The secret life of Tony Cascarino ?

[Closed Account 2]

Is this site for real ?

http://www.tonycascarino.com

It claims an Irishman under the alias of Tony Cascarino was fighting for the Croats in the 1990s !?!?

I always though he had an air of absence about him when he played for us :D

Might explain the disgraceful incidents that marked the end of the match in Turkey as a few Turks fought in the former Yugoslavia too.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Is this site for real ?

http://www.tonycascarino.com

It claims an Irishman under the alias of Tony Cascarino was fighting for the Croats in the 1990s !?!?

I always though he had an air of absence about him when he played for us :D

Might explain the disgraceful incidents that marked the end of the match in Turkey as a few Turks fought in the former Yugoslavia too.


You serious? Never heard of this guy before?? He was all over the European press last year in connection with the escape of General Gotovina. The Irish Independent reported the US government had offered a $5 million dollar reward having received info that the general was under cascarino's protection in Ireland.

see the media reports at: www.cascarino.homestead.com

[Twelfth Apostle]

Just wondering about the nationality......of the passport photo....looks Irish?


According to Sean MacBride who interviewed Cascarino for the Croatian Herald earlier this year:

"Possibly the first thing that struck me about Tony, was his uncanny physical resemblance to the uniformed photograph I'd seen of his late grandfather. His dark, almost Mediterranean complexion, was the classic found along west coast Ireland and he could quite easily pass for a Spaniard or an Italian."

http://213.191.154.38/default.aspx?clanak=2294&LID=1

[Closed Account 2]

You serious? Never heard of this guy before?? He was all over the European press last year in connection with the escape of General Gotovina. The Irish Independent reported the US government had offered a $5 million dollar reward having received info that the general was under cascarino's protection in Ireland.



Honestly I hadnt heard of him at all, I only found the stuff when I was looking for info on foreign fighters in the wars in the former Yugoslavia... Over here in England there wasnt much coverage on the war recently and hardly any on foreign fighters... theres been a bit on the Pakistani/British people who "fought" for the Islamic Mujahideen in Bosnia.

[lopez]

Just wondering about the nationality......of the passport photo....looks Irish?Tan passport to me. Irish passport would have been in Irish and English. This is all a bit surreal though. Why Tony Cascarino, FFS? :confused: Millwall fan per chance?

[Twelfth Apostle]

Tan passport to me. Irish passport would have been in Irish and English. This is all a bit surreal though. Why Tony Cascarino, FFS? :confused: Millwall fan per chance?

"The international volunteer came in Croatia in October 1991, and our [Croatian] co-veterans named him Tony Cascarino after famous footballer and Irish fellow citizen."

Globus (Zagreb, 26/9/2003)
.................................................. ..................................................

"Luka Misitec told the Irish News of the World: 'I have seen the reports but I do not know Ante Gotovina's current whereabouts. An Irishman was a member of General Gotovina's unit and a combatant.

'I have seen the reports about him being in Ireland. The information is based on an allegation about the former Irish soldier who joined the Croatian forces in 1991.'

"The mystery Irishman was given the nomme de guerre Tony Cascarino, after the famous Irish international soccer player Tony Cascarino had a high profile at the time and was popular in Croatia.

The President of the HSP 1861 party in Croatia, Dobroslav Paraga, said he was also aware of reports the general was in Ireland and he too confirmed a Croatian fighter had been Irish.

The ultra-nationalist, whose party is also known as the Croatian Party of Rights 1861, said: "Nothing would surprise me with this affair."

(Irish News of the World 18/01/2004)

http://www.cascarino.homestead.com/IRISHNOW.html

[lopez]

Shouldn't surprise anyone that these low lifes end up in Ireland. Didn't Otto Skorzeny and Oswald Moseley live there for a while?

[Twelfth Apostle]

Shouldn't surprise anyone that these low lifes end up in Ireland. Didn't Otto Skorzeny and Oswald Moseley live there for a while?

WTF??? Is this some kind of 'all Croats are fascists' sweeping generalisation rubbish?

Neither cascarino or the general are even right-wingers, never mind fascist.

[lopez]

WTF??? Is this some kind of 'all Croats are fascists' sweeping generalisation rubbish?

Neither cascarino or the general are even right-wingers, never mind fascist.Couldn't give a f*ck if he was a Trotskyist-Maoist - not that you'd put money on that if you've ever read anything about 20th century Croatian - as opposed to (pan-)Yugoslavian - nationalism. It's the bit about him being 'a war crimes suspect wanted for trial the The International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague' that intrigues. Still, I'm sure he's a decent family man who likes dogs and golf. :rolleyes:

[Twelfth Apostle]

Couldn't give a f*ck if he was a Trotskyist-Maoist - not that you'd put money on that if you've ever read anything about 20th century Croatian - as opposed to (pan-)Yugoslavian - nationalism. It's the bit about him being 'a war crimes suspect wanted for trial the The International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague' that intrigues. Still, I'm sure he's a decent family man who likes dogs and golf. :rolleyes:

Gottya! Say no more....your from the 'all Croats are fascists' school & people 'suspected' of crimes are automatically low-lifes.

I've gotta hand it to ya - yer ignorance is plainly outstanding!

Do ya also think that all Irish catholics are IRA and all Blacks are muggers?

[Closed Account 2]

Yeah hes right, there were some fascists fighting for the Croats, but most of them were not Croatian, and there werent that many. There was a rather infamous Black Swedish man who was a fascist (I know it sounds a bit strange but it was true), I cant remember his name but a while back he got done in Sweden for executing 2 policemen in some bizzare ritual. There was also a Dutchman killed during captivity in/around Knin, who some say was fascist and some say wasnt, and a spanish journalist. A fair few volunteers fought for the Croats (to some it was like the Resistance to Franco in the Civil War for some) and most of them were not fascists. The Croat armed forces were at times brutal, but in most civil wars soldiers are... events tend to spiral out of control. Certainly every side in the former Yugoslavia at times broke the Geneva convention. What the Serbs did is fairly well documented, the Croats were no saints during Operation Storm in 1995, and the Bosnian Muslims, shelled their own people and imported Iranians and Arabs to de-capitate Serb and Croat civilians, but they were America's darlings of the war so not much attention is paid to their misdermenors, shades of Turkey-Armenia really.

Having been to both Serbia and Croatia, I have to say that every person I met in both countries was very pleasent, positive and charming.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Honestly I hadnt heard of him at all, I only found the stuff when I was looking for info on foreign fighters in the wars in the former Yugoslavia... Over here in England there wasnt much coverage on the war recently and hardly any on foreign fighters... theres been a bit on the Pakistani/British people who "fought" for the Islamic Mujahideen in Bosnia.

If you're into this cfdh_edmundo I'd recommend you read his manuscript 'millennium memory' - very credible and realistic without the usual exaggerated Hollywood type gung-ho crap.

He shatters many of the myths/propaganda surrounding the war's origins/dynamics etc; which some people (no names lopez) seem to have swallowed. Another good book is 'Anatomy of deceit' by Jerry Blaskovitch.

The biggest mistake in my opinion is to consider either all Croats as fascist; or all Serbs supportive of Milosevic and cronies. Out of the two sides IMHO the latter were the more fascist of the two. It wasn't a right/left war, or even a war for or against a 'pan-Yugoslavia' (that died with Tito and Milosevic's actions). It was a fight for post-communist survival and against Serb nationalist expansion.

[lopez]

Gottya! Say no more....your from the 'all Croats are fascists' school & people 'suspected' of crimes are automatically low-lifes. I've gotta hand it to ya - yer ignorance is plainly outstanding!Sticking to this General Ante Gotovina rather than your own sensitivities over Croatians, if he's such an innocent man, why flee Croatia? Strikes me that he's worried about prosecution in his own country - where I presume murdering 150 civilians for no reason is likely to get a long stretch - let alone in the Hague? BTW, as you're so keen to label me being from the 'all Croats are fascists' school of thought, where did I say this in post #8? I think you're making things up.

Do ya also think that all Irish catholics are IRA...?Being both Irish and Catholic I've been accused of this a few times. Have you?

[Closed Account 2]

I think the sketch is Croatia wants to be in the EU. The EU has a huge number of conditions to be met if any country wants to get in, most of them are to do with Human Rights (which buggers Turkey's chance of getting in). Both Croatia and Serbia have to round up all their war crimes suspects and send them off to the Hague. Croats argue that the Hague's impartiallity means they'll try and nail some Croats (just because so many of the suspects in the Hague are Serbs) - to a certain extent they may have a point, but ive not really looked at what Govina's up for in the court.

I will say this tho, Croatia and Serbia are actually moving closer together since 1995. Its a little known fact but the Croats (and virtually every other country in the region) were against NATO's bombing of Serbia during the Kosovo thing. The fact that the Serbs were ejected from the Kraijina (in what was undoubtedly an ugly incident), actually removed the main Serb-Croat flashpoint. Clearly the fact that 150,000 civilians had to move out is highly regrettable (the whole war was regrettable) but without it there would be even more anger between the countries (im not saying that it made Operation Storm right tho). Some Serbs have moved back to Croatia, again part of the EU entry rules, and from what ive read they havent had any problems (at least compared to Serbs living in NATO-governed Kosovo).

The whole Hague tribunal is a complex issue. On the one hand there is a desire to punish those who commited mass crimes, but on the other hand you have to ask the question, does it further the peace ?? Agreements like Good Friday seem to suggest war courts arent as useful as they proport to be. I dont know what the best answer is, but IMO the ICC at the Hague isnt looking very good. Theyve charged Milosevic with so many charges the trial will never be finished, plus his demands to call Blair and Clinton to give evidence cant really be ignored if the court is to give him a fair trial - but then Blair and Clinton almost certainly wont go to the Hague. Theyve still not got Karadzic or Ladic either, who are probably the biggest war criminals in the region. And dont forget that the Bosnian Muslims wont be charged for the most part. They imported their war criminals (mainly mujahideen / Soviet-Afghan veterans), most of whom are now running amock in Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabach, southern Afghanistan etc or living a nice life of luxery courtesy of Saudi Arabia.

[lopez]

cfdh_edmundo: I haven't read much about 'Yugoslavia' since the nineties - when I was visiting the area three times in twelve months to watch Ireland and as part of my MA in Modern European Studies, a module of which I did was 'Post communist Eastern Europe.' Personally I found it all truly depressing.

Marcus Tanner's book on the country - Croatia: A Nation Forged in War - provides an interesting insight into Gotovina: It doesn't mention him once (well not in the index). The trouble is the whole war business was very complex, so much that few insiders let alone us outsiders can make head nor tale of it: Tudjman's and Slobodobachop's secret deal to split Bosnia; Croats living in Serb areas forced to kill Muslims in order to implicate them in; the use of 'rape'. One thing IMO is clear is that without 'outsiders' (from both within and outside Yugoslavia) maybe things would not have been so bad. Maybe I'm just an idealist.

I've no doubt that Gotovina's probably Croatia's lamb to be sacrificed (his death toll is probably an hour's work for Ratko Mladic) because even they recognise that their side was hardly whiter than white. Still, I doubt he's the innocent person some gnat-arsed minds think he is - no names Twelfth Apostle.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Sticking to this General Ante Gotovina rather than your own sensitivities over Croatians, if he's such an innocent man, why flee Croatia? Strikes me that he's worried about prosecution in his own country - where I presume murdering 150 civilians for no reason is likely to get a long stretch - let alone in the Hague? BTW, as you're so keen to label me being from the 'all Croats are fascists' school of thought, where did I say this in post #8? I think you're making things up.
Being both Irish and Catholic I've been accused of this a few times. Have you?


Lol!!! Lopez are you just basing your arguments on Gotovina on newspaper reports and Marcus Tanner's book here? As you clearly know little on the facts.

You seem to be adept at making presumptions.

How do you know Gotovina's fled Croatia? Are you saying Carla Del Ponte and the actual Hague prosecuter's (i.e the people who wish to prosecute Gotovina) are liars?

You clearly don’t understand any of the key facts surrounding this case. Your contradictory waffle is also outstanding - you say on the one hand Gotovina’s “probably Croatia’s sacrificial lamb” and then state you “doubt his innocent” on the other.

You then state Marcus Tanner’s book doesn’t mention Gotovina. WTF has that got to do with anything? (Other than reconfirming to everyone how little you know on Gotovina.)

What has Otto Skorzeny or Oswald Moseley got to do with either the Croatian war of independence, general gotovina or Cascarino?

If these weren’t fascist inferences then why mention them in the first place?

[Twelfth Apostle]

Still, I doubt he's the innocent person some gnat-arsed minds think he is - no names Twelfth Apostle.

On what basis do you form this opinion Lopez? On the fact that he's not mentioned in 'A nation forged in war?' Lol!!! :D

[Twelfth Apostle]

Croats argue that the Hague's impartiallity means they'll try and nail some Croats (just because so many of the suspects in the Hague are Serbs) - to a certain extent they may have a point, but ive not really looked at what Govina's up for in the court.

Spot on. Some Croats unquestionably committed terrible crimes during the wars and some were even protected by Tudjman's government.
My position is that anyone who commits a crime regardless of ethnicity should be prosecuted.

The Gotovina case is very different though than all the other indictments. Simply - Gotovina has not committed any crime and this is chiefly why he refuses to stand trial.

See:

http://www.cascarino.homestead.com/ante.html


The fact that the Serbs were ejected from the Kraijina (in what was undoubtedly an ugly incident), actually removed the main Serb-Croat flashpoint. Clearly the fact that 150,000 civilians had to move out is highly regrettable (the whole war was regrettable) but without it there would be even more anger between the countries (im not saying that it made Operation Storm right tho).

I dispute that the Krajina Serb population was ejected during Operation Storm. They were in fact ordered to withdraw by their own leadership's president Milan Martic several hours into the operation.

[lopez]

On what basis do you form this opinion Lopez? On the fact that he's not mentioned in 'A nation forged in war?' Lol!!! :DOn what basis do you form your opinions? Through a website of someone who claims to be from one country - mentioning his grandfather's role in its fight for independence - who joins the army of the country that his grandfather fought against to gain independence before finally ending up as a soldier of fortune...sorry, some latter-day George Orwell in a third country? Or do you have first hand knowledge of the General - let me precise here, did you serve as a soldier with General Gotovina throughout the war - and therefore know his innocence? Perhaps your Mr Cascarino himself? Because all it sounds like to me is that you are just a one, maybe two book expert.

You seem to be adept at making presumptions.How do you know Gotovina's fled Croatia? Are you saying Carla Del Ponte and the actual Hague prosecuter's (i.e the people who wish to prosecute Gotovina) are liars?
I know probably as much as anyone else on this thread. My interest once again is that a war criminal wanted by the Hague is suspected of living in Ireland.

Call it seeing too many innocent people being locked up but I tend to be sceptical of any attempt by the British justice system to bring high profile cases to trial. FFS I was even keen to give Ian Huntley the benefit of the doubt. However I'll be interested to hear of the International Court of wrongly convicting anyone from Yugoslavia. Perhaps you'll help here?


You clearly don’t understand any of the key facts surrounding this case. Your contradictory waffle is also outstanding - you say on the one hand Gotovina’s “probably Croatia’s sacrificial lamb” and then state you “doubt his innocent” on the other.

Contradictory waffle doesn't compare with such ludicrous statements as asking someone like me 'Do ya also think that all Irish catholics are IRA.' I'm still chuckling over that one. You're however right about my understanding the 'facts' as you call it. It's because I'm not really interested in the case. What has it got to do with me? The Hague court wants some bum for war crimes, he does a runner...sorry refuses to go, and you want me to believe he's innocent. LOL :D Whatever happened to an officer's honour? Sounds like he wants the perks of rank - power, prestige, the right to shoot whoever takes his fancy - but not willing to face up to the consequences. Innocent people don't run and don't commit suicide. It just makes them look guilty.The people interested are the relatives of Gotovina's alleged victims. My interest before you started an argument was the news that a 'suspected' war criminal is living in Ireland.

As for the sacrificial lamb bit, this is when someone low down gets sacrificed to protect those higher up. Sorry that you couldn't grasp my argument - even though you say the same in a post further down: 'Spot on. Some Croats unquestionably committed terrible crimes during the wars and some were even protected by Tudjman's government' - so I'll explain it a bit better for you. A similar case was the GAL state-sponsored assassinations in Spain where a number of lowly police and mercenaries were imprisoned before a determined judge was prepared to go after the big fish: in this case politicians. Although he managed to send to prison Spain's Minister of the Interior, there were claims that the order to kill ETA suspects went to the Prime Minister himself. My point is that Gotovina is probably guilty of his charges but that there are others further up above that are more culpable.


You then state Marcus Tanner’s book doesn’t mention Gotovina. WTF has that got to do with anything? (Other than reconfirming to everyone how little you know on Gotovina.)
Tanner's book was first published in 1997. At the same time Tim Judah's book, The Serbs, had details about all the celebrities on the Serbian 'ethnic cleansing' circuit. Tanner mentioned Croatian war crimes but little on the people committing them. Why the delay?


What has Otto Skorzeny or Oswald Moseley got to do with either the Croatian war of independence, general gotovina or Cascarino? If these weren’t fascist inferences then why mention them in the first place?
Well if Ireland allowed Poll Pot to live in Ireland I would have mentioned him too. Speak to the Department of Justice if you are concerned about who they allow to stay in the country.


My position is that anyone who commits a crime regardless of ethnicity should be prosecuted. The Gotovina case is very different though than all the other indictments. Simply - Gotovina has not committed any crime and this is chiefly why he refuses to stand trial.
Very touching that you are all for war criminals being prosecuted. When in Belgrade in 1998 I and two friends met this bloke called Milan in a bar in the city centre. Milan was not the sort of bloke that you'd bring home to mum and we noticed after an hour that the bar resembled the outside of the GPO with numerous bullet holes in the wall. Milan was according to his business card a hairdresser but also in his words, a 'top Partizan hooligan'. Inevitably the conversation turned to darker subjects and to cut a long story short after talking about his own career in the war he lifted his shirt to show burn marks all over his body. These weren't cigarette marks but large burns made with an iron or a poker. So thank you my Croatian expert for telling me that some 'Croats unquestionably committed terrible crimes during the wars': I already knew that.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Lol!!! :)

Here’s a refresher…Lopez came into this thread and initially branded Gotovina a ‘lowlife’, suggesting he was akin to Otto Skorzeny and Oswald Moseley when Gotovina is neither rightwing nor fascist.

Lopez states Gotovina’s 'fled Croatia' and on that basis claims that Gotovina’s 'worried' about being prosecuted in Croatia; despite both the Hague prosecutors themselves stating that Gotovina has never left Croatia and all the Croatian polls showing the overwhelming majority support his actions.

Lopez then stated “the whole war business was very complex, so much that few insiders let alone us outsiders can make head nor tale of it” then proceeds to make some pretty firm opinions about "Croatian as opposed to pan-Yugoslavian nationalism" and a Croatian General who’s not mentioned at all in a book he claims to have read on Croatia…

Lopez claims Cascarino claims to be from a particular country on a website, and libels him as a ‘soldier of fortune’ whereas the facts are cascarino, who’s family is well known in Ireland, has not disclosed his nationality on any website; and is also well known as being totally opposed to mercenaries. Not even the Serbian side he fought against call him a mercenary. A public UN document which is on the web also states he was not a merecenary.

Lopez then livens things up with his classic contradictory waffle by libelling Gotovina branding him a ‘war criminal’ who ‘wants to shoot whoever takes his fancy,’ then in the next breath states “I know probably as much as anyone else on this thread” and then asserts “he’s probably guilty of his charges.”

Lopez as I previously stated…you don’t even know what the charges are. And each of your posts re-enforces your ignorance. Gotovina has not personally killed anybody, nor is there any suggestion that he has personally killed anybody. Neither is he charged with personally killing anybody. And he has most certainly never been convicted of killing anybody.

What has a dodgy Serb in a bar claiming to be a hairdresser, football hooligan and tortured by Croats got to do with gotovina?

Your providing real entertainment here Lopez!!! Lol!!!!

A lot of chatter…but no substance!

I'd suggest you discard your misguided preconceptions and personal prejudices, get the facts of the matter straight and learn something about the actual case being discussed; otherwise you may appear like a contradictory libelling imbecile and complete cretin.

:)

[lopez]

I find you great entertainment also. That's why I keep replying. I'm just wondering though if your an Andy McNab type fan who gets a hard on watching war porn with a certificate 'E' or the real deal 'Tony Cascarino.'

You still haven't got the message mate. I'm not interested in the case. I'm interested at the allegation that a war crimes suspect is living in Ireland. If he isn't as you suggest, great. The country is better without him. Seeing that people turn down parole in preference to admitting guilt I think your general is not helping his case by not fighting his 'innocence' in court. Certainly not with me. However you will pleased to hear I'll be looking out for the case. If he's innocent, I promise a full retraction.

BTW, I've decided you're 'Tony Cascarino.' Only someone as close to the general would spend as much time discussing him on this site with your conviction. A war porn w*nker would have given up by now. You've come on and posted ten posts: All on this thread. Nothing about football...on a football site.

[Twelfth Apostle]

As for the sacrificial lamb bit, this is when someone low down gets sacrificed to protect those higher up. .

I disagree. A sacrificial lamb to most people is when someone innocent gets sacrificed to protect the guilty. Like the story of Christ for example.


I find you great entertainment also. That's why I keep replying. I'm just wondering though if your an Andy McNab type fan who gets a hard on watching war porn with a certificate 'E' or the real deal 'Tony Cascarino.' .

Keep wondering Lopez. You seem to spend most of your time wondering about things and getting them wrong.


I'm not interested in the case. I'm interested at the allegation that a war crimes suspect is living in Ireland. If he isn't as you suggest, great..

Wow....a fairly reasonable comment from Lopez!


The country is better without him. Seeing that people turn down parole in preference to admitting guilt I think your general is not helping his case by not fighting his 'innocence' in court. Certainly not with me. However you will pleased to hear I'll be looking out for the case. If he's innocent, I promise a full retraction..

And another!


BTW, I've decided you're 'Tony Cascarino.' Only someone as close to the general would spend as much time discussing him on this site with your conviction. A war porn w*nker would have given up by now. You've come on and posted ten posts: All on this thread. Nothing about football...on a football site.

Well..I'll be...cor blimey...I've been rumbled....completely outfoxed by CSI Lopez. Lol!!

So now Lopez has 'decided' I'm Cascarino...as apparently gotovina only has one supporter.

Tell me Lopez...are you a Sci-Fi fan per chance? :)

[lopez]

So now Lopez has 'decided' I'm Cascarino...as apparently gotovina only has one supporter.
What's up? Too uncool to go on a football website to discuss your old boss? Or bit strange talking about yourself in the first rather than the third person? A member of Joe Public obsessed with Michael Jackson's innocence. Yes. A Croatian General none of us have heard of? No chance! :D And if I'm going to spend hours reading through cases of people wrongly convicted and campaign for their justice, I'll start with those at home, thanks!

Tell me Lopez...are you a Sci-Fi fan per chance?No, but it sure sounds like you believe in little green men! The only one whose living in a fantasy world is the person who thinks Gotovina should escape justice because he 'has not committed any crime' (Your words). Well with a declaration like that, surely we could throw 90% of Britain and Ireland's criminal cases in the bin. :rolleyes:

For the sake of anyone that is still remotely interested in reading this sh*t (that's you, me and the moderator) I'll move to a body far more impartial and respected than one of Gotovina's former soldiers, for an assessment: Amnesty International.

A report from the organisation that actively campaigns against torture, state sponsored murder and fair judicial process claims that Gotovina 'was charged by the Tribunal with counts of persecution, murder, plunder of property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, deportation and forced displacement, and other inhuman acts, for his alleged responsibility for crimes committed by the Croatian forces during operation "Storm".' The report continues that: 'Ante Gotovina went into hiding immediately prior to the publication of his indictment in July 2001 and the Tribunal Prosecutor has repeatedly criticized the Croatian authorities for their inability, to date, to arrest Ante Gotovina and transfer him to the Tribunal. While the Croatian authorities have pledged their cooperation with the Tribunal, Ante Gotovina has reportedly enjoyed the protection of criminal circles and of some members of the Croatian intelligence community.' Finally Amnesty concludes: '...that the failure of the Croatian authorities to apprehend him and ensure that he is brought to justice before the Tribunal amounts to a violation of Croatia's obligations under Article 12 of the Convention against Torture.'

So even Amnesty International wants Gotovina in the dock. :)

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR640012004

BTW: Still waiting for those cases of 'rough justice' that the tribunal have handed out in recent years.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Lol! Lopez is off again with his antics!
Apparently, as well as having ‘decided’ I’m Cascarino (he’ll accuse me of being the general next!) he accuses those who believe that gotovina ‘has not committed any crimes’ as fantasists. :D

Thanks for the ‘impartial and respectable source’ featured on the Amnesty International site. Old Hat I’m afraid. Inspired by the not so impartial VERITAS organisation. :p

Still waiting for ‘rough justice cases’ within your infallible International Tribunals Lopez? Maybe you should contact the UN’s own internal watchdog, which after a 2001 investigation accused them of ‘corruption’ and ‘mismanagement.’

Why don’t we look at some ‘actual’ impartial and respectable sources?
Like the editor of the Washington Times for instance:

“The Gotovina indictment is deeply flawed; it is also revolutionary in its implications for international criminal law. The theory of "command responsibility" violates the basic tenet of the definition of a war crime — the principle of personal responsibility for one's actions. The Croatian general is not accused of individually committing or ordering atrocities; he is simply guilty of being in "command" when alleged war crimes were committed. The ultimate goal of the indictment is not only to punish the Croats for exercising their legitimate right to self-defense, but to make war itself a crime.” http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/tribunals/yugo/2002/0909criticism.htm

Or what about the testimony of Larry Hammond before the House International Relations Committee:

“Another case recently indicted by the ICTY—this one involving alleged war crimes said to have occurred at the end of the war in Croatia—also deserves close attention. The ICTY Prosecutor has indicted General Ante Gotovina in connection with crimes alleged to have been committed by Croatian military forces against Serbian civilian populations in the Krajina region. In the last days before the ceasefire that led to the Dayton Conference, the Croatian Military engaged in an offensive known as Operation Storm. As with the case of General Blaskic, serious questions remain with respect to whether the acts alleged were in fact undertaken with General Gotovina’s knowledge and authorization…”

"Again, the Gotovina indictment affords what may be suitable and distressing examples of the need to ask similar questions about ICTY prosecutorial decisions. Paragraph 20 of the Gotovina indictment charges that the General is responsible for a "large-scale deportation" – a "forced displacement" – of an " estimated 150,000-200,000 Krajina Serbs." Amazingly, that very charge is contradicted by the Prosecutors’ own spokeswoman, Florence Hartman. Ms. Hartman published a book in 1999 in which she wrote that Milosevic, not Croatia, ethnically cleansed the area in question: "It was Belgrade that evacuated the Serbs from Krajina and led them to Banja Luka and northern Bosnia. This was done so that Belgrade could later justify holding on to these Bosnian territories during future peace negotiations over Bosnia and Herzegovina. "

“One might argue that a prosecutor is not bound by the public statements of her official spokesperson, but my concern is that such blatant inconsistencies evidence a lack of prosecutorial care and attention to accuracy. The Gotovina indictment affords a second example. The last paragraph of the indictment (Paragraph 44) alleges that "Croatian forces [said to be under the command of General Gotovina] directed a massive artillery assault on Knin" (the city described by the Serbs as their "capital "). Where did this accusation come from? At least three American journalists who were in the region on the day of the supposed "massive artillery assault" saw no evidence of one. It is a reasonably safe assumption that had there been such an assault the destructive effects would have been evident. It may be even safer to conclude that no investigator or prosecutor from the Hague visited Knin to assess artillery damage. A federal prosecutor in the United States, mindful of the Hyde Amendment, would surely not bring charges of this portent without careful evaluation. A prosecutor acting on behalf of an international tribunal can operate on no lower standard of justification.”
“The recent history of the cases like the Gotovina, Blaskic and Barayagwiza cases suggests that, indeed, proceedings that disserve due process can happen at the Hague and in Rwanda. Unless a fair trial—one in which the accused is given full access to all information in the hands of the prosecution or within his grasp—is assured, there will be little cause to support this Tribunal and even less cause to place confidence in the International Criminal Court yet to come into existence. The world and the United States need these courts. They perform critical roles, but they cannot be embraced and respected unless they exist as a first priority to secure justice, rather than to secure convictions.”
http://wwwc.house.gov/international_relations/107/hamm0228.htm

But finally, why don’t we look at the words of the head of the Croatian Helsinki Commission, Zarko Puhovski, a long time advocate for Croatian Serbs, who called upon Carla Del Ponte to “reconsider her indictment of Gotovina” on the basis of the videotape shown recently on Croatian TV, at a meeting of General Gotovina and his men the day after Knin’s liberation which “strongly dispells the notion that Gotovina condoned criminal acts after Storm or that there was a criminal conspiracy to use violence and arson to prevent refugee returns.”

[Twelfth Apostle]

I think this thread says more about Lopez's character than anyone elses. He says he's uninterested in a subject but yet spends his time posting on it. Claims to know little, then proceeds to demonstrate it with either irrelevant facts or downright lies and fabrications. Contradicts himself at every turn and libels others. :) Love it!!! Lol!!!!

If nobody had heard of gotovina before, well thanks to you, they have now!

In fact I'm beginning to suspect you aint for real and that you're a secret gotovina supporter. Anyone can see straight through your failed attempts to discredit gotovina and can notice you persist with your blatantly futile posts in order for me to both correct them and educate you at the same time.

Thanks Buddy!

Twelth Apostle. :cool:

(PS I should be charging you for this!)

[lopez]

Oh diddums, we have had our feathers ruffled! You ask me to look into the case, and when I come back with the best impartial source for international justice with an opinion that concludes far from a likely miscarriage of justice, the General should be put on trial, you start throwing your toys out of the pram. :o

Amnesty International or Cascarino.com. Hmmm, what a choice! :rolleyes: I was talking to another poster on here about you yesterday Tony and he reckoned you'd come back with the old 'bunch of liberals not knowing the complexities of war' argument, but all you can say is that the AI report is old hat! The report's dated 28 May 2004, but the Washington Times article you've offered is from September 9, 2002 - one which, like your website, is merely 'opinion' - while the other is seven months older. Talk about me contradicting myself. You truly are hilarious.

Still waiting for the miscarriages of justices from the Hague! Instead, this morning I read that the court's own appeals board has reduced the sentence of General Tihomir Blaskic from 45 years to 9, while also quashing most of the charges against him. No doubt you'll argue that this puts the court's integrity in doubt. For the rest of us it shows that there are sufficient safeguards to ensure justice - and let's not forget that Blaskic's crimes were still sufficiently serious to merit a 9 year jail term, a sentence which he has still to complete.

You mention libel? Nurse, my sides!! :D And me being a Gotovina supporter. Oh dear Tony! Now I've been rumbled. :eek: I've added your argument as to why he shouldn't stand trial as my new signature just to prove what a real supporter of the General I truly am.

Oh happy days!!! BTW, you're right I should be paying you! You're far more entertaining than anything TV can offer these days. :D

[Twelfth Apostle]

Wow! What a coincidence….

General Blaskic who received the harshest sentence in the tribunal’s history yesterday had 16 of the 19 counts from his original indictment slashed.

“In a sweeping rejection of the lower court's conclusions, the five-member appeals panel said the court had misinterpreted the law and punished Blaskic unfairly for the crimes of forces under his authority. It quashed both the earlier ruling and sentence.”

“In March 2000, Blaskic was found guilty of so-called "command responsibility" at the peak of the 1992-1992 Bosnian war, including crimes against humanity and grave breeches of the Geneva Convention. But those convictions were thrown out on Thursday.”

"The appeals chamber considered that the trial chamber's assessment was wholly erroneous" and that it had not been "proven beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant is responsible for ordering the crimes in Ahmici and neighboring villages on April 16, 1993."

“It upheld three counts of grave breeches of the Geneva Convention related to the imprisonment of Muslims at a series of camps in Bosnia where detainees were forced to dig trenches, build fences and used as human shields during shelling by enemy forces.”

.................................................. .................................................. .
BTW - love your attempted forced choice (AI vs cascarino site) whilst disregarding the Helsinki charter for human rights source I provided.

I'm sure you wouldn't care to hear the words of one of its founding members, Ivan Cicak, that features on the Serbian Unity Congress web site and who actually 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 also 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.

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

[Twelfth Apostle]

Happy Days indeed Lopez!!! :p

Now that we know that Blaskic's trial was "wholly erronous" and that "the court had misinterpreted the law and punished Blaskic unfairly for the crimes of forces under his authority" ....

Why don't we take a look at how Amnesty International reacted to his original sentence in 2000?

"Amnesty International welcomed the bringing to justice of General Tihomir Blaskic for war crimes and crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia today as a milestone in the achievement of justice for the victims of war crimes in Bosnia-Herzegovina."

He was convicted on all but one of 20 charges against him and sentenced to 45 years' imprisonment, the highest sentence imposed so far, reflecting the gravity of the crimes committed and the accused's status as a commander."

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGEUR630032000

[Closed Account 2]

Well lets be realistic, most of the Generals on all 3 sides will have committed some sort of war crime. The Geneva Convention is all well and good, but you have to bear in mind that the soldiers who fought for the likes of Gotovina (and on the otherside too) probably had bad experiences during the war, they probably lost brothers/sisters/children/parents in particularly grotesque circumstances. Civil wars tend to spiral out of control, it is hard to think of a civil war (certainly ethnic wars) where similar things have not happened. Of course i'm not saying that it in anyway excuses war crimes, but I will say it probably makes it hard for anyone on here (myself included), and Ms. Carla Del Ponte, for that matter to understand things.

I also find it particularly ironic that the trial is being held in Holland, a member of NATO. Let us not forget that NATO aircraft dropped bombs (some of which cluster bombs, and some were radioactive) on targets that included hospitals, trains of civilians and populated areas. It is a sad state of affairs a group of countries, a lot of whom participated in the dropping of cluster bombs (remember these are essentially airbourne mines) in populated areas, tries war criminals safe in the knowledge that they themselves will not be brought to account. Some say there is no such thing as a "neutral" country, but did it have to be held in a NATO country, why not Sweden.

[lopez]

Blaskic's innocent also, Tony? Oh but he's still serving a nine year stretch, soon to be released. Must have been for making cold tea! Still nice to see that he got the opportunity of an appeal. Shame that thousands that died in Yugoslavia never got the same. In fact, while the tribunal was criticised, Blaskic's appeal relied on new evidence which had been kept from the original trial because of a 'lack of cooperation on the part of Republic of Croatia'. Moreover, Blaskic has shown remorse for the crimes committed by others under his command and gave himself up voluntarily to the tribunal. Don't know if the general has shown remorse - silly me, he's innocent of course - but the Hague's still waiting for him. With the court now well and truly taken to task over the Blaskic case your general now has nothing to fear, has he?

http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/tri/tri_338_5_eng.txt

No 'news' clippings for me tonight, Tony? Just more 'old hat.' Shame! Still waiting for a miscarriage of justice at the Hague - you know where someone totally innocent is convicted, not someone whose overcharged and whose sentence is corrected by the court's own appeals procedure! Maybe you'll have something for me for Christmas. Do like your signature though - imitation, flattery etc. - but I think mine is more helpful to getting the General justice.

Edmundo: It's great to read some sense at long last on this thread rather than Tony's pathetic attempts at proselytising me to the cause of a wanted war criminal.

[Twelfth Apostle]

So by Lopez's logic it's fine for a court to misinterpret the law, indict people for crimes they haven't committed, conduct wholly erronous trials and to punish them unfairly on the basis that they have an appeals court as safeguard :D

So, judging from the immaturity displayed in your posts you were a child at most when cases like the Birmingham Six/Guildford Four occurred. Perfectly acceptable to Lopez as there's a chance that similar cases will eventually win their appeals and aquit them, or convict them on other charges, after having been deprived of their liberty for years and their lives ruined.

The 'old hat' to which I referred Old Chap signified that the AI article you presented was discredited way way back as having originated by the Serbian VERITAS organisation and its head Savo Strbac, as was gotovina's indictment, and not the historic date. Strbac has also been working with the Office of the Prosecutor at the Hague.

Even if we accept it as AI's own report all they've done is reported the details from the indictment and given their opinion based on that indictment as they did with the Blaskic case, which we now know to have been a miscarriage of justice.

If Blaskic, or anyone else has committed crimes then they should be indicted for those crimes and prosecuted accordingly for those crimes. Not for crimes they haven't committed.

'Old Hat' relates also to your 'discovery' that the (Tudjman) Croatian government witheld evidence from the Blaskic trial. Both they and the US governent have done this with gotovina's.

Your position that 'only totally innocent people' should be spared the 'incompetent and wholly erronous prosecution' which you advocate is ridiculous.

BTW - just read cascarino's chapter 13 and guess what...can't find your quote anywhere! LOL!!!!!

Good weekend? Been shirtlifting again with strange men in bars? :)

[lopez]

Good weekend? Been shirtlifting again with strange men in bars? :)Ooooooohhhh!!! You bitch!! Ah the pathetic attempts at proselytising now turn to homophobic insults. Wonderful!!! You get better every post! We've obviously got something against homosexuals haven't we? All that time spent in barracks with men in uniform? Must get lonely for some people?

Birmingham six, Guildford Four, etc. were totally innocent of any charge, unlike Blaskic. So I suppose no one should ever stand trial in a British court again? If Blaskic is innocent, why 'the remorse'? why the nine years? YAWN!!! Still waiting for a miscarriage like the B6, G4, etc. Guess there isn't one! AI just a front for Serbians. JFK shot by little green men. Do you read Sci-Fi by any chance?

No more 'old hat' for me, Tony?! Well I suppose that concludes your 'arguments', and guess what, I still think that if the Hague is of the opinion that your buddy needs to stand trial, then that's good enough for me.

As for the quote below Tony, no it doesn't come from any manuscript. I'm too busy bumming down the Gay bars to read sh*t like that. (BTW: There's a nice quote to put in as your signature). It comes from you in post #19. If Edmundo doesn't want to talk to you - he too is of the belief that 'most of the Generals on all 3 sides will have committed some sort of war crime' - then switch the light off on the way out, please!

[Twelfth Apostle]

Still waiting for the miscarriages of justices from the Hague!

I think you'll find that on October 23, 2001 the (ICTY) Appeals Chamber concluded that a "miscarriage of justice" had occasioned to the Bosnian Croat Kupreskic brothers (Zoran and Mirjan) and their cousin Vlatko and ordered their immediate release.

That's The Hague Lopez... :eek:

[Twelfth Apostle]

Well lets be realistic, most of the Generals on all 3 sides will have committed some sort of war crime. The Geneva Convention is all well and good, but you have to bear in mind that the soldiers who fought for the likes of Gotovina (and on the otherside too) probably had bad experiences during the war, they probably lost brothers/sisters/children/parents in particularly grotesque circumstances. Civil wars tend to spiral out of control, it is hard to think of a civil war (certainly ethnic wars) where similar things have not happened. Of course i'm not saying that it in anyway excuses war crimes, but I will say it probably makes it hard for anyone on here (myself included), and Ms. Carla Del Ponte, for that matter to understand things..

I agree cfdh_edmundo that most of the generals will have committed 'some' sort of war crime and so anyone really is fair game for the prosecuters. The heart of the issue here though appears to be the sweeping generalised "Command responsibility" not the individual crimes themselves.

The prosecuters seem more interested in securing convictions than ensuring justice for the victims in my eyes. In the Blaskic case, he was eventually convicted on evidence which clearly linked him to the crime (human rights abuses etc.) and all the other counts were dismissed.
With the gotovina case, there is 'no evidence' other than the fact that he was the commander of an operation.
Terrible crimes were committed. I think though it's the people who actually committed those crimes who should receive a fair trial and punishment by a competent court of law.

BTW - the majority of the crimes in question apparently occurred after the operation and not neccessarily by soldiers under gotovina's command. All the available evidence suggests that gotovina was unaware of terrible crimes which took place against his orders, condemned them, and punished the identified perpetrators.


I also find it particularly ironic that the trial is being held in Holland, a member of NATO. Let us not forget that NATO aircraft dropped bombs (some of which cluster bombs, and some were radioactive) on targets that included hospitals, trains of civilians and populated areas. It is a sad state of affairs a group of countries, a lot of whom participated in the dropping of cluster bombs (remember these are essentially airbourne mines) in populated areas, tries war criminals safe in the knowledge that they themselves will not be brought to account. Some say there is no such thing as a "neutral" country, but did it have to be held in a NATO country, why not Sweden.

Good point. There are several "non-neutral" agendas at work at the ICTY which are more akin to politics than justice.

[lopez]

I think you'll find that on October 23, 2001 the (ICTY) Appeals Chamber concluded that a "miscarriage of justice" had occasioned to the Bosnian Croat Kupreskic brothers (Zoran and Mirjan) and their cousin Vlatko and ordered their immediate release. That's The Hague Lopez.What's this, sweetie?: No reference to my sexuality. I suppose it doesn't do you any good these days being homophobic does it.

At long last I get a proper miscarriage of justice, and so the whole court should now be shut down and anyone who says they are innocent, should be excused attendance. :rolleyes: I'll be placing a retraction of the 'scumbag' tag on this thread - should it not be closed down beforehand in an effort to keep out boring subjects - when the General is finally exonerated. Until then Tony, he's still a wanted war criminal.

Kiss, kiss!!!! :D

[Twelfth Apostle]

cfdh_edmundo,

Maybe the following may demonstrate how ‘neutral’ and ‘impartial’ the Office of the Prosecutor is.

Similar to Lopez’s selected Amnesty International article, much of the information used by the Hague prosecutor’s office against Croatian army generals originates from the Serbian ‘Veritas’ organisation.

As previously mentioned, Veritas’s boss is the notorious Savo Strbac, who is a former official of ‘Republic Serb Krajina’ and outspoken Greater Serbian enthusiast.

The 'RSK' for those unaware was part of the "joint criminal enterprise" defined in the Hague’s/ICTY’s own ‘Milosevic Croatian indictment’ - to cleanse "Croat and other non-Serb population from approximately one third of the territory of the Republic of Croatia".

According to Brian Gallagher:

“The "RSK" was established in 1991 by the invasion and ethnic cleansing of one third of Croatia by Serbia, which involved monstrous crimes against humanity including the destruction of Vukovar, the ethnic cleansing of over 170,000 non Serbs and mass slaughter of civilians - over 15,000. The Milosevic indictment correctly describes all this as a "Criminal Enterprise".

Strbac, government secretary no-less for the aforementioned illegal RSK, is now a top adviser to the prosecuter’s office. Incredibly, he’s received a reference from the prosecuter’s office which states that they have been working in “successful co-operation” with Veritas since 1994 – one year before Operation Storm and whilst Strbac was an official for the same criminal RSK (and anti-Croatian independence/operation storm.) The reference, which is on veritas’s own web site, has to be read to be believed.

http://www.veritas.org.yu/Preporuke/tribunal.htm

[lopez]

...the aforementioned illegal RSK...Well blow me down with my handbag and my YMCA guide to the gay flophouses of Europe. Something we both agree on!

Regarding the suggestion that AI is a stooge for ultra-Serb nationalists, I've taken this from the 2004 report by the organisation into Bosnia-Herzogovina. It makes some interesting reading into AI's views on the illegal government of Srpska. Regarding 'International prosecutions'.' It states: 'Cooperation between the RS authorities and the Tribunal remained unsatisfactory. The RS police failed to arrest those indicted by the Tribunal. A total of 17 publicly indicted suspects remained at large at the end of the year, the majority of them Bosnian Serbs.'

And under 'Domestic Prosecutions'?: 'Time and again the domestic criminal justice system failed to take steps to actively prosecute alleged perpetrators. A major factor in fostering this continuing impunity was the lack of cooperation between Federation and [the Republika Srpska] judiciary and police forces, in particular in enforcing arrest warrants.

If this sounds like AI going soft on Serbs viz a viz Croats then God help Radovan and co. if they decide to switch sides.

It seems that Veritas - OK, anything called 'truth' is always bound to be suspect - is supplying documental evidence for prosecution. It describes itself as a 'Centre for Collecting Documents and Information' over wartime atrocities against Serbs. About as partial as your website really but as we both know that the Serbs also suffered war crimes, their evidence can't all be lies.

I've looked around for a connection in Yahoo! between amnesty and Strbac and found nothing, although Brian Gallagher pops up with a letter in The Washington Times of June 18 (he doesn't mention the connection either). Who is he? Another 'nom de plume' of yours or someone credible? I won't comment on much of his letter although his rant against the UN smearing the US and the accusations about the former being 'happy to indulge the Serbian rampage across Croatia and Bosnia' has all your hallmarks for creative writing. His impartiality may well have been more credible if he mentioned the original Tudjman plans for the partition of Bosnia in which Muslims were to be dismissed as either a Croatian or Serbian minority.

Love you millions, darling!! ;)

[Closed Account 2]

If any of you guys have views on the international media coverage of the wars (up to 95) in Croatia Bosnia it would be great... I've 15,000 words to write and only got 6,000 so far ;).

Twelfth Apostle, if anyone you know actually took part in the war it would be incredibly useful if you could find out to what extent the media influenced their decision. By that I mean what type of things (articles, TV programs, radio etc) caused people to volunteer.

Most of what I’ve got so far goes is based around points like:-

- Certain people suggest some sides "played the media card" so to speak. Gen's Rose & Morillion and Lord Owen suggest this vis-à-vis the Bosnian Government. This section touches on Ruder Finn, and their use by the Croat and Bosnian governments. It also talks a bit about "character assassination" methods used by the Bosnian Government, namely foreign minister Haris Siljadic, (e.g. of Gen. McKenzie (in Bob Stuarts' book), Lord Owen and Jimmy Carter.)

- Was the International Media fair, this is a hard issue to investigate. I say that by and large very few journalists were embedded (so to speak) with the Serbs/Bosnian Serbs so their perspectives were perhaps underplayed. I go on to suggest that in some ways the war was portrayed by some as the "good" Croats and Bosnians vs. the "bad" Serbs, which in numeric/general terms might be correct but was too simplistic (perhaps due to readership issues) and ran into major problems during the Croat-Bosnian "war within a war" (1993-4).

- There was a lack of media interest at first, but it did increase a bit. This could be due to the inherent dangers of journalism during the war. I’ve got statistics to which show that the rate of journalist fatalities were well in excess of other more conventional wars (e.g. Gulf War one, Falklands/Malvinas). I say this perhaps made journalists more reluctant to get into the field of conflict. I mention a bit about Journalists not travelling properly (often in ex-RUC :eek: :eek: Vauxhalls which didn’t afford great protection) and Martin Bell's description of the "Journalist Pool" makes an appearance.

Those are the main points, I'm a bit worried though. My dissertation seems a bit too pro-Serb in places, mainly because they seem to have failed to recognise the role the international media could play. For similar reasons (namely their use of the media) my dissertation doesn’t cast the Bosnian Muslims in a great light. I don’t really know what to do about this, as the subject is the media - I've put a disclaimer similar to above few lines at the start of the dissertation though.

Anyone got any thoughts ?
__________________________________________________ ___________

In terms of war crimes and trials etc, the impression I’ve got (and its just my feeling, not really backed up by facts) is that the ICC/Hague have a sort of quota to fill. There is probably an element of the political about it, too. There will probably be some miscarriages of justice and some innocent people will probably be locked up (although perhaps its more appropriate to say people who committed more minor crimes will get punishment for more serious crimes if you know what I mean). Some people who are guilty will almost certainly not get punished. I doubt they'll take Mladic alive for instance, and I pity any Serb policeman who is tasked with apprehending him as it would be a risky job.

The issue of to what extent is a commander responsible for his troops actions is a vexing one. In conventional warfare, a general should be in total charge of his men, which of course has implications for the UK and US given Abu Garayeb etc. However I’d guess (and this is a total guess) that commanding the sort of armies that fought in the former Yugoslavia is far more complex. The impression I get is that a lot of these armies were essentially paramilitary in nature. Even the most professional ones were probably far removed from the sort of armies the Geneva Convention was designed for. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have to adhere to it, but one should bear in mind that it would be substantially more difficult for some like Govina (if he had to) to reign his troops in than someone like Schwartzkopp of Sanchez.
I still haven’t made my mind up on whether the benefits of the ICC/Hague outweigh its drawbacks. As I’ve said before I think there is a credibility issue with it being conducted in a NATO country (especially in the eyes of some Serbs), there are also issues over the fact that none of the VERY top level people who have been indicted will get punished. Tudjman and Izetbegovic have died, Milosevic imo wont be around for the end of his trial, and I will be very surprised if Karadzic or Mladic are taken alive. All of the countries are still suffering economically from the war, and perhaps if there was more investment the standard of living for people there would increase and there is a case put forward that this would be more beneficial for the people than the trials. If you look at South Africa, and to a certain extent Northern Ireland, those scenarios have tended to suggest that trials which focus on truth and reconciliation and closure for bereaved families are more likely to be successful than punitive trials. Then again, Bob Stuart’s argument that there is a need to punish for to set a dissuasive precedent is fair. At the end of the day I didn’t louse any relatives in such a war so perhaps it is inappropriate for me to comment too much...

[Pat O' Banton]

Twelve Apostle, You attack the impartiality of Amnesty and in answer to this you use an article from what you describe as an impartial source the Washington Post, it is clearly not.

It seems to be written by a journalist who backs up the American administrations policy of opposing the setting up of the ICC. America’s real reason for opposing the court is that it does not like international things that it can’t control. If the potential forerunner of the ICC can be discredited it would give more legitimacy for the US ‘s refusing to sign up for the court when it came into administration. Equally it has to be said that after the goings on in Guantanamo Bay I for one am hardly going to listen to any US administration backer about how to conduct war crimes.

Secondly the as the journo points out ‘The United States supported the offensive because it rightly concluded that Croatia was pivotal to altering the strategic balance of power in the Balkans.’ This hardly shows the source to be impartial when discussing the actions of Croatian generals and what should happen to them. Does the US want yet again to be associated with war criminals?

As for the impartiality of Amnesty can you remind me who they backed in the conflict?

Please note that it does your argument no good what so ever to try to use such nonsense in the terms of impartiality.

I am not presuming the guilt or innocence of the General but from what I have read (admittedly not as much as you) I get the impression that there is at least a case to answer.

Oh btw such blatant homophobia as you have exhibited in some of your arguments and also in your signature just makes you look intolerant.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Twelve Apostle, You attack the impartiality of Amnesty and in answer to this you use an article from what you describe as an impartial source the Washington Post, it is clearly not.

It seems to be written by a journalist who backs up the American administrations policy of opposing the setting up of the ICC. America’s real reason for opposing the court is that it does not like international things that it can’t control. If the potential forerunner of the ICC can be discredited it would give more legitimacy for the US ‘s refusing to sign up for the court when it came into administration. Equally it has to be said that after the goings on in Guantanamo Bay I for one am hardly going to listen to any US administration backer about how to conduct war crimes.

Secondly the as the journo points out ‘The United States supported the offensive because it rightly concluded that Croatia was pivotal to altering the strategic balance of power in the Balkans.’ This hardly shows the source to be impartial when discussing the actions of Croatian generals and what should happen to them. Does the US want yet again to be associated with war criminals?

As for the impartiality of Amnesty can you remind me who they backed in the conflict?

Please note that it does your argument no good what so ever to try to use such nonsense in the terms of impartiality.

I am not presuming the guilt or innocence of the General but from what I have read (admittedly not as much as you) I get the impression that there is at least a case to answer.

Oh btw such blatant homophobia as you have exhibited in some of your arguments and also in your signature just makes you look intolerant.

Hello Pat, read your post with interest. Firstly, I am neither homophobic nor have I made any homophobic remarks. The signature was put as a reply (cheap gag admittedly) in response to Lopez's equally cheap gag where he's taken my words out of context and attributed them to me (although he's used another persons name). My comments are as homophobic as Lopez's references to Otto and Oswald were fascist insinuations.
Lopez may have misinterpreted it as relating to his 'sexuality' but that says more about him than me.

I have several friends who are homosexual and an even greater number of work colleagues. And whilst we're at it - I am neither racist nor believe (as I've previously stated) that all Croats are fascists or all Serbs supported Milosevic. My posts are anything but intolerant. What I have a dislike for is propaganda and ignorance of the facts.

Now back to your post:


Twelve Apostle, You attack the impartiality of Amnesty and in answer to this you use an article from what you describe as an impartial source the Washington Post, it is clearly not..

I didn't attack anything. And my answer to the amnesty 'article' (not amnesty itself) provided three sources, not the one which you selected.
Are you disagreeing with the Helsinki Commission bosses comments from Zarko Puhovski and good old Larry?

The source for the majority of the media (and some of the Hague's indictments including Gotovina's) etc particularly regarding Operation Storm. comes from an organisation which has images of 'Greater Serbia' on its web site, has an endorsement to collect funds signed by the prosecuters office, which was recently named in the Milosevic trial by a leading Serb intelligence officer as having been run by 'Belgrade' (synonm for Milosevic), whose founder and boss was a high ranking official in the (illegal) krajina government, which is named by the same prosecuter's office as being 'criminal.' This is a man who has stated in a Belgrade newspaper (sourced provided on request) that several of the indictments against Croatian generals (not all but including Gotovina) will make way for the Re-structure of the (illegal/criminal) Republic Serb Krajina, of which he is a fervent supporter. I'm saying to you that the Amnesty 'article' was inspired by this organisation veritas and not knocking Amnesty as an organisation.

Although you make an interesting point Pat, I can't accept that the Editor of the Washington Times can even be compared to the outrageousness of the above facts.

How the hell can someone have a fair trial when the prosecution is based on info chiefly originating from the accused's very own enemy who works for the prosecution's office?

There is a school of thought manifesting from some on this thread that 'human rights organisations' and 'courts of justice' are infallible. I strongly disagree with this.

Regarding the US role in Operation Storm, I refer you to millennium memory chapter 13 and make your own mind up if its useful info or not. Also google search with 'MPRI' + operation storm.

Cheers,

Twelfth Apostle. :)

[Twelfth Apostle]

If any of you guys have views on the international media coverage of the wars (up to 95) in Croatia Bosnia it would be great... I've 15,000 words to write and only got 6,000 so far ;).

Twelfth Apostle, if anyone you know actually took part in the war it would be incredibly useful if you could find out to what extent the media influenced their decision. By that I mean what type of things (articles, TV programs, radio etc) caused people to volunteer.

Christopher Long might be worth a try. He was a correspondent throughout the wars and is now based in France. Simple google search should bring up the info you need.

Certainly from the UK/Ireland, many of the volunteers responded to an article in the 'Combat & Survival' (May 1991?!) magazine. It's now - or was at least - owned by Martial Arts Illustrated (MAI). Kind of a survivalist type mag which has been on occassion uncannily accurate in its predictions of future conflicts. During my research a suprising high number has either read or were familiar with the article.

The media changed in their angles like the wind during that period. Was a very confusing time. Initially pro-serb (under the misapprehension that the serbs were trying to 'preserve' Yugoslavia), then having realised their true nature went Pro-croat, and then when Bosnia happened it all went to pieces.

Cheers,

Twelfth Apostle :)

[Twelfth Apostle]

Another 'nom de plume' of yours or someone credible? ... has all your hallmarks for creative writing. Love you millions, darling!! ;)

Cheers Lopez...thanks for the compliments...love you too!

Now come on Lopez...so now I personify any and all sources which speak favourably of the general? :eek:

Brian Gallagher's London based and writes extensively on Croatia and the ICTY. His web site is www.croatiafocus.com

Cheers,

Twelfth Apostle. :)

[lopez]

My comments are as homophobic as Lopez's references to Otto and Oswald were fascist insinuations. Lopez may have misinterpreted it as relating to his 'sexuality' but that says more about him than me.And so by commenting on two 'lowlifes' that the Irish government had allowed into the state in reference to an alleged 'third', I came from the 'all Croatians are fascists' school of thought. ALL of them! I don't think you're homophobic, Tony. I think it's pure frustration that your arguments have failed to make an impression on me or probably anyone reading here, if not about the general's innocence, certainly about whether he should be up in court.

How the hell can someone have a fair trial when the prosecution is based on info chiefly originating from the accused's very own enemy who works for the prosecution's office?Who do we suggest obtains the information and hosts these trials alleged to be against Croatian military officials? Croatia itself? As Amnesty is now discredited I had a look at Human Rights Watch and their 2002 and 2003 reports into Croatia which suggest that the Croats - just like their neighbours - are more keen on finding war criminals from other ethnic groups than their own. The 2003 report states: 'In a welcome development, the authorities accelerated domestic prosecution of ethnic Croats suspected of war crimes committed during the 1991-95 war. Serious concerns remained about the quality of these proceedings, however. Judicial bias and witness tampering characterized some trials, including the high-profile trial in Split for crimes committed in 1992 in the Lora military prison. The witnesses were scared to speak openly in the courtroom about the crimes, and the presiding judge demonstrated bias in favor of the accused Croatian soldiers. The trial had not been completed as of mid-November.'

Last month IHRW reported about the case of a 78 year old Croatian Serb, Ivanka Savic, whom it claims was convicted 'without evidence of wrongdoing.' Human Rights Watch stated in its own 'Balkans Justice Bulletin' that: '...the two principal problems with the Savic trial were the court’s erroneous application of Croatian law and international humanitarian law, as well as ethnic bias against the Serb defendant.' More disturbingly, HRW argued that the 'increasing willingness of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to defer war crimes trials to national jurisdictions—part of a long-term exit strategy to wind up its operations—underscores the importance of effective and fair domestic trials to secure justice and the rule of law throughout the former Yugoslavia.' In other words, fair trials are less likely in any part of the former Yugoslavia than in the more detached surroundings of the Hague.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Unlike you Lopez, where you accuse people willy nilly on the scantest of, or indeed no evidence whatsoever, of all sorts of weird and wonderful things, I did something which is totally alien to you:

As this thread concerns the Croatian war, as the defenders of the 1991-1995 Croatian war are (wrongly) pre-judged by some people as being fascists, and as you selectively mentioned two fascists in your original post, I gave you the opportunity of explaining yourself and in your reply, you employed your classic self-contradiction by saying:

“Couldn't give a f*ck if he was a Trotskyist-Maoist - not that you'd put money on that if you've ever read anything about 20th century Croatian - as opposed to pan-Yugoslavian - nationalism.”

So some people may draw from your initial posts, particularly when you stated you’d studied these countries academically, so therefore must have been aware of the anti-Croatian ‘fascist’ stereo-type that:

A – The two selected examples of fascists was either deliberate or a mistake

and that

B – Your reply implies the former as it suggests you’ve formed a firm opinion of Croatian nationalism as opposed to pan-Yugoslavian which is demonstrated by your embedded subtle hint.

What’s going on here sunshine, is that you’ve been posting falsehood and inaccurate info about certain others and I’ve simply been correcting it. Plain and simple. Nothing personal.

‘Old Hat’ refers also to most of your (feeble) tactics….several failed attempts to wander from the subject at hand…initial smart arse declarations about relevant academic study…first hand accounts of witness testimonies….accusations that I represent anyone who’s ever supported the general…your almost total disregard for or ignorance of the presented facts …twisting my words out of context...implying I've said things which I haven't actually said...but most of all…your contradictory waffle….

BTW – your suggestions of ‘other people are discussing this with you behind the scenes’ demonstrates a deep insecurity in both your capability and conviction. It more than hints that you’re beginning to feel out of your depth by referring to others. The ‘and we thought you’d do x next’ only amplifies it that you’re running out of steam and crying out for help... and if you were to have a quick perusal of your posts you’ll find what ever argument you thought you had has slowly but surely become weaker and weaker to the point where you’ll soon start to have serious doubts as to why you came on here in the first place.

Your argument's not with me Lopez, rather yourself.

My words did not discredit "Amnesty" and this was made perfectly clear. It was transparent that I referred specifically to the 'article' you presented. This is just one of a catalogue of instances where you've 'fabricated' my words. Another was when you'd inferred I'd said 'Blaskic was completely innocent' before proceeding into another irrelevant rant.

Juvenile...Old Chap...Juvenile....

By posting lots of wonderful facts and figures of dubious convictions within the Croatian courts is again irrelevant to your firm assertions that Gotovina is a 'lowlife' that he 'shoots people' and is a 'war criminal.' :eek:

Now so we stick to the heart of the issue, alone or with your re-enforcements, please explain to us all on what basis you concluded that gotovina is a 'low-life war criminal who shoots people'.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Twelve Apostle, You attack the impartiality of Amnesty and in answer to this you use an article from what you describe as an impartial source the Washington Post, it is clearly not.

It seems to be written by a journalist who backs up the American administrations policy of opposing the setting up of the ICC. America’s real reason for opposing the court is that it does not like international things that it can’t control. If the potential forerunner of the ICC can be discredited it would give more legitimacy for the US ‘s refusing to sign up for the court when it came into administration. Equally it has to be said that after the goings on in Guantanamo Bay I for one am hardly going to listen to any US administration backer about how to conduct war crimes.

In Accute Slavophobia THE WASHINGTON TIMES, JUNE 1, 2003 the same author wrote:

"A similar indictment against Gen. Clark — or any American — would rightly be unacceptable to Washington. It would demand that the charges be dropped immediately. But in the case of Gen. Gotovina, the State Department is insisting that Croatia hand him over to the tribunal. Ironically, even Serbian human-rights activists have stated that the general is innocent. "


Secondly the as the journo points out ‘The United States supported the offensive because it rightly concluded that Croatia was pivotal to altering the strategic balance of power in the Balkans.’ This hardly shows the source to be impartial when discussing the actions of Croatian generals and what should happen to them. Does the US want yet again to be associated with war criminals?


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?


I am not presuming the guilt or innocence of the General but from what I have read (admittedly not as much as you) I get the impression that there is at least a case to answer.

Fair comment.

On that note, the US government issed a $5 million dollar reward for the general to appear in the hague, whilst simultaneously witholds evidence for gotovina's defence.

I suggest you check the following most interesting documents:

http://213.191.154.38/doc/Powell_letter1.PDF?LID=1

[lopez]

Now so we stick to the heart of the issue, alone or with your re-enforcements, please explain to us all on what basis you concluded that gotovina is a 'low-life war criminal who shoots people'.Because he is wanted by the ICTY where other low lifes either presently reside, are currently wanted or by the lack of an early death missed the chance to stand trial.

Complete waffle, Tony? Take a look at your own writings here. Lies? Take a look at your own writings. Words taken out of context? Need I go on? Unlike yourself, I've no favourite in the Yugoslav mess. As for me 'running out of steam', 'crying out for help' and me having 'serious doubts as to why you came on here in the first place' :D :D :D :rolleyes: not while you keep posting suggestions that at best Amnesty International are naive and at worse in tow to a Serbian ultra-nationalist, and other dubious articles from biased sources. My 'head of steam' was briefly interrupted when you started suggesting that I was a homosexual because it suddenly became obvious that you had nothing left but my sexuality to talk about.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Because he is wanted by the ICTY where other low lifes either presently reside, are currently wanted or by the lack of an early death missed the chance to stand trial.

If a person is wanted by the ICTY then they are 'suspected' of having committed crime/crimes. Contrary to your opinion, this does not necessarily automatically imply they are guilty of the crimes they are suspected of having committed.



while you keep posting suggestions that at best Amnesty International are naive and at worse in tow to a Serbian ultra-nationalist, and other dubious articles from biased sources. My 'head of steam' was briefly interrupted when you started suggesting that I was a homosexual because it suddenly became obvious that you had nothing left but my sexuality to talk about.

Thanks for the above example. My suggestion was somewhat different than what you conclude. I actually suggested that AI's article was inspired from the Serb Veritas organisation who are ackowledged by all (less yourself) as being responsible for the dissemination of information concerning Serb victims to the vast majority of media, NGO's and human rights groups.

Are you suggesting that AI is the exception to the rule?

Your accusation that I have suggested you are homosexual is yet another smokescreen employed in a pathetic attempt to gain sympathy from others against my 'supposed' suggestions.

Again, nowhere have I stated it. It's simply an attempt on your part to create an emotional response in others and divert their attention away from the facts.

So are you going to keep harping on about your sexuality or are you going to answer the questions and engage in a rational debate?

[Twelfth Apostle]

Complete waffle, Tony? Take a look at your own writings here. Lies? Take a look at your own writings. Words taken out of context? Need I go on? Unlike yourself, I've no favourite in the Yugoslav mess.


Thanks for this other classic example as well.

I didn't state anywhere you were 'complete waffle' some of the points you make are okay. But this shows how you don't go off facts rather your emotions. I actually said you employed 'contradictory waffle' which has a very different signification. :eek:

No please tell me who my 'favourite' is or was in the 'Yugoslav mess'?

Another 'presumption' on your part with no foundation in fact. The only thing anyone can deduce from my posts here is that I consider gotovina's indictment unjust and that he is innocent of the charges as he insists. :)

Anything other than that is pure speculation.

I may have disagreed with Operation Storm. I may have agreed with Milosevic. The fact is you don't know. The fact is other than the fact I have posted my opinions and presented evidence/sources regarding the gotovina case you don't know anything about me....gender, age, nationality....zilch...absolutely zilch..... :eek:

There is also another key difference between us. I've taken the time to actually study the specific circumstances surrounding the case and the people involved before forming any sort of opinion. :D

[lopez]

No please tell me who my 'favourite' is or was in the 'Yugoslav mess'?
Your posts clearly show that you are pro-Croatian (or more to the point pro-Gotovina) from the moment I mentioned Skorzeny. You trash the 'veritas' organisation of any credibility because - why? - they show signs of irredentism and 'has images of 'Greater Serbia'' on its web site.

The only thing anyone can deduce from my posts here is that I consider gotovina's indictment unjust and that he is innocent of the charges as he insists.
Maybe the case might have been better helped if you didn't jump in accusing people of anti-Croatian bias because the Irish government allows foreign fascists to reside within its borders.

Anything other than that is pure speculation.The fact is other than the fact I have posted my opinions and presented evidence/sources regarding the gotovina case you don't know anything about me....gender, age, nationality....zilch...absolutely zilch.....
Of course my suggestion that you are 'Tony Cascarino' is speculation. But the sums all add up. Your knowledge of Gotovina, Cascarino and Croatia, and the fact that you are using a football website to convert us to Gotovina's 'innocence.' And you protesteth too much!

There is also another key difference between us. I've taken the time to actually study the specific circumstances surrounding the case and the people involved before forming any sort of opinion. :DBecause you are the one presenting the defence. I told you I don't care. I'll leave it to the Hague to decide. I've yet to be convinced otherwise because AI and HRW - unlike Cascarino.com, Veritas, the International Amigos of Croatia and Brian Gallagher (who he??) - are both neutrals in all this, think that the sun shines out of the ICTY's ar*e and that Gotovina needs to be in court, even if like Mrs Savic, he just pushed some old dear around to make him breakfast and tidy the house up.

[Twelfth Apostle]

Your posts clearly show that you are pro-Croatian (or more to the point pro-Gotovina) from the moment I mentioned Skorzeny. You trash the 'veritas' organisation of any credibility because - why? - they show signs of irredentism and 'has images of 'Greater Serbia'' on its web site. .

I discredited Veritas for much more than the two selected issues which you just presented as you know full well.


Maybe the case might have been better helped if you didn't jump in accusing people of anti-Croatian bias because the Irish government allows foreign fascists to reside within its borders.

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.


Of course my suggestion that you are 'Tony Cascarino' is speculation. But the sums all add up. Your knowledge of Gotovina, Cascarino and Croatia, and the fact that you are using a football website to convert us to Gotovina's 'innocence.' And you protesteth too much!
Because you are the one presenting the defence. I told you I don't care. I'll leave it to the Hague to decide. I've yet to be convinced otherwise because AI and HRW - unlike Cascarino.com, Veritas, the International Amigos of Croatia and Brian Gallagher (who he??) - are both neutrals in all this, think that the sun shines out of the ICTY's ar*e and that Gotovina needs to be in court, even if like Mrs Savic, he just pushed some old dear around to make him breakfast and tidy the house up.

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.

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?

As for:


you are using a football website to convert us to Gotovina's 'innocence.'.

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.

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

Are you suggesting that the fact that this is a football site it is incorrect for one member to correct the misconceptions of another?

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.