Posted on 06/25/2008 7:19:23 PM PDT by Bokababe
The topic of the thread is Galbraith's flip flop in Hague testimony, not Thompson.
That Thompson is a neo-Ustasha hate band?
No it isn't.
That fascism is still alive and well in Croatia and the diaspora, even though they try to hide the "hate the Jews" message while still glorifying those who slaughtered thousands of Jews along with Serb Christians 60 years ago? (But every once in a while it still bleeds through because someone in the Croat diaspora didn't get the PR memo?)
There are no fascist parties in the Croatian Parliament nor does Thompson glorify NDH.
How is it "Christian" for me to defend a hateful ideology that calls for the murder of Serbs and Jews? That isn't "Christian", it's "anti-Christian"!
I'm not defending NDH nor is Thompson.
If you think that "Thompson isn't at fault and isn't fascist", then you have one place to look for assignment of blame -- those Croats, both in Croatia in the diaspora, who have produced tons of Thompson memorabilia with WWII Ustashe symbolism on it. Thompson apologists are fools, because it doesn't matter what Perkovic says or does, he just keeps raking in the cash off of them while he poisons a new generation of neo-Nazis that could have had a shot at a decent Christian life!
If you actually took the time to research Thompson's lyrics, you'd notice that they revolve around three themes: love of country, love of family, and love of God. His lyrics have nothing to do with NDH, nor the Ustasha.
Once again you've been corrected. I'm quite positive now that you'll ignore the corrections and repeat the same lies in the future.
I'd have more respect for him if he had a swastika tattooed on his forehead.
Tudjman and Milosevich were cut from the same scum bag cloth. Tudjman snuck the old Ustashe assholes under his covers in the middle of the night, and Milosevich had Arkan and a bunch of other paramilitary war criminal bag lickers under his. They were both filth.
as usual, you engage in outright lies as many Serbs do.
You're getting better. At least you didn't call us ALL liars this time.
Except, of course, when he jailed them in 1991 for attempting to overthrow the regime. See: Paraga, Paradzik, and the pre-Djapic HSP party.
"I've already corrected you on this matter. The quote is taken out of context. He made that statement because he said that he was neither a fascist nor a communist. It had nothing to do with race. Ante Pavelic's wife was from a Jewish family and Tito's wife was a Serb."
Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds, Dio? Your explanation for Tudjman is just too pathetic even argue with. I ignored it the way that a polite person ignores someone else's fart.
As for your "corrections", they'd hold some weight if there was something to back them up, but as always, anything new that comes up you just have some new lame way to explain it away that defies the facts.
I do think that you are in part correct about Tudjman getting and retaining power, but I also think that Tudjman was a racist to the bone -- and Galbraith does confirm that.
If you can't handle the truth, it's too bad for you. Have you ever bothered researching the actual context in which this comment was made? Of course you didn't, which is why you view the comment as racist.
Did you even know that Tudjman's own son-in-law, Dejan Kosutic, is a Serb?
Galbraith also claimed that the Serbs cleansed themselves.
Why has he (Galbraith) changed his mind now? Simple: because there is no threat from The Hague to Americans thx to American supplying of weapons and MPRI (for Operation Storm)...so Galbraith helped the prosecution then and is helping the prosecution now. In the end, the NWO types win."
(Notes in parentheses are mine)
Galbraith admitted that the US knew about Operation Storm beforehand. If Galbraith admitted that Operation Storm was "ethnic cleansing", then that would put the US in the same position as Serbia was with Srebrenica -- "not guilty of doing it, but guilty of failing to prevent it". They would not allow Galbraith to go that far.:
"Galbraith, who testified on Monday in the presence of a U.S. government representative, said that he and other American officials had information months before Operation Storm that there would be a military attack on the Serb Krajina."
Someone was there monitoring what Galbraith said and was prepared to take him out of there if he said more than what was agreed to.
The good thing here with Galbraith’s testimony (and the hilarious testimony of the disgraced Canadian officer) is that Gotovina’s attorney believes that the prosecution’s case against him has completely evaporated. Misetic stated today that Galbraith couldn’t have been a better witness for the defense even though he was a witness for the prosecution!
...and another positive from Galbraith is that he stated that the shelling of Knin was nowhere as bad as the Serb shelling of Vukovar and Dubrovnik.
And that would be the bad thing, not "the good thing".
You want to see Gotovina jailed even though he’s innocent of the charges against him? Wow.
Yeah, sure. I love to see "innocent people" go to jail. Don't be stupid, Dio.
Then you’ll be in favour of seeing Gotovina released when he is rightfully acquitted.
You're question is not so much about fact but rather put forth for effect.
Simply put, I could pose similar questions in the same context related to the behavior of many other countries.
Because the acquittal of the War Criminal Gotovina will never be right.
He always goes for the melodrama, it’s the usual dog and pony show.
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.