Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Strage a Bali, giornale ipotizza ruolo Usa in attentato

Strage a Bali, giornale ipotizza ruolo Usa in attentato Giacarta, 16:46 
 Il quotidiano indonesiano Republika ha pubblicato una serie di articoli
che suggeriscono un'implicazione di Washington nella pianificazione
dell'attentato di sabato a Bali. In uno di questi articoli un esperto di
intelligence afferma che è "impossibile che un piano così articolato
possa essere stato organizzato da malaysiani. Può solo essere stato
realizzato da una superpotenza".  I malaysiani sono l'etnia più numerosa
sia in Indonesia che in Malaysia, stati confinanti. A Giakarta un alto
diplomatico occidentale ha detto che molti indonesiani trovano difficile
accettare l'idea che un gruppo islamico, seppure estremista, possa
compiere attacchi come quello di Bali. Il diplomatico aggiunge che
nonostante la maggioranza dei musulmani sia moderata, si teme che la
guerra contro il terrorismo serva come scusa per un attacco al mondo
islamico in generale. La guerra imminente contro l'Iraq ne sarebbe
un'ulteriore prova.  Questi pareri sono sintomatici di un sentimento
anti americano ampiamente diffuso in Indonesia, la più popolosa nazione
musulmana del mondo. Già in seguito all'attacco alle Torri gemelle erano
emerse nei vari paesi islamici molte 'teorie della cospirazione', che
accusavano in particolare gli ebrei di avere pianificato gli attentati. 
Ed in questo clima la situazione del governo di Giakarta diventa ancora
più difficile: c'e il timore che una repressione contro i gruppi
islamici possa provocare reazioni violente ed indebolire ulteriormente
la fragile democrazia indonesiana. (Red) 

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:aoi075$p19$1...@gossip.excite.it...



Se avessero l'abitudine di riflettere, non starebbero dalla parte sbagliata.
Ciao
Ad'I

 realizzato da una superpotenza".
ROTFL! Ma andiamo, far saltare una bomba in un locale di una località
turistica senza nessuna protezione particolare, potrei farlo pure io!
Sicuramente è stato più facile degli attentati giornalmente compiuti da
Hamas nel blindatissimo Israele. Secondo me l'articolo è falso.
Probabilmente te lo sei inventato. Altrimenti devo supporre ke tu conosca la
lingua dell'Indonesia. Dov'è il link dell'articolo? Se invece è vero, questi
stanno peggio della redazione nostrana del "Manifesto". Ki è 'sto
diplomatico?
Ciaociao
Luca
 --
-----------
Io cerco la verità


Vorrei ricordare ai presenti che pochi decenni fa il terrorismo colpi'
l'Italia.
Sappiamo per certo di organizzazioni coperte di stampo autoritario
inquadrate e dirette dall'intelligence USA.
Le bombe contro la gente le misero frange di queste organizzazoni che
riciclarono ex repubblichini per l'opera.
Il fatto che mai si giunse e si potra' giungere alla verita' su quelle
stragi, stranamente simili alle attuali, ci induce a pensare con minima
probabilita' di errore che dietro ad esse ci fosse l'intelligence USA.
Quindi certi atteggiamenti offesi sono fuori luogo, gli USA ne hanno fatte
di tutti i colori, come diceva Andreotti a pensar male si fa peccato ma
quasi sempre ci si azzecca.
Vedremo se beccano i responsabili, se non li beccano vuoi vedere che...
E' dai tempi delle guerre con i pellirossa che gli USA si costruiscono i
casus belli, pagando qualche rinnegato asassino, sarebbe ora di smetterla,
sono cose da vomito, avete un brutto marchio storico di infamia.
Stare da una parte o dall'altra limita solo le capacita' di giudizzio, io
sto dalla mia parte e condanno la bestialita' degli uni e l'ipocrisia degli
altri.
Saluti Cad Ali
--
http://www.hyperlinker.com/spg/
-
http://www.hyperlinker.com/spg/pppop.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------

 ha scritto nel messaggio > E' dai tempi delle
guerre con i pellirossa che gli USA si costruiscono
Non parlare di cose che, evidentemente non conosci.

 ha
scritto:

forse sei tu che non conosci . Sentito mai parlare ad esempio del "famoso"
incidente di Tonchino? (Vietnam, se sai di cosa si parla...)
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://usenet.libero.it


Aggiungo.
Guerre con i pellerossa e trattati di pace mai rispettati con vomitevoli
pretesti.
Guerra con la spagna casus belli l'esplosione di una nave americana a la
Havana, fatto a bella posta.
Guerra con il Messico una invasione Yankee a casa degli altri con pretesti
da tagliaborse.
Stragi del mercato di Sarajevo, fatte per la CNN
Strage di Rakac messa in piedi dagli uomini ONU/CIA.
Io se fossi in te Patton cambierei esercito, avete il marchio di infamia,
troppe donne e bambini bruciati col Napalm o scannati dal settimo
cavalleggeri (  genocidio ), almeno avresti accesso a informazione libera e
non alle solite balle preconfezionate.
Quindi con il passato da tagliaborse che tenete non fatevi meraviglia se
dubitiamo, ne abbiamo tutte i diritti e le ragioni.


 dubitiamo, ne abbiamo tutte i diritti e le ragioni.
Tutti i diritti senz'altro. Le ragioni, beh, per quelle di scuse se ne
trovano sempre.
Bye

Posso sapere perchè la guerra in vietnam è iniziata a causa degli
europeri?questa non l'ho capita,oppure hai riscritto la storia.

E chi ha parlato della guerra nel vietnam? Ma li leggi attentamente i miei
post?
Bye

 post?
dopo che hai sbraitato agli altri di non sapere nulla e rimediato una
figuraccia non sarebbe il caso almeno di rimanere un pochino in silenzio?


 esclusivamente alla guerra contro i pellirossa, comunque:
Cad Ali invece scriveva :
E' dai tempi delle guerre con i pellirossa che gli USA si costruiscono ....
e tu invece hai sbraitato oltre a dire una grossa fesseria.



 OK aspettiamo le prove, intanto per me siete 50-50 voi e i vostri ex
alleati islamici.


 ha scritto nel messaggio > E' dai tempi delle
guerre con i pellirossa che gli USA si costruiscono
Non parlare di cose che, evidentemente non conosci
era ben chiaro che io mi riferissi alla questione dei pellirossa. Altrimenti
non avrei fatto un cut del resto. E' così difficile per il tuo piccolo
cervello arrivarci?


Non nego assolutamente che gli americani abbiano sterminato i pellirossa
(cosa che non cerco nel modo più assoluto di minimizzare sia chiaro), quello
che voglio dire è che mai si dice che lo sterminio dei pellirossa è stato
iniziato dagli europei, per primi gli spagnoli.
Bye


Qua c'e da darti ragione, quanto a genocidi siete in buona compagnia, pero'
c'e' una cosa da dire, l'ho imparata in Messico.
Dicono i Messicani ( oramai tutti mischiati ) che e' stata una fortuna per
loro che siano passati di li gli Spagnoli, se passavano i Gringos finivano
in qualche riserva sulle mesas.
Saluti Cad Ali'

 Stragi del mercato di Sarajevo, fatte per la CNN
cazzate, mio caro. cazzate trite e ritrite, tra l'altro. ma il solo ripetere
una falsità innumerevoli volte non la trasmorma in verità.
io non so chi ve le dice queste cose, puoi mostrarmi un documento che
affermi queste infamie?
saluti
claudio

 in qualche riserva sulle mesas.
Guarda che i gringos in questione non sono altro che gli inglesi e i
francesi.

Guai a contraddirli. S'incazzano pure. :)

Mystery of the market massacre
by Eve-Ann Prentice
SIXTY-EIGHT people died and more than 200 were injured when a single shell
exploded in a small Sarajevo market. The ghastly scenes were filmed and a
horrified world was left in no doubt that the Serbs were to blame. The
slaughter brought deeper American involvement in the Balkans, with the
formation of the US-led Contact Group and an American-negotiated alliance
between Bosnia's Muslims and Croats.
The massacre also ultimately paved the way for American airstrikes on
Bosnian Serb positions in late summer, 1995. Furthermore, the killing
brought about a deal whereby the Serbs pulled back their heavy guns from the
mountains surrounding Sarajevo and the Muslims reluctantly signed a
ceasefire. The easing of the siege, and the relief for the people of
Sarajevo, was a notable achievement.
To this day no one knows who fired the deadly mortar round on Markale market
in February 1994. Survivors and witnesses said they heard no characteristic
whistle of an approaching missile; this later led to suggestions that a bomb
had been placed under a stall. A Western diplomat who was in Sarajevo at the
time told me in 1999 that he was convinced the bombing was perpetrated by
the Muslim-led Government. The Muslims were sure that the Serbs would be
blamed and hoped that outrage at the carnage would lead to airstrikes
against their foes and increase pressure for a lifting of the arms embargo
that was in place against all the warring sides. Britain and France were
vehemently opposed to lifting the embargo, although America had shown signs
of wanting to arm the Muslims.
"On the morning of the explosion some people were told that it was not a
good day to go to the market," the Western diplomat said. "There was also no
shelling from the Serb positions that day, and the injuries were mainly from
the waist down, as if a bomb had exploded in situ." The diplomat said that
another sign that the Muslim-led Government had been responsible was that
government media with cameras were on the scene "within seconds", as if
poised in advance to record the full horror of the carnage to gain as much
world impact as possible.
The suggestion that the Muslims shelled their own people began to be
discussed by diplomats, politicians and a few journalists after the UN's
investigation into the massacre concluded that no one could be sure whence
the shell had come. But most people recoiled at the idea of such
self-inflicted mutilation. The majority of the world's press and politicians
accepted the instant suggestion that the Serbs were responsible; questions
were not encouraged and the general view was that the end justified the
means: the siege of Sarajevo was eased. But blaming the Serbs without proof
set a precedent, and the process of demonising them took deeper root.


Stepping-Stone to Europe
The intended targets of the mujahedin network in Bosnia are not limited to
that country but extend to Western Europe. For example, in August 1995, the
conservative Paris daily Le Figaro reported that French security services
believe that ,Islamic fundamentalists from Algeria have set up a security
network across Europe with fighters trained in Afghan gerrilla camps and
[[in] southern France while some have been tested in Bosnia." [[(London)
Daily Telegraph, 8/17/95] Also, in April 1996, Beligan security arrested a
number of Islamic militants, including two native Bosnians, smuggling
weapons to Algerian guerrillas active in France. [in France. [Intelligence
Newsletter, Paris, 5/9/96 (No. 287)] Finally, also in April 1996, a meeting
of radicals aligned with HizbAllah ("Party of God"), a pro-Iran group based
in Lebanon, set plans for stepping up attacks on U.S. assets on all
continents; among those participating was an Egyptian, Ayman al- Zawahiri,
who "runs the Islamist terrorist operations in Bosnia- Herzegovina from a
special headquarters in Sofa, Bulgaria. His forces are already deployed
throughout Bosnia, ready to attack US and other I-FOR (NATO Implementation
Force) targets." ["States- Sponsored Terrorism and The Rise of the HizbAllah
International," Defense and Foreign Affairs and Strategic Policy, London,
8/31/96 Finally, in December 1996, French and Belgain security arrested
several would-be terrorists trained at Iranian-run camps in
Bosnia.["Terrorism: The Bosnian Connection," (Paris) L'Express, 12/26/96]
The Radical Islamic Character of the Sarajevo Regime
Underlying the Clinton Administration's misguided policy toward Iranian
influence in Bosnia is a fundamental misreading of the true nature of the
Muslim regime that benefited from the Iran/Bosnia arms policy. "The most
dubious of all Bosniac [i.e., Bosnian Muslim] claims pertains to the
self-serving commercial that the government hopes to eventually establish a
multiethnic liberal democratic society. Such ideals may appeal to a few
members of Bosnia's ruling circles as well as to a generally secular
populace, but President Izethbegovic and his cabal appear to harbor much
different private intentions and goals." ["Selling the Bosnia Myth to
America: Buyer Beware," Lieutenant Colonel John E. Sray, USA, U.S. Army
Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS, October 1995]
The evidence that the leadership of the ruling Party of Democratic Action
(SDA), and consequently, the Sarajevo-based government, has long been
motivated by the principles of radical Islam is inescapable. The following
three profiles are instructive:
Alija Izetbegovic: Alija Izetbegovic, current Bosnian president and head of
the SDA, in 1970 authored the radical "Islamic Declaration," which calls for
"the Islamic movement" to start to take power as soon as it can Overturn
"the existing non- Muslim government...[Muslim government...[and] build up a
new Islamic one," to destroy non-Islamic institutions ("There can be neither
peace nor coexistence between the Islamic religion and non-Islamic social
institutions'), and to create an international federation of Islamic states.
[The Islamic Declaration: A Programme for the Islamization of Muslims and
the Muslim Peoples, Sarajevo, in English, 19901 Izetbegovic's radical
pro-Iran associations go back decades: "At the center of the Iranian system
in Europe is Bosnia-Hercegovina." President, Alija Izetbegovic, . . . who is
committed to the establishment Of an Islamic Republic in Bosnia-
Hercegovina." ["Iran's European Springboard?", House Republican Task Force
on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, 9/1/92 The Task Force report
further describes Izetbegovic's contacts with Iran and Libya in 1991, before
the Bosnian war began; he is also noted as a "fundamentalist Muslim" and a
member of the "Fedayeen of Islam" organization, an Iran-based radical group
dating to the 1930s and which by the late 1960s had recognized the
leadership of the Ayatollah Khomeini (then in exile from the Shah).
Following Khomeini's accession to power in 1979, Izetbegovic stepped-up his
efforts to establish Islamic power in Bosnia and was jailed by the
communists in 1983. Today, he is open and unapologetic about his links to
Iran: "Perhaps the most telling detail of the [detail of the [SDA's
September 1, 1996] campaign rally ... was the presence of the Iranian
Ambassador and his Bosnian and Iranian bodyguards, who sat in the shadow of
the huge birchwood platform.... As the only foreign diplomat [platform....
As the only foreign diplomat [present], indeed the only foreigner traveling
in the President's [only foreigner traveling in the President's [i.e.,
Izetbegovic's] heavily guarded motorcade of bulky four-wheel drive jeeps, he
lent a silent Islamic imprimatur to the event, one that many American and
European supporters of the Bosnian Government are trying hard to ignore or
dismiss." [trying hard to ignore or dismiss." [NYT, 9/2/96] During the
summer 1996 election campaign, the Iranians delivered to him, in two
suitcases, $ 500,000 in cash; Izetbegovic "is now 'literally on their [on
their [i.e., the Iranians'] payroll,' according to a classified report based
on the CIA's analysis of the issue." LAT, 12/31/96. See also "Iran
Contributed $ [LAT, 12/31/96. See also "Iran Contributed $ 500,000 to
Bosnian President's Election Effort, U.S. Says," New York Times, 1/l/97, and
Washington Times, 1/2/97] Adil Zulfikarpasic, a Muslim co- founder of the
SDA, broke with Izetbegovic in late 1990 due to the increasingly overt
fundamentalist and pro-Iranian direction of the party. [See Milovan Djilas,
Bosnjak: Adil Zulfikarpasic, Zurich, 1994]
Hassan (or Hasan) Cengic: Until recently, deputy defense minister (and now
cosmetically reassigned to a potentially even more dangerous job in refugee
resettlement at the behest of the Clinton Administration), Cengic, a member
of a powerful clan headed by his father, Halid Cengic, is an Islamic cleric
who has traveled frequently to Tehran and is deeply involved in the arms
pipeline. ["Bosnian Officials Involved in Arms Trade Tied to Radical
States," Washington Post, 9/22/96] Cengic was identified by Austrian police
as a member of TWRA's supervisory board, "a fact confirmed by its Sudanese
director, Elfatih Hassanein, in a 1994 interview with (lazi Husrev Beg, an
Islamic affairs magazine. Cengic later became the key Bosnian official
involved in setting up a weapons pipeline from Iran.... Cengic ... is a
longtime associate of Izetbegovic's. He was one of the co- defendants in
Izetbegovic's 1983 trial for fomenting Muslim nationalism in what was then
Yugoslavia. Cengic was given a 10- year prison term, most of which he did
not serve. In trial testimony Cengic was said to have been traveling to Iran
since 1983. Cengic lived in Tehran and Istanbul during much of the war,
arranging for weapons to be smuggled into Bosnia." [WP, 9/22/961 According
to a Bosnian Croat radio profile: "Hasan's father, Halid Cengic ... is the
main logistic expert in the Muslim army. All petrodollar donations from the
Islamic world and the procurement of arms and military technology for Muslim
units went through him. He made so much money out of this business that he
is one of the richest Muslims today. Halid Cengic and his two sons, of whom
Hasan has been more in the public spotlight, also control the Islamic wing
of the intelligence agency AID [Agency for Information and Documentation].
Well informed sources in Sarajevo claim that only Hasan addresses
Izetbegovic with 'ti' [second person singular, used as an informal form of
address] while all the others address him as 'Mr. President,"' a sign of his
extraordinary degree of intimacy with the president. [BBC Summary of World
Broadcasts, 10/28/96, "Radio elaborates on Iranian connection of Bosnian
deputy defense minister," from Croat Radio Herceg-Bosna, Mostar, in
Serbo-Croatian, 10/25/96, bracketed text in original] In late 1996, at the
insistence of the Clinton Administration, Hassan Cengic was reassigned to
refugee affairs. However, in his new capacity he may present an even greater
hazard to NATO forces in Bosnia, in light of past incidents such as the one
that took place near the village of Celic in November 1996. At that time, in
what NATO officers called part of a pattern of "military operations in
disguise," American and Russian IFOR troops were caught between Muslims and
Serbs as the Muslims, some of them armed, attempted to encroach on the
cease-fire line established by Dayton; commented a NATO spokesman: "We
believe this to be a deliberate, orchestrated and provocative move to
circumvent established procedures for the return of refugees." ["Gunfire
Erupts as Muslims Return Home," Washington Post, 11/13/96]
Dzemal Merdan: "The office of Brig. Gen. Dzemal Merdan is an ornate affair,
equipped with an elaborately carved wooden gazebo ringed with red velvet
couches and slippers for his guests. A sheepskin prayer mat lies in the
comer, pointing toward Mecca. The most striking thing in the chamber is a
large flag. It is not the flag of Bosnia, but of Iran. Pinned with a button
of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran's late Islamic leader, the flag
occupies pride of place in Merdan's digs -- displayed in the middle of the
gazebo for every visitor to see. Next to it hangs another pennant that of
the Democratic Action Party, the increasingly nationalist Islamic
organization of President Alija Izetbegovic that dominates Bosnia's Muslim
region.... Merdan's position highlights the American dilemma. As head of the
office of training and development of the Bosnian army, he is a key liaison
figure in the U.S. [liaison figure in the U.S. [arm and train] program....
But Merdan, Western sources say, also has another job -- as liaison with
foreign Islamic fighters here since 1992 and promoter of the Islamic faith
among Bosnia's recruits. Sources identified Merdan as being instrumental in
the creation of a brigade of Bosnian soldiers, called the 7th Muslim
Brigade, that is heavily influenced by Islam and trained by fighters from
Iran's Revolutionary Guards. He has also launched a program, these sources
say, to build mosques on military training grounds to teach Islam to Bosnian
recruits. In addition, he helped establish training camps in Bosnia where
Revolutionary Guards carried out their work." ["Arming the Bosnians: U.S.
Program Would Aid Force Increasingly Linked to Iran," Washington Post,
1/26/96, emphasis added] General Merdan is a close associate of both
Izetbegovic and Cengic; the central region around Zenica, which was
"completely militarized in the first two years of the war" under the control
of Merdan's mujahedin, is "under total control of the Cengic family." ["Who
Rules Bosnia and Which Way," (Sarajevo) Slobodna Bosna, 11/17/96, FBIS
translation; Slobodna Bosna is one of the few publications in Muslim-held
areas that dares to criticize the policies and personal corruption of the
ruling SDA clique.] Merdan's mujahedin were accused by their erstwhile Croat
allies of massacring more than 100 Croats near Zenica in late 1993.
["Bosnian Croats vow to probe war crimes by Moslems," Agence France Presse,
5/12/95]
The Islamization of the Bosnian Army
In cooperation with the foreign Islamic presence, the Izetbegovic regime has
revamped its security and military apparatus to reflect its Islamic
revolutionary outlook, including the creation of mujahedin units throughout
the army; some members of these units have assumed the guise of a shaheed (a
"martyr," the Arabic term commonly used to describe suicide bombers), marked
by their white garb, representing a shroud. While these units include
foreign fighters naturalized in Bosnia, most of the personnel are now
Bosnian Muslims trained and indoctrinated by Iranian and other foreign
militants - which also makes it easier for the Clinton Administration to
minimize the mujahedin threat, because few of them are "foreigners."
Prior to 1996, there were three principal mujahedin units in the Bosnian
army, the first two of which are headquartered in the American IFOR/SFOR
zone: (1) the 7th Muslim Liberation Brigade of the 3rd Corps, headquartered
in Zenica; (2) the 9th Muslim Liberation Brigade of the 2nd Corps,
headquartered in Travnik (the 2nd Corps is based in Tuzla); and (3) the 4th
Muslim Liberation Brigade of the 4th Corps, headquartered in Konjic (in the
French zone). [Bodansky, Some Call It Peace, page 401 Particularly ominous,
many members of these units have donned the guise of martyrs, indicating
their willingness to sacrifice themselves in the cause of Islam. Commenting
on an appearance of soldiers from the 7th Liberation Brigade, in Zenica in
December 1995, Bodansky writes: "Many of the fighters ... were dressed in
white coveralls over their uniforms. Officially, these were 'white winter
camouflage,' but the green headbands [bearing Koranic verses] these warriors
were wearing left no doubt that these were actually Shaheeds' shrouds."
[Some Call It Peace, page 12] The same demonstration was staged before the
admiring Iranian ambassador and President Izethbegovic in September 1996,
when white winter garb could only be symbolic, not functional. [[NYT,
9/2/96] By June 1996, ten more mujahedin brigades had been established,
along with numerous smaller "special units' dedicated to covert and
terrorist operations; while foreigners are present in all of these units,
most of the soldiers are now native Bosnian Muslims. [native Bosnian
Muslims. [Some Call It Peace, pages 42-46]
In addition to these units, there exists another group known as the Handzar
("dagger" or 94 scimitar") Division, described by Bodansky as a "praetorian
guard" for President Izetbegovic. "Up to 6000-strong, the Handzar division
glories in a fascist culture. They see themselves as the heirs of the SS
Handzar division, formed by Bosnian Muslims in 1943 to fight for the Nazis.
Their spiritual model was Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of
Jerusalem who sided with Hitler. According to LJN officers, surprisingly few
of those in charge of the Handzars ... seem to speak good Serbo-Croatian.
'Many of them are Albanian, whether from Kosovo [the Serb province where
Albanians are the majority] or from Albania itself.' They are trained and
led by veterans from Afghanistan and Pakistan, say LTN sources." ["Albanians
and Afghans fight for the heirs to Bosnia's SS past," (London) Daily
Telegraph, 12/29/93, bracketed text in original]


Self-Inflicted Atrocities
Almost since the beginning of the Bosnian war in the spring of 1992, there
have been persistent reports -- readily found in the European media but
little reported in the United States -- that civilian deaths in Muslim-held
Sarajevo attributed to the Bosnian Serb Army were in some cases actually
inflicted by operatives of the Izetbegovic regime in an (ultimately
successful) effort to secure American intervention on Sarajevo's behalf.
These allegations include instances of sniping at civilians as well as three
major explosions, attributed to Serbian mortar fire, that claimed the lives
of dozens of people and, in each case, resulted in the international
community's taking measures against the Muslims' Serb enemies. (The three
explosions were: (1) the May 27, 1992, "breadline massacre." which was
reported to have killed 16 people and which resulted in economic sanctions
on the Bosnian Serbs and rump Yugoslavia; (2) the February 5, 1994, Markale
"market massacre," killing 68 and resulting in selective NATO air strikes
and an ultimatum to the Serbs to withdraw their heavy weapons from the area
near Sarajevo; and (3) the August 28, 1995 "second market massacre," killing
37 and resulting in large-scale NATO air strikes, eventually leading to the
Dayton agreement and the deployment of IFOR.) When she was asked about such
allegations (with respect to the February 1994 explosion) then-U.N.
Ambassador and current Secretary of State-designate Madeleine Albright, in a
stunning non sequitur, said: "It's very hard to believe any country would do
this to their own people, and therefore, although we do not exactly know
what the facts are, it would seem to us that the Serbs are the ones that
probably have a great deal of responsibility." ["Senior official admits to
secret U.N. report on Sarajevo massacre," Deutsch Presse-Agentur, 6/6/96,
emphasis added]
The fact that such a contention is difficult to believe does not mean it is
not true. Not only did the incidents lead to the result desired by Sarajevo
(Western action against the Bosnian Serbs), their staging by the Muslims
would be entirely in keeping with the moral outlook of Islamic radicalism,
which has long accepted the deaths of innocent (including Muslim) bystanders
killed in terrorist actions. According to a noted analyst: "The dictum that
the end justifies the means is adopted by all fundamentalist organizations
in their strategies for achieving political power and imposing on society
their own view of Islam. What is important in every action is its niy 'yah,
its motive. No means need be spared in the service of Islam as long as one
takes action with a pure niy' Yah." [Amir Taheri, Holy Terror, Bethesda, MD,
1987] With the evidence that the Sarajevo leadership does in fact have a
fundamentalist outlook, it is unwarranted to dismiss cavaliery the
possibility of Muslim responsibility. Among some of the reports:
Sniping: "French peacekeeping troops in the United Nations unit trying to
curtail Bosnian Serb sniping at civilians in Sarajevo have concluded that
until mid-June some gunfire also came from Government soldiers deliberately
shooting at their own civilians. After what it called a 'definitive'
investigation, a French marine unit that patrols against snipers said it
traced sniper fire to a building normally occupied by Bosnian [i.e., Muslim]
soldiers and other security forces. A senior French officer said, 'We find
it almost impossible to believe, but we are sure that it is true."'
["Investigation Concludes Bosnian Government Snipers Shot at Civilians," New
York Times, 8/l/951
The 1992 "Breadline Massacre": "United Nations officials and senior Western
military officers believe some of the worst killings in Sarajevo, including
the massacre of at least 16 people in a bread queue, were carried out by the
city's mainly Muslim defenders -- not Serb besiegers -- as a propaganda ploy
to win world sympathy and military intervention.... Classified reports to
the UN force commander, General Satish Nambiar, concluded ... that Bosnian
forces loyal to President Alija Izetbegovic may have detonated a bomb. 'We
believe it was a command-detonated explosion, probably in a can,' a UN
official said then. 'The large impact which is there now is not necessarily
similar or anywhere near as large as we came to expect with a mortar round
landing on a paved surface." ["Muslims 'slaughter their own people',"
(London) The Independent, 8/22/92] "Our people tell us there were a number
of things that didn't fit. The street had been blocked off just before the
incident. Once the crowd was let in and had lined up, the media appeared but
kept their distance. The attack took place, and the media were immediately
on the scene." [Major General Lewis MacKenzie, Peacekeeper: The Road to
Sarajevo, Vancouver, BC, 1993, pages 193-4; Gen. MacKenzie, a Canadian, had
been commander of the U.N. peacekeeping force in Sarajevo.]
The 1994 Markale "Market Massacre": "French television reported last night
that the United Nations investigation into the market-place bombing in
Sarajevo two weeks ago had established beyond doubt that the mortar shell
that killed 68 people was fired from inside Bosnian [Muslim lines." [people
was fired from inside Bosnian [Muslim] lines." ["UN tracks source of fatal
shell," (London) The Times, 2/19/94] "For the first time, a senior U.N.
official has admitted the existence of a secret U.N. report that blames the
Bosnian Moslems for the February 1994 massacre of Moslems at a Sarajevo
market.... After studying the crater left by the mortar shell and the
distribution of shrapnel, the report concluded that the shell was fired from
behind Moslem lines." The report, however, was kept secret; the context of
the wire story implies that U.S. Ambasador Albright may have been involved
in its suppression. [DPA, 6/6/961 For a fuller discussion of the conflicting
claims, see "Anatomy of a massacre," Foreign Policy, 12/22/94, by David
Binder; Binder, a veteran New York Times reporter in Yugoslavia, had access
to the suppressed report. Bodansky categorically states that the bomb "was
actually a special charge designed and built with help from HizbAllah
["Party of God," a Beirut-based pro-Iranian terror group] experts and then
most likely dropped from a nearby rooftop onto the crowd of shoppers. Video
cameras at the ready recorded this expertly-staged spectacle of gore, while
dozens of corpses of Bosnian Muslim troops killed in action (exchanged the
day before in a 'body swap' with the Serbs) were paraded in front of cameras
to raise the casualty counts." [Offensive in the Balkans, page 62]
The 1995 "Second Market Massacre": "British ammunition experts serving with
the United Nations in Sarajevo have challenged key 'evidence' of the Serbian
atrocity that triggered the devastating Nato bombing campaign which turned
the tide of the Bosnian war." The Britons' analysis was confirmed by French
analysts but their findings were "dismissed" by "a senior American officer"
at U.N. headquarters in Sarajevo. ["Serbs 'not guilty' of massacre: Experts
warned US that mortar was Bosnian," (London) The Times, 10/i/95 A "crucial
U.N. report [(London) The Times, 10/i/95] A "crucial U.N. report [stating
Serb responsibility for] the market massacre is a classified secret, but
four specialists - a Russian, a Canadian and two Americans - have raised
serious doubts about its conclusion, suggesting instead that the mortar was
fired not by the Serbs but by Bosnian government forces." A Canadian officer
"added that he and fellow Canadian officers in Bosnia were 'convinced that
the Muslim government dropped both the February 5, 1994, and the August 28,
1995, mortar shells on the Sarajevo markets."' An unidentified U.S. official
"contends that the available evidence suggests either 'the shell was fired
at a very low trajectory, which means a range of a few hundred yards -
therefore under [a range of a few hundred yards - therefore under [Sarajevo]
government control,' or 'a mortar shell converted into a bomb was dropped
from a nearby roof into the crowd."' ["Bosnia's bombers," The Nation,
10/2/95 ]. At least some high-ranking French and perhaps other Western
officials believed the Muslims responsible; after having received that
account from government ministers and two generals, French magazine editor
Jean Daniel put the question directly to Prime Minister Edouard Balladur:
"'They [i.e., the Muslims] have committed this carnage on their own people?'
I exclaimed in consternation. 'Yes,' confirmed the Prime Minister without
hesitation, 'but at least they have forced NATO to intervene. "' ["No more
lies about Bosnia," Le Nouvel Observateur, 8/31/95, translated in
Chronicles - A Magazine of American Culture, January 1997]


"A few days ago Mr. Boutros Ghali informed me that the projectile which hit
the Markale marketplace in Sarajevo was an act of (Bosnian) Muslim
provocation". President Mitterrand of France, 1995
Open military confrontation in Bosnia-Herzegovina ended with the signing of
the Dayton Peace Agreement on 14th December 1995. The conflict had resulted
in more than 160,000 deaths, and 2.5 million refugees and displaced persons.
Not long before, the United Nations (UN) had ordered the first combat units
from its rapid reaction force into Sarajevo, after after Serb rebels killed
two French peacekeepers. Three Bosnian Serb shells had hit the French and
Danish areas of a U.N. compound in Zetra, north of Sarajevo's centre killing
a French peacekeeper and wounding another French soldier and a Dane. A
half-hour later, another French peacekeeper was killed and two wounded, one
seriously, when a U.N. convoy was targeted by Serbs in the suburb of Butmir.
The deaths brought the number of French dead to 42 since the Bosnian war
began in April 1992 - and not all of them were killed by the Bosnian Serbs,
a number of them were also killed in crossfire or deliberately by the forces
of the Bosnian government.
Not only did the UN get tough with the Bosnian Serbs - whose political and
military leaders have now been charged with war crimes - in 1995, NATO had
become directly involved when when they ordered air strikes against the
Bosnian Serbs. These attacks had been preceded by a series of barbaric
attacks against civilians in the Markele market in Sarajevo, all of which
were assumed to be the work of the Serb army laying siege to Sarajevo.
There were three attacks on the markets, all of which were blamed on them:
the first on 27th May 1992, killed 16 people, the second on 5th February
1994 killed 68, and the third on 28th August 1995, killed 37. The last
attack is the most significant, as it has been widely alleged, by members of
the UN Mission in Bosnia, UN Commanding officers and of course, predictably,
the Bosnian Serbs themselves, that this one in particular was staged by
elements within the Bosnian government to provide the pretext for NATO
military involvement in the war. In subsequent attacks, bombs and bullets
used by the NATO jets used Depleted Uranium (DU) which is now estimated to
have claimed the lives of some Serb 300 civilians who lived in the vicinity
of the bases hit by NATO, according to reports that surfaced in 2001. What
evidence is there for the claims that the Bosnian government carried out
these attacks ?
The first attack in 1992
The first of three attacks happened on 27th May 1992 when 16 people killed
in a "mortar attack" on a bread queue in Vase Miskina street in Sarajevo. As
The Independent (22nd August 1992) noted, the televised scenes of civilians
cut to pieces by an explosion as they queued for bread horrified
international public opinion, and added growing pressure for NATO to
"intervene" in the civil war against the Bosnian Serbs. Vivid footage showed
dead bodies littering the street and "terrified crying people sitting on the
pavement in pools of blood". The attacks came shortly before a meeting by
European Union ambassadors to consider imposing sanctions on the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia. UN officials from the start were "suspicious about
the circumstances but would not go public with their thoughts without
jeopardising the UN mission" in Bosnia. Classified reports given to the
commander of the UN peace keepers, General Satish Nambiar, concluded that it
was likely that the army of the Bosnian government in Sarajevo carried out
the attack. In fact, they were reported to believe it wasn't a mortar attack
at all but a "command-detonated explosion - probably in a can". The impact
mark left by the "mortar" on the market square floor was nowhere "near as
large as we came to expect with a mortar round lading on a paved surface".
This is also supported by another UN commander in Bosnia, General Michael
Rose of the British army, who according to his book Dispatch the Bosnian
government in Sarajevo shelled their own people to get a military response
by NATO against the Bosnian Serbs (The Observer, 28th March 1999). NATO
launched air strikes against the Bosnian Serbs as a result of this attack.
According to The Independent, United Nations (UN) officials and senior
Western military officers believe that the attack in 1992 was carried out by
the Bosnian government, "To win world sympathy and trigger intervention".
This was also expressed in confidential reports circulating at the UN
headquarters in New York, and in classified briefings to US policy makers in
Washington, according to the British newspaper. The attack on the bread
queue in Vase Miskina Street also led to draconian sanctions against
Yugoslavia imposed by the Security Council (resolution 757) on 30th May 1992
(which had been preceded by Yugoslavia's expulsion from the WHO). All
supplies of raw materials to the well-developed pharmaceutical industry of
Yugoslavia for production of medicines were immediately suspended. The
justification for blaming Yugoslavia for attacks carried out in Bosnia was
based on Western intelligence disinformation that the country was directing
the war on behalf of the Bosnian Serbs.
The second attack in 1994
The second attack on a market in Sarajevo happened on 5th February 1994 when
a single mortar round left 68 dead and 200 wounded. Some people immediately
questioned how son many civilians had been killed or wounded by one mortar
bomb. Furthermore, officials from the Bosnian government did allow anyone
from UNPROFOR to verify what had happened. Despite vehement denials from the
Bosnian Serbs, the US news channel, CNN, immediately reported that they were
responsible for the shocking carnage that the attack left, which CNN claimed
was "caused by a Serb mortar bomb". The US President Bill Clinton added to
this saying it was "highly likely" that the Bosnian Serbs were responsible
for it.
Thus, US ambassador to the UN, Madeline Albright and the US presidential
security advisor Anthony Lake, immediately called for NATO air strikes
against the Bosnian Serbs. Yet there were already people claiming that even
the UN itself did not suspect the Bosnian Serbs, but this appears to have
been suppressed by the Western media, possibly acting under covert British
and American pressure, assuming the the whole purpose of the mortar attack
was to provide the pretext for NATO military involvement in the Balkans for
the first time. If this is not the case, then it is certainly hinted at by
the former British Foreign Secretary David Owen in his book Balkan Odyssey
(Victor Gollanz, London, 1995):
"People around General Rose never tried to hide the fact that at his meeting
with Bosnian Muslim leaders (President Alia Izetbegovic and General Delic)
he said that he had just received some information which shows that the
mortar bomb did not come from the area under Serb control but from the
Muslim part of the city . . ."
However, Owen's account of the the Market square massacre in 1994 has been
criticised by Noel Malcom in a review of his book in The Sunday Telegraph on
12th November 1995.
When discussing the market-place massacre in Sarajevo of February 1994, Lord
Owen goes on at length about a UN investigation which concluded that the
mortar shell had been fired from a Bosnian Government position.
Dramatically, he confirms that General Rose put pressure on Bosnian
ministers by threatening to reveal this finding, unless they did as they
were told. What Lord Owen does not tell us is that a second, more thorough
investigation found that the first had made mistakes in its calculations,
and concluded that the shell could equally have come from the Serb side. It
is surely inconceivable that Owen is unaware of this second report; yet he
chooses not to mention it. Readers will have to draw their own conclusions
about the overall reliability of this grotesquely vainglorious book.
But, Owen also fails to give any clear evidence as to the perpetrators of
this attack - if you read his statement carefully, he is only telling us
that the second investigation, although on one hand, described as "more
thorough", still concluded that the shell could "equally" have come from the
Serb side. This indicates to me that their is still no hard evidence that
either side were responsible. Bosnian Serb and Russian claims should be
treated with scepticism (as they have a vested interest, from a propaganda
point-of-view, in making sure these allegations are widely circulated). But
the claims of the UN and representatives of various NATO countries serving
as peacekeepers should be treated as serious and worthy of investigation.
From example, On 6th June 1996, Yasushi Akashi, UN special envoy for Bosnia,
told a German journalist working for DPA in New York, that there was a
secret UN report accusing the Bosnian government forces of this massacre. It
was claimed that this secret report was passed on to the UN Secretary
General, Boutros Boutros Ghali, who did not publish it in the interest of
"higher politics". Citing this UN report, B. Volker, a French journalist
working for TV TF1 said that the mortar bomb was fired from Bosnian
government positions. Volker also quotes the words of President Mitterrand:
"A few days ago Mr. Boutros Ghali informed me that the projectile which hit
the Markale marketplace in Sarajevo was an act of (Bosnian) Muslim
provocation".
The third attack in 1995
The third attack, on 28th August 1995 also hit market and left 37 dead and
90 wounded. When UN issued a declaration blaming the Bosnian Serbs, it
evidently ignored the report of the British and French experts as well as
the assessment of the UN's artillery expert for the Sarajevo sector, a
Russian colonel, A. Demurenko. Soon after the attack, NATO launched
extensive air strikes against Bosnian Serb military and civilian targets.
The strategy appeared pre-planned as it coincided with an joint Croat and
Bosnian government offensive against the Bosnian Serbs. The attacks changed
the course of the war in Bosnia as enabled NATO to enter the conflict on
behalf of the Bosnian government and Croat forces. After this attack,
President Yeltsin gave official credence to reports circulating in the
Russian media that a "third party" was responsible for the mortar attack on
the bread queue. Yeltsin said that Russia "insists" that the UN "look again"
at the attacks as there was new evidence indicating that it was not the
Bosnian Serb's who carried out the attack. Despite this, NATO went ahead and
launched air strikes. One military adviser to the foreign ministry, General
Boris Gromov, even claimed (with no evidence provided) that one of the NATO
powers was involved in the mortar attack "as a provocation". Yeltsin also
said:
"Why am l against the expansion of NATO ? This (mortar attack in Sarajevo)
is the first sign of what might happen when NATO comes right up to the
borders of the Russian Federation. Those who insist on the expansion of NATO
are making a major political mistake. The flame of war would burst out
across the whole of Europe" (The Guardian, 9th September 1995).
The Russians and Bosnian Serbs have claimed that the third attack was
prepared in advance over many months by "certain" Western secret services
(probably including the CIA), and that Bosnian government troops under the
commander of the General R. Delic carried it out. The reason for this, they
argue, was to provide NATO with an opportunity not only discredit the
Bosnian Serbs, but to provide the pretext to use heavy air strikes on them
so as to destroy their military potential. The Russian intelligence service
(FSB) were said to had known about the preparation of the plan since
February 1995. Then a detailed plan, allegedly called Cyclone 2, was related
to a secret memorandum, signed on 10th August 1995 at the Pleso airport in
Zagreb, Croatia. The memorandum was signed for the UN by the commander of
the UNPROFOR forces based Croatia and Bosnia,General B. Janvier and by
Admiral L. Smith for NATO. This secret memorandum was only passed on, as
"secret", on 13th September 1995 to the UN Security Council, when the main
destruction of Serb targets had already taken place. According to article 7
of the memorandum UNPROFOR agreed to provide all information necessary for
the NATO strikes against Serb targets to achieve the maximum success.
According to the FSB, the mortar was fired from the roof of a building near
the market and they further claimed that the device was not a standard
mortar bomb. Another author, Y. Bodansky, the director of the Republican
parliamentary task force studying terrorism and unconventional warfare
(Target America, Terrorism in the US Today, S.P.I. Books, Shapolsky
Publishers, New York, 1993), believed that the Bosnian Serb intelligence
service knew that "something was being planned" in Sarajevo. On 26th August
1995 (two days before the second massacre) he spoke by telephone to a senior
official of the Republika Srpska in the Yugoslav capital, Belgrade, who told
him anxiously that once again "something terrible is being planned against
the Serbs" in Sarajevo. How much of this is true, made up or just a joint
FSB-Bosnian Serb disinformation campaign is hard to assess.
Another report indicating that the Bosnian Serbs were not responsible for
this market place attacks was published in The Sunday Times on October 1st
1995. It claimed that British ammunition experts serving with the UN in
Sarajevo had "challenged" key evidence of the attack on the bread market
which not only triggered NATO attacks against the Serbs in Bosnia, but
turned the tide of the war against them. According to the newspaper, the
British experts:
"found no evidence that the Bosnian Serbs had fired the lethal round"
Nora Beloff, writing in her book Yugoslavia: An Avoidable War (New European
Publications, London, England, 1997), also allege that "that Bosnian
government arranged to kill their own people" so as to get the Bosnian Serbs
blamed. She alleges the news reporter Martin Bell, now an independent MP in
Britain, had known about these allegations through his contacts with British
UN officers but "he ignored what they might have told him". She repeats clai
ms, as reported in David Owen's account of the bombings, that western
experts had discovered that it was the Bosnian government forces and not the
Bosnian Serbs who had been behind the attack in February 1994. Allegedly,
when UNPROFOR wanted the Bosnian government to participate in truce
negotiations, the British commander, General Michael Rose:
"Blackmailed the Bosnian Muslim leaders into submission. He told them that
unless they agreed to cooperate, he would tell the international press that
he had technical expertise proving that the grenade came from the Muslim,
not the Serb, side" (Beloff, p112/113).
Other attacks supposedly carried out by the Bosnian government - and blamed
on the Bosnian Serbs - include:
29th June 1992: Rocket attack on Sarajevo's TV station kills 5 people.
Bosnian government troops implicated in this attack (The Sunday Times,
October 1st 1995).
17th July 1992: A "choreographed" mortar salvo, 30 seconds after British
Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd entered a building for a meeting with the
Bosnian President, Alija Izetbegovic. The attack killed or wounded 10
bystanders - but not Hurd's guard of honor, who had clearly been forewarned
and ducked for cover seconds before the attack.
4th August 1992: Bomb attacks which were filmed by the Western film crews at
a funeral of two orphans in a cemetery in Sarajevo. The attacks were blamed
on the Bosnian Serbs.
13th August 1992: After the Yugoslav Prime Minister Milan Panic arrives in
Sarajevo airport for a meeting with Izetbegovic, a Bosnian government sniper
kills US TV producer David Kaplan. The attacks disrupts the schedule of
Panic, and he only manages to spend 20 minutes on the phone with
Izetbegovic.
Philip Corwen, a senior member of the UN in Bosnia has recently written a
book about his experience there (Dubious Mandate: A memoir of the UN in
Bosnia, Summer 1995 [Duke, London, UK, 1999]):
"The French forces (the main UN armed force in Sarajevo) were continually
harassed, shot at, blocked at, and threatened by Bosnian government forces .
. . it was the French who pointed out that the Bosnian government was
placing weapons systems next to UN facilities in order to draw fire from
Serb artillery onto civilian and UN targets and thus provoke international
outrage against the Serbs . .. (p178)
I recommend that readers interested in the background to the conflict in
Bosnia read Corwen's book: His meticulous account shatters once and for all
the "one victim - one enemy" myth promoted mainly by the Western media. For
the record, l unequivocally condemn the war crimes and crimes against
humanity carried out by the Bosnian Serb regime against the people of
Sarajevo - whom they relentlessly bombed and shelled. The Bosnian Serb
leaders Radovan Karadzic and General Ratko Mladic have been rightfully
indicted by the International war crimes tribunal in the Netherlands - but
why has this tribunal failed to indict Alija Izectbegovic, the Bosnian
President and other senior officials of his government when there is clearly
enough prima-facie evidence of their complicity in war crimes carried out by
the Bosnian army ? I believe that the UN probably has ample evidence to show
that the Bosnian government carried out these attacks in Sarajevo, but along
with NATO, decided not to pursue charges against Bosnian government leaders
for political reasons, and decided to sweep the whole story under the carpet
and suppress it.
Footnote: an estimated 300 civilians killed after NATO used depleted Uranium
in reprisal attacks
"Up to 300 men, women and children who lived close to the site of the (NATO)
bombings in 1995 have died of cancers and leukemia over the last five
years". Robert Fisk, 2001
Finally the bombings of the market place unleashed a wave of NATO
air-strikes against Bosnian Serb military targets in and around Sarajevo. In
these attacks, bombs and bullets used by the NATO jets used Depleted Uranium
(DU) that is now estimated to have claimed the lives of some Serb 300
civilians who lived in the vicinity of the bases hit by NATO. According to
Robert Fisk, writing in The Independent of Sunday on 14th January 2001, NATO
subjected the Serb military bases and surrounding civilian areas to an
intense bombardment between 30th August to 15th September 1995, using jets
and artillery from Mount Igman just outside Sarajevo. Civilians living in
the area surrounding the bases starting to begin suffering from a variety of
symptoms now linked to the use of DU by NATO in Bosnia. NATO governments
have so far shown little interest in helping the civilian victims of DU in
either Bosnia, Yugoslavia or during the assault on Iraq in 1990.


Visto a far incazzare la gente?
C'e' il richio di saturare l'NG.
Non trovo il rapporto degli ufficiali ONU uno Russo e uno Francese, esiste
anche un articolo su RID di qualche anno fa, ho provato a spulciare ma e'
dura sono 100 numeri da leggere.
Comunque dovro' farlo appena rientro, le bombe del mercato di Sarajevo ( tre
episodi distinti ) sono la chiave di volta per la comprensione del nostro
tempo.
I links terroristi mussulmani, intelligence USA, uso dei mezzi di
comunicazione, sono il prologo all'11 Settembre.
Come dire il prologo della terza guerra mondiale, Jugoslavia=Spagna stessa
storia di intervento straniero in una guerra civile che rovescia il
risultato della guerra, sperimenta le nuove tecniche militari, impiega
truppe coperte e disegna i nuovi scenari e le nuove allenaze.
Per Rakac rinvio a quanto scritto da Ennio Remondino nel suo "La TV va a la
guerra", lui era in zona ai tempi.
Saluti Cad Ali'


 comunicazione, sono il prologo all'11 Settembre.
Sei un povero paranoico, secondo me. Cui prodest? Gli USA cosa ci hanno
guadagnato in questi 7 anni in cui sono stati in Bosnia? Xké il presidente
Bush se ne vuole andare dai Balcani? A tutt'oggi l'ipotesi più attendibile
alli'intervento della NATO nel '95 e nel '99 è quella della credibilità
aggiunta all'indignazione popolare dei massacri interetnici. Altrimenti xké
intervenire sono nel 1995, quando la guerra era già scoppiata in Croazia nel
1991, x contagiare la Bosnia nel 1992? Noto ke "luca16" nn ha risposto alla
mia rikiesta, è probabile quindi ke l'articolo ke ha creato tutto questo
flame sia falso?
Ciao



Sono fatti, forse il paranoico sei tu che non vuoi vederli.
Saro' un paranoico ma le torri gemelle sono venute giu', la stessa gente
coinvolta in Bosnia e' implicata nell'affare, tu credi e sii beato, hanno
bombardato Bosnia e Serbia per ordine di Babbo Natale.
C'e' una bella e gorssa base USA in Kossovo, cui prodest?


 ha scritto nel messaggio > C'e' una bella e
gorssa base USA in Kossovo, cui prodest?
Non č poi cosě grande. E in ogni caso non č poi molto utile come credi tu,
se la vedi come base per espandersi verso est, dal momento che Romania ed
Ungheria concedono l'utilizzo di basi agli USA. Quindi avrebbero messo in
piedi tutto sto casino per ottenere una base in Kossovo. Ma va....
Bye


Non so perche', quali sono i targhet, ma mi sono visto tutta la commedia, o
sono totalmente deficente e degno di ricovero, oppure andate a raccontare a
un'altro la storiella dei buoni che bombardano i cattivi.
E' ridicola propaganda, che fatti precisi smentiscono.
Se poi e' vera la remota possibilita' che per difendere i mussulmani
bosniaci e poi i mussulmani kossovari sia stato messo in piedi tutto quel
casino, c'e' da prendere tutta la CIA e mandarla urgentemente a un corso di
riabilitazione per mongoloidi della durata minima di cinque anni a
Guantanamo.
Un po' piu' di un anno fa mentre denunciavo l'estremismo islamico e la sua
espanzione in occidente, mi sono beccato del paranoico deficente
ossessionato razzista.
Questo fino a settembre dell'anno scorso, non per darmi delle arie da
veggente ma per rimarcare che forse non sono totalmente rincoglionito.
