How the NYT lied, and how the World believed it

In more than sixteen years now (December 1997), the New York Times was repeating at least 2,236 times that the Krajina Serbs are “occupiers”, “conquerrors” or “land grabbers” of one third of Croatia. They repeated, in the same period, the same fabrications about the Bosnian Serbs at least 3,807 times. They claimed that the Bosnian Serbs are “occupiers”, “conquerrors”, “land grabbers” of two thirds of Bosnia.

From the here presented literature it is clear that the Serbs settled in Bosnia in seventh century. They were invited to settle in Krajina in 1578

The following map was issued by the New York Times, Saturday, November 26, 1994.

map-NYT-1994

This map is a Smoking Gun Proof that New York Times (as well as the other major Western media) were involved in blunt Goebbelsian-like propaganda. This map shows that they KNEW they were laying when labbeling the Serbs as “occupiers”, “aggressors”, “land grabbers” etc.

While they published countless maps of the Serbian “conquer” once (and once only!) did they publish that those Serbs actually LIVED (before the war) on the territories they controlled. On the map the Serbs were represented in solid gray color.


NOTE: Even here, at a rare moment of truth, the New York Times had to be true to its ways. They had to blame the Serbs, and Serbs only, for disintegration of Yugoslavia.

In very few sentences of the above text seen on the map they managed to slip the following lies:

  1. They claimed that Serbs had “political domination” over Yugoslavia. The truth is, as you will will see if you follow the following link, that Croat and Slovene Communists controlled Yugoslavia.
  2. The Serbs could not be “minority” in Croatia and Bosnia, as said above. The Serbs were CONSTITUENT nation of Yugoslavia. If secessionists had right to secede the same way the loyal population had the right to stay in the federation…
    Croats and Bosnian Muslims wishing to make their own countries did not have right to kidnap the Serbs and take territory – for centuries majority Serbian – with them.

One more IMPORTANT NOTE: The country of Yugoslavia was formed in 1918. Its first name was the “Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes”. Those three nations were the constituent nations of Yugoslavia. Thus, they have the right to (using peaceful means) negotiate leaving the union.

Albanians of Kosovo are NOT constituent nation of Yugoslavia. They are minority in the true sense of the term. To make a precedent and give Albanians of Kosovo “right” to secede would open a whole new Pandora’s box in the international relationships.

 

Source: NYT,
srpska – mreža.com 

 

Demolishing the myth of the tolerant Ottoman Rule in Balkan

Since I observe more and more Turks claiming that they brought  ‘Civilization, tolerance,  noble culture, prosperity and respect for the non -Ottomans,  and even more Bosnian and Albanian Muslims  who dream the return of the Ottomans in Balkan again,  let  us  see what are they actually up to.

From mid-15th century for the next four centuries the Serbian  Christians of Bosnia suffered tyrannical rule.

If any single factor made the Balkans what they were in history — and what they still are today — it was the ordeal of the Turk… For the 18th and 19th Centuries, the image of Turkey was that of a rotting empire, of a corrupt, incompetent and sadistic national elite preying on the subject Balkan peoples – of a cynical government WHOSE VERY METHOD OF RULE WAS ATROCITY.

They forbade the building of all but the meanest churches, and likewise outlawed the ringing of church bells.

What was damaging to the Balkan peoples was [that]… they had been stripped of pride and freedom. As Christians, they were now despised…

The Turkish overlordship created a Balkan mosaic of legal, social and economic relations… What was uniform to all [subdued Christians] was the experience of alien overlordship and the legacy of violence as the cohesion and power of the Empire declined. When the Empire passed its apex of power in the 17th and 18th Centuries, the conditions of the subject peoples took a catastrophic turn for the worse… It was in these… years that the proverb came into vogue: “Where the Turk trod, no grass grows.” Within the Empire, the 17th and 18th Century military officials, the beys and dahis, savagely oppressed the people; they were scarcely to be distinguished from the robber bands…

On the frontiers, [which is where Bosnia was] war — and with it the parallel evils of yearly murder, rape and arson — became as regular as the cycle of season.

The above quote is from:
“The Balkans,” pp 43 – 45
Time-Life World Library
by Edmund Stillman and the Editors of LIFE
Time Inc., New York, 1967

In the Serbian regions, the most fanatical opponents of Christian emancipation were the Muslims  Bosniacs…

A systematic enquiry into the condition of the Christians was conducted by British consuls in the Ottoman Empire in the 1860s. Britain was then Turkey’s strongest ally. It was in its own interest to see that the oppression of the Christians would be eliminated in order to prevent any Russian or Austrian interference. Consul James Zohrab sent from Bosna-Serai (Sarajevo) a lengthy report, dated July 22, 1860, to his ambassador in Constantinople, Sir Henry Bulwer, in which he analyzed the administration of the provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He stated that from 1463 to 1850 the Bosniac Muslims enjoyed all the privileges of feudalism. During a period of nearly 400 years Christians were subjected to much oppression and cruelty. For them no other law but the caprice of their masters existed… Under false accusations imprisonments are of daily occurrence. A Christian has but a small chance of exculpating himself when his opponent is a Muslim.”

The above quote is from:
Origin of the Myth of a Tolerant Ottoman Pluralistic Islamic Society
Chicago, August 31, 1995

Bosnajci sa Turskom

Bosnian Muslims in Serbia, Raska, wave Turkish flags as their national, saying: This is Turkey (not Serbia)


In the year 1413 the southern Serbian provinces were unable longer to hold out against the Turks. Serbia in 1459, Bosnia in 1463, and Herzegovina in 1481 were all finally conquered and became Turkish provinces.

The basis of Ottoman power was the sword and the Ottoman State was and is an organised theocracy.

The Mohammedan Ottoman religion is not a religion in the Christian sense of involving principally the problems of morality, spiritual growth, and immortality. Ottoman Mohammedanism is a state of society founded on a collection of laws and legal principles dealing with and ruling every event of individual and public life. The vast community of believers in various countries of the world basing the entire political, social, and religious fabric on that collection of laws, and the mystical, ethical, and philosophical tenets given by Mahomet in the Koran, afterward developed by the masters of the “Four Schools” of Mohammedan teaching, forms “Islam.”

For that reason where the Ottoman Islam is master no other civil status is recognized except in tolerance and in subordination to the Islam. There can be no assimilation with people of other creeds or civilization  The perception of that fact was vividly set forth in the arguments of that Sultan, in the seventeenth century, who urged that as an Ottoman Muslim victor and Christian vanquished could never make one people, Ottoman domination could become secure only by the universal slaughter of all Christians in conquered territories. Up to our own time that conclusion has haunted Stamboul [Istanbul] like an evil dream.

The conquered Christian populations were disarmed and dispossessed of all property, and were soon pressed into a condition of serfdom under Turkish masters. They were called “giours” and in the mass the “rayah,” “the herd.” Whoever renounced his faith and became a Turk – Mohammedan was thereby instantly naturalized into Islam, receiving the status and all the life-chances of a born Osmanili [Turk]. That was the sole means in his power of escaping from the subjected masses or of opening a door of opportunity.

The Serbians in general refused to accept that door of escape from durance vile  and remained true to their Orthodox Christian and national faith, even though the long night of practical extinction, hoping for a dawn though long deferred.

Many of the Serbian nobles and numbers of the common people fled to Serb lands under Venice or those under Hungary [i.e. to Krajina].

But certain ones among the nobles and others became Turks – Moslems, thereby preserving their lands and castles, and authority was given to them under the Turks as Pashas, Beys, Agas, and Spahis. They became ranged, in the eyes of the general populations, on the side of the conquerors, and were looked upon by the people as Turks.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the inhabitants had not only been subject to Turkish attack, but had been obliged as well to stand, ever beating back Hungarian invasions, the greater part of the nobles went over in body to Mohammedanism.

Large numbers of Serbs, loyal to their faith and home traditions, escaped to the mountain fastnesses from which they were able to harass the Turks of the plains and so maintain a relative independence.

The Serbians of the Rayah lived under great oppression and humiliation, their only means of protection being through the Serbian Patriarch so long as one existed. 

In case of acts of injustice or violence suffered at the hands of individual Turks, there was no possible redress.  –

The Orthodox Christian Serbs were forbidden the use of horses or camels, only mules and asses being allowed them.

They were forbidden to ride even a mule or an ass in the presence of a Turk (or in the presence of an converted, former Serbs).

It was not permitted that their houses should have a better appearance than Turkish houses.

For their faith they had much to suffer. The Serbian Orthodox clergy, few in number, were kept in miserable conditions, and churches which had been destroyed were not allowed to be rebuilt, the building of new churches being strictly forbidden.

The sound of church bells was forbidden as was also the reading aloud of the Holy Scriptures or the pronunciation of the name of Jesus Christ.

It was not lawful to make the sign of the cross, to show a cross, or to eat pork in sight of a Turk.

The Rayah were not allowed openly to bury their dead; Christian burials took place at night or in secret; mourning for the dead was strictly prohibited either by costume or by symbol or in any other way.

Church services were often held in some secluded spot in forest or glen, sometimes under a chosen tree marked with a cross; or ordinary houses were built as if for a family, with a central hearth, and sometimes with surrounding st

In Ottoman Empire Christians were but slaves at nonexistent mercy of their Muslim lords. Many, many books worldwide write about different horrors the Christians endured.

One of the most humiliating forms of oppression was that Muslims gave themselves “right of the first night”. In practice it meant that Turkish (or local Muslim Slav) lord would spend the first night with the new Christian bride. The groom had to take shoes off and silently circle the house while the Turk makes love to his wife.

Still, by far the worst horror the Christians had to endure was the Turkish Janissary system. Western scholars frequently downplay the importance of this “Tax in Blood” as Christian subjects nicknamed it. 

While any subject boy might aspire to the highest rank in the Turkish Empire, he had to convert to Islam to do so; when the security of the Ottoman state demanded, there were forced conversions. Every four years the most vigorous boys were taken from the towns and villages, willingly or not, to be trained as Janissaries (a word from the Turkish yeni cheri, or new troops).
The DEVSHIRME system is well known. Begun by the Sultan Orkhan (1326-1359), it existed for about 300 years. It consisted of a regular levy of Christian children from the Christian population of the Balkans. These youngsters, aged from fourteen to twenty, were Islamized and enslaved for their army. The periodic levies, which took place in contingents of a thousand, subsequently became annual. To discourage runaways, children were transferred to remote provinces and entrusted to Muslim soldiers who treated them harshly as slaves. Another parallel recruitment system operated. It provided for the levy of Christian children aged six to ten (ICHOGHLANI), reserved for the sultans’ palace. Entrusted to eunuchs, they underwent a tyrannical training for fourteen years.

The above quote is from:
Origin of the Myth of a Tolerant Ottoman Pluralistic Islamic Society
Chicago, August 31, 1995

download

Turkish way of dealing with Serbs ( with  RAYAH, as they called them)

The first presentation above sounds almost idyllic: A boy dreams of obtaining “high rank in the Empire” or some boys “were taken” from their parents in order to achieve glorious carrier in Turkish Army.

What it actualy meant was that the hated Turks would kidnap your child and – even worse – return it, now as a Muslim and your worse enemy!

How can anyone put it in words? Dr. Ivo Andrich, who was born in Bosnia was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1961 for his novels about Bosnian Christian suffering. Encyclopedia Britannica (Micropedia, Edition 1986, Vol 1, Page 393, entry: Andric, Ivo) said (quote):

Andric’s work reveal his deterministic philosophy and his SENSE OF COMPASSION AND ARE WRITTEN OBJECTIVELY AND SOBERLY, in language of great beauty and purity. The Nobel Prize committee commented particularly on the “ephic force” with which he handled his material, especially in “The Bridge on the Drina”.

Let the master of literature talk. Here is an excerpt from the above mentioned Nobel Prize book “Bridge on the Drina,” which describes how this “tax in blood” felt, as it is told and retold chilling blood of generations of surviving Christians of Bosnia


On that November day a long convoy of laden horses arrived on the left bank of the river and halted there to spend the night. The Aga of the janissaries, with armed escort, was returning to Stambul after collecting from the villages of eastern Bosnia the appointed number of Christian children for the blood tribute.

…the necessary number of healthy, bright and good looking lads between ten and fifteen years old had been found without difficulty, even though many parents had hidden their children in the forests, taught them how to appear half witted, clothed them in rags and let them get filthy, to avoid the Aga’s choice. Some even went so far as to maim their own children, cutting off one of their fingers with an axe.

a little way behind the last horses in that strange convoy straggled, dishevelled and exhausted, many parents and relatives of those children who were being carried away forever to a foreign world where they would be circumcised, become Turkish and, forgetting their faith, their country and their origin, would pass their lives in the service of the Empire. They were for the most part women, mothers, grandmothers and sisters of the stolen children.

[The women would get driven away but…] ….gather again a little later behind the convoy and strive with tear-filled eyes to see once again over the panniers the heads of the children who were being taken from them. The mothers were especially persistent and hard to restrain. Some would rush forward not looking where they were going, with bare breasts and dishevelled hair, forgetting everything about them, wailing and lamenting as if at a burial, while others almost out of their minds moaned as if their wombs were being torn by birthpangs and blinded with tears ran right onto the horsemen’s whips and replied to every blow with the fruitless question: “Where are you taking him? Why are you taking him from me?” Some tried to speak clearly to their children and give them some last part of themselves, as much as might be said in a couple of words, some recommendation or advice for the way…
“Rade, my son, don’t forget your mother…’
“Ilija, Ilija, Ilija!” screamed another woman, searching desperately with her glances for the dear well-known head and repeating this incessantly as if she wished to carve into the child’s memory that name which would in a day or two be taken from him forever.

Mother’s cries must still be echoing Bosnian mountains.

It should not pass without mention that once Westerners conquered Bosnia, recently, one of the first thing they did in the course of “engineering democracy” (and while trying to impose Muslim rule on Bosnian Serbs) was to ban use of Dr. Andrich’s works from school books for the Serbian children. It is as if one was to ban Shakespeare in England!

Andrich’s books were translated in all languages of the West. His, above cited book “The Bridge on the Drina” can be found in any decent size library in the West. It tells volumes about total collapse of Western culture and morality that the same Western nations which praized Bosnian author in 1961 – banned his works few decades later.

Again, the Serbian grief was amplified by the fact that these returning children, now Janissaries were the most intolerant, most militant Muslims. As the time was passing and the central rule in the Empire was dying out, it was Janissaries who actually governed Bosnia. They were the ones who were the most oppressive and cruel. When Great Britain (in trying to repel Russia from the Balkans, in its self-imposed, everlasting “Great Game”) insisted that Turkish sultan should give equal rights to his Christian subjects, Janissaries of Bosnia were the ones who started a rebellion to topple the sultan.

 Bosnian Muslims also provided the Ottoman bureaucracy in Hungary after the battle of Mohacs in 1526. At lower level of administration, the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Christian peasants of the raya were governed by Slav Muslim landowners, who, whilst retaining their Slavonic speech, adopted the manners and dress of the Turkish court. Like many converts, they often ‘out-Ottomaned the Ottomans in their religious zeal’.

The above quote is from:
“A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples”
by Professor Fred Singleton,
Cambridge University Press,
Edition 1985, pp 20-21

The janissaries, who were once the elite corps of the sultan army, had degenerated by the end of the eighteenth century into an unrully and lawless rabble, who were at best an embarrassment and at worst threat to their rulers… Sultan Mahmud I (1730-54) attempted to disband the janissaries and to put in their place a modern force, modelled on the standing armies of his European enemies. Unfortunately for the Serbs, he was only partly successful. In an attempt to remove the influence of the janissaries from Istanbul, where they naturally formed a powerful opposition to his reforms, Mahmud tried to buy them off by offering them a virtually free hand in garrisoning the remote provinces of the empire [like Bosnia and Hercegovina]. There they could plunder and abuse the local peasantry with impunity, even dispossessing them from their lands. … Mahmud may have bought time for himself, but he stored up trouble for his successors.

The above quote is from:
“A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples”
by Professor Fred Singleton,
Cambridge University Press,
Edition 1985, page 75

The reform of the Ottoman government contemplated by the sultan Mahmud II (1808-1839) was BITTERLY RESENTED in Bosnia… Many of the janissaries had married and settled on the land, forming a strongly conservative and FANATICAL caste, friendly to the Moslem nobles, who now dreaded the curtailment of their own privileges. Their opportunity came in 1820, when the Porte [the Turkish government] was striving to repress the insurrection in Moldavia, Albania and Greece. A first Bosnian revolt was crushed in 1821, a second, due principally to the massacres of the jannissaries, was quelled with much bloodshed in 1827. After Russo-Turkish War of 1828-29, a further attempt at reform was initiated by the sultan and his grand vizier, Reshid Pasha. Two years later came a most formidable outbreak: THE SULTAN WAS DENOUNCED AS FALSE TO ISLAM, AND THE BOSNIAN NOBLES GATHERED IN BANJALUKA (Bosnia), DETERMINED TO MARCH TO CONSTANTINOPLE, AND RECONQUER THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE FOR THE TRUE [Islam] FAITH.

A HOLY WAR WAS PREACHED BY THEIR LEADER, HUSSEIN AGA BERBERI, A BRILLIANT SOLDIER AND ORATOR, WHO CALLED HIMSELF “ZMAJ BOSANSKI” [dragon of Bosnia], AND WAS REGARDED BY HIS FOLLOWERS AS A SAINT. The Moslems of Herzegovina, under Ali Pasha Rizvanbegovic, remained loyal to the Porte, but in Bosnia Hussein Aga encountered little resistance. At Kossovo he was reinforced by 20,000 Albanians, led by Mustapha Pasha, and within a few weeks the united armies occupied the whole of Bulgaria, and large part of Macedonia. Their career was checked by Reshid Pasha, who persuaded the two victorious commanders to intrigue against one another, secured the division of their forces, and then fell upon each in turn.

The rout of the Albanians at Prilipe and the capture of Mustapha at Scutari were followed by an invasion of Bosnia. After a desperate defence, Hussein Aga fled to Esseg in Hungaria – Slavonia, his appeal for pardon was rejected, and in 1832 he was banished for life in Tribizond.

The power of the Bosnian nobles, though shaken by their defeat, remained unbroken, and they resisted vigorously when their kapetanates were abolished in 1837, and again when A MEASURE OF EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW was conceded to the Christians in 1839.

In Herzegovina, Ali Pasha Rizvanbegovic reaped the reward of his fidelity. HE WAS LEFT FREE TO TYRANNIZE OVER HIS CHRISTIAN SUBJECTS, a king in all but name.

The above quote is from:
Encyclopedia Britannica,
Edition 1910
Volume 4, page 284

As  BAT YE’OR*  said  in her speech 

THE INTERNATIONAL STRATEGIC STUDIES ASSOCIATION 

SYMPOSIUM ON THE BALKAN WAR 

YUGOSLAVIA: PAST AND PRESENT  –  31 August 1995: 

 (…) The DEVSHIRME system is well known. Begun by the Sultan Orkhan (1326-1359), it existed for about 300 years. It consisted of a regular levy of Christian children from the Christian population of the Balkans. These youngsters, aged from fourteen to twenty, were Islamized and enslaved for their army. The periodic levies, which took place in contingents of a thousand, subsequently became annual. To discourage runaways, children were transferred to remote provinces and entrusted to Muslim soldiers who treated them harshly as slaves. Another parallel recruitment system operated. It provided for the levy of Christian children aged six to ten (ICHOGHLANI), reserved for the sultans’ palace. Entrusted to eunuchs, they underwent a tyrannical training for fourteen years. (A system of enslaving Black Christian and Animist children, similar to the DEVSHIRME existed in Sudan as is shown from documents to be published in my book. A sort of DEVSHIRME system still exists today in Sudan and has been described and denounced by the United Nations Special Report on Sudan and in a recent article last Friday’s TIMES OF LONDON.) In 1850, the Bosniac Muslims opposed the authority of the Sultan and the reforms, but were defeated by the Sultan’s army aided by the Christians who hoped that their position would thereby improve, “but they hardly benefited.” Moreover, despite their assistance to the sultan’s army, Christians were disarmed, while the Muslims who fought the sultan could retain weapons. Christians remained oppressed as before, Consul Zobrab writes about the reforms: “I can safely say, they practically remain a dead letter”.

Discussing the impunity granted to the Muslims by the sultan, Zohrab wrote:
“This impunity, while it does not extend to permitting the Christians to be treated as they formerly were treated, is so far unbearable and unjust in that it permits the Muslims to despoil them with heavy exactions. 
Under false accusations imprisonments are of daily occurrence. A Christian has but a small chance of exculpating himself when his opponent is a Muslim.
“Christians are now permitted to possess real property, but the obstacles which they meet with when they attempt to acquire it are so many and vexatious that very few have as yet dared to brave them. Although a Christian can buy land and take possession it is when he has got his land into order […] that the Christian feels the helplessness of his position and the insincerity of the Government. [Under any pretext] “the Christian is in nineteen cases out of twenty dispossessed, and he may then deem himself fortunate if he gets back the price he gave.”

Commenting on this situation, the consul writes:

“Such being, generally speaking, the course pursued by the Government towards the Christians in the capital of the province Sarajevo where the Consular Agents of the different Powers reside and can exercise some degree of control, it may easily be guessed to what extend the Christians, in the remoter districts, suffer who are governed by Mudirs generally fanatical.”

He continues:

“Christian evidence in the Medjlises (tribunal) as a rule is refused. Knowing this, the Christians generally come forward prepared with Mussulman witnesses (…), twenty years ago, it is true, they had no laws beyond the caprice of their landlords.”

“Cases of oppression are frequently the result of Mussulman fanaticism, but for these the Government must be held responsible, for if offenders were punished, oppression would of necessity became rare.”

In the spring of 1861 the sultan announced new reforms in Herzegovina, promising among other things freedom to build churches, the use of church bells and the opportunity for Christians to acquire land.

Commenting on this, Consul William Holmes in Bosna-Serai writes to Ambassador Sir Henry Bulwer thatthose promises rarely applied. He mentions that the Serbs, the biggest community were refused the right to build a church in Bosna-Serai. Concerning the right to buy land, he writes; “Every possible obstacle is still thrown in the way of the purchase of lands by Christians, and very often after they have succeeded in purchasing and improving land, it is no secret that on one unjust pretext or another, it has been taken from them.”

Consul Longworth writes, from Belgrade on 1860 that by its Edicts the “Government may hasten such a reform but I question very much whether more evil than good will not arise from proclaiming a social equality which is, in the present stage of things and relations of society, morally impossible.”

The biggest problem, in fact, was the refusal to accept either Christian or Jewish testimony in Islamic tribunals.

Consul Longworth comments on “the lax and vicious principle acted upon in the Mussulman Courts, where, as the only means of securing justice to Christians, Mussulman false witnesses are permitted to give evidence on their behalf.”

The situation didn’t change, and in 1875 the Grand Vizier Mahmud Pasha admitted to the British Ambassador in Constantinople, Sir Henry Elliot, the “impossibility of allowing Christian testimony at courts of justice in Bosnia.” Thus, the Ambassador noted: “The professed equality of Christians and Mussulmans is, however, so illusory so long as this distinction is maintained.”

This juridical situation had serious consequences due to the system of justice, as he explained: “This is a point [the refusal of testimony] of much importance to the Christians, for, as the religious courts neither admit documentary nor written evidence, nor receive Christian evidence, they could hope for little justice from them.

The difficulty of imposing reforms in such a vast empire provoked this disillusioned comment, from Sir Francis, consul-general, judge at the British Consular Court in 1875 Constantinopole: “Indeed, the modern perversion of the Oriental idea of justice is a concession to a suitor through grace and favor, and not the declaration of a right, on principles of law, and in pursuance of equity.”

From Consul Blunt writing from Pristina on 14 July 1860 to Ambassador Bulwer, we learn about the situation in the province of Macedonia: “[…] For a long time the province of Uscup [Skopje, Macedonia] has been a prey to brigandage: […] Christian churches and monasteries, towns and inhabitants, are now pillaged, massacred, and burnt by Albanian hordes as used to be done ten years ago.

“The Christians are not allowed to carry arms. This, considering the want of a good police, exposes them the more to attacks from brigands.” “Christian evidence in law suits between a Mussulman and a non-Mussulman is not admitted in the Local Courts.”

Ten years before he said: “Churches were not allowed to be built; and one can judge of the measure of toleration practiced at that time by having had to creep under doors scarcely four feet high. It was an offense to smoke and ride before a Turk; to cross his path, or not stand up before him, was equally wrong.” […]

Fifteen years later, in another report from Bosna-Serai, dated December 30, 1875, from consul Edward Freeman, we learn that the Bosnian Muslims had sent a petition to the sultan stating that before the reforms, “they lived as brother with the Christian population. In fact, wrote the Consul, “their aim appears to reduce the Christians to their former ancient state of serfdom.” So once again we go back to the myth. When reading the literature of the time, we see that the obstruction to Serbian, Greek and other Christian liberation movement was rooted in two main arguments:

1) Christian DHIMMIS are congenitally unfitted for independence and self-government. They should therefore remain under the Islamic rule.
2) The Ottoman rule is a perfect model for a multi-religious and multi-ethnical society.

Indeed these are theological Islamic arguments that justify the JIHAD since all non-Muslim people should not retain political independence because their laws are evil and must be eventually replaced by the Islamic rule. Those arguments are very common in the theological and legal literature and are exposed by modern Islamists.

Collusion

The myth didn’t die with the collapse of the Turkish Empire after World War I.  And in the same way as the myth of the Ottoman political paradise was created to block the independence of the Balkan nations. 

And although from the beginning of this century until the 1930s, a stream of Christian refugees were fleeing massacres and genocide on the roads of Turkey, Irak and Syria, the myth continued to flourish,sustained mostly by Arab writers and clergyman. The myth reappeared in the form of a multi-cultural and multi-religious tolerance and caused  pernicious effects that led to the destruction of the Christians in Lebanon. One might have thought that the myth would end there.

But suddenly the recent crisis in Yugoslavia offered a new chance for its reincarnation in a multi-religious Ottoman Muslim Bosnian state. What a chance! A neo Ottoman Muslim state again in the heartland of Europe. And we know the rest, the sufferings, the miseries, the trials of the war that this myth once again brought in its wake.

To conclude, I would like to say a few last words. The civilization of dhimmitude does not develop all at once. It is a long process that involves many elements and a specific conditioning.

It happens when peoples replace history by myths, when they fight to uphold these destructive myths, more then their own values because they are confused by having transformed lies into truth. They hold to those myths as if they were the only guarantee of their survival, when, in fact, they are the path to destruction. Terrorized by the evidence and teaching of history, those peoples preferred to destroy it rather than to face it. They replace history with childish tales, thus living in amnesia.

=== The end of the speech

* About the speaker:

 BAT YE’OR, a pseudonyme of the Egypt born  author and scholar. A British citizen living in Switzerland, she is a specialist on the DHIMMIS and “DHIMMITUDE” (a new word which she coined), and the subject of her pioneer research for the past twenty-five years. Author, since 1971, of numerous articles on non-Muslims under Islamic rule.

Based on:

 “A Short History of the Yugoslav Peoples” Professor Fred Singleton,Cambridge University Press, Edition 1985,

Origin of the Myth of a Tolerant Pluralistic Islamic Society” Bat Ye’Or Chicago, August 31, 1995

“THE SERBIAN PEOPLE” by P. Lazarovich-Hrebelianovich & Eleanor Calhoun New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910, etc….

  sourse: “Srpska mreža”,

Confirmed: At least 8255 killed Serbs in Sarajevo

At least 8255 Serbs were killed in Sarajevo from 1992. to 1995,  confirmed  by the Institute for Research of Serbian suffering in the 20th century, Belgrade.

groblje srpsko

In addition, there are 860 persons are still missing. The Institute stated that the possibility of errors in the list is less than three percent and  that all  the inventory has been checked.    Associates of the  Institute  collected the data  through witnesses who were kept in the concentration camps, people who remained in Sarajevo during the war, from family members and survivors, who testifed that  the entire Serbian families were killed as their neighbors and friends testified.  One of the Institute’s  cooperates  Strahinja Živak said that the list has to be checked for every victims,  including name,  year of birth and death.

nikola gardovic

On the 2.  March 1992 Orthodox Priest Nikola Gardovic  was shot during the wedding of his son by pro Ottoman terrorists  in front of the Orthodox Church in Sarajevo.  His son in law was wounded.  That was the shot that started the War. 

“When the list is so large the possibility is ton have error of 3%, because some people in the meantime were exchanged, or managed to escape from the camps, and we couldn’t get any information nor could they been found. So the errors are possible, but 97 percent of the data was checked and is absolutely accurate,.”

He announced that his book  “The executed Sarajevo Serbs ” is to be published soon.

source: http://www.vesti-online.com/Vesti/Ex-YU/189039/Ubijeno-najmanje-8255-Srba-u-Sarajevu

http://www.rating.rs/en/bonitet/INSTITUT-ZA-ISTRAZIVANJE-SRPSKIH-STRADANJA-U-XX-VEKU

Republika Srpska marks 21 years since the attack on Kupres

– The laying of wreaths at the monument to the fallen soldiers and civilians in Republika Srpska and the service of the liturgy in the Church of the Holy Trinity in Kupres / Republika Srpska /  have marked 21 years since the attacks of Croat-Muslim forces on Kupres and  Malovan village,  when 72 Serbian soldiers and civilians were killed.kupres

President of the Municipal Veterans’ Association of Republika Srpska in Kupres  / Spiro Knežić, said that the crime happened, unfortunately, and no one ever investigated it nor put on trial.  One member of Croatian forces was indicted, but the local (Croatian) court almost immediately released him.

During  the first day of the Croatian attack on Kupres about 80 Serbs were killed; some are still missing ( 14 Serbs still missing after being taken in the conc camps in Herzegovina and Croatia)

The memorial service  was  served at 10:00 am in the Church of the Holy Trinity in Novo Selo, and gathered  families of fallen soldiers, members of the Presidency of the Municipal Veterans’ Association, and the head of the Veterans of the Republika  Srpska.

At 11.00 the wreaths were laid at the monument to the fallen soldiers at Novo Selo.

The fate of 14 Serbian civilians from Kupres, which were captured by the Croatian army in  April in 1992.  even 21 years later is not fully resolved.

All the traces have been lost in the area between Kupres-Tomislavgrad  – Split-Zadar l, and their bones have not been found.

After the massacre in Sijekovac and Brod, Kupres is the first municipality occupied by the regular forces of Croatia and by  Territorial Defense of the Western Herzegovina who  committed massive crimes against the Serbian civilian population.

HV units, Split, Osijek, Varazdin and other places along with paramilitary forces from Tomislavgrad, Posusje and Livno, attacked at dawn 3 April in 1992.  Serbian villages above Kupres – Donji  and Gornji Malovan. Locals who were not able to escape to a nearby forest were killed in the most brutal manner.tl_files/ug_jadovno/img/preporucujemo/2013/vijesti/sjecanje-svijeca-zastava.jpg

The attack on the village was conducted by the following units of the Croatian army:
Unit 106 Osiječka101 Zagreb and 142 Split-Kastela Brigade of the Croatian Army, then a special unit of Vukovar “Yellow Ants” unit of special purpose Croatian Interior Ministry, Student Battalion / Battalion / “Kralj Tomislav“, made up of students from Tomislavgrada and Livno,  battalion “Velez” and “Zrinjski“.

After conquering  Serbian village, the Croatian forces conducted a raid on Kupres, on 6. April,  so they  occupied almost the entire territory of the mountainous municipality.  The death toll of this criminal attack was horrible. 57 Serbian civilians  have been killed and hundreds of Serbs detained in the camp that have been set up in the hall of the factory “Kvalitet” in  Kupresu.

The occupation of Kupres  lasted until the 7th April in 1992. year, when the forces of the JNA (Yugoslav National Army) under the command of  General Slavko Lisica, liberated the town and the entire municipality.

In a panic run Croatian soldiers took  hostages –  group of captured Serbian civilians who have been through many conc camps in western Herzegovina, and many of them ended up in one of the most notorious camp “Lora” in Split.

The Kupres area, for centuries inhabited by Serbs, falls again into Croatian forces hands on 4 November 1994. Later on the Dayton peace plan confirmed the are as a part of the Croato – Muslim federation.

 

 

 

Sources:  БИГ РАДИО /

срна

The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks

In the time when neo Ottomanism is back and has already ‘gently’ conquered Balkans (through their proxy,  Bosnian Muslims and Albanians as well as through the movies and music),  Turkey attempts to present the Ottoman rule in Balkan as ‘bringing the mercy and civilization to the barbers ‘  and the ‘ centuries of great prosperity, peace and harmony’. That’s what their official  history textbooks even teach young Turks! – and that has nothing to do with reality.

So, let us see what really happened to Orthodox Christians  in Balkans during the Ottoman rule.

The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks: The Academic Publication on the Greek Genocide

The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks (www.caratzas.com) is a book which digs deep into the deplorable actions of the dying embers of the Ottoman Empire and the foundation of the Turkish Republic which systematically annihilated various Christian communities. These various Christian communities were the indigenous people and suffered such brutality because of their ethnicity and religious affiliation. However, in the vast majority of schools throughout Europe and further abroad, this “hidden genocide” remains “in the dark” because of enormous pressure from modern Turkey and other factors.

Like the title of the book implies, the area covered is the genocide of the Greek community. Indeed, this is the first academic publication on the Greek genocide therefore it will serve to be a valuable source of information. The brutality that occurred during this period of history is unimaginable and clearly it is essential that a major academic publication deals with this very important subject. Therefore, The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks fills this academic gap and sheds light on a genocide which needs more international attention.

On the Greek Genocide website it is stated that During the years 1914-1923, whilst the attention of the international community focused on the turmoil and aftermath of the First World War, the indigenous Greek minority of the Ottoman Empire, the Republic of Turkey’s predecessor, was subjected to a centrally-organized, premeditated and systematic policy of annihilation. This genocide, orchestrated to ensure an irreversible end to the collective existence of Turkey’s Greek population, was perpetrated by two consecutive governments; the Committee for Union and Progress, better known as the Young Turks, and the nationalist Kemalists led by Mustafa Kemal “Atatürk”. A lethal combination of internal deportations involving death marches and massacres conducted throughout Ottoman Turkey resulted in the death of one million Ottoman Greeks.”

William Ramsay, a British ethnographer, visited the Ottoman Empire and clearly he understood what Turkish Muslim rule meant. He commented that the “Turkish rule…meant unutterable contempt…The Armenians (and Greeks) were dogs and pigs…to be spat upon, if their shadow darkened a Turk, to be outraged, to be the mats on which he wiped the mud from his feet. Conceive the inevitable result of centuries of slavery, of subjection to insult and scorn, centuries in which nothing belonged to the Armenian, neither his property, his house, his life, his person, nor his family, was sacred or safe from violence – capricious, unprovoked violence – to resist which by violence meant death.”

Henry Morgenthau, the ambassador of the United States (1913-1916) to the Ottoman Empire, stated that the policies of the Turkish government led to “outrageous terrorizing, cruel torturing, driving of women into harems, debauchery of innocent girls, the sale of many of them at 80 cents each, the murdering of hundreds of thousands and the deportation to and starvation in the desert of other hundreds of thousands, [and] the destruction of hundreds of villages and many cities”, all part of “the willful execution”

Comments and areas covered by the book titled The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks 

“The period of transition from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire to the foundation of the Turkish Republic was characterized by a number of processes largely guided by a narrow elite that aimed at constructing a modern, national state. One of these processes was the deliberate and planned elimination, indeed extermination, of the Christian (and certain other) minorities. According to demographic studies, the numbers are stark: In 1912 the areas of Asia Minor and Thrace were inhabited by about 4-5 million Christians and 7-8 million Muslims; by 1923 only 250-300,000 Christians remained.”

“Raphael Lemkin, the legal scholar who introduced the term genocide into international law, formulated his early ideas on the definition of this war crime by studying the destruction of the Christians of Asia Minor, while the distinguished Turcologist Neoklis Sarris has noted that the annihilation of the Christian minorities represented an integral element in the formation of the Turkish Republic. As the editors of this volume note the 2007 resolution by the International Association of Genocide Scholars, recognizing the Greek and Assyrian Genocides suggests a wider range of victim groups. This volume therefore represents an effort to provide an outline and a direction of a more extensive study of the deliberate destruction and elimination of a Greek presence that spanned over three millennia, in the space that became the Turkish Republic.”  [http://www.greek-genocide.org/iags_resolution.html]

greeks

“The last two decades have seen a massive amount of research of the genocide of the Armenian population in the Ottoman/Turkish space. Much less scholarly work has been done on the genocide of the Greeks of Asia Minor and Thrace; there are many reasons for this, including the fact that Turkish governments have been successful in intimidating diplomats in the context of Turkish-Greek relations of the last generation, and of subverting academic integrity (inducing some scholars to make a career as denialists supported by international NGOs, all in the name of countering nationalism).”

“The volume includes article contributions on the areas subtitled: Historical Overview, Documentation, Interpretation; Representations and Law; Genocide Education; Memorialization; Conceptualization; and a very extensive Bibliography”

Conclusion

This book is essential reading for all people who are concerned about the genocide of Christians by Turkish rulers. The denial of the genocide encouraged Adolf Hitler because he stated “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians? Therefore, the book called The Genocide of the Ottoman Greeks is a must read in order to fully understand the brutal reality of what happened to the Ottoman Greeks and other minorities.

sources:   http://moderntokyotimes.com/2012/05/06/the-genocide-of-the-ottoman-greeks-new-book-which-focuses-on-the-christian-genocide/

       http://www.caratzas.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&product_ID=531

‘War Child’ involved with arms lobby – is the Dutch princess a war criminal? (III)

Dutch royal scandal sheds light on former ‘Bosnia lobby’

Mabel-Wisse-Smith_big                       Sacirbey_Muhamed3_big

Mabel Wasse Smit, Mabel van Oranje                 Muhammed Sacirby

The ‘charity’ War Child was used a a cover for arms lobbying during the Bosnia war. War Child was always a politically dubious organisation, and was involved in financial scandals before. The current scandal in the Netherlands about the fiancee of Prince Friso – Mabel Wisse Smit – has unexpectedly given an insight into War Child. Mabel was a co-founder of War Child Netherlands, and that is not as admirable as it seems.

The scandal has been misreported outside the Netherlands as a sort of romantic tragedy. Even in the Netherlands, attention concentrated on Mabel’s affair with gangster Klaas Bruinsma while she was at university.

But the later period is much more interesting. The truth is that Mabel Wisse Smit was thoroughly involved in the international pro-Bosnia lobby, including its illegal arms lobby activities. She worked at the United Nations in 1993: there was an all-out war in Croatia, and the Bosnian war was starting. See the chronology

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1066981.stm

There she met the charismatic Bosnian ambassador to the UN, Mohammed Sacirbey, and began an affair with him which lasted several years. He later became Foreign Minister – he is now in an American jail awaiting extradition to Bosnia, on charges of embezzlement during that time.

Mabel helped him with his lobby work on behalf of Bosnia, her role was largely behind the scenes. The Dutch inquiry into the Srebrenica massacre later confirmed that the two of them had direct access to the Foreign Ministry, and influenced Dutch policy, in the run-up to the massacre (1995).

In 1994 Mabel set up the ‘European Action Council for Peace in the Balkans’, she did that together with Willemijn Verloop en the lawyer Phon van den Biesen. Van den Biesen represented Bosnia at the International Court in The Hague, when Bosnia charged rump ‘Yugoslavia’ (= Serbia) with genocide. He made the opening speech together with Sacirbey. The EACPB operated from his office. It is very unclear what exactly it did at the time, or since. Two meetings in the last 8 years are all that show on internet searches. But it’s clear that the founders defined ‘peace’ as Bosnian success in the war – not as the absence of fighting.

By mid-1995 the war had reached a critical phase. The Croatians went on the offensive with American-trained troops, and captured the Serb-inhabited Krajina region in August. In July, Serb forces had captured Srebrenica, which was protected by Dutch troops, they abandoned the enclave. Details of the subsequent killings there emerged during the following months.

During 1995 the same three people set up a Dutch branch of the existing English ‘charity’ War Child. Willemijn Verloop was paid by the EACPB – its funding is also unclear – to organise its activities. So War Child Netherlands was being run by the Bosnian Foreign Minister’s girlfriend, the Bosnian governments lawyer, and its organiser was in paid service of a separate political organisation – of which all three were directors.

The Bosnian forces were under severe pressure in 1995. They were geographically isolated and badly armed, and Sarajevo was surrounded. Officially no-one could help them militarily, because there was an arms embargo. UN Resolution 713, adopted in 1991, states:

“…all States shall, for the purposes of establishing peace and stability in Yugoslavia, immediately implement a general and complete embargo on all deliveries of weapons and military equipment to Yugoslavia until the Security Council decides otherwise following consultation between the Secretary-General and the Government of Yugoslavia”.

Bosnia had four strategies:

1. to seek secret arms supplies from western powers. That meant they would break their own arms embargo, but they had already done that to aid the Croatians.

2. to campaign to get the arms embargo lifted. Pro-Bosnia campaigners in the west supported this option.

3. to encourage a NATO invasion of Bosnia, which would be a de facto war against the Serb militias.

4. to seek illegal arms supplies from others, mainly Muslim states. Bosnia certainly got arms, and money to buy arms, from a network of Islamic sympathisers, including the then little-known Osama bin Laden. Supplies through Croatia in 1995 were tacitly approved by President Clinton. For the Iran-Bosnia connection, see

 http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/kokkalis/GSW3/Ibrahim_Al-Marashi.pdf

Sacirbey would have been involved with all of these strategies. He certainly tried openly to break the arms embargo, see this Reuters item for instance…

sources:

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/5252

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/kokkalis/GSW3/Ibrahim_Al-Marashi.pdf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1066981.stm

Bloody hands of the Dutch princes Mabel of Oranje-Nassau (II)

The following article represents  the last part of  materials related to obscure role the Dutch Princess Mabel of Oranje – Nassau played in Balkan tragedy. However, since I don’t speak Dutch, I used Google auto translations and also one good hearted native Dutch (thanks, R, kisses) .

My advantage is that I worked on this case during my career in a Serbian Weekly ten years ago, so I am familiar with the issue.

So this is the second part, edited and more or less successfully translated in English:

The Soros Foundation and the Open Society Institute in the Netherlands are not active. They have played a role in the support campaign for Soros’ B92 Channel,   radio station in Serbia. This was, in the two years before the Kosovo war, the main symbol of the pro NATO  opposition in Serbia.

It was mainly Dutch activists from the world of so called free media and internet, who stood up for B92 – as so-called “independent media” in Serbia.  It was the George Soros eho financed the transmitters.  It was also  time of the great Internet hype and in 1900-es capitalism seemed omnipotent, the global  economy grown into the infinite, and ‘all the good things came from the U.S.’ propaganda.

b92

Therefore Yugoslavia (Serbia, Montenegro and Serbs in Krajina and Bosnia)  was a stupid relic that had to be cleared by progressive forces – such as the NATO.   Internet service provider – the very first in the Netherlands – regulated the presence of pro NATO B92  Channel  on the Internet, so it could avoid the ‘censorship’ of Serbian authorities.

The website of the ‘free radio from Belgrade was transmitted via server located in  Amsterdam, and the service was paid from New York.  During the time being there was even a public invitation for B’92 Radio support  by depositing money into an account in New York – This was requested by George Soros .

Later, during the Kosovo war, the “independent” station broadcast from NATO aircraft and a BBC satellite channel. The motives for the Dutch backup are clear from the following piece of Karin Spaink, who was an adviser to the OSCE (OSCE), which was part of the administration of occupied Kosovo:

http://www.spaink.net/english/osce_internetfreedom.html

images (4)

It is almost certain that Mabel  Wisse Smit during the mid 90s maintained contacts with the Intelligence, possibly of several countries.   There was a war going on in Europe, it was far the most important in the EU agenda, the possibility of Western intervention was present from 1991, the Netherlands had troops in Bosnia from 1994.   And Mabel was the girlfriend of  Bosnian Sacirbey – that improves the Bosnian image in the West.  But  Sacirbey was also an American citizen – he grew up in the U.S. – and U.S. intelligence certainly  got a ‘file-Mabel’ .

Sacirbey

Capture: Muhamed Sacirbey, former Bosnian UN ambassador. Also former Dutch princess’ Mabel lover

Mabel worked with Italian politician Emma Bonino as well: She was a long time EU Commissioner, and she was in charge of humanitarian aid.   Bonino signed on 8 October 2003 a Statement of support for Mabel’s  organization.  Bonino  also stated that one ‘influential Dutch’ had requested so.  Through her work Mabel cooperated  in any case with Ruud Lubbers and Frits Bolkestein, and probably  Ed Thijn (former head of delegation of the OSCE observers in Bosnia).

The Times printed the Bonino’s  letter  on 9 October, and reported about it on the front page, presumably at the insistence of editor Peter Brothers (PvdA).  This is important simply because the list of signatories gives a picture of the world of Mabel Wisse Smit and the people who supported her criminal mission. It was clear that charity has nothing to do with it:

Morton Abramowitz: former U.S. ambassador to Turkey. He was also a Minister of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for intelligence. He was a board member of Human Rights Watch – an NGO largely paid by George Soros.  HRW was the main pro-intervention lobby under Clinton, and had close ties to the government and the US intelligence services.

Aryeh Neier: former director of Human Rights Watch, and long term president of the Open Society Institute of George Soros.

Emma Bonino: Italian ex-member of parliament, Radical Party, former European Commissioner, Member of the European Parliament as well.  In recent years, mainly known for a lobbying for Israel to be admitted to the EU, see:

http://www.radicalparty.org/israel/israele_f.htm 
http://coranet.radicalparty.org/israel

With Marco Panella  she’s a head of the ‘Transnational Radical Party’.  – The TRP  it allows no candidates for national elections, therefore it has the status of “non-governmental organization”.

 At the UN it’s  lobbying organization ( together with Human Rights Watch, the OSI, and Freedom House)  for  “creation of a group of democratic states. “(This group has to be led by the U.S.  and their goal is to takeover the  UN ).

Gian-Franco dell’Alba: board member of the Transnational Radical Party, Member of the European Parliament, and the secretary of No Peace Without Justice organization. This organization is campaigning for the trial of war criminals, and surprisingly the organization finds that all opponents of the U.S. committed the most horrible War crimes.   This so-called “independent” organization is paid by the EU – more than a million  per annum , thanks to EU Commissioner Chris Patten, fromthe British Conservative Party.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/europeaid/projects/eidhr/pdf/cpi-printed-brochure-seminaire-janvier2002_en.pdf

Gareth Evans: former Foreign Minister of Australia, and board member of the International Crisis Group (together with Emma Bonino).  The ICG is a powerful lobby for Western intervention.  Ed van Thijn and  Wim Kok  are the  board members, alongside other important persons  such as former NATO chief Wesley Clark.  ICG is paid by the United States (USIP, grants on behalf of the U.S. Congress to grant foreign political organizations).  Other Western countries (including the Netherlands)also pay, and  Bill Gates as an individual supporter.

During the 1997. the Dutch princess Mabel Wisse Smit was a member of  ICG:

http://www.crisisweb.org/annual/1998/staff.htm

ICG would like to thank the following individuals for their contribution to the organisation’s work during 1997: Laura Bernard, Sue Blackmore, Lee Bryant, Carole Corcoran, Lynne Davidson, Leo Dobbs, Eran Fraenkel,Martin Gairdner, Betsy Hamilton, Deborah Hinton, Alice Jay, Bernard Leloup, Peter Luff, Ivan Lupis, Paul Manning, Moritz Mieier-Ewart, Natasha Nadazin, Raymond Ryan, David Shearer, Simon Sheehan, Victor Tanner, Christiaan Winkel and Mabel Wisse-Smit.”

William Shawcross: also the board member of the International Crisis Group. Shawcross is a former opponent of the Vietnam War, who later became advocate of Western intervention, including in Chechnya, Iraq, Sierra Leone, Timor and Afghanistan. He supported and defended the policy of Bush and Blair in Iraq. He writes a book – besides his biography of the Queen Mother, see

http://www.guardian.co.uk/monarchy/story/0, 2763,997231,00. html

Bernard Kouchner: long time lobbyist for Western intervention. Founder of theDoctors Without Borders, who played an important role in popularizing the “humanitarian” military intervention and who were supposedly involved in international human organ trade.    After the war against Serbia, Kouchner was the UN and NATO appointed governor of occupied Kosovo – a suitable position for his neocolonial ideas. He is also mentioned as a possible governor of Iraq.

Bernard-Kouchner

Mark Malloch Brown: neoliberal, former media chief of the World Bank, and a head of UNDP – part of the UN  directly sponsored by corporate business, see

http://www.xs4all.nl/% 7Eceo/observer3/general.html # UNDP

Albert Rohan: former head of the Eastern European sector of the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and then Secretary-General, during the Balkan wars. Advocated Albanian and Muslim Bosnian interests,  military intervention against Serbs and the independence of Kosovo, see

http://afa.at/globalview/051999/kosovo.html      and this speech:

http://www.osce.at/osze/od/dokumente/upld/958982242.rtf.html

“In dealing with ruthless authoritarian regimes, diplomacy alone is not enough. It has to be backed up by a credible threat of armed interventionism and – if Necessary – by military action. Looking at the Developments in the Balkans or the last 10 years it becomes evident That Everything that has leg Achieved in terms of conflict resolution leg has done so by military force. ”

Laura Silber:  wrote a book (along with a campaign on BBC series)  in order to influence the  public opinion of England  in favor of military intervention against Serbia.  See the review here:

http://www.antiwar.com/malic/foretold.html

Sibel

Later she worked at the Open Society Institute as a policy adviser.

George Soros: really the spider in the web. Soros is not justone of the richest men in the world, he also has a great influence on the foreign policy of Western countries, as well as on the political development in Eastern European countries. He is the incarnate crusader of so called ‘Western values’. There is much on the internet about Soros: This is the New Statesman, June 2003, by Neil Clark …

http://www.mindfully.org/WTO/2003/George-Soros-Statesman2jun03.htm

soros1

“Soros likes to portray himself as an outsider, an independent-minded Hungarian emigre and philosopher-pundit who stands detached from the U.S. military-industrial complex. But take a look at the board members of the NGO he organises and finances. At Human Rights Watch, for example, there is Morton Abramowitz, U.S. assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research from 1985 to 1989, and now a fellow at the interventionist Council on Foreign Relations, former Ambassador Warren Zimmerman (Whose spell in Yugoslavia coincided with the break up or That country), and Paul Goble, director of communications at the CIA-created Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (which Soros Also funds). Soros’s International Crisis Group boasts such “independent” luminaries as the former national security advisers Zbigniew Brzezinski and Richard Allen, as well as General Wesley Clark, once Nato supreme allied commander for Europe. The group’s vice-chairman is the former congressman Stephen Solarz, once described as “the Israel lobby’s chief législative tactician on Capitol Hill” and a signatory, along with the likes of Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, to a notorious letter to President Clinton in 1998 calling for a “comprehensive political and military strategy for bringing down Saddam and his regime.”

Take a look at Also Soros’s business partners. At the Carlyle Group, where he has invested more than $ 100m, they include the former Secretary of State James Baker and the Erstwhile defense secretary Frank Carlucci, George Bush Sr. and, until recently, the Estranged relatives of Osama bin Laden.Carlyle, one of the world’s largest private equity funds, makes most of its money from its work as a defense contractor.

Soros may not, as some have suggested, be a fully paid-up CIA agent. But that his companies and NGOs are Closely wrapped up in U.S. expansionism can not seriously be doubted. “

It is interesting to compare Soros with his friend Tom Lantos, a Congressman with a similar background. Both come from a well-off Jewish environment in prewar Budapest, both survived the fascist regime, but chose to flee to the West rather than to remain in a communist Hungary – they have a deep hatred for Communism. The difference is that the U.S. Lantos glorified as a savior, both of the Jews, as in Hungary, as in Europe. Soros does not, at least not in public. Given its policy, it seems likely that he also has a similar historical role to the U.S..

In November 2003, Soros decided to campaign against president Bush. His criticism of Bush  in some media was seen as  criticism of  the U.S. military interventions.  But that’s not correct, because Soros supported it when Bill Clinton was president – and he would undoubtedly do the same of the elected president was Kerry.

In 1999, Soros spoke at the John Hopkins University, and his (rare) speech describes his ideal –  global military intervention by an alliance of democratic countries, under the auspices of the UN in order to finally reorder the world through violence.

“We need an authority That Transcend the sovereignty of states. We have Such an authority in the form of the United Nations, but the UN is not guided by the principles of open society. It is an association of states, some are democratic, others aren’t, and each of them is guided by its national interests. We have an association of democratic states,  NATO,   which intervenes in defense of democratic values, but it is a military alliance incapable of preventive actions.   By the time it intervenes it is too late and we have seen that its intervention can be counterproductive. It needs to be complemented by a political alliance dedicated to the promotion of open society and capable of acting both Within the UN and outside it. ” Commencement Speech delivered by George Soros. Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, May 27, 1999.

The next day, Serbia and Kosovo were  bombed day and night, with a total of 792 assaults.

Wisse Smit have founded the EACPB  in 1994, in order to lobby for Bosnian Muslims.  Simultaneously Mabel Wisse Smit had a relationship with Mohammed Sacirbey, then UN Ambassador of Bosnia.  In 1995, the  War Child Netherlands was founded.  In 1995 Sacirbey,  Minister of Foreign Affairs in Bosnia, was the principal of Phon van den Biesen.  The  War Child Netherlands through two of the directors had  ties with the Muslim Bosnian government.  The organization certainly had, together with its English branch, many pro-intervention and anti Serb propaganda practiced (and still does).

But that was not all. Mabel Wisse Smit through both the EACPB and War Child, has done some very obscure work in favor of Bosnia. If one is “peace activist” or “friend of children’  he can easily travel and makes contacts, but the situation is different when it comes to lobbyist .

War Child was (ab)used as a cover, as it came out. The donors have been cheated.  Not only Mabel Wisse Smit, but also Phon van den Biesen, knew what Mohammed Sacirbey did, and what helping the Bosnian ‘thing’  meant.  Sacirbey and princess Mabel arranged Iranian arms supplies, for example – and those were the things they openly arranged … 

http://www.payk.net/mailingLists/iran-news/html/1995/msg01049.htmlIran Says Islamic army chiefs to meet on Bosnia

NICOSIA, July 24 1995 (Reuters) – Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati was quoted on Monday  saying  that defense ministers and military chiefs from eight Moslem states will meet soon to discuss ways of helping Bosnia’s Muslims. Veleyati, quoted by IRNA in an interview with the daily Tehran Iran, said the military chiefs would ‘discuss practical ways to help Bosnian Muslims.”  Bosnian Foreign Minister Mohammed Sacirbey, who attended the Geneva meeting, said that  OIC military chiefs  stressed  to the newspaper that ‘According to the article 51 of the United Nations Charter, the Bosnian government  despite the IC Embargo on Weapon,  ” … has the right to conclude bilateral defensive contracts with other countries. ”

After acknowledging activities of  Sacirbey and Mabel, can you at least conclude that they have been, both,  hypocritical and unconscionable. She was the director of War Child funds , in charge to collect money for young victims of the war in Bosnia.

To help to all the children with injuries, for example, caused by weapons. Weapons of the Bosnian army, for example. And where did these weapons come from? They were discretely  imported (famous Split airport in Croatia)  by the Western powers,  and partly from Muslim countries.  In both cases because the Bosnian government and its representative Mohammed Sacirbey, have lobbied for this.

In Western capitals, especially in the Hague,  Sacirbey was helped by his Dutch girlfriend. The later Sacirbey’s assertion  that Mabel knew nothing of arms transactions, is simply a lie. As the Reuters report indicates they have both been directly involved.

Racism has also played a role in the ease with which the elites in Europe decided how Southeast Europe should look.

Even when War Child and similar organizations are doing what they claim to do – namely assistance – the paternalistic racism shines out of it.

In 2002, War Child Netherlands had projects in Bosnia, Kosovo, Eritrea, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Georgia, Chechnya and Pakistan. But as usual with Western aid organizations, there was not a single local  from these countries on the management board. The organization is 100% native Dutch (although, the cleaning staff was not mentioned in the annual report).  The organization is based on a contempt for the people who helped.

The heads of War Child sees the people in the “target countries” not morally equivalent, especially with regard to the social and constitutional order in their own area. Not coincidentally, all the countries on the list of War Child are also named as targets of Western intervention, or have already been.

A combination of arrogance, loftiness, snobbery, racism, and a lesser appreciation of non-Western life,  is certainly how Mabel Wisse Smit, Phon van den Biesen, and Willemijn Gradient treated  the Balkans.

Nevertheless they are not alone: ​​an infamous quote by Madeleine Albright, UN Ambassador and Secretary of State under Clinton, shows how their way of thinking.  In May 1996. Albright appeared  in the talk-show “60 Minutes”, and Lesley Stahl asked about the sanctions against Iraq:

http://www.zmag.org/hermanworthit.htmStahl: “We have Heard That a half a million children have died [Because Of sanctions against Iraq]. I mean that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And – you know, is the price worth it?”

Albright: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.”

Mabel Wisse Smit, Phon van den Biesen, and Willemijn Verloop are responsible and involved in  the deaths of 270,000 people alone in Bosnia: a further 1.17 million were driven out of there.

The economy collapsed in the war zones,  and it’s  still not restored, so that millions of people are still living in poverty. In 1990.  there was no war, and a state was economically  between Austria and Greece. In 2004 we have only Western protectorates and pro-Western nation states there.  Is that what they prefer to have, and do  they think, “It was worth it.”?

source: http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/mabel.html