel.
If I believed that Srebrenica was as it is propagandized I would agitate for every Serb involved to be rounded up and thrown into prison forever. But that would require a real investigation — any idea why there hasn’t been one? Possibly because then the “story” would no longer serve as well. Better an undisturbed myth, which is so much more useful.
You — a Serb? In name only.
I know non-Serbs who appear more Serbian than you — those who have a sincere interest in finding out the truth. Why don’t you pick a nationality, the one you really want to be, and align yourself openly with it, instead of pompously playing the “innocent” among the “bad” Serbs. I blame you self-annointed “innocents” for Serbia being held back today, for not being able fully to get to the truth, because you hold on so firmly to the crap that has been shoveled onto Yugoslavia. Anytime someone wants to dig out of that pile of shit you’re frantic to shovel it back on.
As for Mladic hiding, everybody knows what the man could expect. His name is mud, he’s been conviceted without ever seeing a court, and innocent or guilty he will get the same unfair treatment. As I have already stated many times, I very much wish he would be found because maybe, just maybe, the facts of Srebrenica could finally come out then if by some miracle the ICTY didn’t silence him. I had been looking forward to hearing the Srebrenica phase of Milosevic’s trial, but what happened? Oh, right, he, um, “died.” Right. Yes, yes, the facts, it seems, wouldn’t serve so well. That was a close call for the West.
Blackbird on 02/05/07 08:32 PM
So on it goes, the long-running KLA plan to take over the Balkans. But it must be Serbia’s fault, right?
http://www.makfax.com.mk/look/novina/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=2&NrArticle=65464&NrIssue=333&NrSection=20
April 30, 2007
Greater Albania Project Moves On
Albanian terrorist threaten Greece
Masked and armed Albanian terrorists threaten Greek region of Epirus, announcing the formation of a “Liberation Army of Chamuria.” Judging by the flags on the table, they are clearly aware who their allies are.
Albanian Terrorists Announce Greece is Next
According to an announcement on the Albanian-language website Dervina.com, a paramilitary formation named the Liberation Army of Chamuria (LAC) had appeared in the north Greek region of Epirus, along the border with Albania.
Using the same recipe for hijacking the land employed in Serbian Kosovo-Metohija province, beginning with the albanization of the name of the region, Albanians refer to the Greek Epirus as the Chamuria or Tchamuria. Along the information that the Albanian terrorist unit covering this region has been formed, the web site also offers two videos previously shown on the Albanian television News 24.
Before the video footage was shown, president of the Albanian municipality Himara in the Valona region of Albania, stated that Epirus in Greece, populated by the majority of ethnic Albanians, should be given autonomy.
Video recordings from the Dervina web site show eight masked and armed men, with UCC (Ushtria Clirimtare e Camerise in Albanian, or Liberation Army of Chamuria) acronym on their uniforms. One of them reads the statement about the formation of the UCC/LAC sitting at the table decorated with the USA and EU flags. On the walls behind, an Albanian flag and map of “Tchamuria” are hanged.
According to the Serbian news agency Tanjug, media in Athens has called on the Greek government to sharply condemn the threats issued by Albanian terrorists and to request the information from Yahoo which hosts the web site about the location of the site’s web master.
Ian Cresswell on 05/05/07 11:34 AM
“For instance, Serbs putting the Muslim women and children on buses to take them to safety”
Safety from whom Blackbird? The Martians?
Or the army that surrounded them for years, attempted to starve them, then burnt their homes, dynamited their places of worship, and finally killed all the men.
Why couldn’t they just be safe in the place they lived?
It really is a bit much for you to talk like this and then complain about ‘terrorism’.
Blackbird mentions the Srebrenica Research Group – here is a debate I took part in with them.
http://www.medialens.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1578
I’ll leave the reader to judge who has been spoon fed and who took the trouble to look at the evidence.