Article

2011-07-05 Europe

Ratko Mladic Protests International Trial, Is Removed From Court

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-07-05 08:55|| || Front Page|| [1 views ] Top

#1 Can't get his own lawyers? Why not? He has to take court appointed lawyers who are guaranteed to drop the ball for him? That's kinda suspicious, isn't it? Can you say "kangaroo court"?

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-07-05 11:50|| 2011-07-05 11:50|| Front Page Top

#2 Steve, my editorializing had more to do with the international stupidity surrounding the entire event.

To start with, both the Croats and the Serbs went into the situation as uniformed soldiers, granted with non-uniformed auxiliaries, against a non-uniformed enemy, after the plebiscite that was a slam dunk for the 44% Muslims to force the Christians to remain under their rule, was guided by the UN.

The Serbs even tried to boycott the dictated vote, which seemed to be crafted with the idea of creating a Muslim European state, with Christians as second class citizens.

The Serbs were very clear from the onset that they would not allow Muslims to continue to live in the Serbian annexed part of Bosnia. For their part, the Muslims used the old, "Once Muslim territory, always Muslim territory", to claim control over areas that were heavily majority Serbian Orthodox.

Then western Europe, the US, and the UN, came down singularly on the side of the Muslims. About the only allies the Serbs could get were Russia and other Orthodox nations, to a lesser extent, all of whom had long been fighting against Muslim expansionism.

As far as the Muslims of Srebrenica were told, then ordered to evacuate the city, they refused, and their men, without military organization, began fighting the Serbs, in the good old jihadi style. So the Serbs had to go house to house, round up the Muslims and tell them to get marching.

They men were seen as non-uniform combatants, enemy in civilian clothes staying to fight the Serbs as soon as they could get arms. Either in the Serbian areas or as soon as they got outside of them.

The US has prisons in Afghanistan to keep the thousands of captured Taliban. As soon as released, they take up arms again. What could the US do if it had no prisons?

Now, after the end of hostilities, sort of, the international community is only trying Serbs, not Muslims, for war crimes. The Muslims, for their part, now in full control of Christian areas, has instituted a policy of destroying every church in their territory, and driving all Christians out, or killing them. No surprise on either side to them doing this. Not a whole lot of international press about it, either. Not PC.

All under the watchful, and indifferent, gaze of the "peacekeepers", who are not allowed to become involved unless either sides shoots at the other.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-07-05 13:28|| 2011-07-05 13:28|| Front Page Top

#3 What could the US do if it had no prisons?

Not that I was ever there or have any expertise on the subject, but if you have 8,000 guys on your hands and you are suspicious that they will come back and try to kill you if you release them, kill your wives and daughters too, what would you do? Put them in a camp, feed them, clothe them, keep them warm and assign guards to make sure they don't escape? Who's gonna pay for that? Would they do the same for your guys if the tables were turned?

Are they gonna ask these questions in court? Or are the court-appointed lawyers gonna let it slide?

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-07-05 14:03|| 2011-07-05 14:03|| Front Page Top

#4 Moose, unfortunately you're saying that the Serbs were somehow justified in doing what they did. Somehow the Serbs were 'justified' in 'ordering' the evacuation of Srebrenica, and then murdering the men and boys (in whatever clothing) because they 'feared' leaving them loose.

Whereas, what it was, was a pogrom, pure and simple. They didn't murder the men and boys because of fear, they murdered them because that's what they wanted to do.

I won't condone the murder of young boys.

I won't condone the murder of anyone, Serb, Croat or Bosnian; Orthodox, Catholic, or Muslim. What happened in Srebrenica was just plain wrong, and Mladic now answers to it.

Murdering people because you 'fear' them isn't a legal defense, as Mladic will soon find out.

There was no reason for that insane, stupid civil war except ethnic hatred. I'm not going to excuse that.

Posted by Steve White 2011-07-05 14:59|| 2011-07-05 14:59|| Front Page Top

#5 Ebbang Uluque6305, Dr White, have either of you gave any thought to the possibility that "Srebrenica Massacre" and, say "Jenin Massacre" are a lot more similar than either of you believes.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2011-07-05 15:44|| 2011-07-05 15:44|| Front Page Top

#6 "The accursed has been advised of his lack of rights under the Secret Code of Military Toughness and will conduct himself accordingly! Bailiff, gag him!"

Posted by mojo 2011-07-05 15:47|| 2011-07-05 15:47|| Front Page Top

#7 Jenin was a crock. The 'Srebenica hoax' is an allegation of one person. He needs to prove it. We have plenty of evidence of the young boys being killed.

Posted by Steve White 2011-07-05 16:44|| 2011-07-05 16:44|| Front Page Top

#8 g(r)omgoru, with so many varied accounts of these incidents I don't feel qualified to pass judgement on any of them. Over the years, however, I have developed a deep skepticism about some of these media outlets and the reporters who work for them.

In this case, the article doesn't say why Mladic can't have the lawyers he wants. That seems to me like a very important question and the reporter doesn't seem to have made any effort to answer it. That's basic journalism. He just flunked Journalism 101. I lose faith in a reporter who is so negligent. I lose faith in his publication. His editors and publishers should have prodded him to do better.

With such unreliable information, how can I pass judgement?

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-07-05 16:44|| 2011-07-05 16:44|| Front Page Top

#9 The evidence is there in UN/EU reports: despite 10 years of looking, no 8000 bodies. Not even 4000. Nor 3000. Less than 2000---and not buried in one place in one time. All men of military age (13+, that's Muslims) killed over a period of weeks.
Well, as they say about horses & water.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2011-07-05 17:22|| 2011-07-05 17:22|| Front Page Top

23:51 trailing wife
22:36 rammer
22:28 JosephMendiola
22:18 Bigfoot Thud6124
22:17 JosephMendiola
22:04 JosephMendiola
21:44 Nimble Spemble
21:41 Nimble Spemble
21:38 USN,Ret.
21:34 Scooter McGruder
21:30 Iblis
20:37 Skidmark
20:01 JosephMendiola
19:56 JosephMendiola
19:43 JosephMendiola
19:13 Barbara
18:46 Lord Garth
18:40 Procopius2k
18:35 ryuge
18:29 Barbara
18:27 Thing From Snowy Mountain
18:13 ryuge
18:12 S
17:55 Redneck Jim