YUGOSLAVIA: FASCIST PROPAGANDA IN AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES TODAY

I personally took great exception to this unbridled racism since I lost 17 of my relatives during the Holocaust who were burned to death in a Serbian Orthodox church in the village of Vojnic in 1942 by Croatians and their Nazi Catholic priests. I lost the last 5 relatives of my name during Operation Storm in August of 1995 when 200,000 Serbs were "ethnically cleansed" from Croatia. My relatives were too old and too sick to flee. They were found a month later with their throats slit.

INTRODUCTION BY RODNEY ATKINSON We reproduce here a letter written by the distinguished Serb author and academic William Dorich to the Director of the Hoover Institution in California, complaining about the publication of pro Albanian and virulently anti Serb propaganda in their "Policy Review". Dorich is right in seeing this and other examples at eg Stanford University as proof of a re-writing of European history in US academic life which is favourable to those sundry fascist powers whom the USA helped to defeat in 1945.

The Hoover has had a high reputation for political economic and foreign policy research, based on its past ability to attract distinguished retired academics, among whom was the Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman. I knew the late Milton Friedman who praised some of my work and I know (having expressed his worries to me after reading my book Fascist Europe Rising) that he would not have accepted the use of a Hoover Policy Review by Albanian propagandists.

In the early 1990s the Clinton White House - like the French Government - remembered the role of Serbs in the defeat of fascism during the Second World War and the role of Croatian Catholicism and Albanian and Bosnian Muslims in their collaboration with Nazism and Italian Fascism. But the Roman Catholic Madeleine Albright and the kind of personnel in the US Foreign Policy Establishment who provided safe havens for "former" Nazis and Fascists from the Axis powers after the war (plus the perennial Catholic corporatist influence of Boston Democrats who see Croatia as the "Jewel in the Crown" of the Vatican) managed to "turn" the US Government (strongly lobbied by Germany) against the Yugoslav Government.

As a result the US, German and British Governments went to war against Yugoslavia ostensibly to prevent ethnic cleansing and the rise of ethnically and religiously pure states only to see their allies in that war - Kosovo Albanians , Croatia and Bosnia drive out a million Serbs and establish just such statelets, politically and ethnically turning the clock back to Fascist Europe of the 1940s.

We are pleased to reproduce William Dorich's letter to The Hoover Institution. No other author whom we have published on this website has had such a cruel family history at the hands of German Nazism and Croatian fascism as William Dorich. He lost 17 of his relatives during the Holocaust who were burned to death in a Serbian Orthodox church in the village of Vojnic in 1942 - by Croatians and their Nazi Catholic priests. He lost the last 5 relatives of his name during Operation Storm in August of 1995 when 200,000 Serbs were "ethnically cleansed" from Croatia - as NATO troops looked on. His relatives were too old and too sick to flee and were found a month later with their throats slit.

Dear Mr. Rasian: I write in response to The End of Balkan History by Fatos Tarifa and Peter Lucas featured in the Policy Review of the Hoover Institution - an astonishing attempt to rewrite Balkan history by two Albanians which should have no place in an institution of higher education. But this comes as no surprise as Hoover and Stanford have demonstrated an ugly and biased assault on the Serbian people for many years.

During the Bosnian Civil War when hundreds of Bosnian Forums were organized on university campuses across the country, Serbs were always denied participation. At such a forum at Stanford, Provost Condolleesa Rice, was contacted by this writer to offer my participation in the forum along with a number of prominent Serbian scholars including Dr. Alex Dragnich, recipient of the Thomas Jefferson Award for Outstanding Scholarship at Vanderbilt University, and author of ten books on Balkan history and politics.

Ms. Rice ignored our telephone calls and correspondence. Instead, she made the opening statements for this student-sponsored Bosnian Forum in which Serbs were denied a right to participate.

At a Stanford University dinner party in 1992, the former president of the Hoover Institute Glenn Campbell (died 2001) said publicly: "All Serbs are Nazis…….It was too bad if the Croats killed the Jews, but they should have exterminated the Serbs, so that they would have no trouble with them today".

The Hoover Institution never made a public apology to the Serbian community for this immoral and outrageous outburst. I personally took great exception to this unbridled racism since I lost 17 of my relatives during the Holocaust who were burned to death in a Serbian Orthodox church in the village of Vojnic in 1942 by Croatians and their Nazi Catholic priests. I lost the last 5 relatives of my name during Operation Storm in August of 1995 when 200,000 Serbs were "ethnically cleansed" from Croatia. My relatives were too old and too sick to flee. They were found a month later with their throats slit. The insults, bigotry, slander and lies leveled at the Serbian people in this country - and which led to US support of that war and those massacres were led by morons from your institution.

Serbs came to this country before the turn of the century settled in the gold country of California where they built the first Serbian Orthodox Church 1896 (a church still in use) and have built a dozen churches throughout California since. The first woman (a Serb) elected to the California State Legislature, Roseanne Vuich, was from Fresno, California - a freeway is named in her memory. The Balkan Chair at your teaching institute is sponsored by the Rados Family of Southern California who have contributed handsomely to Stanford for decades. And yet Serbs have been so vilified with collective guilt that the Hoover Institution reveals that no level of conscience or restraint is necessary in attacking us. The editor of this diatribe should be fired for the contempt shown for Balkan history and for the eagerness with which this publication allow Albanians to rewrite history.

We now know that Operation Storm was aided and abetted by U.S. intelligence with cover from the US Airforce who turned off the radar system to allow Croatia to violate the "No-Fly Zone". The Croats bombed and strafed fleeing Serbs, a war crime by every definition.

Operation Storm was led by Agim Ceku, a convicted Albanian war criminal who massacred Serbs in Croatia in 1992 and 1995 and went on to massacre entire Serbian villages in Kosovo. (This is well documented by the Dutch whose troops were on the ground and by Canadians like General MacKenzie who commanded UN troops in the area).

How immoral that the Hoover Institute now pays tribute to Ceku, a convicted criminal who anointed himself Prime Minister over Kosovo before any statehood had been internationally considered or granted.

During the Holocaust Nazi Croatians, Bosnian Muslims and Albanian Nazis helped to liquidate over 1.2 million Serbs, Jews and Gypsies in Yugoslavia. Many of the war criminals responsible for these unspeakable crimes were brought into the United States through a secret project called Bloodstone. Thousands of these war criminals were on the payroll of the CIA. Bloodstone became more than an umbrella organization that converted Nazi criminals into U.S. agents for sabotage and assassination operations in exchange for U.S. citizenship. One of the ring leaders of this ugly policy was none other than Evron Kirkpatrick, the late Ambassador's husband.

These efforts were directed by Robert Lovett, who later became the Secretary of Defense and Frank Wisner, who headed the lobby effort for Bloodstone within the National Security Council. Wisner's memos to the Department of State, PPS 22/1, March 4, 1948, March 17, 1948, and May 26, 1948, are registered documents marked "secret" and clearly indicate Wisner's activities.

Further evidence and documents indicate that in the original group of emigres some 250 such experts were brought to the United States, 100 of them to work for the Department of State, primarily at Charles Thayer's Voice of America, while the remaining were disbursed in the armed forces.

In one original Bloodstone document it reads: "Unvouchered funds in the amount of $5,000,000.00 should be made available by Congress for the fiscal year 1949 to a component of the National Military Establishment. Upon receipt, the component should immediately transfer [the] funds to the Department of State... (which) should be responsible for the secret disbursement of these funds in view of the fact that the problem is essentially one of a political nature... as to conceal the fact that their source is the U.S. Government." This proposal was approved on June 10, 1949 by SANACC, which stands for "State Army, Navy, Air Force Coordinating Committee." This initiative was originally promoted by George Kennan (a post war apologist for and a promoter of "German civilisation" helped to end the Denazification programme) and Franklin Lindsay.

Franklin Lindsay served during the war as OSS Liaison to Tito's guerrillas in Yugoslavia. He later became the chief of the Office for Policy Coordination in charge of behind-the-lines guerrilla actions in Eastern Europe between 1949-51. In 1968 President Nixon named Lindsay head of a secret task force on CIA reorganization. Lindsay published a book entitled Beacons in the Night, his recollections of the time spent with Tito's forces. The book was published by Stanford University Press, an institution in which many of these war criminals were warmly welcomed.

In the list of Bloodstone's top officials you will find individuals who engineered U.S. cold war strategy for every administration from 1945 to 1963. That list included three U.S. ambassadors to Moscow; George Kennan, Charles Bohlen, and Llewellyn Thompson, a director of the Voice of America, Charles Thayer, a director of Radio Free Europe, Howland Sargeant and two directors of the State Department Intelligence section specializing in East Block affairs, W. Park Armstrong and Evron Kirkpatrick.

Kirkpatrick mentioned Nikolai N. Poppe in particular as one of the scholars he was most proud to assist in placing in the CIA. Poppe was the Soviets head of intelligence for the whole of Asiatic USSR before he came to the U.S. and had supposedly defected directly from the USSR to the U.S. However, Evron's version of this story WAS A LIE. Poppe had been one of the Nazis senior intelligence analysts and had spent considerable time working for the Germans in Berlin before striking a deal with Kirkpatrick and Bloodstone. Bloodstone's ability to circumvent U.S. immigration law existed for a good reason. Coming through legal channels the majority of these Nazi war criminals and collaborators would have been denied entry into the United States.

While Poppe was an intelligence expert and Hilger a high-ranking diplomat, a large number of Bloodstone recruits were from pro-Axis emigre organizations. At least six high-ranking Albanian emigres had backgrounds as leading Nazi collaborators. Midhat Frasheri was the head of the Albanian Nazi collaborationist organization, Balli Kombetar.

Stanford University's Marc Truitt, in his doctoral thesis, disclosed the relationship of Albanians and the CIA. Some of these individuals included Xhafer Deva, minister of the interior of the Italian Fascist occupation regime in Albania, Hasen Dosti, minister of Justice in the pro-Fascist government, and Mustafa Merlika-Kruja, the Albanian premier from 1941-43.

It was more than apparent the Kirkpatricks did not discriminate about the company they kept. Once inside the United States, Deva, Dosti, and Frasheri, along with several others, established the National Committee for a Free Albania, which was substantially financed by the CIA with funds laundered through Radio Free Europe.

What is shocking about the two writers of this ugly assault on the Serbs is the skill with which they rewrite history with impunity and how it seems to have the blessing of the Hoover Institute.

When Albania was formed as a country after the First World War, and The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was formed in 1918, Albanians represented less than 5% of what became Yugoslavia. Now Americans are being told that the 1,500 Serbian churches built in Kosovo since the 12th century were Albanian Catholic churches, seized by the Serbs and converted into Orthodox churches.

After 9/11, and over a four-year trial at The Hague disproving "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" of Albanians in Kosovo (something the murdered reporter Daniel Pearl uncovered as early as 1999 - see Wall Street Journal 31. December 1999), the Albanian lobby has managed to align American interests with the al Qaeda-trained Kosovo Liberation Army, well known as a terrorist organization. Americans are being spoon fed into believing these Albanians are interested in ethnic harmony, multi-culturalism and democratic principles.

Albanians have displayed their real feeling about independence this past weekend in violence in Kosovo that left two dead and dozens injured. In March, 2004 in 4 days of this same brand of mob violence these same Albanians destroyed 43 ancient Serbian churches, some listed by UNICEF as World Treasures, they razed 500 Serbian homes and murdered 14 innocent Serb victims. Their own Albanian web site showed a map of the region that not only included Kosovo, but parts of Montenegro, Macedonia and northern Greece.

Is the Hoover Institution really this naive to not face the fact that Albanian ambitions point directly to a Greater Albania? The comment "Nobody wants to cohabit with Belgrade," is disgusting and insulting considering the Serbs were the majority of Kosovo for a thousand years until the Holocaust when over 10,000 Serbs were liquidated and more than 150,000 were ethnically cleansed from Kosovo. (And considering that Albanians were in the Milosevic Government! )

Tito forbade their return, giving Serbian land to Nazi collaborators. When Tito granted "autonomy" to Albanians in 1974 without a single vote of the Serbian people, Albanians began their assault on the remaining Serbs by banning the use of the Serbian language.

The Albanian authorities removed over 2 million books on Serbian religion, history and music from Kosovo schools and libraries and burned them. From 1974 to 1989 more than 125,000 Serbs were forced from Kosovo by the rape of Serbian nuns and Serbian girls which your writers cleverly ignore.

In 1989 a gang of teenage goons and thugs nearly beat to death the 79-year-old Serbian bishop of Kosovo. They led animals into his church to defecate on the altar and they urninated on the walls where they scribbled obscenities over the 12th century frescoes. Today that bishop is the Patriarch of the Serbian church. In spire of the fact that he spent three months in intensive care from this beating he refused to press charges.

As a person involved in higher education I end with the final example of the level to which Albanians stoop in their hatred of the Serbs. (although their murders do not stop at Serbs, Jews and gyspsies being equally unacceptable to them) Not only have Albanians destroyed 150 Serbian churches in the past six years but their behavior under "autonomy" speaks volumes about what they will do to achieve their goals of an ethnically pure state.

And let us not ignore the fact that 40% of the Albanians in Kosovo are illegal aliens who crossed the border from Albania into Kosovo as easily as Mexicans cross our border each night in San Diego.

In the 1970s, Albanologists spread rumors that they were on the verge of finding archeological evidence that the Albanians were direct descendants of Illyrians. Millions of dollars came in from Tirana, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. But, no such evidence was found. During the construction of the dam on the Fierza River project, which flooded parts of Metohija, in the archeological remnants were discovered remains of flooded Vrbnica. The Kosovo Albanian "experts" were ready to believe it a godsend that they had finally found their traces of an Illyrian settlement. The money came pouring in for additional research.

Meanwhile, the discovery turned out to be remnants of Slav culture and suddenly all financial assistance was discontinued and the project was abandoned. Albanian authorities in control and people like Professor Ismajli of Pristina University who did not believe the Serbs deserved enlightenment of these discoveries made sure the site was sunk in the newly created lake.

I would think that Stanford University and the Hoover Institute would be appalled at such anti-intellectual behavior but apparently there is no depth to which you will not stoop to further demonize the Serbs who were our allies in two World Wars as you defend Albanians, the majority of whom were Nazi collaborators and would not know a democratic principle if it smacked them in the face.

Striving for an ethnically pure Albanian Kosovo state in the heart of Europe is repugnant especially when a major American teaching institution provides the means to achieve such a goal through unbridled propaganda and hate speech.

Shame on you Mr. Rasian and shame on the Hoover Institution. William Dorich Los Angeles, CA 90024

The writer is the author of 5 books on Balkan history including the 1992 book, Kosovo, co-written with Dr. Thomas Emmert; Right Rev. Bishop Atanasije Jevtic; Dr. Alex Dragnich; V. Rev. Mateja Matejic; Archimandrite Dositei Obradovich; Dimitrije Djordjevic and Slavko Todorovich.

William Dorich is the recipient of The Order of St. Sava, the highest recognition given to a lay person by the Holy Synod of Serbian Orthodox Bishops and an Award of Merit from the Serbian Bar Association of America.

http://justwhatithink.com/blog/index.php?y=2006&m=10&d=3

On March 11th, the House approved a non-binding resolution endorsing the use of American troops to enforce a peace agreement between the Yugoslav regime of Slobodan Milosevic and secessionist leaders in Yugoslavia's Kosovo province. On March 23rd just hours before Solana issued the order to begin the bombing, the Senate approved a resolution supporting the military campaign. But Clinton Administration officials, including the President, had by that time made it
clear that while they sought *approval* of the military action from
Congress, they did not consider it necessary for Congress to *authorize* the military strike on Yugoslavia.

A few senators seemed to understand the constitutional implications of these actions.

Senator Don Nickles (R-OK) pointed out, "If we start a massive bombing campaign, we're going to war."

Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) described the prospect of waging an undeclared aggressive war upon Yugoslavia as "a precedent I don't want to be involved in."

Even more pointed were the comments of Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM). "I say shame on the President," declared Domenici, momentarily forgetting that Bill Clinton has repeatedly demonstrated that he is incapable of shame. "If this is such an important matter, why couldn't [the President] trust the United States Senate and United States House and ask us whether we concur?"

In order to appreciate the depth of the Administration's deception regarding the war over Kosovo, it is necessary to understand that the war was "authorized" by NATO long before the bombing began on March 24th.

The day after the war began, the *London Telegraph* reported that General Clark NATO's supreme military commander, "received his activation order for hostilities last October. The order was the official moment when authority over the forces to be used was transferred to him from the top brass of the member countries supplying them. The supreme commander *does not need new
permission* from politicians or diplomats whenever he wishes to change
tactics, or increase or scale back operations." (Emphasis added.)

At 1:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time on March 24th, with American bombers en route to Yugoslavia and just minutes before the first explosions were reported on the ground in Kosovo, White House spokesman Joe Lockhart explicitly admitted that the power to take our nation into war had been surrendered to a foreign official namely, the NATO Secretary-General.

Lockhart was asked by correspondent Helen Thomas, "Who gives the green light on this now? Is it the President himself, or the Supreme Commander of NATO...?" Lockhart replied, "The Supreme Commander of NATO acts on the authority of the political leaders of the NATO countries, and he has that authority."

In brief, the power to declare war in Kosovo was exercised by NATO
Secretary-General Solana; the power to make war was given to NATO's Supreme Commander; the President of the United States played the role of "selling" the war to the public, and Congress was tacitly told that its duty was to rubber-stamp the decision to take our nation into war, and to authorize payment of the resulting expenses.

"No power but Congress can declare war," observed Daniel Webster in 1846 "but what is the value of this constitutional provision, if the President of his own authority may make such military movements as must bring on war?"

The Administration's actions in committing our country to enforce, through military action, diplomatic initiatives in Kosovo presented Congress with a *fait accompli.* The only recourse left to Congress was to defund military deployments to which the Administration had previously committed our country but the political will for that is not evident.

Unfortunately, the majority in both houses of Congress have abdicated their responsibility and have acquiesced in the usurpation of their powers. The passivity of the House in allowing Bill Clinton to carry out an illegal war is particularly galling in light of the fact that the same body impeached him last December for much less serious crimes.

Under the Constitution, explained Alexander Hamilton, "It is the province and duty of the Executive to preserve to the Nation the blessings of peace. The Legislature alone can interrupt those blessings, by placing the Nation in a state of War."

By surrendering to a series of executive usurpations (those of Bill Clinton being the most brazen), Congress has abandoned the separation of powers and embraced in its place a version of *fuhrerprinzip* the "leader principle" in which Congress meekly endorses the decisions of an imperial "commander-in-chief."

"Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their people in wars pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was the object," wrote Abraham Lincoln in 1848.

The royal war-making prerogative which permitted one man to commit his country to war, was regarded by our Founding Fathers "to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions," Lincoln explained.

For this reason, the statesmen who gathered at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 "resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us."

James Madison's notes on the Convention record the care with which the Founders assigned the power to declare war to the legislative branch. This was done, as George Mason of Virginia noted, for the purpose of "clogging rather than facilitating war."

At the initiative of Madison and Elbridge Gerry, the original language authorizing Congress to "make" war was changed to the power to "declare" war, thereby (in Madison's words) "leaving to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks."

In an April 2, 1798 letter to Thomas Jefferson, Madison further elucidated the reasoning behind this careful assignment of powers.

"The constitution supposes, what the History of all [governments] demonstrates, that the [executive] is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly, with studied care, vested the question of war in the legislature."

Alexander Hamilton, who favored a strong Executive branch, observed in *The Federalist*, No. 69:

"The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect, his authority would *nominally* be the same with that of the king of Great Britain, *but in substance much inferior to it.*" (Emphasis added.)

Where the power of the English king "extends to the *declaring* of war and to the *raising* and *regulating* of fleets and armies," Hamilton explained, the authority of the U.S. President "amounts to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the land and naval forces, as first general and admiral" after the declaration of war has been issued by Congress.

The text of the Constitution itself (Article II, Section 2) specifies, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States...."

In other words, "Commander in Chief" describes a specific and limited role played by the President. Rather than Congress having a Commander in Chief before which it must prostrate itself, it has in the President an executive it may entrust with delegated war-making authority.

It bears repeating that in the Kosovo war, the role of commander in chief by the Administration's own admission, has been assigned to NATO's Supreme Commander, who exercises (in Hamilton's words) "the supreme command and direction of the land and naval forces" called into service by Secretary-General Solana.

Perhaps, given Mr. Clinton's own history of "loathing" for the military, personal cowardice, and bottomless corruption it is of benefit to the morale of American servicemen fighting in Yugoslavia
to know that it is General Clark who serves as their commander in chief.

Nevertheless, this arrangement gravely undermines the constitutional
mechanisms designed to protect our liberties and national sovereignty.

In my remarks to the House of Representatives during the March 11th debate I reminded my colleagues that nothing in the laws or the Constitution suggests that a determination by the United Nations Security Council or by the North Atlantic Council (NATO's governing political body) is a substitute for a congressional declaration of war. Furthermore, by making war on a sovereign nation, NATO acted in violation of both its own charter and that of the United Nations.

The North Atlantic Treaty states that NATO will "refrain in [its]
international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner
inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

The document specifies that NATO was created to defend "the territorial integrity political independence or security" of its members in exercising the right of "collective self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations."

Whatever one thinks of the actions of the Milosevic regime in suppressing a secessionist movement within its own borders, it must be admitted that the Yugoslav regime did nothing to threaten the "integrity political independence or security" of NATO members. Thus NATO's attack on that regime violated the alliance's founding treaty.

Furthermore, NATO's commitment to act in harmony with "the purposes of the United Nations" requires that the alliance be bound by the UN Charter.

Article 2, section 7 of the UN Charter states, "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state"; the suppression of Kosovo's ethnic Albanian secessionist movement is clearly within Yugoslavia's domestic jurisdiction.

Under the precedent set in the Kosovo war, America may find itself committed to military intervention in ethnic conflicts around the world. Should we attack Turkey to protect the Kurds, who chafe under Turkish rule?

Should we go to war with China in support of independence-minded Tibet?

Will U.S. planes attack Sri Lanka in defense of Tamil separatists, or bomb targets in India on behalf of Muslims in Kashmir?

The logic of the Kosovo precedent dictates that U.S. troops can be committed to war, without congressional sanction, anywhere in the world where atrocities are captured by the camera lens.

The war on Yugoslavia, we must remember, was brought about by NATO's demand that Milosevic consent to the foreign occupation of his country by an international army, which would enforce the terms of an agreement intended to grant "autonomy" to ethnic Albanian rebels. When Milosevic refused to permit the occupation, NATO threatened to bomb his country, and ultimately carried out that threat.

Once again, the Clinton Administration has been devastatingly candid about key facts.

On February 10th, in testimony before the Committee on International Relations, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering confirmed that Kosovo is part of Yugoslavia's sovereign territory, and that an attack upon Yugoslavia waged because of Milosevic's refusal to allow foreign intervention would be nothing less than an act of war.

It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation."

More remarkable still, and even more unsettling, is the fact that the beneficiary in the case of Kosovo the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) is a collection of Maoist drug-peddlers and terrorists who have been armed by Iran and provided with training and support by Saudi terrorist financier Osama bin Ladin, who is the world's most notorious sponsor of international terrorism.

When Bill Clinton, in an earlier crime against the Constitution
unilaterally launched missile strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan, he claimed that his target was the terrorist network operated by bin Ladin.

However, in Kosovo, Bill Clinton has committed America's military might to the support of bin Ladin's Balkan allies, and the policy of the Clinton Administration seeks the creation of a Balkan outpost for bin Ladin's terrorist network.

THE NEW AMERICAN was the first national publication in this country to
document the KLA's narco-terrorist background:

"Diving into the Kosovo Quagmire
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1999/03-15-99/kosovo.htm

[March 15th issue), and I made this magazine's findings available to many of my colleagues on Capitol Hill. Although few U.S. publications have looked into the KLA's role in international narco-terrorism, the *Times *of London for March 24th, in a story published just before NATO commenced airstrikes upon Yugoslavia, reported that the KLA, in "the judgment of senior police officers across Europe," is "a Marxist-led force funded by dubious sources including drug money."

Police forces in three Western European countries together with Europol, "are separately investigating growing evidence that drug money is funding the KLA's leap from obscurity to power," continued the report.

A report filed on the same day by Steve Rodan of the *World Tribune* described how an "autonomous" Kosovo under KLA control could serve as a springboard for Iranian sponsored terrorism throughout Europe and beyond.

According to Western European security experts, wrote Rodan, "Iran, Saudi Arabia and some of their terrorist beneficiaries have exploited the fighting to establish a sphere of influence that spans from Greece to the Austrian border."

NATO's willingness to go to war on behalf of Muslim ethnic Albanians in Kosovo could ignite insurrections across Europe, to which the KLA's terrorist sponsors would eagerly lend support.

"The concern of European strategists is that an Iranian sphere of influence would do greater damage to such Western countries as Britain, France and Germany," reported Rodan.

"France has about two million Muslims, most of them poor and alienated. Britain has about 1.5million." A European diplomat told Rodan, "Once these minorities feel that they can obtain the support of NATO, we could see flare-ups everywhere."

We could see "flare-ups" within our own nation as well and the Kosovo precedent would justify military intervention by the "international community" to settle such conflicts within our own borders. Consider the case of the southwestern United States, a region referred to as "Aztlan," the mythical homeland of the Aztecs, by such militant groups as the "Brown Berets."

Aztlan radicals have announced their intention to conduct *la reconquista* the re-conquest of that region through unrestrained illegal immigration, as well as subversion and violence. It is not difficult to foresee a future scenario in which the "international community" authorizes the use of military force in support of "autonomy" for Aztlan, in the same way that the war in Yugoslavia was launched in support of "autonomy" for an Albanian Muslim-dominated Kosovo.

Had Congress performed its constitutional duty, all of these facts would have been rigorously examined before our nation found itself committed to an illegal war in Yugoslavia.

We would have demanded that the President make his best case to the people's representatives in a formal request for a declaration of war. This would have given us the opportunity to require that he defend an alliance with drug-dealing Marxists bent upon promoting terrorism throughout Europe.

Had Congress been willing to exercise a check on presidential ambitions by withholding funds for the envisioned military deployment, we would have learned, in a timely fashion, about the unconstitutional arrangement through which the power to declare war was delegated to a Spanish Marxist, and the power to make war was assigned to NATO's military commander. Had we acted with statesman-like deliberation, we would have soberly discussed and contemplated the implications of the Kosovo precedent for our nation's future.

It was our duty to do all of this before deciding whether or not to interrupt "the blessings of peace by placing the Nation in a State of War."

Instead, Congress submitted to the usurpations of a corrupt, impeached President, and made itself complicit in his crimes against our Constitution and our national sovereignty.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.