From: stojanov@husc10.harvard.edu (Milan Stojanovic)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia
Subject: Re: Fascism Reawakens in Croatia, Charges Jewish Leader
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:05:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Aug19.190556.14914
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Aug19.214145.7420@src.umd.edu> josip@src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) writes:
>Mr. Stojanovic has moved this debate from facts to attacks on my person.  He 
>has apparently run out of arguments...  my response could be long and boring, 
>because defense against personal attacks usually is, but for the record I'm 
>obliged to respond.  Sigh...

Pure you.  Excuse to avoid admitting that you tried to 
lie and got caught.

>
>>In article <1992BAug19.145407.1432@src.umd.edu> josip@src.umd.edu (Josip 
>Loncaric
>>) writes:
>>>In article <1992Aug18.201614.27851@cs.yale.edu> pavlovic-milan@CS.YALE.EDU 
>(Milan Pavlovic) writes:
>>>
>>>>is a reawakening of fascism and genocidal policy in Croatia.  I will quote
>>>>an article from "The Jewish Advocate", of January 24-30, 1992.
>>>>Without permission, for academic purposes only.
>>>>===========================================================================
>===
>>>>      Fascism Reawakens in Croatia, Charges Jewish Leader
>>>>
>>>>By Klara Mandic
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>Mrs. Madic is a Serbian propagandist and not Jewish at all.
>>                                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>Josip
>>
>>I am surprised how far are you ready to go in this.
>>Mrs. Mandic is Jewish. I would like to believe that you are
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Your information is incorrect.
>

Sir, By some chances my parents know her.  She is a Jewish.  
Period.

>>not such a pathological liar, that you are just naive and
>>believe everything you read in the third rate Croatian Journals.
>>Although in the appended article, which I decided at first not
>>to post, I will show that you have once again used the same
>>method.  Lie, avoid to apologize, hoping that your
>>lie would stay as a truth in at least some readers' heads.
>
>I'm stating what I know.  She's a Serbian part of the "Serbian-Jewish 
>Friendship Society" whose primary purpose is to smear Croats as fascists.  
>I'll dig up some references: the information that Mrs. Mandic is Serbian and 
>not Jewish at all dates back to the January-March 1992 timeframe.  I should 

She was one of the initiators, from the Jewish side.  Your information
is definitely not correct. She might be the same as Mosha Pijade a 
Serbian-Jewish but that is hardly "not at all."

>point out that the Croatian Jewish community disputes the charge of 
>"reawakening fascism" in Croatia.  These charges are Belgrade propaganda with 
>the goal of starting and justifying a war against Croatia.

Yes, they were warned by blowing up the Synagogue in Zagreb. 


>-------------------------------------------------------------------End Quote.
>
>Mrs. Mandic has been helping Mr. Milosevic with the propaganda part of his war 
>to carve out a Greater Serbia out of former Yugoslavia.

So far this is the only argument I have seen that she is not Jewish.
Are you judging someones religion/nationality by ones political
attitudes?


>
>>In article <1992Aug17.195333.3934@src.umd.edu> Josip Loncaric wrote:
>>>In article 
><1992Aug17.111555.29514@cco.caltech.edu>simic@pollux.ccsf.caltech.edu
>>>
>>>Milosevic has used other lies as well: Croatian Constitution guarantees
>>>equality to all of her citizens; but the claim was made that it does not.
>>>Croats were all along extending a hand to their Serbian minority,
>>>guaranteeing full equality and cultural autonomy, even after some had
>>>(with Milosevic's support) staged a rebellion in August of 1990.
>>>All of this could have been solved by negotiations, but Milosevic
>>>wanted war -- and "all Serbs in one state", no matter how many non-Serbs
>>>have to be killed or "cleansed".
>>
>>"The lie repeated many times would become truth" - guess whom?
>>You forget to say that before the armed rebellion, Croats ( even before
>>Tudjman comming to power ) refused to negotiate even cultural
>>autonomy with Serbs.  Statements like:" Serbs have no culture, so
>>why cultural autonomy" were thrown at their faces ( compare: "thousand
>>years old culture") as a reason for not even discussing autonomy.
>
>This is ridiculous.  You HAVE seen the Croatian Constitution -- it was even 
>posted here -- so why do you persist in making false accusations?  Cultural 
>autonomy is one of the rights explicitly guaranteed by the constitution.  
>Croatia's role model in the area of human rights is Europe, not Serbia.
>

Ah, you again.  The same thing over and over.  I have seen the Croatian
constitution after the rebellion happened.  Stop confusing the 
auditorium. 

>>>The Constitutional guarantees you ask for HAVE been given by the Croats,
>>>in their 1990 Constitution as well as in the additional laws, and the
>>>result was deemed to surpass the European standards.  But this had never
>>>been THE problem; only the Serbian war against (initially) defenseless
>>>civilian population of Croatia has made it a problem.
>>
>>Again, all attempts by Serbs, those around Raskovic ( Tudjman eliminated
>>him nicely, as Ivan Zvonimir Cicak, a Croatian politician, noted, by
>>publishing details from their confidential conversation ), from Knin,
>>and Hadzic , were refused by Tudjman government, afraid of
>>looking whimpy on Serbian issue, thus breaking the election campaign
>>promise.
>
>Raskovic was courted by Tudjman to join Tudjman's government upon his election 
>but Raskovic refused.  See The New Yorker, March 18, 1991.
>

So what?  Why did he refuse is the better question.  And what happened to 
him after Tudjman published secretly taped conversations with him.

>>In article <1992Aug17.181411.2958@src.umd.edu> Josip Loncaric wrote:
>>>In article <1992Aug17.111331.29428@cco.caltech.edu> 
>simic@pollux.ccsf.caltech.edu (Petar Simic) writes:
>>>>      Josip Loncaric writes:
>>>>
>>>>  One correction: Belgrade gas chambers were operated by local Serbs...
>>>>
>>>>  I have one thing to say: Serbian Jews experienced the same fate as
>>>>  Croatian Jews.  In Serbia, there was the Belgrade gas chamber,
>>>>  in Croatia, Jasenovac.  Both were operated by the local authorities,..
>>>>
>>>>      ...Josip
>>>><<<
>>>>
>>>>      This, of course is, LIE. I challenge you to provide a quote from
>>>> the credible historic document which would point the blame for operating
>>>> a gas van, which was brought in spring of '42 from Berlin to Serbia and 
>used
>>>  ^^^^^^^^^
>>>I've remembered the word "gas chamber" but until I've checked Encyclopedia
>>>Judaica" did not realize that it was mobile.  The complicity of Nedic's
>>>Serbian quisling government, however, is well documented, even in Serbian
>>>sources.  For example, I'd suggest you to consult the book
>>
>>This is a beautiful example.  From definite statement that Serbs were
>>operating gas chambers, to complicity in doing this. Do people learn
>>such things on a special course?  
>
>No, people make mistakes when typing from their terminal without having a 
>relevant history book in front of their eyes.
>
>My point in this posting was to show that some Serbs have never faced ugly 
>parts of their own history.  This selective memory of the past has been 
>successfully exploited by Milosevic to start the present ugly war.  I should 
>have been much more specific with my statement, rather than relying on memory.
>

Then you say.  I made a mistake.  I am only a human.  Do not try
to further confuse the issues.
And strange mistake.  How did it happen?

>NOW: Let us see how Mr. Stojanovic exploits this mistake:
>---------------------------------------------------------
>
>>Also, note how the burden of lie
>>has been "professionally" shifted from the big one, i.e. Serbs operating
>>the gas chambers ( or van, as if that matters), to the much smaller,
>>simple mistake, ie, chambers vs. vans.  Also one part is deleted here,
>>the one where it is described where the van was used - in Sajmiste,
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>remember this, reader!
>
>This, of course, twists history.  Read below - and remember that Jajinci was a 
>village near Belgrade where people were being routinely shot.
>

Ts, Ts.  It started in Sajmiste, which was in Croatia. So Nedic government
had nothing to do with it.  

>>>
>>>"Banjica", Historical Archives of Belgrade, Belgrade, 1967.
>>>
>>>This book clearly shows that (1) Germans were not working alone, (2) that
>>>Banjica was primarily staffed by Serbs, (3) that the concentration camp was
>>>funded by Belgrade municipal budget, (4) that the camp chief was Svetozar
>>>Vujkovic, a Serb.  Banjica camp processed over 23,000 people many of whom
>>>were Jews and children.  Many people were shot not by Germans but by
>>>Serbian guards.  The prisoner lists were kept in Serbian, in cyrillic 
>script.
>>>
>>>Besides Banjica, Belgrade also had nearby camps Topovske Supe and Jajinci.
>>>Sajmiste was a camp in Zemun, across the river Sava (present day Serbia,
>>>but then a part of the NDH).  A group of Jewish refugees had been
>>>captured and deported from Sajmiste, then gassed en route from Sajmiste
>>>to Jajinci.  A Serbian company had a contract to collect their clothing.
>>>Source (besides Encyclopedia Judaica):
>>
>>Now, this one is simple to confuse readers unaware of the geography and
>>history of the region.
>
>It seems quite clear to me.
>
>>- "Nedic government complicity is well documented" - he quotes
>>Banjica, while Sajmiste was a place where van was used.
>
>No, the van was used en route from Sajmiste to Jajinci, in Serbia, where a 
>Serbian company had a contract to collect clothing.  Jajinci was a major 
>killing ground in Serbia.  The people who were gassed were captured in Sabac, 
>in Serbia; some were shot and others deported to Sajmiste for a few months; 
>then gassed while en route to Jajinci, again in Serbia.
>
>>- "Nedic government complicity is well documented" - he mentiones
>>some company contracting to collect clothing.
>
>As well as Serbian funding, Serbian guards, Serbian prisoner lists, and
>shooting of prisoners including children by these Serbian guards.
>

In Banjica, not Sajmiste.  You are ..., ugh. 

>>-Bringing confusion by mentioning names like: Banjica, Sajmiste, Jajinci.
>>        -Jajinci - execution and mass grave place, where hostages were
>>executed and their bodies buried.  Run by Germans, the most often
>>used method firing squads ( squads with machine guns). The most of
>>the victims were hostages taken all around Serbia, some resistance fighters.
>>Victims were brought from Banjica, either after request from Germans,
>>in the case of hostages, or in the case of resistance fighters
>>by request of Nedic government special police.  Number of people killed
>>on Jajinci is usually included in Number given for Banjica. because
>>most of them passed through Banjica.
>>        -Banjica - not a death camp, but concentration camp.  Hostages
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Incorrect.  It WAS a death camp, people held there were taken out to be shot 
>in groups ranging from 100 to 300, day by day.
>


In Jajinci.  Again.  And in your last posting you claimed that 20-30.000
people were killed in Banjica.  So check your math.


>>were kept there, under the request from Germans.  Special police had
>>secondary authority there, and kept resistance fighters.
>>Some people resisting, were really killed there by Serbian police.
>
>Including at least 128 children shot by Serbian guards, according to the 
>reference I've quoted.  Do you really believe that only "some people 
>resisting" were killed by Serbian police?
>

In Jajinci, by Germans.  Would you mind posting the whole thing
about children.  What children?  Serbian children by Serbian Guard?
I have to mention Mrs. Klara Mandic and gas van here.

>>The other use of Banjica was that it was a camp where from people
>>were forwarded to other camps, Dahau, Mathauzen, Sajmiste ( a death camp),
>>Smederevo ( Youth Education Centar), or released, if they would pledge
>>support for Nedic government, and had someone to guarantee for them.
>>        -Sajmiste - a death camp, as Mr. Loncaric correctly admits on
>>the territory of the Croatian state.  Nedic government had indeed very
>>little to do with it.
>
>Technically, Nedic authority did not extend Zemun (now a part of Belgrade 
>metropolitan area.)  But Zemun was a Serb-majority city, and while the 
>references I have do not specify who was running Sajmiste (Nazis, NDH, or 
>local Serbs), this location was not the largest one in Belgrade area. 

Nazis were running it. They had some help from local people. 
Important is that camp was formally in Croatia, not Serbia.  That
it is today in Serbia is irrelevant.  I do not see why do you keep 
insisting on it.


>>>>      This is not to say that quisling puppet government under Milan Nedic
>>>> did nothing wrong. His gendarmerie had to be involved to some degree in
>>>> assisting the Germans in rounding up the Jews. This is clear. Yet, if we
>>>> are discussing in good-faith here, we should not mix the leading order
>>>> history with the small, Nth order effects.
>>>               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>      This is the last I have to say on this question.
>>>
>>>Small?  N-th order?  Difference is clearly there, but to say that what
>>>happened in Serbia is "small" or in any sense negligible is completely 
>wrong.
>>
>>What a distortion.  Mr. Simic asks you to distinguish what happened
>>in Serbia due to German acts, and what happened in Serbia due to
>>Serbian acts.  And to compare that with what was going on in Croatia
>>due to the acts of Croats.  Is this concept so difficult to grasp?
>
>Not at all.  But I'm asking Mr. Simic to face the possibility that Serbs might 
>have done something wrong in WWII.  Is this concept so difficult to grasp?

Mr. Simic and I are aware, but we are not going to allow you to be 
able to claim and remain unchallenged that Serbs were same as Croats
in WWII.  We did what we had to do, Croats did what they wanted to do.


>
>>>I'm tired of this discussion too.  This has nothing to do with culture,
>>>but since Belgrade propaganda continues to bring up WWII Dtrocities in order
>>>to justify the carnage they are perpetrating today, I just had to remind
>>>you of some parts of history you do not like to remember.  A bit less "epic"
>>>view of Serbian history might have carried a warning of what Serbian
>>>extremists could do: perhaps Serbs would have exercised more care
>>>in dealing with their own fascists, instead of giving them 24% of the
>>>seats in parliament (I'm talking about Vojislav Seselj's Serbian Radical
>>>Party).
>>
>>Without any attempt to defend Seselj, he can be favourable compared to
>>Tudjman's party.  Especially, taking into account Tudjmans anti-semitic
>>and anti-serbian ramblings. Tudjman was the first one who suggested
>>that Serbs should be paid money to move out of Croatia?!  His party
>>leaders were famous for battle cries against Serbs.  Pre-election rhetoric?
>>May be, but important is that majority of Croats voted for such a
>>rhetorics.
>
>Your charges against Tudjman have been noted, but your primary complaint is 
>that Tudjman is pro-Croatian.  

No, anti-Serbian.  It seems to me that this is normal in Croatian politics.

>
>However, he has ALWAYS been willing to negotiate and to offer assurances.  He, 
>and the leaders of all other republics except Mr. Milosevic, have signed the 
>EC peace plan which would have peacefully transformed Yugoslavia while 
>guaranteeing minority rights.
>

Serbia is not going to sign something, until the Serbs in Krajinas agree
on it. Period.

>By contrast, Mr. Seselj is the one who sent his paramilitary forces to 
>massacre people in Croatia (and more recently Bosnia).  Any comparison between 
>the two men is ludicrous.

>
Tudjman has send "regular troups" in Bosnia and send police in Krajina.
So, where is the difference?

>>>Josip
>
>
>The following is about Croat vs. Serb role in the resistance in Croatia.  Mr. 
>Stojanovic claims that the Croatian role was negligible, I know that it was of 
>crucial importance, and the late 1944 statistics bear me out: 60.66% of the 
>Partisan operative units in Croatia were Croatian.
>

Of course, 1944.  What happened before?  Let's say 1941 and 1942?

>>I erased again your quoting of the "Enciklopedija Jugoslavije." I find
>>that again you are quoting 1944 numbers, while being incapable of supporting
>>your claims for the earlier years.
>
>You have not provided anything to support YOUR claims.  Here is something to 
>support MY claims that Croats had resisted and fought against Ustashas:
>

I had.  Pres. Tudjmans quotes.  He clearly distinguishes the moment when
Croats started joining the Partisans.  Also You conveniently avoided to answer
my posting on soc.history and S.C.Y where I compared numbers in Partisans
and Ustasha/Domobrans.

>The Croats who had resisted Ustashas, and helped protect Serbs in Croatia, 
>must be turning in their graves when they hear your awful misrepresentations.

Sigh!  I apologise to those few.

>
>>>In article <1992Aug17.110938.29340@cco.caltech.edu> 
>simic@pollux.ccsf.caltech.e
>>du (Petar Simic) writes:
>>>>
>>>>      "Spreading of the partisan movement in Croatia came depending upon
>>>> the realisation of the broad masses of people that the Independent State
>>>> of Croatia does not mean the solution of the Croatian national question,
>>                                                ~~~~~~~~
>>>> because this state would share the fate of fascism and Hitler's Europian
>>>> order...(pp.443, "Wastelands of Historical Reality", Nakladni Zavod Matice
>>>> Hrvatske, 1989)."
>>>
>>>This says nothing about the relative representation of Croats vs. Serbs
>>>in the Partisans, but says that Partisan movement grew particularly rapidly
>>>as broad masses of people realized that NDH is not here to stay.  Armed
>>>resistance, however, was limited by the availability of arms, and those
>>>were in short supply until late 1943, when Italian arms were captured
>>>and the Allies started sending in more support.
>>
>>If I had any doubts about whether you are discussing in a good faith, or not,
>>you have just dispersed them.  This is becoming a matter of being honest or
>>not.  Serbs, becoming interested in Croatian national question solution?
>>Note that I have provided even before this article a number of other
>>quotes from Tudjman's book.
>
>Yes, you are fond of quoting all passages you consider damaging.  Clearly, 
>Serbs were pushed into insurgency by Ustashe terror.  Clearly, the NDH under 
>Ustashas could not be a solution to anyone's national question, and people 
>soon realized that.  Still, the U.S. State Department had "verified 
>information" as early as September 18, 1942 that the "vast majority" of the 
>Croats are opposed to Ustashas, and even earlier reports by the German general 
>in Zagreb explain their reasons: aversion and spiritual revulsion. (See 
>references quoted above).
>

Reference is from Zajednicar a Croatian journal in 1942.  Those things 
told in that reference are base upon Croatian sources in emmigration, 
that tried to save Croatia from its deserved post war destiny
(Although the guy speaking is America).

>I say this: in WWII, the Croatian people have made a moral choice, and a vast 
>majority of Croats were against Ustashas EVEN THOUGH Croats wanted to live in 
>their own country, free from Serbian hegemony.
>

Not, according to Tudjman.

>>>I'm tired of this discussion too.  But you continue distorting the record,
>>>trying to smear Croats as fascists, although you know full well that
>>>Croats had firmly rejected fascism in the strongest possible way:
>>>by risking everything and fighting against overwhelming odds for their
>>>freedom and dignity.  I find your manipulations of history morally
>>>reprehensible, stimulated by Milosevic's warmongering propaganda.
>>>
>>>Josip
>>
>>
>>Nice last passage.  But empty, except falsehoods.
>>
>>Milan N. Stojanovic
>
>We've had discussions before, and you fond of attacking people personally when 
>you run out of arguments. 
>

No, I just state that you are liar. I stick to that, until you 
admit that you made a mistake in the case of Klara Mandic.
You are nearer to me retracting this by admitting the van
-chamber thing, but you should still retract that publicly.

>Josip

Milan
Xref: sparky soc.culture.yugoslavia:8109 soc.culture.europe:7512