From: josip@src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia
Subject: Re: Fascism Reawakens in Croatia, Charges Jewish Leader
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:41:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: src.1992Aug19.214145.7420
Organization: Systems Research Center, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park

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...

>In article <1992Aug19.145407.1432@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.

>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 
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.

Let me quote "Carving Out a Greater Serbia", by Stephen Engelberg, from The 
New York Times Magazine, September 1, 1991.  This is a story about the Serbian 
President Slobodan Milosevic:

  ...[In mid-March of 1991], the legendary reclusive Balkan politician 
outlined his plan for crushing the opposition: a renewal of the iron-fisted 
nationalism that first won him acclaim. ...
  ...In his steadfast quest for a Greater Serbia, he has followed a single 
strategy.  Each step begins with a propaganda campaign stressing injustices -- 
usually grossly exaggerated -- done to Serbs. ...
  ...Having stoked the fires with propaganda, Milosevic then pressures his 
target, either through organized demonstrations, military action or diplomacy.  
These tactics forced the governments of Vojvodina and Kosovo to abandon their 
powers to Serbia last year.  More recently, the same tactics have sent the 
republic of Croatia reeling and now threaten Bosnia-Herzegovina...
-------------------------------------------------------------------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.

>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.

>>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.

>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.

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.

>>
>>"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.

>-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.

>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?

>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. 

>>>      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?

>>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.  

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.

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.

>>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.

>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:

The German general in Zagreb, assessing the poor morale of Domobrani [Croats 
drafted into the NDH army] sent to support Ustasha units, writes of their 
"spiritual revulsion against the struggle which the mass of the Croats 
regarded as a fratricidal war.  They regard the outbreak and extension of the 
insurrection [of Serbs threatened with genocide by Ustasha] as a 
judgement...on the mad hatred of the Ustashas for the Serbs".  (Quoted from 
Vishaupt, in "Yugoslavia in the Second World War", p.66)
---------------------
[the German General in Zagreb reported:] "The aversion against the Ustasha 
movement felt by everyone who did not directly profit by it was widespread.  
The capital 'U' in the Croatian insignia had become the symbol of the 
"Gessler" hat for a broad strata of the Croatian nation."  There was continued 
news of Ustasha misdeeds, excesses of murder and robbery, which led to an 
increase in the insurgent movement in the territories populated by Croats.  
(Quoted from Paul N. Hehn: "The German Struggle Against Yugoslav Guerrillas in 
World War II", p.70)
---------------------
At the U.S. State Department meeting, September 18, 1942, Mr. M. Elmer Davis 
criticized "attacks of 'Srbobran' [Serbian emmigree newspaper] on all Croats" 
and stated: "These attacks are unfounded, because according to verified 
information of the U.S. State Department there is evidence that a vast 
majority of the Croats in the old country disagrees with Pavelic's government 
and resists and fights against intruders Hitler and Mussolini." (Translated, 
original reference "Zajednicar", September 30, 1942)
---------------------

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

>>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).

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.

>>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. 

Josip
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.bulgaria,soc.culture.greek