STOP NATO: �NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK --------------------------- ListBot Sponsor -------------------------- Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com/links/joinlb ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: TARGETS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, July 02, 2001 2:59 PM Subject: THE SHAMELESS TREASON OF VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA >THE SHAMELESS TREASON OF VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA > >By Chris Black, Richard Hugus and Jared Israel [2 July 2001] > >A chorus of voices of remarkable diversity is proclaiming Vojislav >Kostunica innocent of kidnapping President Slobodan Milosevic. This chorus >includes not only the mainstream media, which uniformly supports the >kidnapping, but also various groups and individuals who oppose the >kidnapping. Their common view is that Kostunica was out of the loop; that >the kidnapping was a big surprise or even an attack on him by Serbian Prime >Minister Djindjic. > >The evidence doesn't support this view. > >KOSTUNICA BLAMES THE VICTIMS > >Yesterday Mr. Kostunica issued a statement on the kidnapping. In it he >blamed everyone but himself. Remarkably, the blame extended to the >Montenegrin Socialists (SNP). > >According to Kostunica, by refusing to support his proposed extradition >law, the SNP had blocked an: > >"opportunity to legally regulate cooperation with the tribunal so that our >citizens could be protected." {Kostunica's statement, as translated by >Emperor's Clothes} > >Huh? > >Mr. Kostunica's proposed law would have established regulations to speedily >extradite anyone demanded by NATO's Hague Tribunal. How can that be >portrayed as "protecting citizens"? When a government regulates Injustice, >does that make it Just? > >In his statement, Kostunica whitewashed Washington and blamed Mr. Milosevic >for getting kidnapped: > >"From the arsenal of Milosevic's politics, which was truly defeatist for >the state and the people, are now adopted and revived precisely its most >undemocratic elements: illegality and the pulling off of humiliating >maneuvers that no one in the international community asked for, at least >not explicitly." {Ibid.} > >Huh? > >First of all, the "international community" definitely did demand Milosevic >be brought to The Hague. And they praised the kidnapping once it happened. >Why does Kostunica deny it? And what is the meaning of "at least not >explicitly?" > >Second, as far as the kidnapping having roots in Milosevic's practices, >what practices? Kostunica doesn't say. Did Milosevic kidnap people and send >them to the Tribunal? Did he try to force anti-constitutional extradition >laws through Parliament? If Milosevic was such a terrible dictator, how >come he didn't arrest Mr. Kostunica whose Presidential election campaign >accepted tens of millions of U.S. dollars, smuggled into Serbia in >"suitcases full of cash?" (1) > >It seems that every time Mr. Kostunica makes a statement he finds some way >to include some attack on Slobodan Milosevic, accusing him of all crimes, >though never providing evidence. Isn't this just like the Western media? Or >perhaps it is worse, because Mr. Kostunica's attacks are fodder for Western >TV and newspapers; his attacks are quoted and people think, "I guess NATO >was right. Even the Serbs admit Milosevic is monster." This creates a >political climate in which crimes, whether the Kosovo Liberation Army >invasion of southern Serbia or the kidnapping of President Milosevic, can >more easily be carried out. > >IS KOSTUNICA GUILTY? > >Kostunica worked hand in hand with Djindjic to deport Slobodan Milosevic. > >Now that the deed is done and the Yugoslav people are rising up in fury, >Kostunica is making a great show of falling out with Djindjic. The function >of this "battle" is for Kostunica to retain his credibility. > >His claim that he is innocent of the actual deed can be disproved through >the exercise of common sense. > >1) Kostunica used to say he knows extradition is unconstitutional: > >"Kostunica has said he would not extradite his ousted predecessor and other >war crimes suspects to face trial at the international court in The Hague >because it would be unconstitutional. > >"According to Kostunica, the Yugoslav constitution does not allow >extradition of Yugoslav citizens to a foreign court." ('AP Worldstream,' >January 16, 2001) > >2) Yet, after Kostunica met with Powell and Bush in Washington seven weeks >ago, he promised to push an extradition law through Parliament. He went >back to Yugoslavia and tried to do just that. > >While he was in Washington Kostunica also discovered new merit in the Hague >War Crimes Tribunal: > >"Cooperation with The Hague tribunal is something that is necessary for >this country being a member of the United Nations and behaving as a good >member of the international community." ('Houston Chronicle,' 10 May 2001) > >That's the same Hague Tribunal that has murdered and demonized Serbs. And >that's the same international community that bombed Yugoslavia. > >3) When Kostunica returned to Yugoslavia, he used his control of the mass >media to try and sell Yugoslavs the notion that they had to bow to the >Tribunal or Washington wouldn't let a Donors Conference save the Yugoslav >economy. > >Kostunica had to know the promises of aid were false. Donors Conferences >may promise to give some credits, but they are always followed by the theft >of the industrial wealth of the target country. This is clearly explained >in the SPS statement, 'We Accuse: Washington's Aid Promises Are A >Traitorous Lie!' (2) > >4) The Montenegrin socialists (SNP) hold the balance of power in the >Yugoslav Parliament. When they refused to vote for Kostunica's extradition >law, Kostunica and Djindjic pressured and threatened them to force them to >comply. At the same time, Kostunica suppressed opposition from the patriots >in his own party. > >5) The SNP held firm. So Djindjic and Kostunica decided to bypass >Parliament entirely. > >"The government was forced to issue a federal decree through the cabinet, >where Mr. Kostunica and his reformists have a majority after losing its >battle with Parliament this week." ('N. Y. Times,' 24 June 2001) > >The cabinet's action not only usurped the functions of Parliament but >attempted to overrule the Constitution by decree. In his statement >yesterday, Kostunica still defends this: > >"Everything was tried, all was laid out so that - with federal law, or >federal and republican law, only through republican law, and afterwards >through the decree of the Federal government - the difficult question of >cooperation with the Tribunal would be regulated." {From Kostunica's >Statement} > >6) Three days ago, the Constitutional Court ordered a temporary injunction >against extraditing Milosevic while he appealed the Federal >administration's decree. > >As President, Mr. Kostunica's job is to a) command the army in order to b) >protect and defend the Constitution. Which includes, of course, defending >the decisions of the Constitutional Court. > >Why didn't Kostunica do his job and prevent the kidnapping? > >Kostunica says the problem was he didn't know. > >That is not an answer. First of all, Kostunica and Djindjic had been >partners pushing for extradition all along. Djindjic says he never would >have staged the kidnapping without Kostunica's approval. > >But even if Djindjic is lying, his intentions were no secret. Days before >the kidnapping he and others said that if legal obstacles were put in the >way of extraditing Milosevic they would take the law into their own hands. > >Once Djindjic made this public commitment to break the law - that is, to >kidnap the former head of state - it was Kostunica's duty to arrest him and >order the army to take charge of the Belgrade Prison where Milosevic was >being held. In this way, he would have guaranteed there was no kidnapping. > >Some people say Kostunica is really a good man, that he didn't take this >action because he's very abstract and absent-minded. > >Nonsense. From the start he pursued the extradition of Milosevic with >firmness and persistence, fully aware it was unconstitutional. > >Two days before the kidnapping, leaders of the Socialist Party (SPS) met >with him. They said they were worried there would be an attempt to kidnap >Milosevic before Milosevic's appeal against the Federal government's decree >could be heard. > >Kostunica told those SPS leaders: "I WILL NOT PERMIT DJINDJIC TO TAKE >UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTION." > >So before the kidnapping, Kostunica says, "I won't let them do it." And >after allowing the kidnapping to happen, if not actually carrying it out, >he says, "I didn't know it was going to happen, but it was illegal." And >still he does not arrest Djindjic. > >Does he take us for imbeciles? > >Mr. Kostunica is the law officer in charge of protecting the Yugoslav >constitution and defending the State. If a law officer knows that a crime >is going to be committed, even if he is not involved in the actual details >of planning the crime, and he stands aside while the crime is being >committed, he is just as guilty as those who do the dirty work. > >Here's the plain truth: Djindjic and Kostunica have sold out their people, >their own people, to the United States government. > >Djindjic and Kostunica are shameless. > >-- Chris Black, Richard Hugus and Jared Israel > >*** > >Further reading: > >1) 'Kostunica Says Some backers 'Unconsciously Work for American Imperial >Goals'' at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/erlang.htm > >2) 'We Accuse: Washington's Aid Promises Are A Traitorous Lie!' at >http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/fools.htm > >*** > >The URL for this article is http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/treas.htm > >Send this article to a friend! > >www.tenc.net >[Emperor's Clothes] > > > >TARGETS - Independent monthly paper on international affairs >Sloterkade 20 >1058 HE Amsterdam >The Netherlands >Ph. ++ 31 20 615 1122 >Fax: ++ 31 20 615 1120 > > ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
