NATO headquarters in Skopje
spokesman major Eric Munio states on Monday
that North-Atlantic military Alliance has
no plan to bring the refugees back from
Macedonia to Kosovo because, he says, it is
the job of the international relief
organizations, UNHCR above all.

In this way, Munio denied his boss, NATO
secretary general Javier Solana who has
recently stated that the plan to bring back
the ethnic Albanian refugees on Kosovo,
once the peace accord to that Serbia's
province is signed, had been already made
in Brussels.

NATO is no tourist agency to deal with the
problems of the refugees' returning, Munio
stresses and the present journalists
believed him because this military Alliance
is mainly dealing with the killing and
destruction and has caused the mass flee of
Albanians from Kosovo, dropping the bombs
and launching missiles on them daily.

However, journalists did not believe the
other part of the Munio's today's briefing
because, as the western officials, he
promised maximal economic help for
Macedonia since this state, as he said,
invested a lot in taking care of the
refugees.

Macedonian officials, among whom the
loudest one is the foreign minister deputy
Boris Trajkovski, persistently point out
that America and western-European
countries, the NATO member-states, have
abandoned this state, not providing it with
the promised aid.

Instead of aid, the more brave Macedonian
ministers notice, west has reduced us to
poverty.

USA have their
soldier in the Albanian border
area in the aim of secret help
to the terrorists of the
so-called Kosovo Liberation
Army (KLA), London "Sunday
Times" says on Sunday relying
on the testimonies of its
reporters.

Although the official
Washington and NATO claim not
to have "formal contacts" with
the KLA, London paper stresses
that more and more evidences
are occurring concerning the
cooperation of Washington with
the Albanian terrorists. The
paper recalls that a group of
KLA terrorists is situated in
an American center in Kukes in
the north of Albania.

"Sunday Times" finds out that
discontent is notable among
the NATO officers because of
that cooperation. An officer
states that he is aware that
NATO would have to disarm the
KLA and even fight against it
once the political agreement
is reached.

Appointment of the Agim Ceku,
formal brigadier of the
Croatian Army to be a
"commander" of the KLA is
interpreted in the light of
that secret cooperation in the
British military circles. Ceku
started his cooperation with
the American officers and
officials in Croatia so his
arrival serves the further
"mutual work".

he Ushtria Clirimtare e Kosove (UCK) or Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has several “parents” — including the Iranian
and Bosnia-Herzegovina governments — and several important “midwives-cum-doting aunts”, including the United States,
Croatian and Turkish governments and a wide range of individuals. The KLA would not be the significant factor it is today in
the Kosovo crisis, however, had it not been for the blessing of the United States Clinton Administration, and for the direct and
indirect support given to it by the Clinton Administration.

It now seems clear that the US Clinton Administration and the German Government have been actively supporting the KLA
since 1992 with weapons, training, intelligence and, most importantly, significant political encouragement. The final turning point
in KLA fortunes came when US special envoys Richard Holbrooke and Peter Galbraith posed in 1998 for pictures with the
KLA leadership, thereby cementing the endorsement. Ironically, the KLA has its origins in the stalinist/leninist/maoist Albanian
Party of Labor of the late Albanian leader Enver Hoxha. Today, although clearly of a maoist bent — its leader, Adem Demaci,
uses the maoist clenched fist salute constantly — it also uses the appeals of nationalism and religion to win converts among the
Kosovar Albanians.

Gradually, following the end of the stalinist era in Albania in 1992, the KLA, by now mainly operating out of Germany and
among the expatriate Albanian Kosovars, as well as inside Albania, began drifting more toward becoming a purely criminal
organization, almost totally preoccupied with narcotics trafficking and extortion to sustain itself. Not much has changed since
then, apart from the addition to the KLA’s persona of political-military support from the Iranian Government and then from the
US and German governments.

In a landmark report — Italy Becomes Iran’s New Base for Terrorist Operations — written for Defense & Foreign
Affairs Strategic Policy in late 1997, and published in the April-May 1998 edition, Senior Editor Yossef Bodansky noted:
“y late 1997, the Tehran-sponsored training and preparations for the Liberation Army of Kosovo (UCK — Ushtria
Clirimtare e Kosoves — in Albanian; OVK in Serbian), as well as the transfer of weapons and experts via Albania, were
being increased. Significantly, Tehran’s primary objective in Kosovo has evolved from merely assisting a Muslim minority in
distress to furthering the consideration of the Islamic strategic access along the Sarejevo-to- Tiranë line. And not only by
expanding and escalating subversive and Islamist-political presence can this objective be attained.”

“In the Fall of 1997, the uppermost leadership in Tehran ordered the IRGC [Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps; the
Pasdaran] High Command to launch a major program for shipping large quantities of weapons and other military supplies to
the Albanian clandestine organizations in Kosovo.”

“... y early December 1997, Iranian intelligence had already delivered the first shipments of hand grenades, machine- guns,
assault rifles, night vision equipment, and communications gear from stockpiles in Albania to Kosovo. ... the Iranians began
sending promising Albanian and UCK commanders for advanced training in [Iranian-controlled] al-Quds forces and IRGC
camps in Iran. Meanwhile, weapons shipments continue. Thus Tehran is well on its way to establishing a bridgehead in
Kosovo.”

The report detailed the KLA’s requirements for men and equipment, and outlined the KLA’s proposed theaters of operations.
[The full text of the report is available on the Defense & Foreign Affairs website at www.StrategicStudies.org.]

The report further went on to say that the KLA’s radical wing was considering the assassination of the leader of the moderate
Democratic League of Kosovo (DLK), Dr Ibrahim Rugova, and Fehmi Agani, the DLK deputy chairman, and blaming
Belgrade for the killings. Dr Rugova, however, escaped assassination and remained in Yugoslavia to help negotiate a peaceful
solution to the Kosovo crisis. Even after the NATO bombings began on March 24, 1999, he remained in Yugoslavia to help
negotiate an end to the crisis, a move which has led KLA sources to “leak” to the media the fact that Dr Rugova was, in fact,
“a virtual prisoner” of the Yugoslav Government, something which Dr Rugova’s visibility in the Yugoslav media should have
dispelled.

Dr Rugova’s position, however, is not one which the US Clinton Administration wishes to hear. The US committed itself to the
KLA, and therefore to trying to break off Kosovo — with its 20 ethnic groups, not just the Kosovar Albanians — into a
separate state. So the thought that Dr Rugova was “a virtual prisoner” remained in the media interpretation, blessed by the
Clinton White House. Either because of political commitment, or to simplify the public’s perceptions, the Clinton Administration
has promoted the view that the KLA represents those Kosovo residents of Albanian origin. Clearly, the KLA does not. The
KLA has for some years based its revenue collection on extorting money from expatriate Kosovars under the threat of
assassination of their relatives at home, and on drug trafficking and violence aimed largely at the Kosovo people themselves.

The KLA is the principal proponent of the “greater Albania” philosophy, under which the organization first hopes to achieve an
independent Kosovo under its control and then to use that base to take over Albania itself, given that Albania is currently in a
virtual state of anarchy. Before that stage is reached, however, the swelling Albanian minority in the Former Yugoslav Republic
of Macedonia (FYRM) would be targeted for either complete takeover or for the “Albanian part” to be targeted for
“independence”. These are objectives which the KLA does not bother to hide. However, the German and US administrations
have chosen to ignore these objectives, and the ongoing criminal activities of the organization.

As noted, the KLA, supported since 1992 by the US and Iran — who are, in fact, strategic opponents, given the Iranian
clerical administration’s structural incompatibility with the West — received much support and training from the radical Muslim
leadership of Bosnia-Herze- govina, under President Alija Izetbegoviæ. It may be a matter of some significance that during
1992, before William Clinton became US President, he signed, as Governor of the US State of Arkansas, an “initiative” with
the “Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina”. In response, the Bosnians “pronounce[d] the month of April 1992 as ‘The
Month of Bosnia-Berzegovina and Arkansas’”. The Official Gazette of the Bosnians, in February 1992, published the following
item, dated February 15, 1992: “On acceptance of the initiative of the governor of the state of Arkansas, on
establishment of close cooperation with the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina: The initiative of the governor of the
state of Arkansas on establishment of close cooperation between the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina in the field of
culture, education, economy, science and other forms of cooperation is hereby accepted.”

The implications for the KLA are apparent in this closeness.

Ironically, the KLA’s head of élite forces, Muhammed al-Zawahiri, is the brother of Ayman al-Zawahiri, the military
commander for Saudi-born terrorist leader, Osama bin Laden. The US Clinton Administration has, of course, declared bin
Laden “public enemy number one” for his alleged involvement in the bombing of the two US embassies in East Africa in 1998.
And Ayman al-Zawahiri has been implicated in the assassination attempt in 1995 against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Little wonder that numerous US policy analysts, even those who are hostile to Yugoslavia as a basic stance, are extremely
uncomfortable with the Clinton Administration’s close ties with the KLA.

There is no doubt that the involvement of the two brothers al-Zawahiri in the two movements is not coincidental. Ben Works,
director of the Strategic Research Institute of the US, noted: “There’s no doubt that bin Laden’s people have been in Kosovo
helping to arm, equip and train the KLA. ... [T]he [US] Administration’s policy in Kosovo is to help bin Laden. It almost seems
as if the Clinton Administration’s policy is to guarantee more terrorism.”

Noted strategic analyst and columnist, former US Army Colonel Harry Summers, said on August 12, 1998, that in Kosovo, the
US found itself “championing the very Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups who are our mortal enemies elsewhere”.

The KLA’s criminal activities are well-known in Europe, but in nearby Italy, they are of greatest concern, because increased
war will make its first impact on the European Union’s prosperity by affecting Italy. In the first two weeks of January 1999,
alone, there were nine murders carried out in Milan by KLA assets. The line between the KLA and the other purely criminal
Albanian mafia elements is now indistinguishable.

And yet this is the group favored by the Clinton Administration (and as a result by the Blair Administration in the UK) over the
moderate Kosovo Albanian leaders who have always sought to create a situation in which Yugoslavs of Albanian origin could
live, pray and work in harmony alongside the other 25 Yugoslav nationalities. Indeed, Clinton and Blair deliberately overturned
a workable agreement signed by all Yugoslav parties in Kosovo so that the KLA-written “Rambouillet Accords” could be
served up as an ultimatum to the Yugoslav Government.

Agim Gashi, 35, an ethnic Albanian from the Kosovo capital, Pristina, was, until his recent arrest, the major drug dealer in
Milan. In a March 15, 1999, article (ie: before the bombing began) by writer William Norman Grigg, an Italian police telephone
intercept was cited in which Gashi urged his Turkish heroin suppliers to continue shipments during the holy Muslim period of
Ramadan. Gashi said that the continuation of the shipments was for the sake of an important cause: “To submerge Christian
infidels in drugs.” But at least part of the billions which Gashi made from the narcotics trade went to buy a variety of weapons
for the KLA. Most of the weapons were from pirated Russian stocks, ironically. Today, Russia is trying to reinforce Yugoslavia
in the fight against the KLA and NATO.

Grigg’s article continued:

The developments leading up to the Administration’s announcement of a US mission to Kosovo were projected with uncanny prescience in an
August 12, 1998 analysis by the US Senate Republican Policy Committee (RPC). The report noted that ‘planning for a US-led NATO
intervention in Kosovo is now largely in place ... The only missing element seems to be an event “with suitably vivid media coverage” that
would make the intervention politically salable, in the same way that a dithering Administration finally decided on intervention in Bosnia in 1995
after a series of “Serb mortar attacks” took the lives of dozens of civilians: attacks which, upon closer examination, may in fact have been the
work of the Muslim regime in Sarajevo, the main beneficiary of the intervention.’

“That the Administration is waiting for a similar trigger in Kosovo is increasingly obvious,” observed the RPC report. Last July [1998], the
Administration had already described the “trigger” event it was seeking as a pretext for intervention. The August 4 [1998] Washington Post
quoted “a senior US Defense Department official” who told reporters on July 15 that “we’re not anywhere near making a decision for any kind
of armed intervention in Kosovo right now”. The Post observed that the official “listed only one thing that might trigger a policy change: ‘I
think if some levels of atrocities were reached that would be intolerable, that would probably be a trigger.’

The “trigger” was pulled on January 16, 1999, when William Walker, the [US] Administration official assigned to Kosovo with a team of
observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), announced that a “massacre” of more than 40 ethnic Albanian
peasants by Serbian security personnel had taken place in the village of Raèak. The January 20 New York Times observed that the Racak
“massacre” followed “a well-established pattern: Albanian guerillas in the Kosovo Liberation Army kill a Serb policeman or two. Serb forces
retaliate by flattening a village. This time they took the lives of more than 40 ethnic Albanians, including many elderly and one child.”

However, as the French newspaper Le Figaro reported on the same day, there was ample reason to believe that Walker’s assessment of the
situation was made in “undue haste”. Walker, the US official who headed a 700-man OSCE “verification” team monitoring a ceasefire in Kosovo,
accused Serbian police of conducting a massacre “in cold blood”. According to Le Figaro’s account, Serb policemen, after notifying both the
media and OSCE officials, conducted a raid on a KLA stronghold. After several hours of combat, Serbian police announced that they had killed
10 KLA personnel and seized a large cache of weapons. Journalists observed several OSCE officials talking with ethnic Albanian villagers in an
attempt to determine the casualty count.

“The scene of Albanian corpses in civilian clothes lined up in a ditch which would shock the whole world was not discovered until the next
morning, around 9am,” reported the French newspaper. “At that time, the village was once again taken over by armed [KLA] soldiers who led
the foreign visitors, as soon as they arrived, toward the supposed massacre site. Around noon, William Walker in person arrived and expressed
his indignation.” All of the Albanian witnesses interviewed by the media and OSCE observers on January 16 related the same version of events:
namely, that Serbian police had forced their way into homes, separated the women from the men, and dragged the men to the hilltops to be
unceremoniously executed.

The chief difficulty with this account, according to Le Figaro, is that television footage taken during the January 15 battle in Racak “radically
contradict that version. It was in fact an empty village that the police entered in the morning ... The shooting was intense, as they were fired
on from [KLA] trenches dug into the hillside. The fighting intensified sharply on the hilltops above the village.” Rather than a pitiless attack on
helpless villagers, the unedited film depicts a firefight between police and encircled KLA guerillas, with the latter group getting by far the worst
of the engagement. Further complicating things for the “official” account is the fact that “journalists found only very few cartridges around the
ditch where the massacre supposedly took place”.

“What really happened?” asks Le Figaro. “During the night, could the [KLA] have gathered the bodies, in fact killed by Serb bullets, to set up
a scene of cold-blooded massacre?” Similar skepticism was expressed by Le Monde, a publication whose editorial slant is decidedly
antagonistic to the Serbian side in any Balkan conflict.

“Isn’t the Racak massacre just too perfect?” wondered Le Monde correspondent Christophe Chatelot in a January 21 dispatch from Kosovo.
Eyewitness accounts collected by Chatelot contradicted the now official version of the “massacre”, describing instead a pitched battle between
police and well-entrenched KLA fighters in a nearly abandoned village. “How could the Serb police have gathered a group of men and led them
calmly toward the execution site while they were constantly under fire from [KLA] fighters?” wrote Chatelot. “How could the ditch located on
the edge of Racak [where the massacre victims were later found] have escaped notice by local inhabitants familiar with the surroundings who
were present before nightfall? Or by the observers who were present for over two hours in this tiny village? Why so few cartridges around the
corpses, so little blood in the hollow road where 23 people are supposed to have been shot at close range with several bullets in the head?
Rather, weren’t the bodies of the Albanians killed in combat by the Serb police gathered into the ditch to create a horror scene which was sure
to have an appalling effect on public opinion?”

The Need for “Victory”

Conflict resolution usually comes only in one of two forms: a victory in which “peace” is imposed upon a beaten enemy; and a
mutual victory in which each side feels that honor and national objectives have been satisfied. The Serbs were overrun in
Kosovo, their most holy territory, by the Turks at the Battle of Kosovo in 1389; they did not, however, submit to the Turkish
overlords, eventually fighting for, and gaining, their independence again in the early 19th Century in one of the first major wars
against feudalism.

So today’s Serbs are unlikely to accept the alienation of their lands; certainly any forced division of Serbian territory would
result in years — even centuries — of conflict in one form or another.

So “victory” for the two contestants in the current Balkan war is seen as, on the one hand, the perpetuation of national
sovereignty, and on the other hand as a final end to communism in Europe. The NATO states also see “justice” for the
Kosovar Albanians as part of the equation, even though the NATO 1999 military approach has been largely responsible for the
destruction of Kosovo’s economic and social viability.

Given that a cessation of military activity and embargoes by NATO against Yugoslavia would restore that country’s sense of
sovereignty, and that some kind of symbolism that Yugoslavia embraces Western market economics could be found, there is
very little distance to travel from the present impasse to a sense of victory on both sides. It is true, however, that Western
leaders (particularly Clinton and Blair) have indicated that only the departure from office of President Milosevicwould mark the
transformation from the ancien regime to the “new world order”.

The problem with that requirement for NATO’s “victory” is that the Yugoslav people, previously in varying degrees hostile to
their President, have now (because of NATO) rallied around him, and would reject the imposition of a NATO edict demanding
the President’s removal from office.

On April 22, 1999, a Russian Government delegation led by former Prime Minister Viktor S. Chernomyrdin held meetings with
the Yugoslav President. The New York Times the next day reported that the Yugoslav Government “appeared to give very
little ground”, but in fact he agreed to “an international presence [in Kosovo] under United Nations auspices”, a significant
point, if the US was not fundamentally suspicious of the UN.

Underlying the entire conflict resolution process is the fact that the US Clinton Administration does not really have any idea
what should constitute victory. On the one hand, it has said that victory means re-settlement of the Kosovo Albanians under an
autonomous, if not independent, state. On the other, it has said that victory could not be achieved if Yugoslav President
Milosevicremained in office.

Basically, however, Clinton has consistently moved the goalposts, so that any response given by the MilosevicGovernment
would be unacceptable. Clinton needs the war to continue for his own reasons, and certainly he needed to get through the
NATO 50th anniversary Summit in Washington DC on April 23 looking “statesmanlike”. He certainly did not wish the Chinese
intelligence/funding scandal, discussed in the Cox Report, to diminish his stature at a time when he is trying to create an historic
“legacy”.

World War III would be a significant legacy!

Columnist Charles Krauthammer, writing in The Washington Post on March 26, 1999, confirmed that the Clinton objectives
going into the bombing lacked coherence. Discussing Clinton’s speech on March 24, Krauthammer said: “For incoherence and
simple-mindedness, for disorganization and sheer intellectual laziness, it is unmatched in recent American history.” He added: “It
is not forgivable to send American men and women into battle in the name of a cause one can barely elucidate.” The columnist
sharply criticized Clinton’s attempts to equate Milosevicwith Hitler. “But if Serbia's Milosevic is Hitler, how come this Hitler has
been our peace partner in the Dayton Accords these past three years now? Never mind. When in doubt, play the Hitler card.
No matter how ridiculous the analogy. After all, Serbia has no ambitions to rule a continent, nor the power to do so.”

Significantly, Clinton has always chosen small, relatively weak opponents when he has needed “bad guys” to take the media
attention away from his problems. As we noted in this journal earlier, he has no intention of allowing anyone on the enemies list
to make peace. He has always needed to be able to resurrect a villain on command. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Libya’s
Mu’ammar al-Qadhafi and Yugoslavia’s Milosevichave been his targets of choice.

So it is probably fair to say that Clinton has no wish to end this conflict as long as he has need of distraction from the
intelligence/funding scandal as outlined in the Cox Report, now awaiting release. So the Yugoslavs can do little to appease
Clinton (and therefore NATO). The answer is that Clinton is seeking a prolonging of the war at as little cost — and as much
noise — as possible. If he is forced out of the Kosovo crisis, he must immediately resurrect another crisis. The US has already
resumed bombing of Iraq, “just in case”.

That is the Clinton rationale. Not all of his Administration, nor his allies, have the same rationale. There is a geopolitical
perspective in Washington which says that US dominance in the Balkans, via Albania, is essential if the US is to retain any
strategic influence in a Europe which could soon be dominated by a homogeneous political entity — and economic rival — in
the form of the European Union.

There are other, more human considerations, too. People close to Clinton say that he has made it clear that his “legacy”, or the
memory of his presidency, will not be one in which his impeachment over the ramifications of a tawdry sex scandal dominate
history. Some of his associates (their own sense of history also involved) say that Clinton would rather be remembered as the
US president who took the US and NATO into a major war — with all that this entails — than be either a forgotten president,
or one discredited by tawdriness and illegality.

What, then, constitutes “victory” for Clinton? It is unlikely that the US Congress would suppress (or be able to suppress) the
Cox Report with its apparently damning evidence of White House culpability in the campaign-funds-for-strategic-favors
scandal.

Just how damning is the evidence against Clinton with regard to the passing of ballistic missile and nuclear weapons
technologies to the People’s Republic of China? Enough for the Clinton Administration to use every lever of authority at its
disposal to stop the declassification of the Cox Report and other inter-agency reports on the matter. The White House has
called in every agency it can think of, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Foreign Intelligence Advisory
Board (FIAB) to put roadblocks in the way of declassification of the 700-page Cox Report.

The Washington Times of April 26, 1999, in an editorial entitled And the spying goes on, confirmed this. “For months now,
the Administration has been battling the Rep. Cox and his committee to keep these details secret.” The Cox Report was due to
be released by the end of March 1999 (the subject of the report had become publicly known in April 1996), but because of
the Administration’s pressures this was postponed until the end of April 1999, with the later understanding that the ongoing
conflict would enable the Clinton White House to further obfuscate and delay release.

“Given the national security consequences of the revelations as well as the president’s propensity to avoid any responsibility, it
is now more imperative than ever that the Cox Report be promptly declassified,” The Washington Times editorial said.

This is the scandal which eclipses the Monica Lewinsky matter which led to Clinton’s impeachment by Congress.

So, if a “legacy other than scandal” is the goal of President Clinton, then he must attempt to continue the distractions, which
means the fighting. There is the prospect of switching the combat to a less-difficult “threat”, such as Iraq’s Saddam Hussein,
and there is evidence that this option has been well-considered.

It may well be, failing all else, that the US Congress will be required to determine what constitutes “victory”. All agree, at least
nominally, that NATO cannot survive as a viable strategic instrument if it fails to achieve its “objectives” in the war against
Yugoslavia. There were still a few in government in NATO states who, in late April 1999, clung to the belief that air power
alone could force compliance by the MilosevicGovernment to the NATO terms. But these were only, literally, the naïve, with
no understanding of military history. No major strategic campaign has been won by air power alone.

There are others who believe that the insertion of ground forces into Yugoslavia, or even just the Kosovo-Metohija region, is
an unfortunate necessity to achieve compliance. But they, too, are naïve: a Yugoslav abandonment of the most sacred
heartland of the Serb people will not happen. Germany inserted 700,000 troops into Yugoslavia in 1941-45, and failed to
successfully control the country. NATO is not prepared to do even that much.

Similarly, because the Serbian people see that they have been so maligned by the peoples (US, UK and France) whom they
once suffered to defend in two World Wars, and accused of so many atrocities that they know have been committed against
them as a people in the past, they will not surrender up even President Milosevic, as much as some of them may have disliked
him in the past.

Furthermore, Yugoslavia’s military capabilities have hardly been touched, despite the bombing campaign (or perhaps because
the bombing has been directed largely at civilian economic targets). So a military “victory” would not be possible without a
massive, and unrealistically large, cost to NATO in economic, manpower and time terms.

What will be necessary is for NATO (or rather Clinton, because NATO will follow) to “re-define victory”, if victory is to be
achieved. The concern in even the anti-Clinton circles of NATO is that without a victory, NATO’s future credibility and
viability will be lost. This is in great part true, and it is an additional reason why many senior members of the US and NATO
military forces are quietly extremely angry at Clinton.

So a US Congressional re-definition of “victory” must consider the long-term ramifications for NATO. It seems likely that the
Yugoslavs, themselves extremely anxious for a cessation of hostilities and a resolution to the Kosovo crisis, will be only too
happy to assist in this.

The visit to Belgrade on April 18-21, 1999, by US Congressman Jim Saxton (Republican, New Jersey), under the auspices of
the International Strategic Studies Association (ISSA), the publisher of this journal, was therefore an important breakthrough in
attempting to wrest control of the strategic agenda from the Clinton march toward Armageddon. Not surprisingly, Congr.
Saxton returned to Washington to face outright hostility from the Clinton Administration and skepticism from the media and
some other members of Congress, all well-steeped in the propaganda version of the conflict.

At first, a curious media besieged Rep. Saxton, requesting that he speak on CNN’s Larry King Live, and other prime time
network television news shows. But, following a 45-minute telephone harangue of the Congressman by Secretary of State
Albright, State Department pressure ensured that the networks withdrew their invitations for the Congressman to speak. Few in
the Washington media want to jeopardize their access to the White House or State Department.

But despite this, the chance to grasp at peace attracted many, and the option — begun by the Saxton initiative — was opened.
Debate emerged into the open.

Realities on the Ground

It goes without saying that if the international reporting on the Kosovo conflict was correct then certain “facts on the ground”
would be very different from what they have really proven to be. It had been stated that NATO forces had, by mid-April 1999,
destroyed the Yugoslav Armed Forces’ capability to wage war. The problem began with the original premise of the US Clinton
Administration that the Yugoslav Government of Slobodan Milosevicwould fall into disarray and compliance once the White
House committed US and NATO military forces into combat against Yugoslavia.

US analysts are known to have told the White House that once air strikes began against Yugoslavia, as they did on March 24,
1999, then refugees in massive numbers would begin to flee from Kosovo into neighboring countries. There were, before the air
strikes began, no refugees in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and only a few (those connected with the UCK) in
the anarchic northern areas of Albania. There is no question but that the White House had been told unequivocally by its own
intelligence services that a massive refugee flight from Kosovo would begin with the bombing. The White House chose to ignore
this advice.

This writer returned to Yugoslavia to compare the media coverage with the facts on the ground. This particular passage was
written, on April 19, 1999, at 22.35hrs, as air raid sirens were wailing throughout Belgrade. What was discovered “on the
ground” was a very different reality to that being promoted by the US and UK administrations.

Serbian troops are ethnic cleansing, brainwashed, wedding ring and gold tooth stealing, megalomaniacal, child raping, genocidal, decapitating, baby killing, village burning, human shield using, identification document stealing, nose cutting off, propagandizing, emasculating, uneducated(2 planes do not equal 200), fascists (these are their good qualities). Anyone defending the Serbs are also guilty of these crimes by association. NATO will crush the lying NAZI Serbs under the heel of American justice.
All other opinions except Guido's, Emina's, Jack's, Zoja's, DS's, Pete's and Rosies' are null and void due to the fact that their authors lack the necessary insight required to discern reality from fiction.

Cao

Sergey:

I suggest you not go faking press releases. I happen to work for AP and I know for a fact they don't write tripe like you posted here purporting to be an AP press release. Keep it up and you will be found out for what you really are.

Pete

sergey

PS Yu caint even speel rite!

This is what make we Serbs afraid.

To Maja,

Geez you go on and on and on and on. Give it a rest. Boring........................

Hey whore wanna see my Mig-29.It's not impotent as your screwed up croatia.Klacemo vas kao i pre.I bet it wouldn't even fit your mouth bitch.Hey ds you american clown!!Mine is not impotent.Maybe you need viagra but not me.Gee,I really feel sorry for your boyfriend Al Gore.Soon the bombs will be falling on zagreb and all croat dumbass motherfuckers will die.SERBIA WILL WIN!!!Tell your boyfriend franjo that he is first in line


LONG LIVE SERBIA!!!

Hey Draza,

Do you earn a lot of money? Does it get cold at night with just your G-Strings on?

Another thing.........ZIVILA ZIVILA ZIVILA CROACIJA!!!! Where is your KRAJINA loser?

Maja

Defending yourself, as you do, goes to prove you do have something to hide. And who started this getting personal by the way? Who started on spelling mistakes? Not Emina, not me.... You only got back what you rightfully deserved, that's all.

Go play with you black market friends from Russia on this board. As it is next to impossible for normal hard working Russians to be online, Basil and Sergey manage to do that over and over again for extended periods of time. Looking at Russias economy it has to be the black market or thieving going on here. Maybe you can support them with some legal aid, if they do get caught. Or otherwise, go sue America. It will keep you busy.

Zoja

PS If you want to write mails, please don't imitate so much. You copied your text from some things my sis and I wrote, not even to you, a couple of times. Think of something original, ok?

Incredible: the AGRESSORS (the definition of the term is provided by the international law) call the most reasonable people on the board NAZIs.

No sooner had we Jack London pissed off when other brainwashed morons such as Guido (the guy has gone nuts completely - who still doubts that?) and transvestits as Zoja emerged. Just read what Guido writes:

<<<NATO will crush the lying NAZI Serbs under the heel of American justice. <<<

Keep your lousy justice for your wife, though I'm pretty sure it's you who is under her heel. Look in the mirror - you'll see a genuine NAZI there, we crushed a lot of such morons in WWII (mind you - RUSSIA did, not your brave Texan rangers fit only for shooting rats tied to a fence).

Now comes Zoja, the masculine personification of the free western press (she sais Maja is frigid - have you tried her yet? Don't hesitate). Has your dearest Guido ever read that press? His words:

<<<All other opinions except Guido's, Emina's, Jack's, Zoja's, DS's, Pete's and Rosies' are null and void due to the fact that their authors lack the necessary insight required to discern reality from fiction. <<<

Who's beeing in Stalin's shoes? I haven't noticed such ideas of "I'm right and you're fools" in Nick's or Sergey's postings. And I doubt Guido's ability to tell reality from fiction for one simple reason: I'm pretty confident that he can't read. He has proved lack (no, absence) of education thousands of times on the board. That's why he is almost unreadable and people have asked him several times to quit posting here.

<<<The last counts for Basil, too. He was born under communism, and still has to learn what democracy is like. <<<

To my mind it's much preferrable to be born UNDER communism than BY morons. It isn't a matter of individual choice, but of the way one thinks when lacking arguments he helplessly refers to stereotypes.

So, EMINA you haven't answered my questions yet: Do you care for Kosovo Albanians? Does it make any difference to you who rape them - The Serbs or Americans? Why do you occasionally (more often recently) shut up when NATO bombs a village or a camp? The close cooperation between KLA and Americans is a proven fact. Don't get too much greived when the allied sepa-nationalist forces destroy another village full of Albanian refugees on the border to promote a ground invasion. The Americans don't like to get body bags, that's why they are sure to send albanian volunteers ahead and you'll learn what mass murder is. Don't be hypocritical - acknowledge American genocide in Yugoslavia.

THANKS, DAVID, I BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF STRONG AND SENSIBLE AMERICA.

Hi David
Nice to hear a different opinion for a change.
What exactly do people in the States (in your palce , if you don't mind telling us what state you are from) think about this war in Europe?

I mean anti-american spirits are very high here in Russia, TV here is rather pro-american, at least they give a lot of news made by Reuters and the like. And this news is that more than 70% americans are for bombing, some don't care and very few are against.

I'm a teacher, and I see how much the students I talk to have started to hate america. It's rather difficult to persuade them that one mustn't blame the whole country for its government's stupidity.

What do your friends think about it? Is their opinion changing? Where to, if it does? We'd like to hear it from YOU, not the "public opinion" by CNN.

Best wishes