The Unholy Alliance

After some struggling and contemplation, I wrapped up last week's column for Antiwar.com with the following passage:

There is something disturbing about how Karadzic's arrest is being cheered by slimy Eurocrats, Imperial interventionists and frenzied jihadists alike. Either he actually is a paragon of evil – which, assertions and allegations notwithstanding, there is little evidence for – or the three most destructive forces in the world today can agree on somebody (or a whole nation of somebodies, rather) they all love to hate.

Around that time, Mick Hume was writing for Spiked about how Western imperialists manufactured the myth of Bosnia (and Serbs as the "new Nazis") to give itself purpose and meaning.

It appears Brendan O'Neill, Hume's colleague at Spiked, had a similar thought to mine - and chose to put it together with Hume's thesis, producing a fascinating essay. "Bosnia, Hysteria Politics, and the Roots of International Terrorism" was published yesterday on Antiwar.com, and is a great read.

Essentially, O'Neill points out that the Empire and the jihadists worked together during the Bosnian War, both seeking a new purpose in a changed world, and finding a shared enemy in the Serbs. Their relationship was almost symbiotic: mujahedeen would be Empire's proxies on the ground, fighting the war, while the Empire recruited fighters for the jihad by making outlandish propaganda claims about "genocide", "rape camps" and Muslim suffering.

Concludes O'Neill:

There is nothing so bitter as a conflict between former allies. We should remind ourselves that much of today's bloody moral posturing between Western interventionists and Islamic militants – which has caused so much destruction around the world – springs from the hysterical politics of "good and evil" that was created during the Bosnian war. No doubt Karadzic has a great deal to answer for. But the West/East, liberal/Mujahideen demonization of Karadzic and the Serbs, and through it the rehabilitation of both Western militarism and Islamic radicalism, has also done a great deal to destabilize international affairs and destroy entire communities.

Read the entire article. It will open your eyes. That is, if you don't have them wide shut already...

Rendition

Officially, Radovan Karadzic was arrested on Monday, July 21. Except there are multiple reports indicating the arrest actually took place on Friday, July 18. Furthermore, Serbian police was specifically said not to have taken place in the arrest. So, who did actually arrest Karadzic? The Tadic government isn't telling.

Now, Serbian law doesn't recognize habeas corpus, but I'm pretty sure one's not supposed to be subject to arrest by someone other than police, or held for several days before being brought before a judge. But hey, he's a "war criminal," right? Who cares? Not like he's a mujahedin fighting to "stay home," or he'd get sympathy from the West...

Now, Serbian constitution does not allow for extradition of citizens - except to the Inquisition. Currently, Serbian authorities are refusing to extradite Miladin Kovacevic to the United States. Kovacevic is accused to severely beating another college student in a bar fight in upstate New York. So, illegal rendition of former presidents, generals and government officials to a self-appointed, illegitimate quasi-court is perfectly all right, but extraditing someone who almost killed someone else in a bar fight? Oh no, can't do that...

Wait, illegal rendition?!

Absolutely.

See, to have a proper extradition, you have to at least have an extradition hearing. There are all these judicial procedures. Neither Slobodan Milosevic (who was arrested on completely different charges - and never prosecuted! - before being rendered to the Inquisition) nor Radovan Karadzic ever got a hearing in court. They were simply packed into a van, then into a helicopter, and shipped off to a foreign country, where their chances of getting a fair trial are less than zero.

(If you're arguing that the ICTY has actually acquitted people - like Ramush Haradinaj or Naser Oric, think again. Those people they could acquit without bringing their own existence into question. Acquitting a Serb leader? No way. Without the alleged Serb "joint criminal enterprise", the whole Tribunal is pointless.)

Under Serbian law, Karadzic also had the right to appeal his arrest. His lawyer said he had mailed the appeal on Friday. Somehow, the all-efficient (ha!) Serbian Postal Service said on Monday that no such appeal has been mailed. So, as thousands of people demonstrated in downtown Belgrade, under the truncheons of riot police, Karadzic was packed off into a police van and shipped out of the country.

Now, Imperial satrap Boris the False and his followers love to talk about the Tribunal as "Serbia's international obligation." They are always big on obligations, somehow forgetting their job isn't to fulfill foreigners' demands, but to protect Serbian interests. And that would include, one supposes, upholding the law, from the Constitution on down. Of course, as that would require actually defending Kosovo, giving people they arrest a fair hearing, or not sending riot police to beat up people they don't like, it's too much of a hassle. They'd rather democratically democratize democracy the entire democratic day.

What happened to Karadzic is merely a symptom of a sycophantic, collaborationist regime gone mad. There hasn't been law in Serbia for a very long time. Since 1944, some say (or rather, 1941). Even the "evil Milosevic" still paid lip service to law, however. That's more than his "democratic" successors have done since 2000, embracing rather the all-trumping "convenience." The true purpose of the law, however, was never to bind criminals (they disobey it by definition), but to constrain the government from abusing the innocent-until-proven-guilty. So much for that, then.

For the second time after the October 2000 coup, the government, the media, and the "non-governmental sector" are all under firm control of the same (foreign) interests. The first time was during the martial law in the spring of 2003. Now the boot is treading a bit more softly, but it is still the same boot. And it is still stomping on the human face, forever.

Combo #2, with extra cheese

While I'm pretty sure the BBC employs a political (correctness) commissar, it definitely does not employ fact-checkers. I know, I know, big surprise. But if they did, they would avoid such whoppers as:

"Mr Karadzic declared independence for Bosnian Serbs in 1991..."

Huh? The "Serb Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina" (later renamed just Serb Republic, Republika Srpska) was established in January 1992, following an illegal decision by Muslim and Croat delegates to hold a referendum on "Bosnian" independence. Isn't it great how the BBC puts the cart before the horse?

Oh, but it gets better. Ever since Izetbegovic adopted the name "Bosniak" for people who were previously known as Muslims (in Izetbegovic's youth they were "Croats of Islamic faith," and in the days of his grandfather, "Turks"), foreign journalists have been thoroughly confused.

What's the difference between "Bosnian" and "Bosniak"? To them, none - they've used both terms interchangeably since the war. And hey, if the reporters can't tell the difference, and most of their audience can't tell Bosnia from Botswana, no wonder the ploy to establish Bosnia as the homeland of "Bosniaks" (with Serbs and Croats as vile interlopers) seems to have succeeded.

So what is one to think of this line, used by BBC to describe what Karadzic is wanted for:

He has been indicted for crimes against humanity and genocide over the massacre of up to 8,000 mainly-Muslim Bosniaks at Srebrenica in 1995. (emphasis added)

What in the name of Political Correctness is "mainly-Muslim"? Is that like "a little bit British" or maybe "somewhat-American"?

So, let's see... I'll have a Serbophobia Special, extra cheese. Ultra-size it, BBC, and don't worry about the facts. Not like your audience gives a damn.

Self-righteous phonies

Day three of the propaganda orgy following the arrest of Radovan Karadzic saw the publication of Roger Cohen's diatribe in the International Herald Tribune. It wasn't about Karadzic, or Bosnia, but mostly about Roger Cohen.

Look at this turgid prose: "sharp burst of Serbian violence that opened the war and 'cleansed' wide swathes of the country of non-Serbs, many processed through murderous concentration camps. Pits of bones form the bitter harvest of this genocidal Serbian season."

Oh Roger, not even the authors of the "concentration camp" hoax bother to repeat it any more. But no, there you go, ranting about "pits of bones" and "genocidal Serbian season."

He writes about the "stubbornness of love" he learned from an actor who lost his legs; of "fierceness of moral clarity" he learned from a "beautiful" Muslim woman who saw the world in black and white (with her, of course, as white); and the "quietness of courage" from a Muslim paraplegic who insisted he would always be morally better than the Serb who shot him. All these people exist to teach one Roger Cohen how to be an "advocacy journalist," eschewing objectivity for the sake of passionate reporting "from the heart" and being a "single dissenting voice."

Uh, excuse me? Roger Cohen was never a single, dissenting voice, but rather a part of a thundering chorus of career and aspiring journalists, scribblers, stringers, has-been and wannabe celebrities and various others who saw the tragedy of Bosnia as a way to wealth and fame.

So, what did Roger Cohen do to help Nermin Tulic after his injury? Did he perhaps organize a fundraiser to buy him a powered wheelchair? Or did he note how the Muslim authorities in Sarajevo almost kicked Tulic out on the street? No, because he doesn't really care about Nermin Tulic, unless he can use him to make a point.

How do I know about Tulic? Easy. He was my neighbor, barely a block away. I am from Sarajevo, born and raised. My family has lived in the city for generations. I was there during the war, too. Unlike Roger Cohen, I wasn't there as a tourist or adventurer. While he made fame for himself by peddling propaganda for the "Bosniak cause" I would starve and freeze and dodge bullets. And I would remember things.

I remember seeing Muslim artillery dug in around a playground - only to later hear of children who had played there getting killed after Serb guns returned fire. No one reported that.

I saw the Muslim authorities stealing 3/4 of people's food rations, and warehouses filled with aid from the world over that were set aside for black markets (controlled by the government) and the use of government officials, who dined on roasted lamb while the besieged citizens were starving. No one reported that.

I sat in meetings between Muslim officials and UN officers discussing utility repairs, and heard Muslims refuse to open water and gas valves to their own people as that would look bad on CNN. Roger Cohen didn't report that either. None of his colleagues ever did. And they knew damn well about all of this.

So forgive me if I have little respect for Roger Cohen and his colleagues, who dwell on their self-righteousness against "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" but who really treat the people who suffered in the war as nothing more than props. They declare themselves the conscience of the world, and then manufacture a twisted reality in which murderers, thieves, terrorists and liars are idolized as "fathers of the nation" or "defenders of multicultural democracy." They talk about justice, but then provide alibis for mass murderers. They can't sleep when they think about Bosnia? Could it be that what's left of their conscience won't let them, because some part of them still knows the sheer wrongness of what they have done?

I don't know. But this kind of sanctimonious bullshit from Roger Cohen and other presstitutes who profited on our pain makes me sick. And sure I hope they all meet the kind of justice they proclaim to believe in.

Having to argue the obvious

The orgy of lies that started on Tuesday with the news of Radovan Karadzic's arrest shows no sign of winding down. In fact, it is getting worse, with every Tom, Dick and Harry who's ever made a deposit into the Bank of Collective Serbian Guilt elbowing into the limelight to get his two minutes of hate in.

So normal has it become to hate the Serbs that no one is asking the obvious questions one would expect in this situation: what's all that fuss really about, for example, or whatever happened to the presumption of innocence?

Fortunately, over at the Brussels Journal, two writers do precisely that.

Michael Huntsman takes to task "the likes of Lord Ashdown, Richard Holbrooke, David Miliband and a raft of others" who "all speak of Karadzic as if he had already been tried and convicted. The little matter of holding a trial concerns them not."

Though Karadzic's arrest is welcome, he claims, "not least because it brings the ending of the ICTY's mandate that much closer," it "surely is disgraceful that public figures should thus pronounce him guilty" before he's even been extradited. Huntsman concludes:

I have no idea if Mr. Karadzic is guilty or not. We shall only know that when he has had his trial and his appeals have been exhausted. Then we can say with precision what he did and to whom. That can only be achieved after the holding of a fair trial at which he is able to challenge through counsel the assertions of those who have already pronounced him guilty. Until then the likes of Lord Ashdown ought to keep their own counsel, he not the least because he may yet be a witness at Karadzic's trial. His impartiality and objectivity are now most certainly utterly compromised.

At first I was somewhat annoyed at what seemed to me naive idealism. Ashdown's impartiality and objectivity compromised? I've known this ever since his days as the Bosnian Viceroy. Trials by public opinion? Old news, even before the show trial of Slobodan Milosevic. And the notion that Karadzic will get anything even tangentially approaching a fair trial from a "court" that is specifically designed to preclude that possibility may sound laughable.

But then I realized that I may know all this, but the general public is probably quite oblivious. And that arguments such as Huntsman's need to be made, precisely because no one else seems to challenge the Inquisition or the likes of Ashdown, Holbrooke and others. Things like fairness and justice ought to be virtues - something that I sometimes forget when slogging through the swamp of lies, where there is no virtue, only power.

Another excellent contribution at TBJ is John Laughland's essay, "The Plight of the Bosnian Serbs." Again, it seems obvious - but everyone except Laughland (and Srdja Trifkovic, earlier in the week) has been too busy calling for Serb blood to even wonder. Laughland makes the argument the Serbs themselves have been too intimidated to make, one that years of demonization in the West have managed to prevent from being heard.

Laughland takes issue with the perception of the war - reinforced this week by thousands of reports, commentaries and essays - that the Serbs were the "aggressors" who committed genocide against innocent Muslim victims:

Even if one accepts that crimes against humanity were committed during the Balkan wars, it should be obvious that both these claims are absurd.

The Serbs were as much of an aggressor as Abraham Lincoln, he argues (note that I disagree here; Lincoln actually was an aggressor...). The accusation of aggression was deliberately made to condemnt the Bosnian Serb war effort as such, "(in terms of ius ad bellum) independently of any condemnation for the way the war was fought (ius in bello)." Laughland counters:

In fact, the Bosnian Serb war effort was no more or less legitimate than the Bosnian Muslim war effort. The Muslims wanted to secede from Yugoslavia (and were egged on to do this by the Americans and the Europeans) while the Bosnian Serbs wanted to stay in Yugoslavia. It was as simple as that.

He further illustrates that the Muslims "cheated" by deciding on an independence referendum in the absence of Serb legislators, and that Muslim behavior gave the Serbs "excellent grounds for believing that the Bosnian Muslim secession was quite simply a coup d’état":

In any case, once the Muslims had seized power in Sarajevo, the Bosnian Serbs sought not to conquer the whole republic but instead simply to fight for the secession of their territories from Muslim control. Of course atrocities were committed against civilians during this period, especially ethnic cleansing. But the same phenomenon is observed, I believe, and by definition, in every single war in which a new state is created... If the Muslims had the right unilaterally to secede from Yugoslavia, why should the Bosnian Serbs not have had the right unilaterally to secede from the new state of Bosnia-Herzegovina which had never before existed and a state, and to which the Bosnian Serbs had no loyalty whatever?

Laughland also takes issue with the charge of "genocide." But rather than focus on the number of those killed (Muslims claim 8,000, Serbs say much fewer), or the fact that Srebrenica was not a demilitarized "safe haven" but a base of operations for an entire division of the Bosnian Muslim army, he argues against it on principle:

What is clear is that the Srebrenica massacre cannot possibly be described as genocide. Even the most ardent pro-Muslim propagandists agree that the victims of the massacre there were all men. The Bosnian Serbs claim that they were combatants (although that is certainly not an excuse for killing them) but the point is that an army bent on genocide would precisely not have singled out men for execution but would have killed women too. The Srebrenica massacre may well have been a crime against humanity but it is impossible to see how it can be categorised as genocide.

Yet, he says, "there is a very clear political reason why" it has been. In his remarks following the capture of Karadzic, the current leader of Bosnian Muslims, Haris Silajdzic, argued that the whole Bosnian Serb Republic was based on genocide and aggression. Says Laughland:

The clear implication of what he was saying was this: if the very existence of the Bosnian Serb republic... is found, in a court of law, to have been had as its president a man, Karadzic, who is convicted of genocide in the process of creating it, then its status would be illegitimate and it should be abolished. The Muslims continue to claim control over the whole of the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, while the Serbs merely want the preservation of their considerable autonomy within it. (emphasis added)

And there you have it, in a nutshell. Serbs never denied the Muslims their right to a state - they did, however, deny the Muslims the "right" to dominate them by separating Bosnia from the rest of Yugoslavia and disenfranchising its Croat and Serb population. Muslims countered by accusing the Serbs of "aggression" and "genocide" - neither of which makes any sense, but both of which have been accepted as fact by the West.

Laughland will inevitably be condemned as a "Serb apologist" by the legions of actual Muslim apologists, men and women and creatures who have accumulated money, power and fame on the myth of Serbian aggression and genocide, persuading the gullible world that things that were patently untrue were the actual truth. That Laughland is one of the few in the West to even dare make the argument he made, or that no Serb leaders seems to have the courage to argue likewise, is a sad testament to the state of the world today, run by the peddlers of myths abut Bosnia.

Thaci Hires Speechwriter: Borat

And now for something... slightly different.

It appears that the KLA regime in the self-proclaimed "republic of Kosovo" hired as their newest speechwriter none other than the infamous Kazakhstani troublemaker, Borat Sagdiyev. Evidence? In the July 18 statement to the Imperial Secretary of State, "prime minister" Hashim Thaci declared:

"Thank you, Madame Secretary, for the strong support that the United States of America has given to Kosovo and its people.

Today, Kosovo is an independent, sovereign and democratic state; it is a country of peace, stability and with a perspective to develop. Kosovo has excellent cooperation with all the countries of the region, with Macedonia, Albania, Montenegro, and in the near democratic future, we believe, also with Serbia. ....

This is a historical visit and meeting, because it is the first delegation of the state of Kosovo to visit Washington.

We expressed our new commitment to making progress in Kosovo, and awareness about the new responsibilities that we will take over for Kosovo as a state that will be part of the Euro-Atlantic family, part of NATO and of the European Union, and always in excellent relations with the US.

Kosovo and the people of Kosovo bow before the Government and the people of America for their support."

This had to have been written by Borat. Right?

(Apologies to Sacha Baron Cohen any offense that may have been accidentally given by associating his name with the terrorist KLA regime.)

The Real Face of Evil

Mark Twain once famously said, "It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Richard Holbrooke probably never read Twain, and even if he had, that would hardly stop him. The man who ended the Bosnian War on America's terms (after Washington sabotaged every attempt to end it any other way), known for a complete absence of tact and only a loose attachment to the truth, Holbrooke is somewhat of an idol to Clinton-era interventionists, some of whom have been reborn as Obamamaniacs.

Once a month, he pontificates from the pages of the Washington Post, a newspaper that's never seen a Russian or a Serb it did not love to hate (unless the said Russian or Serb did Empire's bidding without a second thought; then he merely could not be trusted). He used this month's opportunity to gloat over the capture of Radovan Karadžić, former leader of the Bosnian Serbs.

Now, I'll give Holbrooke this; he doesn't hide his Serbophobia. He wears it proudly, like a badge of honor. That doesn't make him much different than the hordes of Serbophoboes-for-hire that infest Western capitals and media, but they usually have an excuse ready if someone brings it up, because their greatest fear is being accused of "intolerance". (Not that anyone cares about calling people on hatred of Serbs; in this day and age of political correctness, not hating Serbs is a hate crime.) But Holbrooke hates openly, and with pride. Fair enough.

Lies are another matter, though. His Post column today contains at least four verifiable untruths. I know, I know, a Serb-hater engaging in lies? What's the world coming to?! Well, I for one am sick and tired of lies. And I'm going to do something about it.

Lie the first: The one and only time he met Karadžić, Holbrooke and his team were in Belgrade, "trying to end a war that had already taken the lives of nearly 300,000 people."

This is what editors would call a "gross factual error" that should get any journalist fired on the spot. Not so Holbrooke, apparently. But the official demographic study of the ICTY (the same tribunal Holbrooke praises in his diatribe) from 2003 established the total death toll in Bosnia at just over 100,000 civilians and military. Subsequent research by a Bosnian commission reached the final figure of 92,000 dead. Yet the 250,000 or even 300,000 have been routinely used in reports of Karadžić's arrest as verified fact. It is, however, a lie.

Lie the second: Holbrooke blames Karadžić, Gen. Ratko Mladić, Slobodan Milošević and God only knows who else for the deaths of three of his colleagues, Bob Frasure, Joe Kruzel and Nelson Drew. They died when their vehicle slid off the road into a mine-filled ravine. In his Post column Holbrooke claims the road they traveled went through "sniper-filled, Serbian-controlled territory." In fact, the road they took went over Mt. Igman, a supposedly demilitarized zone under nominal UN control which was in fact occupied by the Muslims and used as their army's base of operations.

Furthermore, as Holbrooke reveals in his memoir, he blamed the Serbs because they would not give Frasure and his team a safety guarantee if they tried flying in. But the Serbs could not give any such guarantee, not because they were willing to shoot the plane down, but because they could not stop the Muslims from doing so. So the American diplomats used the road through Muslim territory and died. May as well blame the Serbs for the mountain being there in the first place...

Lie the third: Holbrooke claims his meeting with Karadžić resulted in the lifting of the siege of Sarajevo. Complete and utter nonsense. All he did was reopen the airport, which was closed due to ... drumroll... the NATO bombing of Bosnian Serb positions around the city! That was the bombing Holbrooke refers to in the column as threatening to continue (and he actually did, pleading with NATO to "give us bombs for peace," as detailed in his book). Even after the war ended, Sarajevo remained under an internal blockade, as residents needed permission from the Muslim authorities to leave the city.

Lie the fourth: Holbrooke claims that former Serbian PM Zoran Đinđić was assassinated in 2003 "as a direct result of his courage in arresting Milosevic and sending him to The Hague in 2001." Holbrooke may well believe this, as do many fanatical "democrats" in Serbia, but there has never been any actual evidence to prove it. To this day, it's just a conspiracy theory, which Holbrooke here presents as fact. Alright, then, Holbrooke was an agent of Al-Qaeda, tasked to arrange a deployment of American troops in Bosnia so they would present easy targets for terrorists and weaken America for the upcoming conflict with the Faithful. See how easy it is to just make up bullshit on the go?

I've just about had it with this sanctimonious, uncouth, arrogant, corrupt slimebucket. He actually had the temerity to title his Post column today "The Face of Evil." He ought to look in the mirror.

Post scriptum:

In addition to the four whoppers in Holbrooke's venomous diatribe, there is one passage that ought to be of interest to Balkans observers: "the negotiating team (meaning Holbrooke) had decided to marginalize Karadžić and Mladić and to force Milošević, as the senior Serb in the region, to take responsibility for the war and the negotiations we hoped would end it."

Here is the open admission that Milosevic was forced to negotiate on behalf of the Bosnian Serbs, and that he did not, in fact, exercise control over them, effective or otherwise.

Furthermore, Holbrooke's turn of phrase ("senior Serb in the region") suggests that neither he nor his superiors cared a whit about actual legitimacy of countries and leaders, but saw the Serbs as some savage tribe to be cowed into submission by a display o violence. Had this taken place somewhere in Africa, Holbrooke and his government would have rightly been accused of racism. But since the target of their hatred and contempt are the Serbs, no one cares.

An Orgy of Lies

The arrest of Radovan Karadzic yesterday (or Friday, as some reports indicate) occasioned an orgy of Serbophobia in the Western press, as wire services, newspapers and TV networks competed in who would trot out more rancid propaganda to "spice up" otherwise factually sparse reports about Karadzic's capture.

Karadzic was thus described as minion of Milosevic (false), a "key organizer" of the Bosnian war (also false), the "Butcher of Bosnia" (that one's new), an architect of "genocide" in Srebrenica (wasn't that supposed to be Mladic?) etc. Dozens of reports I've read have repeated the baseless assertion that Karadzic had disguised himself as an Orthodox priest and hid in monasteries - a claim calculated to defame the Serbian Orthodox Church.

To describe the war itself, the media dug up every trope and cliche from their old clipboards: "Europe's most murderous conflict since the end of World War II" is just one example. Similarly, the siege of Sarajevo was alleged to have killed 12,000 (only if one counts the military fatalities, and then on both sides, could this number possibly be true), and the Bosnian war a "quarter-million" people. I mean, come on, that crap again?

I could also dwell on the lazy (or malicious? you decide) description of what supposedly happened in Srebrenica; to hear the mainstream media say it, Serb forces stormed the unprotected, disarmed civilian town, seized 8,000 men and shot them on the spot. Except none of this - none - is actually true.

It's revolting. It's disgusting. It's normal for the folks that brought us "Kuwaiti incubator babies" and "Saddam's weapons of mass destruction" and God knows how many other lies invented and disseminated to justify the Empire and its wars of conquest.

My next column on Antiwar.com will deal with the Karadzic affair, but I just wanted to express my intense revulsion with this obscene orgy of lies. I've actually survived the war in Bosnia, inside Sarajevo no less. It was terrible enough without presstitutes, pseudo-diplomats and NGO scum making up preposterous stories, as they have for the past 16 years. Everyone claims to be championing the "victims," but they don't; they use the victims to achieve their own ends, be that greater circulation/ratings/awards, conquest and domination, or simply money.

Now, if you want some actual facts about Radovan Karadzic and his role in the Bosnian war, I direct you to an excellent essay by Srdja Trifkovic posted earlier today. But if you are happy to feed on the offal poured down your trough by the mainstream media, what the hell are you doing reading this blog anyway?

What, me worry?

Rumors of my retirement following the formation of a Yellow-and-Red government in Serbia have been wildly exaggerated. I'm a libertarian, remember? When one believes that all governments are bad, and some are worse than others, seeing a really rotten government ascend to power is hardly a cause for despair. A sigh of exasperation, perhaps, maybe a bit of disappointment, but when one seeks to comment on the condition of humanity (or parts thereof) those come with the territory. May as well complain about the water being wet, or the summer being hot. Which it is, by the way.

The world being what it is, I'll run out of time before I run out of material. So stay tuned. I'm just getting warmed up.

Supporting Their Own

Just as I was watching the ending of the Croatia-Turkey matchup at Euro 2008 (I won't give it away, but let's just say few saw that coming), this photo arrived in my inbox:



I don't know the source. I don't know where it was shot (though I presume somewhere in Germany, judging by the license plates) or when exactly. The caption was, "In Germany, support for their own."

As a commentary on immigration, integration and multi-culturalism in Europe, this picture is certainly worth a thousand words.

Kudos to the Irish

As they shoot down the EU Constitution crudely disguised as the "Lisbon Treaty."

After the original Constitution was staked through the heart by Dutch and French voters in 2005, the EUrocrats decided to get sneaky (after all, that's always worked far better than open collectivization), change some wording, stop calling it a Constitution and make it a "treaty" instead. This way, they figured, no referenda would be necessary and they could simply ratify it in parliaments.

Except the Irish law mandated a referendum. And that was a problem. Because, you see, the Irish had already told the EUSSR to shove it back in 2001, rejecting the Treaty of Nice. That was fixed by holding another referendum the following year; no doubt there would have been another yet, had the voters not "seen reason" and "made the right choice" (i.e. voted as their lords and masters in Brussels told them to). Still, the Irish had a history of being... difficult.

So this time, there was an enormous amount of pressure put on Ireland to shut the hell up and obey, from the EUrocracy and the commentariat alike (covered in a lot of detail by Brendan O'Neill). And the Irish still said "no."

Now, the naive might think the EUSSR will just melt away like the Wicked Witch when doused with water. No such luck. Too much power and Other People's Money is at stake for the EUrocrats to just give up. I'm guessing there will be enormous political, media and economic pressure on Ireland to annul the vote, or vote again (and again, and again, until the "right" result is achieved). Or the EUSSR might suspend Ireland's membership, thus enabling the "Treaty" to come into effect on schedule and unhindered. Laws and rules aren't going to stop the people who've already said that legal is whatever they decide is legal (e.g. the Kosovo declaration of "independence").

The Irish rejection, however, could encourage other EU countries to, um, re-evaluate their relationship with Brussels. Not likely, I know, but at least it keeps the EUrocrats from sleeping well at night. In this bleak world of deceit and violence, one should cherish any victory, no matter how small or temporary - while hoping, of course, and working so it becomes sweeping and permanent.

Go raibh maith agat, Eire.

Jasenovac, Blood and Ashes

In 1983, Croatian director Lordan Zafranović made a harrowing documentary about Jasenovac, the biggest death camp operated by the 1941-1945 "Independent State of Croatia." The film, "Jasenovac: Blood and Ashes" was suppressed during the 1990s, following the rise of Tudjman's nationalist government. Zafranović himself was blacklisted and lived in exile in Prague.

The film has recently become available on YouTube, with English subtitles:

- Part 1;

- Part 2;

- Part 3;

- Part 4;

- Part 5;

- Part 6.

It can be downloaded for free in from here and as a free torrent here.

I mention this now not in service of modern politics, but to honor the courage and integrity of the filmmaker who told the story of this bloodiest chapter in Croatian history, and to cherish the memory of the innocent victims of Jasenovac and the regime that operated it. Such atrocities must not be allowed to happen again. Forgetting is also a crime.

May the memory of Jasenovac victims live forever.

~ MikeVronsky, from sivisoko.blosgpot.com

Someone Got It Right

Antiwar.com's Justin Raimondo, that is. One would think that after eight years of Clinton "humanitarianism" and another eight years of Bushian "humble foreign policy" the American people would not be eager to elect another warmongering imperialist to the White Marble Throne. Not so.

This week Antiwar.com is doing its quarterly pledge drive, soliciting donations from readers in order to continue its operations. As part of illustrating the consistent opposition of Antiwar.com to imperialism (which is bad for both the people being "liberated" and Americans), Raimondo has posted excerpts from his 1996 brochure opposing intervention in Bosnia. From his introduction:

It was the Kosovo incursion that set the stage for the Iraq invasion, from the rhetoric of "liberation" to the mechanics of "nation-building." Operation Allied Force had all the elements that were later developed to the max in Operation Enduring Freedom – an allied group that provided phony "intelligence," i.e., war propaganda, and had the same hubristic, hectoring style. Militant interventionists, such as John McCain, jumped on board the war bandwagon because they realized that a precedent had to be set in the post-Cold War world, an assertion of American hegemony.

Today, we are all paying the consequences.

Whether you want to or not, you are already funding murder and pillage at home and abroad, through taxes you are forced into paying. If you value your freedom and oppose the soul-sucking and murderous enterprise that is the Empire, I urge you to make a voluntary contribution to a cause of liberty and justice today.

(Yes, I'm a columnist for Antiwar.com and as such, keeping them in existence is in my self-interest; but that doesn't make anything I've said here any less true, and you know it.)

Democracy, Tolerance and Enlightenment

There is a small, but very loud, group of people in Serbia that style themselves better than the rest of their countrymen. They are the "Other Serbia," gathered around the radio/TV network B92, the Liberal Democratic Party and so-called non-governmental "human rights" organizations (who are financed almost exclusively by foreign governments, and care not a whit for human rights of Serbs). These "true believers" even see the quisling Democratic Party and its sycophantic leader Boris Tadic as "too soft", too willing to make compromises with the underfolk - the Serbian people, the Serbian Orthodox Church, academia and press. Naturally, they see themselves as the paragons of democracy, tolerance, and enlightenment - and in the pursuit of these lofty ends, consider any and all means acceptable.

(That they are an instrument of foreign governments isn't even questionable; just look at their analogs set up in Russia, funded from the same source...)

Once a week, the radio show Peščanik ("Hourglass") channels the feelings of these "Otherserbians" (not to be confused with "Serbnationalists"). The two hosts - Svetlana Lukić and Svetlana Vuković - have taken to publishing transcripts of the show; the latest book of these transcripts, volume 10, was recently reviewed by Slobodan Antonić. I've translated the review here, omitting perhaps a sentence or two; those who read Serbian can see all of it here.

Please note that Antonić writes with dripping sarcasm, and that the language and imagery used by the self-proclaimed champions of "modernity and reform" can be nauseating to some readers. Proceed at your own risk.

Any errors in the translation are my own.

Educating the "People Gone Wild"
(Pečat, issue 12, May 6, 2008, p. 48-50)

Peščanik is often dubbed a "cult show" of the Other Serbia. That is quite literally true, as the authors and fans of Peščanik are an ideological and political cult, gathering once a week by their radios to listen to the same preachers. Those most dedicated will buy the books of collected sermons.

One such book is before us, containing the transcripts of shows between September and November 2007. It contains the core ideological messages of this cult: belief in their own ideological and political exceptionalism, contempt and hatred towards their surroundings. They curse the sin-soaked people for not accepting the cult and not giving itself fully over to its shamans. But the cult is noble, and instead of leaving the unworthy to their fate, it is ready to make sacrifices and lead it into deliverance. All they need is a tiny bit of power - and the entire society will become like Peščanik.

"My people are a special kind of stupid," says Petar Luković (p. 314). "Serbia is not a normal country," agrees Svetlana Lukić (p.99). It is a "pit of a country, a suffocating room, a cell and an insane asylum both at once" (p.9). Latinka Perović says the same thing, in a more sophisticated way: "Serbia is a very neglected country with institutions that aren't functioning, and very far away from any notion of rule of law." (p.329). It is a country, adds Ivan Kuzminović of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, where "thirty percent of people are missing teeth and voting Radical" (p.248).

It is hard to love such a pit of the toothless. "We Serbs are a people who worshiped Milošević and killed Đinđić," explains Sreten Ugričić. "It is hard to love that, belong to that, and identify with that, it is hard to be a Serb patriot" (p.347). So one must understand why this cult believes that "contempt for the people is the highest form of patriotism" (Ugričić, p.346). However, members of this cult are not snobbish, willing to look upon the sinful with contempt from on high. They want to help, and "take responsibility," so they have a plethora of advice.

One such advice is to disregard the will of the people. "Oh, if everyone heeded the will of the people, we'd have all been fucked," explains Petar Luković (p.235). "The very worst thing here is that the elected politicians follow the will of the people," he warns (p.235). "The government has to listen to the citizens, yes," concurs Nataša Kandić, "but those citizens have to have certain values" (p.260). And since the toothless people don't have the right values, the government ought to listen to the elite, gathered around Peščanik. If only they are given a chance, they will perform their social mission: "to educate the people gone wild"(Dubravka Stojanović, p.265).

"We need a self-transformation," claims Nikola Samardžić, "we don't need to pollute the European Union, like so much biological waste" (p.61-2). Of course, such wild people and "biological waste" needs to know order before even thinking about the EU. "Do they need our garbage? I don't think so," says Samardžić (p.62).

To educate and enlighten such garbage, one has to resort to extreme measures. Since, as Nenad Prokić educates us, the last witch-burning in Europe happened in Serbia (p.153), perhaps it would be proper to apply similar measures to the unworthy populace: "Nothing will get better in Serbia until the Holy Spanish Inquisition starts burning people at the stake. Think of it what you will!" (Prokić, p.33).

"Either we get them, or they will get us," agrees the paragon of tolerance Biljana Srbljanović (p.152). "We need to attack, but not piecemeal, but straight at the head, where they are most dangerous," she adds. Sadly, it's impossible to burn the entire people at the stake, but one could make an example of the nationalist elite. "I have only one thing to say about the Serbian elite: Napalm is all!" said Petar Luković in the previous volume (book 9, p. 282). Thus the Other Serbia easily resolves the issue of "biological waste," between the stakes and napalm.

As they see it, garbage is not confined to "nationalist" parties. Its fountainhead is the Serbian Orthodox Church. The Patriarchy, explains Svetlana Lukić, "is still looking for the first decent human being" (p.353). Since there are no decent human beings within the Church, that explains how Petar Luković commented on the hunger strike of Bishop Filaret: "The pig slopped" (93). The Church pigs will have their turn, once the "education" begins, followed by the nationalists and all the other "fascists."

Speaking of which, "fascism" was in particular a topic of this collection. Rajko Đurić established that the number of Nazis in Serbia is "over 250,000" (p.191). "Fascists and Nazis," explains Đurić his numbers, "aren't just those who wear the swastika. There are salon fascists, thought fascists, academic, literary and media fascists..." (p.191). How to treat these professors, authors and journalists is clear: "They are Hitlerspawn, and there is no talking to Hitlerspawn; for communication, one needs logos, a mind, reason" (p.191). Dealing with the estimated quarter million Serbian fascists, as Peščanik counts them, is simple: "The depth of thoughts and breadth of soul of a Nazi can only be measured by a bullet" (p.190). Burnings at the stake, napalm and bullets - and there we have it, the holy de-Nazification and decontamination trinity of Other Serbia.

In addition to "Serb fascism," this book also dwells on uncovering the evil Russian imperialism. Until recently, Peščanik paid no heed to the gigantic heap of biological waste out east, perhaps too busy with the one at home. Now, however, the evil Russia has invaded Peščanik's blissful existence. They have discovered that all the evils that have visited us throughout history came from - Russia!

Nenad Prokić thus lectured us that the Russian secret service, the Okhrana, was behind the key assassinations in Serbian history: the 1860 murder of prince Danilo in Kotor, the 1868 murder of prince Mihailo in Belgrade, the 1903 murder of King Alexader Obrenović - and of course, the 2003 murder of Zoran Đinđić (p.28). But Prokić was not satisfied with these incredible discoveries - he also taught us that the Russians were behind the Holocaust! Namely, says Prokić, the Nazi genocide of Jews would not have been possible without the Okhrana agent Matvei Golovinski writing the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in Paris in 1898 (p.28). Hitler drew inspiration from the "Protocols," and "Golovinski was believed by Churchill and Stalin"(p.28). And this satanic Empire is now thought of in Serbia better than our eternal friends and worldwide benefactors, the United States? Never!

No wonder Pera Luković rages whenever he sees something Russian on TV. "I watched the Russian version of 'My Nanny' on B92, and you know what? I'd have these Russians shot, and I'd shoot those who bought the show, too. It's a Russian home, man, we're watching a reality show from a fucking Russian home!" (p.232). Only the evil Cuba can measure up to the evil Russia, so Luković does not cloak his rigtheous anger over the dire Cuban threat to the Other Serbia: "Fuck Cuba, fuck all of Cuba with both Fidel and Raul, and all their brothers and sisters if they have them. Fucking cunts!" (p. 234).

Mirko Đorđević explains the justified odium towards the evil Cuba. He is horrified that now "Che Guevara is used as a symbol by the most aggressive of nationalists" (p.307). And since it's well known that fascists are easily identified by wearing Che T-shirts, as well as those that say "Rossiya", it is finally understandable how thye preachers of Peščanik arrived at a number of some quarter-million Nazis in Serbia.

Finally, this volume introduces a sudden discovery by Peščanik of the incredible potential for Euro-reforms in the - Socialist Party! This was claimed as early as September 14, 2007 by Miljenko Dereta. Asked how to ensure "the maximum support for the pro-European option," Dereta explained his vision: "There is a surprising potential in the Socialist Party of Serbia" (p.48). This potential, Dereta says, can only be realized if the SPS does the following : "I expect of the Socialists to reform, denounce the past and help the pro-Europeans. We need to support those leading the SPS in that direction. There is a generational change in SPS, and those who were directly involved in the events of the 1990s are dying out. New people will replace them and reform that party, and they will need help. They should not be forgiven, or forgotten, but they will need help to make a new step"(p.48).

The prophetic Dereta clearly saw the danger of Euro-reformers never winning a majority in Serbia, so he demonstrated his tolerance by offering the warm embrace of the Cult to the outcast SPS. Who can say the Cult is discriminatory, who says the only things they offer are napalm and bullets? No, Dereta says nicely, "Don't forgive, don't forget, but help them make a new step." And look how useful listening to Peščanik can be, in the aftermath of the May 11 elections. All it takes now is that "one small new step" by Ivica Dačić; his membership won't get absolution, but if he makes that one "right step," everything will be all right. Every radio will be Peščanik, every TV will be B92, every newspaper will be the "Helsinki Charter" (newsletter of Sonja Biserko's Helsinki Committee for Human Rights - GF.), every school will become a "summer camp for civic instruction," and the government will finally begin "educating the people gone wild."

Once every Serb is issued his personal "self-liberation kit", there won't be much need for the holy trinity of decontamination. The SPS would be transformed, the Orthodox Church will call for entries for a reformist Patriarch, Serbs would stop wearing Che T-shirts, and the Serb professors, authors and journalists will know the beauty of The Hague and the Pentagon. Then N. Samardžić would have to work less on cleaning out biological waste, P. Luković will put down the chainsaw, and N. Prokić will put down the torch.

All will be happy, all will be in NATO - except for that trifling quarter-million. But after that group of infidels is treated by the holy trinity of decontamination, the remaining hard-liners will have to listen to the holy sermons of Peščanik, read the holy books of Peščanik, and meet the holiest relic of Peščanik, the Blessed Chainsaw. Following such testimonies, who would dare not believe?

Smurftastic

It's been four days since the election, and Serbia still doesn't have a government. Last time around, it took four months. Of course, last time it was hard to imagine that DSS would even think of an alliance with the Radicals (and now that's pretty much assumed), while anyone even thinking of a possible coalition between the DS and the Socialists would have been locked up in an insane asylum. Yet now you have the Imperial propaganda machine straining to promote the very people they've demonized for years as genocidal nationalist architects of Balkans bloodshed... It's actually kind of funny, if in a twisted way.

In light of President Tadić's statement that he "won't allow" a government "against the wishes of the people," I can only recall something I wrote last May, when it was Tadić and his Democrats that trampled all over that will (and the Radicals had parliamentary plurality):

Nikolić's election was protested by EU commissars. A scheduled delegation from Brussels canceled its visit. The world media (otherwise known for their fair and impartial coverage of Serbs, right?) are spreading panic about Nikolić being an ”ultra-nationalist” etc. President Tadić, head of the Democratic Party, said Nikolić's election was ”harmful to state interests” and a ”democratic Serbia.” Or was that a Democratic Serbia?

Tadić's party has been negotiating (or not) for months with the old PM Koštunica about a new government, without results. They claim they got the most votes, so they can dictate the make-up of the government. One teeny little problem with that argument is that the Radicals actually got the most votes. But that's an inconvenient truth, and thus overlooked in "democratic" discussion. Because, you see, only the "democratic bloc" can act democratically and build democracy in a democratic state... At which point I'm getting flashbacks to an 1980s cartoon where every Smurf smurfs smurfingly the entire smurfing day!

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose, then. Seems like Tadić and his foreign sponsors believe they are the only ones that get to decide who and what is "democratic," regardless of how people vote or what they actually think. Holding people in contempt has never been a winning strategy in the long run. I wonder if they know that.

A Math Lesson

Official results of the Serbian elections haven't been released yet, but the EUphoric Democrats are already claiming total victory. Everyone's got a right to an opinion, of course - but not to their own facts.

Well, what about the facts? According to CESID, a pro-Western election monitoring NGO, the May 11 election results are as follows:

Democratic Party/G17 : 103 seats
Serbian Radical Party (SRS): 77 seats
Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS)/NS: 30 seats
Socialist Party of Serbia/PUPS: 20 seats
Liberal Democratic Party (LDP): 13 seats
SDA: (Muslim parties) 4 seats
MK (Hungarian parties): 2 seats
KAL (Presevo valley Albanians): 1 seat
Total seats in the parliament: 250

If I understand correctly, it takes 126 mandates to swear in a cabinet. Let's assume the Democrats will get the LDP on board, as well as the Hungarians, Muslims and Albanians. That's still only 123 mandates.

But if the Radicals, Socialists and the DSS make a deal... they have 127 mandates right there. A majority. A government.

Oh, I suppose it is theoretically possible for the Democrats to court the Socialists, but wait - aren't the Socialists the "hardline ultra-nationalists," the party of "the late dictator Slobodan Milosevic"? Hard to imagine the self-proclaimed postmodern democratic reformers whose wellspring of legitimacy is the coup against Milosevic in October 2000 actually contemplating any sort of cooperation with them. Anyone who can see the Socialists in the same government as LDP has got to be on some powerful hallucinogens.

Now, anything is possible, in theory. But in practice, the only way the Democrats will have won this election is if they can somehow defeat the math that says they do not have a majority to form a government.

A New Kind of War

Gary Brecher, the eXile's resident War Nerd, writes in TakiMag:

To succeed in the post-1918 world, the world Woodrow Wilson dreamed up where “small nations” have rights even if they can’t defend them, you need to use slower, less obviously military methods, like birthrate and immigration.

The classic example of this kind of slow conquest is Kosovo. The Serbs could always defeat the Albanians on the battlefield, even when outnumbered, but the Albanians had a huge advantage in the most important military production of all—babies. According to the BBC, the birthrate of Kosovo Albanians 50 years ago was an amazing 8.5 children per woman.

The Serb/Albanian conflict offers damn near perfect lab conditions to prove my case that birth rate trumps military prowess these days, because the Serbs always beat the Albanians in battle, yet they’ve lost their homeland, Kosovo. Here again, we can blame Woodrow Wilson and his talk about “rights.” In places where tribes hate each other, a tribe that outbreeds its rival will become the majority, even if it can’t fight. So, after generations of skulking at home making babies, letting the Serbs do the fighting, the Albanians finally became the majority in Kosovo and therefore the official “good guys,” being oppressed by the official “bad guys,” the Serbs. At least that’s the way the naïve American Wilsonian types like Clinton saw it. So when the Serbs fought back against an Albanian rebellion in Kosovo, and dared to beat the Albanians, Clinton decided to bomb the Serbs into letting go of Kosovo, the ancient heartland of a Christian nation that had spent its blood holding off the Turks for hundreds of years.

Now, what helped the Albanians in this endeavor were two things. First, after 1945, Serbs had little or no authority in Kosovo (or Serbia, for that matter), so they could do little to stop this. Secondly, Tito's regime plowed massive resources - plundered from all over Yugoslavia - into the Albanian-dominated province, building schools, hospitals, factories, apartment blocks and other benefits of civilization. One notable thing is that the Albanian birth rate did not drop with urbanization - quite the contrary, it rose thanks to better medical care.

This is precisely what KFOR commander de Marhnac spoke of last November: Albanians not only outnumber the Serbs, they also out-breed them by orders of magnitude. And if the Serbs dare procreate, there's ways of fixing that.

Kosovo is not just a case study of successful (for the time being, anyway) demographic warfare. It is also a case study in how not to oppose it. A military response, even a successful one, can be used as a pretext for an actual invasion (i.e. the 1999 NATO bombing/occupation). It is inhumane by definition, and opens one up to charges of "genocide," whether deservedly or not. The only way to resist this sort of takeover is prevention. This means not just tighter immigration controls - though there is good sense in not letting just about anyone in, let alone people who wish you ill - but tackling the core vulnerability that demographic warfare has been designed to exploit: the welfare state.

Without a way to saddle someone else - preferably the host society - with the expense of delivering, feeding, educating and employing all those "weaponized" babies, any project of demographic conquest is effectively stillborn.

Flags and Advertising

Balkans politicians talk a lot about "branding" their pocket-countries. Maybe they should take a look at what that would look like, using the example of flag design.

Hilarious. Or is it?

(hat tip: Vox Day)

Back in the Saddle

I'm back from overseas, and trying to catch up; before regular posts resume, I'll try and answer some questions posed in my absence.

lassejohansson wants to know:

As a libertarian, what is your view of the radical party in Serbia? They seem to have wind in their sails right now. Do you think this is good for Serbia? And if they win, what will it mean for Kosovo? Finally, what do you think it will mean for the cooperation between Serbia and Russia?

I've written about my mixed feelings concerning the Radicals before. I still think their greatest shortcoming is that they essentially subscribe to the same exact model of governance as the demoncrats and Jacobins. Yes, patriotism is and should be a major issue, but one can't neglect the importance of putting food on the table, either. Look, economics ain't hard; less taxation means more capital for investments, more profit, higher wages and better living. A gargantuan bureaucracy regulating every aspect of life, from the price of rapsberries to banking, is going to require confiscatory taxation even if none of its employees were corrupt in any way. The solution is clear - but the Radicals and Kostunica are yet to grasp it. Surely I'm not the only one pointing this out... am I?

This doesn't mean any sort of "wild capitalism" or "neoliberalism" or what have you; it merely means that the government has become so obsessed with plunder, it's abandoned its ostensible main reason for existence: protection.

Now, the Radicals are Russophiles, while the demoncrats are EUrophiles, so it's to be expected that a Radical government would have better relations with Moscow. There's lessons to be learned from Russia. In 1998 it was a wasteland, ruled by a corrupt puppet of the Empire and lorded over by oligarchs and organized crime. In just a decade, it's turned itself around almost completely, just because the government was business-friendly and cracked down hard on both oligarchs and criminals. For all that the West is criticizing Putin, he has neither sent tanks to bomb the parliament (like Yeltsin) or invaded anyone (like Bush the Lesser).

What any of this may mean for Kosovo, it's hard to tell. The Empire seems convinced that the Serbs will roll over and give up, accepting the Albanian usurpers. I don't think that's going to happen, well, ever. Still, it would not hurt the Serbs to make that known rather explicitly. Just so there's no misunderstanding.

Speaking of which, eudaemonism has a good question:

I'm doing some background research on the term "Merciful Angel" as metaphor for NATO's 1999 Operation Allied Force, and wondered if you could help me identify the origin - if not specific originator - of the term.

Honestly, I have no idea. It's always been clear to me that NATO's 1999 attack was named "Allied Force" - they weren't even pretending to have humanitarian motives, it was just naked aggression, pure and simple. Judging by how widespread the misconception about the operation's name being "Merciful Angel" is in Serbia, I'd hazard a guess it originated from the Serbian television at some point. I know that's not very helpful, but that's the best I've got.

Ok, now back to catching up with emails and news; My latest column about the Balkans contains most of my observations from Bosnia. I'll post some more thoughts later.

On the Road Again

I'm in Europe for the next two weeks, doing some research and getting some (in my opinion) well-deserved R&R. I may post some observations while traveling, but then again, I might not. Reliable broadband 'net access is still a pipe dream in some places. We'll see.

Meanwhile, chew on the notion that Europeans tend to look at Americans with a mixture of pity , sympathy, condescension and smugness. Sure, the EUSSR is destroying itself from within as well - but that self-implosion is far less obvious than the teetering dollar, the Iraq fiasco, and the circus that is the presidential election.