“Serbia should unequivocally condemn Srebrenica”

Why do they talk only about Serbs ? Were other partisipants pure as Mother Thereza ? No they weren't ! They massacred Serbs and then exposed their dead bodies as Albanians. They killed Serbs for organs. They bombed civil objects located hundreds miles away from the conflict area. They assasinated Serbs during Storm Operation and during the war in Bosnia. And now they need one side apologies. Why not put them all together to confess and ask pardon ? Demonizing only one side will never bring durable peace to the Balkanes. And I personally believe that participants to those conflicts were all in some degree degree victims of the West's temporary Complex Of Superiority.

It's easy to condemn and it's easy to confess.. It's difficult to be a human at some circumstances and nobody is trying, really. Nobody here and nobody elsewhere! It's all about interests, this case also. Who ever condemned any of the genocides over Serb people last 500 years?! They've been building towers of our sculls, even. If you do not commit genocide "they" will, that's sure.

"Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.
(Viktor, 22 February 2010 15:22)"

They actually called it an "act of genocide". Why the inclusion of this small word 'act' if it is not necessary or conditional as the use of 'act' implies'???

This is not at all the same as 'genocide' because the court would have to accept a complete reinterpretation of the word, far beyond what they did already (and the judges at the Krstic trial in the ICTY). Using the word 'act' in this sense means 'localized' which denies common sense let alone comparisons to where real genocides happen where genocide was actually a campaign of indiscriminate killing of men, women and children regardless of status nor geography.

It was called an 'act of genocide' because the victims aren't women, nor children, nor were they civilians but officially listed as soldiers in the ArBiH and were armed, not to mention that they were neither the only bosnian moslem men in the whole of Bosnia (numbers). This is the 'conditional' aspect of the use of 'act'. It's not genocide but it is despite not fulfilling all of the fundamental aspects of the definition.

'Act' only serves as an enabler to slip in the word genocide, by effectively calling it a mini-genocide, a slight-genocide, an extremely limited genocide. It is dishonest in the extreme and fortunately won't stand up to history and all those who are serious about studying history.

Politicians, being the self-serving scum they are, play this game too. Just look at which countries officially recognize the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottomans and which recognize Srebrenica as genocide. They do it because it is easy, it is politically expedient, it is an easy way to put oneself on a moral pedestal..because there are no repercussions. Why doesn't the United States officially call what happened in Chechnya 'genocide' or why hasn't it been taken up by the various human rights courts? The list is endless.

Applied retrospectively, this definition can be then found thousands of times in the twentieth century to just about any conflict you can think of.

The irony of it all is that by calling what ever you want genocide and having war crimes courts, these idiots think that those who go to war and are responsible for war crimes would even think twice because of such a ruling. It is not saving anybody's lives, it is pure and simple post facto punishment/retribution.

The only vaguely decent value from the ICTY are the transcripts which tell a different story from what the 'free and democratic' media in the West have been peddling for all these years.

Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.
(Viktor, 22 February 2010 15:22)

actualy icj did not rule that genocide was committed in srebrenica but simply accepted the ruling of the icty. it did rule that gemocide was not committed in bosnia se we have 2 contradictory rulings by 2 diffrent tribunals.

the term "genocide" is being used way too easily these days. you can't put what happened in srebrenica in the same category as the holocaust. it simply isn't the same. and i don't think one should underestimate inflation of the sense of victimisation that every side seems to be keen on. calling a massacre are genocide is a part of the same game.

the srebrenica massacre should be condemned and i do think that each side should look at their oen backyard before complaining about others. rather than looking at own victims and inflating their numbers look at victims of your own side. you won't even need thousands of them in order to feel shame, i'm sure. and the same goes for every side in every war.

I just want to say nada kolundzia is a disgrace! She does not represent Serbs but rather the amrican embassy is Beograd.

One day, next generation or Serbs hopefully more consious about the attrocities in the last wars in the Balkans will appologise for crimes their parents of grandparents did to other non-Serbs. The same will be form Croats, Serbs and Albanians. The question today is how can Serbia restore its proud and come clear with guilty feelings. How can Serbia of today prepare the path for a European Serbia of tomorrow. Nobody will blame Serbs today if they admit and appologise for what some of them did. This is a real sign that Serbia is on the side of other nations and respect the human rights. There is no excuse to kill somebody for the sake of a nationalistic ideology. Clean first your home, then ask the other to clean theirs. Serbia deserves to be a respected nation, but needs to accept mistakes of the past

Lenard,
I'm not sure what colour those glasses are that you seem to view life through, but rite wrongs and compensate families simply does not happen. For if it did, I would wonder what the landscape of North America would look like, and what the balance of wealth would be.
Firstly we must consider that North America (the Americas as a whole) were virtually wiped clean of their indigenous peoples. The estimates range in the 20 million range (dwarfing any numbers that the German Nazi machine accomplished). The survivors were repaid by being forcibly moved to virtual concentration camps (not in the same way one would imagine a Nazi CC -- but rather a forced dense concentration of the undesirables), where there was no chance of advancement of any kind. These people have not been given their land back, their way of life, nor been compensated for it.
Secondly we can take a look at the African Slave trades that were nothing if they were not genocide. The African American population numbers are massive, and yet this whole swath of the American population has not been repaid, their families repaid, the wrongs righted. No! this simply does not happen in our modern civilized society.
We do not hear the great leaders of democracy and freedom condemn their pasts let alone make attempts to fix them. I would be politically sufficient to apologize and as we can see eventually socially acceptable to leave it at that.
Of course this does not mean that I necessarily feel that some form of payback should not be made, just that it is rather rare and unlikely to expect it to happen. And if it does not happen that really does not change things. As they say, the past is the past, move onto the future.

What is unequivocally sad is how crimes committed against "us" must be condoned first before we will admit to anything. It is like a political bargaining chip, and people (Serbs and others) don't see the moral lows of such an argument. Very sad.


"She said that parliament is not a court and should therefore not deal with classifying crimes, adding that "the International Court of Justice already stated, (ruling) on Bosnia’s charges against Serbia, that genocide was not committed in Srebrenica"."

Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.

The word 'genocide' goes beyond the act - it includes an element that makes a comment about the intent.

Whatever the intent, the act itself was wrong. The act must not be repeated - no intent can justify it.

The 'act' did no good for the reputation of Serbia or for Serbs in RS. Nor was it good for the consciences and well being of those who reject murder and other related war crimes. For those who love Serbia (as opposed to those driven by greed, anger or narrow resentment) it was a body blow that is hard to live with.

It is good for Serbia to unreservedly condemn that kind of behaviour both for the past and for the future. This is not just an expression of regret for the past, it is also an expression of honourable intent for the future. If it is not both of these things at the same time then there is little point in either.

The condemnation of the Srebrenica massacre should also include a full acknowledgement that laws of decency are expected to apply throughout the region from now on. Even if future wars occur, there should not be the crime, murder and dishonour that was associated with the recent terrors.

What should also be acknowledged is that the 'act' dishonoured the 'actors'. The killers are not heros, they are cowards. They are also criminals. They are failures against all the standards of both law and honour that have been evolved to bring at least an element of decency into the evils of warfare. They are the people that the laws of war failed to control but that the laws of war require should be punished.

This declaration is a good step - as long as it is done with a good heart. The world will take note - provided the heart is there. If the heart is not there, the world will note that too - so it is important that the significance of the declaration is understood and it is not just flannel.

This declaration is an accusation of Mladic. The only way that Mladic could bring back an element of honour to himself after what happened would be for him to hand himself in and acknowledge the situation. That would be better for him than to be captured. He should mount his defence and/or admit fault. Then Serbia really could move on.

Serbia will unequivocally condemn the Srebrenica crime with its resolution. Then what is Serbia going to do put pressure on the Srpska Entity its client and partner in crime. To rite the wrongs and compensate the victims and their surviving traumatized families. Or is it just to ease their conscious and pretend they did something with empty platitude words with no substance to back them up.

When are the Serbs going to receive an apology, or condemnation of crimes against Serbs by other parties? Seems to be a one way street here...

If Serbia is required to condemn 'Srebrenica', I think it is only fair that Serbia and the rest of us understand what 'Srebrenica'is.

I regard 'Srebrenica' as a series of events which include the 2-3 years prior to the so-called 'massacre'; the suspicious inputs of certain Western Governments surrounding the 'massacre' and the conspicuous delays in reporting this same 'masacre'. The situation regarding numbers and origins of bodies found and unfound also merits serious re-investigation.

Once the truth is established, condemnations can be issued.

MB,Ireland

(Bob, 22 February 2010 19:55)
Firstly, Mladic has been declared guilty from the start. Just look at Vojslav Sesejl, the so called Tribunal does not have a shred of evidence against this man, but he is still in prison as he represents a danger to the west by simply being able to stand for elections and his ability to win.
No one denies that people were killed in Srebrenica, but nowhere near the number of 8,000 – this is a figment of US imagination. In fact it is on record that there are people still alive today but declared as being killed by Serbs in that town. Many Serbs would be happy to hold a proper inquiry into Srebrenica and I am one of those, but no western government is willing to do that because it would show Srebrenica as a lie and more importantly it would show up the US.
Mladic will not be surrender because all Serbs in the Hague have been paid well for “being captured”. Mladic has said many times that money does not concern him and this man is deadly to the west because he cannot be bought and they fear of creating a martyr out of him.
Serbs do not have to admit to anything that did not occur to move on. When the US admits to murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans then they can come to my door and ask for admission whatever they like.
If the current government wishes to earn extra Euros in their pockets for passing this resolution they can, but don’t include the rest of Serbia.

Serbia will unequivocally condemn the Srebrenica crime with its resolution. Then what is Serbia going to do put pressure on the Srpska Entity its client and partner in crime. To rite the wrongs and compensate the victims and their surviving traumatized families. Or is it just to ease their conscious and pretend they did something with empty platitude words with no substance to back them up.
(Lenard, 22 February 2010 17:51)

Lenny when is Croatia going to pass a resolution condemning your Croat brothers for killing those Bosniaks in central Bosnia. Some were burnt alive in their houses by Croat forces. That was before the Bosniaks started to whip your Croat backsides and you had to beg Serbs to allow 20 000 Croats to escape over their territory otherwise the Bosniaks would have made sure there were 20 000 less Croats. When is your lot going to “rite the wrongs and compensate the victims”?????? I wait your response.

This play on words is nothing more than the west attempt of legal entrapment of the Serb people to suffer collective shame when clearly it was NOT genocide. Did the act happen, yes. Were "men and boys" i.e. militia slaughtered like cattle, yes. Thats all, it was a slaughter of muslim men and boys, Israel has killed more than that since 1967, she we call that genocide? How many Iraqi dead at the hands of NATO? is that genocide? How many more people have suffered throughout history?

sj

I wish you had the heart to condemn all the killings and want to put it all behind. The defence seems shrill - conspiracy theories left and right.

Why do you make a defence? Probably you know as little as you say they know about the actual truth.

You say they are wrong but they say they want the chance to decide - that is why there needs to be a trial somewhere.

If you are right, I am sure that the legal process (how ever slow) will establish that in the end. Let the trial take place. Let the facts be put on the table. The Hague is as good a place as any. Whatever the politics, the placing of evidence is generally sound and the judgements well reasoned.

I would rather Serbia got its house in order over the Srebrenica affair. Serbia looks very bad because of what happened and making a shrill defence just confirms to the world that people have not acknowledged and are unwilling to learn. Something awful happened and it needs to be answered.

If Mladic is a general he should be ordered to take himself to the Hague. If he has a case, let him make it. Any general in any army would be expected to face a court given the nature of the accusations. He should stop hiding.

The "act" of genocide was indeed the court's ruling. As such the interpretation varies. Also, while it was mostly men of fighting age, there were hundred of elderly people and boys under the age of fifteen, who were never a threat, so whoever tries to lessen that crime by re-contextualizing (ie. fabricating figures) it, will never really be prepared to accept any crimes apart from those committed against them. I have been to Srebrenica, and have seen the thousands of graves and the large section of land left open for future identified bodies. Is the number of 8000 the accurate one, I don't know, but why does it matter? Even if it is 5000 thousand or even 10 or 1, why is one life worth less than eight thousand. A crime was committed, the most numerous in terms of deaths in a single day of the war, and as such it has stayed burned into people's consciousness. However, this ruling has nothing to do with blaming Serb nation as a whole. The day that the Srebrenica Resolution is passed is the day that crimes committed in these various wars stop being about specific nations, but instead about a minority that was responsible for them.

Some posts point out to numerous crimes committed by Israel, America, etc. They should all be condemned, but there is no will power on the behalf of the fragmented leftist and Arab group to fight against these crimes. Most Western nations, or rather their politics, are complicit in the daily misery of the Palestinians, they are all aware of that, but they accept that because Israel is more important to them than Palestine, and the powerful pro-Isreali lobby groups are instrumental in maintaining that status quo, while the fragmented Palestinian groups spend more time fighting against each other, than for a common cause.

Irregardless, one should not look onto others, and whether they have accepted responsibility for their crimes before facing the crimes that were committed in our name. It shows a lack of compassion and understanding, and politicizes the victims in the coldest way.

The world is an unfair place, and as such, if one politicizes every issue and resolution, then what have we all been reduced to?

Let us lead by example, the rest will fall into place.

(Bob, 23 February 2010 19:17)
I appreciate where you’re coming from, but you see these are not conspiracy theories. For example, after the first Gulf War the Canadians made a two-part documentary which covered this topic from start to finish. US officials were interviewed and they confirmed all the details. First, how the US ambassador in Iraq at the time gave Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait. Then they played the testimony before the senate hearing of the daughter of the Kuwait ambassador to the US – she stated that she saw Iraq soldiers throwing pregnant women and babies from the second floor of the main hospital in Kuwait – all lies she left to study in the US two years before the invasion and had not returned during that period. More recently Iraqi weapons of mass destruction – I could write an entire library on the first part alone – the lies, the deception is staggering.
Unfortunately I know too much about the processes behind western governments and the propaganda used on innocent countries that just want to live according to their ideals and traditions, but get in the way of the west. I have worked in that area for many, many years and recognize lies very easily. You should read up on a fellow called Christopher John Boyce – this actually happened. Also, there was talk of the US wanting to arrange a “massacre” 6 months after the war started in Bosnia. In fact the west was passing off the Bosniak army of 5000 as being killed by Serbs, but they crossed over to Serbia and were transported to the four corners of this planet – some were billeted in my City and during an interview the TV editors forgot to remove their voices and the translation did not match up with what these guys were saying.
The Tribunal is a joke amongst the legal fraternity around the world. It is what the old US propaganda films called “Soviet Show Trials of the 1920s and 1930s”. During one of the first Serbs to be on trial, the defense lawyer discovered that the prosecution’s only “eye” witness was lying and he confessed that he never saw the Serb do anything but he was paid by the Bosnian Government to testify. The next two witnesses testified that they did not see anything but they were told by a friend who claimed was told by someone else. And they call this a Court!
I am happy to have an official Truth Inquiry that meets requirements of all both Bosniaks and Serbs. I can tell you now that it will be easier for you to jump over the moon than this kind of inquiry taking place. The west will avoid it at all costs.
The judiciary on the Tribunal are the worst practitioners of that profession. One of the men that was instrumental in establishing the Tribunal was Australia’s former Governor General, Sir Ninian Stephens, but when he realized the real purpose he resigned after 12 months in the job. The Tribunal was established to punish not deal out justice.
Once again I repeat people were killed in Srebrenica but not in those numbers. Who cares what the world thinks Serbia. If you live your life trying to please others your life is not worth living. I’m happy to pass any resolution provided the US does the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Serbia will unequivocally condemn the Srebrenica crime with its resolution. Then what is Serbia going to do put pressure on the Srpska Entity its client and partner in crime. To rite the wrongs and compensate the victims and their surviving traumatized families. Or is it just to ease their conscious and pretend they did something with empty platitude words with no substance to back them up.

One day, next generation or Serbs hopefully more consious about the attrocities in the last wars in the Balkans will appologise for crimes their parents of grandparents did to other non-Serbs. The same will be form Croats, Serbs and Albanians. The question today is how can Serbia restore its proud and come clear with guilty feelings. How can Serbia of today prepare the path for a European Serbia of tomorrow. Nobody will blame Serbs today if they admit and appologise for what some of them did. This is a real sign that Serbia is on the side of other nations and respect the human rights. There is no excuse to kill somebody for the sake of a nationalistic ideology. Clean first your home, then ask the other to clean theirs. Serbia deserves to be a respected nation, but needs to accept mistakes of the past

What is unequivocally sad is how crimes committed against "us" must be condoned first before we will admit to anything. It is like a political bargaining chip, and people (Serbs and others) don't see the moral lows of such an argument. Very sad.


"She said that parliament is not a court and should therefore not deal with classifying crimes, adding that "the International Court of Justice already stated, (ruling) on Bosnia’s charges against Serbia, that genocide was not committed in Srebrenica"."

Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.

Why do they talk only about Serbs ? Were other partisipants pure as Mother Thereza ? No they weren't ! They massacred Serbs and then exposed their dead bodies as Albanians. They killed Serbs for organs. They bombed civil objects located hundreds miles away from the conflict area. They assasinated Serbs during Storm Operation and during the war in Bosnia. And now they need one side apologies. Why not put them all together to confess and ask pardon ? Demonizing only one side will never bring durable peace to the Balkanes. And I personally believe that participants to those conflicts were all in some degree degree victims of the West's temporary Complex Of Superiority.

It's easy to condemn and it's easy to confess.. It's difficult to be a human at some circumstances and nobody is trying, really. Nobody here and nobody elsewhere! It's all about interests, this case also. Who ever condemned any of the genocides over Serb people last 500 years?! They've been building towers of our sculls, even. If you do not commit genocide "they" will, that's sure.

I just want to say nada kolundzia is a disgrace! She does not represent Serbs but rather the amrican embassy is Beograd.

The word 'genocide' goes beyond the act - it includes an element that makes a comment about the intent.

Whatever the intent, the act itself was wrong. The act must not be repeated - no intent can justify it.

The 'act' did no good for the reputation of Serbia or for Serbs in RS. Nor was it good for the consciences and well being of those who reject murder and other related war crimes. For those who love Serbia (as opposed to those driven by greed, anger or narrow resentment) it was a body blow that is hard to live with.

It is good for Serbia to unreservedly condemn that kind of behaviour both for the past and for the future. This is not just an expression of regret for the past, it is also an expression of honourable intent for the future. If it is not both of these things at the same time then there is little point in either.

The condemnation of the Srebrenica massacre should also include a full acknowledgement that laws of decency are expected to apply throughout the region from now on. Even if future wars occur, there should not be the crime, murder and dishonour that was associated with the recent terrors.

What should also be acknowledged is that the 'act' dishonoured the 'actors'. The killers are not heros, they are cowards. They are also criminals. They are failures against all the standards of both law and honour that have been evolved to bring at least an element of decency into the evils of warfare. They are the people that the laws of war failed to control but that the laws of war require should be punished.

This declaration is a good step - as long as it is done with a good heart. The world will take note - provided the heart is there. If the heart is not there, the world will note that too - so it is important that the significance of the declaration is understood and it is not just flannel.

This declaration is an accusation of Mladic. The only way that Mladic could bring back an element of honour to himself after what happened would be for him to hand himself in and acknowledge the situation. That would be better for him than to be captured. He should mount his defence and/or admit fault. Then Serbia really could move on.

"Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.
(Viktor, 22 February 2010 15:22)"

They actually called it an "act of genocide". Why the inclusion of this small word 'act' if it is not necessary or conditional as the use of 'act' implies'???

This is not at all the same as 'genocide' because the court would have to accept a complete reinterpretation of the word, far beyond what they did already (and the judges at the Krstic trial in the ICTY). Using the word 'act' in this sense means 'localized' which denies common sense let alone comparisons to where real genocides happen where genocide was actually a campaign of indiscriminate killing of men, women and children regardless of status nor geography.

It was called an 'act of genocide' because the victims aren't women, nor children, nor were they civilians but officially listed as soldiers in the ArBiH and were armed, not to mention that they were neither the only bosnian moslem men in the whole of Bosnia (numbers). This is the 'conditional' aspect of the use of 'act'. It's not genocide but it is despite not fulfilling all of the fundamental aspects of the definition.

'Act' only serves as an enabler to slip in the word genocide, by effectively calling it a mini-genocide, a slight-genocide, an extremely limited genocide. It is dishonest in the extreme and fortunately won't stand up to history and all those who are serious about studying history.

Politicians, being the self-serving scum they are, play this game too. Just look at which countries officially recognize the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottomans and which recognize Srebrenica as genocide. They do it because it is easy, it is politically expedient, it is an easy way to put oneself on a moral pedestal..because there are no repercussions. Why doesn't the United States officially call what happened in Chechnya 'genocide' or why hasn't it been taken up by the various human rights courts? The list is endless.

Applied retrospectively, this definition can be then found thousands of times in the twentieth century to just about any conflict you can think of.

The irony of it all is that by calling what ever you want genocide and having war crimes courts, these idiots think that those who go to war and are responsible for war crimes would even think twice because of such a ruling. It is not saving anybody's lives, it is pure and simple post facto punishment/retribution.

The only vaguely decent value from the ICTY are the transcripts which tell a different story from what the 'free and democratic' media in the West have been peddling for all these years.

Actually ICJ ruled that genocide was not committed in Bosnia, but that it was committed in Srebrenica.
(Viktor, 22 February 2010 15:22)

actualy icj did not rule that genocide was committed in srebrenica but simply accepted the ruling of the icty. it did rule that gemocide was not committed in bosnia se we have 2 contradictory rulings by 2 diffrent tribunals.

the term "genocide" is being used way too easily these days. you can't put what happened in srebrenica in the same category as the holocaust. it simply isn't the same. and i don't think one should underestimate inflation of the sense of victimisation that every side seems to be keen on. calling a massacre are genocide is a part of the same game.

the srebrenica massacre should be condemned and i do think that each side should look at their oen backyard before complaining about others. rather than looking at own victims and inflating their numbers look at victims of your own side. you won't even need thousands of them in order to feel shame, i'm sure. and the same goes for every side in every war.

Lenard,
I'm not sure what colour those glasses are that you seem to view life through, but rite wrongs and compensate families simply does not happen. For if it did, I would wonder what the landscape of North America would look like, and what the balance of wealth would be.
Firstly we must consider that North America (the Americas as a whole) were virtually wiped clean of their indigenous peoples. The estimates range in the 20 million range (dwarfing any numbers that the German Nazi machine accomplished). The survivors were repaid by being forcibly moved to virtual concentration camps (not in the same way one would imagine a Nazi CC -- but rather a forced dense concentration of the undesirables), where there was no chance of advancement of any kind. These people have not been given their land back, their way of life, nor been compensated for it.
Secondly we can take a look at the African Slave trades that were nothing if they were not genocide. The African American population numbers are massive, and yet this whole swath of the American population has not been repaid, their families repaid, the wrongs righted. No! this simply does not happen in our modern civilized society.
We do not hear the great leaders of democracy and freedom condemn their pasts let alone make attempts to fix them. I would be politically sufficient to apologize and as we can see eventually socially acceptable to leave it at that.
Of course this does not mean that I necessarily feel that some form of payback should not be made, just that it is rather rare and unlikely to expect it to happen. And if it does not happen that really does not change things. As they say, the past is the past, move onto the future.

When are the Serbs going to receive an apology, or condemnation of crimes against Serbs by other parties? Seems to be a one way street here...

This play on words is nothing more than the west attempt of legal entrapment of the Serb people to suffer collective shame when clearly it was NOT genocide. Did the act happen, yes. Were "men and boys" i.e. militia slaughtered like cattle, yes. Thats all, it was a slaughter of muslim men and boys, Israel has killed more than that since 1967, she we call that genocide? How many Iraqi dead at the hands of NATO? is that genocide? How many more people have suffered throughout history?

(Bob, 22 February 2010 19:55)
Firstly, Mladic has been declared guilty from the start. Just look at Vojslav Sesejl, the so called Tribunal does not have a shred of evidence against this man, but he is still in prison as he represents a danger to the west by simply being able to stand for elections and his ability to win.
No one denies that people were killed in Srebrenica, but nowhere near the number of 8,000 – this is a figment of US imagination. In fact it is on record that there are people still alive today but declared as being killed by Serbs in that town. Many Serbs would be happy to hold a proper inquiry into Srebrenica and I am one of those, but no western government is willing to do that because it would show Srebrenica as a lie and more importantly it would show up the US.
Mladic will not be surrender because all Serbs in the Hague have been paid well for “being captured”. Mladic has said many times that money does not concern him and this man is deadly to the west because he cannot be bought and they fear of creating a martyr out of him.
Serbs do not have to admit to anything that did not occur to move on. When the US admits to murdering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans then they can come to my door and ask for admission whatever they like.
If the current government wishes to earn extra Euros in their pockets for passing this resolution they can, but don’t include the rest of Serbia.

Serbia will unequivocally condemn the Srebrenica crime with its resolution. Then what is Serbia going to do put pressure on the Srpska Entity its client and partner in crime. To rite the wrongs and compensate the victims and their surviving traumatized families. Or is it just to ease their conscious and pretend they did something with empty platitude words with no substance to back them up.
(Lenard, 22 February 2010 17:51)

Lenny when is Croatia going to pass a resolution condemning your Croat brothers for killing those Bosniaks in central Bosnia. Some were burnt alive in their houses by Croat forces. That was before the Bosniaks started to whip your Croat backsides and you had to beg Serbs to allow 20 000 Croats to escape over their territory otherwise the Bosniaks would have made sure there were 20 000 less Croats. When is your lot going to “rite the wrongs and compensate the victims”?????? I wait your response.

If Serbia is required to condemn 'Srebrenica', I think it is only fair that Serbia and the rest of us understand what 'Srebrenica'is.

I regard 'Srebrenica' as a series of events which include the 2-3 years prior to the so-called 'massacre'; the suspicious inputs of certain Western Governments surrounding the 'massacre' and the conspicuous delays in reporting this same 'masacre'. The situation regarding numbers and origins of bodies found and unfound also merits serious re-investigation.

Once the truth is established, condemnations can be issued.

MB,Ireland

sj

I wish you had the heart to condemn all the killings and want to put it all behind. The defence seems shrill - conspiracy theories left and right.

Why do you make a defence? Probably you know as little as you say they know about the actual truth.

You say they are wrong but they say they want the chance to decide - that is why there needs to be a trial somewhere.

If you are right, I am sure that the legal process (how ever slow) will establish that in the end. Let the trial take place. Let the facts be put on the table. The Hague is as good a place as any. Whatever the politics, the placing of evidence is generally sound and the judgements well reasoned.

I would rather Serbia got its house in order over the Srebrenica affair. Serbia looks very bad because of what happened and making a shrill defence just confirms to the world that people have not acknowledged and are unwilling to learn. Something awful happened and it needs to be answered.

If Mladic is a general he should be ordered to take himself to the Hague. If he has a case, let him make it. Any general in any army would be expected to face a court given the nature of the accusations. He should stop hiding.

The "act" of genocide was indeed the court's ruling. As such the interpretation varies. Also, while it was mostly men of fighting age, there were hundred of elderly people and boys under the age of fifteen, who were never a threat, so whoever tries to lessen that crime by re-contextualizing (ie. fabricating figures) it, will never really be prepared to accept any crimes apart from those committed against them. I have been to Srebrenica, and have seen the thousands of graves and the large section of land left open for future identified bodies. Is the number of 8000 the accurate one, I don't know, but why does it matter? Even if it is 5000 thousand or even 10 or 1, why is one life worth less than eight thousand. A crime was committed, the most numerous in terms of deaths in a single day of the war, and as such it has stayed burned into people's consciousness. However, this ruling has nothing to do with blaming Serb nation as a whole. The day that the Srebrenica Resolution is passed is the day that crimes committed in these various wars stop being about specific nations, but instead about a minority that was responsible for them.

Some posts point out to numerous crimes committed by Israel, America, etc. They should all be condemned, but there is no will power on the behalf of the fragmented leftist and Arab group to fight against these crimes. Most Western nations, or rather their politics, are complicit in the daily misery of the Palestinians, they are all aware of that, but they accept that because Israel is more important to them than Palestine, and the powerful pro-Isreali lobby groups are instrumental in maintaining that status quo, while the fragmented Palestinian groups spend more time fighting against each other, than for a common cause.

Irregardless, one should not look onto others, and whether they have accepted responsibility for their crimes before facing the crimes that were committed in our name. It shows a lack of compassion and understanding, and politicizes the victims in the coldest way.

The world is an unfair place, and as such, if one politicizes every issue and resolution, then what have we all been reduced to?

Let us lead by example, the rest will fall into place.

(Bob, 23 February 2010 19:17)
I appreciate where you’re coming from, but you see these are not conspiracy theories. For example, after the first Gulf War the Canadians made a two-part documentary which covered this topic from start to finish. US officials were interviewed and they confirmed all the details. First, how the US ambassador in Iraq at the time gave Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait. Then they played the testimony before the senate hearing of the daughter of the Kuwait ambassador to the US – she stated that she saw Iraq soldiers throwing pregnant women and babies from the second floor of the main hospital in Kuwait – all lies she left to study in the US two years before the invasion and had not returned during that period. More recently Iraqi weapons of mass destruction – I could write an entire library on the first part alone – the lies, the deception is staggering.
Unfortunately I know too much about the processes behind western governments and the propaganda used on innocent countries that just want to live according to their ideals and traditions, but get in the way of the west. I have worked in that area for many, many years and recognize lies very easily. You should read up on a fellow called Christopher John Boyce – this actually happened. Also, there was talk of the US wanting to arrange a “massacre” 6 months after the war started in Bosnia. In fact the west was passing off the Bosniak army of 5000 as being killed by Serbs, but they crossed over to Serbia and were transported to the four corners of this planet – some were billeted in my City and during an interview the TV editors forgot to remove their voices and the translation did not match up with what these guys were saying.
The Tribunal is a joke amongst the legal fraternity around the world. It is what the old US propaganda films called “Soviet Show Trials of the 1920s and 1930s”. During one of the first Serbs to be on trial, the defense lawyer discovered that the prosecution’s only “eye” witness was lying and he confessed that he never saw the Serb do anything but he was paid by the Bosnian Government to testify. The next two witnesses testified that they did not see anything but they were told by a friend who claimed was told by someone else. And they call this a Court!
I am happy to have an official Truth Inquiry that meets requirements of all both Bosniaks and Serbs. I can tell you now that it will be easier for you to jump over the moon than this kind of inquiry taking place. The west will avoid it at all costs.
The judiciary on the Tribunal are the worst practitioners of that profession. One of the men that was instrumental in establishing the Tribunal was Australia’s former Governor General, Sir Ninian Stephens, but when he realized the real purpose he resigned after 12 months in the job. The Tribunal was established to punish not deal out justice.
Once again I repeat people were killed in Srebrenica but not in those numbers. Who cares what the world thinks Serbia. If you live your life trying to please others your life is not worth living. I’m happy to pass any resolution provided the US does the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.