Jugoinfo
* Prima Convenzione Europea per la Pace - Berlino 23-24 marzo 2001
(dalla sezione tedesca del Tribunale per i crimini della NATO in Jugoslavia)
* Uno studio sul genocidio dei rom kosovari
(LAW PROJECTS CENTER YUGOSLAVIA)
* L'ultimo libro di Juergen Elsaesser
===========================================================
w.schulz@... ha scritto:
> 1st European Peace Convention
>
> Initiative Group
>
>
> Berlin, December 2000
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear friend,
>
> In the light of not ending efforts of US and EU for a conflict management by military means using NATO and EU intervention forces and investing a considerable amount of money in new dangerous armament a group of organizers having prepared and conducted the European Tribunal on the NATO-war against Yugoslavia in June 2000 in Berlin decided to organize the 1st European Peace Convention.
>
> Many of the international participants in the tribunal movement have supported this initiative.
>
> The constitution of the first convention shall take place on 23/24 March 2001 in Berlin.
>
> We believe that this convention should be open to everybody -without any exclusion- sharing the common values of all peace oriented people and groups forming a European Peace Forum
>
> The theme of the 1st convention should be: Human Rights and Intervention
>
> The second convention in 2002 could e.g. deal with the newly introduced Intervention Force of the EU.
>
> In January 2001 we will send You a draft proposal for a statute and a paper for discussion on the subject of the convention.
>
> Enclosed please find the invitation for the convention. Please inform other organizations and individuals being probably interested in participating in the convention.
>
> We would very much appreciate Your conformation in case You are principally ready for cooperation.
>
> We would like to wish You all the best for a good New Year with good luck and success
>
> Best regards,
> Professor Wolfgang Richter
>
> For the Initiative Group
>
>
>
> Elmar Schmähling
>
> Secretary of the preparatory committee
>
>
>
> Contact address:
> 1th European Peace Convention. c/o GBM, Weitlingstrasse 89, 10317 Berlin
>
> The first convention will be prepared and organized by a committee of initiators presided by a working presidium. Former Rear Admiral Elmar Schmähling will act as secretary of the committee.
>
> The committee originates from the movement for a European Tribunal on the NATO-war against Yugoslavia. Following practical reasons representatives of the German peace movement will compose the committee.
>
> The committee needs still active collaborators. Financial support of the organization is highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> The proceedings of the convention will be published in a special issue of the journal ICARUS.
>
>
>
> Preliminary contact address:
>
> Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und Menschenwürde e.V. (GBM), Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin,
>
> phone +49 30 5578393, fax +49 30 5556357,
>
> E-Mail: gbmev@....
>
> For more information please contact the GBM’s homepage: www.gbmev.de
>
>
>
> Invitation
>
>
> 1st European Peace Convention
>
> 23/24 march 2001
>
>
>
> Berlin Kreuzberg,
>
> Church „Zum Heiligen Kreuz“
>
>
> c/o: Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und Menschenwürde e.V.
>
> Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin
>
> ---
-------- Original Message --------
Oggetto: P: 1st European Peace Convention on March 23 and 24 in Berlin
Data: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 11:13:06 +0100
Da: <w.schulz@...>
A: Law-Schulz@...
CC: petar@...
We are not only responsible for that, what we do, but also for that, what we
take without objections.
(Ernst Bloch)
1st European Peace Convention
Dear Friends of Peace,
By copy of this email, we would like to ask you, if you may support and join
the 1st European Peace Convention.
Do you agree, that we call your organization in the list of supporters? Do
you can see your way to support more?
We also would appreciate very much if people from your movement would join
the European Peace Convention on March 23 and 24 in Berlin.
Below and in the attachment you will find the invitation and agenda. For
more information please visit also www.gbmev.de or write me.
Yours for Peace and Justice,
Wolfgang Schulz
Berlin
----------
The first convention will be prepared and
organized by a committee of initiators
presided by a working presidium. Former
Rear Admiral Elmar Schmähling will act as
secretary of the committee.
The committee originates from the movement
for a European Tribunal on the NATO-war
against Yugoslavia. Following practical
reasons representatives of the German peace
movement will compose the preparatory.
The committee needs still active collaborators. Financial support is highly
appreciated.
The proceedings of the convention will be published in a special issue of
the journal ICARUS.
Preliminary contact address: Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und
Menschenwürde e.V. (GBM), Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin, phone +49 30
5578397, fax +49 30 5556355,
E-Mail: gbmev@....
For more information please contact the GBM’s homepage: www.gbmev.de
Haus am Köllnischen Park
Am Köllnischen Park 6 –7
10179 Berlin
S - Bahnhof Jannowitzbrücke
U - Bahnhof Heinrich Heine Str.
Bus 265, 240
Invitation
1st European
Peace Convention
23/24 march 2001
23 march
Conference on „Human Rights and Intervention“
Haus am Köllnischen Park
24 march
Manifestation and Constitution of the Convention
Church „Zum Heiligen Kreuz“
----------------------------
War is not a law by nature
and peace is not a gift
"Friedenskantate" Hanns Eisler,
Ernst Fischer
Agenda:
23 march 2001 10 a. m.
Conference on the subject: Human Rights and Intervention.
Resume: Appeal to all governments and peace forces (A draft paper will be
sent in time prior to the convention)
A proposal for a resolution on this issue will be forwarded to the
manifestation for approval.
End of the consultation: 7 p.m.
24 march 2001 9 a. m.
1st commentaries of the participants concerning tasks and statute of the
European Peace Forum
2nd Constitution of the European Peace Convention
(A proposal for the statute and terms of reference will be provided)
3rd Accreditation of a convention presidium
(The representatives of the invited organizations, e.g. peace initiatives,
NGO’s, political parties, trade unions, parliaments and churches are kindly
requested to also nominate a representative of their respective
organizations as a member of the presidium)
4th Appeal concerning the foundation of a European Peace Forum
5th Adoption of the resolution on “Human Rights and Peace”
End: 4 p.m.
===========================================================
LAW PROJECTS CENTER YUGOSLAVIA
To Whom It May Concern
Law Project Center Yugoslavia (LPC) and Yugoslav Coalition for an
International Criminal Court (YCICC) in join efforts finished study
about Genocide over Roma population in Kosovo. Study contains
testimony of those, which survived torture in Kosovo, impressive
photo documentation with original photos from refugee's camps, and list of
missing Roma persons with muslim-albanian name. Study also proves
Political manipulation with term of Genocide.
This study is translated into English. You can see it at:
www.lpc.org.yu
Best regards
Darko Trifunovic M.S.L
President of LPC
Secretary Generally of YCICC
Lpc@...
www.lpc.org.yu
===========================================================
KONKRET-Magazin, Ruhrstr.111, D-22761 Hamburg, Germany
Juergen Elsaesser
Tel. xx49-331/6005211
Fax. xx49-331/6005213
Mobil 0171/1720368
Email: J.Elsasser@...
Website: www.juergen-elsaesser.de
New Book about Depleted Uranium and other Nato-Lies of the Kosovo-War
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
the discussion about the crimes caused by the depleted uranium weapons of Nato
shake the western public opinion. Now there’s a chance to bring all the truth
about this bloody war on the surface.
Since 15th October, my new book about the lies of Nato in the Kosovo-conflict is
on sale in Germany. It was sold out within six weeks, a second edition had to be
printed. A dutch edition will be available in April and a greek one in May, both
will include an extended chapter about the „Balkan-Syndrom“.
I would appreciate if you would write a critique about my book for the press of
your country. Perhaps you also know an organization or a publishing house which
is interested intranslating and printing my book for your country?
Please remail me if you are interested, my publisher could send you the book at
once.
All details about book and author you find below.
Thanks a lot
yours sincerely
J.E.
Summary
KRIEGSVERBRECHEN
Die toedlichen Luegen der Nato und ihre Opfer im Kosovo-Konflikt.
Mit einem Dossier zur Uranmunition
(Konkret Verlag Hamburg, 192 Seiten, 26.80 DM)
WAR CRIMES
The Deadly Lies of Nato and ist Victims in the Kosovo-Conflikt.
With a Special File about Depleted Uranium
»Never before so few lied so thoroughly to so many, as in connection with
the Kosovo war«, says Willy Wimmer, member of the CDU party in the German
Bundestag. »People died for this.«
No lie seemed too grotesque to start the slaughter and keep it going:
Milosevic as the new Hitler, concentration camps in Pristina, Auschwitz in
Kosovopolje. Whereas NATO and CNN took the trouble to provide fabricated
video documents, the German Minister of Defense sought to convince by mere
force of words: Mister Scharping‘s portrayal of Serbs playing football with
the heads of their Abanian victims or Serbs grilling foetuses, torn from
their mothers‘ wombs will go down in the annals of psychopathology. Finally
miracles of biblical dimensions: massacred Albanian intellectuals hold post
mortem press conferences in Western capitals; ghost trains suddenly appear on
scarcely used tracks and bore their way into NATO-missiles; mass graves are
found as empty as Our Lord‘s vault on the third day.
What is left? »In the nine months after stationing of KFOR in Kosovo
nothing could be found to sustain the indictment of ›genocide‹ « (Le Monde
Diplomatique, March 2000) . In the light of new evidence and with the aid of
previously unaccessible documents Juergen Elsaesser questions NATO‘s
justification for the war.
After mysterious deaths in the Sfor- and Kfor-armies a fierce discussion in the
western public has begun. Even the italian premier Guiliano Amato is upset about
the potential consequences of the depleted uranium: „ We have the suspicion that
things aren’t as simple as Nato always argues.“
This book proves that Amato’s suspicion has good reasons - not only in the case
of the „Balkan-syndrom“. Elsaesser proves the thesis that the first victim of
war is the truth to be wrong. For the truth dies long before a war starts: It
was the lies about Srebrenica, about Racak, about Rambouillet and about the
so-called apartheid in Kosovo that deceived members of parliament and citizens
alike and led them into a murderous adventure. NATO was made the »air force in
an ethnic war« (Henry Kissinger ) and brought the KLA into power. The result:
Pristina is
purged, ethnic monirities have been driven out of Kosovo, chaos rules in
the streets, the KLA‘s secret police is everywhere, and the few remaining
survivors fear in ghettos for their lives. Indeed, nobody talks now of
»humanitarian catastrophe«, »ethnic cleansing« or »genocide« and not
surprisingly so: to acknowledge the disgrace of the last war would impede
preparations for the next.
About the Author
Juergen Elsaesser was born in 1957. Until June 1997 he was chief editor of
Berlin‘s daily newspaper Junge Welt and from April 1999 on has been editor of
the monthly magazin Konkret, Germany‘s most important magazine of an
independent Left since 1957 . He also works as a freelance journalist,
amongst others for the Allgemeine Juedische Wochenzeitung, the Sueddeutsche
Zeitung, the state television WDR and the Kursbuch.
In the time of the Kosovo war he coined the slogan »No Blood for
Joschka«, an anology to the slogan »No Blood for oil«, that the members of
the Green Party had coined in the Golf war 1991. The German magazine Der
Spiegel consequently libelled him as a »professional cynic« bound to
»antiquated leftist clichés«. Others were more kindly disposed: About his
latest book Nie wieder Krieg ohne uns. Das Kosovo und die neue deutsche
Geopolitik (Konkret Verlag, June 1999, second edition November 1999)
the renowned daily newspaper Frankfurter Rundschau wrote: »An excellent book.
Written in anger and deep regret, regrets about the development of the Left
movement and the Green Party. But it is thoroughly investigated.«
Table of contents
Foreward
Big Brother is Talking to You
Orwell’s Newspeak and the Nato
The Mother of all Lies
The „Ramps of Srebrenica“ as Starting-Point of the War
Withheld Murders
The KLA’s Terror before the War and the Ignorance of the Western Public
Classified:Racak
The Previoulsly Classified Autopsy-Records of the 40 Bodies of Racak Disprove
Nato’s Version of a Serbian Massacre
Meddled
Memoirs of the EU-Frontman in Rambouillet, Wolfgang Petritsch
Wag the Dog
The so-called Serbian „Operation Horsheshoe“ - an Amateurish Fabrication of the
German and Austrian Secret Services
Sex, Lies and Video
Nato’s Blockbusters Against Milosevic
Legal, Illegal, Collateral
Legends and Facts about the „Air-Campaign“
The Balkan-Syndrom
Depleted Uranium for 4.500 Million Years
Killing Fields and Deadly Lies
What Remains of the 100.000 Corpses in Mass Graves?
Prizren is Cleared of Serbs, Jews, Roma
The Albanian fascism is marching on
And the lived happily together ever after
Nato’s fairy tale about the multi-ethnic future of Kosovo
Epilogue
Fact-Dump Cyberspace
The Murderer is Always the Serb
Appendix
International Press Commentaries on the Situation in Kosovo in the 1980ies
Classified: The Reports of the German Foreign Ministery about Kosovo 1990 - 1998
Analysed: „As seen - As told“, an OSCE Report with Strange Details
Bibliography Juergen Elsaesser
Antisemitismus - das alte Gesicht des neuen Deutschland (dietz berlin,
1992)
Wenn das der Führer hätte erleben dürfen (Konkret 1995)
Vorwärts und vergessen? (zus. mit S. Wagenknecht - Konkret 1996)
Braunbuch DVU (Vorwort Jürgen Trittin, Konkret 1998)
Nie wieder Krieg ohne uns (Konkret 1999)
„Die Fratze der eigenen Geschichte“ (zus. mit Andrei S. Markovits -
Elefantenpress 1999)
===========================================================
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1114880/www.consulteque.com
(dalla sezione tedesca del Tribunale per i crimini della NATO in Jugoslavia)
* Uno studio sul genocidio dei rom kosovari
(LAW PROJECTS CENTER YUGOSLAVIA)
* L'ultimo libro di Juergen Elsaesser
===========================================================
w.schulz@... ha scritto:
> 1st European Peace Convention
>
> Initiative Group
>
>
> Berlin, December 2000
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear friend,
>
> In the light of not ending efforts of US and EU for a conflict management by military means using NATO and EU intervention forces and investing a considerable amount of money in new dangerous armament a group of organizers having prepared and conducted the European Tribunal on the NATO-war against Yugoslavia in June 2000 in Berlin decided to organize the 1st European Peace Convention.
>
> Many of the international participants in the tribunal movement have supported this initiative.
>
> The constitution of the first convention shall take place on 23/24 March 2001 in Berlin.
>
> We believe that this convention should be open to everybody -without any exclusion- sharing the common values of all peace oriented people and groups forming a European Peace Forum
>
> The theme of the 1st convention should be: Human Rights and Intervention
>
> The second convention in 2002 could e.g. deal with the newly introduced Intervention Force of the EU.
>
> In January 2001 we will send You a draft proposal for a statute and a paper for discussion on the subject of the convention.
>
> Enclosed please find the invitation for the convention. Please inform other organizations and individuals being probably interested in participating in the convention.
>
> We would very much appreciate Your conformation in case You are principally ready for cooperation.
>
> We would like to wish You all the best for a good New Year with good luck and success
>
> Best regards,
> Professor Wolfgang Richter
>
> For the Initiative Group
>
>
>
> Elmar Schmähling
>
> Secretary of the preparatory committee
>
>
>
> Contact address:
> 1th European Peace Convention. c/o GBM, Weitlingstrasse 89, 10317 Berlin
>
> The first convention will be prepared and organized by a committee of initiators presided by a working presidium. Former Rear Admiral Elmar Schmähling will act as secretary of the committee.
>
> The committee originates from the movement for a European Tribunal on the NATO-war against Yugoslavia. Following practical reasons representatives of the German peace movement will compose the committee.
>
> The committee needs still active collaborators. Financial support of the organization is highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> The proceedings of the convention will be published in a special issue of the journal ICARUS.
>
>
>
> Preliminary contact address:
>
> Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und Menschenwürde e.V. (GBM), Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin,
>
> phone +49 30 5578393, fax +49 30 5556357,
>
> E-Mail: gbmev@....
>
> For more information please contact the GBM’s homepage: www.gbmev.de
>
>
>
> Invitation
>
>
> 1st European Peace Convention
>
> 23/24 march 2001
>
>
>
> Berlin Kreuzberg,
>
> Church „Zum Heiligen Kreuz“
>
>
> c/o: Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und Menschenwürde e.V.
>
> Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin
>
> ---
-------- Original Message --------
Oggetto: P: 1st European Peace Convention on March 23 and 24 in Berlin
Data: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 11:13:06 +0100
Da: <w.schulz@...>
A: Law-Schulz@...
CC: petar@...
We are not only responsible for that, what we do, but also for that, what we
take without objections.
(Ernst Bloch)
1st European Peace Convention
Dear Friends of Peace,
By copy of this email, we would like to ask you, if you may support and join
the 1st European Peace Convention.
Do you agree, that we call your organization in the list of supporters? Do
you can see your way to support more?
We also would appreciate very much if people from your movement would join
the European Peace Convention on March 23 and 24 in Berlin.
Below and in the attachment you will find the invitation and agenda. For
more information please visit also www.gbmev.de or write me.
Yours for Peace and Justice,
Wolfgang Schulz
Berlin
----------
The first convention will be prepared and
organized by a committee of initiators
presided by a working presidium. Former
Rear Admiral Elmar Schmähling will act as
secretary of the committee.
The committee originates from the movement
for a European Tribunal on the NATO-war
against Yugoslavia. Following practical
reasons representatives of the German peace
movement will compose the preparatory.
The committee needs still active collaborators. Financial support is highly
appreciated.
The proceedings of the convention will be published in a special issue of
the journal ICARUS.
Preliminary contact address: Gesellschaft zum Schutz von Bürgerrecht und
Menschenwürde e.V. (GBM), Weitlingstr. 89, D-10317 Berlin, phone +49 30
5578397, fax +49 30 5556355,
E-Mail: gbmev@....
For more information please contact the GBM’s homepage: www.gbmev.de
Haus am Köllnischen Park
Am Köllnischen Park 6 –7
10179 Berlin
S - Bahnhof Jannowitzbrücke
U - Bahnhof Heinrich Heine Str.
Bus 265, 240
Invitation
1st European
Peace Convention
23/24 march 2001
23 march
Conference on „Human Rights and Intervention“
Haus am Köllnischen Park
24 march
Manifestation and Constitution of the Convention
Church „Zum Heiligen Kreuz“
----------------------------
War is not a law by nature
and peace is not a gift
"Friedenskantate" Hanns Eisler,
Ernst Fischer
Agenda:
23 march 2001 10 a. m.
Conference on the subject: Human Rights and Intervention.
Resume: Appeal to all governments and peace forces (A draft paper will be
sent in time prior to the convention)
A proposal for a resolution on this issue will be forwarded to the
manifestation for approval.
End of the consultation: 7 p.m.
24 march 2001 9 a. m.
1st commentaries of the participants concerning tasks and statute of the
European Peace Forum
2nd Constitution of the European Peace Convention
(A proposal for the statute and terms of reference will be provided)
3rd Accreditation of a convention presidium
(The representatives of the invited organizations, e.g. peace initiatives,
NGO’s, political parties, trade unions, parliaments and churches are kindly
requested to also nominate a representative of their respective
organizations as a member of the presidium)
4th Appeal concerning the foundation of a European Peace Forum
5th Adoption of the resolution on “Human Rights and Peace”
End: 4 p.m.
===========================================================
LAW PROJECTS CENTER YUGOSLAVIA
To Whom It May Concern
Law Project Center Yugoslavia (LPC) and Yugoslav Coalition for an
International Criminal Court (YCICC) in join efforts finished study
about Genocide over Roma population in Kosovo. Study contains
testimony of those, which survived torture in Kosovo, impressive
photo documentation with original photos from refugee's camps, and list of
missing Roma persons with muslim-albanian name. Study also proves
Political manipulation with term of Genocide.
This study is translated into English. You can see it at:
www.lpc.org.yu
Best regards
Darko Trifunovic M.S.L
President of LPC
Secretary Generally of YCICC
Lpc@...
www.lpc.org.yu
===========================================================
KONKRET-Magazin, Ruhrstr.111, D-22761 Hamburg, Germany
Juergen Elsaesser
Tel. xx49-331/6005211
Fax. xx49-331/6005213
Mobil 0171/1720368
Email: J.Elsasser@...
Website: www.juergen-elsaesser.de
New Book about Depleted Uranium and other Nato-Lies of the Kosovo-War
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
the discussion about the crimes caused by the depleted uranium weapons of Nato
shake the western public opinion. Now there’s a chance to bring all the truth
about this bloody war on the surface.
Since 15th October, my new book about the lies of Nato in the Kosovo-conflict is
on sale in Germany. It was sold out within six weeks, a second edition had to be
printed. A dutch edition will be available in April and a greek one in May, both
will include an extended chapter about the „Balkan-Syndrom“.
I would appreciate if you would write a critique about my book for the press of
your country. Perhaps you also know an organization or a publishing house which
is interested intranslating and printing my book for your country?
Please remail me if you are interested, my publisher could send you the book at
once.
All details about book and author you find below.
Thanks a lot
yours sincerely
J.E.
Summary
KRIEGSVERBRECHEN
Die toedlichen Luegen der Nato und ihre Opfer im Kosovo-Konflikt.
Mit einem Dossier zur Uranmunition
(Konkret Verlag Hamburg, 192 Seiten, 26.80 DM)
WAR CRIMES
The Deadly Lies of Nato and ist Victims in the Kosovo-Conflikt.
With a Special File about Depleted Uranium
»Never before so few lied so thoroughly to so many, as in connection with
the Kosovo war«, says Willy Wimmer, member of the CDU party in the German
Bundestag. »People died for this.«
No lie seemed too grotesque to start the slaughter and keep it going:
Milosevic as the new Hitler, concentration camps in Pristina, Auschwitz in
Kosovopolje. Whereas NATO and CNN took the trouble to provide fabricated
video documents, the German Minister of Defense sought to convince by mere
force of words: Mister Scharping‘s portrayal of Serbs playing football with
the heads of their Abanian victims or Serbs grilling foetuses, torn from
their mothers‘ wombs will go down in the annals of psychopathology. Finally
miracles of biblical dimensions: massacred Albanian intellectuals hold post
mortem press conferences in Western capitals; ghost trains suddenly appear on
scarcely used tracks and bore their way into NATO-missiles; mass graves are
found as empty as Our Lord‘s vault on the third day.
What is left? »In the nine months after stationing of KFOR in Kosovo
nothing could be found to sustain the indictment of ›genocide‹ « (Le Monde
Diplomatique, March 2000) . In the light of new evidence and with the aid of
previously unaccessible documents Juergen Elsaesser questions NATO‘s
justification for the war.
After mysterious deaths in the Sfor- and Kfor-armies a fierce discussion in the
western public has begun. Even the italian premier Guiliano Amato is upset about
the potential consequences of the depleted uranium: „ We have the suspicion that
things aren’t as simple as Nato always argues.“
This book proves that Amato’s suspicion has good reasons - not only in the case
of the „Balkan-syndrom“. Elsaesser proves the thesis that the first victim of
war is the truth to be wrong. For the truth dies long before a war starts: It
was the lies about Srebrenica, about Racak, about Rambouillet and about the
so-called apartheid in Kosovo that deceived members of parliament and citizens
alike and led them into a murderous adventure. NATO was made the »air force in
an ethnic war« (Henry Kissinger ) and brought the KLA into power. The result:
Pristina is
purged, ethnic monirities have been driven out of Kosovo, chaos rules in
the streets, the KLA‘s secret police is everywhere, and the few remaining
survivors fear in ghettos for their lives. Indeed, nobody talks now of
»humanitarian catastrophe«, »ethnic cleansing« or »genocide« and not
surprisingly so: to acknowledge the disgrace of the last war would impede
preparations for the next.
About the Author
Juergen Elsaesser was born in 1957. Until June 1997 he was chief editor of
Berlin‘s daily newspaper Junge Welt and from April 1999 on has been editor of
the monthly magazin Konkret, Germany‘s most important magazine of an
independent Left since 1957 . He also works as a freelance journalist,
amongst others for the Allgemeine Juedische Wochenzeitung, the Sueddeutsche
Zeitung, the state television WDR and the Kursbuch.
In the time of the Kosovo war he coined the slogan »No Blood for
Joschka«, an anology to the slogan »No Blood for oil«, that the members of
the Green Party had coined in the Golf war 1991. The German magazine Der
Spiegel consequently libelled him as a »professional cynic« bound to
»antiquated leftist clichés«. Others were more kindly disposed: About his
latest book Nie wieder Krieg ohne uns. Das Kosovo und die neue deutsche
Geopolitik (Konkret Verlag, June 1999, second edition November 1999)
the renowned daily newspaper Frankfurter Rundschau wrote: »An excellent book.
Written in anger and deep regret, regrets about the development of the Left
movement and the Green Party. But it is thoroughly investigated.«
Table of contents
Foreward
Big Brother is Talking to You
Orwell’s Newspeak and the Nato
The Mother of all Lies
The „Ramps of Srebrenica“ as Starting-Point of the War
Withheld Murders
The KLA’s Terror before the War and the Ignorance of the Western Public
Classified:Racak
The Previoulsly Classified Autopsy-Records of the 40 Bodies of Racak Disprove
Nato’s Version of a Serbian Massacre
Meddled
Memoirs of the EU-Frontman in Rambouillet, Wolfgang Petritsch
Wag the Dog
The so-called Serbian „Operation Horsheshoe“ - an Amateurish Fabrication of the
German and Austrian Secret Services
Sex, Lies and Video
Nato’s Blockbusters Against Milosevic
Legal, Illegal, Collateral
Legends and Facts about the „Air-Campaign“
The Balkan-Syndrom
Depleted Uranium for 4.500 Million Years
Killing Fields and Deadly Lies
What Remains of the 100.000 Corpses in Mass Graves?
Prizren is Cleared of Serbs, Jews, Roma
The Albanian fascism is marching on
And the lived happily together ever after
Nato’s fairy tale about the multi-ethnic future of Kosovo
Epilogue
Fact-Dump Cyberspace
The Murderer is Always the Serb
Appendix
International Press Commentaries on the Situation in Kosovo in the 1980ies
Classified: The Reports of the German Foreign Ministery about Kosovo 1990 - 1998
Analysed: „As seen - As told“, an OSCE Report with Strange Details
Bibliography Juergen Elsaesser
Antisemitismus - das alte Gesicht des neuen Deutschland (dietz berlin,
1992)
Wenn das der Führer hätte erleben dürfen (Konkret 1995)
Vorwärts und vergessen? (zus. mit S. Wagenknecht - Konkret 1996)
Braunbuch DVU (Vorwort Jürgen Trittin, Konkret 1998)
Nie wieder Krieg ohne uns (Konkret 1999)
„Die Fratze der eigenen Geschichte“ (zus. mit Andrei S. Markovits -
Elefantenpress 1999)
===========================================================
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1114880/www.consulteque.com
ROMA: APPUNTAMENTO IL 3 FEBBRAIO ALL'ALTARE DELLA PATRIA
PER DEPORRE UNA CORONA IN MEMORIA DEL "MILITE IGNARO"
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Pasti Foundation <pasti@...>
> To: Rete AUI <pasti@...>
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 7:24 PM
> Subject: Notizie Rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
>
>
> NOTA INFORMATIVA SULL'ATTIVITA' DELLA RETE ABOLIRE
> L'URANIO IMPOOVERITO
> messaggio spedito da: Paolo Pioppi
>
> Trasmettiamo alcune informazioni circa i passi intrapresi da Falco
> Accame in attuazione di alcuni dei punti programmatici approvati a
> Roma nella riunione del 13 gennaio
>
> I N D I C E
>
> 1) Lettera al Presidente della Repubblica. Risposta del Consigliere
> militare del Presidente. Nuova lettera al Presidente (punto 3 del
> programma)
>
> 2) Lettera al Presidente del Consiglio (punto 4 del programma)
>
> 3) Lettere ai Presidenti di alcune Regioni dove si trovano i poligoni
di
> tiro (punto 5 del programma)
>
> 4) Convocazione di una MANIFESTAZIONE di protesta (punto 6 del
> programma)
>
> ATTENZIONE:
> chiediamo a tutte le associazioni di partecipare sabato 3 febbraio
> alle ore 12 a Roma (Altare della Patria) e a farsi portavoce
> dell'appuntamento. Trovate al punto 4 l'appello per la
> manifestazione che consiste nella posa di una corona al
> monumento al milite ignoto (Altare della Patria). Comunicate
> rapidamente la vostra adesione e partecipazione all'indirizzo
> pasti@.... Grazie
>
> 5) Controcommissione alternativa rispetto a quella istituita da
> Mattarella (punto 7 del programma)
>
> NOTA IMPORTANTE
> Vi chiediamo di tenerci aggiornati sulle vostre attivita' in rapporto
> all'uranio, in modo che si possa contribuire a far circolare le
> informazioni tramite e-mail o fax a tutte le associazioni che hanno
> formato la rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
> ************************************************
>
> 1) Lettera al Presidente della Repubblica. Risposta del Consigliere
> militare del Presidente. Nuova lettera al Presidente (punto 3 del
> programma)
>
> Roma, 15 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Repubblica
> Il Quirinale
>
>
>
> Signor Presidente,
>
> la morte di alcuni militari italiani e le malattie contratte da altri
> reduci dalle operazioni nei Balcani, che possono essere messe in
> relazione a contaminazione da uranio impoverito, rappresentano dei
> fatti molto gravi che credo impongano una attenta riflessione anche
> ai massimi livelli di responsabilita' nel nostro paese, in quanto
> coinvolgono aspetti della sicurezza nazionale e internazionale e
> soprattutto sono inerenti al diritto umanitario.
>
> In Somalia e poi in Bosnia e nei primi 5 mesi della campagna del
> Kosovo, il personale militare e civile italiano ha operato in assenza
> di norme di protezione, dato che queste sono state emanate in
> data 22 novembre 1999. Eppure in queste missioni gli Stati Uniti
> avevano emanato precise disposizioni di sicurezza per il loro
> personale in relazione ai rischi connessi all'impiego dell'uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Negli USA sono stati condotti da lungo tempo degli studi a partire
> dai primi anni '90 nei quali si afferma, senza ombra di dubbio, la
> pericolosita' legata alla ingestione di polvere di uranio, come
> testimonia un documento emanato nel 1993 (e che fa riferimento a
> precedenti studi del '91) nel quale si afferma tra l'altro che:
> "Quando i soldati si trovano ad inalare o ingestire polvere di uranio
> essi incorrono in un potenziale incremento nel rischio di cancro".
> "When soldiers inhale or ingeste DU dust, they incur a potential
> increase in cancer risk". Il documento e' del direttore della Sanita'
> dell'esercito USA. In un altro documento dell'ottobre 1993, del
> Support Directorate di Washington, si precisano le disposizioni di
> sicurezza da adottare per il personale USA operante in Somalia.
>
> Per quanto concerne la Bosnia, i raid degli aerei A/10, aerei contro-
> carro degli USA (ed anche alcuni raid degli Harrier britannici) erano
> effettuati operando con armi all'uranio. Questi raid sono partiti
dalla
> base di Aviano. Tale base e' al comando di un colonnello
> dell'aereonautica italiana, che quindi e' ovviamente a conoscenza di
> tutti gli ordini di operazione e rapporti di operazione. Egli e'
altresi'
> a conoscenza delle direttive impartite per l'uso delle armi all'uranio
> impoverito e dei risultati ottenuti nelle singole azioni. Il pilota,
tra
> l'altro, nei debriefing al termine della missione riferisce sul numero
> dei proiettili sparati e sui carri armati, ed altri obiettivi,
> eventualmente distrutti.
>
> L'uso dell'uranio impoverito in Bosnia era noto alle autorita'
militari
> italiane operanti in ambito NATO. Infatti anche il comandante della
> V ATAF di Vicenza era a conoscenza di tutti gli ordini e i rapporti
> di operazione e quindi dei compiti svolti nelle missioni degli aerei
> A/10. Cosi' come ne era al corrente il vicecomandante (italiano) di
> AFSOUTH. Del resto l'operazione in Bosnia fu illustrata in una
> conferenza stampa tenutasi proprio a Napoli presso AFSOUTH. In
> Bosnia, oltre ai proiettili all'uranio impoverito furono lanciati 13
> missili da crociera, contenenti anch'essi uranio impoverito.
>
> Circa la pericolosita' delle armi all'uranio, sulla quale sembra
> esservi discussione, vale la pena di ricordare quanto affermato dal
> generale Osvaldo Bizzari nelle succitate norme di sicurezza
> trasmesse ai reparti, nelle quali si legge testualmente: "Inalazioni
> di polvere di uranio impoverito sono associate nel tempo con effetti
> negativi sulla salute quale il tumore e disfunzioni nei neonati".
>
> Non sembra quindi esservi dubbio alcuno sulla valutazione di
> pericolosita' dell'uranio che e' stata fatta da parte italiana e
quindi
> sui rischi connessi, anche se nel campo epidemiologico non si
> possono avere certezze di tipo meccanico, cioe' deterministiche,
> ma solo relazioni probabilistiche. Forse l'unica certezza che si puo'
> avere e' quella che non vi possono essere certezze di non
> pericolosita' e che quindi si ha a che fare inevitabilmente con dei
> rischi, che possono essere piu' o meno grandi in dipendenza di
> molti fattori.
>
> Per quanto riguarda la pericolosita' dell'uranio, recenti studi hanno
> dimostrato in molti casi la presenza contemporanea anche di
> plutonio, materiale particolarmente nocivo specie in relazione alle
> leucemie.
>
> L'esistenza di rischi e' ben nota negli Stati Uniti in base alle
> esperienze di massa avute nella guerra del Golfo, esperienze che
> hanno dato luogo appunto alla emanazione di norme di sicurezza
> per proteggere il personale per quanto possibile. La protezione del
> personale, militare e civile, e' affidata peraltro non solo alla
> esistenza e conoscenza minuziosa delle norme (e a uno specifico
> addestramento all'applicazione delle norme stesse) ma anche alla
> disponibilita' di mezzi per applicare le norme, come tute protettive
> ricambiabili (data l'esigenza del loro assai frequente lavaggio),
> maschere protettive a perdere, guanti a perdere e cosi'
> via.
>
> Quanto al personale civile italiano, che tra l'altro e' quello che
piu' a
> lungo ha sostato nelle zone contaminate, non risulta che questo
> disponesse del materiale necessario alla protezione e quindi,
> anche nell'eventualita' che fosse stato messo a conoscenza delle
> norme, non avrebbe potuto osservarle. Per quanto riguarda il
> personale militare pare che i mezzi a disposizione siano stati
> alquanto scarsi.
>
> Altro problema riguarda le visite mediche a cui andava sottoposto il
> personale prima, durante e dopo la missione. Purtroppo in Italia
> esistono solo pochissimi centri specializzati che sono in grado di
> effettuare le delicate analisi spettrografiche e quant'altro occorre.
A
> quanto e' dato sapere vi sono state gravi carenze sotto questo
> riguardo e ad oggi migliaia di persone devono essere sottoposte a
> visiste mediche, il che pone dei problemi non indifferenti. Risulta
> che vi siano persone che hanno dovuto effettuare a spese proprie le
> analisi, mentre non vi e' alcun dubbio che tale assistenza debba
> essere a carico dello Stato.
>
> Questa problematica ci porta al discorso relativo alle cure mediche
> concernenti coloro che sono risultati affetti da patologie. Anche qui
> si e' verificato purtroppo il fatto che molte persone si sono dovute
> rivolgere, con ingenti spese, a istituti privati.
>
> Tale problematica ci rimanda alla questione delle cause di servizio
> e dell'equo indennizzo. Le "cause di servizio" vengono stabilite
> nella grande maggioranza dei casi in base a valutazioni
> probabilistiche e questo deve valere anche per la contaminazione
> da uranio che concerne i reduci dalla guerra del Golfo, dalla
> Somalia e dalla ex Jugoslavia. E a tale riguardo si pone anche
> un'altra tematica. Le operazioni di pace compiute sono in realta'
> frammiste ad azioni di guerra. Un soldato che muore in una
> missione di pace dovrebbe quindi essere considerato, dal punto di
> vista dei risarcimenti, come un soldato caduto in guerra. La
> questione coinvolge anche, ovviamente, civili che hanno operato in
> un'area dove si sono svolte operazioni militari.
>
> Di particolare rilevanza e' il problema dei risarcimenti per i
familiari
> delle vittime. Esiste in merito una legislazione molto confusa. Le
> piu' recenti determinazioni sono quelle che hanno valutato i
> risarcimenti dovuti nella misura di 4 miliardi a famiglia e si
> riferiscono alle vittime del tranciamento del cavo della funivia del
> Cermis. Nel caso dei parenti delle vittime della sciagura di Ustica
> sono stati stanziati all'incirca 150 milioni per famiglia. Una cifra
di
> quest'ordine di grandezza e' stata stanziata per le vittime della
> strage di Bologna e per le vittime della tragedia di Casalecchio sul
> Reno.
>
> Altra problematica riguarda l'inquinamento prodotto dall'uso di
> mezzi contenenti uranio nei poligoni di tiro, perche' vi sono casi di
> patologie riscontrate in personale che ha operato nei poligoni.
> L'inquinamento riguarda peraltro anche le acque dell'Adriatico in cui
> sono stati sparati (per prova di corretto funzionamento delle armi
> prima di ogni missione) proiettili all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Infine si pone il problema che per la sua importanza in senso
> globale e' certamente prioritario e che riguarda i risarcimenti in
> campo internazionale per le popolazioni che sono state interessate
> alle conseguenze derivanti dall'impiego di armi all'uranio, i cui
effetti
> di radiazione e tossicita' si protraggono nel tempo molto dopo il
> conflitto e che per questo, come avviene per le armi chimiche,
> dovrebbero essere bandite.
>
> Per la gravita' dei problemi sopra elencati, che riguardano oltreche'
> personale civile anche personale militare italiano, Le chiediamo
> (anche in riferimento alla precedente lettera inviataLe in data
> 22/12/2000) in qualita' di Capo delle Forze Armate, di convocare il
> Consiglio Superiore della Difesa, organo a cui possono partecipare
> ministri responsabili di vari settori nonche' esperti.
>
> Falco Accame
> Presidente Ana-Vafaf
> e a nome della Rete AUI
>
> L'elenco dei componenti della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'Uranio
> Impoverito) e' riportato in allegato.
>
>
>
> RISPOSTA DEL CONSIGLIERE MILITARE DEL PRESIDENTE
> DELLA REPUBBLICA
>
>
> Roma, 19 gennaio 2001.
>
> Onorevole,
>
> Mi riferisco al Suo Appello al Presidente della Repubblica per la
> convocazione del Conbsiglio Supremo della Difesa perche' esamini
> la problematica dei possibili rischi connessi con l'impiego nei
> Balcani di munizioni all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Il Presidente segue con particolare attenzione l'approfondimento
> delle verifiche e delle ricerche disposte dal Ministro della Difesa.
>
> La Magistratura sta a sua volta indagando su eventuali ipotesi di
> reato.
>
> La definizione dei dati medico-scientifici relativi alle attuali
ipotesi
> di rischio e' pregiudiziale all'avvio di nuove iniziative.
>
> Cordialmente
> Sergio Biraghi
>
>
> SECONDA LETTERA AL PRESIDENTE DELLA REPUBBLICA
>
> Roma, 26 gennaio 2001
>
> Signor Presidente,
>
> La ringrazio della cortese risposta in data 19/1/2001 che mi ha
> fatto pervenire tramite il suo consigliere militare. E' certamente
> importante conoscere che cosa dira' la commissione medico-
> scientifica del prof. Mandelli e le altre commissioni che sono state
> nominate. Tuttavia gia' sappiamo che queste commissioni a
> proposito dei casi di tumori e leucemie ed altro contratte da alcuni
> nostri militari non potranno con certezza affermare ne' che le
> affezioni sopra indicate sicuramente derivano da contaminazione
> per uranio impoverito (e metalli associati), ne' che dette affezioni
> sicuramente non derivano da uranio impoverito.
>
> Si resta insomma inevitabilmente nel campo delle probabilita', piu'
> o meno grandi, che e' emersa dall'analisi delle migliaia di casi
> verificatisi in Iraq tra la popolazione civile e nei reduci della
guerra
> del Golfo. Le decine di casi italiani non potranno certamente
> modificare queste valutazioni.
>
> D'altra parte tali valutazioni hanno fatto si' che gli Stati Uniti
> abbiano emanato fin dal 1993, in occasione dell'impiego delle
> truppe in Somalia, norme di sicurezza molto stringenti che
> mettevano in evidenza i rischi di tumori e malformazioni alla
> nascita, come e' stato ricordato anche recentemente dal
> settimanale tedesco «Der Spiegel» del 22 gennaio 2001 e prima
> anvcora da «Il Giornale dei Militari» del 27/11/2000. Del resto nel
> quotidianoo «San Francisco Examiner» del 21 giugno 1998 si
> legge che il regolamento militare USA di medicina preventiva (Art.
> 40-45) prevede che "vengano eseguiti dei test medici qualora si
> ritenga che materiali radioattivi siano stati impiegati in modo tale
da
> poter essere stati ingeriti, inalati o assorbiti all'interno del
corpo".
> Viene precisato inoltre: "Il Col. Cherry afferma che questo e' stato
> fatto in Somalia durante una missione di pace delle Nazioni Unite
> nel 1992 e che attualmente tale regolamento viene applicato in
> Corea, Bosnia e nel Golfo Persico".
>
> Da un punto di vista umanitario (rispecchiato anche nel recente
> diritto internazionale) occorreva quanto meno avvertire le
> popolazioni delle zone colpite dei rischi presenti anche dopo la
> cessazione delle azioni di fuoco e dopo il termine del conflitto.
>
> La conoscenza dei pericoli dell'uranio impoverito era ben nota alla
> sanita' militare internazionale nel quadro delle relazioni
interalleate.
> Si tratta di materia che e' perfino esposta nelle "sinossi" in uso
> presso le nostre scuole militari! Inoltre, l'argomento e' ben noto da
> tempo attraverso la pubblicistica, niente affatto segreta, come i
libri
> dell'ex ministro della giustizia USA, Ramsey Clark: "The fire this
> time" e "The metal of dishonour", quest'ultimo anche tradotto in
> italiano.
>
> Certamente quindi la questione dell'uranio impoverito non poteva
> essere sfuggita all'attenzione, oltreche' dei servizi di informazione
> italiani, anche dell'ambito sanitario-ambientale e degli addetti
militari
> italiani presso le ambasciate nei paesi in cui questo materiale
> veniva usato.
>
> Nelle norme di sicurezza emanate il 22 novembre 1999 nel quadro
> della forza multilaterale nei Balcani (a firma del colonnello Osvaldo
> Bizzari, specializzato NBC) il rischio e' presentificato in termini di
> possibilita' di contrazione di tumori e di malformazioni alla nascita.
> Purtroppo queste norme (che comunque non sono state diffuse tra
> i civili) non hanno riguardato, oltreche' i primi sei mesi della
> campagna in Kosovo, i periodi delle campagne in Somalia e in
> Bosnia. Inoltre i mezzi e le procedure da mettere in atto per ridurre
> il rischio non erano disponibili alla componente civile. Il problema
> sussiste anche nei poligoni di tiro dove forze alleate usano
> armamenti all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Su questo problema che riguarda il "milite ignaro" (ma anche il
> "civile ignaro") ritengo che debba essere portata l'attenzione delle
> superiori autorita' indipendentemente anche da quali possono
> essere le conclusioni delle commissioni medico-scientifiche.
>
> In particolare pare che ogni sforzo debba pertanto essere compiuto
> per accertare come sia stato possibile che una materia cosi'
> gravida di implicazioni, da una parte per i nostri civili e militari
> impiegati nelle zone di operazione e, dall'altra parte (e in primo
> luogo) per le popolazioni civili sia sfuggita all'attenzione dei
> Ministeri dela Difesa, dell'Interno, della Sanita', dell'Ambiente.
>
> Credo che l'opinione pubblica non debba essere lasciata all'oscuro
> di quanto avviene in determinate istituzioni come e' accaduto,
> limitandoci a vicende recenti, per quanto riguarda Ustica, le
> violenze in Somalia, il Cermis, il caso Scieri. Il pericolo e' che
> venga minata la credibilita' dello Stato e la trasparenza del suo
> agire, che costituisce un sine qua non per una democrazia.
>
> E' per questi motivi che lo scrivente riteneva che la convocazione
> del Consiglio Supremo di Difesa potesse costituire un segnale
> positivo in rapporto al fatto che di fronte alla morte e alle gravi
> patologie manifestatesi in numerosi militari si voglia operare nel
> senso della difesa del loro elementare diritto ad essere informati,
> preventivamente e durante le operazioni, mentre si ha l'impressione
> che vi siano soprattutto preoccupazioni per l'autodifesa delle
> istituzioni.
>
> Falco Accame
> presidente ANA-Vafaf
> e a nome della rete AUI
> ********************************************************************
>
> 2) Lettera al Presidente del Consiglio (punto 4 del programma)
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente del Consiglio prof. Giuliano Amato
>
> Signor Presidente del Consiglio,
>
> faccio seguito alle lettere scritteLe in precedenza (vedi allegato)
> circa la questione dell'uranio impoverito e dei rischi corsi dal
nostro
> personale, civile e militare, prima in Somalia e poi in Bosnia e
> quanto meno 5 mesi nel Kosovo, in quanto non era stato informato
> della situazione e non erano stati assicurati i mezzi di protezione.
> (Il personale civile non e' mai stato dotato di mezzi di protezione,
> ne' gli sono state fornite istruzioni in merito).
>
> La problematica relativa a questa vicenda e' specificata in dettaglio
> nella lettera che ho scritto al Presidente della repubblica e che Le
> allego in copia.
>
> Nel frattempo si e' costituita la rete AUI (Aboliamo l'Uranio
> Impoverito). Anche a nome di questa rete Le chiedo un incontro in
> tempi brevi con una delegazione per esporLe alcuni dei problemi
> prioritari da affrontare.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> ***************************************************************
>
> 3) Lettere ai Presidenti di alcune Regioni dove si trovano i poligoni
di
> tiro (punto 5 del programma)
>
> REGIONE LAZIO
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Lazio
> On. Francesco Storace
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nel poligono di tiro di Nettuno si sono svolte e si svolgono
> esercitazioni a cui partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
>
> REGIONE CAMPANIA
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001.
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Campania
> On. Antonio Bassolino
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nel poligono di Persano si sono svolte e si svolgono esercitazioni a
> cui
> partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> REGIONE FRIULI
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Friuli
> dott. Roberto Antonione
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nei poligoni di tiro del Friuli si sono svolte e si svolgono
> esercitazioni a cui partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> Notizie riguardanti i poligoni:
> 1. La procura di Bari avvia un'indagine sulle basi pugliesi (Il Tempo,
> 26 gennaio 2001) 2. La procura della Repubblica di Pordenone ha
> avviato un'inchiesta sul poligono del Dandolo (Maniago, Friuli) (Il
> Tempo 26/1) 3. Interrogazione del parlamentare della Lega Edouard
> Ballaman sul poligono del Dandolo in rapporto alla malattia di due
> militari (Medssaggero Veneto 24/1/01)
>
> °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
>
> 4) Convocazione di una manifestazione di protesta (punto 6 del
> programma)
>
> PORTIAMO UNA CORONA AL "MILITE IGNARO"
>
> Sabato 3 febbraio - ore 12
> Appuntamento a Roma, piazza Venezia
> davanti all'Altare della Patria - monumento al milite ignoto.
>
>
> UNA CORONA PER I MILITARI E I CIVILI VITTIME DELL'URANIO,
> INVIATI NEI BALCANI SENZA NESSUNA PROTEZIONE
>
> UNA CORONA ANCHE PER LE POPOLAZIONI COLPITE,
> NELL'IMMEDIATO E PER UN TEMPO INDEFINITO, DAGLI
> EFFETTI DI ARMI CHE LE CONVENZIONI ESISTENTI SONO GIA'
> SUFFICIENTI A BANDIRE
>
> Iraq (1991), Somalia (1993), Bosnia (1994-95), Jugoslavia (1999).
> L'utilizzo delle armi all'uranio configura un c r i m i n e c o n t r
o
> l' u m a n i t a'. Altro che operazioni umanitarie, guerre
chirurgiche,
> armi intelligenti! Hanno inaugurato invece la guerra nucleare di
> bassa intensita'. Bisogna impedire che possano continuare.
>
> Le morti per leucemia o affezioni simili di reduci dai Balcani hanno
> contribuito finalmente a squarciare la coltre del silenzio che ha
> circondato questi crimini per tanto tempo. Adesso non lasciamo
> sole le vittime. Non lasciamo impuniti i responsabili.
>
> Ministri e alti vertici militari sono stati colti in flagranti
> contraddizioni. Hanno ignorato a lungo quello che assolutamente
> non potevano e non dovevano ignorare. Hanno cambiato piu' volte
> versione, adattandola alle circostanze che via via emergevano.
> Hanno cercato e cercano di scaricare su altri le loro responsabilita'
> o di minimizzare i fatti.
>
>
> CHI E' COLPEVOLE DEVE PAGARE E DEVE INTANTO SUBITO
> ESSERE ALLONTANATO DAGLI INCARICHI CHE RICOPRE
>
> DEVONO ESSERE PRESE MISURE IMMEDIATE PER
> RISARCIRE E PER ASSISTERE DAL PUNTO DI VISTA
> SANITARIO SIA I MILITARI E I CIVILI ITALIANI, SIA LE
> POPOLAZIONI COLPITE.
>
> Coordinamento aboliamo l'uranio
> impoverito
>
> ATTENZIONE:
> chiediamo a tutte le associazioni di partecipare sabato 3 febbraio
> alle ore 12 a Roma (Altare della Patria) e a farsi portavoce
> dell'appuntamento. Comunicate rapidamente la vostra adesione e
> partecipazione all'indirizzo pasti@... oppure al fax 06
> 8174010. Grazie
>
> *********************************************************************
>
> 5) Controcommissione alternativa rispetto a quella istituita da
> Mattarella (punto 7 del programma)
>
> D'intesa con il Tribunale Clark, che ha tenuto la sua seduta il
> giorno 13 nel pomeriggio, dopo l'assemblea della Rete AUI,
> abbiamo verificato la disponibilita' di alcuni specialisti a
costituire
> detta commissione, la cui costituzione e' stata annunciata alla
> stampa e ripresa anche da alcuni giornali (per esempio il Manifesto
> del 20/1/01) il 19 gennaio nel corso della conferenza stampa del
> Tribunale tenuta al Senato con Ramsey Clark, ex ministro della
> giustizia USA e coautore del libro denuncia sull'iuranio impoverito,
> The Metal of dishonor.
>
> La possibilita' di visionare gli atti della Commissione istituita dal
> Ministero della Difesa (commissione Mandelli) e di affiancare con
> esperti di parte quelli gia' nominati, e' stata richiesta
ufficialmente
> al Ministro.
>
> Gli scienziati che hanno dato la loro disponibilita' sono stati
> contattati tramite Mauro Cristaldi del "Comitato scienziate e
> scienziati contro la guerra". Coloro che hanno dato finora la loro
> disponibilita' sono: Carlo Pona, fisico, Roma; Francesca Degrassi,
> mutagenista, Roma; Valerio Gennao, epidemiologo, Genova;
> Giorgio Cortellessa, fisico nucleare, Roma; Livio Giuliano,
> matematico, Roma; Paolo Manzelli, chimico, Firenze; Massimo
> Zucchetti, ingegnere nucleare, Torino; Alessandra Signorini;
> Angelo Baracca, Firenze; Fabrizio Fabbri, naturalista;Mauro
> Cristaldi, naturalista, Roma.
>
> Si tratta di persone altamente qualificate, dalla cui collaborazione
> ci aspettiamo molto. Molti di loro figurano tra gli oratori del
> convegno organizzato dalle scienziate e scienziati contro la guerra
> a Torino il 22-23 giugno 2000 (gli atti sono pubblicati nel libro
> Contro le Nuove Guerre, Odradek, 2000). Venerdi' 2 febbraio il
> Tribunale Clark ha convocato con loro e con gli avvocati che hanno
> dato la loro disponibilita' una prima riunione per coordinare
l'attivita'.
>
> Per quanto riguarda il prof. Massimo Zucchetti di Torino,
> segnaliamo una sua intervista su "Il Tempo" del 27/1/01.
>
>
**************************************************************************
> Vi chiediamo di tenerci aggiornati sulle vostre attivita' in rapporto
> all'uranio, in modo che si possa contribuire a far circolare le
> informazioni tramite e-mail o fax a tutte le associazioni che hanno
> formato la rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
>
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1084757/www.consulteque.com
PER DEPORRE UNA CORONA IN MEMORIA DEL "MILITE IGNARO"
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Pasti Foundation <pasti@...>
> To: Rete AUI <pasti@...>
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 7:24 PM
> Subject: Notizie Rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
>
>
> NOTA INFORMATIVA SULL'ATTIVITA' DELLA RETE ABOLIRE
> L'URANIO IMPOOVERITO
> messaggio spedito da: Paolo Pioppi
>
> Trasmettiamo alcune informazioni circa i passi intrapresi da Falco
> Accame in attuazione di alcuni dei punti programmatici approvati a
> Roma nella riunione del 13 gennaio
>
> I N D I C E
>
> 1) Lettera al Presidente della Repubblica. Risposta del Consigliere
> militare del Presidente. Nuova lettera al Presidente (punto 3 del
> programma)
>
> 2) Lettera al Presidente del Consiglio (punto 4 del programma)
>
> 3) Lettere ai Presidenti di alcune Regioni dove si trovano i poligoni
di
> tiro (punto 5 del programma)
>
> 4) Convocazione di una MANIFESTAZIONE di protesta (punto 6 del
> programma)
>
> ATTENZIONE:
> chiediamo a tutte le associazioni di partecipare sabato 3 febbraio
> alle ore 12 a Roma (Altare della Patria) e a farsi portavoce
> dell'appuntamento. Trovate al punto 4 l'appello per la
> manifestazione che consiste nella posa di una corona al
> monumento al milite ignoto (Altare della Patria). Comunicate
> rapidamente la vostra adesione e partecipazione all'indirizzo
> pasti@.... Grazie
>
> 5) Controcommissione alternativa rispetto a quella istituita da
> Mattarella (punto 7 del programma)
>
> NOTA IMPORTANTE
> Vi chiediamo di tenerci aggiornati sulle vostre attivita' in rapporto
> all'uranio, in modo che si possa contribuire a far circolare le
> informazioni tramite e-mail o fax a tutte le associazioni che hanno
> formato la rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
> ************************************************
>
> 1) Lettera al Presidente della Repubblica. Risposta del Consigliere
> militare del Presidente. Nuova lettera al Presidente (punto 3 del
> programma)
>
> Roma, 15 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Repubblica
> Il Quirinale
>
>
>
> Signor Presidente,
>
> la morte di alcuni militari italiani e le malattie contratte da altri
> reduci dalle operazioni nei Balcani, che possono essere messe in
> relazione a contaminazione da uranio impoverito, rappresentano dei
> fatti molto gravi che credo impongano una attenta riflessione anche
> ai massimi livelli di responsabilita' nel nostro paese, in quanto
> coinvolgono aspetti della sicurezza nazionale e internazionale e
> soprattutto sono inerenti al diritto umanitario.
>
> In Somalia e poi in Bosnia e nei primi 5 mesi della campagna del
> Kosovo, il personale militare e civile italiano ha operato in assenza
> di norme di protezione, dato che queste sono state emanate in
> data 22 novembre 1999. Eppure in queste missioni gli Stati Uniti
> avevano emanato precise disposizioni di sicurezza per il loro
> personale in relazione ai rischi connessi all'impiego dell'uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Negli USA sono stati condotti da lungo tempo degli studi a partire
> dai primi anni '90 nei quali si afferma, senza ombra di dubbio, la
> pericolosita' legata alla ingestione di polvere di uranio, come
> testimonia un documento emanato nel 1993 (e che fa riferimento a
> precedenti studi del '91) nel quale si afferma tra l'altro che:
> "Quando i soldati si trovano ad inalare o ingestire polvere di uranio
> essi incorrono in un potenziale incremento nel rischio di cancro".
> "When soldiers inhale or ingeste DU dust, they incur a potential
> increase in cancer risk". Il documento e' del direttore della Sanita'
> dell'esercito USA. In un altro documento dell'ottobre 1993, del
> Support Directorate di Washington, si precisano le disposizioni di
> sicurezza da adottare per il personale USA operante in Somalia.
>
> Per quanto concerne la Bosnia, i raid degli aerei A/10, aerei contro-
> carro degli USA (ed anche alcuni raid degli Harrier britannici) erano
> effettuati operando con armi all'uranio. Questi raid sono partiti
dalla
> base di Aviano. Tale base e' al comando di un colonnello
> dell'aereonautica italiana, che quindi e' ovviamente a conoscenza di
> tutti gli ordini di operazione e rapporti di operazione. Egli e'
altresi'
> a conoscenza delle direttive impartite per l'uso delle armi all'uranio
> impoverito e dei risultati ottenuti nelle singole azioni. Il pilota,
tra
> l'altro, nei debriefing al termine della missione riferisce sul numero
> dei proiettili sparati e sui carri armati, ed altri obiettivi,
> eventualmente distrutti.
>
> L'uso dell'uranio impoverito in Bosnia era noto alle autorita'
militari
> italiane operanti in ambito NATO. Infatti anche il comandante della
> V ATAF di Vicenza era a conoscenza di tutti gli ordini e i rapporti
> di operazione e quindi dei compiti svolti nelle missioni degli aerei
> A/10. Cosi' come ne era al corrente il vicecomandante (italiano) di
> AFSOUTH. Del resto l'operazione in Bosnia fu illustrata in una
> conferenza stampa tenutasi proprio a Napoli presso AFSOUTH. In
> Bosnia, oltre ai proiettili all'uranio impoverito furono lanciati 13
> missili da crociera, contenenti anch'essi uranio impoverito.
>
> Circa la pericolosita' delle armi all'uranio, sulla quale sembra
> esservi discussione, vale la pena di ricordare quanto affermato dal
> generale Osvaldo Bizzari nelle succitate norme di sicurezza
> trasmesse ai reparti, nelle quali si legge testualmente: "Inalazioni
> di polvere di uranio impoverito sono associate nel tempo con effetti
> negativi sulla salute quale il tumore e disfunzioni nei neonati".
>
> Non sembra quindi esservi dubbio alcuno sulla valutazione di
> pericolosita' dell'uranio che e' stata fatta da parte italiana e
quindi
> sui rischi connessi, anche se nel campo epidemiologico non si
> possono avere certezze di tipo meccanico, cioe' deterministiche,
> ma solo relazioni probabilistiche. Forse l'unica certezza che si puo'
> avere e' quella che non vi possono essere certezze di non
> pericolosita' e che quindi si ha a che fare inevitabilmente con dei
> rischi, che possono essere piu' o meno grandi in dipendenza di
> molti fattori.
>
> Per quanto riguarda la pericolosita' dell'uranio, recenti studi hanno
> dimostrato in molti casi la presenza contemporanea anche di
> plutonio, materiale particolarmente nocivo specie in relazione alle
> leucemie.
>
> L'esistenza di rischi e' ben nota negli Stati Uniti in base alle
> esperienze di massa avute nella guerra del Golfo, esperienze che
> hanno dato luogo appunto alla emanazione di norme di sicurezza
> per proteggere il personale per quanto possibile. La protezione del
> personale, militare e civile, e' affidata peraltro non solo alla
> esistenza e conoscenza minuziosa delle norme (e a uno specifico
> addestramento all'applicazione delle norme stesse) ma anche alla
> disponibilita' di mezzi per applicare le norme, come tute protettive
> ricambiabili (data l'esigenza del loro assai frequente lavaggio),
> maschere protettive a perdere, guanti a perdere e cosi'
> via.
>
> Quanto al personale civile italiano, che tra l'altro e' quello che
piu' a
> lungo ha sostato nelle zone contaminate, non risulta che questo
> disponesse del materiale necessario alla protezione e quindi,
> anche nell'eventualita' che fosse stato messo a conoscenza delle
> norme, non avrebbe potuto osservarle. Per quanto riguarda il
> personale militare pare che i mezzi a disposizione siano stati
> alquanto scarsi.
>
> Altro problema riguarda le visite mediche a cui andava sottoposto il
> personale prima, durante e dopo la missione. Purtroppo in Italia
> esistono solo pochissimi centri specializzati che sono in grado di
> effettuare le delicate analisi spettrografiche e quant'altro occorre.
A
> quanto e' dato sapere vi sono state gravi carenze sotto questo
> riguardo e ad oggi migliaia di persone devono essere sottoposte a
> visiste mediche, il che pone dei problemi non indifferenti. Risulta
> che vi siano persone che hanno dovuto effettuare a spese proprie le
> analisi, mentre non vi e' alcun dubbio che tale assistenza debba
> essere a carico dello Stato.
>
> Questa problematica ci porta al discorso relativo alle cure mediche
> concernenti coloro che sono risultati affetti da patologie. Anche qui
> si e' verificato purtroppo il fatto che molte persone si sono dovute
> rivolgere, con ingenti spese, a istituti privati.
>
> Tale problematica ci rimanda alla questione delle cause di servizio
> e dell'equo indennizzo. Le "cause di servizio" vengono stabilite
> nella grande maggioranza dei casi in base a valutazioni
> probabilistiche e questo deve valere anche per la contaminazione
> da uranio che concerne i reduci dalla guerra del Golfo, dalla
> Somalia e dalla ex Jugoslavia. E a tale riguardo si pone anche
> un'altra tematica. Le operazioni di pace compiute sono in realta'
> frammiste ad azioni di guerra. Un soldato che muore in una
> missione di pace dovrebbe quindi essere considerato, dal punto di
> vista dei risarcimenti, come un soldato caduto in guerra. La
> questione coinvolge anche, ovviamente, civili che hanno operato in
> un'area dove si sono svolte operazioni militari.
>
> Di particolare rilevanza e' il problema dei risarcimenti per i
familiari
> delle vittime. Esiste in merito una legislazione molto confusa. Le
> piu' recenti determinazioni sono quelle che hanno valutato i
> risarcimenti dovuti nella misura di 4 miliardi a famiglia e si
> riferiscono alle vittime del tranciamento del cavo della funivia del
> Cermis. Nel caso dei parenti delle vittime della sciagura di Ustica
> sono stati stanziati all'incirca 150 milioni per famiglia. Una cifra
di
> quest'ordine di grandezza e' stata stanziata per le vittime della
> strage di Bologna e per le vittime della tragedia di Casalecchio sul
> Reno.
>
> Altra problematica riguarda l'inquinamento prodotto dall'uso di
> mezzi contenenti uranio nei poligoni di tiro, perche' vi sono casi di
> patologie riscontrate in personale che ha operato nei poligoni.
> L'inquinamento riguarda peraltro anche le acque dell'Adriatico in cui
> sono stati sparati (per prova di corretto funzionamento delle armi
> prima di ogni missione) proiettili all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Infine si pone il problema che per la sua importanza in senso
> globale e' certamente prioritario e che riguarda i risarcimenti in
> campo internazionale per le popolazioni che sono state interessate
> alle conseguenze derivanti dall'impiego di armi all'uranio, i cui
effetti
> di radiazione e tossicita' si protraggono nel tempo molto dopo il
> conflitto e che per questo, come avviene per le armi chimiche,
> dovrebbero essere bandite.
>
> Per la gravita' dei problemi sopra elencati, che riguardano oltreche'
> personale civile anche personale militare italiano, Le chiediamo
> (anche in riferimento alla precedente lettera inviataLe in data
> 22/12/2000) in qualita' di Capo delle Forze Armate, di convocare il
> Consiglio Superiore della Difesa, organo a cui possono partecipare
> ministri responsabili di vari settori nonche' esperti.
>
> Falco Accame
> Presidente Ana-Vafaf
> e a nome della Rete AUI
>
> L'elenco dei componenti della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'Uranio
> Impoverito) e' riportato in allegato.
>
>
>
> RISPOSTA DEL CONSIGLIERE MILITARE DEL PRESIDENTE
> DELLA REPUBBLICA
>
>
> Roma, 19 gennaio 2001.
>
> Onorevole,
>
> Mi riferisco al Suo Appello al Presidente della Repubblica per la
> convocazione del Conbsiglio Supremo della Difesa perche' esamini
> la problematica dei possibili rischi connessi con l'impiego nei
> Balcani di munizioni all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Il Presidente segue con particolare attenzione l'approfondimento
> delle verifiche e delle ricerche disposte dal Ministro della Difesa.
>
> La Magistratura sta a sua volta indagando su eventuali ipotesi di
> reato.
>
> La definizione dei dati medico-scientifici relativi alle attuali
ipotesi
> di rischio e' pregiudiziale all'avvio di nuove iniziative.
>
> Cordialmente
> Sergio Biraghi
>
>
> SECONDA LETTERA AL PRESIDENTE DELLA REPUBBLICA
>
> Roma, 26 gennaio 2001
>
> Signor Presidente,
>
> La ringrazio della cortese risposta in data 19/1/2001 che mi ha
> fatto pervenire tramite il suo consigliere militare. E' certamente
> importante conoscere che cosa dira' la commissione medico-
> scientifica del prof. Mandelli e le altre commissioni che sono state
> nominate. Tuttavia gia' sappiamo che queste commissioni a
> proposito dei casi di tumori e leucemie ed altro contratte da alcuni
> nostri militari non potranno con certezza affermare ne' che le
> affezioni sopra indicate sicuramente derivano da contaminazione
> per uranio impoverito (e metalli associati), ne' che dette affezioni
> sicuramente non derivano da uranio impoverito.
>
> Si resta insomma inevitabilmente nel campo delle probabilita', piu'
> o meno grandi, che e' emersa dall'analisi delle migliaia di casi
> verificatisi in Iraq tra la popolazione civile e nei reduci della
guerra
> del Golfo. Le decine di casi italiani non potranno certamente
> modificare queste valutazioni.
>
> D'altra parte tali valutazioni hanno fatto si' che gli Stati Uniti
> abbiano emanato fin dal 1993, in occasione dell'impiego delle
> truppe in Somalia, norme di sicurezza molto stringenti che
> mettevano in evidenza i rischi di tumori e malformazioni alla
> nascita, come e' stato ricordato anche recentemente dal
> settimanale tedesco «Der Spiegel» del 22 gennaio 2001 e prima
> anvcora da «Il Giornale dei Militari» del 27/11/2000. Del resto nel
> quotidianoo «San Francisco Examiner» del 21 giugno 1998 si
> legge che il regolamento militare USA di medicina preventiva (Art.
> 40-45) prevede che "vengano eseguiti dei test medici qualora si
> ritenga che materiali radioattivi siano stati impiegati in modo tale
da
> poter essere stati ingeriti, inalati o assorbiti all'interno del
corpo".
> Viene precisato inoltre: "Il Col. Cherry afferma che questo e' stato
> fatto in Somalia durante una missione di pace delle Nazioni Unite
> nel 1992 e che attualmente tale regolamento viene applicato in
> Corea, Bosnia e nel Golfo Persico".
>
> Da un punto di vista umanitario (rispecchiato anche nel recente
> diritto internazionale) occorreva quanto meno avvertire le
> popolazioni delle zone colpite dei rischi presenti anche dopo la
> cessazione delle azioni di fuoco e dopo il termine del conflitto.
>
> La conoscenza dei pericoli dell'uranio impoverito era ben nota alla
> sanita' militare internazionale nel quadro delle relazioni
interalleate.
> Si tratta di materia che e' perfino esposta nelle "sinossi" in uso
> presso le nostre scuole militari! Inoltre, l'argomento e' ben noto da
> tempo attraverso la pubblicistica, niente affatto segreta, come i
libri
> dell'ex ministro della giustizia USA, Ramsey Clark: "The fire this
> time" e "The metal of dishonour", quest'ultimo anche tradotto in
> italiano.
>
> Certamente quindi la questione dell'uranio impoverito non poteva
> essere sfuggita all'attenzione, oltreche' dei servizi di informazione
> italiani, anche dell'ambito sanitario-ambientale e degli addetti
militari
> italiani presso le ambasciate nei paesi in cui questo materiale
> veniva usato.
>
> Nelle norme di sicurezza emanate il 22 novembre 1999 nel quadro
> della forza multilaterale nei Balcani (a firma del colonnello Osvaldo
> Bizzari, specializzato NBC) il rischio e' presentificato in termini di
> possibilita' di contrazione di tumori e di malformazioni alla nascita.
> Purtroppo queste norme (che comunque non sono state diffuse tra
> i civili) non hanno riguardato, oltreche' i primi sei mesi della
> campagna in Kosovo, i periodi delle campagne in Somalia e in
> Bosnia. Inoltre i mezzi e le procedure da mettere in atto per ridurre
> il rischio non erano disponibili alla componente civile. Il problema
> sussiste anche nei poligoni di tiro dove forze alleate usano
> armamenti all'uranio impoverito.
>
> Su questo problema che riguarda il "milite ignaro" (ma anche il
> "civile ignaro") ritengo che debba essere portata l'attenzione delle
> superiori autorita' indipendentemente anche da quali possono
> essere le conclusioni delle commissioni medico-scientifiche.
>
> In particolare pare che ogni sforzo debba pertanto essere compiuto
> per accertare come sia stato possibile che una materia cosi'
> gravida di implicazioni, da una parte per i nostri civili e militari
> impiegati nelle zone di operazione e, dall'altra parte (e in primo
> luogo) per le popolazioni civili sia sfuggita all'attenzione dei
> Ministeri dela Difesa, dell'Interno, della Sanita', dell'Ambiente.
>
> Credo che l'opinione pubblica non debba essere lasciata all'oscuro
> di quanto avviene in determinate istituzioni come e' accaduto,
> limitandoci a vicende recenti, per quanto riguarda Ustica, le
> violenze in Somalia, il Cermis, il caso Scieri. Il pericolo e' che
> venga minata la credibilita' dello Stato e la trasparenza del suo
> agire, che costituisce un sine qua non per una democrazia.
>
> E' per questi motivi che lo scrivente riteneva che la convocazione
> del Consiglio Supremo di Difesa potesse costituire un segnale
> positivo in rapporto al fatto che di fronte alla morte e alle gravi
> patologie manifestatesi in numerosi militari si voglia operare nel
> senso della difesa del loro elementare diritto ad essere informati,
> preventivamente e durante le operazioni, mentre si ha l'impressione
> che vi siano soprattutto preoccupazioni per l'autodifesa delle
> istituzioni.
>
> Falco Accame
> presidente ANA-Vafaf
> e a nome della rete AUI
> ********************************************************************
>
> 2) Lettera al Presidente del Consiglio (punto 4 del programma)
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente del Consiglio prof. Giuliano Amato
>
> Signor Presidente del Consiglio,
>
> faccio seguito alle lettere scritteLe in precedenza (vedi allegato)
> circa la questione dell'uranio impoverito e dei rischi corsi dal
nostro
> personale, civile e militare, prima in Somalia e poi in Bosnia e
> quanto meno 5 mesi nel Kosovo, in quanto non era stato informato
> della situazione e non erano stati assicurati i mezzi di protezione.
> (Il personale civile non e' mai stato dotato di mezzi di protezione,
> ne' gli sono state fornite istruzioni in merito).
>
> La problematica relativa a questa vicenda e' specificata in dettaglio
> nella lettera che ho scritto al Presidente della repubblica e che Le
> allego in copia.
>
> Nel frattempo si e' costituita la rete AUI (Aboliamo l'Uranio
> Impoverito). Anche a nome di questa rete Le chiedo un incontro in
> tempi brevi con una delegazione per esporLe alcuni dei problemi
> prioritari da affrontare.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> ***************************************************************
>
> 3) Lettere ai Presidenti di alcune Regioni dove si trovano i poligoni
di
> tiro (punto 5 del programma)
>
> REGIONE LAZIO
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Lazio
> On. Francesco Storace
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nel poligono di tiro di Nettuno si sono svolte e si svolgono
> esercitazioni a cui partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
>
> REGIONE CAMPANIA
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001.
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Campania
> On. Antonio Bassolino
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nel poligono di Persano si sono svolte e si svolgono esercitazioni a
> cui
> partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> REGIONE FRIULI
>
> Roma, 23 gennaio 2001
>
> Al Presidente della Regione Friuli
> dott. Roberto Antonione
>
> Signor Presidente
>
> nei poligoni di tiro del Friuli si sono svolte e si svolgono
> esercitazioni a cui partecipano mezzi con la presenza di uranio
> impoverito.
>
> Di recente sono emersi casi di patologie sospette in cui si rivela la
> possibilita' di inquinamento da detto materiale.
>
> Il Presidente della Regione Sarda, Mario Floris, ha chiesto un
> incontro (vedi allegato) con il Presidente del Consiglio e il Ministro
> della Difesa. Per quanto concerne i poligoni si rende necessario un
> monitoraggio dell'area con appositi mezzi che spesso eccedono le
> possibilita' dei nuclei NBC.
>
> La problematica riguardante l'uso di armi all'uranio impoverito e'
> esposta nella allegata lettera scritta al Presidente della Repubblica.
>
> Anche a nome della Rete AUI (Aboliamo l'uranio impoverito!) Le
> chiediamo di intraprendere misure per verificare le condizioni di
> rischio eventualmente presenti nell'area e adottare le misure
> conseguenti.
>
> Falco Accame
>
> Notizie riguardanti i poligoni:
> 1. La procura di Bari avvia un'indagine sulle basi pugliesi (Il Tempo,
> 26 gennaio 2001) 2. La procura della Repubblica di Pordenone ha
> avviato un'inchiesta sul poligono del Dandolo (Maniago, Friuli) (Il
> Tempo 26/1) 3. Interrogazione del parlamentare della Lega Edouard
> Ballaman sul poligono del Dandolo in rapporto alla malattia di due
> militari (Medssaggero Veneto 24/1/01)
>
> °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
>
> 4) Convocazione di una manifestazione di protesta (punto 6 del
> programma)
>
> PORTIAMO UNA CORONA AL "MILITE IGNARO"
>
> Sabato 3 febbraio - ore 12
> Appuntamento a Roma, piazza Venezia
> davanti all'Altare della Patria - monumento al milite ignoto.
>
>
> UNA CORONA PER I MILITARI E I CIVILI VITTIME DELL'URANIO,
> INVIATI NEI BALCANI SENZA NESSUNA PROTEZIONE
>
> UNA CORONA ANCHE PER LE POPOLAZIONI COLPITE,
> NELL'IMMEDIATO E PER UN TEMPO INDEFINITO, DAGLI
> EFFETTI DI ARMI CHE LE CONVENZIONI ESISTENTI SONO GIA'
> SUFFICIENTI A BANDIRE
>
> Iraq (1991), Somalia (1993), Bosnia (1994-95), Jugoslavia (1999).
> L'utilizzo delle armi all'uranio configura un c r i m i n e c o n t r
o
> l' u m a n i t a'. Altro che operazioni umanitarie, guerre
chirurgiche,
> armi intelligenti! Hanno inaugurato invece la guerra nucleare di
> bassa intensita'. Bisogna impedire che possano continuare.
>
> Le morti per leucemia o affezioni simili di reduci dai Balcani hanno
> contribuito finalmente a squarciare la coltre del silenzio che ha
> circondato questi crimini per tanto tempo. Adesso non lasciamo
> sole le vittime. Non lasciamo impuniti i responsabili.
>
> Ministri e alti vertici militari sono stati colti in flagranti
> contraddizioni. Hanno ignorato a lungo quello che assolutamente
> non potevano e non dovevano ignorare. Hanno cambiato piu' volte
> versione, adattandola alle circostanze che via via emergevano.
> Hanno cercato e cercano di scaricare su altri le loro responsabilita'
> o di minimizzare i fatti.
>
>
> CHI E' COLPEVOLE DEVE PAGARE E DEVE INTANTO SUBITO
> ESSERE ALLONTANATO DAGLI INCARICHI CHE RICOPRE
>
> DEVONO ESSERE PRESE MISURE IMMEDIATE PER
> RISARCIRE E PER ASSISTERE DAL PUNTO DI VISTA
> SANITARIO SIA I MILITARI E I CIVILI ITALIANI, SIA LE
> POPOLAZIONI COLPITE.
>
> Coordinamento aboliamo l'uranio
> impoverito
>
> ATTENZIONE:
> chiediamo a tutte le associazioni di partecipare sabato 3 febbraio
> alle ore 12 a Roma (Altare della Patria) e a farsi portavoce
> dell'appuntamento. Comunicate rapidamente la vostra adesione e
> partecipazione all'indirizzo pasti@... oppure al fax 06
> 8174010. Grazie
>
> *********************************************************************
>
> 5) Controcommissione alternativa rispetto a quella istituita da
> Mattarella (punto 7 del programma)
>
> D'intesa con il Tribunale Clark, che ha tenuto la sua seduta il
> giorno 13 nel pomeriggio, dopo l'assemblea della Rete AUI,
> abbiamo verificato la disponibilita' di alcuni specialisti a
costituire
> detta commissione, la cui costituzione e' stata annunciata alla
> stampa e ripresa anche da alcuni giornali (per esempio il Manifesto
> del 20/1/01) il 19 gennaio nel corso della conferenza stampa del
> Tribunale tenuta al Senato con Ramsey Clark, ex ministro della
> giustizia USA e coautore del libro denuncia sull'iuranio impoverito,
> The Metal of dishonor.
>
> La possibilita' di visionare gli atti della Commissione istituita dal
> Ministero della Difesa (commissione Mandelli) e di affiancare con
> esperti di parte quelli gia' nominati, e' stata richiesta
ufficialmente
> al Ministro.
>
> Gli scienziati che hanno dato la loro disponibilita' sono stati
> contattati tramite Mauro Cristaldi del "Comitato scienziate e
> scienziati contro la guerra". Coloro che hanno dato finora la loro
> disponibilita' sono: Carlo Pona, fisico, Roma; Francesca Degrassi,
> mutagenista, Roma; Valerio Gennao, epidemiologo, Genova;
> Giorgio Cortellessa, fisico nucleare, Roma; Livio Giuliano,
> matematico, Roma; Paolo Manzelli, chimico, Firenze; Massimo
> Zucchetti, ingegnere nucleare, Torino; Alessandra Signorini;
> Angelo Baracca, Firenze; Fabrizio Fabbri, naturalista;Mauro
> Cristaldi, naturalista, Roma.
>
> Si tratta di persone altamente qualificate, dalla cui collaborazione
> ci aspettiamo molto. Molti di loro figurano tra gli oratori del
> convegno organizzato dalle scienziate e scienziati contro la guerra
> a Torino il 22-23 giugno 2000 (gli atti sono pubblicati nel libro
> Contro le Nuove Guerre, Odradek, 2000). Venerdi' 2 febbraio il
> Tribunale Clark ha convocato con loro e con gli avvocati che hanno
> dato la loro disponibilita' una prima riunione per coordinare
l'attivita'.
>
> Per quanto riguarda il prof. Massimo Zucchetti di Torino,
> segnaliamo una sua intervista su "Il Tempo" del 27/1/01.
>
>
**************************************************************************
> Vi chiediamo di tenerci aggiornati sulle vostre attivita' in rapporto
> all'uranio, in modo che si possa contribuire a far circolare le
> informazioni tramite e-mail o fax a tutte le associazioni che hanno
> formato la rete Abolire l'Uranio Impoverito
>
>
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1084757/www.consulteque.com
http://www.rferl.org/newsline/3-cee.html
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Janiary 30, 2001
BELARUSIAN PRESIDENT BLASTS OSCE MISSION FOR EXCEEDING
MANDATE...
Alyaksandr Lukashenka said on Belarusian Television on
27 January that the OSCE Advisory and Monitoring Group
in Minsk is overstepping its mandate by creating a
"corps of 14,000-18,000 militants" who, under the
disguise of election observers, may become a threat to
the country's stability. Lukashenka noted that the
OSCE mission's mandate covers only assistance in
improving Belarusian legislation and monitoring of
developments in the country. He said, however, that
Belarus's electoral legislation has already been
improved to meet international standards and will not
be changed until this year's presidential elections.
Lukashenka claimed to have put the OSCE mission's
budget under his control and to have persuaded the
mission to give up its intention to form a legion of
paid "militants." JM
...PLEDGES TO WARD OFF 'YUGOSLAV SCENARIO' IN BELARUS
Lukashenka said he took a "tough stance" on the OSCE
mission following the opposition's and some Western
"observer's" promises to stage a "Yugoslav scenario"
in Belarus during the presidential elections this
fall. "No, there will be no Yugoslavia here. As long
as I am president, this will not happen... I will not
push you [Belarusians] to the barricades, I will go
ahead of you, I will defend my people," Lukashenka
promised, warning the television viewers that Belarus
may be bombed "from above with shells stuffed with
allegedly depleted uranium." JM
---
> The URL for this article is http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bor2.htm
>
> www.tenc.net
> [Emperor's Clothes]
>
> BORODIN FALSELY ARRESTED - WASHINGTON'S EXCUSE A LIE [1-30-2001]
>
> Note from Emperor's Clothes: Below is the relevant text from a Press
> Conference given by one of Pavel Borodin's lawyers, Genrikh Pavlovich
> Padva.
>
> Mr. Borodin was arrested Jan. 17 when he got off the plane at Kennedy
> Airport en route to the Bush Inauguration. He is a diplomat. He had
> been invited to this State event. The excuse that Borodin was avoiding
> questioning in Switzerland and that the U.S. had received a Swiss
> arrest warrant and had no choice but to arrest him is preposterous.
>
> Mr. Borodin requested a diplomatic visa from the U.S. Embassy in
> Moscow. According to the 'Washington Post' (Jan. 19th), this routine
> request produced "urgent" consultations between the United States
> Embassy in Moscow and the State Department. Why "urgent"? Because if
> the Embassy gave Mr. Borodin a diplomatic visa, then the State
> Department would have a harder time justifying Borodin's already
> planned arrest. The Embassy was instructed to stall: neither to issue
> the visa nor to urge him to stay away from the U.S. Mr. Borodin didn't
> want to miss his plane, so he left on a standard passport.
>
> An arrest complaint against Mr. Borodin was filed in New York on Jan.
> 17th - that is, after the 'urgent' discussion between Washington and
> the Embassy in Moscow. In other words, Borodin was setup for arrest.
> The State Department wanted him jailed. Mr. Borodin's New York
> attorney, Alexander Fishkin, commented:
>
> "The arrest warrant is issued on January 10th, he receives an
> invitation to the inauguration on January 13th and a complaint is
> filed in New York for his arrest on January 17th," he said. "It could
> be a coincidence, yes, but it looks too strange to be a coincidence."
> ('NY Times', 1-19-2001)
>
> Mr. Borodin is supposedly wanted by the Swiss authorities only for
> questioning. But Mr. Borodin's lawyers report that the Swiss,
> apparently under U.S. pressure, had previously rejected a Russian
> offer for Mr. Borodin to meet voluntarily with Swiss officials. The
> Swiss insisted on the extraordinary measure of extradition. This is
> called "Making your demand so extreme that the other side has to
> refuse." The US/Swiss claim that the arrest was necessary was
> literally invented.
>
> What is behind Mr. Borodin's arrest? I disagree with his lawyer, Mr.
> Pavda, who suggests that the arrest is aimed at discrediting the
> Yeltsin family. I think it is a provocation intended to intimidate the
> countries of the Former Soviet Union, and in particular to drive a
> wedge between Russia and Belarus, which is led by the independent
> (from Washington) President Alexander Lukashenko. Mr. Lukashenko is a
> current focus of demonization, stemming from Washington and parroted
> by the usual parrots, including some birds on the Left. He is
> authoritarian, he is crazy, and so on. Yes, crazy enough to resist
> Washington's neoliberal economic policies, with the result that
> working people in Belarus are a whole lot better off than in other
> parts of the Former Soviet Union. We need more crazy leaders like him.
>
> Some may wonder why we are devoting space to this relatively minor
> incident. The reason is, it is not a minor incident. It is an arrogant
> message, delivered by the United States Establishment to the
> politicians - and ordinary people - of the Former Soviet Union. The
> message says: We are the rulers; you are the ruled. It says: you are
> incapable of functioning in an honest, democratic fashion; we must
> control you and you must learn humility.
>
> How charming for Washington and Switzerland to offer a guiding hand to
> the backward Soviets! The Senior guide, of course, is Washington,
> which presently guides people directly or through proxies on every
> continent (via the KLA in Kosovo, the Ugandan and Rwandan armies in
> Congo, death squads and the regular Army in Colombia, grisly Islamist
> secessionists whom it sponsors in the Former Soviet Union, as well
> similar types in Algeria, Indonesia, etc.). The Junior guide is
> Switzerland, which usually avoids direct involvement in war; but then,
> to paraphrase Mr. Milton, they also guide who only stand aside, and
> profit.
>
> Pavel Borodin's arrest indicates that new adventures are planned, new
> attacks on the people of the former Soviet Union, now that Washington
> feels it has a reliable government installed in Belgrade. - Jared
> Israel.
>
> (Another article on this subject, 'Borodin Arrest Targets
> Russian-Belarus Union', can be read at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm )
>
> On the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
> >From the Press Conference given by Genrikh Pavlovich Padva
>
> Official Kremlin Int'l News Broadcast
> January 26, 2001, Friday
>
> Moderator: Good day, dear journalists. Our guest today is Genrikh
> Pavlovich Padva who represents Pavel Borodin's interests. Today we
> will talk about the latest events in New York. Please, share your
> opinion with the journalists.
>
> Padva: First of all, I would like to apologize for being late, but I
> came straight from the courtroom, and you can't leave the courtroom
> until the hearings are over.
>
> There is nothing consoling in these events for us and for Pavel
> Pavlovich Borodin. Only one question was considered yesterday or
> rather today, it was night here -- the release of Borodin from under
> custody. Our side raised the question of releasing him on bail and
> guarantees basically from our state, because the guarantees were given
> by the Russian ambassador to the United States of America.
>
> Hearings lasted several hours, but no release was granted and Borodin
> remains in custody. I want you to understand one thing. For some
> reason there have been many media reports saying that the question of
> his extradition is to be considered. This is not so. The question of
> extradition will be considered later when the Swiss side provides all
> the necessary documents. It has 40 days of the date of detention to do
> so.
>
> The arrest that has taken place, just for you to have a clear idea,
> was necessary [supposedly] to secure Borodin's appearance for
> interrogation. It's not the arrest of the accused or even a suspect.
> It's what is called compulsory process.
>
> The arrest that was effected in America is called conditional arrest
> because the final decision is made not immediately, but later. So, the
> question of extradition, I repeat, will be decided when all the
> necessary documents are provided. We will oppose extradition as such
> when this question is considered. We will provide a large amount of
> data and documents to prove that he is not subject to extradition.
>
> What kind of data and documents are these? First of all, these
> documents will confirm our statement that Pavel Pavlovich has never
> been officially summoned anywhere. I mean Switzerland. The Swiss
> lawyer who is working on this with us is one of the leading lawyers in
> Switzerland. He is a professor and the author of a textbook by which
> all Swiss lawyers study criminal justice. He has specially checked out
> and talked with Mr. Deveau to find out whether Pavel Pavlovich had
> been summoned officially, but then failed to show up. No, nothing like
> this happened.
>
> It's all the more strange because they are trying to extradite him --
> this is an exact translation from English as a fugitive, which he is
> not. I'd say he was not a circumspect, what shall we call him, hunter
> -- well, no, a person who thoughtlessly pushed his way under this
> terrible wheel that was set in motion in Switzerland and that is still
> spinning. He did not escape from anywhere and he did not hide from
> anyone. He lived calmly. By the way, he has been abroad before, not in
> America, but in other countries.
>
> We will prove that it's strange when the question of coercive
> extradition is raised if the person never objected to meeting them
> voluntarily in the first place. Moreover, I am sure you know that our
> government told Swiss law-enforcement agencies, through the Russian
> ambassador in Switzerland, that if Switzerland did not insist on
> extradition, our state and our government would guarantee Pavel
> Pavlovich Borodin's voluntary appearance.
>
> However, they rejected this proposal, which, in my view, is a clear
> indication of bias because if they really want him to come to meet
> them, why extradite him by force? Indeed, in this case they will be
> able to meet him in many months at best because this is not such a
> simple procedure and not such a short procedure. If they want just to
> question him, it is easier to do with our government's guarantees. But
> unfortunately, they did not agree to this and insist on his
> extradition.
>
> I think it's some ambitions, of course. Maybe Mr. Deveau bears the
> grudge for something, perhaps, he thinks that he was not treated
> respectfully enough. Maybe, at least I've got the impression that
> these actions were not dictated by the necessity and are connected
> with some ambitions. I think that's all I can say right now. I am
> waiting for your questions and I'll try to answer them.
>
> Q: Today's Izvestia published an interview with Bertrand Bertossa in
> which he said that in addition to money laundering, the participation
> in some criminal group, excuse me, criminal organization, is
> incriminated to him. How can you comment on this statement?
>
> Padva: You know, it's hard to comment on all these statements, because
> we have not seen official charges. They have not presented either to
> Pavel Pavlovich or his lawyers. We only know that they have been
> published more or less officially and they are known to his lawyer who
> has been mentioned to me, lawyer Ponset (sp?) there in France, that is
> in Switzerland.
>
> Let's begin with money laundering. It's hard to comment because money
> laundering is understood as various actions involving property and
> money obtained illegally. But they don't say that -- they don't have
> proof, but they accuse him of having obtained this money illegally.
> They hoped all the time and said that this would be proved in Russia
> and then the transfer of money through Swiss banks would be recognized
> as money laundering.
>
> However, our thorough investigation -- there are 120 volumes in the
> Mabetex case which is connected with Pavel Pavlovich Borodin, but his
> guild has not been proven. Moreover, our investigation came to the
> conclusion that there is no his guilt in these actions, in contractual
> relations with Mabetex. So, it's not quite clear what money, the
> laundering of what money they are talking about.
>
> As to participation in a criminal group I believe they have the
> following in mind. They have found not one but many different
> accounts, a dozen, two dozen, opened in the names of citizens of ru
> and that are being ascribed to Pavel Pavlovich. Since the movement on
> some accounts coincided or were close, since some could have been from
> one and the same sources, this and only this gives them any reason to
> allege that there was some sort of a criminal group that laundered
> this money.
>
> I repeat that there is no data at all that all this money was gained
> by criminal ways not only by Pavel Pavlovich but also all the others.
> Unfortunately, we can comment only on what we know. But we know very
> little so far because, I repeat, no formal charges have been made
> anywhere.
>
> What does a charge of participation in a criminal group mean? As you
> understand, the charge must indicate what sort of a criminal group
> this was, what it engaged in, what crimes were perpetrated by this
> group of persons -- murdered, robbed, engaged in extortion, got bribes
> and so on. This is quite absurd. It is alleged that a group, say, of
> some 20 totally unrelated persons was accepting bribes or conducted
> joint theft. But nothing is known about the real charges. The only
> charge is participation in a criminal group. But this is really
> absurd. How can one defend oneself against such an allegation? It
> appears to us that this is quite a groundless allegation.
>
> I believe this is all that I can say about this.
>
> Q: Ekho Moskvy radio.
>
> Did the defense expect the decision taken by the court, or was it a
> surprise to you?
>
> Padva: It was an expected decision, of course. But the defense did not
> abandon hope that another decision was possible. It also did its best
> to prevent the decision that was taken from happening. But you know
> all the difficulties that we encounter.
>
> What is the situation? As I understand it, although some people are
> trying to say that this is a purely legal problem... formally,
> perhaps, it is a primarily legal problem. But what in reality have we
> come up against? Let us begin with the following. A couple of years
> ago America became the first country to demand greater transparency
> from Switzerland, its banks. America insisted that the fight against
> money laundering should be started. The American Jewish lobby raised
> the question that after the War, after nazism a tremendous amount of
> the money of victims of nazism had sedimented in Swiss banks. All this
> finally forced Switzerland to start doing something and, indeed, Swiss
> banks have become more open and have started demonstrating accounts,
> mostly Russian ones.
>
> You know very well what is now happening in the world. You know about
> the hysteria concerning the so-called Russian Mafia. You know very
> well about the allegations that Russia is not fighting money
> laundering and that for this reason Russia should be discriminated. In
> an election campaign speech Bush said that if elected, he will do
> everything possible not to give financial assistance to Russia because
> corruption and bribing is on such a grand scale there that all money
> winds up in the hands of our high-placed officials. And you know that
> he even named one of them -- a person as prominent as Chernomyrdin.
> This is the atmosphere in which Pavel Pavlovich Borodin was arrested.
>
> All this cannot but affect the solution of his case, his fate. Of
> course, a judge should proceed first and foremost from the law. But I
> am convinced that no matter how a judge proceeds from the law his
> ideology determines his understanding and interpretation of the law.
> Not directly, perhaps, but indirectly.
>
> We do not know how a judge voted, whether he voted for Bush or not. It
> is possible that he voted for Bush precisely because he said no
> financial help should be given to our corrupt society. This simply
> cannot but play a certain role in the solution of concrete questions,
> concrete cases.
>
> We took all this into account and we knew that we are facing
> substantial difficulties. Availing myself of the presence here of
> representatives of different media outlets I would like to say that it
> really disturbs me that there is a different approach to the fate of
> our citizens who are under investigation abroad and so on. The mass
> media is doing its best to protect Gusinsky and right it is. I fully
> agree with the press. If a person's guilt has not yet been
> established, if it is not yet really known whether or not a person has
> committed a crime, I am convinced that there is no need to keep such a
> person behind bars.
>
> But when we speak about Borodin some media outlets for some reason
> take already a totally different position as if he were not a citizen
> of our country, as if his arrest in these circumstances is not a slap
> in the face for our country. I do not understand this. I would want
> all the media outlets to keep to a single position, the position of
> protecting our citizens. By the way, this is a duty of our state.
> Sometimes I am asked: why is Borodin so defended? Because we should
> protect our citizens. And it is unfortunate that not all are being
> defended. This should be done because this is a constitutional duty of
> our state. It is a duty of our state to defend the interests of our
> citizens if these interests, if the rights of our citizens are
> encroached upon abroad. I believe that all this should be taken into
> account.
>
> As to what has concretely happened, you know everything. I do not know
> what else is there for me to explain to you. There was a court
> hearing. The pleas of the defense were heard out for three hours. This
> appears to be fair. The decision was taken not to release Borodin. But
> I cannot understand this decision. I do not understand why a person
> should be kept under guard when there is full confidence and a full
> guarantee that he will appear in court when summoned and will not
> disappear. There was this proposal to make him wear the electronic
> bracelet. You know, it will transmit information if he moves 100 or
> 150 meters. More than that, our ambassador offered his guarantee. This
> is unique. I do not know about other precedents. Plus a huge bail.
> Frankly, I don't know where this sum of 750,000 came from, apparently
> journalists wanted to raise that much, but the maximum sum that was
> considered was 250,000. However, mass media talked all the time about
> 750,000 for some reason. I think!
> they have been biased.
>
> Q: You say different media give different interpretations but he is
> our fellow citizens and he must be defended. But media say at least
> something, while Vladimir Putin has distanced himself from this. Do
> you follow me? What do you think the President's position?
>
> Padva: You know, I don't think the President is duty bound to make
> statements regarding the arrest of a citizen of his country. The
> President has not made public statements, he has not called a press
> conference and he has not made an official statement. But if the
> Foreign Minister is doing something, I don't think you have any doubts
> that this is being done with the President's consent.
>
> If our state says, through our ambassadors, that there are no reasons
> to keep him in custody and that if need be we can guarantee his
> appearance, this cannot be done without the President's consent. So, I
> don't think that the President has to make statements on each such
> case.
>
> The President is associated with our country. He is our guarantor, and
> I think that if he makes an appeal to some country and that country
> rejects it, it's a slap to all of us, every citizen of our country
> because this is our President, because we elected him, even though
> some may not have voted for him.
>
> This is why I think that the President should be very circumspect in
> making such statements in order not to lose his political face and,
> most importantly, avoid useless moves. I think that if there had been
> clear understanding that the President's statement or appeal would
> solve everything, he would have made it immediately.
>
> Q: You said that Russia provided guarantees of his appearance to
> Switzerland, but Switzerland rejected them. Was it done before
> Borodin's arrest or after?
>
> Padva: I think I made myself quite clear. No official request to
> Borodin or our government or Prosecutor General's Office regarding his
> appearance in Switzerland was ever made before his arrest. So, no one
> could guarantee anything or discuss anything. We gave such guarantees
> after his arrest.
>
> Q: Speaking juridically, does his arrest violate any law, maybe
> American or some other?
>
> Padva: Just formally?
>
> Q: Yes.
>
> Padva: No. Who speaks of a breach of law? Neither we nor our
> government have said that. There is an agreement on extradition
> between Switzerland and America. It obligates them to help each other
> in such cases. If one side requests the arrest of a person and his
> further extradition as provided for in this agreement, they have every
> right to do so and they must do so.
>
> Q: So, this talk of diplomatic passport -- everything is fine there?
>
> Padva: If he had official immunity, then this would be a different
> question. But Pavel Pavlovich does not have official immunity. At the
> same time, arresting a delegate who was basically sent officially on
> behalf of two countries, on behalf of a union of two countries, on the
> border is of course an unprecedented fact. I have never seen anything
> like that before.
>
> Voice: There was no official invitation.
>
> Q: Official? He arrived by regular passport.
>
> Voice: And by fake invitation.
>
> Padva: Wait a minute. Where did you get all this? I am shocked. You
> say this as if you saw all this with your eyes. The invitation was
> absolutely genuine and signed by a member of the presidential
> inauguration committee. I have to tell you that the State Department
> does not officially invite anyone except ambassadors who are
> accredited and live there.
>
> In keeping with the generally-accepted practice in America, such
> invitations are issued by private persons who have direct relation to
> events. I repeat, it was signed.
>
> I also know, although from media reports and not from official
> documents, that he allegedly didn't sign it, although we examined his
> signature. But this is a different question that has not been
> officially investigated or stated. He received an official document
> signed, I repeat, by an official because he was a member of two
> committees. It is more important that he was a member of an
> inauguration committee. Besides, he was a member of the Bush election
> sponsorship committee.
>
> Think of what was in this invitation, what is known to us and what is
> real and not a sham as you want to present it or as you were deceived
> about. It says that Pavel Pavlovich will be met upon arrival, that a
> room was booked for him in such and such place, that he will have a
> personal car, that he will take place in such and such events,
> absolutely official ones -- dinners, official breakfasts -- to which
> people are invited according to a list approved by a presidential
> adviser.
>
> This invitation was brought to the Foreign Ministry by Pavel Pavlovich
> and it did not evoke any doubts. It and his diplomatic passport were
> handed over to the US embassy which did not say that it was a private
> invitation that was invalid. This is why it's totally wrong to say
> that there was no invitation or that it was a false invitation.
>
> If it were a false invitation, perhaps this may be proved one day as a
> result of special investigation, and then the one who sent it will be
> brought to account, but what does Pavel Pavlovich Borodin to do with
> all this?
>
> As for his regular foreign travel passport, delegates who travel
> anywhere do not have to bear diplomatic passports. Diplomatic
> passports are issued only to certain officials. So the fact that he
> left the country and crossed the border by regular passport does not
> make him an unofficial person. Indeed, did he stop being the State
> Secretary of the Union State because of that?
>
> Q: Did he arrive in the US as a private person or as an official?
>
> Padva: What private person? He received an invitation and was sent
> there by the chairman of the Byelorussia-Russia Union, Mr. Lukashenko.
> How can he be a private person after this?
>
> Q: But America does not recognize this union, it hasn't recognized it
> yet, has it? It means nothing to it, do you understand this?
>
> Padva: Well, it does mean something to us. You asked me in what
> capacity he was sent there.
>
> Q: He could have been sent by the Pope, but what difference does it
> make?
>
> Padva: What did you say?
>
> Q: You accuse the States of disrespectful treatment. But on the other
> hand, you say that no law was broken by the arrest.
>
> Padva: That's right, no law was broken because they acted in
> accordance with their obligations under an agreement with Switzerland.
> You have to understand that -- I think I make myself clear enough,
> they were fulfilling their obligations under an agreement with
> Switzerland. In this sense the law was not violated. It was not
> violated because Pavel Pavlovich did not have a formal diplomatic
> immunity. That is why there was no formal violation. I am trying to
> say something else because you do not appear to understand simple
> things. What am I saying is that my experience, and I have been
> working as a defense lawyer for already 50 years, tells me that
> Borodin was officially sent there on an official invitation. This does
> not mean that he had immunity. I repeat, there was no formal violation
> of the law.
>
> But proceeding from my practice, my experience, I do not know of
> instances when an official delegate of such a high rank was detained
> immediately at the border. This is all that I wanted to say. Am I
> clear?
>
> Q: Radio Liberty. You said that there is a different attitude of the
> press to Gusinsky and Borodin...
>
> Padva: I said not of the entire press but of a certain part of it.
>
> Q: Why does this surprise you? Does it not seem to you that these
> persons have a different reputation?
>
> Padva: Because people are detained not on the basis of their
> reputation. And the press should not treat people differently. A
> citizen of Russia should have equal protection until he is found
> guilty and sentenced. Unfortunately, you want Borodin to be found
> guilty and Gusinsky not to be found guilty. As a citizen and a lawyer
> I want both of them to be regarded as equally innocent until their
> guilt is proved.
>
> Q: Your accusations against the press are unfounded. It is the task of
> the press to cover events. This has nothing to do with what we want or
> do not want to do. You are claiming that we are working for one side,
> defending one side.
>
> Padva: I am not speaking about you, I do not know who you are working
> for.
>
> Q: I work for Radio Liberty.
>
> Padva: You are working for somebody just as defense lawyers work for
> somebody. And you are committed to a no lesser extent than lawyers.
> But I would want the press to objectively cover events. As to my
> commitment, it is a natural and official one. I am defending precisely
> Borodin.
>
> As to you, you have no right to defend somebody just because you feel
> like it. You must inform people about objective circumstances. Well,
> objectively, so far neither Borodin or Gusinsky are guilty. And arrest
> equally should not be applied to them, in any case, in the existing
> concrete conditions.
>
> I am prepared jointly with Gusinsky's lawyers to defend his interests
> but I would also want those who rightly and fairly defend Gusinsky to
> give similar treatment to everybody else. Unfortunately, this is not
> what some media outlets are doing. I am not referring to the entire
> press. You know this saying that "Guilty conscience is speaking."
>
> Q: But it is absolutely wrong to blame everything on the press.
>
> Padva: Not on the press but on concrete representatives of the press.
>
> Q: Can you name the person who ... (inaudible) ... from the American
> side?
>
> Padva: Frankly, I do not remember the name.
>
> Q: What is going to happen now?
>
> Padva: Now Pavel Pavlovich is going to remain in prison. Our country,
> the state and mostly lawyers, Swiss, American and Russian lawyers,
> will submit additional data showing that we are right in our opinion
> that he should not be extradited.
>
> Q: And he is going to be kept in prison for so long?
>
> Padva: Yes. How else?
>
> Q: France Presse. Concerning the charge of belonging to a criminal
> group. You mentioned two dozen accounts that got money from a single
> source...
>
> Padva: You are speaking about two dozen accounts while I was speaking
> about two dozen persons.
>
> Q: Two dozen persons with accounts, right? Am I right in understanding
> that money to these accounts came from a single source?
>
> Padva: Wrong.
>
> Q: Can you give us the names of these people? If you can't can you at
> least say if there are any members of the Kremlin administration among
> them? What has happened with these accounts, have they been frozen?
>
> Padva: There is nothing to particularly conceal here since a lot has
> already been written in the press, though not always fairly.
>
> There is no doubt at all that one of Borodin's unofficial accusers is
> a certain Turover. I believe he claimed in one of the newspapers, I
> believe it was Segodnya, that when Borodin realizes that nobody needs
> him, that it is the Yeltsin family that is the target, then,
> supposedly, he will start talking and then there will be full clarity.
> Of course, everything began not with Borodin. Of course, the prime aim
> was to prove Yeltsin's guilt. There were certain circles and you know
> this very well that tried by all sorts of ways to turn our former
> President Yeltsin from a president into a defendant. All sorts of
> methods were used ranging from quite legal ones of the type of
> impeachment to the most illegal ones, attempts to discredit him. And
> one of these attempts were the allegations that he and his immediate
> surrounding, his family in the narrow and broad meanings of the word,
> possessed big dollar accounts in Switzerland. All this was directed
> against Boris Nikolayevich, directly or!
> indirectly.
>
> You mentioned the mass media. One of the first or actually the first
> newspapers to write about this was Corriera della Sera. Strange, but
> this newspaper turned out somehow to be the most informed one. It knew
> absolutely everything and was the first to raise this question in the
> press. And it repeatedly returned to this matter trying to persuade
> the public that all this is true.
>
> When it was established with absolute certainty that Boris
> Nikolayevich Yeltsin did not have and does not have dollar accounts,
> the accent was shifted to the Family. And there were attempts made to
> prove that Tatyana Dyachenko has money and so on. All this also ended
> in nothing. And it was just Pavel Pavlovich Borodin who remained face
> to face with the Swiss law enforcement machine. This is the soil out
> of which this case has grown. And since attempts were made to smear
> the so-called Family and since there were publications by one or two
> persons, I mentioned one of them to you, the Swiss authorities
> declared that Borodin is a member of a criminal group without saying
> what the crime actually was.
>
> You got me wrong that they all had accounts and got money from the
> same source. I did not say this. I said only that in certain
> instances, and please quote me correctly, do not ascribe to me things
> I do not say, well, in some instances the sources crossed one way or
> another. But this does not mean at all that some criminal group of a
> strange origin had existed.
>
> If you thing hard and strain your memory, you will remember that
> accounts may have the same or similar sources. Sometimes somebody
> hands over something to somebody else but this does not mean at all
> that this is a criminal group. For instance, somebody owes money and
> makes a transfer from his account to that of the other person. Does
> this mean that they are criminals? Absolutely not.
>
> So far Switzerland only has isolated bank transactions which they can
> interpret as they like. But nobody knows the truth yet.
>
> Q: Mir Novostei. A question to you as a jurist and not as a defense
> lawyer. A provocative question but my colleagues have also put it.
> When Borodin was arrested and since there are lots of high-placed
> foreigners staying in Russia and who have been involved in various
> scandals, and the FSB and the Foreign Intelligence Service have
> information about this, why did we just arrest them and look at what
> the reaction to this was going to be? Could this be done?
>
> And the second moment. Is it possible that this is some byzantine
> method of our secret services who for some reasons cannot arrest
> Borodin themselves and decided to do this with the help of others? But
> this is hardly the Prosecutor General's Office considering Mr.
> Ustinov's and especially Mr. Kolmogorov's good relations with Mr.
> Borodin. Do you think this is possible?
>
> Padva: I emphatically reject this even as a conjecture.
>
> Q: And what about my first question?
>
> Padva: My knowledge of the situation tells me that our special
> services had nothing to do with this concrete arrest. Although I do
> not regard our special services to be so impeccable and not capable of
> such things.
>
> Sorry, but what was your first question?
>
> Q: What about an arrest of foreign representatives?
>
> Padva: As you probably remember, Mr. Zhirinovsky said this almost
> immediately after this happened. I don't favor such actions. I think
> that if someone acts wrongly, this gives us no right to act wrongly as
> well.
>
> I remember there was a spy mania during the Cold War: you catch our
> spy, we will catch ten your spies. Then they catch 20 our spies in
> response and so on and so forth. Is this a civilized way of building
> relations with other countries? I think there are other ways to
> influence other countries to make them respect ours.
>
> ***
>
> A question from Emperor's Clothes: When has the United States
> government offered any indication that it responds to the "civilized
> way of building relations with other countries"?
>
> ***
>
> If you find Emperor's Clothes useful, we can sure use help.
>
> All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation
> will help with our work.
>
> To make a donation, please mail a check to Emperor's Clothes at P.O.
> Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321.
>
> Or call 617 916-1705 and we will take your credit card information
> over the phone. Thanks very much!
>
> www.tenc.net
> [EMPEROR'S CLOTHES]
>
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1084757/www.consulteque.com
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
Janiary 30, 2001
BELARUSIAN PRESIDENT BLASTS OSCE MISSION FOR EXCEEDING
MANDATE...
Alyaksandr Lukashenka said on Belarusian Television on
27 January that the OSCE Advisory and Monitoring Group
in Minsk is overstepping its mandate by creating a
"corps of 14,000-18,000 militants" who, under the
disguise of election observers, may become a threat to
the country's stability. Lukashenka noted that the
OSCE mission's mandate covers only assistance in
improving Belarusian legislation and monitoring of
developments in the country. He said, however, that
Belarus's electoral legislation has already been
improved to meet international standards and will not
be changed until this year's presidential elections.
Lukashenka claimed to have put the OSCE mission's
budget under his control and to have persuaded the
mission to give up its intention to form a legion of
paid "militants." JM
...PLEDGES TO WARD OFF 'YUGOSLAV SCENARIO' IN BELARUS
Lukashenka said he took a "tough stance" on the OSCE
mission following the opposition's and some Western
"observer's" promises to stage a "Yugoslav scenario"
in Belarus during the presidential elections this
fall. "No, there will be no Yugoslavia here. As long
as I am president, this will not happen... I will not
push you [Belarusians] to the barricades, I will go
ahead of you, I will defend my people," Lukashenka
promised, warning the television viewers that Belarus
may be bombed "from above with shells stuffed with
allegedly depleted uranium." JM
---
> The URL for this article is http://emperors-clothes.com/news/bor2.htm
>
> www.tenc.net
> [Emperor's Clothes]
>
> BORODIN FALSELY ARRESTED - WASHINGTON'S EXCUSE A LIE [1-30-2001]
>
> Note from Emperor's Clothes: Below is the relevant text from a Press
> Conference given by one of Pavel Borodin's lawyers, Genrikh Pavlovich
> Padva.
>
> Mr. Borodin was arrested Jan. 17 when he got off the plane at Kennedy
> Airport en route to the Bush Inauguration. He is a diplomat. He had
> been invited to this State event. The excuse that Borodin was avoiding
> questioning in Switzerland and that the U.S. had received a Swiss
> arrest warrant and had no choice but to arrest him is preposterous.
>
> Mr. Borodin requested a diplomatic visa from the U.S. Embassy in
> Moscow. According to the 'Washington Post' (Jan. 19th), this routine
> request produced "urgent" consultations between the United States
> Embassy in Moscow and the State Department. Why "urgent"? Because if
> the Embassy gave Mr. Borodin a diplomatic visa, then the State
> Department would have a harder time justifying Borodin's already
> planned arrest. The Embassy was instructed to stall: neither to issue
> the visa nor to urge him to stay away from the U.S. Mr. Borodin didn't
> want to miss his plane, so he left on a standard passport.
>
> An arrest complaint against Mr. Borodin was filed in New York on Jan.
> 17th - that is, after the 'urgent' discussion between Washington and
> the Embassy in Moscow. In other words, Borodin was setup for arrest.
> The State Department wanted him jailed. Mr. Borodin's New York
> attorney, Alexander Fishkin, commented:
>
> "The arrest warrant is issued on January 10th, he receives an
> invitation to the inauguration on January 13th and a complaint is
> filed in New York for his arrest on January 17th," he said. "It could
> be a coincidence, yes, but it looks too strange to be a coincidence."
> ('NY Times', 1-19-2001)
>
> Mr. Borodin is supposedly wanted by the Swiss authorities only for
> questioning. But Mr. Borodin's lawyers report that the Swiss,
> apparently under U.S. pressure, had previously rejected a Russian
> offer for Mr. Borodin to meet voluntarily with Swiss officials. The
> Swiss insisted on the extraordinary measure of extradition. This is
> called "Making your demand so extreme that the other side has to
> refuse." The US/Swiss claim that the arrest was necessary was
> literally invented.
>
> What is behind Mr. Borodin's arrest? I disagree with his lawyer, Mr.
> Pavda, who suggests that the arrest is aimed at discrediting the
> Yeltsin family. I think it is a provocation intended to intimidate the
> countries of the Former Soviet Union, and in particular to drive a
> wedge between Russia and Belarus, which is led by the independent
> (from Washington) President Alexander Lukashenko. Mr. Lukashenko is a
> current focus of demonization, stemming from Washington and parroted
> by the usual parrots, including some birds on the Left. He is
> authoritarian, he is crazy, and so on. Yes, crazy enough to resist
> Washington's neoliberal economic policies, with the result that
> working people in Belarus are a whole lot better off than in other
> parts of the Former Soviet Union. We need more crazy leaders like him.
>
> Some may wonder why we are devoting space to this relatively minor
> incident. The reason is, it is not a minor incident. It is an arrogant
> message, delivered by the United States Establishment to the
> politicians - and ordinary people - of the Former Soviet Union. The
> message says: We are the rulers; you are the ruled. It says: you are
> incapable of functioning in an honest, democratic fashion; we must
> control you and you must learn humility.
>
> How charming for Washington and Switzerland to offer a guiding hand to
> the backward Soviets! The Senior guide, of course, is Washington,
> which presently guides people directly or through proxies on every
> continent (via the KLA in Kosovo, the Ugandan and Rwandan armies in
> Congo, death squads and the regular Army in Colombia, grisly Islamist
> secessionists whom it sponsors in the Former Soviet Union, as well
> similar types in Algeria, Indonesia, etc.). The Junior guide is
> Switzerland, which usually avoids direct involvement in war; but then,
> to paraphrase Mr. Milton, they also guide who only stand aside, and
> profit.
>
> Pavel Borodin's arrest indicates that new adventures are planned, new
> attacks on the people of the former Soviet Union, now that Washington
> feels it has a reliable government installed in Belgrade. - Jared
> Israel.
>
> (Another article on this subject, 'Borodin Arrest Targets
> Russian-Belarus Union', can be read at
> http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/borodin.htm )
>
> On the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
> >From the Press Conference given by Genrikh Pavlovich Padva
>
> Official Kremlin Int'l News Broadcast
> January 26, 2001, Friday
>
> Moderator: Good day, dear journalists. Our guest today is Genrikh
> Pavlovich Padva who represents Pavel Borodin's interests. Today we
> will talk about the latest events in New York. Please, share your
> opinion with the journalists.
>
> Padva: First of all, I would like to apologize for being late, but I
> came straight from the courtroom, and you can't leave the courtroom
> until the hearings are over.
>
> There is nothing consoling in these events for us and for Pavel
> Pavlovich Borodin. Only one question was considered yesterday or
> rather today, it was night here -- the release of Borodin from under
> custody. Our side raised the question of releasing him on bail and
> guarantees basically from our state, because the guarantees were given
> by the Russian ambassador to the United States of America.
>
> Hearings lasted several hours, but no release was granted and Borodin
> remains in custody. I want you to understand one thing. For some
> reason there have been many media reports saying that the question of
> his extradition is to be considered. This is not so. The question of
> extradition will be considered later when the Swiss side provides all
> the necessary documents. It has 40 days of the date of detention to do
> so.
>
> The arrest that has taken place, just for you to have a clear idea,
> was necessary [supposedly] to secure Borodin's appearance for
> interrogation. It's not the arrest of the accused or even a suspect.
> It's what is called compulsory process.
>
> The arrest that was effected in America is called conditional arrest
> because the final decision is made not immediately, but later. So, the
> question of extradition, I repeat, will be decided when all the
> necessary documents are provided. We will oppose extradition as such
> when this question is considered. We will provide a large amount of
> data and documents to prove that he is not subject to extradition.
>
> What kind of data and documents are these? First of all, these
> documents will confirm our statement that Pavel Pavlovich has never
> been officially summoned anywhere. I mean Switzerland. The Swiss
> lawyer who is working on this with us is one of the leading lawyers in
> Switzerland. He is a professor and the author of a textbook by which
> all Swiss lawyers study criminal justice. He has specially checked out
> and talked with Mr. Deveau to find out whether Pavel Pavlovich had
> been summoned officially, but then failed to show up. No, nothing like
> this happened.
>
> It's all the more strange because they are trying to extradite him --
> this is an exact translation from English as a fugitive, which he is
> not. I'd say he was not a circumspect, what shall we call him, hunter
> -- well, no, a person who thoughtlessly pushed his way under this
> terrible wheel that was set in motion in Switzerland and that is still
> spinning. He did not escape from anywhere and he did not hide from
> anyone. He lived calmly. By the way, he has been abroad before, not in
> America, but in other countries.
>
> We will prove that it's strange when the question of coercive
> extradition is raised if the person never objected to meeting them
> voluntarily in the first place. Moreover, I am sure you know that our
> government told Swiss law-enforcement agencies, through the Russian
> ambassador in Switzerland, that if Switzerland did not insist on
> extradition, our state and our government would guarantee Pavel
> Pavlovich Borodin's voluntary appearance.
>
> However, they rejected this proposal, which, in my view, is a clear
> indication of bias because if they really want him to come to meet
> them, why extradite him by force? Indeed, in this case they will be
> able to meet him in many months at best because this is not such a
> simple procedure and not such a short procedure. If they want just to
> question him, it is easier to do with our government's guarantees. But
> unfortunately, they did not agree to this and insist on his
> extradition.
>
> I think it's some ambitions, of course. Maybe Mr. Deveau bears the
> grudge for something, perhaps, he thinks that he was not treated
> respectfully enough. Maybe, at least I've got the impression that
> these actions were not dictated by the necessity and are connected
> with some ambitions. I think that's all I can say right now. I am
> waiting for your questions and I'll try to answer them.
>
> Q: Today's Izvestia published an interview with Bertrand Bertossa in
> which he said that in addition to money laundering, the participation
> in some criminal group, excuse me, criminal organization, is
> incriminated to him. How can you comment on this statement?
>
> Padva: You know, it's hard to comment on all these statements, because
> we have not seen official charges. They have not presented either to
> Pavel Pavlovich or his lawyers. We only know that they have been
> published more or less officially and they are known to his lawyer who
> has been mentioned to me, lawyer Ponset (sp?) there in France, that is
> in Switzerland.
>
> Let's begin with money laundering. It's hard to comment because money
> laundering is understood as various actions involving property and
> money obtained illegally. But they don't say that -- they don't have
> proof, but they accuse him of having obtained this money illegally.
> They hoped all the time and said that this would be proved in Russia
> and then the transfer of money through Swiss banks would be recognized
> as money laundering.
>
> However, our thorough investigation -- there are 120 volumes in the
> Mabetex case which is connected with Pavel Pavlovich Borodin, but his
> guild has not been proven. Moreover, our investigation came to the
> conclusion that there is no his guilt in these actions, in contractual
> relations with Mabetex. So, it's not quite clear what money, the
> laundering of what money they are talking about.
>
> As to participation in a criminal group I believe they have the
> following in mind. They have found not one but many different
> accounts, a dozen, two dozen, opened in the names of citizens of ru
> and that are being ascribed to Pavel Pavlovich. Since the movement on
> some accounts coincided or were close, since some could have been from
> one and the same sources, this and only this gives them any reason to
> allege that there was some sort of a criminal group that laundered
> this money.
>
> I repeat that there is no data at all that all this money was gained
> by criminal ways not only by Pavel Pavlovich but also all the others.
> Unfortunately, we can comment only on what we know. But we know very
> little so far because, I repeat, no formal charges have been made
> anywhere.
>
> What does a charge of participation in a criminal group mean? As you
> understand, the charge must indicate what sort of a criminal group
> this was, what it engaged in, what crimes were perpetrated by this
> group of persons -- murdered, robbed, engaged in extortion, got bribes
> and so on. This is quite absurd. It is alleged that a group, say, of
> some 20 totally unrelated persons was accepting bribes or conducted
> joint theft. But nothing is known about the real charges. The only
> charge is participation in a criminal group. But this is really
> absurd. How can one defend oneself against such an allegation? It
> appears to us that this is quite a groundless allegation.
>
> I believe this is all that I can say about this.
>
> Q: Ekho Moskvy radio.
>
> Did the defense expect the decision taken by the court, or was it a
> surprise to you?
>
> Padva: It was an expected decision, of course. But the defense did not
> abandon hope that another decision was possible. It also did its best
> to prevent the decision that was taken from happening. But you know
> all the difficulties that we encounter.
>
> What is the situation? As I understand it, although some people are
> trying to say that this is a purely legal problem... formally,
> perhaps, it is a primarily legal problem. But what in reality have we
> come up against? Let us begin with the following. A couple of years
> ago America became the first country to demand greater transparency
> from Switzerland, its banks. America insisted that the fight against
> money laundering should be started. The American Jewish lobby raised
> the question that after the War, after nazism a tremendous amount of
> the money of victims of nazism had sedimented in Swiss banks. All this
> finally forced Switzerland to start doing something and, indeed, Swiss
> banks have become more open and have started demonstrating accounts,
> mostly Russian ones.
>
> You know very well what is now happening in the world. You know about
> the hysteria concerning the so-called Russian Mafia. You know very
> well about the allegations that Russia is not fighting money
> laundering and that for this reason Russia should be discriminated. In
> an election campaign speech Bush said that if elected, he will do
> everything possible not to give financial assistance to Russia because
> corruption and bribing is on such a grand scale there that all money
> winds up in the hands of our high-placed officials. And you know that
> he even named one of them -- a person as prominent as Chernomyrdin.
> This is the atmosphere in which Pavel Pavlovich Borodin was arrested.
>
> All this cannot but affect the solution of his case, his fate. Of
> course, a judge should proceed first and foremost from the law. But I
> am convinced that no matter how a judge proceeds from the law his
> ideology determines his understanding and interpretation of the law.
> Not directly, perhaps, but indirectly.
>
> We do not know how a judge voted, whether he voted for Bush or not. It
> is possible that he voted for Bush precisely because he said no
> financial help should be given to our corrupt society. This simply
> cannot but play a certain role in the solution of concrete questions,
> concrete cases.
>
> We took all this into account and we knew that we are facing
> substantial difficulties. Availing myself of the presence here of
> representatives of different media outlets I would like to say that it
> really disturbs me that there is a different approach to the fate of
> our citizens who are under investigation abroad and so on. The mass
> media is doing its best to protect Gusinsky and right it is. I fully
> agree with the press. If a person's guilt has not yet been
> established, if it is not yet really known whether or not a person has
> committed a crime, I am convinced that there is no need to keep such a
> person behind bars.
>
> But when we speak about Borodin some media outlets for some reason
> take already a totally different position as if he were not a citizen
> of our country, as if his arrest in these circumstances is not a slap
> in the face for our country. I do not understand this. I would want
> all the media outlets to keep to a single position, the position of
> protecting our citizens. By the way, this is a duty of our state.
> Sometimes I am asked: why is Borodin so defended? Because we should
> protect our citizens. And it is unfortunate that not all are being
> defended. This should be done because this is a constitutional duty of
> our state. It is a duty of our state to defend the interests of our
> citizens if these interests, if the rights of our citizens are
> encroached upon abroad. I believe that all this should be taken into
> account.
>
> As to what has concretely happened, you know everything. I do not know
> what else is there for me to explain to you. There was a court
> hearing. The pleas of the defense were heard out for three hours. This
> appears to be fair. The decision was taken not to release Borodin. But
> I cannot understand this decision. I do not understand why a person
> should be kept under guard when there is full confidence and a full
> guarantee that he will appear in court when summoned and will not
> disappear. There was this proposal to make him wear the electronic
> bracelet. You know, it will transmit information if he moves 100 or
> 150 meters. More than that, our ambassador offered his guarantee. This
> is unique. I do not know about other precedents. Plus a huge bail.
> Frankly, I don't know where this sum of 750,000 came from, apparently
> journalists wanted to raise that much, but the maximum sum that was
> considered was 250,000. However, mass media talked all the time about
> 750,000 for some reason. I think!
> they have been biased.
>
> Q: You say different media give different interpretations but he is
> our fellow citizens and he must be defended. But media say at least
> something, while Vladimir Putin has distanced himself from this. Do
> you follow me? What do you think the President's position?
>
> Padva: You know, I don't think the President is duty bound to make
> statements regarding the arrest of a citizen of his country. The
> President has not made public statements, he has not called a press
> conference and he has not made an official statement. But if the
> Foreign Minister is doing something, I don't think you have any doubts
> that this is being done with the President's consent.
>
> If our state says, through our ambassadors, that there are no reasons
> to keep him in custody and that if need be we can guarantee his
> appearance, this cannot be done without the President's consent. So, I
> don't think that the President has to make statements on each such
> case.
>
> The President is associated with our country. He is our guarantor, and
> I think that if he makes an appeal to some country and that country
> rejects it, it's a slap to all of us, every citizen of our country
> because this is our President, because we elected him, even though
> some may not have voted for him.
>
> This is why I think that the President should be very circumspect in
> making such statements in order not to lose his political face and,
> most importantly, avoid useless moves. I think that if there had been
> clear understanding that the President's statement or appeal would
> solve everything, he would have made it immediately.
>
> Q: You said that Russia provided guarantees of his appearance to
> Switzerland, but Switzerland rejected them. Was it done before
> Borodin's arrest or after?
>
> Padva: I think I made myself quite clear. No official request to
> Borodin or our government or Prosecutor General's Office regarding his
> appearance in Switzerland was ever made before his arrest. So, no one
> could guarantee anything or discuss anything. We gave such guarantees
> after his arrest.
>
> Q: Speaking juridically, does his arrest violate any law, maybe
> American or some other?
>
> Padva: Just formally?
>
> Q: Yes.
>
> Padva: No. Who speaks of a breach of law? Neither we nor our
> government have said that. There is an agreement on extradition
> between Switzerland and America. It obligates them to help each other
> in such cases. If one side requests the arrest of a person and his
> further extradition as provided for in this agreement, they have every
> right to do so and they must do so.
>
> Q: So, this talk of diplomatic passport -- everything is fine there?
>
> Padva: If he had official immunity, then this would be a different
> question. But Pavel Pavlovich does not have official immunity. At the
> same time, arresting a delegate who was basically sent officially on
> behalf of two countries, on behalf of a union of two countries, on the
> border is of course an unprecedented fact. I have never seen anything
> like that before.
>
> Voice: There was no official invitation.
>
> Q: Official? He arrived by regular passport.
>
> Voice: And by fake invitation.
>
> Padva: Wait a minute. Where did you get all this? I am shocked. You
> say this as if you saw all this with your eyes. The invitation was
> absolutely genuine and signed by a member of the presidential
> inauguration committee. I have to tell you that the State Department
> does not officially invite anyone except ambassadors who are
> accredited and live there.
>
> In keeping with the generally-accepted practice in America, such
> invitations are issued by private persons who have direct relation to
> events. I repeat, it was signed.
>
> I also know, although from media reports and not from official
> documents, that he allegedly didn't sign it, although we examined his
> signature. But this is a different question that has not been
> officially investigated or stated. He received an official document
> signed, I repeat, by an official because he was a member of two
> committees. It is more important that he was a member of an
> inauguration committee. Besides, he was a member of the Bush election
> sponsorship committee.
>
> Think of what was in this invitation, what is known to us and what is
> real and not a sham as you want to present it or as you were deceived
> about. It says that Pavel Pavlovich will be met upon arrival, that a
> room was booked for him in such and such place, that he will have a
> personal car, that he will take place in such and such events,
> absolutely official ones -- dinners, official breakfasts -- to which
> people are invited according to a list approved by a presidential
> adviser.
>
> This invitation was brought to the Foreign Ministry by Pavel Pavlovich
> and it did not evoke any doubts. It and his diplomatic passport were
> handed over to the US embassy which did not say that it was a private
> invitation that was invalid. This is why it's totally wrong to say
> that there was no invitation or that it was a false invitation.
>
> If it were a false invitation, perhaps this may be proved one day as a
> result of special investigation, and then the one who sent it will be
> brought to account, but what does Pavel Pavlovich Borodin to do with
> all this?
>
> As for his regular foreign travel passport, delegates who travel
> anywhere do not have to bear diplomatic passports. Diplomatic
> passports are issued only to certain officials. So the fact that he
> left the country and crossed the border by regular passport does not
> make him an unofficial person. Indeed, did he stop being the State
> Secretary of the Union State because of that?
>
> Q: Did he arrive in the US as a private person or as an official?
>
> Padva: What private person? He received an invitation and was sent
> there by the chairman of the Byelorussia-Russia Union, Mr. Lukashenko.
> How can he be a private person after this?
>
> Q: But America does not recognize this union, it hasn't recognized it
> yet, has it? It means nothing to it, do you understand this?
>
> Padva: Well, it does mean something to us. You asked me in what
> capacity he was sent there.
>
> Q: He could have been sent by the Pope, but what difference does it
> make?
>
> Padva: What did you say?
>
> Q: You accuse the States of disrespectful treatment. But on the other
> hand, you say that no law was broken by the arrest.
>
> Padva: That's right, no law was broken because they acted in
> accordance with their obligations under an agreement with Switzerland.
> You have to understand that -- I think I make myself clear enough,
> they were fulfilling their obligations under an agreement with
> Switzerland. In this sense the law was not violated. It was not
> violated because Pavel Pavlovich did not have a formal diplomatic
> immunity. That is why there was no formal violation. I am trying to
> say something else because you do not appear to understand simple
> things. What am I saying is that my experience, and I have been
> working as a defense lawyer for already 50 years, tells me that
> Borodin was officially sent there on an official invitation. This does
> not mean that he had immunity. I repeat, there was no formal violation
> of the law.
>
> But proceeding from my practice, my experience, I do not know of
> instances when an official delegate of such a high rank was detained
> immediately at the border. This is all that I wanted to say. Am I
> clear?
>
> Q: Radio Liberty. You said that there is a different attitude of the
> press to Gusinsky and Borodin...
>
> Padva: I said not of the entire press but of a certain part of it.
>
> Q: Why does this surprise you? Does it not seem to you that these
> persons have a different reputation?
>
> Padva: Because people are detained not on the basis of their
> reputation. And the press should not treat people differently. A
> citizen of Russia should have equal protection until he is found
> guilty and sentenced. Unfortunately, you want Borodin to be found
> guilty and Gusinsky not to be found guilty. As a citizen and a lawyer
> I want both of them to be regarded as equally innocent until their
> guilt is proved.
>
> Q: Your accusations against the press are unfounded. It is the task of
> the press to cover events. This has nothing to do with what we want or
> do not want to do. You are claiming that we are working for one side,
> defending one side.
>
> Padva: I am not speaking about you, I do not know who you are working
> for.
>
> Q: I work for Radio Liberty.
>
> Padva: You are working for somebody just as defense lawyers work for
> somebody. And you are committed to a no lesser extent than lawyers.
> But I would want the press to objectively cover events. As to my
> commitment, it is a natural and official one. I am defending precisely
> Borodin.
>
> As to you, you have no right to defend somebody just because you feel
> like it. You must inform people about objective circumstances. Well,
> objectively, so far neither Borodin or Gusinsky are guilty. And arrest
> equally should not be applied to them, in any case, in the existing
> concrete conditions.
>
> I am prepared jointly with Gusinsky's lawyers to defend his interests
> but I would also want those who rightly and fairly defend Gusinsky to
> give similar treatment to everybody else. Unfortunately, this is not
> what some media outlets are doing. I am not referring to the entire
> press. You know this saying that "Guilty conscience is speaking."
>
> Q: But it is absolutely wrong to blame everything on the press.
>
> Padva: Not on the press but on concrete representatives of the press.
>
> Q: Can you name the person who ... (inaudible) ... from the American
> side?
>
> Padva: Frankly, I do not remember the name.
>
> Q: What is going to happen now?
>
> Padva: Now Pavel Pavlovich is going to remain in prison. Our country,
> the state and mostly lawyers, Swiss, American and Russian lawyers,
> will submit additional data showing that we are right in our opinion
> that he should not be extradited.
>
> Q: And he is going to be kept in prison for so long?
>
> Padva: Yes. How else?
>
> Q: France Presse. Concerning the charge of belonging to a criminal
> group. You mentioned two dozen accounts that got money from a single
> source...
>
> Padva: You are speaking about two dozen accounts while I was speaking
> about two dozen persons.
>
> Q: Two dozen persons with accounts, right? Am I right in understanding
> that money to these accounts came from a single source?
>
> Padva: Wrong.
>
> Q: Can you give us the names of these people? If you can't can you at
> least say if there are any members of the Kremlin administration among
> them? What has happened with these accounts, have they been frozen?
>
> Padva: There is nothing to particularly conceal here since a lot has
> already been written in the press, though not always fairly.
>
> There is no doubt at all that one of Borodin's unofficial accusers is
> a certain Turover. I believe he claimed in one of the newspapers, I
> believe it was Segodnya, that when Borodin realizes that nobody needs
> him, that it is the Yeltsin family that is the target, then,
> supposedly, he will start talking and then there will be full clarity.
> Of course, everything began not with Borodin. Of course, the prime aim
> was to prove Yeltsin's guilt. There were certain circles and you know
> this very well that tried by all sorts of ways to turn our former
> President Yeltsin from a president into a defendant. All sorts of
> methods were used ranging from quite legal ones of the type of
> impeachment to the most illegal ones, attempts to discredit him. And
> one of these attempts were the allegations that he and his immediate
> surrounding, his family in the narrow and broad meanings of the word,
> possessed big dollar accounts in Switzerland. All this was directed
> against Boris Nikolayevich, directly or!
> indirectly.
>
> You mentioned the mass media. One of the first or actually the first
> newspapers to write about this was Corriera della Sera. Strange, but
> this newspaper turned out somehow to be the most informed one. It knew
> absolutely everything and was the first to raise this question in the
> press. And it repeatedly returned to this matter trying to persuade
> the public that all this is true.
>
> When it was established with absolute certainty that Boris
> Nikolayevich Yeltsin did not have and does not have dollar accounts,
> the accent was shifted to the Family. And there were attempts made to
> prove that Tatyana Dyachenko has money and so on. All this also ended
> in nothing. And it was just Pavel Pavlovich Borodin who remained face
> to face with the Swiss law enforcement machine. This is the soil out
> of which this case has grown. And since attempts were made to smear
> the so-called Family and since there were publications by one or two
> persons, I mentioned one of them to you, the Swiss authorities
> declared that Borodin is a member of a criminal group without saying
> what the crime actually was.
>
> You got me wrong that they all had accounts and got money from the
> same source. I did not say this. I said only that in certain
> instances, and please quote me correctly, do not ascribe to me things
> I do not say, well, in some instances the sources crossed one way or
> another. But this does not mean at all that some criminal group of a
> strange origin had existed.
>
> If you thing hard and strain your memory, you will remember that
> accounts may have the same or similar sources. Sometimes somebody
> hands over something to somebody else but this does not mean at all
> that this is a criminal group. For instance, somebody owes money and
> makes a transfer from his account to that of the other person. Does
> this mean that they are criminals? Absolutely not.
>
> So far Switzerland only has isolated bank transactions which they can
> interpret as they like. But nobody knows the truth yet.
>
> Q: Mir Novostei. A question to you as a jurist and not as a defense
> lawyer. A provocative question but my colleagues have also put it.
> When Borodin was arrested and since there are lots of high-placed
> foreigners staying in Russia and who have been involved in various
> scandals, and the FSB and the Foreign Intelligence Service have
> information about this, why did we just arrest them and look at what
> the reaction to this was going to be? Could this be done?
>
> And the second moment. Is it possible that this is some byzantine
> method of our secret services who for some reasons cannot arrest
> Borodin themselves and decided to do this with the help of others? But
> this is hardly the Prosecutor General's Office considering Mr.
> Ustinov's and especially Mr. Kolmogorov's good relations with Mr.
> Borodin. Do you think this is possible?
>
> Padva: I emphatically reject this even as a conjecture.
>
> Q: And what about my first question?
>
> Padva: My knowledge of the situation tells me that our special
> services had nothing to do with this concrete arrest. Although I do
> not regard our special services to be so impeccable and not capable of
> such things.
>
> Sorry, but what was your first question?
>
> Q: What about an arrest of foreign representatives?
>
> Padva: As you probably remember, Mr. Zhirinovsky said this almost
> immediately after this happened. I don't favor such actions. I think
> that if someone acts wrongly, this gives us no right to act wrongly as
> well.
>
> I remember there was a spy mania during the Cold War: you catch our
> spy, we will catch ten your spies. Then they catch 20 our spies in
> response and so on and so forth. Is this a civilized way of building
> relations with other countries? I think there are other ways to
> influence other countries to make them respect ours.
>
> ***
>
> A question from Emperor's Clothes: When has the United States
> government offered any indication that it responds to the "civilized
> way of building relations with other countries"?
>
> ***
>
> If you find Emperor's Clothes useful, we can sure use help.
>
> All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation
> will help with our work.
>
> To make a donation, please mail a check to Emperor's Clothes at P.O.
> Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321.
>
> Or call 617 916-1705 and we will take your credit card information
> over the phone. Thanks very much!
>
> www.tenc.net
> [EMPEROR'S CLOTHES]
>
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Se vuoi sviluppare il tuo business, entra anche tu in
Consulteque.com, la piu grande community on line di
professionisti, dove l'offerta incontra la domanda delle imprese.
E poi potrai leggere le news, discutere con gli altri nel forum,
organizzare con noi i tuoi viaggi e molto altro ...
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1084757/www.consulteque.com
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
[Note: Below is a joint statement by Michel Chossudovsky, Jared
Israel and Nico Varkevisser. The text that follows this statement
is by Jared Israel].
On the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
Last Wednesday (January 17th) Pavel Borodin, Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested following his arrival by plane
in New York City. Mr. Borodin was in the U.S. on official State
business. He was an invited guest at President Bush's Inauguration
ceremonies. The official justification for arresting this Russian
diplomat is that the Swiss wanted to question him about alleged
kickbacks. But the real reason for his arrest, and his subsequent
imprisonment without bail, is that Mr. Borodin is Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union. There is ample evidence that Washington
fostered the breakup of the Soviet Union and has tried to undermine
political and economic links between the former Soviet Republics.
Just as Washington financed the Afghan terrorists during the 1980s
(this was done with the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, to the tune of
over $6 billion), U.S. foreign policy, open and covert, has been
behind several of the civil wars within the former Soviet Union
including the war in Chechnya. The outrageous incarceration without
bail of Mr. Borodin, when he had been invited to America by George.
W. Bush, is an obvious ploy to disable one of the key figures in
the Russian-Belarus Union and to pressure others in Russia and
Belarus to follow political and economic policies that are to
Washington's liking.
- Jared Israel, Michel Chossudovsky and Nico Varkevisser
Bush Gov't Attacks Russian-Belarus Union
by Jared Israel [1-23-2001]
Newspaper accounts of the arrest of Russian diplomat Pavel Borodin at
Kennedy Airport last Wednesday focus on charges of corruption. They
barely refer to the real issues - Washington's desire to a) punish Mr.
Borodin for encouraging close ties between Russia and a Belarus led by
the independent (of Washington) President Alexander Lukashenko and to b)
embarrass and destabilize Russia. The idea is, if the Russian government
does not distance itself from Borodin, the Western media can smear it as
corrupt. If they do desert Mr. Borodin, or if his arrest is downplayed,
this may discourage others from taking actions independent of
Washington. This is American diplomacy: about as subtle as an axe.
But the American media doesn't deal with these real purposes of the
arrest of Mr. Borodin. Instead the media either does not cover the story
at all, or talks about corruption. This is a wonderful thing. Pres. Bush
told Barbara Walters the other day ("20/20", Jan. 19th) that the world
needs to "raid out corruption", and I agree. But why try to start this
difficult "Raiding" process thousands of miles away? Wouldn't it make
sense to pioneer "corruption raiding" right at home? In the Barbara
Walters interview, didn't our new President say, in no uncertain terms,
that people in uncivilized countries need to "build a democracy under
our--under our image"? By "raiding corruption" right here, in the US of
A, wouldn't we be showing these backward types how it is done?
For example, just before leaving office in 1992, Mr. Bush's own father
granted the Barrick Gold Company (in Canada) the rights to a U.S. gold
mine worth $10,000,000,000 (billion). Barrick's cost: $10,000
(thousand).
"So can you guess what happened next? Right: George I then
joined Barrick's board of directors, where he pocketed big
money for the next seven years. And he didn't mind singing for
his supper either; Barrick frequently dispatched the
ex-president to meet with the bloodthirsty dictators who were
his "old friends," like Indonesia's Suharto and Zaire's Mobutu
Sese Seko, to rig up juicy backdoor deals for his corporate
masters.
"Perhaps not incidentally, Barrick poured $148,000 into George
II's campaign this year. And Daddy's dirty work as a bagman
and fixer for other corporate interests has also served l'il
Georgie well. For example, George I went to bat for the Mirage
Casino corporation when they wanted to muscle in on some
Argentina territory; this year, Mirage kicked back $449,000 to
GOP coffers. Daddy G also did some highly remunerative flack
work for Chevron Oil with his old friends in Kuwait; in
return, Chevron pumped $657,000 into the Republican tank in
2000." ('The St. Petersburg Times,' December 12, 2000)
Nevertheless Senior Bush was not arrested at the airport.
Three Things About the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
First , Mr. Borodin is a diplomat. Is the U.S. State Department familiar
with this term?
dip·lo·mat [díppl[(schwa)] màt ] (plural dip·lo·mats) noun
1. government representative abroad: a member or employee of a
government who represents his or her country in dealings with
other nations
2. tactful person: somebody who is tactful and good at dealing
with people
Arresting Mr. Borodin (after inviting him to the Inauguration, no less)
is not diplomatic and may be seen as a provocation by Russia and
Belarus. For starters it violates diplomatic procedure, arguably
international law as well. This is irrelevant of whether or not Mr.
Borodin was carrying his diplomatic credentials when arrested. This
arrest denies diplomacy and affirms the Law of the Bully. Did we need
more affirmations?
Second, it is beyond credibility that Borodin's invitation to the Ball
and his subsequent arrest were not coordinated actions. Mr. Fishkin,
Borodin's lawyer, commented:
'"The arrest warrant is issued on January 10th, he receives an
invitation to the inauguration on January 13th and a complaint
is filed in New York for his arrest on January 17th'" ('NY
Times', 1-19-2001)
Mr. Fishkin remarked to the 'NY Times' reporter that this appears to be
a setup. It does indeed.
Third, Mr. Borodin is the Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union. The
Clinton administration has made clear its fury at Belarus, which has had
the temerity to resist neoliberal policies. Moreover, its government has
not bowed down to the usual Fifth Column "civil society" groups run by
Madeline Albright out of well-furnished offices at the National
Endowment for Democracy (sic!). The U.S. finds this both authoritarian
and anti-democratic.
The arrest of Borodin is the most sensational attack the U.S. has made
on the Russian-Belarus Union. It demonstrates the continuity of U.S.
foreign policy from Clinton to Bush. Having installed its puppet regime
in Yugoslavia, the U.S. Establishment is now escalating the attack on
the states of the former Soviet Union. Coming shortly after the death of
Laurent Kabila, President of the Congo, under circumstances that
strongly suggest U.S. involvement, this indicates a general escalation
of U.S. interventionism around the world.
In case the Russian and Belarus leaders failed to get the message
delivered via Borodin's arrest - that is to say, that they were being
publicly insulted by a bully, with the implicit dare: "Whatcha gonna do
about that, wimp?!" - in case they failed to get the message, George W.
was interviewed Friday by Barbara Walters on the ABC TV show '20/20'.
Junior Bush's apparent assignment was to rub Russia's face in the dirt.
I say 'apparent assignment' because he himself did not seem to be sure
about that or anything else in the interview but fortunately for the
diplomacy of the Free World, Walters was privy to the Humiliate-Russia
plan, so she helped him out. Held him up, one might say.
The exchange went as follows:
"WALTERS: How will your foreign policy be different from Bill
Clinton's?
"President-elect BUSH: We're going to make it clearer to
people that our nation is not going to be a--a nation of
nation builders. We'll be humble in our approach. We can't
have troops going into nations and say that we're going help
you. We're going to--we're going to--you're going to build a
democracy under our--under our image. But if you expect
capital to come into your country, you must make reforms. You
must make--raid out corruption. You must...
"WALTERS: Russia. You're talking about Russia?
"President-elect BUSH: Well, I'm talking about a lot of
countries.
"WALTERS: Do you consider Russia a friend or a threat?
"President-elect BUSH: I don't know yet. I hope--I hope Russia
is a friend. "
Note that when Walters cues Junior Bush, saying "Russia. You're talking
about Russia?" (which means "RUSSIA! YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RUSSIA!
DAMMIT!!") George doesn't get it. So Walters prompts him further: "Do
you consider Russia a friend or a threat?"
Note also that Junior Bush, in the very process of attempting to
humiliate Russia (by having a corrupt, incoherent American deliver a
stern warning against...corruption!) sticks in the incongruous line,
"We'll be humble in our approach." Amazing coming from a fellow whose
handlers have just busted at the airport a Russian diplomat whom they
lured to said fellow's Inauguration.
This profession of humility reminds one of Mr. Bush's oft repeated
phrase, "I am going to be president of all the people, not just those
who voted for me." Apparently they teach Junior Bush these phrases, and
he repeats them, amiably enough, though as often happens with phrases
learned by rote, not necessarily at the correct times or with exactly
the right wording.
Junior Bush's inability to get things straight when he speaks in public
is apparently going to be sold to us during the next, painful, four
years as Charming Stupidity; thus is virtue fashioned from necessity.
The same sort of feat was performed with Slick Willie, whose tendency to
rub on any available leg, and to lie, was sold to us as Puppy Dog
Cuteness.
Stupidity is superior in many ways to Doggieness. For one thing, it
elicits the sympathy of reporters throughout the Western media, who are
forced to write nonsensical stupidity which insults their intelligence
or else lose their jobs. For another, it provides an excuse for almost
any occasion. When in doubt, more and more folks in the Bush entourage
will tell us, "Like, you know, I mean, like, I dunno." To be stupid is
the ultimate stonewall.
Team of Fools
Consider the case of Vincent Zenga, whom you may refer to as Vincent the
Dumb. Vincent was an official member of Junior Bush's Inauguration Team.
(Everything with Junior is a Team, for reasons that ought to be
apparent…) It was he who supposedly invited Pavel Borodin to the
Inaugural "candlelight dinner". That is, Vincent Zenga is supposedly the
reason Pavel Borodin got off that plane at Kennedy airport and thus
could be nabbed by our corruption-fighters.
Mr. Zenga is described in the 'NY Times' as:
"a lawyer from West Palm Beach, Fla., who has contributed
sizable sums to the Republican National Committee and to Mr.
Bush's 1998 campaign for governor. "
Have you noticed that everything with the Bush family involves lots of
money? Is this corruption-fighting thing some kind of psychological
projection?
Zenga denied any complicity in the arrest of Mr. Borodin. "Mr. Zenga
said the invitation was sent by someone in the Moscow office of one of
his companies, Star Capital, " said the 'Times.' (1-19)
In a 'Washington Post' interview, Vincent the Dumb took the line that
Borodin had been invited "inadvertently".
Huh? How do you invite someone 'inadvertently'? Here's the 'Washington
Post' again:
"Zenga said he was mystified about how a letter went out over
his signature inviting Borodin to several exclusive events and
promising not only tickets, but also 'a car with driver' and a
hotel room. The Jan. 13 letter, which advised Borodin to bring
his own black-tie formal clothing, included tickets to a
candlelight dinner for 2,000 attended by Bush last night, and
promised tickets to an inaugural ball Saturday night.
'I have no idea how it happened' said Zenga of the invitation.
'We were surprised at it too.' "
Then, rather incongruously, Vincent added: "We [were un]aware of his
legal problems." ('Washington Post', January 19, 2001)
If Borodin was invited by mistake, whatever that means, what is the
relevance of Zenga having been ''unaware '' of Borodin's "legal
problems"? Is Vincent trying to tell us that, had he known of the legal
difficulties of this man whom he neither knew nor invited to the Ball,
he would not have invited him? Did somebody at CIA screw up and give
this guy two contradictory cover stories? Or is he just trying to
emulate his Master?
Just by the by, how can everybody in an American company that does
business in Russia be unaware of Borodin's "legal problems"? Those
problems have been discussed at least 308 times on Western TV and
newspapers over the past year. (I counted) And if you add the very
important word "Belarus" to the search, you still find 119 stories. This
does not include news reports or commentaries in the Russian language
media.
How does a highly successful man with a telecommunications company in
Russia manage to unwittingly invite a well-known Russian leader to the
Inaugural ball without knowing he has been accused of corruption?
Here is a bit more information.
"A State Department official said Borodin entered the country
on a multiple-entry, combined tourist and business visa issued
in 1998 for a three-year period. He had applied for a
diplomatic visa in Moscow on Tuesday night, prompting the U.S.
Embassy there to send an urgent request for guidance to the
State Department. But there was not enough time to respond
before his departure, and so Borodin used his personal
passport and left his diplomatic passport behind, the State
Department official said. "('Washington Post', January 19,
2001)
Why did the U.S. Embassy have to send "an urgent request for guidance"
to the State Department? Obviously because they read the newspapers and
therefore knew there was a Swiss warrant out for Borodin's arrest and
wanted to know what they were supposed to do: give him a diplomatic visa
which would rule out arresting him at Kennedy Airport or not give him a
visa and risk an international incident.
Nowadays urgent requests can be delivered and answered almost
instantaneously. So the outgoing State Department officials certainly
had time to consult with Bush's handlers. (Of course that's a bit of a
moot point since it was of course Bush's handlers who arranged to send
Borodin the invitation luring him to the U.S. in the first place. But
then, they did that unwittingly. Right?)
Clearly if these exalted beings wished to avoid an insulting provocation
(and an apparent violation of international law - the arrest of a
diplomat invited to a State function, no less) they could have issued
Borodin a standard, diplomatic visa. Or they could have refused while
warning him that there was a warrant out for his arrest. That they did
neither suggests they were hoping Borodin would use his non-diplomatic
visa (they knew he had one because the U.S. Embassy had issued it to
him.)
Liars often talk too much. Note that the 'New York Times' reports that
"Officials in Washington said the United States was tipped off by
someone in Russia that Mr. Borodin was on a plane to New York." Given
that the Embassy had sent "an urgent request for guidance", why the
baloney about being "tipped off by someone" that Borodin was coming?
Note also that the Federal Judge in Brooklyn ordered Borodin held for a
week without bail. Why, if the United States were not trying to insult
and provoke Russia, did US officials insist the man be thrown in jail at
all ?
"In Brooklyn, one of Mr. Borodin's lawyers, Raymond A.
Levites, asked Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky of the United States
District Court to allow Mr. Borodin to stay at the residence
of the Russian consul general while his legal problems were
sorted out. He said the Russian ambassador to the United
States, Yuri V. Ushakov, had offered to ensure that Mr.
Borodin made his court appearances. " (NY Times, Jan. 19,
2001)
Turning down this more than reasonable request is not only an insult to
the Russian Ambassador (implying his word is no better than that of, let
us say, an American President); it is also a further insult to Russia
and Belarus. Note that as of this writing (Tuesday AM, wee hours) Mr.
Borodin remains in jail, though as of Saturday, Mr. Bush became our
leader.
Our leader? As my long-dead Yiddish grandma would have said, "Oy vey is
mir." That literally translates, "Oh woe is me." But it means something
like, "What a world."
Recently some factually challenged fan of the US-sponsored regime in
Belgrade wrote a piece arguing that Baby Bush is going to give the world
a whole new enlightened foreign policy. Sure he will. And I can get you
this great deal on a really nice Bridge in Brooklyn.
Junior Bush may not be able to string two words together in coherent
fashion but his handlers know how to get the job done. The world is
their gold mine. - JI
***
If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can sure use your help...
All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation will
help with our work. To use our secure server, please click here or go to
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm.
Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton,
MA 02461-0321.
Or call 617 916-1705. Thanks very much.
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Consulteque.com e' il sito internet dove l'offerta dei
professionisti incontra la domanda delle imprese!
Seleziona on line i professionisti piu qualificati per
svolgere un'attivita di consulenza per la tua azienda.
Entra anche tu in consulteque.com e risparmia il tuo tempo.
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1083358/www.consulteque.com
[Emperor's Clothes]
[Note: Below is a joint statement by Michel Chossudovsky, Jared
Israel and Nico Varkevisser. The text that follows this statement
is by Jared Israel].
On the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
Last Wednesday (January 17th) Pavel Borodin, Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union, was arrested following his arrival by plane
in New York City. Mr. Borodin was in the U.S. on official State
business. He was an invited guest at President Bush's Inauguration
ceremonies. The official justification for arresting this Russian
diplomat is that the Swiss wanted to question him about alleged
kickbacks. But the real reason for his arrest, and his subsequent
imprisonment without bail, is that Mr. Borodin is Secretary of the
Russian-Belarus Union. There is ample evidence that Washington
fostered the breakup of the Soviet Union and has tried to undermine
political and economic links between the former Soviet Republics.
Just as Washington financed the Afghan terrorists during the 1980s
(this was done with the cooperation of Saudi Arabia, to the tune of
over $6 billion), U.S. foreign policy, open and covert, has been
behind several of the civil wars within the former Soviet Union
including the war in Chechnya. The outrageous incarceration without
bail of Mr. Borodin, when he had been invited to America by George.
W. Bush, is an obvious ploy to disable one of the key figures in
the Russian-Belarus Union and to pressure others in Russia and
Belarus to follow political and economic policies that are to
Washington's liking.
- Jared Israel, Michel Chossudovsky and Nico Varkevisser
Bush Gov't Attacks Russian-Belarus Union
by Jared Israel [1-23-2001]
Newspaper accounts of the arrest of Russian diplomat Pavel Borodin at
Kennedy Airport last Wednesday focus on charges of corruption. They
barely refer to the real issues - Washington's desire to a) punish Mr.
Borodin for encouraging close ties between Russia and a Belarus led by
the independent (of Washington) President Alexander Lukashenko and to b)
embarrass and destabilize Russia. The idea is, if the Russian government
does not distance itself from Borodin, the Western media can smear it as
corrupt. If they do desert Mr. Borodin, or if his arrest is downplayed,
this may discourage others from taking actions independent of
Washington. This is American diplomacy: about as subtle as an axe.
But the American media doesn't deal with these real purposes of the
arrest of Mr. Borodin. Instead the media either does not cover the story
at all, or talks about corruption. This is a wonderful thing. Pres. Bush
told Barbara Walters the other day ("20/20", Jan. 19th) that the world
needs to "raid out corruption", and I agree. But why try to start this
difficult "Raiding" process thousands of miles away? Wouldn't it make
sense to pioneer "corruption raiding" right at home? In the Barbara
Walters interview, didn't our new President say, in no uncertain terms,
that people in uncivilized countries need to "build a democracy under
our--under our image"? By "raiding corruption" right here, in the US of
A, wouldn't we be showing these backward types how it is done?
For example, just before leaving office in 1992, Mr. Bush's own father
granted the Barrick Gold Company (in Canada) the rights to a U.S. gold
mine worth $10,000,000,000 (billion). Barrick's cost: $10,000
(thousand).
"So can you guess what happened next? Right: George I then
joined Barrick's board of directors, where he pocketed big
money for the next seven years. And he didn't mind singing for
his supper either; Barrick frequently dispatched the
ex-president to meet with the bloodthirsty dictators who were
his "old friends," like Indonesia's Suharto and Zaire's Mobutu
Sese Seko, to rig up juicy backdoor deals for his corporate
masters.
"Perhaps not incidentally, Barrick poured $148,000 into George
II's campaign this year. And Daddy's dirty work as a bagman
and fixer for other corporate interests has also served l'il
Georgie well. For example, George I went to bat for the Mirage
Casino corporation when they wanted to muscle in on some
Argentina territory; this year, Mirage kicked back $449,000 to
GOP coffers. Daddy G also did some highly remunerative flack
work for Chevron Oil with his old friends in Kuwait; in
return, Chevron pumped $657,000 into the Republican tank in
2000." ('The St. Petersburg Times,' December 12, 2000)
Nevertheless Senior Bush was not arrested at the airport.
Three Things About the Arrest of Pavel Borodin
First , Mr. Borodin is a diplomat. Is the U.S. State Department familiar
with this term?
dip·lo·mat [díppl[(schwa)] màt ] (plural dip·lo·mats) noun
1. government representative abroad: a member or employee of a
government who represents his or her country in dealings with
other nations
2. tactful person: somebody who is tactful and good at dealing
with people
Arresting Mr. Borodin (after inviting him to the Inauguration, no less)
is not diplomatic and may be seen as a provocation by Russia and
Belarus. For starters it violates diplomatic procedure, arguably
international law as well. This is irrelevant of whether or not Mr.
Borodin was carrying his diplomatic credentials when arrested. This
arrest denies diplomacy and affirms the Law of the Bully. Did we need
more affirmations?
Second, it is beyond credibility that Borodin's invitation to the Ball
and his subsequent arrest were not coordinated actions. Mr. Fishkin,
Borodin's lawyer, commented:
'"The arrest warrant is issued on January 10th, he receives an
invitation to the inauguration on January 13th and a complaint
is filed in New York for his arrest on January 17th'" ('NY
Times', 1-19-2001)
Mr. Fishkin remarked to the 'NY Times' reporter that this appears to be
a setup. It does indeed.
Third, Mr. Borodin is the Secretary of the Russian-Belarus Union. The
Clinton administration has made clear its fury at Belarus, which has had
the temerity to resist neoliberal policies. Moreover, its government has
not bowed down to the usual Fifth Column "civil society" groups run by
Madeline Albright out of well-furnished offices at the National
Endowment for Democracy (sic!). The U.S. finds this both authoritarian
and anti-democratic.
The arrest of Borodin is the most sensational attack the U.S. has made
on the Russian-Belarus Union. It demonstrates the continuity of U.S.
foreign policy from Clinton to Bush. Having installed its puppet regime
in Yugoslavia, the U.S. Establishment is now escalating the attack on
the states of the former Soviet Union. Coming shortly after the death of
Laurent Kabila, President of the Congo, under circumstances that
strongly suggest U.S. involvement, this indicates a general escalation
of U.S. interventionism around the world.
In case the Russian and Belarus leaders failed to get the message
delivered via Borodin's arrest - that is to say, that they were being
publicly insulted by a bully, with the implicit dare: "Whatcha gonna do
about that, wimp?!" - in case they failed to get the message, George W.
was interviewed Friday by Barbara Walters on the ABC TV show '20/20'.
Junior Bush's apparent assignment was to rub Russia's face in the dirt.
I say 'apparent assignment' because he himself did not seem to be sure
about that or anything else in the interview but fortunately for the
diplomacy of the Free World, Walters was privy to the Humiliate-Russia
plan, so she helped him out. Held him up, one might say.
The exchange went as follows:
"WALTERS: How will your foreign policy be different from Bill
Clinton's?
"President-elect BUSH: We're going to make it clearer to
people that our nation is not going to be a--a nation of
nation builders. We'll be humble in our approach. We can't
have troops going into nations and say that we're going help
you. We're going to--we're going to--you're going to build a
democracy under our--under our image. But if you expect
capital to come into your country, you must make reforms. You
must make--raid out corruption. You must...
"WALTERS: Russia. You're talking about Russia?
"President-elect BUSH: Well, I'm talking about a lot of
countries.
"WALTERS: Do you consider Russia a friend or a threat?
"President-elect BUSH: I don't know yet. I hope--I hope Russia
is a friend. "
Note that when Walters cues Junior Bush, saying "Russia. You're talking
about Russia?" (which means "RUSSIA! YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RUSSIA!
DAMMIT!!") George doesn't get it. So Walters prompts him further: "Do
you consider Russia a friend or a threat?"
Note also that Junior Bush, in the very process of attempting to
humiliate Russia (by having a corrupt, incoherent American deliver a
stern warning against...corruption!) sticks in the incongruous line,
"We'll be humble in our approach." Amazing coming from a fellow whose
handlers have just busted at the airport a Russian diplomat whom they
lured to said fellow's Inauguration.
This profession of humility reminds one of Mr. Bush's oft repeated
phrase, "I am going to be president of all the people, not just those
who voted for me." Apparently they teach Junior Bush these phrases, and
he repeats them, amiably enough, though as often happens with phrases
learned by rote, not necessarily at the correct times or with exactly
the right wording.
Junior Bush's inability to get things straight when he speaks in public
is apparently going to be sold to us during the next, painful, four
years as Charming Stupidity; thus is virtue fashioned from necessity.
The same sort of feat was performed with Slick Willie, whose tendency to
rub on any available leg, and to lie, was sold to us as Puppy Dog
Cuteness.
Stupidity is superior in many ways to Doggieness. For one thing, it
elicits the sympathy of reporters throughout the Western media, who are
forced to write nonsensical stupidity which insults their intelligence
or else lose their jobs. For another, it provides an excuse for almost
any occasion. When in doubt, more and more folks in the Bush entourage
will tell us, "Like, you know, I mean, like, I dunno." To be stupid is
the ultimate stonewall.
Team of Fools
Consider the case of Vincent Zenga, whom you may refer to as Vincent the
Dumb. Vincent was an official member of Junior Bush's Inauguration Team.
(Everything with Junior is a Team, for reasons that ought to be
apparent…) It was he who supposedly invited Pavel Borodin to the
Inaugural "candlelight dinner". That is, Vincent Zenga is supposedly the
reason Pavel Borodin got off that plane at Kennedy airport and thus
could be nabbed by our corruption-fighters.
Mr. Zenga is described in the 'NY Times' as:
"a lawyer from West Palm Beach, Fla., who has contributed
sizable sums to the Republican National Committee and to Mr.
Bush's 1998 campaign for governor. "
Have you noticed that everything with the Bush family involves lots of
money? Is this corruption-fighting thing some kind of psychological
projection?
Zenga denied any complicity in the arrest of Mr. Borodin. "Mr. Zenga
said the invitation was sent by someone in the Moscow office of one of
his companies, Star Capital, " said the 'Times.' (1-19)
In a 'Washington Post' interview, Vincent the Dumb took the line that
Borodin had been invited "inadvertently".
Huh? How do you invite someone 'inadvertently'? Here's the 'Washington
Post' again:
"Zenga said he was mystified about how a letter went out over
his signature inviting Borodin to several exclusive events and
promising not only tickets, but also 'a car with driver' and a
hotel room. The Jan. 13 letter, which advised Borodin to bring
his own black-tie formal clothing, included tickets to a
candlelight dinner for 2,000 attended by Bush last night, and
promised tickets to an inaugural ball Saturday night.
'I have no idea how it happened' said Zenga of the invitation.
'We were surprised at it too.' "
Then, rather incongruously, Vincent added: "We [were un]aware of his
legal problems." ('Washington Post', January 19, 2001)
If Borodin was invited by mistake, whatever that means, what is the
relevance of Zenga having been ''unaware '' of Borodin's "legal
problems"? Is Vincent trying to tell us that, had he known of the legal
difficulties of this man whom he neither knew nor invited to the Ball,
he would not have invited him? Did somebody at CIA screw up and give
this guy two contradictory cover stories? Or is he just trying to
emulate his Master?
Just by the by, how can everybody in an American company that does
business in Russia be unaware of Borodin's "legal problems"? Those
problems have been discussed at least 308 times on Western TV and
newspapers over the past year. (I counted) And if you add the very
important word "Belarus" to the search, you still find 119 stories. This
does not include news reports or commentaries in the Russian language
media.
How does a highly successful man with a telecommunications company in
Russia manage to unwittingly invite a well-known Russian leader to the
Inaugural ball without knowing he has been accused of corruption?
Here is a bit more information.
"A State Department official said Borodin entered the country
on a multiple-entry, combined tourist and business visa issued
in 1998 for a three-year period. He had applied for a
diplomatic visa in Moscow on Tuesday night, prompting the U.S.
Embassy there to send an urgent request for guidance to the
State Department. But there was not enough time to respond
before his departure, and so Borodin used his personal
passport and left his diplomatic passport behind, the State
Department official said. "('Washington Post', January 19,
2001)
Why did the U.S. Embassy have to send "an urgent request for guidance"
to the State Department? Obviously because they read the newspapers and
therefore knew there was a Swiss warrant out for Borodin's arrest and
wanted to know what they were supposed to do: give him a diplomatic visa
which would rule out arresting him at Kennedy Airport or not give him a
visa and risk an international incident.
Nowadays urgent requests can be delivered and answered almost
instantaneously. So the outgoing State Department officials certainly
had time to consult with Bush's handlers. (Of course that's a bit of a
moot point since it was of course Bush's handlers who arranged to send
Borodin the invitation luring him to the U.S. in the first place. But
then, they did that unwittingly. Right?)
Clearly if these exalted beings wished to avoid an insulting provocation
(and an apparent violation of international law - the arrest of a
diplomat invited to a State function, no less) they could have issued
Borodin a standard, diplomatic visa. Or they could have refused while
warning him that there was a warrant out for his arrest. That they did
neither suggests they were hoping Borodin would use his non-diplomatic
visa (they knew he had one because the U.S. Embassy had issued it to
him.)
Liars often talk too much. Note that the 'New York Times' reports that
"Officials in Washington said the United States was tipped off by
someone in Russia that Mr. Borodin was on a plane to New York." Given
that the Embassy had sent "an urgent request for guidance", why the
baloney about being "tipped off by someone" that Borodin was coming?
Note also that the Federal Judge in Brooklyn ordered Borodin held for a
week without bail. Why, if the United States were not trying to insult
and provoke Russia, did US officials insist the man be thrown in jail at
all ?
"In Brooklyn, one of Mr. Borodin's lawyers, Raymond A.
Levites, asked Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky of the United States
District Court to allow Mr. Borodin to stay at the residence
of the Russian consul general while his legal problems were
sorted out. He said the Russian ambassador to the United
States, Yuri V. Ushakov, had offered to ensure that Mr.
Borodin made his court appearances. " (NY Times, Jan. 19,
2001)
Turning down this more than reasonable request is not only an insult to
the Russian Ambassador (implying his word is no better than that of, let
us say, an American President); it is also a further insult to Russia
and Belarus. Note that as of this writing (Tuesday AM, wee hours) Mr.
Borodin remains in jail, though as of Saturday, Mr. Bush became our
leader.
Our leader? As my long-dead Yiddish grandma would have said, "Oy vey is
mir." That literally translates, "Oh woe is me." But it means something
like, "What a world."
Recently some factually challenged fan of the US-sponsored regime in
Belgrade wrote a piece arguing that Baby Bush is going to give the world
a whole new enlightened foreign policy. Sure he will. And I can get you
this great deal on a really nice Bridge in Brooklyn.
Junior Bush may not be able to string two words together in coherent
fashion but his handlers know how to get the job done. The world is
their gold mine. - JI
***
If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can sure use your help...
All our expenses are covered by individual donations. Any donation will
help with our work. To use our secure server, please click here or go to
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm.
Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton,
MA 02461-0321.
Or call 617 916-1705. Thanks very much.
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
---
A cura del Coordinamento Nazionale "La Jugoslavia Vivra'".
I documenti distribuiti non rispecchiano necessariamente le
opinioni delle realta' che compongono il Coordinamento, ma
vengono fatti circolare per il loro contenuto informativo al
solo scopo di segnalazione e commento ("for fair use only").
Archivio:
> http://www.ecircle.it/an_ecircle/articles?ecircleid%c2%91979
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
Sito WEB:
> http://digilander.iol.it/lajugoslaviavivra
Per iscriversi al bollettino: <jugoinfo-subscribe@...>
Per cancellarsi: <jugoinfo-unsubscribe@...>
Per inviare materiali e commenti: <jugocoord@...>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Consulteque.com e' il sito internet dove l'offerta dei
professionisti incontra la domanda delle imprese!
Seleziona on line i professionisti piu qualificati per
svolgere un'attivita di consulenza per la tua azienda.
Entra anche tu in consulteque.com e risparmia il tuo tempo.
http://www.ecircle.it/ad1083358/www.consulteque.com
