First of all...here is the item in The Guardian (UK) to which Prof.
Maher is referring:
Regular version at http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/serbia/article/0,2479,379868,00.html
Printer-friendly version at http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4074291,00.html
"Forbidden film pierces Serbs' fog of denial: Less room to hide
for men who committed atrocities - Special report: Serbia, Rory Carroll
in Belgrade, Tuesday October 10, 2000, The Guardian
Email addresses for The Guardian are as follows:
letters@guardian.co.uk
simon.waldman@guardian.co.uk
julian.borger@guardian.co.uk
david.rowan@guardian.co.uk
letterfrom@guardian.co.uk
========================================================================
To the Guardian: Dubrovnik hoax again
To: letters@guardian.co.uk
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 11:20
Sir:
Your piece mentions the "...pounding of the beautiful Croatian
town of Dubrovnik in 1991. 'They used ships. Can you believe it?'...
This is a fraud. Who on your staff was bought by Ruder Finn? Since
1991 the press has dozens of times printed the hoax that the Pearl of
the Adriatic was reduced to rubble. Those stories were fakes. That Dubrovnik
has been rebuilt is exponentially fake. On March 25, 1992, I visited
Dubrovnik to see for myself the truth about the war. The Old City of
Dubrovnik was never destroyed. It was barely scratched.
Roof tiles blown off by concussion had all been replaced when I visited
the city TWO YEARS AGO, THREE MONTHS after the "destruction".
Your writer has a poor vocabulary in English. Buildings are "holed."
Dubrovnik's destruction was an invention of PR companies in the hire
of the war criminals who broke up Yugoslavia without negotiations. The
big bombardment was from PR fakers, not navy guns. -- like the Kuwaiti
incubator babies hoax used by President Bush to stoke up war fever.
PR liars Hill & Knowlton, Ruder Finn, and Waterman Associates have
earned millions in fanning the flames of this war.
The press, that's you, belongs in the war crimes docket with the New
World Order thugs for churning out mendacious "news" stories
about Serb death camps and rape camps, abetting war and mayhem. The
story of an organized Serb rape policy is a racist fraud, like the Protocols
of the Elders of Zion, propagated to foment hatred and incite war against
the innocent. Though it's not polite any more to slander Afro-American
or Jews, Serbs are fair game for the lynch mob.
The "Serb-dominated federal navy" off Dubrovnik was commanded
by Admiral Stane Brovet, a Slovene. The target was not the Old City,
but the Napoleonic fort of St. Sergius far above Dubrovnik and hotels
outside the city walls, where Croatian forces were billeted and because
of the presence of refugees, had set up gun positions from which they
fired on the federal forces in order to provoke death and destruction.
Zagreb's aim was to provoke a Western attack on the Serbs. On December
5, 1991, Croatian forces mounted a mortar on a flat bed truck running
up and down the Stradun taking potshots at naval forces in order to
provoke counterfire.
The "Dubrovnik burning" pictures were shot with long lenses.
This compresses perspective, making it look like there is no distance
between objects that are quite separated in real space. Thus, columns
of smoke billowing up from the harbor are superimposed on the walled
city. The photographic effect is as staged as the stabbing of the lady
showering in Hitchcock's movie "Psycho."
That smoke was from the fuel tanks of two pleasure boats burning in
the Old Harbor -- outside, of course, the walls. Dubrovnik's Old City
never burned. Bullet holes along Stradun were from gunfire inside the
walls, at ground level at close range in a fight on the street between
rival Croatian factions. Scaffolding was set up in front of facades
in anticipation of the shooting to come. Video tapes of gunfire along
the ancient walls, run backward, show clearly that the puffs of gun
smoke are from outgoing, not incoming fire. "Western" reporters
in Dubrovnik since they cannot read Serbo-Croatian, do not mention the
graffiti calling for the lynching of Serbs: Srbe na vrbe (literally
"[hang] the Serbs on the willow trees"). My videotapes of
Dubrovnik from March 25, 1992, have been aired on Chicago Cable Access
TV, Channel 19. Want to see them?
Croatian city? Tito made a gift of it to his native Croatia after WW
II. Dubrovnik was never before "Croatian."
The Byzantine decoration found by restorators beneath paint in the
Dominican monastery attests the Serbian and Greek origins of Dubrovnik.
This war is the latest chapter in the predation of Orthodox lands by
the Western Church. (I'm RC, by the way.) The only building in the Old
City of Ragusa to be gutted by explosives and fire was the one housing
a priceless collection of medireview manuscripts and icons. It was not
navy guns that did the damage, but plastique and incendiary devices
planted on the spot by Croatian forces. Enter it on your map, across
the street from the Orthodox church, which you fail to note is Serbian.
-- 3,000 Serb and 7,000 Croat refugees from Dubrovnik have taken refuge
-- in Belgrade.
J. P. Maher Ph.D. Emeritus Professor, Chicago
=======================================================
(Here we quote Prof. Maher again, from his review of another book,
in which Prof. Maher recounts his own visits to Dubrovnik to investigate
the claims of damage.)
=======================================================
I went with Dejan Lucic into the Old City on 25 March 1992, three months
after the fighting. The shutters along the Stradun showed traces of
small arms fire from street fighting that could only have been between
Croatian rival forces The limestone pavement had a dozen shallow pock
marks from mortar rounds, not navy guns It is not clear to me whether
these were from JNA or Croatian positions.
The press gave us pictures, shot with long lenses, hence compressing
intervening space, in which plumes of smoke issue from the fuel tanks
of boats in the Old Harbor (Ploce side), hence outside the walls Also
outside the walls on the far side smoke billowed from a hotel, housing
Croatian gun emplacements The smoke from the two sources, both outside
the walls, bracketed and silhouetted the towers of the Old City in scenes
evocative of Dante's Inferno, which was also fiction.
In March 1992 damage to the Old City was negligible Every roof was
tiled, most showing the patina of weathering and age Visitors today
can confirm this as they look over the city from above.
Dr Cohen refers (page 127) to the "shelling of the synagogue."
I filmed the synagogue One window pane on the street side, Zudioska
Ulica, was broken.
I had read in Croatian and western publications that the "Serb
dominated NA " was destroying or had destroyed the "port of
Dubrovnik.". I read the contrary in Serbian newspapers A competent
grammarian or translator must ask if is this is appositional of (as
in [the City of] Chicago ) or some other relation (as in the mayor or
the South Side of Chicago)?
Was it possibly the port section of Dubrovnik, i. e. Gruz? I felt the
only way to be sure of the truth was to see it with my own eyes Having
read, too, that a treasure of Serbian manuscripts and icons had been
destroyed by Croatian forces, I asked my camera man, a native Dubrovniker,
to take us to the site He took us to a building in front of the Serbian
Orthodox Cathedral There stood the shell of a multi-storey building.
On the facing wall of a building to the left of it was a sign, plainly
and prominently lettered in Serbian Cyrillic IKONE, and in English "ICONS"
The building indicated was gutted, a shell. The walls were intact; the
interior was a void And it was not navy guns that did it, since adjacent
buildings showed no damage. It was plastique and arson on the spot.
On 15 May 1995 Princess Francesca Von Habsburg gave a slide show at
the National Press Club in Washington Between two shots of a ruined
two-floor villa at Cilipi, near the airport. (Airports tend to be outside
the walls of medireview cities.) Her Highness sandwiched an interior
shot that she said was of the same villa, despite the discrepancy that
the interior shot was of a building with several storeys. It was the
one I just described
The target of the JNA ships had been the Napoleonic fort high above
the city on Mount Saint Sergius, Srdj. Artillery concussions blew off
the tiles of the roofs far below
British journalist Boris Beloff and EU representative Michael Shuttleworth
each also (separately) visited the scene and reported they found it
as I describe Had the Old City been targeted, it would have taken only
two hours to demolish it.
Croatia and her helpers, the PR companies, enjoy a revolving door between
press and government White House Officials "leave government service"
and turn up in lucrative jobs with the PR merchants They pulled a fast
one on the public with this horror story of the destruction of Dubrovnik
One Washington PR firm, Ruder Finn, is collecting money to buy tiles
for shattered Ragusa. There have been reports that this is the target
of an FBI fraud investigation, but we should not be surprised if the
Clinton administration sees that the matter is swept under the rug.
Croatian strategy from the beginning was to provoke all out war to destroy
Yugoslavia, painting the Serbs as the "bad guys" . Here is
Susan L. Woodward:
An assault on Dubrovnik (beginning in early October), which was protected
under the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO),
was particularly significant in creating antagonism toward Serbia and
the Army: the Croatian government had calculated in using sharpshooters
on the Dubrovnik walls to provoke a YPA attack on the city, knowing
that Dubrovnik would attract . attention.
Susan L Woodward. 1995. Balkan Tragedy Chaos and Dissolution after
the Cold War Washington: The Brookings Institution.
==============================================================
Now here's what we, T.V. and Alida Weber, observe:
First of all, a disclaimer: We take NO position either for or against
any individual, action, organization, or government policy position
in Yugoslavia. And unless we decide to move there ourselves, we think
that's none of our business. More to the point, we insist that it is
none of the U.S. government's business.
We were outraged when we found out that foreign political contributions
had influenced the last U.S. election. And we're just as outraged that
the U.S. government tells people in other countries what to do and whom
to vote for.
More to the point, we absolutely condemn any Western propaganda that
makes false allegations against, and stirs up enmity toward, the Serbian
people. This racist material should never be circulated anywhere, and
ESPECIALLY not in Serbia.
Why do we say this?
First of all, FALSE accusations of genocide can be, and all too often
are, used as an excuse to perpetrate very REAL genocide against the
nation that was falsely accused. In fact, FALSE accusations of genocide
are probably the most effective type of propaganda for bringing about
real genocide, for those so evilly inclined.
"Direct and public incitement to commit genocide" is punishable,
according to Article 3 of the U.N. General Assembly resolution 260 A
(III), "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide." (See http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm).
"The following acts shall be punishable: (a) Genocide; (b) Conspiracy
to commit genocide; (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide; (e) Complicity in genocide."
And then there's Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, which reads:
"Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law."
"Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes
incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited
by law."
Evidently, a film was recently shown in Belgrade that is nothing more
than a cobbled-together mess of recycled Western propaganda about all
of the evils that the Serbs allegedly committed under Milosevic.
Why would any Serb show a racist, anti-Serb film like this?
Who knows... maybe it was an act of appeasement to the insatiable powers-that-be
in the West. Maybe it was an effort to get Serbs angry at Milosevic
for supposedly having led the Serbian people down the wrong path. Maybe
it was a misguided and wrongheaded notion of "glasnost and perestroika."
Be that as it may, this propaganda film was crammed with lies and distortions,
of which the nonexistent attack on Dubrovnik is just one. As usual,
there is no attempt to present anything that would stand up to the rules
of evidence. Were it to be presented in any fair trial, it'd be laughed
out of court.
But it wasn't presented in a fair trial. Instead, it was presented
at a time and place that neither lent itself to any healthy debate nor
offered any opportunity to refute this libeling of the Serbian people.
Even some SERBS don't realize that, just because you see a picture
of dead bodies, and someone blames it on Serbs, does NOT mean that Serbs
actually did it!
The exhibition of this film, along with Western "news" coverage
of its exhibition in papers such as The Guardian, will have the following
bad effects:
1. It will turn Serbs, especially young people, against their own people.
How? Easy. After all, no one person can be everywhere at once during
a war. They'll think that, just because THEY never saw Serbs commit
any atrocities, doesn't mean Serbs weren't doing something terrible
SOMEWHERE. And Serbs all too often are outspoken and vociferous in their
criticism of themselves and one another...without realizing the evil
purposes to which this criticism may be put by their mortal enemies.
2. This leads to the fact that the film will provide additional fuel
for the Tony Blair contingent - for use as damage control, to renew
attacks against Serbs in the future, or to provide an excuse for attempting
to keep Serbs from returning to Kosovo.
3. It will prepare public opinion in Serbia for Kostunica or his successors
to give in to Western pressure and begin turning Serbs over to the U.S.-funded
kangaroo court at the ICTY.
4. It will give the neo-Ustashe and neo-Handjak Holocaust-deniers yet
another 'red herring,' to keep people from figuring out what happened
to the Serbs in World War II.
And it will probably have other bad consequences as well.
The long and the short of it is not only that the lies and distortions
in the film itself will affect the Serbs who see it, but that - under
the guise of 'news' - the fact that the film was just now shown in Belgrade
becomes an excuse for all sorts of nefarious Serb-bashing in the West!
T. V. Weber
and
Alida M. Weber, nee Jatich
NEXT YEAR IN KOSOVO!!!!!