"I ACCUSE" (Emile Zola)
or: An Imaginary Speech

By William Markiewicz

Ladies and Gentlemen

We are all witnesses as a small people is robbed of its ancestral land so that two states that never existed before could be created. Muslim and Croatian city dwellers suddenly found themselves with a huge gift that literally fell from the sky with the "peacemakers'" bombs: Serbian land cleaned of Serbs. It is true that if the Nazis had won the war they wouldn't have had to wait fifty years for this gift. How can one open the eyes of the hypnotized world so that they can see the unspeakable crime being performed; a whole people left with only a choice between death and oppression. A small nation called "evil" is being exposed like a solitary bull in the Spanish Corrida - not even to the bravery of a toreador but to an overwhelming power of self-appointed "justiciers." Meanwhile the world wide mob cheers.

The majority of you are professional people who know that in your respective fields you can't form an opinion nor take a decision without exhaustive knowledge of the problem. How, then, have you so easily formed an opinion on a matter where you don't have the slightest familiarity -- the situation in the Balkans?

Yes, you are totally dependent on the media; we all are. But it also means that whoever handles the media rules over the collective mind. The provider of information can become the news creator and the consumer will never know the difference. In our epoch of marketing, only those who know how to get good coverage -- whether for toothpaste or war -- can be sure of success. So information becomes a game of mind and money.

For the less ambitious, to be a reporter on the Balkan situation was the easiest journalistic job in the world; it was enough to stay home and write something anti-Serbian. You could be sure to be accepted and paid for your 'work.' And even if you had to inconvenience yourself and go to Sarajevo to write "from the field" you didn't have to work too hard there either -- the Bosnian Muslim news agency would do the big job for you. I have never seen such a mixture of cynicism, filth, and gullibility at work.

You don't have to be a journalist to be dubious. You can be a politician. I saw the fellow who ordered the Serbs bombed, and thus changed the course of the war, on a TV interview and I remember how he talked to the interviewer: "I have one answer for the Serbs. A Russian answer, and they know Russian. Nyet. N-y-e-t," he smiled as he spelled it out. He looked like a Mephistopheles. I couldn't believe it - was this a peacemaker? I wouldn't buy a used car from him. Shortly after he ordered the bombing he was called to Brussels, accused of major corruption there. For the sake of their credibility the UN accepted his resignation. With their bombers their missiles, and unlimited public support, do they still need to worry about "credibility"?

And why were the UN spokesmen always so anti-Serb in their comments? They must have known that they were forming public opinion, a no-no for 'mediators.'

The sobriquet of atrocity may stick forever to the Serbs like "scalping" does to the North American Indians. And nobody remembers that it was the Whites who started the scalping. The Indians learned about horseriding, scalping, guns, and alcohol from the Whites. The Serbs often took cruel revenge on those who were first to be cruel on a much bigger scale and who now successfully depict themselves as "victims."

While negotiating with the Serbs you can arrest them as suspected war criminals. Any dirty trick can be committed against the Serbs, while, very conveniently, the list of Croatian war crimes suspects has been "stolen." As in a chess game, the Serbs are driven to their mate.

I have always been in favour of United Nations arbitration on the world scale, an international court, and an international Strike Force. Now I see I was naive; the UN is but one more "Central Committee" or Mafia where any unscrupulous group or individual can play private games at the expense of the weaker. Some global arbitration is probably the world's only choice, but the way things are now those politicians who go hand in hand with public opinion manipulators will always be on the side of the richer. In this situation we may know who will win wars and public sympathy before the conflicts even start.

A little bit of history, or what happens when you rape history:

Serbs were the first inhabitants not only of today's Serbia, but Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia. Macedonia, whose name is contested today by the Greeks, was previously called "Old Serbia." Krajina not only was never dominated by the Croats, but wasn't even inhabited by the Croats. Three hundred years ago, the Hapsburgs invited the Serbs to settle in this no-man's land to defend the empire's eastern frontier from the Turks. The Serbs came and did the job. Now that nobody needs them anymore they have been mercilessly expelled and the whole region declared Croatian. Between the "peacekeepers'" bombs and the Croatian superpower created from scratch by the "peacekeepers" the Serbs had no way to defend themselves.

In 1995 the first Croatian state in history was born. The Nazi Croatian state didn't even have a semblance of independence because, as only historians remember, the Germans gave Croatia as a "Protectorate" to Italy. Today's Croatia is the only ethnic-cleansed state dominated by a right wing party headed by a former Communist, today's Revisionist. Nobody seems to notice. In Bosnia-Hercegovina the Allies progressively are achieving an ethnically cleansed Mujahadeen country.

This is not an argument against Croatian or Muslim independence; nobody should be obliged to live under the power of another. But was it necessary to rob the Serb peasants of their land and create the biggest flood of refugees in the history of the Balkans -- the Serb refugees? How can you transform ancestral peasants into lumpenproletariat and where should they go? Serbia has no responsibility for those Serbs whose ancestors were never there and Serbia is already dangerously overloaded with refugees.

If the Serbs are so bloodthirsty why did thousands of Muslim and Croat refugees choose Serbia? Why didn't the Serbs didn't take revenge on the Muslims after the First World War, and on the Muslims and Croats after the Second World War? Nobody cares; it's more flamboyant to shout "death to Serbs!" than to ask logical questions with obvious answers at the end of them.

A footnote or one more feather in the victors' hat: Muslim terrorists who fabricated explosives hidden in children's toys were arrested -- and released. The Bosnian Serb officers, on their way to negotiate, were arrested as suspected war criminals and, guilty or not, they have to remain under arrest as potential witnesses. So, terrorists on the "good" side are released and witnesses on the "bad" side are arrested. The liberated terrorists will be able to pass on a good lesson to their children: it's not important what you do but who you are and who your friends are. 


Back to the index of the Vagabond
© Copyright 1996 E-mail to: William Markiewicz
Brought to you with the help of: PD