SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tom Clarke who wrote (17151)10/11/2000 11:06:26 AM
From: Andy Thomas  Respond to of 17770
 
--
Message #17151 from CharleyMane at Oct 11, 2000 7:04 AM
Its terrible that some people want their own country and an end of welfare to the French.

--

i see that the fruits of socialism are being borne over there.

andy



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (17151)10/11/2000 12:39:23 PM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Respond to of 17770
 
Re: It's terrible that some people want their own country and an end of welfare to the French.

I'm afraid things are not that simple.... If it was merely a question of "people longing for their own country" then you'll have to factor in ALL the parameters --not just economics but demographics, military, and foreign alliances as well.... Get the picture? It brings us back in 1939, on the brink of WWII. Is it really in Flanders's best interest to thrive amidst a wasteland? Surrounded by inimical, resentful communities? Actually, that question is true for Europe as a whole: the EU is like a vast, prosperous Flanders surrounded by impoverished Eastern neighbors and overpopulated Mediterranean outcasts....



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (17151)10/13/2000 4:29:26 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Respond to of 17770
 
Israeli media and the war against Croatia

From the very beginning of the disintegration of Yugoslavia, the Israeli media tended to take a clearly pro-Serbian stand. This was true of reports on what was going on, but was particularly pronounced in attempts to analyze and interpret the developments. There was no trace of sympathy for the attacked as against the aggressor, for the defenseless civilian population on the receiving end of the artillery, navy and air force of the Serbian war machine, which one might have expected and thought natural. Moreover, an invidious policy seemed to be at work in the op. ed. pages: there was no end to letters to the editor and opinion articles that took a pro-Serbian position, while the number of pieces showing sympathy for Serbia's victims was negligible. I have not done research on this, but do know that the Jerusalem Post - a leading Israeli daily, particularly important in this contest because it is published in English - which has carried numerous pro-Serbian letters to the editor and opinion articles, refused to publish quite a few letters and articles that expressed sympathy for Slovenia, Croatia, or Bosnia-Herzegovina. Thus it was adding insult to injury when a member of the Serbian lobby in Israel, writing in the same paper, found it "remarkable that of the 12,000 to 15,000 Yugoslav Jews and their descendants living in Israel today, many raise their voices on behalf of Serbia, but not a single one has a good word to say about Croatia."

The activity of the Serbian lobby should probably be seen as part of the explanation. The lobby is an informal one, but is very well organized and financed, and includes some well-known media personalities. Enjoying an uncontested monopoly on analyzing, explaining, and interpreting the events in the ex-Yugoslavia well into the summer of 1992, it employed all the main methods the regime in Belgrade has been using in putting across at home and abroad what the Serbs call "the Serbian truth": flatly denying the facts, no matter how obvious; diminishing the dimensions of the devastation the Serbs were wreaking on neighboring republics and the numbers of casualties; explaining away the reports of Serbian atrocities by the "anti-Serbian tendencies" of Western media or, alternatively, as the propaganda of those who stood in the way of Greater Serbia. The Serbian lobby also adopted all the main tenets of Belgrade propaganda, insisting that the current war was to be understood as a direct continuation of World War II in Yugoslavia, spreading the Serbian revision of its history, and drawing far-reaching moral and political conclusions from these premises.

In a typical article, the author deplored the fact that when World War II was over, Tito did not permit "mass pogroms [of Croats] which would have drenched liberated Yugoslavia in another bloodbath." and "put on trial only those who [had] perpetrated war crimes." The inevitable conclusion was that the current mass pogroms of Croats at the hands of Chetniks and the "Federal" army were sheer justice, long overdue.

In another article, we were told that any unpleasant connotations of the word Chetnik was due to Croatian propaganda. Conventional Yugoslav history has it that it was the Partisans led by Tito and the Communist Party who fought the German, Italian, and other occupying armies and their local allies, such as Croat Ustashe and Serb Chetniks, and against overwhelming odds achieved what no one else in Europe could: the liberation of their country by themselves, rather than by the Allied forces. Now we learn that it was Chetniks, not the "Partisans" (the quotation marks are the writer's), who were true freedom fighters. The Chetniks of today are freedom fighters too, defending the right of the Serbs "to stay what they are, keeping their heritage... unmolested and together," rather than being a minority in any place. "Surely" we [the Jews] of all people should feel sympathetic to this sentiment," the writer says in conclusion. This call tor Jewish sympathy and support for the Chetniks was published at the time world media were reporting in some detail how Chetniks were rounding up Muslim civilians in the towns and villages of eastern Bosnia, from Foca in the south all the way to Zvornik and further north, massacring them (mostly by cutting their throats with knives), and throwing the bodies into the Drina, thus repeating the same things World War II Chetniks had done throughout the region.
_______________
hr

I presume that, following the exposition of Israel's anti-Croatian flak, a staunch Catholic like you, Charley, would just flounce in.... wouldn't you?



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (17151)10/17/2000 5:34:28 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Respond to of 17770
 
Charley,

Here's a good press digest exposing the Flemish standpoint on Belgium and the French/Flemish divide:

vvb.org

You may want to start with the articles on Brussels.... Actually, there's a striking similarity between Jerusalem and Brussels: both cities have fallen prey to a tug-of-love between rival communities. Indeed Brussels could somehow be viewed as a European Jerusalem populated with 85% French-speaking "Palestinians" and less than 15% "Jew-minded" Flemings whose long-term scheme is to reverse history and regain Brussels as a full-flegded, Flemish city.... We may even think of Brussels' outskirts as of East Jerusalem --although, over here, the colon/native issue comes the other way around.... Brussels is surrounded by Flemish suburbs like Dilbeek, Vilvoorde, Wemmel, Zaventem, etc. However, the affluent French-speaking bourgeoisie has always found it fashionable to live in these quiet, bucolic districts, far from the city's nuisances. Yet, overall, the Brussels region is a predominantly Francophone area. So far, "ethnic" tensions have not intensified as in Israel but if a Flemish "Ariel Sharon" (say, a Vlaams Blok politico) were ever to bombastically show off around an immigrant district (say, Molenbeek), he could get the same welcome as the Israeli one....



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (17151)10/18/2000 12:20:10 PM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 17770
 
RED-HOT FROM THE CATHOLIC WIRE....

5. BELGIUM: LAW PROFESSOR IS CANDIDATE FOR FLEMISH BLOCK IN COMMUNAL ELECTIONS
by Koenraad Denayer, Antwerp


For the second time during the last months, a professor of the renowned Catholic University of Leuven (KUL) in Flanders has turned out to be a politically controversial figure. In May this year, Urbain Vermeulen, Professor of Arabic, made several derogatory statements concerning Islamic, in particular Turkish and Arab cultures. Last week it became clear that Luc Lamine, professor of Law, will be a candidate for the far-right Flemish Block in the coming local elections of 8 October. The professor declared to agree with the Block's infamous 70-points-programme, which is considered strictly discriminatory and racist by the majority of democratic parties.

Rector André Oosterlinck of the Catholic University of Leuven limited his reaction to a warning that the law professor must not damage the name or fame of the university. Lamine himself had said before that he would be mostly surprised if the Rector intervened in a more significant way: "Whatever I do outside university is nobody's business", he stated. Cengiz Barskanmaz, a third-year law student of Turkish origin at the University of Leuven, does not agree. "Professors have a lot of power over students, so shouldn't they be as neutral as possible? This professor agrees with the programme of a political party that does not recognise the rights of part of the population. I think that is not compatible with the Christian-humane vision of the Catholic University of Leuven."

From:
amarc.org

BTW, what happened to the 20,000 Kosovar refugees who were granted temporary residence in the US on the outbreak of NATO's Kosovo campaign (in Spring 1999)? Are they still in the US or did you send them back?