Milosevic Found Dead

[Jaylaani]

^^^^Ali Samater was the top deputy to the president and he should be accountable for what took place in Somalia in his watch. however, I didn't say anything about him or any one else in particular. All I said was SOMALI war Criminals.

 

Who the hell is Qaybdiid?

[codetalker]

^

 

Just gave you examples of selective justice, but I didn't say you mentioned anyone in particular, sxb. I know who Cali Samatar is. Col. Cabdi Qeybdiid is the guy who was detained by Swedish police temporarily for "war crimes" in Somalia in 2005 - he was a USC rebel commander.

[Jaylaani]

^^So he's a warlord, right?

 

I think there is different set of rules applied when it comes to warlords.

[Blessed]

This is selective justice carried out by "certain" groups (not a pan-Somali movement). If we go after Somali war criminals, there must be an agreement to go after all of them - those war criminals from the military dictatorship to the war criminals in the post-91 era.

Are you for real? Somalis will never agree on that and you know it walaal. Samatar had people defending him solely because of tribal affiliation and so did Qeybdiid and Barre and every other warlord. Shoot, even insignificant little Farah gets backed by his tribe.

 

 

What is wrong if 'certain groups' pick out an individual who has committed crimes against them? Should they refrain from doing so merely because other groups choose to ignore / forgive those who wrong them?

 

If you were wronged by an individual would you wait on other Somalis or go about it your own way?

[Castro]

How is Ali Samatar able to live in the United States without being charged with war crimes?

 

To have become a "man of God" is no excuse to evade prosecution for crimes when he was not a man of God. Frankly, the victims of his reign couldn't give a rat's as$ if he turned into a monk.

[Naden]

I have no hope of war criminals being brought to justice in Somalia. I wonder how any clan-based society could possibly bypass clan allegiance and bring their murderous ilk to prosecution. Maybe the cure for us is to have people (expatriates and immigrants) move to Somalia so we become a multicultural society. I'd rather have ethnic strife than endless tribal crap.

[codetalker]

^ Bingo!

 

Originally posted by Jaylaani:

I think there is different set of rules applied when it comes to warlords.

How so?

 

Originally posted by Blessed:

What is wrong if 'certain groups' pick out an individual who has committed crimes against them?

I'm afraid you answered your own question:

 

Originally posted by Blessed:

Samatar had people defending him solely because of tribal affiliation and so did Qeybdiid and Barre and every other warlord.

Meaning, if Cali Samatar is singled-out by members of "Clan X", then "Clan Z" will see it as a witch-hunt. Look at Qeybdiid's case: "Clan A" members accuse him, and in response, "Clan B" members stage a rally in Xamar in the thousands. They think, and rightfully so, how does Qeybdiid eat the dust when we have Gen Morgan sitting amongst us?

 

If you were wronged by an individual would you wait on other Somalis or go about it your own way?

This goes beyond individuals and we both know it. This issue has reprecussions that go beyond the individual or certain group targetting a war criminal. For example, war criminals can be found in almost all the major Somali clans. How come every time a war criminal case takes centerstage, its members of a select clan (i.e. plaintiffs) v. the war criminal (who belongs to a wholly different clan)?

 

Is the war criminal's clan wrong for seeing it as a witch-hunt? I think not. I think that we go after all the war criminals (which is impossible, as you said) or find another venue that can be agreed upon. Because, at the end of the day, selective justice will fail - just as it did with the Samatar and Qeybdiid cases.

[Castro]

Originally posted by codetalker:

Is the war criminal's clan wrong for seeing it as a witch-hunt? I think not.

Yes. They are wrong.

 

A war criminal of "my" clan don't make me proud. If I had any decency, I'd be the first to prosecute him before anyone else.

[codetalker]

^

 

True, Cuban, but you're an enlightened, educated fella. Compare that to the undereducated, fully-armed Somalis back home who are susceptible to radio news and others' views.

 

See anything differently?

[Blessed]

Only with Somalis! French and UK Connected up ******, we are :rolleyes:

 

It’s not at all complicated. Some one commits a crime against a group of people and they take him to court, it’s between him and that group. His tribe isn’t put to trial and no blame is laid on them. They should excuse themselves.

 

Also, walaal, you know very well why the plaintive are usually from another tribe. Somali antagonism has always been tribal but warlords and ‘government ministers’ didn’t commit any crimes against their own.

 

That doesn’t mean their brethren should give them blind support. Reer hebel take your man to court and you have grievances against their man – go after him instead of perverting the course of justice.

 

It would only be wrong if a Somali government went after few selected people, but when citizens, expatriates for that matter as in these cases do it, I don’t see how this can be called unjust / dismissed as a witch hunt.

[Castro]

Codetalker, saaxib, that's one way to look at it but blaming the average ignoramus is not acceptable. Even "enlightened" and educated Somalis subscribe to this. This problem goes beyond educations ninyahow.

 

Let us be the first generation that gets rid of this. Unlike what afweyne did in the 70's and 80's when he "buried" the multi-headed monster of clannism with posters all around town, let's bury it right here and right now. Walaahi it's embarassing to even bring this up with anyone who's not Somali. This shidh must go and to want to bring someone of authority (e.g. Ali Samatar) to justice, even to bloody question him on his role, shouldn't have "his" clan be up in arms ready to defend him whether he was guilty or innocent. Unless and until we see things that way, we're bloody doomed saaxib. And that's that.

[Castro]

Rest Easy, Bill Clinton: Milosevic Can't Talk Anymore

by Jeremy Scahill

 

 

Slobodan Milosevic is characterized in the obituaries as the "Butcher of the Balkans." If that is the story you want to read about, please go to almost any other media outlet and read it again and again. Some are now suggesting that death is Milosevic's final revenge, that he "ended up cheating history" by dying before judgment was passed. But the world has already passed judgment on Milosevic and what is being cheated by his death is history itself.

 

What the corporate media overwhelmingly ignores in Milosevic's death is what they ignored in his life as well--his intimate knowledge of US war crimes in Yugoslavia. While Milosevic was undoubtedly a war criminal who deserved to be tried for his crimes, he was also the only man in the unique position of being able to expose and detail the full extent of the US role in the bloody disintegration of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. In fact, that is precisely what he was fighting to do at his war crimes trial when he died.

 

Because of the rule of victors' justice in the ad hoc tribunal system (a poor and unfair substitute for a true international court), Milosevic's case would have been the only international trial to potentially expose the details of the illegal, US-led NATO bombing of Yugoslavia for 78 days in 1999. While the US-backed court consistently tried to limit Milosevic's right to speak, stripping him of his right to self-representation, Milosevic battled regularly to raise US war crimes. Sadly, with Milosevic will likely die the last hope the victims of these crimes in Yugoslavia had of getting their day (if it could even be called that) in court--a tragic and unjust reality to begin with--that speaks volumes about the twisted state of international justice.

 

Milosevic's cause, regardless of what one thinks of it, was a casualty of 9/11--an event that relegated him and his trial to the annals of history before it was even over. Most people in the world--with the exception of those in the Balkans where the proceedings were broadcast live, daily--probably didn't even know Milosevic was still on trial in the Hague. It became an obscure sideshow to the blood and gore unfolding constantly on the international stage.

 

Milosevic's death means that those who bombed Yugoslavia for 78 days beginning 7 years ago this month, killing thousands, will be, once and for all protected from any public scrutiny for their crimes. However opportunistic Milosevic may have been, he would have been one of the few people to appear at the Hague that could have--and would have--laid out these crimes in great detail. Now, there is almost certain to be no condemnation of the US bombing of Radio Television Serbia, killing 16 media workers, the cluster bombing of the Nis marketplace, shredding human beings into meat, the use of depleted uranium munitions and the targeting of petrochemical plants causing toxic and chemical waste to pour into the Danube River. There will be no condemnation of the bombing of Albanian refugees by the US or the deliberate targeting of a civilian passenger train or the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Milosevic also would have discussed how the US supports a regime in Kosovo that has systematically expelled Serbs, Romas and other ethnic minorities from their homes and burnt down scores of churches. He would have discussed the role of the US in funding and arming the Kosovo Liberation Army, which operates like a death squad and how the new prime minister of Kosovo, Agim Ceku, is a US-trained war criminal who gained infamy in both the Bosnian war and the 1999 Kosovo conflict. And Milosevic would have talked of the US interference in the Yugoslav elections in 2000 and the ultimate neoliberal takeover that was the aim of Clinton's sanctions and 78 days of bombing. In reality, it would have fallen on deaf ears, but it would have been stated for the record.

 

It is ironic that Milosevic's last legal battle was an attempt to compel his old friend turned nemesis Bill Clinton to testify at his trial. If successful, Milosevic would have grilled the man who was US president through the entire Yugoslav war in what would have been a fiery direct examination. Clinton and Milosevic were once pals who talked collective strategy in the 1990s. Milosevic had many damning stories to tell and, without a doubt, uncomfortable questions to ask Clinton. The judges in Milosevic's case clearly worked to keep those moments from ever happening and the US government made clear its forceful opposition to such subpoenas of US officials, even considering invading a country that would put a US official on trial. With or without Clinton, Milosevic's defense would have brought to light some serious documentation of US war crimes and he died, muzzled, before he really got started.

 

Little attention, therefore, has been paid to Milosevic's long-term efforts--which predated 9/11, the 1999 NATO bombing and his own trial--to expose the presence of al Qaeda in the Balkans--from Bosnia to Kosovo. With 9/11, Milosevic's talk of al Qaeda was easily dismissed as laughable, pathetic opportunism. But those who followed Milosevic's career and more importantly the events of the 1990s in Yugoslavia know it was none of those. Those allegations were based on true events the US does not want discussed in an international court. Following the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, many Mujahadeen eventually turned their sights on Yugoslavia where they went to fight alongside the Bosnian Muslims against the Orthodox Serbs and Catholic Croats. Once again, the US and bin Laden were on the same team. To this day there are reports of training camps in Bosnia, which remains under occupation. It is also a likely training ground for future blowback.

 

In his opening statement, Milosevic alluded to some of the information he would introduce during his defense. "In 1998 when [Clinton envoy Richard] Holbrooke visited us in Belgrade, we told him the information we had at our disposal, that in Northern Albania the KLA is being aided by Osama bin Laden, that he was arming, training, and preparing the members of this terrorist organisation in Albania. However, they decided to cooperate with the KLA and indirectly, therefore, with bin Laden, although before that he had bombed the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania [and] had already declared war." Milosevic concluded that "one day all this will have to come to light, these links."

 

That, however, is unlikely and more so now that Milosevic is dead.

 

To be sure, there will never be indictments of these US war criminals at the Hague: Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Jamie Rubin, William Cohen, Sandy Berger, Richard Holbrooke and Wesley Clark. For many of Serbia's victims of US war crimes, Milosevic's trial was a "Hail Mary" pass, as awful of an historical irony as that is, aimed at someone recognizing their forgotten suffering.

 

It is a sad testimony to the state of international jurisprudence that after many attempts to find justice, the only hope for US victims in the Yugoslavia wars was the trial defense of a man many of those same victims despised. If there was an independent international court that was recognized and respected by the US, those responsible for bombing Yugoslavia would have been alongside Slobodan Milosevic in the docks these past years instead of having their responsibility being buried with him.

 

Source

[Jaylaani]

Originally posted by codetalker:

^ Bingo!

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jaylaani:

I think there is different set of rules applied when it comes to warlords.

How so?

 

Warlords aren’t part of sitting government.