| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Europe | |
| Ratko Mladic Protests International Trial, Is Removed From Court | |
| 2011-07-05 | |
| Mladic wore a cap, waved to friends in the gallery, and threatened to boycott the proceedings because he could not have the attorneys he wanted, but only those appointed for him. He loudly protested the latter, until he was removed. Before guards escorted Mladic from court, he shouted at Presiding Judge Alphons Orie, "You want to impose my defense. What kind of a court are you?" Then not guilty pleas were entered by the court officers chosen to present his defense. The court decided to hold his trial on the 16th anniversary of the crime for which he is being tried, to further emphasize his guilt before the trial has begun. If he had cooperated with initial proceeding the trial would have begun on a different day. Judges have their ways... He is accused of "violating the obligation to prevent genocide", in the Bosnian War, after an agreement between the Roman Catholic Croats to annex the part of Bosnia that had Roman Catholics, and the Serbs, to annex the part of Bosnia that had Serbian Orthodox Christians, was rejected by the largest minority of Muslims that wanted to rule over a unified Bosnia, with Christians as dhimmis. So the Serbs entered Bosnia to forcefully reclaim the Serbian Orthodox regions, and force the Muslims there out into the Muslim majority part of Bosnia. The Muslims violently resisted expulsion. After considerable fighting, the Serbs captured Srebrenica, and forced the expulsion of some 30,000 Muslim women and children. Adult men were detained, and some 8,000 The Serbian and Greek units responsible were under the overall command of Ratko Mladic. Both Croatia and Serbia have in past expressed dismay as to why western nations singularly supported Muslims against Christians trying to defend, in their minds, fellow Christians from Muslim persecution.
| |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |
| #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 |