Forum

Puisque l’on reparle en mal des Serbes pour faire avaler le vol du Kossovo, il est bon de connaître les méthodes de guerre médiatique, psychologique…:

Disinformation: Operation Serbia

The war against Serbia actually began a long time ago, with the first attempts to manipulate the public opinion against Serbia, in the beginning of the 90’s. These manipulations have been carefully ordered, planned, organized, structured, scheduled and realized. Their generic name is “DISINFORMATION
OPERATIONS”.

Disinformation is an extremely powerful and formidable weapon. The successes of disinformation operations toward Serbia have led to several wars, huge destructions and sufferings, hundreds of thousands of killed, wounded, deported people, without noticeable reaction of the public opinion other than a more or less tacit and passive approval. I hope the following brochure will help to understand what is disinformation, how it works and how to fight against it. 

Disinformation: Bases

What is disinformation ? 
The disinformation is a manipulation of the public opinion, for political purposes, with an information processed by diverted means. 

What are its goals ? 
- at the enemy : to demoralize, weaken, disintegrate, destroy it. 
- at home : to neutralize and drive the masses in order to make them go in the desired direction at the desired moment without resistence. Success in this area is mandatory in any democracy, which is in fact nothing else than an apparent dictature of the majority. 

How to do it ? 
- Discredit the authorities of the opposing country, imply them into illegal operations, shake their reputation. 
- Discredit and hold up to ridicule everything which is good in the opposing country. Its traditions, its religion, its faith, its army, its history. The aim is to destroy the identity of a people. 
- Weaken the adversary. Encourage and make him a slave of his passions (sex, money, wealth, power) in order to make him paralyzed and without resistence.

- Destroy the adversary by dividing him. Excite some against others, young against old, women against men, political wing against political wing. 
- Accordingly, do exactly the contrary in your country. Make the nation united in the same spirit and having the same will, reinforce the trust in your power, your institutions, your leaders. 

With what methods ? (deals essentially with disinformation “at home”) 

1) Devilization (always say as much evil as possible about the potential enemy). 

2) Manicheism (present one side as 100% good, the other as 100% bad and evil). 
It is the principal characteristic of every violence apology : in a first step, the adversary is presented as a horrible monster, in order to produce a disgust reflex. Moreover, it has the advantage to make the fiction more appealing than the reality, because, not necessitating any reflection, the fiction becomes easier to understand and to assimilate. It works particularly well with primitive and low educated people.  This specific feature is characteristic of the american culture. Indeed, in practically every american movie, one find the following elements, based onto an appropriate use of human passions : 
- good guys
- bad guys
- baddies do appalling horrors, which excites in the audience various passions like hatred, disgust, desire of vengeance, revenge, violence, murder, etc… 
- When the audience is excited enough and dominated by its passions, goodies perform the so desired and long-awaited bloody massacre of baddies. Baddies die in horrible sufferings, the audience is happy and satisfied, and passively absorbs the thesis : “it is justice”. Snakes Pliskens, Ramboes, Rockies, die hards, Schwarzies, Charles Bronsons, judges Dredds, punishers, various warriors, cartoons, Batmans, Chucks Norris, dirty Harries, star wars, aliens, predators, independence days, etc.. are archetypes of such primitive scenarii (including Bill Clinton saying “It’s the war of Good against Evil” ! ). 

3) Repetition. “A lie repeated one thousand times remains a lie, a lie repeated one billion times becomes truth” (Goebbels). Repeat and repeat again what you want people to believe in. 

4) Hyperbolic inflation of the stakes. (Say that the entire Europa and probably later the whole earth will be transformed in a blood bath if you don’t intervene). 

5) Polarisation. (“If you are not with us, you are against us”, “if you refuse to kill, you will be a murderer”). 

6) Invoke God’s punishment. (“God bless America”). 

7) Metapropaganda. (The art of making suspicious everything coming from the adversary). Never call opposing media “informations source”, but always qualify them as “rough liars” and “propaganda tool”. 

8) Black propaganda. (Simulate a propaganda from your enemy, and subtly inject subversive ideas into it). 

9) Appropriate use of false facts (lies). 
- Make the adversary say what he didn’t say (“He is against the bombing, so he is for Milosevic”). 
- Make the adversary say what he didn’t say, but by using what he said elsewhere (hotchpotch) (“You said that you don’t hate Milosevic, so you like him”). 
- Make the adversary say what he didn’t say, but what you guess he would have said if he were fair. (For example, attribute to Milosevic violent anti-albanian speaches, while he never did any) 
- Publish false informations, fakes, rigged images. 
This method can be used extensively and without caution : indeed, only the first announcement does matter. Further denials have NO EFFECT on public opinion. Nevertheless, since it is always possible to bring a lie to the fore, and in order to maintain an impression of objectivity, denials are steadily published, generally in small letters and at a discreet place. 
- Suggest false or unproved things. 
In order to avoid the unpleasant impression left by too frequent denials, another similar technique consists of suggesting false events by using conditionals (would, could, should) and various adverbs like “perhaps”, “probably”, maybe”, “allegedly”, “supposedly”, etc.. that allow to say anything without having to deny afterwards. The use of quotes (”“), which allows to associate suspicion and doubt to anything, is abundantly used by written media. 

10) Appropriate use of true facts. 
The pursued goal here is not to inform, but to obtain a given effect. There are several ways to exploit a fact. It can be asserted/negated, magnified/minimized, approved/disapproved, or simply passed over in silence.

No mention of the fact (“What you dont speak about does not exist.” Goebbels). 
- Negation of facts (And accuse the other of lie. Say that civilian targets are military). 
- Inversion of facts (Present the torturers as victims. In our moralizing and victimophilic time, the compassion reflex is immediate). 
- True/false mixing, in various proportions (Multiply by xx 10,000 the number of supposed victims, the losses of the enemy, etc…) 
- Motif modification (“The goal of the operation is highly humanitarian”). 
- Circumstances modification (“This war is a defence operation against an aggression”). 
- Blurring (Flood the fact in a mass of other facts, overinform with useless information. Start a war in order to make people forget about the president’s lies, lack of honesty or sexual errings). 
- Camouflaging (Blow the ones up out of all proportion, minimize the others). 
- Interpretation (Use of highly appropriate and oriented wording). This technique allows to associate precise ideas to facts. 
- Generalization (Transform individual to collective. Find a couple of Serbian criminals, and say that all Serbs are criminals) 
- Illustration (Inverse of generalization. Say that in every war there are innocent civilian casualties, and that Serbian victims are just the unavoidable illustration of this axiom). 
- Quantitatively unequal parts. (Publish only interviews of Albanians, none of Serbs). (Organize a public “objective debate” with pro- and anti-, let pro speak 90% of the time, anti 10% and interrupt them permanently). 
- Qualitatively unequal parts. (Organize the same “objective debate”, make both parts speak equally 50% of the time, but… invite for pro an academician, PhD in psychology, having a deep knowledge of the situation and used to speak publically, and for anti a seller of hamburgers). 

How it works ? 
The very best disinformation service that ever existed, the “A” department of the First Principal Direction of the KGB, often followed this method : 
- collection of elements allowing to substantiate a given disinformation
- choice of a theme
- recruiting of relays to spread the disinformation
- action (with the help of “resonance chambers” (e.g. influent people), whose function is to maximize the effect of the disinformation) 
- creation of a psychotic hysteria leading people to perform “self-disinformation”. This last point, psychosis and hysteria, is the typical and specific feature of a successful disinformation operation, leading to a quasi-unanimity in the public opinion. Self-disinformation is a kind of quasi pathologic state where people voluntarily get, see, hear only the information which agrees with the disinformation theme. It is self-censure.

How it is realized ? 
A disinformation operation comprizes the following elements : 
- the agent (the actual realizer) 
- the customer (or beneficiary) 
- the marketing study (choice of best adapted supports) 
- the supports (facts or informations. True or false is not important) 
- the relays (to ensure information transfer and spreading) 
- the theme (“Serbs are not people like others”) 
- the processing of the theme (the actual methods used in the operation) 
- the resonance chambers (influence agents) 
- the target (e.g. the public opinion) 
- the psychosis (obtained if the operation is successful). 
The success of a disinformation operation is usually proportional to the ignorance of the population on a given subject, and to the amount of its prejudices. Obtaining psychosis and self-disinformation in the target is the supreme goal of any disinformator. One must have in mind that disinformation is only superficially aimed at intelligence. In fact, it is aimed at emotional centers, guts, instincts, irrational behaviours, primitive fears and reactions, emotional reflexes. Instinctive and emotion-driven behaviour automatically short-circuits the action of intelligence and reflection. It actually eliminates any critical analysis capability of the target, who ends defenceless in the hands of the disinformator. 
 

Disinformation: Examples

Example of different possible uses of the SAME true fact : 
Here is a demonstration of different ways to comment the SAME FACT. The fact is “the dog ate the meat” and the mission is to innocent the dog (I hope you will enjoy). 
- OK it’s the dog, but yesterday it was the cat. 
- What meat ? 
- It was only a small half-pound piece of the several tons of meat stored at this place. 
- It was a small piece of an old burned meat, forgotten in the refrigerator.

- The meat was placed in the dog’s plate, who BTW just licked it, despite of the fact that he didn’t eat for three days. 
- He didn’t eat it, he just gave it to his girlfriend. 
- It’s a five years old German shepherd, who last year saved his master from drowning. He watches the house, brings him the newspaper every morning, barks and eats a lot. 
- The plate of the meat was made of blue earthenware. It was a 4 pounds turkey. The dog was locked up inside the house because of the rain and cold. It is the neighbour who let him eat the meat. 
- Dogs are unhappy in flats because banks do not give low rate loans in order to build individual houses. 
- Noodles so-and-so allow to avoid this kind of problem. 
- It is pitiful, masters who let their dogs starving. 
- An eyewitness testified that a wandering dog ate it. 
- There has been a TV emission explaining that dogs are not responsible unless they have received a correct education. 
- Be careful ! One has already said that he bited somebody 3 weeks ago, while it was another dog. Were you here when the meat disappeared ? No ? So first find the meat, before accusing this poor dog with so many slanders. 
- The dog died : the meat was poisoned. 

The same, with “an Albanian killed a Serb”. 
- The day before, twelve gypsies have been killed at the same place. 
- What Serb ? 
- This war has made several tens of thousands of victims of both sides. 
- He was heavily wounded and dying. The Albanian felt pity for him and put an end to his sufferings. 
- He was under surveillance like the other prisoners, and then he tried to escape and began to run. One of the guards shot him at the legs, but unfortunately the bullet striked him at the head. 
- The Serb first shot at him, and he replied to enemy fire. 
- He is a very experienced officer. He belongs to one of the most famous elite units of the KLA. Those guys receive specific training for special reconnaissance missions in advanced enemy territory and are used to execute their mission in very small groups or even alone, in extremely severe conditions. 
- The Albanian stumbled and the shooting happened by mistake. 
- He saw that the situation was desperate, but he prefered to commit suicide rather than surrender. 
- A good equipment, an appropriate training and a commandment by experienced officers would have allowed to avoid this kind of incidents. 
- The KLA strength has been so much reduced after years of war, so they have even incorporated ex-convicts. 
- An eyewitness testified that he was killed by NATO peacekeeping forces, during a peacekeeping operation. 
- These people know only war since their birth. They have seen their entire family killed and their homes burned. To remove such a hatred will take years and years. 
- Be careful ! Were you here when he was shot ? No ? So first find the responsible, before accusing all the Albanians of being murderers. 
- He has not been killed : he just died naturally. 

Dictionary of “appropriate wording” : 
- assassinate = kill, when your enemies are killing. 
- mass grave = where your enemies have buried your friends. 
- war criminal = who makes war and is not of your side. Very often (and perfidiously) used to indicate someone indicted for war crimes and not yet sentenced guilty. 
- extremist = more extremist than you. 
- fascist = to be pronounced first by you, because it can be applied to you as well as to your enemy. 
- racist = who makes a difference between Islam and Christianity.
- terrorist = who uses violence and is not of your side. 
- deviationist = in a political group, who does not agree with you. 
- totalitarian = politics of your enemy. 
- fanatic = someone who believes in something different than you. 
- nationalist = who loves his country and is not of your side. 

Example of use of appropriate wording (interpretation) : 
In the following list, there are two different ways to describe the SAME FACT. Note that whatever formula is chosen, it can perfectly be inverted from pro- to anti-, and there is no way to be accused of lying or even distorting the truth. 
- Serbs are killed, Albanians are massacred or assassinated. 
- Serbs dig mass graves, Albanians dig tombs or communal graves. 
- A Serbian soldier with a Kalashnikov is a sniper, an KLA soldier with a Kalashnikov is a freedom fighter. 
- Serbian corpses have battlefield wounds, Albanian corpses have traces of tortures. 
- Serbian refugees are leaving Kosovo, Albanians refugees are ethnically cleansed from Kosovo. 
- A Serbian refugee convoy is a line of cars, an Albanian refugee convoy is a deportation. 
- Ethnical cleansing of Albanians is an atrocity, ethnical cleansing of Serbs is a logical payback. 
- A smiling serbian soldier is arrogant, a smiling KLA soldier is happy. 
- Serbian soldiers are slovenly-looking, KLA soldiers clearly suffer from equipment problems. 
- Serbian civilians killed by NATO are collateral damage, Albanian civilians killed by NATO are a terrible mistake. 
- Serbian civilians killed by Albanians are war casualties, Albanian civilians killed by Serbians are war crime victims. 
- Milosevic is Milosevic, Clinton is the President of United States Bill Clinton. 
- There are Albanian eyewitnesse’s concording testimonies reporting that…, there are Serbs saying that… 
- Serbs living near a military target are neighbour population, Albanians living near a military target are a human shield. 
- A successful Serbian attack is a slaughter, a successful KLA attack is a victory. 
- Serbian nationalists are extremists, Albanian nationalists are patriots. 
- Serbs commit atrocities, Albanians commit exactions. 
- Ten torched Serbian houses are a brutal reality, ten torched Albanian houses are evidence of Serb savagery. 
- Serbs insulting Albanians are making terror reign, Albanians insulting Serbs are angry people taking revenge for their humiliation. 
- Serbian soldiers take muslim enclaves, Albanian soldiers defend their homeland. 
- The Krajina is liberated by the Croats, the Bosnia is occupied by the Serbs. 

Disinformation: Operation Serbia

1) The agent. 
The public opinion manipulation agency in charge of the Serbia operation was Ruder Finn Global Public Affairs. 

From June to September 1992, Ruder Finn has : 
- had 30 meetings with the main press groups
- diffused 13 exclusive informations
- sent 37 last minute faxes
- sent 17 official letters
- submitted 8 official reports
- given 48 telephone calls to White House members
- given 20 telephone calls to Senate members
- given about 100 telephone calls to media influent personalities. 
Throughout their activity against Serbia public image, they actively participated in : 
- Islamic Conference emergency session on Bosnia-Herzegovina (Istambul June1992) 
- Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki July 1992) 
- Conference on Former Yugoslavia (London August 1992) 
- United Nations General Assembly (October 1992) 
- OIC in Jedda
- UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva
- meetings with State Department
- meetings with National Security Council officials
They also organized various private meetings between the Bosnia foreign minister and : 
- former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in London
- vice presidential candidate Senator Albert Gore in New York
- Saudi Ambassador to the US Prince Bandar in Houston
- President Bush
- Secretary of State Baker in Helsinki. 

2) The customer (or beneficiary) 
Officially, Ruder Finn had as customers the Republic of Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, as well as the albanian opposition in Kosovo. Such a unanimity is suspect, and it is probable that Ruder Finn has been suggested to them (and helped) by some kind of 4th customer, probably some US department (still not proven, but highly suspected after information publication about CIA role in Bosnia war). 

3) The market study
The original situation was very difficult, because : 
- Serbs fought heroically against nazis during WWII
- the nazis founded a Croat state, whose actual croats openly claim to have their roots in
- bosnian muslims have been massively engaged during WWII in the 13th SS division “Handschar”, known for its atrocities
- albanian muslims have been massively engaged in the 21th SS division “Skenderberg” 
- these SS and croatian ustashis performed a genocide of Jews, Serbs and Gypsies
- Franjo Tudjman wrote a book published in 1989, “Wastelands of historical truth”, clearly antisemitic. He also openly admires Ante Pavelic. 
- Izetbegovic published in 1970 an “Islamic declaration”, clearly racist and claiming a super-islamic state. The only positive point was the tremendous lack of knowledge of Balkan’s history in the population. This point has been fantastically exploited. 

4) The supports
The first support used by Ruder Finn was the publishing by the New York Newsday of articles about prisoner camps, where muslims were kept. 

5) The relays
The stroke of genius of Ruder Finn was to ensure a relaying by Jewish organizations. The single word “camp” was enough to disturb this community, and Ruder Finn immediately organized meetings with three Jewish organizations : 
- the B’nai B’rith Anti-Defamation League
- the American Jewish Committee
- the American Jewish Congress. 
Ruder Finn then suggested them to publish an article in the NY Times, and to organize a demonstration in front of the UN. To make Jews support muslims against christian Serbs was an extraordinary gamble, and it worked perfectly. From this moment, the media started to have a strong anti-Serb attitude and
to use a heavily emotion-loaded language : “ethnic cleansing”, “concentration camps”, “deportation”, etc… The disinformation theme was straightforward : 

6) The theme was : “Serbs = Nazis”. 
Despite of the incongruity of this theme (Serbs have been the most anti-nazi people of the Balkans), the absolute general ignorance about History made it work. This theme was so strong so that it has been assimilated immediately by the media (who love sensationalism), and it was IRREMEDIABLE. Everyone trying to defend the Serbs were depicted as pro-Nazi. This theme is used for almost 8 years now, and is still very successful. 

7) The processing of the theme (other supports) 
Seven other main supports have been used in this operation :

- Destructions
Emphasis has always been put on eventual destructions performed by Serbs. Since they were not sufficient, false information was used. “The city of Dubrovnik has been entirely devastated” (Paris-Match, November 29, 1991). Dubrovnik is actually intact. “Strategic point for the Serbs, the Vukovar bridge was an architectural marvel…” (Actuel, December 1993). There is no bridge in Vukovar, the photography was the bridge of Mostar, and it has been destroyed by the Croats. “The village of Cetekovak has been razed to the ground…” (L’evenement du jeudi, September 12, 1991). Cetekovak is intact. 

- Ethnic cleansings
The expressions “ethnic cleansing”, “deportation” have been intentionally used by the media in order to recall WWII atrocities and to reinforce the theme. While expulsions were practiced by all parts, no media ever reported that a half million Serb refugees have been “ethnically cleansed” from Bosnia and Croatia. 

- Camps
The Serbian camps were absolutely ordinary and had nothing in particular. This required the use of fakes and bogus information. “The picture that fooled the world”, a photography of an emaciated man, behind barbwires, was the first fake (made by Penny Marshall (ITN) and Ian Williams (Chan4), worldwide published August 6, 1992). On the original image, the emaciated man is surrounded by not-emaciated ones. The man, Fikret Alic, was not a prisoner, but a refugee. The Trnopolje camp was a refugee camp and not a prison. The refugees were outside barbwires, the reporters inside. There were no barbwires around the camp, and the barbwires were those of a neighbour pasture. 

The publishing of this picture produced: 
- a huge hysteria campaign in the media (“Belsen 92”, “The Proof”, “The picture of the Holocaust and concentration camps”, “Survivors of Auschwitz”, “Evidence mounts on executions and beatings in Serb-run camps”) 
- an emergency meeting of the cabinet of British prime minister John Major, at which it was decided to send British troops to Bosnia. 
- Democratic Party candidate Bill Clinton and running mate Al Gore asked president George Bush to take military action against Bosnian Serbs. 
- Nato staff (in Brussels) started to plan a military intervention in the Balkans. (The fake was denounced by Thomas Deichmann. ITN admitted the truth in the High Court in April 1997 - five years later). Image of “Muslim prisoners in a Serbian detention camp”, with a skeletal man (Time cover photo, August 17, 1992). The man, Slobodan Konjevic, 37, was Serb and has been arrested and confined on charges of looting. He was skeletal because of suffering from tuberculosis for 10 years. The 1992 BBC filming of an ailing, elderly “Bosnian Muslim prisoner-of-war in a Serb concentration camp” resulted in his later identification by relatives as retired Yugoslav army officer Branko Velec, a Bosnian Serb held in a Muslim detention camp. 

- Rapes
The idea of “rape camps” was positively outstanding. The media hysteria was general (titles : “Rape by order”, “Rape horror”, “Rape camps”, “A pattern of rape”...), and people started to believe in the existence of a “systematic rape plan”. In reality, rapes happened not more than in any war, and have been performed by all sides. In 1992, the Bosnian government claimed that 50,000 muslim women have been raped, information abundantly relayed by the media. After investigation, Amnesty International published in January 21, 1993, a report where the issue of rape was qualified as a “propaganda weapon”. Later on, the UN Commission of Experts on War Crimes identified only 800 victims - Muslim, Serb and Croat -. The hyperbolic inflation of numbers is well illustrated by the following testimony: “When I was at 50 kilometers from Tuzla, I was told ‘go to Tuzla high school ground, as there are 4,000 raped women’. At 20 kilometers, this figure dropped to 400. At 10 kilometers, only 40 were left. Once at the site, I found only 4 women willing to testify.” (French television reporter Jerome Bony, Envoye Special, quoted in French magazine Le Point). 

- Gasses
The April 10, 1995, “Le Soir”, a belgian newspaper, published that Serbian police have used tear-gas. This information has been relayed and transformed as follows: 
“Serbs use gasses” (Die Welt, April 10, 1995). 
“American spokesmen established that in Zepa, Serbs have used chemical weapons” (NBC Handelsblad, July 28, 1995). 

- Mass graves
The expression “mass grave” has something frightening and has been extensively used. Its emotional content overcomes the fact that there are people killed in every war, and these people must be buried somewhere. 

- Massacres
The amount of casualties was dementially inflated, and every death was attributed to Serbs. In February of 1993, the Bosnian government, relayed by the international media, published the estimated number of 250,000 victims. The International Red Cross later on estimated the figures at 20-30,000. Not published. It is interesting to note that the Sarajevo massacre, very probably performed by Bosnian muslims (UN analysis report by Reuters, Feb. 18, 1994 and David Binder article Oct. 2, 1995, “The Nation”), has been willfully and deliberately used as a pretext for NATO operations against Serbia, with FULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS (Publishing of a talk between M. Jean Daniel and M. Juppe, French prime minister “Le Nouvel Observateur”, August 31, 1995). 

8) The psychosis. 
The psychosis and hysteria became total. Some titles and expressions found in the media : 
“the daily horror”, “the criminal madness of Serbian commanders”, “horrors without equivalent in Europe since at least a half-century”, “particularly bestial rapes”, “there are, on Serb side, war criminals”, “the terrible confession of the atrocities committed by a young Serb”, “the black part which is in every human being [...] is here, in all its horror”, “rape is actually a crime against humanity”, “Bosnia the shame”, “everything indicates a deliberate will of humiliation, annihilation of beings where Serbs have been the principal actors”, “Serbs created a hell”, “ordinary cetnik : repeater rapes and murders”, “Serbs reached a new step in war horror”, “the damned of Europe”, “at the end of hatred”, “silence, one kill”, “back to the hell”, “shame camps”, “Mladic butchers”, “the mad psychiatrist”, “the most terrifying action the UN ever participated to”, “the greatest betrayal of UN”, “the ultimate step of an aberrant politics devoured by its own logic”, “Satan himself could not have imagined a so cruel thing”, “a monster of horror movie that you believe dead and in pieces, and whose each tentacle inflates and get autonomous life”... 

The gigantism of the “Operation Serbia” gave rise to number of false notes. 

- A child killed by a sniper in a bus (Sarajevo, Aug 1992) called “muslim” by the TV. The funerals show Orthodox ritual. 
- A 1992 TV report showing Serb victims in Vukovar, reprinted with the caption “Is there any way to stop Serbian atrocities in Bosnia?” (Newsweek, Jan 4, 1993) 
- Reports of massacres of 14 muslims and then 10 muslims supposedly killed by Serbs (CNN March and May 1993). The victims later turned out to be Serbs.Not corrected. 
- Photo of a Croat woman from Posusje grieving for a son killed in Serb attacks (NY times Aug 1993). Fightings in the Croat village of Posusje were between Muslims and Croats and have caused 34 Bosnian Croat deaths, including the son of the woman in the photo. 
- A photo of a woman in front of the grave of her son, presented as Croat. The name is written in cyrillic, she is Serb. 
- A photo of a tortured man with the 3 main fingers cut, presented as muslim. He has his wedding ring at the 4th finger of its right hand, he is a Serb. 
- Armed paramilitary men, particularly sinister, presented as Serbs. They wear the Croat check pattern insignia (Corrected and apologized by “Le Nouvel Observateur”, No 1470 and 1473). 
- Testimony of Anisa, a child, saying that she saw Serbs cutting noses and ears in Tuzla. Tuzla has never been occupied by Serbs. 
- Images of a fragments of a downed “Mig-29” (CTV Mar 26, 1999, 22h42). There is a mention in english “ANNUAL INSP” +references painted on one of the fragments. 

As a conclusion, Serbia is now synonym of Nazi Germany, and the Serbian people, sentenced to poverty and slow death by years of embargo and full devastation by the US+NATO coalition, is now considered by all the West as the parias of mankind. The “Operation Serbia” has been 100% successful. Congratulations. Sad but true. 

Comme je ne trouve pas votre adresse de courriel, voici une référence à un article du Washington Post :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/06/AR2005060601715.html?referrer=email

La lecture de vos pages est un véritable supplice pour les yeux fatigués, le contenu en est cependant plutôt intéressant.
Ecrivez plus grand, merci d’avance.

Our long game pays off - Britain is the leading power in Europe
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
(Filed: 07/06/2005)

The leaders of France and Germany have spoken: Europe’s constitution must be kept alive. No matter that it was President Jacques Chirac’s own people who first rejected the text.

The referendums must roll on: the Danes in September, the Czechs, the Poles, the Irish, all in a bidding contest to see who can outdo the record 62 per cent No set by the Dutch. Such a blindingly misguided policy borders on insanity, unless the lame-duck leaders of two enfeebled economies actually wish to bring about the destruction of the EU.

Jack Straw has done the EU a favour by calling a halt yesterday. No referendum could be carried in Britain now. Sir Stephen Wall, Downing Street’s former Europe guru, confessed that only fear of isolation could have induced the British people to vote Yes, and even then with great difficulty.

Legally, a single rejection is enough to nix the treaty. Politically, a No from both of Europe’s leading defence and diplomatic powers is unanswerable. It is true that Ireland was made to vote a second time on the Nice Treaty to get it “right”, but that followed a rogue result on a low turn-out with scant debate.

The Irish did in fact vote Yes the second time. But who thinks France could ever be made to vote again on the same document, like a naughty child served cold dinner for breakfast?

Gerhard Schröder and Mr Chirac seem to have learnt nothing, and forgotten nothing. Were their fingers not burnt enough by their “Praline Summit” in April 2003, called to announce Europe’s defiant stand against the Iraq war, when only Belgium and Luxembourg turned up?

The EU refused even to offer premises, so the meeting was held in the Brussels Hilton. We now know that 16 of the EU’s 25 current states were siding - publicly or not - with the Americans.

The Franco-German pair tried again last year, “choosing” a Belgian federalist to be president of the European Commission. They spoke too soon. The Poles balked. Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi would have none of it. The Dutch quietly begged Downing Street to step in. Tony Blair obliged. The Belgian was replaced by a free-market Atlanticist: José Manuel Barroso.

This is the new reality of post-Cold War Europe. If not the commanding power, a buoyant Britain is the leader of the EU’s now dominant bloc. France and Germany can cobble together majorities from time to time, but they cannot call the shots. The French have noticed this, which is why they now exhibit more or less the same reflexes as the British in the days of Jacques Delors, when Brussels seemed stacked against us (as it was).

I suspect Europe’s project reached its high-water mark last October in Michelangelo’s Campidoglio in Rome, exactly the same spot where it was launched in 1957. The 25 leaders gathered in the Sala degli Orazi e Curiazi were penning their names to a document most of them never much wanted, and invited failure.

The constitution was not drafted to make the EU “work better” as it grew to 25. Conjured by the German, French and Belgian elites, it was the final push to lock in a tight-knit Europe, with an imperial court, before the arrival of the 10 new states last year, knowing that it would be much harder to do so once the Poles, Latvians, Slovaks and others were fully bedded members. My guess is that the chance has now slipped from their grasp, for ever.

In crude terms, Britain’s long game in Europe has paid off, for which we owe a debt of gratitude to John Major. He kept us out of the euro at Maastricht, while keeping Britain just deep enough in the EU to secure the strategic prize of eastern enlargement. It was the most cunning straddle in modern British diplomacy.

Britain’s opt-out from monetary union is looking more valuable by the day. Indeed, one Italian minister cast an envious eye northwards last week. “In Europe, there is one perfect example: Great Britain, which grows and develops by maintaining its own currency,” he said.

His open call for a return to the Italian lira was not an isolated outburst. Three top figures in the Northern League have spoken of leaving monetary union in recent days, clearly calculating that Italy is now in such deep crisis that a party in the ruling coalition sees political rewards in fomenting revolt against the euro. This should alarm the markets. So far it has not. The “spread” between German and Italian bonds is a minuscule 0.22 per cent.

The Bundesbank warned in the 1990s that Italy’s economy could not endure the rigours of monetary union once the going got rough. The bank was told to shut up. Now the predictions are unfolding with alarming speed.

Italy’s labour costs have risen 25 per cent against Germany over the past five years, owing chiefly to higher wage inflation. This was predictable, since euro entry cut Italian interest rates to German levels almost overnight. Variants of this have occurred in Portugal and Greece, where boom is turning to bust - with Spain not far behind.

Already in recession, Italy now has to “deflate” to claw back competitiveness and save its industry from ruin, since it can no longer devalue. This means undercutting Germany’s near-zero wage inflation. Benito Mussolini pulled this off in 1927, using Fascist control over the unions to slash wages.

As a democracy, Britain had more trouble. Returning to the gold standard led to the General Strike in 1926, the worst civil conflict in a century. Wages proved “sticky” going downwards.

Italy is now in much the same position as Argentina in the last months of its dollar-peg. Food riots and a coalition crisis brought that ordeal to an end. Troubles at Fiat or Alitalia may prove to be the catalyst for Italy.

Investors counting on an EU bail-out to keep the game going should think again after Dutch and French voters so brutally halted Europe’s “inevitable” march to political and fiscal union, and polls in Germany show that 56 per cent want a return to the mark. For the first time, economists from major banks are openly discussing whether the euro can survive as an orphan currency.

For Mr Major, a long-overdue apology is deserved of us who hurled invective over Maastricht. And perhaps a little monument. There is an empty plinth below the National Gallery in Trafalgar Square. He might fit nicely.

Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. For the full copyright statement see Copyright

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/06/07/do0701.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/06/07/ixopinion.html

“Les voies du Seigneurs sont insondables”, mais ... vous le saviez !

Florentin :))

June 7, 2005
Britain Suspends Referendum on European Constitution
By ALAN COWELL
LONDON, June 6 - Deepening a crisis, Britain said Monday that it would suspend plans for a referendum on the European constitution, which was rejected last week by voters in France and the Netherlands.

The announcement to Parliament by Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, laid bare the gulf between nations like France and Germany that want to keep alive a sense that the constitution can be rescued, and Britain, where the government is under pressure to declare it dead. The move seemed to make ratification of the constitution, a cornerstone of European unity, all the more remote.

“The European Union does now face a period of difficulty,” Mr. Straw said.

Technically, the constitution can come into force only if it is ratified by all 25 European Union member governments. Nine have approved it by parliamentary votes and one - Spain - by referendum. The “no” votes in France and the Netherlands seemed to many British legislators to have brought the ratification process to a shuddering halt.

But, confronted by French, German and European insistence that the ratification effort should continue, and not wanting to be the one to seal the constitution’s demise, Britain has shied from saying explicitly that its referendum - expected for next spring - is canceled.

“It is now for European leaders to reach conclusions on how to deal with the situation,” Mr. Straw told Parliament, apparently seeking to shift the onus for the constitution’s future away from Britain.

To explain the suspension, he referred to the British legislative calendar, which requires a “second reading” of a law to allow a referendum to take place.

“Until the consequences of France and the Netherlands being unable to ratify the treaty are clarified, it would not in our judgment now be sensible to set a date for a second reading,” he said. “There is also the need for further discussions with European Union partners and further decisions from European Union governments.”

“We reserve completely the right to bring back the bill providing for a United Kingdom referendum should circumstances change,” he said. “But we see no point in proceeding at this moment.”

However diplomatically couched, Mr. Straw’s announcement seemed intended to send the message to Britain’s European adversaries that many Britons are opposed to a referendum. As an opposition Conservative legislator, Liam Fox, put it, “this constitution is a case for the morgue if ever I saw one.”

In this largely Euroskeptic nation, Prime Minister Tony Blair had risked losing the referendum, shortening the third term in office that he won in elections in May. So the postponement offered him political advantage but could also reopen the debate about when he will hand over power, as widely speculated, to his heir apparent, Gordon Brown, the chancellor of the Exchequer.

Mr. Blair is to meet President Bush in Washington on Tuesday to seek his backing for an array of difficult issues. The coincidence of the two events illuminated Mr. Blair’s efforts to straddle European and trans-Atlantic diplomacy, despite his unpopularity with some Europeans, notably France and Germany, for his alliance with the United States in Iraq. Britain is this year’s leader of the Group of 8 major industrialized nations and will assume the rotating presidency of the European Union on July 1.

But on both counts, he is facing a fairly bleak agenda, confronted with hostility in Europe on an array of issues from the constitution to the European Union budget. At the same time, many political analysts in London expect that he is unlikely to win substantive White House support for his main issues, from relieving African poverty to global warming, at the G-8 summit meeting next month in Scotland.

Mr. Blair has also cast Europe’s division as one of profound dimensions between the so-called Anglo-Saxon economic model of relatively untrammeled capitalism that prevails in Britain and the cozier, socially oriented approaches of France and Germany.

Indeed, Mr. Straw said Monday that “these referendum results raise profound questions about the future direction of Europe.”

Even as word of Mr. Straw’s announcement leaked out in advance, other European nations seemed to be lining up either to question the British decision, or to interpret it in optimistic terms.

José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, said in Brussels that it would be unfair for one country to determine the constitution’s fate. But he added, according to Reuters, “All the indications I have from all member states, including the United Kingdom, are that they want to discuss this issue in the European Council.”

In Warsaw, Poland’s foreign minister, Adam Rotfeld, told reporters that the British move “does not change anything.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/07/international/europe/07britain.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print

Au sujet de votre excellent travail d’analyse sur la crise de l’UE, pourriez-Vous approfondir la question monétaire?
Surtout, sur un plan théorique, serait-il possible pour certains pays—telle l’Italie ou l’Allemagne qui en on parlé—de retourner à une monnaie nationale, peut-etre en régime de double circulation? Et comment? Merci

Pourquoi Mr Chirac a choisi la voix du referendum alors qu’il etait possible de ratifier la nouvelle constitution par le parlement? J’ai lu l’article de Timothy Garton mais il y a toujours la possibilite sous presidence anglaise de declarer la mort de la constitution europeenne. Dans ce cas on ferait quoi?  J’aimerais bien entendre votre avis sur cette question.

Merci.

Compte-rendu intéressant d’un livre de Victoria de Grazia, “Irrésistible empire” sur le site du Grand Soir à l’adresse :

http://www.legrandsoir.info/article.php3?id_article=2404

Irresistible Empire, l’ Empire qui lave plus blanc, Victoria de Grazia.

Comment la consommation américaine a conquis l’Europe.

Qu’en pense notre hôte, Philippe Grasset ?

Le thème des “vraies” pertes américaines en Irak alimente régulierement sur les forums internet les conversations et toutes sortes de spéculations. Jusqu’à aujourd’hui, personne n’a pu apporter une preuve intengible.

Je voudrai rappeler ce qui nourrit de telles rumeurs:
tout d’abord il y’a les rapports de la resistance irakienne qui sont largement diffusés sur le net et connu d’une bonne partie des internautes. L’essentiel des nouvelles proviennent d’un site web: http://www.islammemo.cc .Ce site , à ce qu’il en ressort, a sur le terrain plusieurs correspndants qui “traquent” toutes les informations possibles sur les attaques de la résistance irakienne contre les forces d’occupations et leurs alliers. Le bilan des pertes humaines est très sensiblement superieurs à celui donné par les forces Américaine. Personnelements, je ne peut dire si cela est vrai ou faux. je n’ai jamais mis les pieds en Irak mais je pense qu’il ya une part de vérité dans ces dépeches. Très souvent les resistants irakiens se plaignent de la couverture médiatique qu’en font les grands médias occidentaux, leur reprochant de privilegier exclusivement le coté americain et donc de ne pas rendre vraiment compte des pertes qu’ils subissent. Il faut bien avoir à l’esprit que les grandes agences de presses internationales donc occidentales, ne font que retranscrire ce que disent les porte-parole officiels alors que les correspondants d’islammemo vont directement sur le terrain, reunissent des témoignages etc.
De plus les groupes de combattants irakiens montrent régulierement des videos de leurs attaques ou publient des communiqués dont certains sont très precisement datés montrant clairement que nombres d’attaques subies par les forces américaines ne sont absolument pas rapportées.

Autre élément à charge,il y’a deux ans de cela un Americain, ancien membre de l’armée a crée un site web dans lequel il explique comment le Pentagone a dissimulé à l’opinion publique la mort de centaines de soldats américains en avril 2003. Aucun média americain n’ayant jamais voulu publier son histoire.
je vous donne l’adresse de son site:http://www.ghosttroop.net/
http://www.geocities.com/onlythecaptain/

Voici donc mon point de vue. j’espere que ces quelques lignes contriburont à nourrire le débat et peut-etre un jour faire eclater la vérité.
 

Vous écrivez : L’enjeu européen se trouve dans les thèmes fondamentaux de la crise européenne depuis 1945 : l’Europe politique et la défense européenne. Qui résout cela résout la crise. Aujourd’hui, il y a une clef, — il suffit de comprendre cela, de la saisir, de la glisser dans la serrure et de tourner.”

c’est sympathique -mais ce n’est apstout à fait juste. Vous savez que Benoït XVI a parlé d’une “haine de soi-même” qui affecte ce continent.
C’est d’abrod là-dessuq qu’il faut changer.

Et là, effectivement, la comparaison avec le Etats-Unis est intéressante. Les Etats-Unis sont de culture protestante -c’est-à-dire refus de l’Eucharistie, Présence réelle du Seigneur dns l’hostie, et de l’Eglise fondée sur Pierre par le Seigneur. Voyez le chapître de Huntignton sur la foi des Etats-Unis
dans osn dernier ouvrage sur l’identité des Etats-Unis.

Où les esprits sincères verront que la question de l’origine chrétienne de ce continent n’est pas une question “culturelle”... autant dire folklorique…

Je vous remercie d’avoir publie ce texte. La France et l’Allemagne sont inseparables et le couple est devenu codependant et il serait risque d’ignorer l’Allemagne. Pour des raisons historiques, les liens franco-allemands ont batti un pacte. On ne sait pas combien de temps l’alliance sacree tiendra mais c’est un dossier special signataire des 2 pays. Le peuple allemand aussi bien que le peuple francais en sont conscients: nos economies sont interdependantes et traitees en commun. Il y a tres peu de chances que le noyau dur se trouve affaibli. Je ne pense pas que l’Europe est une histoire de cultures et de societes, mais la vocation de nos democracies pour faire prendre conscience des enjeux politiques (l’exemple Helvetique) et d’inflechir sur le niveau economique.

Le comedien Eddy Izzard (il est de Grande-Bretagne) a toujours caricature l’Europe en tant qu’un melange d’idees et en ne sachant pas comment s’unifier correctement.

L’Europe alerte a la maniere d’un chat en desequilibre se retrouvera sur ses 4 pattes avec plusieurs mesures. La premiere mesure est d’ordre economique et permettra de desamorcer les accords bilatteraux de Rumsfeld dans les anciens pays de l’Est en deleguant des objectifs de partenariat de la defense europeenne un peu comme les accords avec Airbus mais cette fois si dans un aspect interpolitique.
C’est un essai et j’essaierai de decrire cette initiative sur mon blog.

Goede Dag.

c’est clair que les Américains ne sont pas contre une Défense européenne forte pourvu qu’elle soit dépendante (et grande consommatrice d’équipements américains) et aux ordres. Ils s’accommoderaient même très bien de se contenter de manipuler les vassaux, se contentant de leurs chasses gardées habituelles : le continent américain, l’extrême Orient et dans une certaine mesure les champs pétrolifères du Proche-Orient(ils y tolèrent voire favorisent la présence limitée de certains de leurs alliés pour des missions limitées). Ils ont un grand besoin de supplétifs, d’autant plus qu’après le Vietnam, l’Irak confirme qu’ils n’ont qu’une très faible capacité à tenir le terrain.

L’U.S. army manque de bras, et elle fait tout pour recruter les jeunes :en n’hésitant pas à avoir recours aux procédés les plus discutables…
Intéressant article du Monde disponible à l’adresse :

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3222,36-656349,0.html

“
Les recruteurs américains sont prêts à tout pour enrôler de jeunes soldats

David McSwane, élève de terminale dans le Colorado, voulait savoir jusqu’où les recruteurs de l’armée américaine étaient prêts à aller pour enrôler des volontaires, à un moment où la guerre en Irak a fait baisser les vocations. En janvier, il a pris contact avec son centre de recrutement en se faisant passer pour un jeune à la dérive mais intéressé par l’armée. Il a d’abord confessé qu’il n’avait pas de diplôme. Selon le règlement, les recrues de l’US Army doivent avoir au moins un certificat de scolarité du niveau du lycée. Pas de souci, a répondu le recruteur. Il suffit de fabriquer une attestation, le plus sûr étant de choisir une école qui n’existe pas.

L’instructeur a même suggéré un nom, “la Faith Hill Baptist School, par exemple”. Pour 200 dollars, David s’est procuré sur Internet un faux diplôme au nom de cet établissement. Un problème de drogue ? Rien d’insurmontable là non plus. Le recruteur a recommandé un kit de désintoxication qui ferait disparaître les traces en cas d’analyse. Et il a conduit lui-même son élève jusqu’au magasin où se le procurer.

David McSwane avait pris soin d’enregistrer les conversations téléphoniques. Il avait enrôlé sa soeur, 11 ans, pour faire des photos et un ami à peine plus vieux pour tenir une caméra cachée. Le 17 mars, il a publié son récit dans le journal du lycée d’Arvada. Fin avril, la télévision CBS a diffusé ses enregistrements. A la mi-mai, l’affaire avait fait le tour du pays.

Depuis 1973 et la fin de la guerre du Vietnam, l’armée américaine est une armée de volontaires. Aujourd’hui, le recrutement connaît une crise sans précédent. L’armée de terre est en retard de 6 000 recrues sur l’objectif de 80 000 qu’elle est censée remplir avant la fin de l’année budgétaire, en octobre. Les 7 500 recruteurs sont censés enrôler chacun 2 volontaires par mois. A l’approche de la fin de l’année scolaire, la pression est importante. Plusieurs centaines d’excès de zèle ont été signalés. Seuls sept incidents ont été qualifiés de “mauvaise conduite” par l’armée, mais le Pentagone a tenu le 20 mai une journée exceptionnelle dans les 1 700 centres du pays. Les recrutements ont été suspendus pour faire un rappel à l’éthique et au règlement.

Les recruteurs ont accès aux établissements. Ils sont à la cafétéria ou aux réunions parents-professeurs. Ils offrent des places de concerts ou d’événements sportifs. Les parents les trouvent parfois envahissants, mais c’est le lycée qui fournit les numéros de téléphone personnels aux militaires. Les établissements sont tenus de fournir leurs fichiers à l’armée sous peine de perdre leurs financements publics. Au printemps, le représentant de Californie, Mike Honda, a déposé un projet de loi pour que les coordonnées des élèves ne soient pas transmises à l’armée sans autorisation expresse des parents. Un district scolaire de l’Etat de New York qui a refusé de s’exécuter attend ces jours-ci la visite d’un colonel qui doit l’inciter à coopérer.”

Avec un peu de chances les autorités U.S. finiront par devoir rétablir la conscription… en se foutant le peuple à dos…
Il est permis de rêver un peu, non ?

Bonjour,

Après cette première rupture (mais il faut rappeler que la CED devrait rester sous tutelle de l’Otan), il en existe une seconde avec l’abandon du premier projet de traité constitutionnel (projet Spinelli) au profit de l’Acte Unique. Cette rupture en 1984 est concomitante de l’abandon de l’union politique, et d’une dérive libre échangiste.

thierry medynski
http://europefederalepolycentrique.chez.tiscali.fr/

Je vous félicite au sujet de vos commentaires presque toujours lucides et profonds. Je partage entièrement votre analyse sur le verdict des électeurs francais.

Partout en Europe maintenant, on eut observer les signes d´une confrontation de plus en plus ouverte entre les élites et le peuple. Ce peuple qui ne consiste plus de “citoyens”, mais plutôt de “citoyens-consommateurs” ou bien de “consommateurs” tout court. En fait, on est dans les dernières étappes d´un lent procès d´érosion des valeurs démocratiques en Europe. Toutes les décisions importantes des années 1980 et 1990 ont été prises sans consultation aucune de l´électorat. On doit reconnaître que la l´essentiel de la politique de défense “européenne” est faite à Washington, la politique monétaire se fait à Francfort, la politique de l´agriculture à Bruxelles, etc. Pour la plupart des nations européens, la souveraineté n´existe pas vraiment. Et toutes les décisions encore importantes ne sont pas faites démocratiquement.

C´est le retour au despotisme illustré, type Joseph II d´Autriche, Charles III d´Espagne, et ce sont précisément les socialistes européens qui ont entamé et dirigé ce développement. (Ce n´est pas par hasard que les socialistes espagnols du PSOE ont pratiquement vénéré Charles III, en bapatisant des universités de son nom, et en élevant des statues de lui).

Tout le langage des élites de l´europe (dont un très grand nombre de socialistes), surtout aprés le vote des francais du 29 mai, est celui des classes dirigeantes de la seconde moitié du XVIIIe siècle.

Hans Vogel,
Kalmthout (Belgique)