Kosovo in a NewYorkTimes 1982’s report

010226_360wI have received one New York Times article from 1982, titled: WAR OF TERROR BY ALBANIANS IN YUGOSLAVIA STRAINS UNITY.
It’s strange to read how the media which knew the facts and truth, less than two decades later decided to twist it, turn it upside down, abuse and side with terrorism, with former Nazi forces (if there could be smth. like ”former Nazi.”)
Let’s analyse it:
– in 1982. the global media was aware that there was a constant Albanian terror in the Serbian land of Kosovo.


The authors highly professionally, inform their audience about all the improvement of human rights and the Albanian position in Serbian state and society.
❝ Problems of the new Albanian nationalism remain large and seemingly intractable. Kosovo is dependent on federal funds for economic development and receives the heaviest subsidies of any region. Yet, much of Belgrade’s money has apparently gone to projects serving ethnic interests, such as expanding the university’s Albanian studies programs. In Belgrade, rumors suggest that the Kosovo Bank used funds to buy out Serbian farmers, thus creating new room for Albanians. ❝

… and one could see that (quote):
❝ the Kosovo Polje, for ex, also carries its name in Albanian, alongside the original Serbian.❝

So the original toponyms and the language in Kosovo have always been Serbian.
Also, that much of Serbian money was spent ”for serving the national (Albanian) interest, such as expanding the Albanian studies program.
But the Albanian employees in Kosovo bank abused the funds to buy houses, flats, land and make room for more Albanian migrants from Albania.
So, the Serbs were subject to the Albanian terror, Serbian money was used to sponsor the Albanian expansion and ethnic cleansing of the Serbs of Kosovo:

njujork tajms 82

The NYT also reminds their readers about the Kosovo field battle when the Serbian nobility fell in a battle against the expanding Turks.
Unlike last decade’s pamphlets and some ”new” history mostly written by lobbyists and leading PR agencies,  which is not more than the murder of truth and raping of history,  there was not a single mention of any Albanians neither living in Kosovo nor participating in the battle.
The article says that after the battle, an exodus of Serbs took place and the Albanians, brought by the Ottoman invaders, occupied Serbian empty houses and fields.
And in the case of Kosovo, history repeats –  this time, instead of Ottomans we have USA, EU and NATO doing exactly the same for the Albanians and to the Serbs.

When history takes a full round, perhaps even the NYT will suddenly ”remind” of the truth.





4 thoughts on “Kosovo in a NewYorkTimes 1982’s report

  1. > On 27. December 1915. Austro Hungarian empire formed the very first concentration camps in Doboj

    1915??? no, it was not the first!

    The Austro-Hungarian authorities imprisoned Carpatho-Rusyns and Ukrainian Russophiles, as well as other Ukrainians and Lemkos from Galicia and Bukovina, considered unreliable during wartime. The first group of prisoners was interned in Talerhof on September 4, 1914. Another internment camp for Rusophiles was the Terezín fortress (German: Theresienstadt), now in the Czech Republic.

    Until the winter 1915, there were no barracks in Thalerhof. Prisoners slept on the ground in the open-air during rain and frost.


    • Hello. Thanks for the feedback. The article You comment doesn’t deal neither with WW I; nor with any conc/death camps. As for the comment per se, I think You noticed that after You object the facts in the article You indirectly confirm them.
      ”The Austro-Hungarian authorities imprisoned Carpatho-Rusyns and Ukrainian Russophiles, as well as other Ukrainians and Lemkos from Galicia and Bukovina, considered unreliable during wartime.” etc.
      Unlike the places You named above, Doboj was the first such a camp established for a sole nation, for Serbs only, who were the only prisoners, regardless their political views, (there were no accusations of ”rusophilia”, for ex) , only clear orders to take Orthodox, Serbs there, regardless their reliability from the perspective of the Austro-Hungarian empire, etc. The Serbs were taken there due to their ethnicity and religion so it was the conc camp for Serbs only.
      The concentration camp in Doboj was formed for a sole ethnicity.
      As for Terezin, it was a prison camp for various nationals, not for exclusively one.
      Among others, Gavrilo Princip was imprisoned in Terezin and he passed away there.
      Best regards,

    • > The article You comment doesn’t deal neither with WW I

      Sure, but that article had comments closed already.


      > Doboj was the first such a camp established for a sole nation

      Well, the article’s claim was about “The first concentration camps in Europe were”, not about “The first mono-ethnic concentration camps” (this “prize” would probably go to British camps in Southern Africa).

      Another questions whether Ukrainians in 1914 could be considered a separate ethnicity.
      Are Montenegrins today a separate ethnicity? Were Croatians always separate ethnicity?

      Basically it was an artificial selection at work, remove people who consider themselves in vague terms as “Ukrainian variant of Russian” – and the rest would become “non-Russina Ukrainians”.
      Remove all Montenegrins who consider themselves variant of Serbs – and you would have a separate Montenegrin ethnicity artificially created.

      > only clear orders to take Orthodox, Serbs there

      It is interesting that you first mention religion, and only then ethnicity.
      At the same time you claim that the only factor that mattered was Serbian ethnicity, and the rest was in practice irrelevant.
      Basically I can see only two interpretations there:
      1) either the camps were primarily for Orthodox, and it happened that practically all of Orthodox in that region were Serbs
      2) or, there just was no pro-Austrian non-Orthodox Serbs in the region in any significant number, who could be separated and groomed into new ethnicity, like there were in retroactively named Ukrainians.

      Also, since it was a whole year later into the war, the policies and practices of establishing camps could deteriorate. Was it the first camp in Doboj and only a year later one in Terezin – the “inclusiveness” if the policies could be the opposite way.

  2. The nature of WWI in the territory of present-day Bosnia i Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia was not only national (anti-Serb) but also confessional (anti-Orthodox) since both were characteristics of only one nation. The same thing happened in WWII, therefore it is justified and even a moral obligation to stress that when speaking about the victims who were murdered by millions. If You know and have evidence about some other, non – Serbian prisoners from the Doboj camp, you should share it with the world.
    Ukrainians, Lemkos? One or two nations?
    Still, I don’t deal with the Ukrainian issues and I’m not planning to. However, I appreciate your suggestion.
    Croats, Bosnian Muslims were fighting on the opposite side, for Austrohungarians as their official troops.
    I suggest taking and studying the report of Dr Archibald Reiss, for example. It could provide You with all the answers.
    The facts are the way they are and no arguing about them is possible.

Comments are closed.