The Emperor’s New Clothes (TENC) * www.tenc.net
Subscribe to the
Emperor's Clothes newsletter
Debate on the Nonviolence Discussion Board Jared Israel vs. Tony Frye
I.) Blame and Consequence - General debate on Yugoslavia
II.) Who's at Fault in Kosovo
In refuting my [post - J.I.] WHO'S AT FAULT IN YUGOSLAVIA? Tony Frye raises the critical question for the antiwar movement. If we accepted Fryes argument, that all sides in the Balkans conflict share equal blame (e.g., the U.S., Milosevics Serbia and Tudjmans Croatia) then the passion of our opposition to U.S. policy would necessarily cool. So let me deal with Frye's assertion, that Serbias President Milosevic is the same as Croatias President Tudjman. Is Frye right?
In August, 1995 the Croatian army, trained and led by a US military subcontractor (MPRI) and using US planes to bomb and disrupt the communications and radar of the Serbian Republic in Croatia, called Republika Srpska Krajina (RSK), launched a massive attack on the mountainous Krajina, where ethnic Serbs had lived for hundreds of years. The Croats swept through UN lines, slaughtering some Czech troops and driving 250,000 Serbs, mostly farmers, from their homes and property in five days. These refugees clogged the roads. With scant possessions carried in every imaginable way, they poured into the state of Serbia: men, women, children, tractors, horses; desperate people, thirsty, hungry, no place to go, their farms burned, looted, creating a disaster for Serbia, which had been suffering four years under sanctions as severe as those imposed on Iraq.
About 20,000 people were slaughtered as planes strafed the roads and Croatian troops ambushed the exhausted refugees from the side. Croatian authorities said their boys were only firing at snipers; thus the Serbs were guilty even of their own deaths as they fled land they had ploughed and planted long before the United States existed, long before Germany was a national entity. The Western media reported the whole event as interesting news; there was no concern expressed for the Serbs, sympathy having been preempted by demonization. For his part, President Clinton said he was not displeased. This would simplify negotiations, he said.
Afterwards, Croatian President Franjo Tudjman
went on a nationwide railroad tour of celebration. On Aug.
26, 1995, Radio Croatia reported that he said: "There
can be no return to the past, to the times when Serbs
were spreading cancer in the heart of Croatia, a cancer
that was destroying the Croatian national being."
Referring to the expulsion of the Serbs, Tudjman
continued: "So it is as if they have never lived
here...They didn't even have time to take with them their
filthy money or their filthy underwear!" (See "The
Invasion of Serbian Krajina," by Gregory Elich at:
Concerning this event, Frye says: "Not only is Tudjman comparable to Milosevic, they are one and the same. When the Croatian Army was ethnically cleansing over a quarter of a million Serbs from Krajina back in 1995, there was a noticeable silence on this from Milosevic."
Tudjman carried out the genocide; Frye says Milosevic did nothing try to stop him. Leaving aside the factual truth of this very serious criticism of Milosevic, how can Frye argue that failing to prevent a murder is the same as committing one?
Fryes second piece of evidence that Milosevic equals Tudjman is the alleged massacre at Srebrenica. Says Frye: "There was nothing internationalist about what happened in Srebrenica in July 1995 (though you can rest assured no minorities were being 'pampered'), and this type of butchery perfectly mirrors what the Croats were doing in Krajina the same year."
Heres what the West claims happened: a group of 3-8,000 men, mostly members of a Bosnian Islamic Fundamentalist Army which had lost a bloody offensive, were rounded up by members of the Bosnian Serb Army and slaughtered.
If this charge were true, it would be a war crime. I am convinced it is not true, not because all Serbs are saints, but because the evidence smells of a different crime: fabrication. But let's put that aside for a moment and consider Frye's argument.
The alleged crime was supposedly the work of what the Washington Post calls a "rogue unit" of the Bosnian Serb army. This army was not under the control of the state of Serbia, it was an army of an entirely independent state, called Republika Srpska or RS, the Bosnian Serb Republic.
So Frye's comparison between the alleged actions of some Bosnian Serb troops and "what the Croats were doing in Krajina the same year" is false; the Croats in Krajina were members of the regular Army of the Croatian state.
This may seem like nit picking; it is not. Glossing over the distinction between Serbia proper and the Bosnian Serb Republic (RS) allows the media (and Frye) to distort the theme, so to speak, of the Serbian state.
Serbia was a Republic in Socialist Yugoslavia. 60% of its citizens are ethnic Serbs - thus 40% are not. With 26 different ethnic groups, Serbia was by far the most multiethnic of all the Yugoslav Republics. Today, it is the only one that remains significantly multiethnic. (Even the refugees in Serbia are multiethnic, including Croats, Bosnian Moslems, Kosovo Albanians, etc.) This is no surprise because Serbia has always been the main supporter of the Yugoslav idea of ethnic unity. Serbs made up the bulk of the Partisans who formed the government of Socialist Yugoslavia. The multiethnic character of Serbia is no accident; it reflects the desire of Serbs to live and work with different nationalities. That's their cultural orientation.
Consistent with this outlook, Serbia has among the most tolerant minorities policies in the world. Schools and media are funded by the government for 26 ethnic groups, in their own languages. Courts provide translators for nine languages. Street signs are multi-lingual.
"Serbia" is constitutionally defined as a state of all its citizens not as a state of the Serbs. In this it differs from other former Yugoslav republics, for instance Croatia, which is a state of the Croats. Lumping Serbia together with the RS (Bosnian Serb state) suggests that both are simply collections of ethnic Serbs and implicitly supports the false notion that Serbia is racially exclusionary in orientation.
Republika Srpska (RS), the Bosnian Serb nation, is almost entirely ethnic Serbian. That's because RS is an artificial creation which came into existence as a reaction to the attempt, by neo-Fascist Croatian and Islamic Fundamentalist factions in Bosnia, to artificially create a Bosnian state by splitting Bosnia-Herzegovina off from Yugoslavia. Not wanting to be ruled by Islamic Fundamentalists and Croatian Neo-Nazi's (would you?) the Serbian community banded together and resisted. In this resistance they were supported or allied with various Croats and especially non-Fundamentalist Moslems. The Croatian/Islamic breakaway state was aided, advised and partly led by covert government forces from the US and Germany. This was part of the US/German effort to breakup Yugoslavia.
RS is mostly farmland because the Bosnian Serbs comprised the peasant class. As I've said, the existence of this Serbian farmer-state was not the result of Serbian Chauvinism, it was a defensive measure to try to avoid being separated from Yugoslavia. The secessionists were the ones violating both Yugoslav and international law.
Lumping Serbia and RS together encourages people to think of Serbia as a racial, rather than a social and political entity; encourages them to think of Serbs as people with a racial agenda.
There is a good deal of evidence that the US government loathes Serbia because Serbia hasn't jumped on the privatization bandwagon and because Serbia is the obstacle to the imperialist takeover of the Balkans.
But NATO can't very well tell its citizens they have to fight the Serbs because they're an obstacle to imperialism; hence the demonization of the Serbs as a race. In carrying out this demonization, the NATO media, not Milosevic, sounds a lot like President Franjo Tudjman of Croatia who said, after expelling the Serbian people from their homes in the Krajina:
The constant repetition in the media of anti-Serbian horror stories has created an atmosphere in which people like Frye can with impunity smear "the Serbs". If he applied this sort of collective-guilt-attack to members of an ethnic group that had not been properly demonized, they would serve up his insides on a plate.
Getting back to the argument that Serbia has done stuff as bad as Croatia: If a massacre had taken place at Srebrenica it would have been a crime, but not Milosevic's crime. And it wouldn't compare to the forced evacuation of 250,000 people from the Krajina, planned and executed by Croatia and the U.S.
But let us say I am wrong. Let us say Milosevic did control the Bosnian Serb Army. Let us say the two events were comparable. There would still be a problem with the Srebrenica massacre. The problem would be: it did not happen.
After the alleged massacre, the media talked about "satellite photos of mass graves". This convinced most people the story was true. But the photos "somehow got lost in the CIA-State Department-Pentagon-White House bureaucratic labyrinth." (Washington Post, 10/29/95) And no evidence has been produced, other than these non-existent photos.
By the way, speaking of the Croatian/Serbian comparison, Croatian Pres. Tudjman wrote a book, "Wastelands," which can be skimmed at: http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/Tudjman.html
Tudjman says: Jewish thinking created the holocaust; Jews did the killing in the WW II death camps; they were motivated by greed; the Croatian Ustashe guards were just observers. Tudjman's neo-Ustashe movement has created a chilling imitation of the W.W.II Croatian state. [Note added Oct. 13, 2007: In W.W.II, the German-sponsored Ustasha clerical-fascists set up the first Independent State of Croatia. Vast numbers of people, mainly Serbs, also Roma and Jews and of course opponents of the Ustashe, regardless of ethnicity - were slaughtered with the encouragement and indeed practical participation of the Catholic church - see Encyclopedia of the Holocaust at http://tinyurl.com/2xejnc . - J.I.]
When Tudjman resurrected Independent Croatia eight years ago, he chose the same flag as the WWII State of Croatia, the same currency, the same army uniforms, even the same Fascist salute. Croatian streets have been renamed after Ustashe leaders. The monster Archbishop, Stepinac, responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands, was beatified (a step in Sainthood) in a ceremony led by the Pope and hosted by Tudjman. A total of 600,000 Serbs were driven out. Jews were terrorized.
None of this happened in Serbia. Serbia has no fascist government propaganda. Serbia is the only part of the former Yugoslavia that has accepted hundreds of thousands of refugees of all nationalities. Croatia is defined constitutionally as a state of the Croats; Serbia is defined constitutionally as a state of all its citizens, of whatever ethnicity. I'm not saying these things because I'm pro-Serbian. I'm defending Serbia against a campaign of outrageous lies for the same reason I defend Black Americans against a campaign of outrageous lies: because I loathe racism.
The current US claims of genocide in Kosovo are unsupported except by NATO's media machine; density of misinformation replaces evidence, as with Frye. Most of the 400 villages burned by evil Serbs as of the NATO Press Conference on 4/16 were miraculously resurrected within a day, thus outdoing Jesus: NATO's 4/17 briefing dropped the number to 18. And even then what was the evidence? What was the evidence of the "18 burned villages"? A satellite photo in which, according to the NATO general at the press conference, "The white stuff that you see is the burning." Nothing like solid proof. Was it a photo of a building hit by Humanitarian Missiles? Was it really in Kosovo? Was it maybe in New Jersey? Was it my aunt Sarah's chest x-ray? Perhaps if you'd turn it upside down it might be easier to see...
Demonization accompanies genocide; that was the game-plan in the destruction of Native American society, that was the game plan in the enslavement of Black Africans and that remains the game-plan in post-Slavery America to this very day and that is the game plan against the Serbs and Roma ("Gypsies") in the Balkans. It's all linked to geopolitics. Geopolitics means theft: he who's land and labor they would steal, they first make unclean.
"They didn't have time to take their dirty underwear and their dirty money."
The Krajina is worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Genocide is profitable.
These lies are sent to test us.
Blame and Consequence
Demonization? Here you are rationalizing the slaughter of Srebrenica civilians based on some myth of the Bosnian army being a bunch of fundamentalists. If you want to see fundamentalists, go to Afghanistan. This is nothing more than ethno-revisionism, plain and simple. If one wanted to measure the religiosity of people in the Balkans, the Croats and Serbs would typically be judged as if not more religious than the Bosnian Muslims. If this isn't religious bigotry, I don't know what is. This is like Pope Urban II rationalizing the Christian slaughter of Jerusalem's non-Christian population, including little babies, on account that they were the Infidel, and deserved to die.
On your denial over Srebrenica, not only is there no "myth" to de-bunk, much like your purposeful misrepresentations that the US favored the recognition of Croatia, Srebrenica was a case where the killing occurred in broad daylight in front of UN soldiers and American satellites. At this point, I have to ask, if you can rationalize shooting people in the heads and burying them in mass graves on account of them supposedly being fundamentalists, could you personally partake in this kind of conduct?
As for saying that all sides are equally to blame for Yugoslavia, if such things were based on proportionality, it would be no contest: Serb nationalism helped create the conditions for the break-up Yugoslavia, helped legitimize Croat nationalism, whose subsequent success was a response to the ethnic cleansing of the Yugoslav JNA, and it was the JNA and the Bosnian Serb paramilitaries that were responsible for the vast majority of the crimes and killings in the formerly unified Yugoslavia. Those weren't "fundamentalist" Bosnian Muslims running those rape camps (raping on upwards of 20,000 women according to the UN), but the Bosnian Serbs who were committing these acts. Then again, like some Balkans version of David Irving, I'm certain you think the UN is in on some anti-Serb conspiracy here too, and that the rape camps are all myths, that it never happened, and that even if it did the other side were fundamentalists. This is starting to sound familiar. It sounds eerily the same rationalizations used by Germans at the end of WWII. Once you can rationalize killing people, there is absolutely no end in sight the level of butchery people can sink themselves to. You can rape them, shoot them, gas them, incinerate them, dismember them, chop them, bury them, bomb them, claim their deaths were an "accident," delude yourself into thinking they never died, or that they did then they had it coming. It is the evil of those who think their right to live means that others must die. For that, the sinking of people to accept the use of military force, all sides are to blame.
Blame and Consequence
Tony is hysterical. Is he unused to having his Serbophobia challenged?
E.g., he says: " Demonization? Here you are rationalizing the slaughter of Srebrenica civilians based on some myth of the Bosnian army being a bunch of fundamentalists." Has Serbophobia rendered Tony immune to the printed word? What part of "if there had been a massacre it would have been a crime, but there was no massacre" does he not understand? It's a myth.
My reason for labeling the Bosnian Army that attacked Srebrenica "Islamic Fundamentalist" was not to justify atrocities but to communicate a fact. The Moslems in Bosnia were split and still are. The faction led by Bosnian President Izetbegovic, which took power illegally, is Islamic Fundamentalist. The non-fundamentalists fought alongside the Serbs. (Interestingly, the press has consistently called Izetbegovic Fundamentalists the "Bosnian government" and called the non-fundamentalists, who had won the election but were forced out, 'rebels'.
Serbs and secular Moslems are wise to resist rule by Islamic Fundamentalists. These people, including "President" Alija Izetbegovic, worked with the Nazis during World War II, forming 2 SS divisions, and slaughtered the usual "inferior" people as well as non-fascist Moslems.
The media portrayal of the current Bosnian Moslem regime as 'liberal' is amazing. Please read this excerpt from "The Islamic Declaration" ("Islamska deklaracija") written by Bosnian Pres. Alija Izetbegovic:
Iran supplied arms to Izetbegovic and trainers in terrorism, all with U.S. approval. Its documented. You can read more of Izetbegovic's book at:
Most of the rest of Tonys rebuttal is rant. E.g., he repeats the discredited claim that Bosnian Serbs systematically raped Moslem women. Rape is monstrous and its cheap propaganda use by these Serbophobes to slander one of the great victims of the Holocaust when hundreds of thousands of Serbian women were raped and then slaughtered by Nazi proxies -- including Izetbegovic's friends -- this is despicable.
Diana Johnstone, former press secretary of the Greens in the Euro Parliament, wrote an article last fall. (If you want to read the article, please email me.) Here's a quote on the Bosnian rape issue:
Blame and Consequence
"NO SLAUGHTER OCCURRED" in Srebrenica? Wow, this is beyond denial. If killing 5,000 people in broad daylight is not "slaughter," what is? Do you deny the UN reports on this as well? This is sad. I don't know whether to feel sorry for you, or angry at your cultural-induced delusion.
"Most of the rest of Tony's rebuttal is rant. E.g., he repeats the propaganda lie that Bosnian Serbs systematically raped Moslem women. Rape is monstrous and its cheap propaganda use by these Serbophobes to slander one of the great victims of the Holocaust when hundreds of thousands of Serbian women WERE raped and then slaughtered by Nazi proxies - including Izetbegovic's friends - this is despicable."
A rant, excuse me, I'm not the one denying the existence of the slaughter of thousands of people as a non-event. And your invocation of WWII is standard among the ethnic nationalists in the Balkans: If my neighbors' grandparents might have done something awful 50-60 years ago then they must also die. Your quote of the Euro Green makes the argument that not enough attention was paid to the others who were raped. I would agree, and if I was debating a Croatian apologist for their Milosevic (Tudjman), I would have no qualms about reminding them of Krajina (as I have with pro-NATO folk like Andre from England). However, Johnstone's remarks about the rapes say nothing about denying the existence of the Bosnian rape camps, which you deny. This would be like a German ethnic nationalist taking my statements about the barbarism of the Allied bombings of Dresden and the Soviet Red Army's rape of millions of German women as a way to absolve or deny any of the Axis crimes during WWII. I ask, do you deny the existence of the Bosnian rape camps? The United Nations not only substantiated them, but has interviewed the victims who were raped as well. Ah, but they're not of your kin, so their mutilation doesn't count.
This is the consequence of nationalism. I say the same to you as I would any other ethnic nationalist in the Balkans. I do not care what happened at some battle 610 years ago. I do not care what someone's grandparents may or may not have done during WWII. We are all members of the same species--Serb, Croat, Albanian, Muslim, Orthodox, Catholic. We all have a common ancestry. We breathe the same air and bleed the same blood. Everything else is a myth. Until we can get beyond the myths, and hatreds, the rationalizations for the deaths of others on all sides, the human race will die in a hellfire of war. What is happening today will repeat itself over and over and over until the Milosevics, the Tudjmans, the Clintons, the NATOs, the UCKs of the world are subverted, their violence rejected, their leaders disobeyed.
Blame and Consequence
Frye is the name, misrepresentation is the game. (Cause got no facts)
Yes, Tony, "killing 5000 people in broad daylight" would be slaughter; so too at night. Do I then "deny the existence of the slaughter of thousands of people as a non-event?" Not if it occurred, but it didn't; so I deny it, not as non-event but as LIE. Dear reader, do you notice that I refute Fryes words whereas he generously stuffs unfamiliar ones in my mouth?
Do I "deny the UN reports on this as well?" I deny Srebrenica happened, period, and I do so for solid reasons.
The U.S/German assault on Yugoslavia has featured a massive media campaign against all the Serbs, especially in Bosnia. Heres a nice example: early in the Bosnian war, horrible pictures appeared on TV and in newspapers around the world a group of Bosnian Muslim men, and especially one emaciated man, behind barbed wire. These pictures, supposedly men imprisoned in a Bosnian Serb concentration camp, were used by Bush and Clinton to whip up anti-Serbian hysteria.
The pictures were edited from footage shot by a British (ITN) TV crew led by Penny Marshall. As it happens a Bosnian Serb film crew accompanied Ms. Marshalls folks that day and filmed the Marshall people filming.
I have seen a copy of the Serbian film. It is clear that Marshalls folks shot from inside a barbed wire enclosure that had been set up to safeguard some building materials. They were inside the barbed wire; the people they were filming were outside. In the film we can hear and see Penny Marshall talking to people through the barbed wire; it is obvious from her questions that she's trying to get them to say something negative. Alas, they don't; they say its a humanitarian food distribution center for people displaced by the fighting, including Bosnian Moslems. Copies of that film are available.
The Serbs are often charged with cherishing a false sense of victimization. But with the exception of the Russians and Jews, Serbs suffered the worst losses in W.W.II. 750,000 were slaughtered in death camps, untold thousands more were hunted down by Croat, Bosnian Islamic Fundamentalist, ethnic Albanian and Hungarian Nazis in groups like the League of Pritzen (Albanians) or the Ustashe (Croatians) or the Bosnian SS divisions.
Nobody criticizes the Jews for "being obsessed with what happened to them in WWII." And nobody would dare lump Jews and Germans together as Frye outrageously lumps victims and killers when he says "invocation of WWII is standard among the ethnic nationalists of the Balkans." Croat, Muslim and Albanian nationalists deny what happened in WWII and for good reason: their political forbears killed Serbs, Gypsies, Jews and Slavic Muslims, as well as Communists and Socialists.
Frye scorns memory of this real Holocaust but is perfectly comfortable comparing Serbian actions in the 90s with "Axis crimes during WWII." He finds a convincing parallel between the policy of rape, used by the Germans for terror and recreation, and the media stories about Serbian "rape camps." He says the Diana Johnstone quote doesnt argue against the existence of these camps. Well du-uh. Diana Johnstone says there was no evidence of systematic rape by Bosnian Serbs, so use the noggin, Frye no systematic rape means no rape camps. In other words, Johnstone is saying it didn't happen. Not it camp, not out of camp - nowhere.
Take heed folks: Serbophobia makes you dumb.
Regarding UN reports on rape in Bosnia: if Frye is talking about UN Report ENCN.4/1993/50, it concludes there were about 2400 women raped on all sides. (That's four sides...) ( or more on this see: http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/rapes-fiction.html )
Explaining me racially, Frye says: "Ah, but they [that is, non-Serbs in the Balkans] are not of your kin, so their mutilation doesn't count. "
Sorry, Tony; Im not a Serb. Im a NY Jew. Born in Brooklyn. I was a leader of the anti-war movement at Harvard. You can read inaccurate accounts of my adventures in various books on Students for a Democratic Society. I am not now nor have I ever been a Serb. Never even had a Serbian girlfriend. Just an aging, stubborn internationalist who views all people as my kin. Including non-Serbians in the Balkans. I just hates lies, Frye.
But I am not entirely unbiased. The Serbs refused to turn on the Jews in WWII and paid a terrible price; I feel a certain debt and am disposed not to believe they have turned into raving Nazis. So I guess that, like all the Jews, Im stuck in WWII. You finally nailed me, Frye.
Blame and Consequence
* * * * *
(Frye's dramatic parting remark (posted above) left me befuddled because I really am a New York Jew; I even remember the Dodgers. I thought I'd hear no more from Frye but was deceived. I posted the following, "Who's at Fault in Kosovo" and, as you will see, Frye replied.)
NATO says Kosovo's problems began in 1989 when Milosevic suppressed Autonomy out of nationalist spite.
According to this myth a) Kosovo was fine 'til then; and b) even after that the U.S. boosted Milosevic as a democrat, only reluctantly turning against him when his behavior became so fascistic that the NATO humanitarians had little choice.
In fact the US was openly meddling in Yugoslavia as early as 1987. Covert meddling surely precedes that date. In 1987 Congressman Dioguardi reported efforts by him, Sen. Dole, Sen. Paul Simon and others to encourage Kosovo Albanian secessionism. (NY Times letter, Nov. 8, 1987) The effect of this cannot be over-stressed. When leading legislators in the U.S. openly support a secessionist movement (especially when the CIA is "helping" too) it vastly increases their appeal.
Before 1989, Albanian racists, very similar to racist whites in the old south, persecuted non-Albanians.
Did you note the use of the phrase "ethnically clean"? This was in 1982. So much for the Serbs having invented this term during the 1990s, as the media tells us.
By 1987 the racist harassment had gotten worse:
It was the Serbs and other minorities, not the Albanian majority, who developed a movement against racist harassment in Kosovo because they were the ones being harassed as an ethnic group. This movement became gigantic and included not just Serbs but Roma ("Gypsies") who the secessionists hated as much as they hated Serbs, as well as Goran (Slavs like the Serbs who had converted to the Moslem religion) and Jews and even ethnic Turks and Hungarians. (NY Times, 10/7/88) Contrary to popular belief, U.S. officials did not merely support Kosovo Albanians' opposition, they openly fomented ethnic strife. Thus Bob Dole and other Congressmen visited Pristina, in Kosovo, in 1990 and the visit was the occasion for coordinated riots.
What an extraordinary situation, and what a clear expression of the secessionists' strategy of getting the US help them create an ethnically pure Greater Albania.
Who's at Fault in Kosovo
"According to this myth: Kosovo was fine 'til then; and even after that the U.S. boosted Milosevic as a democrat, only reluctantly turning against him when it had no other choice."
We never reluctantly turned against Milosevic, but collaborated in his conduct (actively opposing the initial break-up of Yugoslavia amid the ethnic cleansing of the JNA and the JNA's invasion of Slovenia) until he became a political embarrassment to the legitimacy of NATO at a time of its imperial expansion on the back door of Russia. The turn against Milosevic was rather unhesitating on our part, just as it was with Noriega and Hussein. All killers need a devil to justify the deaths of their contrived enemies. Milosevic needs the Albanians like NATO needs Milosevic. It helps brainwash people into accepting the slaughter of civilians as some Hegelian inevitability. All you need is a rationalization, such as your excuse for killing thousands of civilians at Srebrenica on account of some fundamentalist threat, or NATO's excuse-making for murdering civilian train passengers as some type of "accident" (as if someone can "accidentally" bomb anyone after launching).
This is the advantage of NATO Turkey doing the same thing to Kurds what Yugoslavia is doing to Albanian Kosovars. This may sound cynical, but the Serbs could have probably solved all of their problems by applying for NATO membership, and gaining the license to treat their minorities the same way Germany treats the Turks, the French treat Algerians, the Greeks treat Macedonia, the Turks treat Kurds. Instead, you have to spend your time spreading propaganda about the victim being the victimizer, the killer the oppressed, the expelled the expellers. The Turks can just kill their disfavored (as they did in a village raid the other day) and get away with it. If you had been smart enough to maintain close ties to the US, and sought arms support along with IMF loans, you still may be a unified race state today.
Who is at Fault in Kosovo
It's like a monster movie. There's no explaining to Frye. You think you've made what you're saying impossible to misunderstand and he turns up with the same wacky answer, as if you had never spoken.
Thus Frye says I excuse the "killing thousands of civilians at Srebrenica on account of some fundamentalist threat." But in the BLAME & CONSEQUENCE thread I explained three times that if Srebrenica had happened it would have been terrible but it didn't happen. The first time Frye quoted me as justifying the Srebrenica "massacre" he could have been mistaken. By the third time he was either lying or stoned, who knows, I can't explain humans, give me a dog any day, they tell the truth.
As for Frye's rambling comparison between Kurds and Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, it is false and in a way obscene.
False because we're comparing apples and oranges on both sides.
The Kurds are a nation without a state. The Kosovo Albanians have two states - they are citizens of Serbia (this is complicated by the existence of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, but I ain't touching that one) and, if they want an Albanian state, they have - Albania. It's true that Albania is in terrible shape, but it's a country.
The Turkish government outlaws all manifestations of Kurdish culture, including language. The Serbian government provided, perhaps mistakenly, a complete set of institutions for ethnic Albanians, including schools to Ph.D. level.
In trying to crush Kurdish identity, Turkey has slaughtered 35,000 (it admits to that - the figure must be higher). In the war between the KLA (an externally-created terrorist group that mainly targets "collaborationist" Albanians) and the Serbs, the U.S. said 2000 died as of the start of bombing. That's genocide and I'm the Easter Bunny.
For 50 pages of information on the KLA's policy of assassinating Albanians who resist their gangster rule, see:
The Kurds are scorned by the powers that be. The KLA has NATO as air force and trainer. Not bad for struggling guerillas.
The KLA was put together from drug gangsters, Contra fashion.
The Kurds have been victims of a century-long genocide in Turkey. How many Kurds has Turkey murdered one way or another? One million? Two million? Nobody knows. This is not the case with ethnic Albanians - hence the comparison has a certain obscenity: it denies a real genocide by trivial comparison.
There has been genocide in Kosovo as well, but it has been committed against the Serbs, by racists among the ethnic Albanians. These forces had their field day during WW II when the Axis gave them Greater Albania, and they declared a jihad and hunted down Serbs, Gypsies and reds all over Kosovo. When the Partisans swept through Kosovo at the end of World War II, the local fascists suffered a partial setback; defeated but not destroyed, they responded much like the defeated slave owners in the post Civil War South; they regrouped, they formed racist organizations, just as former slave owners formed the KKK in the South and they began a campaign of terror against the Serbs. It is that campaign which I describe in my post, 'Who is to Blame in Kosovo.' And You will note that Frye says nothing about the factual evidence I present, from the NY Times, that the Serbs were the persecuted group in pre-1989 Kosovo.
Milosevic did not invent the fact that somewhere around 100,000 Serbs were driven out of Kosovo by violent harassment during the 70's and 80's. The Serbs are not fighting to suppress cultural identity in Kosovo. They are fighting a secessionist group of thugs, backed by the world's most powerful imperialist states, who want to break up the Balkans into bite-sized pieces so they can make lots of - money. They're killing all these people for money.
If you find emperors-clothes useful, we can use your help...
Our work depends on donations. If you find Emperor's Clothes useful,
please help us to pay website, research and technical expenses. Every
donation helps, big or small.
Subscribe to the Emperor's Clothes newsletter
Please send this
to a friend. You may post any TENC article on the internet as
long as you credit TENC and the author(s).
The Emperor’s New Clothes (TENC) *