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]
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