[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18099008[/url]
[quote=BBC News][B]Prosecutors have described the chaos leading up the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, on the second day of Bosnian Serb ex-commander Ratko Mladic's trial.[/B]
Video shown to the court in The Hague showed panicking civilians swamping UN trucks as Bosnian Serb forces neared.
Gen Mladic faces 11 charges, including genocide, over the 1992-95 Bosnian war. A not guilty plea was entered for him.
However, the presiding judge later adjourned the hearing indefinitely due to disclosure errors by prosecutors.
The judge, Alphons Orie, said judges were still analysing the "scope and full impact" of the errors.
Prosecuting counsel Peter McCloskey said that the crimes at Srebrenica had never been in dispute so the prosecution's focus would be on individual criminal responsibility.
He said that the Bosnian Serb Army was not an "army out of control" and that Gen Mladic had been on the ground and in command.
"We have radio intercepts of VRS [Bosnian Serb] soldiers and officers discussing murders. We have video of two of the actual executions themselves. So let me be perfectly clear, the crime will not be the main focus of this prosecution. This case will be primarily about one issue. The individual criminal responsibility of Ratko Mladic," he said.
The court watched video of local people panicking in a UN compound outside Srebrenica on 11 July 1995 as Bosnian Serb forces approached, followed by scenes of Gen Mladic triumphantly entering the town.
"We give this town to the Serbs as a gift," he says to the camera.
Another video playing in court showed Gen Mladic addressing a bus full of Muslims, telling them: "I am giving you your life as a gift."
More footage showed Gen Mladic berating Dutch UN peacekeepers.
Mr McCloskey concluded by saying that Srebrenica "was a Bosnian genocide that we must never forget".
During the evidence Gen Mladic listened intently, occasionally making notes.
The Srebrenica massacre was the worst atrocity in Europe since the end of World War II.
Serb fighters overran the enclave in eastern Bosnia - supposedly under the protection of Dutch UN peacekeepers. Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) men and boys were separated off, shot dead and bulldozed into mass graves - later to be dug up and reburied in more remote spots.
Gen Mladic is also charged in connection with the 44-month siege of Sarajevo during which more than 10,000 people died.
[B]'Criminal endeavour'[/B]
On the first day of the trial on Wednesday, the prosecution at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) argued that Gen Mladic had intended to "ethnically cleanse" Bosnia.
Prosecuting counsel Dermot Groome said they would prove Gen Mladic's hand in the crimes.
Mr Groome said that by the time Gen Mladic and his troops had "murdered thousands in Srebrenica", they were "well-rehearsed in the craft of murder".
He then showed judges video of the aftermath of a notorious shelling of a market in the Bosnian capital Sarajevo, in which dozens of people died.
Mr Groome said there was "no doubt" that Gen Mladic had controlled the shelling of Sarajevo. He had promised that the city would shake, the prosecutor said.
Mr Groome said the attacks were part of an "overarching" plan to ethnically cleanse non-Serbs from parts of Bosnia.
He said crimes of sexual violence had played an integral part of the process of "taking over and ethnically cleansing Bosnia".
The prosecution also highlighted the role of snipers in Sarajevo, showing images of a child shot dead on a street and pictures taken from sniper nests overlooking the besieged city.
The trial had been scheduled to begin hearing evidence on 29 May.
However, at the end of Thursday's hearing, Judge Orie said: "In light of the prosecution's significant disclosure errors... the chamber hereby informs the parties that it has decided to suspend the start of the presentation of evidence.
"The chamber is still in the process of gathering information as to the scope and the full impact of this error. The chamber aims to announce the start date of the prosecutions evidence as soon as possible."
The BBC's Allan Little at The Hague says the court will now be adjourned for some months.
Gen Mladic spent 15 years on the run before being apprehended by Serb forces last May and sent to The Hague.
The number of crimes of which he stands accused has been almost halved to speed up his trial.
Judicial authorities have rejected defence calls to delay proceedings, most recently a petition to have the Dutch presiding judge replaced on grounds of alleged bias.
[B]Strong emotions[/B]
Gen Mladic is accused of committing genocide and other crimes against Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) and Bosnian Croats in a campaign of ethnic cleansing that began in 1992 and climaxed in Srebrenica.
Pre-trial hearings have been characterised by ill-tempered outbursts from Gen Mladic, who has heckled the judge and interrupted proceedings.
"The whole world knows who I am," he said at a hearing last year.
"I am General Ratko Mladic. I defended my people, my country... now I am defending myself."
The case has stirred up strong emotions among watching survivors, with some shouting "murderer" and "killer" from the court gallery.
Members of the "Mothers of Srebrenica" group were among those attending Thursday's hearing
Axel Hagedorn, a lawyer for victims' relatives, said it was a "very important [day] for the Mothers of Srebrenica".
However, while Gen Mladic's critics consider him a butcher, to some Serbs he is a national hero.
Gen Mladic suffered at least one stroke while in hiding and remains in frail health.
Some former Bosnian Serb commanders have already been convicted by the international court in connection with the Srebrenica killings.
In 2010 Vujadin Popovic and Ljubisa Beara were sentenced to life in prison. Five other defendants were jailed for between five and 35 years.
The architect of the Balkan wars, former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, died in detention in his cell in 2006, before receiving a verdict.
[img]http://www.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/dhtml_slides/09/srebrenica_massacre/img/01_bosnian_war_466map.gif[/img][/quote]
I like how some retarded Serbs actually support this guy.
Yet they live in my country instead of Serbia which they think is "the best country on Earth".
As a Serb, I think that he only did his job as a general. He was no more than a soldier.
One mistake he made that would cost him dearly is Srebrenica, but then again Srebenica is partialy UN's fault since they did terrible job here.
He did it for retaliation because Naser Olic destroyed around 100 villages around that region and killed ¬5000 Serbs.
Don't get me wrong, the act has no excuse, but if UN did it's job right, there would've been way less violence.
[quote]The architect of the Balkan wars, former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, died in detention in his cell in 2006, before receiving a verdict.[/quote]
Now this is just pure bias. All three sides are to blame for war (Tudjman, Milosevic, Izebegovic) yet the media wants to potray it as if the Serbians are the only bad guys and that there wasn't any violence against them. That's what makes me angry the most.
[QUOTE=Aman VII;35989993]I like how some retarded Serbs actually support this guy.
Yet they live in my country instead of Serbia which they think is "the best country on Earth".[/QUOTE]
Of course they will support him beacuse in their eyes, he was the one defending them against Croat and Muslim forces. Just like Bosniak diaspora treats Oric as a hero, or Croatian one treating Tudjman as a hero.
-Yeah,UN really fucked up there,"maintaining neutrality".If UN really cared,they would at least try to keep civilians safe(regardless of nationality).
-"The architect of the Balkan wars, former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic..." About that part,I tend to hear rumours from time to time that it were both Tudjman and Milosevic that were the architects of the war,that it was all planned...in a way.
-All that can be said now is that it was an unnecessary war in which the civilian casualties surpassed the military casualties,war crimes were commited and the relations between Croatia/Bosnia and Serbia were even more unsettled.The war accomplished nothing(nothing good or worth the sacrifice,at least).Both sides were cruel to the civilians of the other and that`s a fact.
[QUOTE=Lycanthorph;35990497]
-"The architect of the Balkan wars, former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic..." About that part,I tend to hear rumours from time to time that it were both Tudjman and Milosevic that were the architects of the war,that it was all planned...in a way.
[/QUOTE]
Yes. Originally the plan was to divide Bosnia between Serbia and Croatia, but then world intervened (more like west because that wouldn't fit in their plans for Balkans (ie. Germany wouldn't be able to have it's dick so deep in Croatia if that happened, but I'll stop disscusing that since that would be going off topic)) and Croatia had to change if it wanted to save it's own skin.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karađorđevo_agreement[/url]
The U.N. fucking up doesn't excuse ethnic cleansing Spirit Breaker, implying that he was no more than a soldier misrepresents his responsibility
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;35990885]The U.N. fucking up doesn't excuse ethnic cleansing Spirit Breaker, implying that he was no more than a soldier misrepresents his responsibility[/QUOTE]
I already said that.
[quote]Don't get me wrong, the act has no excuse, but if UN did it's job right, there would've been way less violence.[/quote]
I'm not denying anything, the thing that makes me really mad is thanks to media and propaganda, everyone knows how Serbs did the bad stuff yet nobody knows about Croatian or Muslim ethnic cleansing.
Coming from a rather uninformed position I thought most people recognised the conflict as absolutely disgusting from both sides? However, I still think your wording de-emphasises the role Mladić played, the article itself states that the trial is focused upon the role he played rather than the massacres which occurred. Ergo, The atrocities committed by everyone else is irrelevant to his prosecution
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;35991019]Coming from a rather uninformed position I thought most people recognised the conflict as absolutely disgusting from both sides? [/QUOTE]
I disagree.
The more I read into the case the more I think Mladic won't get a fair trial.
[QUOTE=Mabus;35991189]The more I read into the case the more I think Mladic won't get a fair trial.[/QUOTE]
You don't say? They're practically keeping Seselj in there for years without any evidence, they don't know what to do anymore because he figured them out and even made witness confess that he was forced to lie by Hague.
This article is nicely written. [url]http://www.fpif.org/articles/serb_demonization_as_propaganda_coup[/url]
This has been going on since i was 5. I am not sure what it's about exactly, but no year went by without it being on the news.
I don't think you can justify the Serbian's mass murder with an ''eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'' altitude since thousands of innocent poeple got killed who probably didn't want to have anything to do with the war at all.
It just happens that NATO backed the Bosnians so after their bombings the serbs pretty much lost the war, and it are always only the losers who get convicted for warcrimes. Wich is indeed unfair.
It didn't just happen, they needed scapegoat and they used Serbia as one and they successfully demonized it. There hasn't been a single time NATO helped Serbia.
They bombed Serb Krajina, they bombed Republic of Srpska, they bombed Kosovo, hell, they even bombed Serbia itself.
If you look at some non mainstream documentaries, you can see that there were Serbs in Sarajevo, and they got along perfectly fine with muslims. There were loads of Serbian-Muslim couples, but CNN and BBC insisted on promoting the violence between people so they could justify their bombings.
If you have time, check this video out. It's pretty good.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGpWcej-Fog[/media]
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35990187]As a Serb, I think that he only did his job as a general. He was no more than a soldier.[/QUOTE]
defending a serbian war criminal
woww
[QUOTE=thisispain;35995113]defending a serbian war criminal
woww[/QUOTE]
Are you that dense that you didn't even bother to read rest of the post?
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995051]they needed scapegoat and they used Serbia as one and they successfully demonized it[/QUOTE]
of course ignoring the fact that serbian militants invaded UN designed areas and slaughtered civilians
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Deliberate_Force[/url]
i'm against bombing of any kind and i've always hated the reaction towards the Serbian people from the West, but you're fucking with history right now
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995051]CNN and BBC insisted on promoting the violence between people so they could justify their bombings.[/QUOTE]
you need to back that up dude, that's an incredibly serious accusation.
[editline]17th May 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995127]Are you that dense that you didn't even bother to read rest of the post?[/QUOTE]
you said Srebrenica was "a mistake" and that it was partly the UN's fault.
it's the not the UN's fault that Mladic decided to attack Srebrenica
[quote]of course ignoring the fact that serbian militants invaded UN designed areas and slaughtered civilians[/quote]
And where was UN before Srebrenica when Naser Olic destroyed all nearby Serbian villages and harvested resources? Or Croatian violence against Serbs and forcing them out from every public place and just directing violence against them? Do note both of these things happened before Serbian attacks, so I still stand by my opinion that Serbs were used as a scapegoats.
Also, isn't it amusing how Croats and Bosniaks started counter attack cooperating with NATO bombings (and later on caused Operation Storm which forced 300 000 Serbs out of Croatia and many of them were slaughtered while they were running away)?
Oh, and some of UN's people ended up being high ranked Muslim/Croatian officers, so that may explain why UN failed so badly (I'll source this up later)
[QUOTE=thisispain;35995233]
you need to back that up dude, that's an incredibly serious accusation.[/QUOTE]
It's in the documenatry I posted above, I'll see to find exact minutes later.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35995233]
you said Srebrenica was "a mistake" and that it was partly the UN's fault.
it's the not the UN's fault that Mladic decided to attack Srebrenica[/QUOTE]
Well I think that it is their fault because what the hell are they doing there in the first place if they can't do their job right? They were there to prevent anyone from touching Srebrenica, and they failed at it badly. They just stood aside and did nothing while genocide was happening.
And on the other side, Srebrenica was of high strategic importance, and it was a war. He even warned them to evacuate which they (understandably) refused.
[quote]The Serb authorities remained intent on capturing the enclave. On 13 April 1993, the Serbs told the UNHCR representatives that they would attack the town within two days unless the Bosniaks surrendered and agreed to be evacuated. The Bosniaks refused to surrender.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995381]And where was UN before Srebrenica when Naser Olic destroyed all nearby Serbian villages and harvested resources?[/QUOTE]
He was indicted by the UN for those crimes.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995381]Or Croatian violence against Serbs and forcing them out from every public place and just directing violence against them? Do note both of these things happened before Serbian attacks, so I still stand by my opinion that Serbs were used as a scapegoats.[/QUOTE]
we're not talking about long-term sectarian violence, we're talking about the specific outbreak of violence there which was caused by these military groups under the Serbian banner. even Naser Olic was supposedly responding to violence caused by Serbian militant forces. that doesn't excuse anything but it does mean that it's historically wrong to suggest that it wasn't a one-sided conflict.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995381]Also, isn't it amusing how Croats and Bosniaks started counter attack cooperating with NATO bombings (and later on caused Operation Storm which forced 300 000 Serbs out of Croatia and many of them were slaughtered while they were running away)?
Oh, and some of UN's people ended up being high ranked Muslim/Croatian officers, so that may explain why UN failed so badly (I'll source this up later)[/QUOTE]
Operation Storm did not involve the NATO to any particular degree.
just for the record i'm not anti-serbian in any extent, I even agree with you when you say that serbians have been demonized and scapegoated.
but you are taking completely the wrong path by apologizing and defending militant Serbian actions. it's counter-productive and it's only going to continue the extremely long conflict between the people there.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35996322]He was indicted by the UN for those crimes.[/QUOTE]
Pffffttt
[quote]
The trial
The trial began on October 6, 2004 and the prosecution completed its case on June 1, 2005. A week later the tribunal dropped two of the counts against him, withdrew all allegation of plundering public and private property; the tribunal also dropped two villages from the list of alleged raids. The defense case commenced on July 4, 2005 and ended on April 10, 2006. The prosecution asked for an [B]18 year prison term[/B], while the defense asked for an acquittal. In all there were 182 trial days, 82 witnesses testifying (52 prosecution and 20 defense) and 1,649 exhibits presented as evidence. The decision in the case was delivered on June 30, 2006. .
The verdict
The International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) convicted Naser Orić for failing to prevent the murder and inhumane treatment of Serb prisoners. Orić, sentenced to [B]two years[/B] in prison, was released immediately for time already served. [/quote]
They let him off scot free. Compare him to Milosevic.
Milosevic didn't even survive long enough to hear his verdict (nor was he anywhere near it) and they plan to do the same thing to Seselj.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35996322]
Operation Storm did not involve the NATO to any particular degree.
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Summer_'95[/url]
It was indirect cause to it. That's what happens when you give one side too much power and not do your job to just control peace, not balance powers.
[quote]just for the record i'm not anti-serbian in any extent, I even agree with you when you say that serbians have been demonized and scapegoated.
but you are taking completely the wrong path by apologizing and defending militant Serbian actions. it's counter-productive and it's only going to continue the extremely long conflict between the people there.[/quote]
The point of my arguments is not to defend Serbian crimes. I just want people to know that Serbians aren't the only ones who did bad stuff, and that nobody was innocent in this war. The only one who lost in this war are people, they are too easy to manipulate with all media around.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35996476]The point of my arguments is not to defend Serbian crimes. I just want people to know that Serbians aren't the only ones who did bad stuff, and that nobody was innocent in this war. The only one who lost in this war is people, they are too easy to manipulate with all media around.[/QUOTE]
but you're doing it the wrong way, using tactics that apologize rather than inform. especially when you espouse yourself a serbian and refer to militant groups by their ethnic group.
note how i never said The Serbs killed these people, i said serbian militant groups did. there's an important distinction there.
I know of a guy who's name sounds kind of like Mladic.
[editline]17th May 2012[/editline]
He's Indian.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35996668]note how i never said The Serbs killed these people, i said serbian militant groups did. there's an important distinction there.[/QUOTE]
That`s a mistake people tend to make often,either by mistake or on purpose.
[QUOTE=Spirit_Breaker;35995381]And where was UN before Srebrenica when Naser Olic destroyed all nearby Serbian villages and harvested resources? Or Croatian violence against Serbs and forcing them out from every public place and just directing violence against them? Do note both of these things happened before Serbian attacks, so I still stand by my opinion that Serbs were used as a scapegoats.
Also, isn't it amusing how Croats and Bosniaks started counter attack cooperating with NATO bombings (and later on caused Operation Storm which forced 300 000 Serbs out of Croatia and many of them were slaughtered while they were running away)?
Oh, and some of UN's people ended up being high ranked Muslim/Croatian officers, so that may explain why UN failed so badly (I'll source this up later)[/QUOTE]
Lol
I don't care if every Croatian soldier ate Serbian babies for breakfast. That doesn't excuse Serbian crimes.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't excuse Croat war crimes either or American ones. Because I'm pretty sure the bombing of Pink TV (A civilian television building) water supplies and hospitals isn't exactly playing by the rules that they constantly claim to enforce. Hell, from what I've read a number of countries tried to bring this to light but got voted down in the security council, by shock horror members of Nato.
[QUOTE=Mabus;36003645]I'm pretty sure that doesn't excuse Croat war crimes either or American ones. Because I'm pretty sure the bombing of Pink TV (A civilian television building) water supplies and hospitals isn't exactly playing by the rules that they constantly claim to enforce. Hell, from what I've read a number of countries tried to bring this to light but got voted down in the security council, by shock horror members of Nato.[/QUOTE]
It was RTS.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_the_Radio_Television_of_Serbia_headquarters[/url]
[quote=wikipedia]
N Secretary General Kofi Annan was critical of the intervention, and of the indecision by the United Nations. Italy, itself a NATO member, was reluctant to agree to the NATO operations due to the tens of thousands of refugees that conflict would bring to Italy, and due to the large number of financial investments Italy holds in Kosovo. Greece was opposed, but had to agree to it under pressure of other members. The war has caused wide anti-US sentiment in the Greek population, who are historical friends of the Serbs. Other NATO members were reluctant too, and especially uncomfortable were new members, Poland, Hungary and Czech Republic. Other countries which condemned the bombing were Russia, China, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Algeria. Iran also condemned the bombing by calling the campaign 'illegal'.
However, a Resolution proposed by Russia condemning the bombing was defeated in the Security Council 12-3, with only Russia, China, and Namibia voting in favor while Argentina, Bahrain, Brazil, Gabon, Gambia, Malaysia, and Slovenia, along with NATO members the US, Britain, France, Canada, and Netherlands voted against it. In 1999, a Canadian law professor, Michael Mandel, filed a formal complaint of NATO war crimes with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia charging 67 NATO leaders with war crimes. These complaints were dismissed by the tribunal who claimed they had no jurisdiction over NATO.
The Council of State, the Supreme Court of Greece, found NATO guilty of war crimes for its 1999 bombing[/quote]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
