Nikolić's genocide statement is “unacceptable”

He is the Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor so he must defend a theory about genocide in Srebrenica. I also agree with Mr. Nikolic that it is a huge crime against humanity but not a genocide. It is very delicate to talk about this, and I am a shamed because of this, but my basic knowledge is that genocide means killing of the all ethnic population, without exception of age and sex. Why they insist on the genocide? For someone who left without his fellow creature, it is the same however you call this crime. It is a crime against humanity.

When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide.

Majority of Serbian citizens support views of Tomislav Nikolic.
In Bosnia happened civil war between Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats. Serbia is not responsible for that.

What about Bratunac and the surrounding Serbian villages around Srebrenica?! Naser Oric's killing squad have been well documented he even boasted on TV of his barbaric actions! But was thrown out of the Hague! I tell you this there will be no peace in Balkans if only one side is blamed it will fuel more hatred! Also how can it be genocide if it was well proven Mladic had the women, children and old people sent on buses to Tuzla?! The truth is out there and i am afraid my Bosniak brothers your leaders lied to you again and sacrificed your people for there gain like they have for the last 20 years! They are leading you down a path of darkness! I saw a Norwegian TV program following a Bosniak man who found mass evidence of muslims crimes as well as Izetbegovic killing his own for personal gain!

"it is the worst massacre on European soil since WW2. that a head of state should deny is the shame of your country"

Nikolle

Interesting Nikolle that you stop at WW2. I wonder if you know what the worst genocide in the balkans was during WW2? Correct! Jasenovac, where 700.000 serb women, men and children were butchers by the ustashe. But, I guess that doesn't count since the only thing that matters is what happend after WW2. HYPOCRITE!

Nikolle: He isn't denying there was a massacre at Srebrenica. He is saying, and write rightly, that it does not constitute genocide. It's a war crime to slaughter civilians or military personnel but in this instance it isn't genocide. It doesn't threaten the existence of the Bosniaks, women, children and the elderly were spared. Now any other genocides you know of where women, children and the elderly were evacuated? Were women, children and elderly spared amongst Armenians, Jews, Tuutsis or even Serbs at Jasenovac? No, because in each instance the goal was elimination of that ethnicity in part, as with the Serbs in the puppet Croatian state in WW2, or in whole as with the holocaust, Rwanda and the Armenian genocide.

If he is convinced of Karadzic's guilt, then doesn't this prejudice the trial?..why bother going through the charade of a trial and presumed innocence? let's just hang him from a tree. Yes sirree!

Has Brammertz ever suggested that the slaughter of Serbs in the villages surrounding Srebrenica even happened let alone that it might be considered a genocide?

I don't like the word genocide used in relation to Srebrenica as it belittles the real genocide of six million jews and half a million serbs at the hands of german, croatian and muslim nazi's. If we are going to use the word 'genocide' for what happened in Srebrenica then we need to come up with a new word for what happened to the jews and serbs during the war as the two crimes are not compatible, if only in the fact that the women and children were spared in the Serbian attrocity, but not in the attrocities committed by the Germans, Croatians and Bosnian Muslims.

When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide.
(sj, 8 November 2012, 13:17)
Finally you made a true statement.

One question that is never asked is how many of the Moslem men who were killed were wearing army boots and carrying guns.

The BBC version of events that these were peaceful Moslems pulled from their homes and killed is very far from the truth.

Mr Nikolic forgot for a moment the political correctness.

People,

Before making much noise about genocide, read the definition of it in the international law:

http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/officialtext.htm

Why they insist on the genocide?
(Ralen, 8 November 2012, 12:46)
--
Because it is a political kangaroo court created and financed at the forefront by NATO countries.

"When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide."
(sj, 8 November 2012, 13:17)

It depends on the action taken. Intentionally deporting 1000s of male persons, no matter of what age (13-7x) from Srebrenica in buses and systematically slaughter them later is the action that was ruled genocide by the ICTY (an international court approved and created by the UN, to remind you).

Your job is over Brammertz. Serbia and the ICTY have no outstanding issues. If he wants to equate bosnia with the jews, armenians etc. then he can if it makes him feel better. He can't tell other people what to say or think because it is beyond his remit. The ICTY ruling is irrelevant as anyone who bothered to read its convoluted reinterpretation of genocide knows. They wanted a conviction of genocide (on someone who wasn't even there or in command!) so they changed the rules to make it fit. The joke is on the ICTY's legal legacy and the ICC.

Nikolić's genocide statement is “unacceptable”

Well Mr. Bremmeritz, next time bring a UNs translation of genocide or a Webster's Dictionary, highlight your translation of the meaning of the word genocide, and leave it with Mr. Nikolich so he won't forget next time. I'll leave a copy for you where I'll highlight the true meanings
of the words:Appeaser, coward, hypocrite, lier, war criminal, evil, thief,
humility, character, dignity, self-respect, noble, truthful, honest, self-worth, teaching by example, bearing false
witness.

What the former Yugo needs is a truth and reconciliation commission. Politicians, historians, legal experts can all make their case and lets see if there was a genocide. Also would give some background.

What further evidence do you need for the shaky foundation of the ICTY? UN court my a**. Check -> http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2009/12/24/the-soros-connection-leading-the-goldstone-lobby

I quote "Soros was one of the two mega-funders that together gave some $1 million to pay for the precursor to the ICTY. Thanks to Neier, a Soros grant then funded the first year of ICTY operations..."

Even NATO have pretty much admitted control. Check -> http://www.nato.int/kosovo/press/p990517b.htm

I quote "Jamie Shea : As you know, without NATO countries there would be no International Court of Justice, nor would there be any International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia because NATO countries are in the forefront of those who have established these two tribunals, who fund these tribunals and who support on a daily basis their activities."

For the doubters, you are welcome to keep your head buried in the sand.

" However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide"

the point being that they weren't murdered in battle. no they were rounded up, males as young as 16 and killed in a matter of 3-5 days. around 8000 of them. i know you don't believe but its true, go and visit Srebrenica if you have any moral courage. it is the worst massacre on European soil since WW2. that a head of state should deny is the shame of your country

"Such statement is contrary to rulings of the International Court of Justice"

Well, if the International Court of Justice was not controlled by the US and the brits its ruling would have some meaning. However, judging Srebrenica to be genocide but not Jasenovac and the turkish slaughter of 1 million armenians is just hypocritical. Typical of major powers, deciding what is and what's not a genocide. So, once more, Srebrenica is not genocide. At least not until Jasonovac and the turkish islamist holacaust on armeninas becomes one.

What can we expect from the Serbs! They deny their crimes even when caught red handed. The whole world knows what happened in Srebrenica.

This guy is putting Serbia in a grave ! He is killing future IOC the country and is just an example of misleading and lying to people ! He has nothing to offer to Serbia, just diverting people from the situation they are and that will get worst, same for loud declarations without consequence do DPM Vucic ! Thye have nothing to offer than just raise nationalist pride !
Just a bunch of lies ! Of course it s dedicated to serbia internal audience but not understanding this speeches affects future investments and country development !, but A government of Donkeys would have been clever !

(Comm. Parrisson, 8 November 2012, 14:55)

It’s amusing to read this same story over and over again, but as Goebbels once said you yell out a lie long and loud enough and it becomes the truth. Those executed were Bosniak volunteers not its regular army and they were the worst of the worst, but since you mention genocide in they same breath tell me why did the same “genocidal Serbs” leave old men , women of all ages and young children, male and female unharmed and even placed them on buses and sent them to Sarajevo?
That same so called ICY is staffed by the dregs of international judicial figures – people who became judges in their country through political means not capability, but are so inept to the point they are not allowed to sit on traffic court. Now that you have mentioned it would these same buffoons classify the US killings of 100 000 Iraqi’s genocide? Or are they democratic killings?

When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide.
(sj, 8 November 2012, 13:17)
Finally you made a true statement.

Mr Nikolic forgot for a moment the political correctness.

People,

Before making much noise about genocide, read the definition of it in the international law:

http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/officialtext.htm

" However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide"

the point being that they weren't murdered in battle. no they were rounded up, males as young as 16 and killed in a matter of 3-5 days. around 8000 of them. i know you don't believe but its true, go and visit Srebrenica if you have any moral courage. it is the worst massacre on European soil since WW2. that a head of state should deny is the shame of your country

He is the Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor so he must defend a theory about genocide in Srebrenica. I also agree with Mr. Nikolic that it is a huge crime against humanity but not a genocide. It is very delicate to talk about this, and I am a shamed because of this, but my basic knowledge is that genocide means killing of the all ethnic population, without exception of age and sex. Why they insist on the genocide? For someone who left without his fellow creature, it is the same however you call this crime. It is a crime against humanity.

When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide.

If he is convinced of Karadzic's guilt, then doesn't this prejudice the trial?..why bother going through the charade of a trial and presumed innocence? let's just hang him from a tree. Yes sirree!

Has Brammertz ever suggested that the slaughter of Serbs in the villages surrounding Srebrenica even happened let alone that it might be considered a genocide?

I don't like the word genocide used in relation to Srebrenica as it belittles the real genocide of six million jews and half a million serbs at the hands of german, croatian and muslim nazi's. If we are going to use the word 'genocide' for what happened in Srebrenica then we need to come up with a new word for what happened to the jews and serbs during the war as the two crimes are not compatible, if only in the fact that the women and children were spared in the Serbian attrocity, but not in the attrocities committed by the Germans, Croatians and Bosnian Muslims.

One question that is never asked is how many of the Moslem men who were killed were wearing army boots and carrying guns.

The BBC version of events that these were peaceful Moslems pulled from their homes and killed is very far from the truth.

Majority of Serbian citizens support views of Tomislav Nikolic.
In Bosnia happened civil war between Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats. Serbia is not responsible for that.

What about Bratunac and the surrounding Serbian villages around Srebrenica?! Naser Oric's killing squad have been well documented he even boasted on TV of his barbaric actions! But was thrown out of the Hague! I tell you this there will be no peace in Balkans if only one side is blamed it will fuel more hatred! Also how can it be genocide if it was well proven Mladic had the women, children and old people sent on buses to Tuzla?! The truth is out there and i am afraid my Bosniak brothers your leaders lied to you again and sacrificed your people for there gain like they have for the last 20 years! They are leading you down a path of darkness! I saw a Norwegian TV program following a Bosniak man who found mass evidence of muslims crimes as well as Izetbegovic killing his own for personal gain!

Why they insist on the genocide?
(Ralen, 8 November 2012, 12:46)
--
Because it is a political kangaroo court created and financed at the forefront by NATO countries.

"When they murdered Serbs it wasn’t genocide, but the poor Bosniaks were only defending themselves. However, when the Serbs took action then its genocide."
(sj, 8 November 2012, 13:17)

It depends on the action taken. Intentionally deporting 1000s of male persons, no matter of what age (13-7x) from Srebrenica in buses and systematically slaughter them later is the action that was ruled genocide by the ICTY (an international court approved and created by the UN, to remind you).

Your job is over Brammertz. Serbia and the ICTY have no outstanding issues. If he wants to equate bosnia with the jews, armenians etc. then he can if it makes him feel better. He can't tell other people what to say or think because it is beyond his remit. The ICTY ruling is irrelevant as anyone who bothered to read its convoluted reinterpretation of genocide knows. They wanted a conviction of genocide (on someone who wasn't even there or in command!) so they changed the rules to make it fit. The joke is on the ICTY's legal legacy and the ICC.

Nikolić's genocide statement is “unacceptable”

Well Mr. Bremmeritz, next time bring a UNs translation of genocide or a Webster's Dictionary, highlight your translation of the meaning of the word genocide, and leave it with Mr. Nikolich so he won't forget next time. I'll leave a copy for you where I'll highlight the true meanings
of the words:Appeaser, coward, hypocrite, lier, war criminal, evil, thief,
humility, character, dignity, self-respect, noble, truthful, honest, self-worth, teaching by example, bearing false
witness.

What the former Yugo needs is a truth and reconciliation commission. Politicians, historians, legal experts can all make their case and lets see if there was a genocide. Also would give some background.

What further evidence do you need for the shaky foundation of the ICTY? UN court my a**. Check -> http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2009/12/24/the-soros-connection-leading-the-goldstone-lobby

I quote "Soros was one of the two mega-funders that together gave some $1 million to pay for the precursor to the ICTY. Thanks to Neier, a Soros grant then funded the first year of ICTY operations..."

Even NATO have pretty much admitted control. Check -> http://www.nato.int/kosovo/press/p990517b.htm

I quote "Jamie Shea : As you know, without NATO countries there would be no International Court of Justice, nor would there be any International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia because NATO countries are in the forefront of those who have established these two tribunals, who fund these tribunals and who support on a daily basis their activities."

For the doubters, you are welcome to keep your head buried in the sand.

"Such statement is contrary to rulings of the International Court of Justice"

Well, if the International Court of Justice was not controlled by the US and the brits its ruling would have some meaning. However, judging Srebrenica to be genocide but not Jasenovac and the turkish slaughter of 1 million armenians is just hypocritical. Typical of major powers, deciding what is and what's not a genocide. So, once more, Srebrenica is not genocide. At least not until Jasonovac and the turkish islamist holacaust on armeninas becomes one.

What can we expect from the Serbs! They deny their crimes even when caught red handed. The whole world knows what happened in Srebrenica.

"it is the worst massacre on European soil since WW2. that a head of state should deny is the shame of your country"

Nikolle

Interesting Nikolle that you stop at WW2. I wonder if you know what the worst genocide in the balkans was during WW2? Correct! Jasenovac, where 700.000 serb women, men and children were butchers by the ustashe. But, I guess that doesn't count since the only thing that matters is what happend after WW2. HYPOCRITE!

This guy is putting Serbia in a grave ! He is killing future IOC the country and is just an example of misleading and lying to people ! He has nothing to offer to Serbia, just diverting people from the situation they are and that will get worst, same for loud declarations without consequence do DPM Vucic ! Thye have nothing to offer than just raise nationalist pride !
Just a bunch of lies ! Of course it s dedicated to serbia internal audience but not understanding this speeches affects future investments and country development !, but A government of Donkeys would have been clever !

Nikolle: He isn't denying there was a massacre at Srebrenica. He is saying, and write rightly, that it does not constitute genocide. It's a war crime to slaughter civilians or military personnel but in this instance it isn't genocide. It doesn't threaten the existence of the Bosniaks, women, children and the elderly were spared. Now any other genocides you know of where women, children and the elderly were evacuated? Were women, children and elderly spared amongst Armenians, Jews, Tuutsis or even Serbs at Jasenovac? No, because in each instance the goal was elimination of that ethnicity in part, as with the Serbs in the puppet Croatian state in WW2, or in whole as with the holocaust, Rwanda and the Armenian genocide.

(Comm. Parrisson, 8 November 2012, 14:55)

It’s amusing to read this same story over and over again, but as Goebbels once said you yell out a lie long and loud enough and it becomes the truth. Those executed were Bosniak volunteers not its regular army and they were the worst of the worst, but since you mention genocide in they same breath tell me why did the same “genocidal Serbs” leave old men , women of all ages and young children, male and female unharmed and even placed them on buses and sent them to Sarajevo?
That same so called ICY is staffed by the dregs of international judicial figures – people who became judges in their country through political means not capability, but are so inept to the point they are not allowed to sit on traffic court. Now that you have mentioned it would these same buffoons classify the US killings of 100 000 Iraqi’s genocide? Or are they democratic killings?