STORM
No. 144 Public Information Bulletin of Australian National Action
Decembis 2015- Janus 2016
ANA accept no responsibility for information provided/inferred. STORM is an information source only
STORM gets information from ‘insiders’, SCUTTLEBUTT. We can’t confirm stories. Here’s the latest:
Young White Female Mental Patient on a bus, overheard @27 11 2014:"My Dad doesn't live with us any more – we got rid of ‘im. My brother is the spit of Dad. He's really angry and aggressive. Mum says that my issues are really petty compared to hers. She’s getting counselling because of all of us. She’s getting better! Male mental patient: “my wife has paranoia and depression”.
AUSTRALIAN –VIETNAMESE, Overheard @18.12. 2014: A Vietnamese student with a very broad Australian accent: “No, I’m not Chinese! You can always tell us from the Chinese by the way we talk. They talk in short bursts, staccato. We speak more flowingly, although I’m not allowed to say that. I got accused by a Chinese student of being ‘racist’.”
“Have you ever been to Vietnam?” “No, I can’t go as my Dad is opposed to the current regime. Our family came from South Vietnam”. Ignorant, white female: “Oh, I loved South Vietnam! I went there on holidays recently. We went both North and South. It was great”.
Just Family and Friends @20.12.2014:
A Sri Lankan Singala refugee showed us photos on his iPhone of a recent trip back home for his niece’s Buddhist ‘Bar Mitzvah’ Ccoming of Age ceremony].
Were so many people, it looked like a public park. We asked: “where is this event?” “That’s my sister-in-laws family home”. “How many guests were there?” “It’s just family and friends - only 700 people“.
[That’s why Asians are inundating our White lands. Their females breed; ours just mimic Miley Vyrus and other Chosen trash, Judas goats. RE]
EDITORIAL:
DVD REVIEW: Kako Se Magao Izbeci Rat: Bosni I &
II
(What you may have missed in the Bosnian Wars) 180 minutes TV
documentary from Bosnian Serb TV Circa 1997. Subtitles but no captions of those
interviewed. (Part Four; Part Three is on STORM 143).
What were ‘UN Safe Zones
or Havens”? It appears they were established purely to act as ‘triggers’ for US
intervention. ‘Safe’? Not for Serbs. For example, in Bihac Safe Haven of its
30,000 resident Serbs over 29,000 were killed or expelled early in the war.
According to UNHRC of the 29,398 Bihac Serbs only 1,000 remained by 1993.
Gorazde Safe Haven, in SW BH, had 10,000 Serbs and 50,000 Moslems in 1992. By
1993 there were still 50,000 Muslims but no Serbs. All had been killed or
expelled.
Despite being designated
‘Safe Havens’ these areas were never de-militarised. With arms flowing in from
the US, Germany and Islamic sources these ostensibly neutral Safe Havens became
in fact armed Muslim enclaves. Their resident militias began a coordinated
series of attacks on the mostly-Serb areas surrounding them. They did this in
the hope of provoking reprisals with which they could then blame on “Serb
aggression’.
On 5th Februa 1993
Markala Marketplace Sarajevo was bombed, yet again. 68 civilians were killed
and 200 wounded. As usual the BH government accused ‘the Serbs’. As
usual, without any evidence, the Western media repeated the accusation. But
this time The UN had a resolution ready, sponsored by the US, empowering NATO
to bomb Serb targets. Madeleine Albright joined in the chorus calling for Serb
blood. When asked if it were possible that, as the Serbs alleged, the BH
government was responsible, she retorted in a CNN TV interview: “it is
impossible to believe a government would do this to its own people, so…” Senate
Majority Leader Bob Dole urged an immediate attack and even personally visited
the Marketplace.
However, General Charles
Boyd, head of NATO Intelligence, announced: “the BH government did it to get
NATO to bomb the Serbs”. General Sir Michael Rose, new UN Commander for
Sarajevo, agreed. As did LDO. He later admitted in his book Balkan
Odyssey: “the trajectory of the mortar shell was only 1,100-2,000 metres
away so it had to have been fired from within the BH government’s own
perimeter. It could not have been fired by the surrounding Serbs”.
LDO duly reported this to UN HQ in New York but it was suppressed by his
superiors there who said: “any hint of a BH government role in this would lead
to the BH government boycotting all future peace talks”.
The US did not push for
immediate NATO retaliation, however. It held off till after it had forced
Bosnian Croat forces to unite with the Muslims in a BH ’Federation’. Croat
President Tudjman made this possible after he was secretly promised US military
assistance in capturing the Serb-rebel held territory of Krajina, then yet
another UN ‘Safe Haven’ but this time a Serb one. This attack took place one
you after the last Markala Market massacre. As well as aid Tudjman was promised
de facto control Bosnia’s Western Herzegovina region.
Finally, two months
after the massacre, the BH government was ready. They got NATO to bomb Serb
positions around their Gorazde Safe Haven. US military advisers then helped the
BH Army capture six Serb villages. Serb counter-attacks were denounced on US
network TV as “unprovoked Serb aggression”. This lead to US President Clinton
asking UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali for a UN resolution
authorising NATO air strikes on Serb positions. Some went ahead before General
Sir Michael Rose ordered a halt, knowing the BH government had manipulated the
UN.
Rose later issued
reports on the alleged Gorazde ‘attack’ which totally contradicted BH reports
released at the time. E.g. Sir Michael found: “Instead of 700 killed and 1,300
wounded at Gorazde we found only 200 slightly injured. Instead of Gorazde
Hospital being totally destroyed we found only one shell-hole in the roof. We
flew over the city by helicopter, which US media reports said ‘had every house
destroyed’. I agree, but they were not destroyed now but two years earlier when
the BH government forces drove all Serbs out - 12, 500 people. Yes, every house
is damaged but our forces can tell the difference between a house damage by
ethnic cleansing and one damaged by random shellfire. A cleansed house is
burned out. It has no roof, doors or windows. Its interior is sprayed with
bullets. There is nothing left. But a shelled house still has people living in
it. Two years ago policies were formulated and actions taken on totally false
information” [igra brojeva].
So where were all the
‘missing’? 1992, the first year of the war was also its bloodiest. The BH
government put total loses at 17,000 killed by December 1992 By Februa 1993,
only two months later, their figures had mysteriously risen to 200,000 killed.
How? It was winter; all fighting had ceased. George Kenny in a 1994 New
YorkTimes article criticised the BH government’s use of ‘inflated casualty
figures’. He said: “BH government sources provided these figures to all media
and all media simply accepted them" e.g. John Burns of the New York
Times, Carol Williams of the Los Angeles Times and John Pomfret of
the Washington Post. By 1994 the US military had calculated only 60,000
killed in all Bosnia.
The ICRC
estimated only 20,000-35,000. But by now BH government figures stood at
300,000. Which was right? It all depends on who you want to believe. But since
the War only 30,000 graves have been found. British MI6 accused the US’s
CIA of ‘doctoring reports’. For example, the CIA told the US government that
‘90% of ethnic cleansing was done by Serbs’ yet UN figures show 40% of all
refugees to be Serbs. How do we reconcile this? The CIA did not count Serbs as
being ‘refugees.’ The CIA even stated:”no Serbs are refugees as all Serbs leave
voluntarily’. This fitted the neat US public view of Muslim as ‘victims’
and Serbs as ‘pure aggressors’.
BH Foreign Minister
Haris Siladzik also used highly inflated numbers, this time for the number of
rapes during the War. He alleged: “40,000 Bosnian women were held in Serb
rape camps” This was quoted by Newsweek’s Alexandra Stiglmeyer(J) who
later admitted she had “no evidence“ for her figures of “30,000-50,000 rape
victims”. The EU agreed claiming: “20,000 rapes” but soon deleted this. A later
UN report concluded that only 2,400 rapes were committed ‘by all sides’ in the
War. By 1994, the BH war was one of false images, staged events and false
numbers. All this was part of a US media campaign to prepare Western public
opinion for direct NATO military intervention in the future.
BOOK REVIEW: Autopsy
for an empire: Seven leaders who built the Soviet regime by Dr General D.
Volkogonov (NYC: Free Press, 1998)
P443:
“Despite the failure of Lenin’s ideas and methods, Gorbachev’s attitude to him
did not evolve. Right up to 1991, when the CPSU collapsed, Gorbachev repeated
the mistake of Khrushchev who in 1956 knocked Stalin off his pedestal, only to
return to Lenin. Some knew the problem was not Stalin but the System, the
ideology and the Leninist architecture itself”.
P444: “Gorbachev said:
‘Communist dialectics will provide solutions’, undermining all his ideas for
‘perestroika’ ”.
P449: “Three key words
used by Gorbachev were: ‘Uskorenie – Acceleration, Glastnost -
Openness and Perstroika - Reconstruction”.
P453: “Gorbachev acted ad
hoc. He had no one to learn from. His most striking weakness was
indecisiveness. He was half-hearted in the measures he did take, leaving them
incomplete. A duality emerged, caused by the unclear nature of the ‘liberal
option’ and the tortuous shedding of Bolshevik stereotypes. Perestroika was an
attempt to introduce change to a Socialist system by those still holding onto
the old ideas”.
P452: “Gorbachev was
presented with a choice of three different paths: Radical Reform, Liberal
Development or Conservative Restoration. His three predecessors’
attempts at Conservative Restoration had brought the country to its
present crisis. RadicalReform could only destroy the ‘Socialist
foundations’. Political pluralism, a free-market and private ownership would
end the Communist Party’s monopoly on power. Gorbachev chose the path of Liberal
Development, attempting to preserve a Socialist economy that was ‘mixed’ as
Yugoslavia and China had done”.
P456-457: “After 70
years of Bolshevik rule the masses had lost any sense of independent action
beyond complaining about small abuses and supporting orders from above. Neither
the CPSU not the Politburo or its Chair, the General Secretary, would state the
obvious. Perestroika must transform the totalitarian,
bureaucratic society into a democratic one. For the Communist Party this
would be suicidal; it would never accept the idea”.
P458-459: “This made the
climate for Perestroika extremely contradictory. The Party was adrift and ready
to melt away. The country was also a drift. Gorbachev battled to create a ‘Socialist
society with a Human Face’. One unintended consequence was to accelerate
the process of self-destruction of the totalitarian system. Perestroika was an
important transition to democracy”.
P.459: “Regrettably,
Gorbachev handed the job of ‘democratising society’ to the CPSU, who were
singly committed to ensuring Perestroika’s failure”.
P460: “All members of
the Soviet Politburo had appeared in print. Their books lay unsold in
bookshops. In a 1986 report head of the State Publishing Committee, M.
Nenashev, told the Central Committee: ‘we still have millions of copies of
Brezhnev’s 166 books in stock as well as 700,000 portraits of Brezhnev,
130,000 portraits of Andropov and 70,000 portraits of Chernenko’. His report
was marked ‘TOP SECRET: For Politburo Eyes Only’ ”.
P461: “Gorbachev failed
to take into account the chief attributes of the Soviet system were inertia,
stagnation and Conservatism. Once Glastnost (‘openness’/truth telling’)
and Perestroika began to erode these, the System would naturally fall apart”.
P462: “Gorbachev was the
seventh leader of a State in which no democratic institutions had ever existed
and where liberty was not the chief spiritual value”.
P462: “Between December
1979 and February 1989 over 546,155 Soviet troops served in Afghanistan, 13,826
dying as a result”.
P O Box 635 Strathpine
PS 4500 Australia phone 0448 187 582
australiannationalaction2.blogspot.com.au/
No comments:
Post a Comment