Subscribe to our newsletter!
|Have you seen the Emperor's Clothes movie JUDGMENT? It proves the Western media lied about Bosnia.|
More on how Ramsey Clark Attacked Milosevic at the National Press Club
by Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser
[Posted 19 May 2003]
Since this article was published we have written two more pieces:
a follow-up to the article, "Ramsey Clark Poses as
Milosevic's Lawyer and then Smears the 'Client' on
Nationwide US Television" at
In that earlier article we accused Ramsey Clark of two things.
[ www.tenc.net ]
Regarding our article about Ramsey Clark's appearance before the National Press Club last week, we have received a few letters arguing that Clark was *not* trying to pose as President Milosevic's attorney.
These letters noted that Tammy Lytle (we had spelled her name, phonetically, as 'Lydel') asked Clark:
These readers argued that Lytle was only using President Milosevic as an example of the *kind* of monster (sic!) whom Clark would represent. They further argued that in his reply, Clark never mentioned President Milosevic by name, but spoke about why he *would* defend accused war criminals in general. The idea is, it was all hypothetical.
We disagree. We think the question and answer exchange between Clark and Lytle communicated to ordinary people that Clark was President Milosevic's lawyer.
But it's really a moot point.
Ms. Lytle stated explicitly that Clark represented President Milosevic; by not correcting her, Clark agreed.
In preparing our first article, we did not yet have access to the full, official transcript. We only had the video and a partial transcript, so we thought that the exchange we quoted earlier was the *only time* that Lytle falsely asserted that Clark was President Milosevic's attorney.
But now we have seen the full transcript and we can see that Ms. Lytle falsely stated that Ramsey Clark represented President Milosevic *twice*.
Early in the National Press Club luncheon, Lytle introduced Clark with a brief biography. Then Clark gave a lengthy talk. And it was after Clark's speech that Lytle asked Clark several questions before getting to the one about Clark representing war criminals.
During her introduction Lytle said:
Look at the key sentence: "In addition, he [Ramsey Clark] has defended a rogue's gallery of clients, including Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic..."
Whether out of ignorance or ill intent, Lytle explicitly stated that President Milosevic had been Clark's client. There was no room for confusion.
Moreover she did so in a sentence linking President Milosevic to two of Clark's most appalling clients, Lyndon LaRouche, an anti-Semitic sect leader jailed after being convicted of, among other things, swindling elderly people in a telephone investment scam, and Sheikh Rahman, who organized the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and who is the religious leader of the Egyptian terrorist-fundamentalist group, Gama'a al-Islamyya. [1A]
Neither here nor at any other time did Clark correct Tammy Lytle's false statement that President Milosevic was his client. Thus of course viewers would assume it was true. Nor did Clark object to Lytel's linking of President Milsoevic with these two odeous characters, Larouche and Rahman.
Clark had a golden opportunity to tell the truth about what NATO has done to Yugoslavia. Why didn't he say a single word?
By twice falsely asserting that President Milosevic was Clark's client, Ms. Lytle gave Clark two openings to answer the crucial question: *why* is President Milosevic in The Hague?
If Clark really were opposed to the demonization of the Serbian people, as he has sometimes claimed, he would have used this chance to reach perhaps millions of people with the truth about Yugoslavia. Such as:
* First, Yugoslavia has been shattered. This was done by the Western powers using fascist forces from Croatia and Islamic Fundamentalist proxy and secessionist forces from Kosovo and Bosnia, and their own bombers as well. [1B]
* Second, three years ago the freely elected government of President Milosevic was overthrown in a coup d'etat financed by these same Western powers. 
* Third, led by the United States government and Human Rights (sic!) Watch, those same powers used economic blackmail to coerce Yugoslavia to deliver President Milosevic to The Hague. 
* Fourth, President Milosevic was kidnapped by a conspiracy of two US-backed Serbian leaders, Djindjic and Kostunica, apparently working under the direct orders of the U.S. Ambassador in Belgrade. This kidnapping contradicted the wishes of most Yugoslav citizens and the express prohibition of the Yugoslav constitutional court. 
* Fifth, President Milosevic was taken to a jail in Holland run by a 'tribunal' which exists to demonize the Serbian people and destroy their leaders. And he was put on trial by a court which is openly sponsored by the very forces that destroyed President Milosevic's country! 
* Sixth, there is now a draconian dictatorship in Yugoslavia, about which few people in the West are even aware. And Clark did nothing to make them aware, despite having an audience numbering perhaps in the millions. 
Clark's televised speech was 3000-words long. His supposed theme was the harm done by US military power.
He never once even mentioned the US bombing of Yugoslavia.
He never talked about the German and US resurrection of the Croatian clerical fascists who, under US leadership, drove 200,00 Serbs from their homes in the Krajina section of Yugoslavia.
He said nothing about the US mobilization of Muslim fundamentalism against Yugoslavia, coordinating the efforts of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Indeed, the only time he talked about Islamic fundamentalism, it was to praise Sheik Rahman, the maniac who organized the bombing of the world trade center. 
He said this about the invasion of Iraq (our emphasis, below):
The most serious act of aggression in US history? Why would Clark, a former Attorney General who, one would think, is trained to use words carefully, make such an absurd statement? What about the 10-year war that destroyed the multiethnic state of Yugoslavia, the mainstay of peace in the Balkans?
(For that matter, what about Vietnam, where the US killed perhaps 2.5 million civilians? And by the way, it was during the Vietnam War that Ramsey Clark served as attorney general. That's right, his claim to fame comes from being the attorney general personally picked by his family friend, Lyndon B. Johnson, the President who drastically escalated the war in Vietnam. Clark claims he was a big opponent of the war. Did he resign in protest over Johnson's betrayal of the explicit promise, made during his Presidential election campaign, *not* to escalate the war? No, Clark did not resign.
In response to a question from Ms. Lytle, Clark asserted that he had strongly opposed the Vietnam War while he was attorney general. Does he take us for fools? Or does he think that none of us can remember? In fact Clark supervised the 1968 prosecution of Dr. Benjamin Spock, the famous pediatrician, who was a symbol of opposition to the Vietnam War, on charges of conspiracy for urging young men to refuse to go to Vietnam. If Clark was an opponent of the Vietnam War, we would hate to see a supporter. Clark's sheer dishonesty raises the question: What is the real character of the so-called International Action Center (IAC) that tries to take control of protest movements in the US - and elsewhere in the world as well - and that has a man such as Ramsey Clark as its founder?)
Lytle handed Clark two golden opportunities to reach millions of people and explain why the charges against the Serbian people and President Milosevic are false.
He could have done it during his 3000-word, televised speech, which followed Lytle's first false assertion that President Milosevic was Clark's client. Above we wrote a six-point summary of what happened in Yugoslavia. It is only 186 words long. Clark could have doubled the length of this summary and still used up only a *tenth* of his time.
Clark *could* have said: "Let me make it clear, I am not President Milosevic's attorney 'cause he wouldn't have me, nor anyone else. He wants to personally defend his country before the world, and he's right. You know, the U.S. government claims it wants to fight Muslim fundamentalism so isn't it ironic that it was under George Bush's father, George Sr., that the US conspired with Iran and Saudi Arabia to ship in mujahideen terrorists to slaughter the Bosnian Serbs and then they accused the Serbs of being the guilty parties. Under Clinton they backed the Islamic terrorists in Kosovo. President Milosevic fought those terrorists - and now they put President Milosevic on trial for defending his own country, while they themselves invade far away Iraq."
Why didn't Clark make this point, linking the U.S. Establishment and the Muslim fundamentalists whom the US Establishment has been sponsoring since 1979 when they and the Saudi princes began pouring 6 *billion* dollars into creating the mujahideen in Afghanistan? 
And Clark could have done it later, when Lytle again falsely referred to President Milosevic as Clark's client for a second time.
But Clark said nothing.
It was after Tammy Lytle's second false assertion that Clark is President Milosevic's lawyer that Clark waxed poetic about Sheik Rahman:
Notice that Clark did not limit his remarks to saying, "Every person deserves a lawyer." Instead he touted Rahman's achievements, praising him as an Islamic scholar. But it is precisely in his capacity as a religious scholar that Sheikh Rahman leads Gama'a al-Islamyya, the most vicious terrorist group in Egypt. They're the ones who mutilated tourists at Luxor in Egypt in 1997.
People in the antiwar movement may believe that Clark's fame is a big help, but let us tell you, by praising Rahman, famous Ramsey Clark did more harm to the antiwar movement than the Bush administration could do in a year. Clark created the false impression that people in the antiwar movement feel respect and even affection for vicious, ruthless Islamist terrorists.
And Clark praised Rahman immediately after Lytle *repeated* the lie that Clark was President Milosevic's attorney.
The point in media propaganda is to create an impression.
The impression created by Lytle and Clark seems rather clear: they falsely associated the antiwar movement *and* President Milosevic *and* the Serbian people with the very terrorists whom the Serbian people have had to fight to defend their country.
What a nightmare.
Jared Israel and Nico Varkevisser
[Footnotes and Further Reading Follow The Appeal]
Emperor’s Clothes Needs Your Help!
Our work depends entirely on donations from readers. If you find this work useful, please support us with a donation. None is too small... or too big. (If you can’t afford a donation, thank you for reading anyway! You can also help by circulating these articles wherever possible on the internet.)
Our best is yet to come!
* By credit card at our secure server (Accepts Visa,
Footnotes and Further Reading
 Federal News Service May 12, 2003 Monday Section: Press Conference Or Speech Length: 7650 Words Headline: National Press Club Luncheon With Ramsey Clark, Director, International Answer Subject: How U.S. Militarism Threatens The Destiny Of Humanity Location: National Press Club Ballroom, Washington, D.C.
[1B] For a glimpse at the Muslim fundamentalist forces on whom the US-led Empire relied in Bosnia - 'our allies,' as it were - check out the fond reminisces of the leader of 'Bosnian government' forces in the town of Srebrenica, Nasir Oric, as he talks openly to a reporter, letting it all hang out. "A Reporter's Account of Evening Spent with the Commander of Bosnian Muslim Forces in Srebrenica" http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/oric.htm
Oric and friends looked back fondly at the World War II Bosnian Muslim Division called Handzhar. See, "Himmler was their Defender!" http://emperors-clothes.com/bosnia/svijet.htm
 The straight facts about the US control of the Kostunica election campaign that led up to the October 2000 coup are so grotesque they read like satire. See, "Kostunica says some backers 'unconsciously work for American imperial goals' " by Jared Israel and Max Sinclair http://emperors-clothes.com/news/erlang.htm
 For an account of the events leading up to the kidnapping to The Hague of President Milosevic, see "How Djindjic & Kostunica Marketed the Extradition of Milosevic..." http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/fools.htm
 Zoran Djindjic countered claims that he carried out the kidnapping of Milosevic all alone by publishing the supposed transcript of his pre-kidnapping phone conversation with Vojislav Kostunica. See "Alleged Transcript of Conversation between Djindjic and Kostunica Just Prior to Milosevic's Kidnapping " at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/partners2.htm
 For an account of President Milosevic's first appearance at The Hague, see "Reichstag Fire Trial, the Sequel," at http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/point1.htm
To get an idea of the real character of The Hague Tribunal, read Kosta Cavoski series:
For documentation of NATO's barely
disguised sponsorship of The Hague Tribunal, see: *
"NATO says The Hague Tribunal (or ICTY) belongs to NATO. The
Tribunal says they and NATO are Partners."
and * "Attorney Asks: Does your Research show that Hague Prosecutor Arbour conferred with NATO politicians prior to indicting Milosevic?" http://emperors-clothes.com/letters/philpot.htm
 Regarding the fierce crackdown on political thought and action in Yugoslavia, see: "Serbia under Martial Law," by Nebojsa Malic http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/malic/martial.htm
 The US-Iranian
alliance behind the Islamist terror in Bosnia is
documented and discussed in the article " U.S. &
Iran: Enemies in Public, but Secret Allies in Terror,"
by Jared Israel at
 Regarding the US
sponsorship of the mujahideen in Afghanistan - to the
tune of billions of dollars - see: 'Washington's Backing
of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy,' by Steve Coll
And * "Afghan Taliban Camps Were Built by NATO," http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/camps.htm
This Website is