The secret life of Tony Cascarino ? [Archive] - Page 2

lopez

02/08/2004, 10:20 AM

I discredited Veritas for much more than the two selected issues which you just presented as you know full well.
And we are to believe that those collecting evidence for Croatian and Bosniac victims are any more impartial.

If think my 'case' as you put it is clear and concise, without any requirement of assistance from anyone else. Your 'case' however may have been made better if you hadn't jumped in slagging people off, accusing people of being someone who they're not, and then either quoting them out of context or selectively.
I could say the same about you. Remember: I said 'lowlifes like Otto Skorzeny and Oswald Mosely.' You said I was therefore from the 'all Croats are fascist' school.

Which calculator are you using...I'd check its batteries if I were you. Anyone can see that my knowledge of gotovina, cascarino and croatia, and certain other aspects as well which you forgot to mention like milosevic, krajina serbs, Belgrade, serbia, yugoslavian history etc., WW2 regimes etc., and several other things not yet mentioned is the result of hard research and study. I have not revealed or disclosed any personal information about any of these subjects (unlike yourself), rather info the majority of which can easily be accessed and verified on the net. Your simply inputting non-existant figures on a dud calculator.
Except two things: One: The statement that Tony Cascarino is not 'right-wing'. How do you know what his 'politics' are? I'm not going to read through a manuscript that is heavily laden with 'Andy McNab' style war gumf but I spotted that despite Cascarino's service with the British Army he was 'sympathetic' to the aims of the PIRA (I'm sympathetic to an all-Ireland democratic - and therefore a state liable to autonomy and self - rule by minorities -sovereign state which is slightly different from PIRA's aims) and was 'sickenned' by his own regiment's involvement in Bloody Sunday. But this doesn't either say he's a pinko, an old style conservative or a fascist (all of whom can be counted in PIRAs supporters).And two: That the 'public UN document which is on the web [stating] he was not a merecenary (sic.)' is not accesible. Perhaps you could provide the link.

See google at: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=cascarino+UN+mercenary

Even if I was the general, cascarino, or Brian Gallagher, how does that change the fact that you have made malicious unsubstantiated allegations against two of them? The first results from the ICTY. The second from various newspaper reports - the most recent I read was in 1997 about mercenaries in Croatia in The Guardian - although the term mercenary is, I admit, slightly inaccurate, as the Guardian reported Croats failed to pay the money that these 'soldiers of fortune' were promised. The third: Let me see? How's about a man that writes biased propaganda masquerading as impartial comment.

Well if that's the case great, as I happen to believe he's innocent. That's not why I'm here though. I'm here to counter the lies, malicious accusations and plain bull**** with fact in order for people to make up their own minds. If people decide to consider gotovina in a positive light and discover he's not the 'trigger-happy low-life war criminal' that you suggest then fine.
You didn't arrive with that intention. You arrived because you discovered us talking about you. Your agenda is purely to use this thread to be an advocate for the General. You're no different than a tout looking to sell tickets.

As I previously stated for each lie I encounter whether pro or anti gotovina; I'll challenge it.
Same here, baby.

Are you suggesting that the fact that this is a football site it is incorrect for one member to correct the misconceptions of another?
No, but it would be more appropriate if you had some interest in football.

Gotovina is one of many cases I've studied and I will defend each of those which I believe to be innocent as equally as I defend him. BTW - can you tell me the name of a single person the general's shot or has been accused of shooting? Have a good look around Lopez. Mark my words - you will fail.Watching 'Island At War' last night - Sad, I Know but my boyfriend stood me up for another date - when a young maiden asks a German officer if he will personally execute a 'spy' he replies: 'I have staff for that.' No, you don't have to personally get up close and personal to be charged with murder! How many Jews did Reinhard Heidrich personally kill at Auschwitz?...oops sorry, I mentioned another 'fascist'.

the 12 th man

02/08/2004, 10:59 AM

Always though Cas.was a centre-forward :rolleyes: .....albeit a sometimes cumbersome one....... ;)

"and the referee is reaching for his pocket"."he is taking out a card" ......yes its a red one....... :D

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 12:47 PM

And we are to believe that those collecting evidence for Croatian and Bosniac victims are any more impartial..

Jeez...talking about a child throwing toys out of a pram....

Lopez...it would be preferable for you to cease throwing tantrums and just admit you had no grounds for the malicious accusations which you made.
Emotional outburts do not assist your cause, so stop getting wound up and stick to the facts.
I'd though you'd have learnt from your previous outbursts like in 'Ray Houghton Disgrace' National Team Forum, No. 42, ("Don't ****ing lecture me!") and the others, including the one's on this thread that others find it rather boring...and pathetic.

Lopez...before we get back to the question you've been asked regarding your remarks which you're so eager to avoid. I must point out to you something of which you are obviously equally unaware. Whether, deliberately or not, you are adept at misinterpreting others.

Lopez...each of your posts asks irrelevant questions which you attribute to me, but on inspection, have not originated from me.

The Croatian Helsinki organisation I previously mentioned has been a long term advocate of CROATIAN-SERB rights.

I could say the same about you. Remember: I said 'lowlifes like Otto Skorzeny and Oswald Mosely.' You said I was therefore from the 'all Croats are fascist' school..

You omitted the fact that I asked you to explain yourself first and your response didn't exactly exonerate you. Did it?

Wooooooawww!! Slow down Lopez....you have been asked several times to account for your malicious accusations that gotovina was a 'low-life trigger-happy war criminal' you have also stated cascarino was a 'soldier of fortune'.

Stop attempting to deviate from the questions.

What cascarino's 'political' affiliations are and if and how I know what they are has nothing to do with the questions which have been put to you and which you refuse to answer.

You arrived because you discovered us talking about you. Your agenda is purely to use this thread to be an advocate for the General. You're no different than a tout looking to sell tickets.

Really, well if that's the case who's the biggest lemon who's built the very soap box for me to stand on and handed me the loudspeaker eh Lopez?

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 1:01 PM

Watching 'Island At War' last night - Sad, I Know but my boyfriend stood me up for another date - when a young maiden asks a German officer if he will personally execute a 'spy' he replies: 'I have staff for that.' No, you don't have to personally get up close and personal to be charged with murder! How many Jews did Reinhard Heidrich personally kill at Auschwitz?...oops sorry, I mentioned another 'fascist'.

Is this a wind up or are you a genuine imbecile?

How many people has Gotovina killed Lopez? Are you suggesting Ante Gotovina was part of a genocidal conspiracy?

YOU STATED: GOTOVINA HIMSELF "WHO WANTS TO SHOOT WHOEVER TAKES HIS FANCY"

I ask you again..on what basis did you form this opinion?

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 2:15 PM

So let's wrap this up shall we Lopez?

Show us all one piece of evidence, any evidence that you wish, from any source, which suggests that Ante Gotovina 'shoots whoever takes his fancy' or that the Irishman known as 'Tony cascarino' who fought for croatia was a 'Soldier of Fortune'.

Because, for all your waffle, emotional outbursts and attempts to wangle out of it, one thing is certain: YOU CANNOT!

And the reason you cannot provide any evidence WHATSOEVER Lopez, is because you simply made it up didn't you?

And all you've been doing since then is denying to yourself the truth that you made it up. :eek:

No ifs, buts, Croatia did this, croatia did that, I've travelled to Yugoslavia, I've studied this and that, you're Tony cascarino, you're Brian Gallagher, you're the personification of everyone who supports the general...

Just face the facts that you've been telling porky pies about people you don't know relating to subjects you admittedly don't fully understand.

There's a :eek: good boy.

lopez

02/08/2004, 8:31 PM

Jeez, talking about...good boy.Take it the UN document exonerating you of being a mercenary is no longer on the web?

"and the referee is reaching for his pocket"."he is taking out a card" ......yes its a red one....... :DFor a wee moment I thought Tony was going to talk about his side's disgraceful UEFA cup exit to a team from :eek: Liechtenstein. Then I realised it wasn't him... :(

For anyone wishing to see the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia's original and amended Indictments of General Ante Gotovina, dated 21 May 2001 and 19 February 2004 respectively, look here. http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/got-ii010608e.htm
http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/got-ai040224e.htm

Bearing in mind that this is a court that is viewed as legitimate and sufficiently capable of dispensing justice by both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, I would like to direct people to item 13 and 16 of the original indictment and Item 20 of the amended indictment.

Item 20 states: Between 4 August 1995 and 15 November 1995, the accused Ante GOTOVINA, acting individually and/or in concert with other members of the joint criminal enterprise, planned, instigated, ordered, committed or otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, preparation, or execution of persecutions of the Krajina Serb population in the southern portion of the Krajina region. The crime of persecutions was perpetrated through the following: Plunder of Public or Private Property (Item 21); Destruction of Property (Item 22); Deportation / Forced Displacement (Item 23 & 24); Murder (Item 25); Other Inhumane Acts (Item 26 &27). The amended indictment is different in that the late Franjo Tudjman is no longer mentioned.

Pat O' Banton

02/08/2004, 8:38 PM

Are you seriously suggesting that the source is to be discredited as he's a citizen of the US because the US government supported the offensive?
[/url]

Not had time yet to look at the document that you suggest but will soon.

No what I am saying is that you use this as an impartial source when for the above reasons; that the journo concerned backs the US stance on the war and also their stance on the creation of the ICC and international courts in general. This means that the source has a political point of view that he wans to put across, something surely as an opinion writter he is paid to do. He of course has a right to put this across but it should not be regarded as impartial.

As to the homophobic, the reason that I said this was that you had a signiture that was to say the least dubiously homophobic re the hairdresser and shirt lifting, and also the comment regarding Lopez the were you out shirt lifting comment. Fair f*cks if your not but it was not the best way to show a tolerent man. Thanks for the correction.

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 8:54 PM

The amended indictment is different in that the late Franjo Tudjman is no longer mentioned.

I think if you actually read it you'll find it's still there.

Take it the UN document exonerating you of being a mercenary is no longer on the web?.

Au contraire Lopez. The publicly available document is still there. Which distinguishes the volunteers from the mercenaries, explains 'jus sanguis' and those classed as 'friends of croatia' and names an 'Irishman known as Cascarino.'

I think I've responded enough to your "I bet you can't show me X Y and Z" - you know where I've posted the exact things which you bet I wouldn't show you. However you haven't been playing ball have you?

You're acting like a spoilt child craving for attention.

I asked you simple questions regarding your false accusations and you can't answer them.

My..my we have been a busy boy! And you told everyone you weren't interested.

Nobody disputes what the indictment says Lopez you Dork! :D

BTW Thanks for handing me back the loudspeaker. :)

Bearing in mind that this is a court that is viewed as legitimate and sufficiently capable of dispensing justice by both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, I would like to direct people to item 13 and 16 of the original indictment and Item 20 of the amended indictment.

Bearing in mind that the same court several days ago had its previous 45 year conviction against another cro general quashed in what was called a miscarriage of justice and had 16 of its 19 counts thrown out by the appeals court on what was described as a 'wholly erronous' tribunal. That the court had misinterpreted the law, made factual errors, obtained insufficient evidence and meted out unfair punishment. Upheld only three lesser counts of war crimes for not adequately protecting detained civilians and not punishing his subordinates who had wrongfully detained them.

Amnesty International previously called this miscarriage of justice and wholly erronous trial a 'Milestone in the achievement of justice for the victims of war crimes' ....'

Gotovina's indictment is essentially the same as Blaskic's - tell me was Blaskic someone who 'shot at whoever took his fancy too?'

You have a memory like a sieve and clearly don't read posts Lopez, too wrapped up with trying to prove me wrong no doubt.

Ivan Cicak, the founder and former president of Croatia 's Helsinki Committee on Human Rights, investigated the charges of human rights abuses by Croatian forces during Operation Storm and concluded that "95 percent of the war crimes were committed after the operation ended."

Mr. Cicak said that most of the crimes were perpetrated by returning civilians seeking revenge after the operation was over, when the recovered areas fell under the jurisdiction of local security and police forces.

"About 40,000 houses and barns were destroyed three months after Operation Storm, as well as 500 civilians were killed. There was mass looting and property damage," he said, stressing that the evidence collected by Helsinki Watch was based on eye-witness accounts of local Serbs in the area who remained behind following the military operation."

"I have not seen one document showing the guilt of Gotovina during or after the operation."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 28/7/02

And who helped draft the indictment Lopez?

So what you're saying is you're not going to tell us on what basis you accused gotovina as someone who 'shoots people who takes his fancy' and cascarino as a 'soldier of fortune?'

Why don't you just say:

"Twelfth Apostle...I can't back up the allegations I made...they're unsubstantiated assumptions on my part..and I apologise..."

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 9:06 PM

Not had time yet to look at the document that you suggest but will soon.

No what I am saying is that you use this as an impartial source when for the above reasons; that the journo concerned backs the US stance on the war and also their stance on the creation of the ICC and international courts in general. This means that the source has a political point of view that he wans to put across, something surely as an opinion writter he is paid to do. He of course has a right to put this across but it should not be regarded as impartial.

As to the homophobic, the reason that I said this was that you had a signiture that was to say the least dubiously homophobic re the hairdresser and shirt lifting, and also the comment regarding Lopez the were you out shirt lifting comment. Fair f*cks if your not but it was not the best way to show a tolerent man. Thanks for the correction.

Fair comment Pat.

Yes, I posted Lopez's edited comments into the signature to demonstrate how ridiculous his 'emotional' statement was (something he has a habit of doing it appears), the purpose of which is to gain an emotional response and divert people away from the questions posed to him.

Imagine how ludicrous it is:

Prosecution:

"Now please Lopez, can you inform the court as to your evidence as to why you concluded General Gotovina is a low-life war criminal who shoots whoever takes his fancy?"

Lopez:

"Well he wasn't mentioned in a book I read on the Croatian war..."

"And during a trip to Belgrade...I met a Serb called Milan in a city centre bar who claimed to be a hairdresser...and a Partizan football hooligan and all...he showed me some wounds which he said were committed by Croatians during the war...."

Prosecution:

The prosecution rests its case.

Twelfth Apostle

02/08/2004, 9:13 PM

Well..well well!!!

Whilst accusing the Twelfth Apostle of using the off-topic area of a football site to defend others against Lopez's false accusations; it's been discovered that Lopez has been using both the on and off topic forums to air his personal and political views. :eek:

A simple search produces some most interesting results.

It seems you�ve had a number of similar �exchanges� with other members who also disagree with you eh Lopez? :eek:

Perhaps most interesting is your transparent preoccupation with fascists, homosexuals and your Irish identity due to the disproportionately high number of references you make to them.

Does this post ring any bells Lopez: �celebration of the victory of a Dutch Homosexual 300 years ago� �

If someone of Dutch nationality was victorious 300 years ago � beggars belief what their sexuality has to do with it Lopez eh?

And you were calling me homophobic? Tut�tut�tut!

You truly are a hypocritical hamster aren�t you?

In fact, this board is littered with your rants about politics, your Irishness and the words �Fascist� �Nazi� �Homosexual� (or �Queer� as one of your posts stated referring to the QPR board), and references to paedophilia.

I mean what a coincidence! As on this thread, whilst although not mentioning your Irish identity, you�ve made a disproportionately high number of references to homosexuals and fascists�.

Whatever is all that about?

No suggestion whatsoever that you are or not a homosexual, fascist or Irish etc., as that has no bearing on anything, rather just the observation that from your posts at least you seem preoccupied with these matters.

Food for thought eh? :eek:

I�ll leave you with Duncan Gardner�s words from a previous discussion which some may think could equally apply to this one:

�Lopez, again. I'm afraid you're reacting to this more obsessively than almost everyone (else). Why, as you keep claiming to be uninterested?�

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 10:51 AM

Like a puppet on a string�. :eek:

Thanks for introducing the indictment Lopez!! :) :) :)

Just to demonstrate how vague and unspecific Gotovina�s indictment is and to show why the Helsinki Commission boss who investigated the crimes stated �"I have not seen one document showing the guilt of Gotovina during or after the operation."
Why don�t we take a look at Goran Hadzic�s indictment in comparison?

http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/had-ii040716e.htm

Whilst both indictments contain the vague/cover all options unspecified sweeping charges:
�Acting individually and/or in concert with other members of the joint criminal enterprise, planned, instigated, ordered, committed or otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, preparation, or execution of�.�

Hadzic�s specify the charges against him linking to the crimes; whilst Gotovina�s doesn�t. It just alleges �Gotovina had reason to know� but doesn�t state how he had reason to know.

Hadzic's also shows how he participated in the alleged joint criminal enterprise. Gotovina's doesn't.

Bit of a difference eh Lopez?

1. Goran HADZIC, acting individually or in concert with other members of the joint criminal enterprise participated in the joint criminal enterprise in the following ways:
a. In his capacity as the President of the Government of the SAO SBWS and subsequently as President of the RSK, he formulated, promoted, participated in, and/or encouraged the development and implementation of SAO SBWS / RSK governmental policies intended to advance the objective of the joint criminal enterprise. Throughout 1991, 1992 and 1993, Goran HADZIC attended meetings with the Serbia and (S)FRY leadership and/or their agents defining these policies of the joint criminal enterprise and presented its positions in international negotiations.
b. He was instrumental in the establishment, support and maintenance of the government bodies ruling the SAO SBWS / RSK, which in co-operation with the military and police implemented the objectives of the joint criminal enterprise and participated in the commission of crimes as listed in this indictment.
c. He participated in and contributed to the creation, organisation, financing, and direction of the SAO SBWS Milicija and the SNB. These police or security forces were created and supported to assist in the execution of the joint criminal enterprise through the commission of crimes in violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the Statute of the Tribunal.
d. He participated in and contributed to the creation, organisation, financing, and direction of the local Serb Territorial Defence forces (TO) of the SAO SBWS, including volunteers related to the Serbian Volunteer Guard and the Serbian Chetnik Movement, which participated in the crimes described in this indictment. From at least 26 June 1991 to and including December 1993, Goran HADZIC was the de jure commander of the TO forces.
e. He personally participated in crimes committed by these police and military forces in the targeted territories as described in paragraphs 19 and 25 of this indictment.
f. He participated in the provision of financial, material, logistical and political support necessary for the military take-over of territories in the SAO SBWS and the subsequent forcible removal of the Croat and other non-Serb population by the local Serb TO forces, who acted in subordination of or co-ordination with the JNA, the Serbian MUP forces and the SAO SBWS Milicija and SNB.
g. He requested the assistance of or facilitated the participation of JNA and Serbian MUP forces to further the objective of the joint criminal enterprise.
h. He encouraged and assisted in the acquisition of arms and their distribution to local Serbs in Croatia to further the objective of the joint criminal enterprise.
i. He openly espoused and encouraged the creation by violence of a homogenous Serbian State encompassing the territories specified in this indictment.

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 11:55 AM

PS.Yer man Gen.G/'Cas'.may not have committed the crimes you say he didn't,but at the very least is involved through 'guilt by association'...not a tangible crime,but a predictable facet of human behaviour in such extreme circumstances!

Even when the evidence suggests he was disassociated from the crimes Davros? - The crimes contrary to his specific orders, 95% of the crimes occurring after the operation, videotape evidence showing his outrage on hearing of crimes being committed, 300 soldiers who did commit crimes ordered by him to be punished, the majority of murders apparently committed by returning civilians and police (not Army), the alleged 'ethnically cleansed' in actuality when the Serbs own leadership ordered their withdrawal (which they even admit!).

Incidentally, Operation Storm was not the first operation to reclaim the seized/occupied Croatian territories Gotovina commanded/participated during the war.

There were approximately 5 others between 1991-1995. If Gotovina was the 'cold-blooded trigger happy low life war criminal' as Lopez suggested....why is it that no similar crimes occurred in any of the others???

With the indicted Serbs there is a clear track record, one battle/siege/massacre after another where there is indisputable evidence that crimes occurred which were ordered/planned/instigated and often personally carried out by the indicted - and their indictments reflect this.

Very different kettle of fish here though.

Gotovina's track record on his side is the opposite - battles/breaching sieges/preventing massacres with little or none violations/crimes - but Operation Storm (where the evidence contradicts the vague indictment). The indictment being essentially a cut and pasted copy of the ones served to the Serbs, less any 'specific' charges other than the fact that 'Gotovina was the operational commander during operation storm' - the latter being the only undisputed fact.

A Croatian once told me regarding the above:

"This is why many people consider his indictment a farce and the more and more you discover about the Gotovina case, the more and more you begin to see a clear difference between Gotovina -- and the Serb war criminals to the point where, despite whatever previous ideas you may have had, if indeed any at all, you soon realise that the charges against him are completely false and you start to form a positive opinion of him."

lopez

03/08/2004, 1:28 PM

Bad day at the office yesterday, Tony? :D :D And looking through my old posts, aswell. Dangerous sign of a bunny boiler here! :eek: Wow, I'm not a homosexual now but a homophobe. I'm so relieved. BTW, you're still 'Tony Cascarino.'

As for Gotovina, still a 'low-life' to me. I'm sure he would expect everyone to presume his innocence first until proven otherwise, but seeing the way the military behaved in Yugoslavia and the nature of 'Martial' law, I for one won't. Someone claiming so and so is 'innocent' and expecting this to be enough for him not to go before a court is about the most laughable statement I've heard for years. This is why it is now my signature and believe me Tony it will take one hell of a bell-end like yourself to come along and make me remove it.

Now, clearly you like to repeat yourself ad nauseam - that's fine by me - but I've got better things to do like bash some queers. I've given up reading your sh*t as it has nothing to do with Gotovina any more and everything - exemplified by the personal attacks - to do with the fact that your laughable attempts at clearing the General have not only failed to work with me but with everyone else on this thread. You are now behaving like a two-year old that's had his dummy taken away. Five posts since I last replied. :D I really must stay away more often.

For EVERYONE ELSE still remotely interested, the evidence Tony demands me to show is currently sub judice, as he well knows. This is why it's not available from the ICTY website, but is available to the General. It is also why when asked by the Bosnian newspaper Liberation if she had evidence concerning Gotovina, Carla Del Ponte said: 'Yes, I do have it, but I am not going to discuss it with you now. I would discuss it with the Court.' Ironically, sub judice is there to entail the accused gets a fair trial.

Bowsy

03/08/2004, 1:40 PM

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 2:03 PM

See ya later Lopez! Thanks for your help. I know you built me the soap box and the loudspeake's yours too, but seeing as your leaving now d'ya mind leaving them with me?

Thanks and good luck! :)

P.S

If you can't take it - don't dish it out. You slag off others, accuse others of all sorts of unsubstantiated things and of being people who they're not, then the moment they show you substantiated things which you've done and others can see you've done, some of which you've accused others of doing, the rattle's slung to the wall, there's a few words in attempt to rally all the troops to leave with you (as if they were all with you in the first place) ...and then you slam the door.

Adios!

TC I've done you proud!

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 2:43 PM

Fair enough....know a few Croat & Serbs bhoys.....ask them who's right & who's wrong.....don't blame if it sets off a minor fire-war...... :rolleyes:

What it will do in all likelihood, is divert away from the specific gotovina case and degenerate into a row over the Serb-Croat war in general.

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 2:52 PM

Hey,it takes two to tango.....yer just as opinionated & are using largely the same approach as the good Senor :rolleyes: .....just remember..... ;)

Au contraire Davros. Although you're of course entitled to your opinion, I haven't libelled people and when confronted made a mad dash to gather evidence and support from others in a failed attempt to prove the accusations.

I have simply responded to an individual's allegations which I know, not believe, know, to be false and asked them to account for their allegations. That individual was given ample opportunity and has simply failed to do it.

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 3:45 PM

Have been reading this thread with great interest. Can't claim to have any knowledge of this beyond as what has been provided on this thread and have no opinion on the innocence or guilt of Gotovina but one thing confuses me. If the prosecutions case is so flawed why does Gotovina refuse to stand trial. Everybody charged with a crime has to stand trial. They are not always guilty but that is the point of the trial. if the prosecution have such a woeful case based on inaccurate information surely even Lionel Hutz could get the General off.

Hi Bowsy, very good question.

A popular theory (one which, incidentally, I believe there is certainly a large element at play here) is the 'all sides equally guilty theory' regarding those responsible for the wars in the former Yugoslavia.

Your question infers you are are of the opinion that the 'trial' would be a 'fair' trial and would either prosecute and convict on fair evidence based on the charges; acquit if found innocent; or convict and then have 'Lopez's appeals court safeguard' to ensure that justice is done.

This is the heart of the issue.

If a CIA report is to be believed (impartial?!) 90% of the crimes committed in the former Yugoslav wars were committed by Serbs. Even if the percentage is inaccurate what we do know is that at the very least the Serbs committed the vast overwhelming majority of the crimes.

The ICTY history was that they originally indicted mainly Serbs. The Serbs subsequently protested and cried out 'ICTY is prejudiced against the Serbs!' 'What about the others!!'

In response to this (or so the theory goes and there is much evidence to suggest this is the case) the ICTY then 'suddenly' began to investigate 'alleged' crimes committed by the Cro forces, which nobody had previously had much problems with.

(Operation Storm indictment came 6 years later.)

However, all the prosecuters appear to have done is 'cut and paste' the charges (criminal conspiracy) against the Serbs; and pasted it against leading Croatian generals with some slight ammendments.

They're not interested in who did the crimes (evidence suggests in Cro case it was generally more vengeful individuals rather than the systematic regime-sponsored Serb one) but simply those who equate in power and rank to the Serbs they were indicting - thus all sides guilty, regardless of whether they've committed crimes or not.

Let me remind you approx 250,000 people were killed by the Milosevic regime. 150 people are on the Gotovina indictment....and he has no track record of 'murdering anyone' never mind 'shooting whoever he fancies' and despite Lopez's allegations, there is no evidence anywhere to suggest he had anything to with any of the charges on the sheet .

If anyone should be in the dock it's certain former members of the Croatian Tudjman regime, particularly regarding Bosnia. They witheld evidence at the Blaskic trial to protect themselves (and indeed from what i understand witheld vital info and evidence from Gotovina - like not telling him as he was Inspector General of the Cro army that he was under investigation).

Then you have the US (Clinton Adm.)government who planned Operation Storm, originally claimed it as their own, then remain silent of their involvement, are witholding evidence for gotovina's defence, though simultaneously offer a $5 million dollar reward for his arrest!

The Croats watched as one by one their generals were indicted to the hague on 'newly revised' (or invented!?) charges.

Gotovina is the big fish as he actually symbolises the Croatian war for many (also impeccable military record/met Pope John Paul twice). He learnt from the media and not from official sources that he was one of two generals whose names were on a sealed indictment. (Why sealed?)

Bearing in mind he would have seen the fate of one or two of his fellow colleagues at the hands of the hague, not least of all the aforementioned General Blaskic, and that he was being denied evidence to support himself, from both the then Cro government and the US government, added to the fact that his indictment was sealed and so didn't know what he was actually charged with - he was tipped off by sympathisers the day before it was due to be served and went underground.

He was given no time to prepare a defence, and even if he had he was blocked from accessing the evidence to defend himself with.

He quite clearly believes (some would say understandably) that his trial is a political show trial and farce and it is this which he is refusing to accept; not the justice.

The Blaskic sentence would have only re-enforced his belief at that time; and the recent appeal decision would only prove to both him and his supporters - that he was right.

45 year sentence for crimes you didn't commit....or a life on the run?

Who's in control here?

He's refusing to be a scapegoat and believes he won't receive a fair trial by that tribunal.

lopez

03/08/2004, 4:26 PM

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 5:33 PM

If the Hague's case is as flawed as Tony claims why aren't organisations that pride themselves on fighting injustice throughout the world - including Europe - not taking on the case?..

What... like they did for the Kupreskic three and General Blaskic?

While if you type in google: 'Croatian Helsinki Commission Puhovski Gotovina', the source that claims that 'Zarko Puhovski, asks for Gotovina's case to be 'reconsidered' is Tony earlier on this thread and, shock horror, Cascarino.com. See for yourself..

Lol!!! What entertainment! What was that in Blaskic's case about 'factual errors'......

Whilst it may feature on what i thought was 'cascarino.homestead.com' and not 'cascarino.com' which hosts cascarino's manuscript; it is a copy of the Agence France Presse report of April 7th 2004.

See:
http://www.cascarino.homestead.com/videotape.html

And click the link below the article.

..................................

Tony implied I was a homosexual. Unless I am one, that would be classed as libel. .

No I didn't and no it wouldn't. Are you inferring that to be a homosexual is wrong and which would damage a persons reputation in the minds of right thinking people?

I certainly don't think the fact that someone's homosexual has any bearing on anything, particularly when, despite your claims, nobody called you it; on the other hand, slandering someone as a 'low-life war criminal with a penchant for shooting people' or the polished up mercenary description 'soldier of fortune' most certainly would damage a persons reputation, regardless of their sexuality.

BTW - You didn't explain the relevance of your previous reference of the 'victorious Dutchman of old's' sexuality either Lopez.

You were repeatedly asked to back up your two unfounded malicious allegations; not provide evidence as to 'if the general should got to trial or not' which clearly demonstrates yet again you don't read posts.

Gaining support from others refers to your sporadic suggestions of others not taking an interest in this thread, suggestions that others talking with you about this thread, as if you are some kind of spokesman for the other members.

BTW - was waiting for the 'we're all having a good laugh down the pub at this' line and all...sure you had that one lined up! (Again)

The proof's in the pudding, confirmed both by my PM's and also the comments of other members on this very thread and not your false fradulent fantasies :eek:

You're becoming increasingly childish, contradictory and erratic in your behaviour Lopez. :eek: :eek: :eek:

Lopez you are simply a chatterbox who makes knee-jerk reactions stemming from emotional over-reactions of things you think 'are' - but on inspection, have no substance or grounding in fact. :D

Now c'mere tell me, what rattled you the most? The presentation of your previous post exposing you as a hypocrite concerning the Dutchman � or the realisation that you�re a libellous fraud?

I also find it an honour that you associate me to cascarino, never mind call me the man himself. So Gracias!

Jon'o

03/08/2004, 5:43 PM

You're becoming increasingly childish, contradictory and erratic in your behaviour Lopez. :eek: :eek: :eek:

Lopez you are simply a chatterbox who makes knee-jerk reactions stemming from emotional over-reactions of things you think 'are' - but on inspection, have no substance or grounding in fact. :D

get a room you two :D

lopez

03/08/2004, 6:37 PM

Yet more blah, blah, blah from Tony. 'Now c'mere tell me, what rattled you the most? The presentation of your previous post exposing you as a hypocrite concerning the Dutchman – or the realisation that you’re a libellous fraud?' What rattled you Tony to fire off five posts about me? The fact that your sources are sh*te or non-existent.

You give me a report about Gotovina from Agence France Presse which I cannot find on their press site. OK, it has no archive but this important piece of news was not reported in any other press site with archives found through google. In addition, so the General 'orders his troops to restore order and security in the region until the Croatian military surrenders control of the region to civilian authorities later that same day!' Milosevic was claiming that he was doing everything in his power to control his forces during the whole Yugoslav episode and that genocide was merely the arrest of 'terrorists.' To save you from another seizure Tony, I'm not suggesting the General is guilty of genocide, just (for the umpteenth time) that there is a case to answer. The evidence against him is with the ICTY. Meeting to Pope (twice) does not mean he's innocent. :rolleyes:

get a room you two :DYou have my apologies for having to endure even an once of this sh*te. :D

lopez

03/08/2004, 6:39 PM

BTW, I was responding to your unedited post of 18:33 3 August 2004. F*ck knows what you've changed. :rolleyes:

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 6:41 PM

BTW, I was responding to your unedited post of 18:33 3 August 2004. F*ck knows what you've changed. :rolleyes:

If that's a question, then let me know which post and I may answer it.

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 6:51 PM

Okay Lopez, several other members have stated that they think the general may have a case to answer and I never took issue with them. That is a fair comment. Most of them have not presumed anything one way or the other.

What we are at loggerheads with is your two allegations about two individuals which you made at a time when you admitted knowing nothing of these same individuals.
I was asking you how you can form firm opinions when you admit you knew little about them...

"Meeting the Pope (twice) does not mean he's innocent."

I didn't suggest it did Lopez. My 'Papal' reference was used to explain that (at least one) of his papal meetings was conducted after several years after Operation Storm - of which was widely reported

How many war criminals are received by the pope? He (pope) obviously didn't have a problem with operation storm then.

Are we going to continue playing silly buggers now or actually discuss this?

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 7:14 PM

You give me a report about Gotovina from Agence France Presse which I cannot find on their press site. OK, it has no archive but this important piece of news was not reported in any other press site with archives found through google.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/040410/323/eqqy7.html

"But there was a new twist to the case earlier this week.Croatian television broadcast a videotape showing Gotovina condemning his troops for barbaric behaviour and calling for order at a meeting with top officers in Knin, a rebel Serb stronghold that had just been retaken by Coratian troops.The meeting took place on August 6, 1995, a day after Croatia recaptured the southern town and the surrounding region in the operation led by Gotovina.His lawyer Ivo Farcic said the tape had a great importance for Gotovina's defence, stressing: "If the person who drafted the indictment had the tape when writing it, the charges would have been completely different."
.................................................. .................

http://draxisblogging.blogspot.com/2004/04/taping-history-this-week-ante-gotovina.html

"For most of Croatian public this tape is greeted as the smoking gun that finally establishes General's innocence of all war crimes. �arko Puhovski (Zarko Puhovski), chairman of HHO, top Croatian human rights organisation, says that ICTY would have to re-write the indictment based on the materials available on the tape."

.................................................. ..........................................

http://www.europeanfoundation.org/pubs/id/Issue%20No%20190.pdf.

(Note - wrongly alleges krajina serbs chased out!)

.................................................. ......................................

Still from the video in Croatian Nacional magazine:

http://www.nacional.hr/english.php?broj=2004-04-13&kat=english

"The tape of the Knin meeting on 6 August 1995 shows that for the most part, there never should have been a case against Gotovina"

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 7:29 PM

Milosevic was claiming that he was doing everything in his power to control his forces during the whole Yugoslav episode and that genocide was merely the arrest of 'terrorists.'

There is clear evidence though that Milosevic had done everything in his power to direct the forces under his command, including the paramilitaries, to commit genocide.

Even his very own men have testified against him at his current trial to confirm this.

Lovely description here detailing his individual criminal responsibility and co-conspirators.

http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/mil-ai021023.htm

Is there a similar one on Gotovina's indictment showing the link from the accused to the actual crimes?

lopez

03/08/2004, 8:13 PM

Twelfth Apostle

03/08/2004, 8:36 PM

Now that's more like it, Tony. So you believe there are suspicions about the case. Fair point. But a video, third hand evidence and a man who has began the process of sainthood to some fairly dubious 'men of god' is hardly convincing. Ever see those fathers, step-fathers and husbands on TV crying about the great loss, how could anyone take their daughter/wife, etc and then found to be guilt of their murder. Ever see Harold Shipman lying on TV. This means zilch.

Point taken. But where's the convincing first hand evidence regarding the charges?

What means anything is first hand evidence which will appear at the General's trial. Witnesses will give evidence. Because if all the ICTY relies on is the sort of third hand hearsay and Papal audiences to convict Gotovina, Bowsy's right. Even Lionel and the practice of 'I can't believe I'm a lawyer' will win the case.

Yes, but you've automatically assumed that this would be a fair trial and this is where we disagree. I refer you back to Blaskic & Co, where was Lionel then? Surely this confirms 'gross errors' and in fact in the appeals own words 'a miscarriage of justice' had occurred? As well as the previous case I pointed out.

The Blaskic case being the more relevant of course due to the sweeping cover all options charge of 'Command responsibility.'

All the other indictments specify how the accused is connected to the criminal group and the actual crimes. Not so Gotovina's.

Now show me the UN document that you claimed was on the net re yourself and I'll take back - contradict myself once more - the bit about you being a mercenary. :)

Lopez, yet again, it is not my responsibility to provide evidence, which I have, to counter your libel, rather your responsibility to prove it's not libel.

You made the accusations so go on and prove me wrong!

Show me and everyone else how you concluded the Irishman who fought for Croatia known as Tony cascarino was a soldier of fortune.

Was he mentioned in that '97 Guardian report?

Have you ever seen it written or stated anywhere?

Admit it was, like your allegations against gotovina, completely unfounded and then we'll be friends. :)

lopez

04/08/2004, 12:06 PM

Point taken. But where's the convincing first hand evidence regarding the charges?
The evidence that makes the case is with the ICTY. Courts based on judicial systems that we find in Europe don't put people on trial without evidence. Its sometimes flawed, sometimes withheld, but I'm yet convinced that this is some sort of conspiracy. The CIA claiming that 90% of crimes were committed by Serbs sounds reasonable, but it doesn't mean that the 10% should get away free just because two of the three biggest 'lowlifes' amongst them are still free. Mitigating circumstances - the most obvious revenge - should be taken into consideration, but this doesn't excuse that a case has been brought and that Gotovina is evading justice. Even Blaskic was guilty of a crime that got him 8 years and early release because he did not dodge his duty to the court and showed remorse.

Yes, but you've automatically assumed that this would be a fair trial and this is where we disagree. I refer you back to Blaskic & Co, where was Lionel then? Surely this confirms 'gross errors' and in fact in the appeals own words 'a miscarriage of justice' had occurred? As well as the previous case I pointed out.The Blaskic case being the more relevant of course due to the sweeping cover all options charge of 'Command responsibility.'.
I could argue that the British criminal system was biased towards Irish and Black people after the miscarriages of the seventies and eighties. With regards to the B6, G4, M7 and Judith Ward, these were political trials needed to seek retribution for an IRA campaign that seemed unstoppable. Had the trials been held in a neutral court then perhaps either the cases would have been thrown out or the appeals procedure would have found the incarcerated innocent far sooner. I take it that the ICTY would no accept a withdrawn confession as evidence unless it is corroborated?

However, despite these cases, what course of action is left to the Irish and Black communities of Britain. One could argue that with a couple of IRA trials in the nineties where the defendants were released and the convictions of loyalist paramilitaries that the suggestion by its apologists is true: British justice is one of the best in the world.

The alternative is of course to let the General go on trial in Croatia. This has been proved to be unacceptable - as unacceptable in putting either a Serbian accused on trial in 'Srpska' or Belgrade or indeed putting a Serbian on trial in Croatia for crimes committed in Vukovar or Osijek. The Hague is the best place for bringing justice and I take it, it was given full support from Tudjman and co. when the Serbs were being indicted.

All the other indictments specify how the accused is connected to the criminal group and the actual crimes. Not so Gotovina's..
I'm not reading the other indictments so if you say so, then so be it. Gotovina's indictment is there for all to see. Specific details are missing which is not unusual for what is a media statement of a case under sub judice.

Lopez, yet again, it is not my responsibility to provide evidence, which I have, to counter your libel, rather your responsibility to prove it's not libel. You made the accusations so go on and prove me wrong! Show me and everyone else how you concluded the Irishman who fought for Croatia known as Tony cascarino was a soldier of fortune. Was he mentioned in that '97 Guardian report? Have you ever seen it written or stated anywhere? Admit it was, like your allegations against gotovina, completely unfounded and then we'll be friends.Well I don't know about the friends bit, but it's been a pleasure cyber-rumbling with you. And no hard feelings on my part. It was I admit a cheap shot about the 'soldier of fortune, sorry, latter day George Orwell' and I concede that I had no grounds for this allegation. As too is the allegation about the General 'shooting anyone who takes his fancy.' However you can't deny that mercenaries were not in evidence in Croatia, nor that the behaviour I implied of the general has never happened with generals, one I can think of became the head of state of a major European country for almost 40 years.

But I still believe you're Tony. And the General is in my eyes still a war criminal. Only his trial will prove to me otherwise.

Twelfth Apostle

04/08/2004, 12:17 PM

Good post Lopez, and likewise apologies on my part for any comments I may have made which you may have found unwarranted. No hard feelings on my part either. :)

Twelfth Apostle

04/08/2004, 12:54 PM

I don't think I've got so much a problem with the ICTY per se, or certainly in theory, but surely it needs at the very least a gigantic kick up the ass for the outrageous goings on regarding the aforementioned cases?

If we return to the original miscarriage of justice against the three Bosnian Croats. The appeals court rejected it saying it was "critically flawed" that the "case against them cannot stand" adding that the charges had been "too general and vague" and that the Prosecutors had built a weak case based on "unreliable witnesses." The court said the trial court had accepted the testimony of shaky witnesses who had identified the three Kupreskic relatives as participants in the dawn offensive on Ahmici and the surrounding villages in April 1983.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/0,2763,579667,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/10/23/world/main315519.shtml

Then we have the miscarriage of justice and wholly erronous Blaskic case...

And a prosecuter's office which issues indictments to Serb officials for a "criminal conspiracy and illegal state," then subsequently indicts Croatians who fought against it, and uses a non-indicted high ranking official of the same criminal illegal state, who still openly advocates it, to provide the main evidence against the Croatians, resulting in vague unspecific charges and a glowing reference for the criminal in order to raise money.

But I think we've all seen enough about the 'flaws' in the trials. Why don't we now take a look at some facts about the chief prosecuter herself and her prior track record?

The Agence France Presse July 24, 2003 reported that no less than 60 Non-Governmental Organizations in Rwanda signed a letter to UN secretary Kofi Annan strongly urging him not to re-appoint Carla Del Ponte - Hague�s chief prosecuter at the ICTY for her �dismal record�; which is confirmed on the UN�s very own site:
http://www.unwire.org/UNWire/20030724/449_6883.asp

NGOs in Rwanda oppose Del Ponte's renewal to criminal tribunal

DATELINE: UNITED NATIONS, July 23
Sixty Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) operating in Rwanda on Wednesday asked the United Nations Wednesday not to reappoint Carla del Ponte as prosecutor on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).
The NGOs argue Del Ponte has not been effective enough in bringing those responsible for the African nation's 1994 genocide, which took the lives of hundreds of thousands of Rwandans, to justice. "We, the sixty undersigned groups, urge the UN Security Council to strongly consider the dismal record of Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda when deciding her renewal in September 2003," the NGOs said in a letter to UN secretary general Kofi Annan.
Del Ponte, a Swiss citizen, has served as the ICTR's, UN-appointed, prosecutor since September of 1999.
��
Last month, 60 Rwandan nongovernmental organizations sent a petition to Annan and the council complaining about Del Ponte's "dismal record," which they said "has undermined the likelihood of Rwandans receiving the full and fair justice that they deserve from this tribunal."
http://unwire.org/UNWire/20030808/449_7358.asp
��.

Or what about the Coalition for Women's Human Rights who complained that Del Ponte was �denying rape victims justice�, �whose record shows no commitment to develop evidence and bring charges despite the overwhelming proof of sexual violence� and �indicates she does not care�, called on her to �end her neglect of rape victims and to fulfill her legal mandate by investigating and prosecuting sexual violence crimes fully and fairly� and also �urged the U.N. to take into consideration Prosecutor Del Ponte's dismal record..�
http://www.peacewomen.org/news/March%2003/Rwandanjustice.html
��.

At the end of the day it's not justice that gotovina's evading - it's injustice.

He's made several offers to meet the prosecuters and each one of them has been turned down by Carla Del Ponte.

Bowsy

04/08/2004, 12:58 PM

I'm feeling the love on this thread now. :D

lopez

04/08/2004, 9:05 PM

OK lads, break it up! This site is not the place to pat each other on the back and agree with one and other. There's other sites for that sort of thing.

Without going over old ground, every legal system needs a kick up the a*se now and again. This week in Britain it is Sion Jenkins to bring the system into question. The sad case about this is that even if Jenkins is found innocent, the Police will say 'hey, we did all we could' and so therefore f*ck justice for his foster daughter Billie-Jo. Then the 'cot death' cases. How the hell did these women ever get convicted with just the say-so of a doctor and a mathematical equation? I shook my head in disbelief when the solicitor went down. But still the justice system is not totally to be discredited

Funny that Del Ponte is accused of not bringing people to justice. I think much of this rests with the forces on the ground rather than with herself. If she is deliberately ignoring a rake of war criminals that is one thing, but there is a danger here that she's doing the same with Gotovina if she allows him to just wander around. It must also be added that 90% of war crimes will not necessarily make up 90% of war criminals. Serbian crimes came from the very top. Milosevic is in the Hague. Biljana Plavsic has been tried, Milan Martic is in the Hague too (??), while Arkan is sadly drinking with Satan. Only Mladic and the Psychiatrist remain of the big cheeses to be caught. On the other hand if the ICTY absolves Gotovina of any wrongdoing, it will be left with the foot soldiers who had committed these atrocities to be tried, because they cannot say the old 'I was only obeying orders.' I don't think the ICTY had a cat in hells chance of getting Tudjman even if he was still breathing.

I'll leave the last word to our guest here. Personally I still find the Yugoslav mess depressing. It's a story you couldn't make up. For years military men like Franco, Pinochet, Amin, were seen as the psychos and civilian politicians the voice of reason. Not any more, with someone whose daytime job was considered to be helping the sick, included as the number two worst scum to be found here. Yugoslavia taught us two things: Don't trust the politicians any more than the generals. And of course, don't trust your neighbours if you're different from them.

Perhaps the vicious outcome of these 'ancient hatreds' was inevitable, but I'm still in awe that the present time continuum started with one politician deciding to send his deputy to a deal with complaints from Serbs in Kosovo in April 1987, because he was too busy to go himself. That politician - former Serbian president during communist rule, Ivan Stambolic - ended up with the indignity of being found dead in a forest pit last year. The deputy - Slobodan Milosevic - meanwhile will probably die in a Dutch jail and whose legacy is to be the most hated person in Europe - Jim Davidson excepted - since Hitler. Sweet ending? Can we now have the defence for Arkan?