The secret life of Tony Cascarino ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cfdh_edmundo

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 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

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'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pat O' Banton

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pat O' Banton

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davros

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

---

Very good Davros!! :D Lol!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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&l...o+UN+mercenary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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

---

Same here, baby.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davros

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

Jeez, talking about...good boy.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the 12 th man

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

---

For 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/en...-ii010608e.htm
http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/en...-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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twelfth Apostle

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lopez

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..."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pat O' Banton

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.