► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Human Rights Watch’

Hot Air makes common cause with Tranzi Progressive NGO Human Rights Watch

by Phantom Ace ( 102 Comments › )
Filed under Progressives, Russia, Tranzis at February 1st, 2013 - 7:00 am

I am no fan of Hot Air. I like many of the commentators over there, like our own Dorian Grey or AZFederalist and others but the people who run the blog are just tranzi progressive propagandists. When the Arab Spring began Hot Air was supporting it knowing full well it was a Muslim Brotherhood led movement. When Qaddafi began to crack down on Al-Qaeda, Hot Air advocated war to remove him. Then when Obama went to  war for the Islamists, they complained he did not do enough. When the blowback from Libya destabilized Mali, Hot Air hypocritically attacked Obama for getting rid of Qaddafi.

Now Hot Air launches an attack on Russia’s “human rights” record.

Hot Air

The title says a “Rights” group. Here is the the article which they link to and notice the name of the organization.

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Authoritarianism increased last year in Russia to levels unseen since the Soviet era with a raft of harsh laws curbing political freedoms and harassment of opposition activists and critics, Human Rights Watch said on Thursday.

Hot Air which is allegedly a Conservative blog is supporting the viewpoint of a Tranzi Progressive NGO!  If people do not know who Human Rights Watch are, well here is what the The Volokh Conspiracy has to say on Human Right Watch’s connections.

Human Rights Watch, bleeding donors because of the various scandals surrounding its reporting on the Middle East [I have a lengthy series of blog posts on HRW and Israel, most of which can be found here, with some more recent ones here], and apparently finding Saudi elites either unavailable or no longer palatable, has found a sugar daddy: George Soros, who is donating $100 million to the organization.

This certainly takes care of HRW’s intermediate funding needs, but also makes HRW’s position as a leading organization of the anti-Israel international left even clearer. Even J Street and Soros parted ways long ago, before J Street even officially launched, because Soros is so toxic to anyone most people sympathetic to Israel, and J Street seeks to represent the left/liberal wing of the pro-Israel community. Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor has more.

This is a George Soros supported anti-Capitalist organization. They are also very anti-Israel and have criticized nations such as Colombia, India, the Philippines and various American Corporations. Now as to who Putin is cracking down on, they are Russian Leftist Occupy Wall Street types who want a  Marxist state. The Russia of today is not the Soviet Union. They are a Rightwing Nationalist Capitalist nation with a better tax code than the US and a private Social Security system . Who Putin cracks down on is an internal matter for Russia and as an American it’s none of my concern.

I hope Conservatives realize how Hot Air is pulling a  fast one on them. The fact they are linking to Human Right Watch proves they are not a  Conservative blog. They are a Tranzi Progressive blog with a Globalist agenda. There is nothing Conservative about a blog that supports a George Soros linked group.

Conservatives need to realize the con job Hot Air is pulling on them.

Refuting the Nazi Sympathizer at Washington Times

by 1389AD Comments Off on Refuting the Nazi Sympathizer at Washington Times
Filed under Balkans, Headlines, Holocaust, Media, Serbia, World War II at April 30th, 2011 - 2:05 pm

Nazi sympathizer Jeffrey T. Kuhner
Nazi sympathizer Jeffrey T. Kuhner

Sour Croat at Washington Times: A Translation

Posted by Julia Gorin at Republican Riot

The coming Balkan war: Hague conviction of Croatian general rekindles designs for ‘Greater Serbia’

By Jeffrey T. Kuhner, Washington Times, Apr. 19

Croatia is headed toward another war. The Balkans – again – will explode with violence. It is only a matter of time. And the so-called “international community” has been pivotal in stoking the flames of ethnic conflict.

TRANSLATION: Because a popular Croatian general has been sentenced to 24 years for war crimes instead of another Serbian general getting sentenced to 46 years, this is cause for war.

Recently, the [ICTY] sentenced Croatian Gen. Ante Gotovina to 24 years in prison. The ICTY’s ruling rightly has sparked angry protests across Croatia.

Gen. Gotovina has been convicted for having “command responsibility” over an August 1995 military campaign, known as Operation Storm, that effectively ended the Croat-Serbian war. The ICTY alleges that the Croatian general oversaw the expulsion of 100,000 ethnic Serbs and the murder of hundreds of civilians. According to the United Nations war crimes court, the campaign constituted a “joint criminal enterprise.”

The ICTY’s verdict is preposterous and outrageous. Gen. Gotovina is not a war criminal; rather, he is a Croatian patriot and hero whose campaign restored Croatia’s territorial integrity. Moreover, it delivered a decisive blow to the late Serbian strongman Slobodan Milosevic’s dream of a “Greater Serbia.”

OH YEAH — that 1990s Greater Serbia design that has always existed exclusively in the pages of the media. To re-quote Andy Wilcoxson who, unlike Kuhner, has been actually paying attention to the Hague proceedings for MORE THAN A DAY: “Even if the Bosnian Serbs had secretly been fighting for a “Greater Serbia,” they would have needed the cooperation of Slobodan Milosevic and the Serbian government in Belgrade — which was not forthcoming.”

From 1991 until 1995, Milosevic’s marauders rampaged across the region. He used the disintegration of Yugoslavia – a synthetic multinational state – to advance his goal of establishing a Great Serbian empire stretching from the Danube to the Adriatic.

Unlike the “non-synthetic,” ethnically pure state of Croatia? Whose borders — claimed and therefore legitimized by the Croats — were communist-delineated when they weren’t Nazi-delineated. Meanwhile, Croatians sure didn’t have a problem with that synthetic Yugoslav state when they voluntarily signed on to it, accepting an over-generous accommodation offered by the victorious Serbs to their WWI-era haters and enemies based on Slavic unity. Like the Slovenes, the Croats took the deal and immediately got to work undermining the country to get their independent state anyway, with their first international sponsor being Adolf Hitler and their next one being a newly reunified Germany, along with the Vatican and America.

In Croatia, Serbian paramilitaries – aided and abetted by the Yugoslav army – waged a brutal war of aggression. The result: A third of Croatia’s territory was annexed, more than 180,000 Croatians were ethnically cleansed, and nearly 20,000 civilians were murdered. Milosevic’s aim was to unite the truncated parts of Croatia with the nearly 70 percent of territory his forces had carved out in neighboring Bosnia. Call it state-building through genocidal partition.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Not wanting one’s ears, fingers, eyes and nose to become Croatian jewelry again while all the Nazi symbols, street names, currency and flag start reemerging everywhere as one is being fired from government jobs and suddenly getting reduced parliamentary representation — is a “war of aggression,” according to this nationalist psycho. Does Kuhner have Serbs confused with Croats, whom it takes mega willpower to let a Serb pass in their presence without knifing it? Yes, I said “it.” That’s the status of a Serb in Zagreb (Remember: To be a Serb in Zagreb is to be a pig in Tehran.) Meanwhile, expecting to stay a citizen of the country that one was a citizen of the day before — unreasonable! The federalists become the “rebels”!

As Canadian former ambassador to Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia, James Bissett, explained in a longer version of his article last year:

Germany has always looked upon Croatia as a traditional ally and actively supported Croatia’s desire to separate from Yugoslavia and declare independence. When fighting erupted between Croatian armed forces and the Yugoslav Federal army, Germany openly championed the Croatian cause and promoted the recognition of Croatian independence. Despite serious reservations by fellow EU members, Germany’s will prevailed….

The recognition of Croatian independence changed the nature of the conflict. The secessionist Croats suddenly acquired sovereign legitimacy while the federalist Serbs became rebels in their ancestral land. Subsequently, they were treated as such by the international community.

In April 1990, when Franjo Tudjman and his Croatian Democratic Party came to power in Croatia with an undisguised platform of separation from Yugoslavia, the Serbian population in Croatia had cause for concern. Tudjman’s party had resurrected many of the old Ustashi symbols and slogans and made it clear it was not interested in treating the Serbs as equals. A new constitution was enacted that designated Serbs as a minority group and hundreds were dismissed from their jobs; others were forced to sign a loyalty oath to the Zagreb regime.

The Serbian regions of Croatia had no desire to separate from Yugoslavia in favor of living under their slayers and, fearing a repetition of what had happened to their forefathers fifty years before, formed an autonomous region. When Croatia declared independence in May 1991 armed clashes broke out and the Yugoslav army intervened on behalf of the Serbian federalists.

Fighting was only brought to an end in January 1992 when President Milosevic of Serbia and President Tudjman signed a ceasefire leading to a United Nations peace plan and the creation of four “Protected Areas” in the Serbian parts of Croatia. With some exceptions the ceasefire was generally respected and few major engagements occurred.

However, during the next two and a half years, the United States openly supported the Croatian cause and by providing weapons, equipment, training and professional expertise enabled Croatia to build a formidable and modern military force. In May 1995 the new Croat army overran the Serbian region of western Slavonia and on August 4, 1995, aided by US air strikes against Serb positions, launched “Operation Storm” in the historic Serb region of the Krajina — designed, as stated by President Tudjman, to inflict such blows “that the Serbs will to all practical purposes disappear.”

And disappear they did. It is estimated that at least 200,000 Serbs fled Croatia and many of those that did not flee were killed. A European Union monitoring team reported on August 11, 1995 that “…an average of six corpses a day, continues to emerge, some fresh, some decomposed, mainly of old men. Many have been shot in the head or had their throats slit, others have been mutilated.” It would seem the insane violence of the new Ustashi matched that of their predecessors of 1941-45.

Operation storm was described by Carl Bildt, the former UN Special Envoy to the Former Yugoslavia as, “the most efficient ethnic cleansing we’ve seen in the Balkans.” The Serbs were, in effect, abandoned by Slobodan Milosevic, who ordered them not to resist. President Tudjman was the victor and Croatia is still today essentially “Serb-free.”

I’ll have to check my files to see what Kuhner thinks he means by 180,000 Croatians cleansed and 20,000 civilians “murdered” (I believe 20,000 is the overall death toll of the war on both sides), but it’s interesting that 180,000 Croatians count as “cleansed,” but 250,000 Serbs do not. (As we know, those who did not flee — mostly the elderly and disabled — were in fact killed with great enthusiasm.) Back to Kuhner:

Operation Storm put a stop to all of this. Gen. Gotovina’s army launched a U.S.-backed offensive that was a stunning success: Civilian casualties were minimized, the campaign lasted just three days, and the crushing defeat of the rebel [there it is!] Serbs eventually paved the way for the signing of the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords.

A stunning success! Serben-rein in JUST 3 DAYS! The atom bomb in Nagasaki put an end to WWII, and Operation Storm “put a stop to all of this!” — the difference being that the latter conflict was ended in favor of the bellicose party, and evil triumphed.

Moreover, numerous media outlets – The Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal, Newsweek and the Jerusalem Post – have investigated Operation Storm and have concluded that Gen. Gotovina is innocent of any wrongdoing. He never personally ordered or tolerated the commission of any crimes. In fact, the ICTY’s prosecution was dismal on this point. It failed to show any kind of proof that Gen. Gotovina was responsible for orchestrating a criminal conspiracy…

Ditto for the Serbs whose convictions and draconian sentencing — on flimsier grounds than Kuhner perceives Gotovina’s to be on — Kuhner hasn’t had a problem with.

The orders to evacuate the Serbian population from the so-called “Krajina” zone of occupation came from Belgrade several days before the commencement of Operation Storm. Milosevic, realizing he was facing a military humiliation, ordered Croatia’s Serbs transferred to Bosnia and Kosovo to consolidate his revanchist gains there. This was done before Croatian forces even launched their campaign.

Indeed, Milosevic was telling the Krajina Serbs to not fight. Just run. Which is why Serbian paramilitary leader “Captain Dragan” wanted to freaking assassinate Milosevic. One certainly wonders how that “order” from Milosevic — who as president of Serbia and not Yugoslavia wasn’t in a position to give Croatian Serbs any “orders” — jibes with Kuhner’s assessment that he was going for a Greater Serbia. If he had been, it’d certainly make the bad blood between him and Captain Dragan all the more head-scratching. As for “realizing he was facing a military humiliation, [Milosevic] ordered Croatia’s Serbs transferred to Bosnia and Kosovo to consolidate his revanchist gains there”: Again, what military humiliation in Croatia could a Serbian president be facing? Kuhner is attributing strategies where there was only retreat, defeat and no will to fight; he’s just coming up with ways to make the unwieldy facts fit his creative interpretation of events — and attributing them all to Milosevic as our ignoramus pop presses do. You think maybe that, more likely than a military defeat, what might have elicited a suggestion that Serbs run for their lives was that the Yugoslavian government got wind of this meeting between Tudjman and his generals — including, of course, Gotovina:

Tudjman is planning the operation [Storm] together with his top military brass… ‘We have to inflict such blows that the Serbs will to all practical purposes disappear.’ …Tudjman explains that, for the benefit of propaganda in the international community, leaflets should be given to Serbian civilians saying, ‘We are appealing to you not to withdraw…This means giving them a way out, while pretending to guarantee civil rights etc.’

(More Croatian planning for ethnic cleansing and murder here.)

Back to the sour Croat:

Hence, the entire Gotovina conviction and prosecution rests on a giant fraud: The removal of the Serbian population occurred under the explicit command of local Serb authorities acting under the authority of Belgrade. Therefore, Croatian forces could not have committed “ethnic cleansing.” The ICTY verdict is a sham.

Ah, so 18 years into the ICTY’s sham existence, the man notices that it’s a sham. Funny, it wasn’t a sham ’til his kin got burned. Anyone who has been following the slanted proceedings (which up ’til now had suited Kuhner just fine), would realize that this verdict is more of an attempt to de-sham, if only for show — so that the Serbs “stop whining” about bias.

The U.N. court is a politicized vehicle that aspires to render history’s final judgment on the Balkan wars of the 1990s. And its verdict is clear: All sides were guilty of atrocities; no party – or nation – was more responsible than the other. This is what Serbia has been demanding for years. It has sought to cover its genocidal culpability and national shame with moral equivalence.

Actually, moral equivalence is as good as can be hoped for, and what the Serbs are settling for. Since the real aggressors (Croats, Bosnian-Muslims, Albanians and Slovenes) — will NEVER be named as such. As for covering one’s genocidal culpability and shame, how’s that apology for exterminating Serbs in WWII coming along, Kuhner? It’s only been 70 years. Take your time.

Of course, when Serbs are accused of ethnic cleansing for busing women, children and elderly out of Srebrenica to safety (as opposed to going “Croatian” on them) this bothers Kuhner not at all. When an Orthodox bishop obliges a request by international forces to bus out Muslim women, children and old people from a town in Herzegovina, and soon after is threatened with getting hauled in for charges of “ethnic cleansing,” no “sham” there, huh, Kuhner? As long as the targets of international “justice” are the same people who were the targets of the Croats, Bosniaks and Albanians, nothing is noticeably askew at Den Haag or its affiliates.

Hence, the Gotovina conviction is a major triumph for Belgrade. Already, Serbian revanchists are claiming that the ICTY’s ruling enables Croatia’s international borders to be altered. Led by the odious Tomislav Nikolic, Belgrade’s nationalists are surging in the polls. They are demanding the restoration of a Greater Serbia. The ICTY has shown them the way forward: If Croatia’s war for independence was a “joint criminal enterprise,” then the entire Croatian state – by that twisted logic – is founded upon war crimes and ethnic cleansing.

And all along, while the Bosnian-Muslims have been doing the exact same thing to de-legitimize Republika Srpska (albeit with less legal standing than exists against the genocidal Croatian state), Kuhner doesn’t notice. Indeed, he no doubt toes his kindred Muslim spirits’ line on that front.

This is why Croatia’s ruling party, the HDZ, should never have sent Gen. Gotovina to The Hague. That it was a precondition for Zagreb’s entry into the European Union only underscores how reckless and contrary to Croatia’s national interests fast-track European Union membership is. The HDZ claims it will help Gen. Gotovina’s legal team with the verdict’s appeal. This is a dollar short and a day late. The ICTY is a kangaroo court determined to make an example out of the Croatian general. His fate is sealed no matter what the Croatian government does – and HDZ leaders know this.

The HDZ regime is fundamentally treasonous. After having won the war, Zagreb is losing the peace. The HDZ has betrayed Gen. Gotovina, the country’s veterans and Croatia’s hard-won [ill-won] independence. It has sold Croatia down the river in a mad dash to appease Brussels. The HDZ must be defeated, swept into the dustbin of history and replaced with a new conservative party – one that will provide voters with a real patriotic-populist option.

TRANSLATION: The supremacist Croats need an even more nationalist option to surge in the polls than what they’ve already got — yet it’s Nikolic who’s the ‘odious nationalist’ and — oh no! — surging in the polls. As for appeasing Brussels, it seems — predictably — that Kuhner can’t handle even a taste of the identity-, security- and freedom-evisceration that the quisling Serbian regime has been serving up for Brussels and Washington for over a decade. Of course, the Croats are Nazis, so they could do with a little identity-evisceration.

Croatians must demand that Zagreb end its unconditional cooperation with the ICTY, withdraw its bid to join the EU, free Gen. Gotovina, have all cases at The Hague transferred to domestic courts and insist that the ICTY stop its assault on Croatia’s territorial legitimacy. In short, it is time to put Croatia first.

Right, because Croatians don’t already put Croatia first, second, and third. They don’t even sleep without thinking about their Croatian-ness. And yes, transfer the cases to that always reliable, impartial Croatian judiciary that’s been holding up its EU bid in the first place. (Though I agree that the EU isn’t a good thing — for anyone in it.)

The ICTY’s ruling has given ultranationalist Serbs what they want: another shot at splintering Croatia. The winds of war are blowing. Handing over Gen. Gotovina to The Hague was a colossal mistake. Zagreb will rue the day.

So the Balkan nation that has been the second-most recalcitrant cooperator with the Hague (Albania/Kosovo gets first place) — and while it’s been good and proper and compulsory that the Serbs cooperate with this sham institution — now needs to remove any and all cooperation. This long-coming, more justifiable target of the Hague gets just the slightest taste of the far more unrelenting persecution by the Hague that its neighbor Serbia has been dealing with for a much longer time, and — big surprise — its supremacist champions can’t handle it.

By the way, put me in a roomful of “ultranationalist Serbs ™” over Croatian “Democrats” any day.

The obvious question remains, but will never be entertained by the likes of Kuhner: Why is it OK for Croatians to defend and celebrate their national heroes-slash-war-criminals as Kuhner does, but that sort of thing gets bad press only when Serbs do it? The latter being at least as “shammily” convicted.

A few excerpts about the lovely Croatia and its systems that Kuhner has so much confidence in:

“…a country that long overlooked or justified crimes committed by its own people in the 1991-95 Serbo-Croat war.”
– Associated Press, May 30, 2008

“Croatia for years declined to prosecute its own, claiming that only Serbs committed crimes in the war.”
– Associated Press, June 18, 2007

“In general, ethnic bias continued to affect the investigation and prosecution by the Croatian judiciary of wartime human rights violations. There continued to be widespread impunity for crimes allegedly committed by members of the Croatian Army and police forces.”
– Amnesty International on the Croatian justice system, reviewing the year 2006

To the authorities in Croatia:
• War crimes prosecutions need to be brought without regard to ethnicity.
• Croatia should enhance efforts to investigate and prosecute incidents in which ethnic Croats were responsible for crimes against ethnic Serbs.
• Charging standards and sentencing practice should be the same for all defendants, regardless of their ethnic origin. Croatian prosecutors should cease the practice of indicting Serbs for war crimes on the basis of minor offences, where Croats alleged to have committed the same acts are not charged.
• Croatia should not discriminate on the basis of ethnicity in hiring judges. Returnee Serbian judges should not be discriminated against and should have an opportunity for employment in Croatian courts.

— 2004 HRW recommendations to Croatia

Glavas Case Raises Concerns About Croatian Judiciary
(Institute for War and Peace Reporting, Sept. 22, 2006)

…Branimir Glavas, a former general and member of parliament who has been one of the most powerful politicians in Croatia over the past 15 years, is accused of crimes against Serb civilians in Osijek, a city in eastern Slavonia near the border with Serbia, during the Croatian war in 1991.

The Zagreb District Court’s handling of the matter has been criticised as lax….Three months after the investigation into his case began, Glavas is still a free man, despite repeated requests from prosecutors to place him in custody…the accused is impeding the investigation by intimidating witnesses into changing their testimony.

But the Zagreb judge leading the investigation, Zdenko Posavec, has turned down all requests for custody, saying there is no proof that Glavas was behind any threats.

Charges brought against Glavas after a year-long investigation conducted by leading crime scene expert Vladimir Faber include the murder of at least two Serb civilians and the unlawful detention and mistreatment of many others.

The investigation followed claims by Krunoslav Fehir, a former member of a Croatian unit under Glavas’s command, that the general ordered gruesome extrajudicial executions of Serbs in Osijek.

Fehir alleged that Glavas ordered civilians to be imprisoned in his wartime headquarters, the National Defence Secretariat, where they were interrogated, tortured and finally killed. The alleged acts of torture included forcing acid from car batteries down their throats.

Fehir, who was only 16 at the time, admitted taking part in these crimes. He told Croatian investigators that one of the detainees, Cedomir Vuckovic, died shortly after he was forced to drink acid. He said that another Serb who had seen what happened, Djordje Petkovic, was executed on Glavas’s order. Petkovic’s body was never found.

Faber was dispatched from Zagreb to investigate allegations of war crimes in the city, because it had become apparent that the local police force would not be able to do so. The investigation was then shifted from Osijek to Zagreb for the sake of impartiality. [Or, at least, ‘lesser partiality.’]

Despite the serious nature of the accusations, there is no sign that Glavas will be arrested any time soon. Investigating judge Zdenko Posavec even allowed Glavas to travel to Germany this summer to watch the football World Cup.

According to police in Osijek, former soldiers who served under Glavas subsequently threatened some of the witnesses, leading the state prosecutor to demand his arrest – with no success.

“The case of Glavas and Fehir causes great concern and raises questions about Croatia’s ability to conduct war crimes investigations efficiently,” said Mary Wyckoff, who heads the law department of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s mission in Zagreb…“The investigative procedure should strengthen the public’s confidence in state institutions responsible for criminal investigations and proceedings. If this procedure is conducted properly, then its results – whatever they are – will be accepted as legitimate,” she explained. [Except that we’re dealing with a Croatian public, and it’s the opposite of impartiality that inspires confidence here.]

Because of the way the whole case has been handled, many observers suggest it has descended into farce.

Several legal experts told IWPR it was “scandalous” that Glavas has been allowed to defend himself as a free man. They argue that there are grounds for immediate detention, specifically the gravity of the allegations and the indications that the accused has used his liberty to influence witnesses.

Several witnesses who were questioned by the investigating judge have already significantly altered the original testimonies they gave to police.

Glavas even threatened some witnesses in the presence of investigative judge Posavec.

Ladislav Bognar, a university professor who was in the area where Glavas was in charge at the time of the events of 1991, says he found himself in an alarming position when he gave a statement to the authorities.

“Since the things I was saying were not really in Glavas’s favour, he attacked me right in front of judge Posavec. He called me a communist bastard and said I would get what I deserved,” said Bognar.

Glavas did not stop there – he launched his own web site on which he started posting witness testimonies. He stopped only when the investigating judge asked him to remove the material from the internet.

But he still used his website and media appearances to insult Faber, the investigating police officer, calling him “an immoral freak” and “human trash”. Nor did he spare other officials, calling State Prosecutor Mladen Bajic “rotten as a rotten tooth” and describing the judiciary as corrupt and politically influenced.

“I would much rather be tried in Banja Luka in Republika Srpska, because their judiciary is much more honest than Croatia’s,” he said in one of his public outbursts. […]

(Meanwhile, the force-feeding of battery acid to Serbs reminds me of the case of Azra Basic, the Kentucky woman whom Kuhner might have become fast friends with if she hadn’t been arrested last month on an Interpol warrant for making Serbs drink gasoline and drink blood from another Serb whose throat she’d slit — and made them eat Yugoslav currency. She also burned Serb faces, made prisoners crawl along broken glass, pulled out teeth and fingernails, cut off ears and enjoyed forehead-carving. One certainly wonders why Kuhner didn’t see fit to speak up in defense of this Croatian heroine.)

Amnesty chides Croatia for war crime probe failure (AP, Dec. 8, 2010)

Amnesty International on Thursday accused Croatia of failing to prosecute war crimes quickly and impartially, saying many perpetrators of brutalities may never face trial because of the country’s lack of will to investigate its painful history. [By which it means ‘pain-inflicting.’]

Despite promises by the government to aggressively probe war crimes committed during the country’s bloody 1991-1995 ethnic war with Serb rebels, the country only closes 18 cases each year, with about 700 cases yet to be prosecuted and many likely never to come to trial, the human rights watchdog said in a new report.

“Croatia must deal with its past in order to move forward” said Nicola Duckworth, Amnesty’s Europe and Asia director….Though there has been some progress, “justice has been slow in coming and very selective.”

The country has been reluctant to investigate the ethnic Croat majority, with three quarters of the accused being ethnic Serbs, the report said. Public allegations against several senior Croatian political and military officials – including the deputy speaker of parliament, for instance – have not been investigated, it said.

“Impunity for war crimes is a stumbling block toward membership” in the EU, Duckworth said.

Croatia long insisted that Serbs were the sole perpetrators of atrocities during the war, which began when the country’s minority Serbs rebelled against Croatia’s independence from Yugoslavia. That stance changed in 2000, when pro-Western governments began launching proceedings against some Croats, resulting in war crimes convictions of at least three senior officials and dozens of soldiers. […]

“Croatia refuses to hand over general accused of war crimes” (Guardian, Sept. 26, 2002)

Showdown with UN looms after indictment for massacre of Serbs in 1993 is defied

Croatia is engaged in a high-risk showdown with the United Nations war crimes tribunal in the Hague after refusing to hand over a former army chief indicted for war crimes against Serb civilians and wounded soldiers in 1993.

General Janko Bobetko, 83, who has retired, is the oldest person to be indicted by the tribunal and the most senior Croatian official demanded for extradition by the Hague.

[President Stipe] Mesic, a supporter of the Hague tribunal and a discreet critic of the Croatian government’s attempts to stall the handover of Gen Bobetko, will find himself presenting evidence against Mr Milosevic while his government is on the brink of breaking off cooperation with the court.

Gen Bobetko has robustly dismissed the charges. He and his many supporters are seeking to paint the indictment of an individual as an assault on Croatia. [See this tactic employed by their Albanian fellow nationalist-supremacists in Kosovo, vis-a-vis the murder-for-organs scandal.]

Army generals are picketing the government on his behalf and the Croatian Catholic church is urging the country to defy the international community.

An opinion poll yesterday found that 84% of Croats backed Gen Bobetko and almost as many favoured abandoning cooperation with the Hague. [One wonders if the other 16% are still breathing.]

The rightwing opposition, heirs to the late authoritarian president, Franjo Tudjman, is demanding constitutional changes to insulate Croats against the tribunal.

So that would place a Washington Times columnist named Jeffrey Kuhner in the category of heir to Franjo Tudjman.

Since the indictment bombshell was dropped last Friday, Gen Bobetko has repeatedly asserted that he will not be taken to the Hague alive.

A parade of prominent supporters [has] visited his luxury villa in Zagreb to demonstrate solidarity.

Although Gen Bobetko has admitted in his memoirs to the key role that his army played beyond Croatia in the 1992-95 war in Bosnia, the charges against him relate to a lightning Croatian army raid in the Medak pocket, south-west of Zagreb, in September 1993.

Serb separatist rebels [sic: the Croats were the separatists; Serbs were the opposite: federalists] had held the area since early in the war in 1991, but were flushed out in a matter of hours. The general did not take part in the battle, but was in overall charge.

The indictment says that scores of houses of Serb civilians were deliberately destroyed and that around 100 Serb civilians and wounded combatants were killed.

The former army chief faces charges on five counts of crimes against humanity; he is alleged to have been aware of the unlawful killings in September 1993 and to have done nothing to prevent them or to subsequently call those responsible to account.

“No government can challenge an indictment,” said Florence Hartmann, spokeswoman for the chief prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte.

But the government is doing just that, walking a tightrope and anxious to avoid a full-blown political dispute with the Hague while opening “a legal dispute”.

It argues that the events of September 1993 were a legitimate police operation to “combat terrorism” on sovereign and internationally recognised Croatian territory, and that the aim was not “ethnic cleansing” of the indigenous Serb population. [Yet again! Just as in Storm, “ethnic cleansing” wasn’t the aim at all!]

Cardinal Josip Bozanic, the powerful archbishop of Zagreb and the head of the Croatian Catholic church, called on the country yesterday to “unite in the face of the external pressure”.

Which of course brings us to the Croatian Catholic Church. Before announcement of the verdicts this month, the Croatian Catholic Church — and I do mean to differentiate this mutant critter from the Catholic Church at large even if the Vatican is disturbingly reluctant to do so — called on Croatians to fast and pray for acquittals or close to it.

What other church does this? What other church is this inseparable from, and intertwined with, nationhood? And vice versa: what country is this inseparable from the church? What other church involves itself with, and is so invested in, the fate of war criminals?

Unless, of course, we’re talking about Islam and Muslims. Indeed, the fanaticism of the Croatian church comes second only to that much discussed phenomenon.

As a letter by Michael Pravica published in The Washington Times on Monday responded to Kuhner:

…I’m only sorry that more of the guilty weren’t prosecuted for crimes ranging from bombing fleeing columns of refugees, raping and slaughtering elderly grandmothers, beating up Orthodox Christian nuns and trying to hide the grisly evidence after wiping out entire villages with the approval, aid and encouragement of Franjo Tudjman’s government.

The greatest unresolved problem in the Balkans pertains to the largely unreported and uncompensated genocide of Serbian Orthodox Christians, Jews and Roma in Croatia during World War II. Hundreds of thousands of innocents were slaughtered, ethnically cleansed from a “Greater Croatia”…and forcibly converted to Roman Catholicism. Today’s Croatia differs little from the Croatia of that time in its hatred of anything Serbian since the country was never properly de-Nazi- fied…

If Croatia is unable to accept responsibility for crimes committed by its citizens [in both wars], Mr. Kuhner may be correct in asserting that there will be a far more vicious war between Croatia and Serbia.

I close with more from Ambassador Bissett on this point:

Croatia has never acknowledged its role in the Second World War as a loyal ally of the Nazi cause, and its ardent participation in genocide against its Serbian, Jewish and Gypsy (Roma) populations…

When Hitler’s forces invaded Yugoslavia in the spring of 1941, Croatian right wing extremists, under the leadership of Ante Pavelic and his fascist “Ustashi” movement, were given control of Croatia. Pavelic [also a national Croatian hero — just look inside any Croatian Cultural Center anywhere in the world] aligned the country enthusiastically to the Nazi cause and immediately launched a horrific onslaught against the Serbian minority. The official policy was openly expressed. It was: kill one third of the Serbs, convert another third to Catholicism and expel the remaining third from Croatia.

In the early spring and summer of 1941 thousands of innocent Serbs were slaughtered in the most barbaric fashion by Ustashi killers. Serbian orthodox churches were burned and many Serbian communities wiped out. As the war progressed, Serbs, Jews and Gypsies were interned in concentration camps where thousands of victims were slaughtered like animals by having their throats slit or beaten to death by mallets or axes.

The nature of the carnage was so horrific that senior ranking German officers in Croatia, including SS Obergruppenfuhrer Arthur [Phleps], sickened by the slaughter and worried that it was driving Serbians and anti-Ustashi Croats into the ranks of resistance groups, urged Berlin to demand a stop to the slaughter. These protests were in vain and the genocide continued. Senior Italian officers also were appalled at the killing and are on record of not only complaining but frequently offering protection to fleeing victims.

When the war ended and Tito’s communists took command of Yugoslavia, they had no desire to come to terms with or make an accounting of the dreadful events that had taken place in Croatia. Yugoslavia’s slogan was “Brotherhood and Unity.” Every effort was made to bury the past and as Yugoslavia soon became an ally in the Cold War against the Soviet Union, the Western democracies had little interest in exposing the genocide.

Twice in the twentieth century Croatia has managed to get away with violating the most basic standards of international human behavior — including genocide — without being called to account. Even today Pavelic and Tudjman are looked upon by many Croatians as national heroes, as are some of the most vicious Ustashi criminals…Crowds at Croatian soccer games and concerts flaunt Ustashi and Nazi symbols and sing old fascist chants and songs. Croatia marks August 5 as a national holiday commemorating the expulsion of the Serbs by “Operation Storm.” Croatians indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia are also hailed as defenders of the nation…

Croatia needs to purge itself of its dark past. Its prolonged denial of outrageous crimes committed in the 20th century has created what the Croatian exiled writer Dubravka Ugresic has described as a “culture of lies.” […]

Washington Times columnist Jeffrey T. Kuhner is every bit a part of that culture. Indeed, one wonders if the ‘T’ is for Tudjman. When it comes to Croatian supremacism, Kuhner is what’s called a case study. If only the Washington Times editorial board and management could comprehend what is in their house, their blood would freeze. What they have is a ‘colleague’ who is Za Dom, Spremni! Editors, if you don’t know what that means — and naturally you don’t — it’s the WWII Croatian-Nazi slogan “For the Homeland, Ready!” — and your boy Kuhner is.


Soros and Human Rights Watch: a Match made in Hell

by Phantom Ace ( 132 Comments › )
Filed under Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Liberal Fascism, Progressives, Tranzis at September 13th, 2010 - 4:30 pm

Tranzi Totalitarian Progressive and vile human, George Soros is at it again. This time he links up with the Islamic supporting, Anti-American and Anti-Semitic organization Human Rights Watch. This organization pretends to be non partisan and fair. By allying with George Soros, their mask has been ripped off and they are now being seen for what their true colors are. It’s just another front group for the Progressive-Islamic Axis.

In accepting a huge grant from George Soros, Human Rights Watch has spurned the public advice (and warning) offered nearly a year ago by its founder Robert Bernstein. Rather than grapple with the serious problems of credibility and bias, HRW Executive Director Kenneth Roth has cemented relations with Soros — a partisan ideologue who also supports Moveon.org, a controversial advocacy group.
 
[…]
 
Over the years, HRW lost its moral compass and substituted ideology and an Israel-obsessed agenda. Bernstein was trying to awaken the group’s leaders to the decayed state of what was once a human-rights superpower
 
[…]
 
In May 2009, HRW launched a fund-raising drive in Saudi Arabia, using its anti-Israel record to solicit funds from “prominent members of Saudi society.” That September, HRW “senior military analyst” Marc Garlasco was “outed” as an avid collector of Nazi memorabilia — a troubling hobby for the main author of a number of HRW reports that accused Israel of “war crimes” and other violations.

Read the rest: Selling Out to SorosRights group’s dubious record

Human Rights is an anti-American concept as we have Individual rights. Human Rights Watch and George Soros are vile creatures who seek to empower Progressive and Islamic movements. It’s time to stop caring about human rights and focus only on what America’s interests are. HWC and Soros are enemies of this nation and they need to be exposed as the evil people they are.

‘Human Rights’ Is The New ‘Race Card’

by 1389AD ( 142 Comments › )
Filed under Afghanistan, Canada, Censorship, Cold War, Dhimmitude, Free Speech, Islamists, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Political Correctness, Spain, Tranzis at September 8th, 2010 - 8:30 am

buzzsawmonkey sums it up

Here is a brief essay that buzzsawmonkey posted as a comment in a recent guest post by huckfunn, namely American Sovereignty Under Attack By U.S. State Department:

“Human rights,” and “human rights” language, have increasingly infiltrated domestic political discourse over the last 40-odd years.

It began when the Civil Rights Movement, having been hijacked by the Marxists, separatists and Islamists, began demanding rights over and above the civil rights that King and the original movement had been rightly seeking.

It continued when the gay-rights movement, which could not lay claim to “sexual preference or orientation” being a suspect classification under Constitutional law (as “race” was, and is), began demanding recognition, and concessions, on a “human rights” basis.

It has continued since the Islamist movement, which took its playbook entirely from the gay-rights movement (including adoption of the bogus “-ophobia” locution), began demanding special rights over and above the freedom of religion which everyone enjoys.

buzzsawmonkey sums it up very well indeed.

The hard-left origin and pro-jihadi agenda of the ‘human rights’ movement

Now for some background on just how the Marxists got everyone started on this spurious ‘human rights’ rhetoric, and just a few examples of how the tranzi-progressive/jihadist convergence has been using ‘human rights’ mudslinging to further the jihadi agenda.

I have previously blogged about the true origins and purpose of Amnesty International in The True Genesis of Amnesty International: It’s not what you might think!:

And if you have ever suspected that Amnesty International is anything but politically neutral, despite its stated policy of representing “prisoners of conscience” from both the left and the right, you will learn exactly how and why your suspicions are correct.

According to Veliz:

The Cold War experience would also have confirmed Münzenberg’s conviction that waged urbi et orbi, such campaigns would be ignored inside a communist world undisturbed by a free press and public opinion, but would undermine the moral status of policies advanced by the United States and its allies.

Any organization, especially one that was founded on corrupt principles to begin with, is liable to become even more corrupt over time. It can become a magnet for self-serving, greedy, malevolent, and in every way unsavory characters, along with some outright psychopaths and sickos.

It is no surprise that organizations such as Amnesty International that supported the Communist agenda during the Cold War, currently use use the same tactics to support the jihadi agenda now that the Muslim world is our primary enemy. All the while, employees of such organizations enrich themselves and promote their own careers.

Cartoon showing human rights 'serving the poor' to alleviate their OWN poverty

Also see:


‘Human rights’ rhetoric is a fig leaf for jihadism and shari’a

During the Cold War, Amnesty International and similar organizations knew that their protests against abuses on the part of Communist-bloc countries were empty and ineffectual posturing, intended only to give themselves a veneer of impartiality, that would be ignored within territory controlled by Communist governments. They also knew that their protests against non-Communist governments would do immense damage to the free world. They were correct on both counts.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, ‘human rights’ NGOs and activists have successfully repurposed themselves, but their agenda against Judaeo-Christian civilization remains unchanged. They know full well that their protests against the truly evil practices taking place within Islamic countries are an empty show that will be ignored by the authorities and will have no effect in slowing the spread of jihadism and shari’a. On the other hand, their exaggerated protests against even the most minimal efforts on the part of non-Muslim individuals, governments, and communities to protect themselves against jihadism and creeping shari’a are likely to have a crippling impact on the survival of the non-Muslim world.

If you aren’t visiting Jihad Watch every day, you’re missing a lot of valuable information about what is going on in the world:

Jihad Watch: Mission Not Accomplished: Taliban, Sharia making comeback in Afghanistan

“…reconciliation with the Taliban will encourage conservative Islamic clerics and hard-line Islamists, including the moderate elements of the Taliban, to push for the implementation of a harsh justice system that would directly contradict the human-rights guarantees enshrined in the current Afghan Constitution.”

Too late. The human rights guarantees enshrined in the current Afghan Constitution are already hollow and subject to Sharia. Just ask Abdul Rahman, the celebrated Afghan convert from Islam to Christianity a few years ago.

Jihad Watch: Spain: Catalonian parliament rejects burqa ban

…So, politics matter more than principles?

Nine municipalities in Catalonia, including Barcelona, have banned the use of face-covering Islamic veils in public or are considering doing so.

Human rights group Amnesty International had called on the Catalan deputies to reject the motion.

“Any wide-ranging ban will violate the rights to freedom of expression and religion of those women who choose to wear a full-face veil as an expression of their identity or beliefs,” said John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s expert on discrimination in Europe.

“Women should be free to choose what and what not to wear. This is their right under international human rights law.”

While you’re at it, tell that to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan. And while you’re at it, tell it to the women who have been harassed, threatened, raped, and subjected to beatings and honor killings in the Muslim world for choosing not to wear the veil, or for not veiling enough. Or are those countries “more equal than others” in being allowed to state the norms of behavior for their societies?

Jihad Watch: Amnesty International suspends women’s rights activist who questioned its partnership with Taliban supporter

Dhimmitude, cowardice, craven opportunism, and blind Leftist America-hatred. An update on this story, “Embattled Gender Analyst Leaves Post at Amnesty,” from Women’s eNews, n.d. (thanks to Morgaan Sinclair):

Gita Sahgal calls her entry into the world of journalism “sort of accidental,” but her most recent news appearances have been entirely on purpose.

On Feb. 7, the Sunday Times of London published her sharp critique of Amnesty International’s support for former Guantanamo prisoner Moazzam Begg. She went public, the article says, because her internal warnings had been ignored.

Amnesty, the nearly 50-year-old rights group founded to speak on behalf of prisoners of conscience, has hailed Begg as a human rights defender, hosted him on speaking tours and included him in a meeting with politicians at Downing Street.

Sahgal has called him “Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban.” She points to passages in his 2006 autobiography, Enemy Combatant, where he describes moving to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan to “live in an Islamic state–one that was free from the corruption and despotism of the rest of the Muslim world.” He also ran a bookstore in Birmingham, England, that sold works by known al-Qaida mentor Abdullah Azzam.

Jihad Watch: Amnesty International throws human rights under the bus, endorses ‘defensive jihad’

The clueless dhimmis at AI have no idea, I’m sure, that every jihad being waged around the world today is cast by the jihadis as defensive — in the absence of a caliph, an offensive jihad would be illegal according to Sharia. Thus Osama bin Laden, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and all the rest have explained the most vile acts of mass murder as “defensive jihad.” And that is apparently just fine with Amnesty International.

“Row over support for ‘defensive jihad,'” by Hasan Suroor in The Hindu, April 2 (thanks to Twostellas):

LONDON: Leading South Asian rights campaigners have accused Amnesty International of “undermining” the rights movement, especially the campaign against sex and gender discrimination, by working with extremist — often misogynist — groups engaged in what they claim is “defensive jihad”.

The row follows remarks by Claudio Cordone, its secretary-general, that “defensive jihad” was not “antithetical” to human rights. He made the comments in response to a Global Petition from rights activists questioning Amnesty’s alliance with Cageprisoners, founded by Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo Bay prisoner and dubbed “Britain’s most famous supporter of the Taliban” by a former Amnesty official.

Also, be sure to read this comment. It is too long to reprint here in its entirety, and excerpting it would not do it justice.

‘Human rights’ as a tool to muzzle the counterjihad movement

This is from the redoubtable Canadian journalist and blogger, Ezra Levant:

Ezra Levant: Richard Warman must hand over his computer for inspection

It’s been months since I’ve given a report about the nuisance SLAPP lawsuits that Canada’s illiberal censors have unleashed against me. As longtime readers will know, I was targeted by Canada’s Orwellian human rights industry back in 2006 when they falsely prosecuted me for publishing the Danish cartoons of Mohammed in a magazine, and I dared to fight back instead of go meekly.

Those bullies dropped the cartoon prosecution against me (after 15 government bureaucrats and lawyers dined out on me for 900 days), leaving me with $100,000 in legal bills. (Thank you for helping me pay that bill, dear reader.) But then the most aggressive members of the human rights industry proceeded to punish me by filing over 20 law society complaints and five defamation suits against me, which have been proceeding ever since.

Today’s story in the National Post about one of those lawsuits seems like a good opportunity to give an update.

Warman must hand over his neo-Nazi records

The Post story is headlined “Lawyer who launched libel suit against Ezra Levant ordered to hand over computer”, and that’s a pretty accurate summary of what happened this week. In brief, an Ontario judge has ordered Richard Warman, a former Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) staffer and Canada’s most prolific censor, to hand over a copy of his laptop computer to an independent forensic expert, who will search it for evidence relevant to Warman’s Nazi activities…

Now that the ‘race card’ is overdrawn…

Large smiley with green eyeshade, playing cards

…watch out for the 'human rights' card.

The 'race card' has been overplayed for so long that people can recognize its tattered edges and dog-eared corners. It no longer works so well as a club to hit Tea Partiers, antijihadists, and other non-leftists over the head with, because too many people start laughing whenever it appears.

The 'human rights' card is still in active circulation, and it's our job to put a stop to it. Whenever you hear 'human rights' rhetoric used by anyone, especially in the presence of the '-ophobia' meme, be suspicious and inquire further.

True, people sometimes use ‘human rights’ rhetoric to complain about a genuine injustice against someone. That’s a good opportunity for us to introduce a more accurate term into the debate, such as injustice or cruelty or tyranny or violation of Constitutional rights – whatever terminology is best suited to the circumstances.

Generally speaking, the term ‘human rights’ is used as a weapon against Judaeo-Christian civilization and a weapon to advance the tranzi-progressive/jihadist coalition. Whenever we see that, it’s time for us to call it out as a leftist code-word and refuse to give it any further legitimacy.


Update: More comments by buzzsawmonkey

Apologies in advance for the post-pimp/repetition, but my first post in the thread referenced at the top of this one bears re-reading:

At the risk of repeating myself, I would remind people that “human rights” are, by their nature, antithetical to the concept of liberty as enshrined in the American Constitution.

“Human rights” are dispensations doled out by the government to the people. The “human rights” view of the world is that government is the source of, and grantor of, rights. What this means, in practice, is that the government can grant or withhold “human rights” at its pleasure, and may give “human rights” to those groups it finds worthy on the basis of the government’s own criteria.

The US Constitution is fundamentally different. It presumes that human beings have liberty—which is to say, citizens can do whatever they want except as their actions must be circumscribed by the government for the common good and maintenance of public order. To ensure that this circumscription is as minimal as possible, and that liberty is therefore as great as possible, the powers granted to the government are limited and enumerated—and civil rights, enforced by the rule of law, grant citizens rights against the government to ensure that the government does not exceed the limitations of its charter.

Thus, “human rights” presume that government is all-powerful, and grants rights to the people—or withholds them—at its will. The Constitution presumes that people are free, that government is limited, and that such restrictions on people’s freedom as are necessary are further limited by the safeguards of civil rights.

Any attempt to overlay a “human rights” model on the liberty and civil rights enshrined in the Constitution is an attack on the Constitution and the very idea of the United States.