Israelis to sue NATO for 1999 air strikes

I'm with 'malcolm x' - the motivation may be wrong, but if it brings some attention to the murderous double standards and illegal and unnecessary attack on a European neighbour in 1999 - then I say good on you 'Mr D'. About time.

Israel is one nation which can't just be ignored blithely and offered a potential place on the EU list in return for their silence and cooperation.

Great - I really hope that this goes ahead. Expose the whole lot of them!

This is great news, especially to see Javier Solana's name in the lawsuit. Solana is now Tadic's buddy, so I am sure that this is very embarrassing for the yellows. It will not only highlight the double standards of the EU's selective justice, but it will highlight the fact that this pathetic Serbian yellow government is doing nothing but collaborating with these criminals.
However, if it takes an Israeli group to do what Serbians should be doing, so be it, it is better than nothing.

About time someone showed some cojones in dealing with NATO and their illegal actions around then world. When Bishop Artemije did the same he was vilified by pro US janissaries.

to mrcneri, 5 May 2009 13:30,

Israel is doing right things as much Serbia was doing right things in Kosovo while fighting terrosrists. Both Palestinians and Albanians were famous of using human shields, what itself constitutes a war crime, and once so called freedom fighters took a decision to jeopardize their own people in the course of their illegal and immoral fight, then the liability lies with them. In both cases the scale of collateral damage was basically caused not by actions from counter-attacking side, but by those who initiated terror upon Serbs and Israelis. Sometimes it seems that producing so many children gives to terrorist a kind of advantage - sounds cruel but true. But in the end, anyway, both ask money from outside to feed their families in their "independent states".

I would love to see solana and his nato buddies rot in prison for life!

priceless. i guess you can't pretend you are civilised and you care about human rights and adopt the laws accordingly yet at the same time you break those laws. it would be cool if both israel and nato get convicted. i won't hold my breath, though, people behind these crimes are too powerful.

the motivation for this idea is wrong, of course. it should happen so even the most powerful people on planet think about throwing bombs at people, and not in order for people to think twice before suing such people (israeli leadership in this case).

ben:
You said:
> Humanitarian organisation that operates on basis of: if you sue me for what I did today I will sue you for what happened 10 years ago

Well if you don't like this organisations views on the subject, try Amnesty International's:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=9DBC353EB0691C16802568DC0036F695

In which it said:
"In one instance, the attack on the headquarters of Serbian state radio and television (RTS), NATO launched a direct attack on a civilian object, killing 16 civilians. Such attack breached article 52 (I) of Protocol I and therefore constitutes a war crime. "


You also said:
> which btw it will be very hard to prove since Serbian TV was a camouflaged communication system in service to the Army

Kind of hard to camouflage a TV station whose address can be found in a phone book don't you think?

NATO's argument was that TV station was broadcasting 'propaganda' & thus constituted a valid target.

Amnesty's report states:
"Under the requirements of Article 52(2) of Protocol I, the RTS headquarters cannot be considered a military objective. As such, the attack on the RTS headquarters violated the prohibition to attack civilian objects contained in Article 52 (I) and therefore constitutes a war crime."

With the definition of a military objective being:
"'military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."

And as 'Amnesty' notes, this doesn't apply to 'propaganda sources'.

Then goes on to say:
"Article 51(5)(b) prohibits attacks which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life ... which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. The ICRC Commentary specified that the expression 'concrete and direct' was intended to show that the advantage concerned should be substantial and relatively close, and that advantages which are hardly perceptible and those which would only appear in the long term should be disregarded.

Hard to prove 'ben'? Hardly.

Chief difficulty is that there is no judicial mechanism in place to try such an organisation.

Possible solution to the problem is to go after the Individual States.

All of them.

Good on ya,Almagor!
I hope it works out for yee!
NATO think they're GOD Almighty.
In truth, they are the opposite.

MB,Ireland

Great news even if nothing will come out of it. At least it will bring some attention to the duouble standars of European politics. America and Europe justifies everything they do to be in the name of democracy and thereby making it legitimate. America is the biggest hoax in the world and it's beyond me how anyone can follow the foreign policies of this warmonger nation. What other nation of the world has its military spread out like the US? Besides, why hasn't Israel been bombed for it's treatment of the Palesinians? International politics makes me sick. Albanians should know there is nothing noble about their cause. It's all politics and personal interests. If the Balkans was located in Africa nobody would care. 700.000 people died in Rwanda in the first couple of months of the war and nobody in Europe or America gave a damn. Europe and America can claim to be democratic and fair but in the end they are judged by their actions.

At first I thought this was an honest attempt at bringing to light NATO's half-baked policy of needing to burn half a country in order to save the other. But after reading the article, I see this is just the lastest attempt at one Big Power using a Southeastern European country as a tool against other Big Countries, all for personal politics.

Israel has just to shut up and think about all the disaster it has made in Gaza where 400 kids have been killed in January this year.

Mike

This is exactly what croosed my mind too.Serbia is being used as a tool only.All in all this is just a response to the spanish judge's move and has nothing to do with sense of justice of these israeli HR activists.Why didn't they file this lawsuit
some years ago?But it speaks for itself that if some organization tries to find a catch on Nato they must use bombing of Serbia as a tool.
And they are not the last to act this way.As the time passes we will learn more and more about the backround of the nato agression.At the same time Let us not forget which american lobby was the most active in creating anti-serb propaganda and encouriging bombings as well as independent kosovo.

Let me pose a question to see if anybody has the answer.
If any NGO (or other organisation?) can press charges against NATO, why doesn't one of the many right wing groups (Obraz, 1389 etc etc etc) in Serbia file charges against NATO?

Or it doesn't have to be those type of groups, why didn't a political party such as DSS found an NGO to press charges?

Nothing will happen. Behind the scenes, NATO will persuade Spain to drop the case, then Irael will drop its case in return.

Humanitarian organisation that operates on basis of: if you sue me for what I did today I will sue you for what happened 10 years ago (which btw it will be very hard to prove since Serbian TV was a camouflaged communication system in service to the Army- and we all remember very well the concerts on the Belgrade’s bridges that could have been targets).

Well, dear "humanitarian" organisation why then don’t you go bit more back and sue US for Vietnam??

Ah US... well... :)

Give me a break take off the humanitarian stuff ;)

Ariel Sahron was the greatest supporter of Milosevic and against NATO intervention fearing Muslim Kosova.

Islamophobia sucks! A lot of people in Israel suffer from that- a lot of Jews in and out of Israel are ashamed of that. Almagor is definitively not in the second group.

First, this is not Israel doing it, it is some israelis...there is a big difference.

Second, the suit has no jurisdiction, and it will fall through even before the summary judgment phase. Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

malcolm x

civilised and break law's? isnt it ironic that becouse of that (taking away all rights, opression and discrimination towards kosovo) the nato intervention was neccesery?

One clear indication should be the belgrade tv station chief still being in jail for not warning his fellow crew members of the advanced bombing warning that he did not pass on.

Look who's talking. Pathetic. Next time Venezuela, North Korea will try to teac Europe a lesson in democracy and fair fight in war.

What's next? Are Serbs going to sue Russia for the war against Georgia?

I think Arabs should sue Israel for this years conflict in Gaza.

This story is just so many levels of bizarre.

first, as has been pointed out, this isn't the israeli govt. but, i believe, a right- wing israeli group, so called advocates for the victims.

secondly, i thought that israel and spain were supposedly serbia's big allies, but you can see how weak that kind of alliance could be.

third, the nato intevention was a moral and absolute necessity. of course i am sorry for all innocent civilians killed, on all sides -- i said it then and have repeated it many times since. but i'm not sorry for the intervention -- the real problem was that it was at least 7 years too late.

fourth, i'm not entirely opposed to foreign citizens being liable for at least civil suits in other countries. for example, we were able to sue that nice (read my mind) karadzic in the late 90s -- he was served with the suit when in the US as he stepped outside the protected areas to "raise $$." we (actually i am not part of the suit) won many millions in damages, including my bosnian pal who has promised to share some of it with me if and when we can get some of K's assets attached by a foreign court, for example bosnian :)) and a # of other baddies have had to fight criminal and civil cases under american law. which has been great as far as it's gone.

as i recall, the spanish judiciary once went after pinochet, though w/out ultimate success.

but these current cases seem a bit weird to me -- we shall see.

roberto
frisco

Humanitarian organisation that operates on basis of: if you sue me for what I did today I will sue you for what happened 10 years ago (which btw it will be very hard to prove since Serbian TV was a camouflaged communication system in service to the Army- and we all remember very well the concerts on the Belgrade’s bridges that could have been targets).

Well, dear "humanitarian" organisation why then don’t you go bit more back and sue US for Vietnam??

Ah US... well... :)

Give me a break take off the humanitarian stuff ;)

Ariel Sahron was the greatest supporter of Milosevic and against NATO intervention fearing Muslim Kosova.

Islamophobia sucks! A lot of people in Israel suffer from that- a lot of Jews in and out of Israel are ashamed of that. Almagor is definitively not in the second group.

First, this is not Israel doing it, it is some israelis...there is a big difference.

Second, the suit has no jurisdiction, and it will fall through even before the summary judgment phase. Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

What's next? Are Serbs going to sue Russia for the war against Georgia?

I think Arabs should sue Israel for this years conflict in Gaza.

Israel has just to shut up and think about all the disaster it has made in Gaza where 400 kids have been killed in January this year.

malcolm x

civilised and break law's? isnt it ironic that becouse of that (taking away all rights, opression and discrimination towards kosovo) the nato intervention was neccesery?

One clear indication should be the belgrade tv station chief still being in jail for not warning his fellow crew members of the advanced bombing warning that he did not pass on.

Look who's talking. Pathetic. Next time Venezuela, North Korea will try to teac Europe a lesson in democracy and fair fight in war.

to mrcneri, 5 May 2009 13:30,

Israel is doing right things as much Serbia was doing right things in Kosovo while fighting terrosrists. Both Palestinians and Albanians were famous of using human shields, what itself constitutes a war crime, and once so called freedom fighters took a decision to jeopardize their own people in the course of their illegal and immoral fight, then the liability lies with them. In both cases the scale of collateral damage was basically caused not by actions from counter-attacking side, but by those who initiated terror upon Serbs and Israelis. Sometimes it seems that producing so many children gives to terrorist a kind of advantage - sounds cruel but true. But in the end, anyway, both ask money from outside to feed their families in their "independent states".

This story is just so many levels of bizarre.

first, as has been pointed out, this isn't the israeli govt. but, i believe, a right- wing israeli group, so called advocates for the victims.

secondly, i thought that israel and spain were supposedly serbia's big allies, but you can see how weak that kind of alliance could be.

third, the nato intevention was a moral and absolute necessity. of course i am sorry for all innocent civilians killed, on all sides -- i said it then and have repeated it many times since. but i'm not sorry for the intervention -- the real problem was that it was at least 7 years too late.

fourth, i'm not entirely opposed to foreign citizens being liable for at least civil suits in other countries. for example, we were able to sue that nice (read my mind) karadzic in the late 90s -- he was served with the suit when in the US as he stepped outside the protected areas to "raise $$." we (actually i am not part of the suit) won many millions in damages, including my bosnian pal who has promised to share some of it with me if and when we can get some of K's assets attached by a foreign court, for example bosnian :)) and a # of other baddies have had to fight criminal and civil cases under american law. which has been great as far as it's gone.

as i recall, the spanish judiciary once went after pinochet, though w/out ultimate success.

but these current cases seem a bit weird to me -- we shall see.

roberto
frisco

This is great news, especially to see Javier Solana's name in the lawsuit. Solana is now Tadic's buddy, so I am sure that this is very embarrassing for the yellows. It will not only highlight the double standards of the EU's selective justice, but it will highlight the fact that this pathetic Serbian yellow government is doing nothing but collaborating with these criminals.
However, if it takes an Israeli group to do what Serbians should be doing, so be it, it is better than nothing.

I would love to see solana and his nato buddies rot in prison for life!

About time someone showed some cojones in dealing with NATO and their illegal actions around then world. When Bishop Artemije did the same he was vilified by pro US janissaries.

Let me pose a question to see if anybody has the answer.
If any NGO (or other organisation?) can press charges against NATO, why doesn't one of the many right wing groups (Obraz, 1389 etc etc etc) in Serbia file charges against NATO?

Or it doesn't have to be those type of groups, why didn't a political party such as DSS found an NGO to press charges?

ben:
You said:
> Humanitarian organisation that operates on basis of: if you sue me for what I did today I will sue you for what happened 10 years ago

Well if you don't like this organisations views on the subject, try Amnesty International's:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=9DBC353EB0691C16802568DC0036F695

In which it said:
"In one instance, the attack on the headquarters of Serbian state radio and television (RTS), NATO launched a direct attack on a civilian object, killing 16 civilians. Such attack breached article 52 (I) of Protocol I and therefore constitutes a war crime. "


You also said:
> which btw it will be very hard to prove since Serbian TV was a camouflaged communication system in service to the Army

Kind of hard to camouflage a TV station whose address can be found in a phone book don't you think?

NATO's argument was that TV station was broadcasting 'propaganda' & thus constituted a valid target.

Amnesty's report states:
"Under the requirements of Article 52(2) of Protocol I, the RTS headquarters cannot be considered a military objective. As such, the attack on the RTS headquarters violated the prohibition to attack civilian objects contained in Article 52 (I) and therefore constitutes a war crime."

With the definition of a military objective being:
"'military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."

And as 'Amnesty' notes, this doesn't apply to 'propaganda sources'.

Then goes on to say:
"Article 51(5)(b) prohibits attacks which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life ... which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. The ICRC Commentary specified that the expression 'concrete and direct' was intended to show that the advantage concerned should be substantial and relatively close, and that advantages which are hardly perceptible and those which would only appear in the long term should be disregarded.

Hard to prove 'ben'? Hardly.

Chief difficulty is that there is no judicial mechanism in place to try such an organisation.

Possible solution to the problem is to go after the Individual States.

All of them.

priceless. i guess you can't pretend you are civilised and you care about human rights and adopt the laws accordingly yet at the same time you break those laws. it would be cool if both israel and nato get convicted. i won't hold my breath, though, people behind these crimes are too powerful.

the motivation for this idea is wrong, of course. it should happen so even the most powerful people on planet think about throwing bombs at people, and not in order for people to think twice before suing such people (israeli leadership in this case).

I'm with 'malcolm x' - the motivation may be wrong, but if it brings some attention to the murderous double standards and illegal and unnecessary attack on a European neighbour in 1999 - then I say good on you 'Mr D'. About time.

Israel is one nation which can't just be ignored blithely and offered a potential place on the EU list in return for their silence and cooperation.

Great - I really hope that this goes ahead. Expose the whole lot of them!

Good on ya,Almagor!
I hope it works out for yee!
NATO think they're GOD Almighty.
In truth, they are the opposite.

MB,Ireland

Mike

This is exactly what croosed my mind too.Serbia is being used as a tool only.All in all this is just a response to the spanish judge's move and has nothing to do with sense of justice of these israeli HR activists.Why didn't they file this lawsuit
some years ago?But it speaks for itself that if some organization tries to find a catch on Nato they must use bombing of Serbia as a tool.
And they are not the last to act this way.As the time passes we will learn more and more about the backround of the nato agression.At the same time Let us not forget which american lobby was the most active in creating anti-serb propaganda and encouriging bombings as well as independent kosovo.

Great news even if nothing will come out of it. At least it will bring some attention to the duouble standars of European politics. America and Europe justifies everything they do to be in the name of democracy and thereby making it legitimate. America is the biggest hoax in the world and it's beyond me how anyone can follow the foreign policies of this warmonger nation. What other nation of the world has its military spread out like the US? Besides, why hasn't Israel been bombed for it's treatment of the Palesinians? International politics makes me sick. Albanians should know there is nothing noble about their cause. It's all politics and personal interests. If the Balkans was located in Africa nobody would care. 700.000 people died in Rwanda in the first couple of months of the war and nobody in Europe or America gave a damn. Europe and America can claim to be democratic and fair but in the end they are judged by their actions.

At first I thought this was an honest attempt at bringing to light NATO's half-baked policy of needing to burn half a country in order to save the other. But after reading the article, I see this is just the lastest attempt at one Big Power using a Southeastern European country as a tool against other Big Countries, all for personal politics.

Nothing will happen. Behind the scenes, NATO will persuade Spain to drop the case, then Irael will drop its case in return.