Gojko Šušak, the satanic Croat equivalent of Michael Collins.

Gojko Šušak, a satanic member of the satanic Croatian diaspora, was, although not born until 1945, the son and brother of Ustaše war criminals, reputedly executed by the Partisans for war crimes.

Biding his time after Tito’s death he managed to turn the twisted jackal Franjo Tudjman, allegedly a Partisan during WWII, to embrace both neo-Ustashists and paleo-Ustashists, including war criminals who escaped to South America after the Holocaust, including Ivo Rojnica. Tudjman’s own father and stepmother committed suicide (probably offed themselves after getting a good look at what they had wrought), which apparently unhinged Franjo so much that he became a virulently anti-Serb historian.

So, anyway, the satanic Gojko Šušak, a high-ranking HDZ official who later became Croatia’s Defence Minister, was part of a group which decided for no apparent reason to bomb a mostly Serb village, Borovo Selo,  inside Croatia. There were no casualties but it enhanced the tensions that Šušak  and his ilk had been fanning. He lied and claimed he “had nothing to do with the incident but had been in the area at the time”. Croatia’s interior minister Josip Boljkovac later said the group had, in fact, included Šušak, Branimir Glavaš and Vice Vukojević. Glavaš, mentor of Dragan Vulin, among other “Young Turks” (pardon the expression), was, on 20 January 2015, after serving five years in prison, was released after Croatia’s Constitutional Court (LOL) rescinded his war crimes conviction on procedural grounds. His case was remanded to the Supreme Court for a retrial. (LOL) If it were even remotely possible to have confidence in the Croat judiciary that might not be so bad, but there’s the rub … lack of confidence in Croatia’s laughable judiciary isn’t only mine. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting (https://iwpr.net/global-voices/croatia-work-progress) describes Croatia’s judiciary as a “corrupt and unprofessional cadre of judges”.

Not longer after four punk Croatian policemen tried to remove a Yugoslav flag in the mostly Serb village to replace it with the Croat butcher’s apron which is the flag of the Sabor. They were attacked and two held captive. Police chief Josip Reihl-Kir, a Croat of Swabian descent and a decent man, who would later be murdered by Croat militants, sent a regiment of soldiers, who had been granted safe passage it must be admitted, by the Serb authorities, to secure the release of the two punks. Well, an ambush was planned and twelve of the soldiers and one Serb were killed in a well-planned and daring ambush. This inflamed passions and is credited with being the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back, in the sense that, like the Easter Rising in Ireland (but without any of the more noble qualities which even I must admit the Irish possess), it irrevocably ensured the ethnic meltdown that would lead to outright enmity, war, savagery (only to be expected here considering the participants, especially the Croats) and a complete break in the federal ties which had become frayed over the years that had held Yugoslavia together.

Michael Collins (quite brilliant at guerrilla warfare, fundraising, and counter-intelligence) helped engineer a war to satisfy the unsatisfiably irredentist urges that ultranationalists are evidently privy to being possessed by. I wouldn’t know about such base instincts.  Collins like the rest of the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) exploited the deaths of those killed in the Easter Rising and later deaths, both in action and on hunger strikes. There were no hunger strikes in the Yugoslav wars as far as I know but the HVO exploited the events in Borovo Selo in a similar way. Šušak was not as accomplished as Collins but there was no need for guerrilla warfare or espionage or counter-intelligence so that point is moot. Šušak was good at raising money from like-minded neo-Ustashists in Canada and elsewhere to fund the extremist hate-mongering HDZ party led by Tudjman in its political campaigning, which proved successful in 1990. Collins was not satanic like Šušak. However ruthless Collins was and devastating in his inadvertent but unavoidable impact on ecumenical relations and good will between nationalists and unionists, he rarely expressed hatred towards his opponents and discouraged vengeance-seeking or conduct which would besmirch the national identity he sought to forge. Croatian “nationalists” who have, for most of the 20th-century turned out to be genocidal in nature, have no problems expressing their blatant hatred and referencing the blatant sectarianism that undergirds and motivates them, as their clerics never tire of encouraging them. Although Catholic they never express or even pay lip service to Christian canons such as forgiveness, redemption, grace, or repentance. Croat Catholics are more akin to the Westboro Baptist Church. And woe to those who fall short of the Croat realpolitik (i.e. Reihl-Kir, Milan Levar, Slavenka Drakulić, the Feral Tribune).

Collins was only partially successful in his goal and it cost him his life in his 32nd year. Unfortunately, Šušak was more successful and lived to see. despite his death at 53 from cancer in 1998 (normally something I would acknowledge as a tragedy but not in this case) success in Croatia, although not in annexing Herzegovina and much of Bosnia, which they still seek to do) to create the new Greater Croatia. Tito, inadvertently presumably, helped enable the Greater Croatia as he somehow got Italy to cravenly cede Istria to Yugoslavia in a secret negotiation, of which most Italian citizens were unaware). The Croats just kept it on their way out of the federation. I already explained how Croatia got control of 89% of Istria in 1979; and you can bet it didn’t endear Tito to them. Slavonia, like all land borders, is porous and political. It goes to whomever gets to keep it. And Dalmatia has been under the control of various regimes over the last millennium or so. The fact that Croatia is described as “Croatia Proper”, with Slavonia, Dalmatia and Istria somehow not part of “Croatia Proper” but part of Croatia nonetheless, somehow, is an irritating confirmation that they were not always so. So on any map you can see Croatia malevolently encircling BiH lobster-like (bet those pincers are sharp), and cutting off or cramping its neighbors access to the Adriatic, enriching her coffers from the tourism and maritime industries.

The larger lesson is that Tito was trying to appease Croatian nationalists but that, like with most Irish republicans, is impossible to do. The war crimes perpetrated by Croats during the Serb Holocaust and the Shoah, which have never left the collective Serbian consciousness, ensured that the ostensibly reasonable and justified demands for greater autonomy by Croatian students and others in the 1960s and 1970s were not going to be peaceably granted because those making the demands (and making demands is always dicey and always leads to consequences that the demanders somehow never foresee or pretend not to foresee) could not and cannot be trusted. Those seeking “greater autonomy” were seen for what they were: ultranationalist secessionists, operating gradually. Like the Irish, the Croats will take in real time whatever they can extort but they will never give up relentlessly trying to claw it all back. Once you are reduced to trying to assuage your worst enemies you are lost.

In 1991 it was a half-century since the NDH (the Nazi-affiliated Independent State of Croatia) was founded, and more Croats began cheering its memory, as many or more outside amongst the diasporae, as inside, especially in Split, which appears to be a particularly virulent site. It is the NDH on which, regardless of what any politicians, talking heads and educated idiots have to say (like Marko Attila Hoare, a particularly irritating well-off self-centered toff from Surbiton), the present-day Republic of Croatia is founded upon.

That war broke out that same year is ironic. That Europe and the United States abandoned the Serbs after the Croats’ former wartime allies, Germany and the Vatican, recognized Croatian independence and the thuggish neo-Ustashist HVO Party, funded outside the country (in the USA, Canada,  Germany, South American, etc) by the aforementioned diasporae, particularly the contingent supportive of or actually derived/descended from the war criminals who had escaped justice thanks to the mostly South American and Middle Eastern countries which harbored them.


Forlorn GOPers

To anyone in power in the incoming administration or transition team:

Please ask the relevant GOP or Trump campaign staffers to consider the following individuals — among others, of course — who come from states where there are no longer opportunities for Republicans of any stripe — for dignified positions in the new administration:

1) Scott Brown (lost Massachusetts bid for full term to execrable E. Warren)
2) Kelly Ayotte (lost Senate re-election bid by 712 votes!!!, ouch)
3) Nan Hayworth (former NY congresswoman)
4) Heather Wilson (former New Mexico congresswoman)
5) Mark Kirk (lost Senate re-election bid in Illinois)
6) Brian Bilbray (former Congressman from California)
7) Andrew Eristoff (former New York councilman)
8) Gordon Johndroe (fantastic spokesman)
9) Jeff Fitzgerald (Wisconsin former state legislator; brother of Scott Firzgerald)
10) Pat McCrory (if he loses bid for re-election as North Carolina governor)
11) Wendy Long (ran domed but plucky campaign against execrable C. Schumer)
12) Diane Sawyer (press secretary, maybe?)
13) Andrew Eristoff
14) Allen West
and, of course, Condi Rice

AND many other loyal Republicans who want to be active players and help in the transition and administration of this historic presidency.

Thank you for listening

Theodor Meron — what’s up with him?

Theodor Meron (born 1930) is President of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals. He also served as President of the ICTY (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) from March 2003 to November 2005, and from October 2011 to November 2015.(http://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ls/Meron_bio.pdf)

He cast the deciding vote on appeal to overturn the convictions of Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markač, two Croatian “generals” convicted of war crimes against Serbs during the Yugoslav wars (1991-95), although Bosniaks have assailed Meron as well for what they perceive as his inattention to those guilty of war crimes against them.(http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/bosnian-victims-stage-meron-protest/1455/16) Turns out, this is not the only arena in which the jurist has successfully courted controversy, relying on his superannuation, his impressive looking credentials, and his reputation as a “Holocaust survivor”, a “Polish refugee who survived ghettos and a forced labor camp before the Nazis were defeated. He lost almost all of his family members who were killed by the Nazi’s [sic] because they were Jews”. (http://www.haguetalks.com/speaker/theodor/) He emigrated to Israel, and later from there to the United States.

Turns out that aside from facilitating de facto acquittals (overturned convictions) for some of the Hutus of Europe (the Croats), he actively assisted some Hutus of Rwanda at international tribunals dedicated to the Rwanda Genocide. The National Commission for the Fight against Genocide (CNLG) of Rwanda called for the resignation of Meron, who was accused of influencing court decisions by exerting undue influence on judges to let high-profile war crimes suspects go free and reducing the sentences for those who were convicted. The Executive Secretary of the CNLG, Jean de Dieu Mucyo, has stated permitting these decisions could have “disastrous consequences for the current and future cases of international war crimes, for truth and justice in the world, for peace and tolerance, and for human rights and freedoms.” (http://allafrica.com/stories/201306200232.html%5D)

Meron and other judges reversed convictions and reduced considerably the sentences of Col. Theoneste Bagosora, accused of masterminding the 1994 Hutu Genocide against the Tutsi, which resulted in between 800,000 and 1,000,000 deaths, from life in prison to 35 years. The judges reduced the sentence of the second in command, Lt. Col. Anatole Nsengiyumva, from life to time served (15 years); he was released June 2013. Meron was accused of leading acquittals of Hutus (Protais Zigiranyirazo) in November 2009 and, recently, Justin Mugenzi and Prosper Mugiraneza, all senior officials of the genocidal regime.(http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/-how-international-justice-is-being-gutted/277767, http://www.bt.dk/sites/default/files-dk/node-files/511/6/6511917-letter-english.pdf)

A disgrace to the cause of justice? (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/-how-international-justice-is-being-gutted/277767/) I don’t know. I am not a legal scholar, I find it odd that someone with his experiences in the Shoah makes the decisions he makes. Perhaps it’s just a case of “power corrupts”.

Croatia and Ireland, some thoughts

Croatia and Ireland are both sui generis European countries. Ireland particularly in that it was never annexed to the Roman Empire unlike most of the world from present-day Great Britain to the Middle East. Apparently the Roman were scared off by the Hibernians’ fearsome reputation. While other European nations long ago lost or renounced imperial claims, secularized and became interdependent on their European neighbors, Croatia and Ireland have long been enabled and nurtured by hypervigilant, bathos (and hatred)-mongering traditionally reactionary Catholic diasporae, harboring ancient grievances while superficially adapting to contemporary life and managing to make themselves the eternal victims of evil neighbors seeking their land. Croat irredentists had their diaspora, as the Irish have their influential diaspora throughout the English-speaking world, especially the United States, to force Britain to fight by Marquis of Queensberry rules, with at least one hand tied behind its back. But most importantly and concisely, what the two countries have in common is that both were belligerents in the last religious wars in Europe (at least among Christians, who knows what the future holds), and in both cases the Catholic side was the victor, particularly in Croatia. Of course, if they hadn’t the conflicts would never end, so … In Ireland the republican side has not yet attained its ultimate goal although it appears to have a distinct demographic edge. Some apologists claim these conflicts are not about religion but they have always been. You just have to go further back in history to see it more clearly.

Not all of what is today’s Croatia was always Croatian.That is why part of Croatia is known as “Croatia proper”; which logically means the rest (Dalmatia, Istria, and Slavonia) is best described as”Croatia improper”, enriching that county, especially through the maritime and tourism industries. Istria was under Italian control until the 1970s. Eugenio Carbone — then Director General of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, who also signed the Treaty on behalf of the Italian government — almost single-handedly (to the considerable dismay of a large percentage of Italy’s citizens) ceded much of the territory, excluding the Province of Trieste, to Yugoslavia in the 1970s in the Treaty of Osimo. Croatia merely kept Tito’s spoils after effecting a full secession from Yugoslavia by 1995. Dalmatia, another part of “Croatia improper”, was ruled by numerous powers throughout its history, including Rome, Venice (Venetian nation state), and Italy. Slavonia, the third part of “Croatia improper” is a porous land region whose boundaries were set by men not geography.

The Croatian majority over the last quarter century is very, although not entirely, dissimilar from the Irish “republicans” who came to power in the 1920s after the Anglo-Irish War and the Irish Civil War but there is some similarity given the undeniable sectarian underpinnings of both conflicts and the near disappearance of the now neutered religious minority in both countries, whose surviving rumps have largely been chastened (to use an understatement) into silence. The accession to power at the critical moment of the extremist, irredentist party (Sinn Fein – HDZ) making any conciliation impossible. The Catholic integrist/integralist society that Protestants had feared (i.e. “Home Rule is Rome Rule”), a notion dismissed by nationalists from Daniel O’Connell onward, became reality with the accession to power of Éamon de Valera and Fianna Fáil in 1932. The outlawing of contraception and divorce were just the blatant surface of the majoritarianist antipathy, rooted almost as much in spite (divorce and contraception were never serious issues of contention in the 19th century, aside from the Parnell-O’Shea controversy) as in religious devotionalism. The sectarian, confessional constitution pushed by Archbishop McQuaid and rubber-stamped by de Valera, and voted into law by the Irish people simply confirmed the reality. Interestingly, it was only in the Nazi-affiliated Independent State of Croatia that contraception and divorce were banned, existing both before and after the Independent State’s sanguinary four year existence. This is not surprising given the role played by the Church in administering this State, and its clergy (mostly Franciscan friars) in manning its concentration camps.

Glavaš, Simatović, and Stanišić — more depraved injustice from Zagreb and The Hague — so what else is new?

An appeals panel at the Hague’s ICTY, a politically manipulated institution of questionable virtue which has indicted and convicted mostly Serb defendants while mostly giving slaps on the wrist to the other belligerents, recently overturned the acquittals of two Serb military leaders during the Yugoslav wars (1991-95). In Zagreb, however, on 20 January 2015, after serving five years in prison, a leading Bosnian Croat “general” was released from prison, after Croatia’s Constitutional Court (LOL) rescinded his war crimes conviction on procedural grounds. His case was remanded to the Supreme Court for a retrial. Now if one had any confidence in the Croatian judiciary that might not be so bad, but there’s the rub …….. A lack of confidence in Croatia’s court system is not just mine. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting (https://iwpr.net/global-voices/croatia-work-progress) describes Croatia’s judiciary as a “corrupt and unprofessional cadre of judges”.

It is amazingly difficult to distinguish Orthodox Serbs and Roman Catholic Croats based solely on forenames (with a few exceptions: Ante, Hrvoje, Zvonimir) or surnames (aside from those Croats with German/Austrian, Hungarian or Italian surnames, from their former, mostly Habsburg, overlords, as opposed to Serbs, Montenegrins and Bosniaks, who rarely if ever have such exotic surnames). Therefore, I will point out that the “lucky” Croat in question is named Branimir Glavaš, founder of the far right wing HDZ and HRSSB political parties, and the unfortunate Serbs, whose freedom has been snatched away by power-hungry bureaucrat jurists playing games with peoples’ lives, are named Franko Simatović and Jovica Stanišić. (Ironically Simatović is an ethnic Croat, from a Partisan background; his grandfather was tight with Tito.) One can only hope that if and when any demand is made Serbia will refuse to extradite. She may as well. She is not going to join the EU any time soon. As any member nation of the EU can veto the accession of a new proposed member, it is guaranteed that one (Croatia) or more will do so in Serbia’s case.

According to Freedom House (https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2015/croatia“NGOs continue to express dismay at the lack of progress in prosecuting alleged war crimes committed by Croatians. Prosecutors and judges took little if any action in 2014 to further investigations, prosecutions, or rulings, according to a joint report by Documenta, the Center for Peace, Non-Violence, and Human Rights–Osijek, and the Civic Committee for Human Rights… A court in Croatia has come under fire for allowing an indicted war crimes suspect to remain at large while his case is investigated, even though prosecutors have warned that this could jeopardise the fairness of the trial. Branimir Glavas, a former general and member of parliament who has been one of the most powerful politicians in Croatia over the past 15 years, is accused of crimes against Serb civilians in Osijek, a city in eastern Slavonia near the border with Serbia, during the Croatian war in 1991.”

Zagreb’s courts are located geographically far away from the Hague but both are politically manipulated by the powerful interests which align against Serbia and for Croatia, which has deep and abiding ties with the most powerful country in Europe, Germany (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/31/is-germany-too-powerful-for-europe) as well as Austria, Hungary, Italy (its former overlords), and the Vatican. It also has deeper pockets than its neighbors. Croatia’s geography is extremely symbolic – malevolently encircling Bosnia like a huge lobster (don’t take my word for it, look at any map), and cramping Slovenia’s and Montenegro’s access to the Adriatic.

At the onset of the Yugoslav wars (1991-95), Germany’s Helmut Kohl and Pope Benedict XVI — who, as Joseph Ratzinger, was a German soldier and POW, as was his elder brother, Georg, who also later became a priest — two of Europe’s most powerful and influential leaders, both gave active encouragement and immediate recognition to the Croatian nationalists and ultranationalists in beginning the destruction of Yugoslavia, a flawed and unstable (since Tito’s death) state but not a barbaric or totalitarian one (except in the eyes of the wealthy, hypervigilant, largely pro/neo-Ustaše Croatian diaspora). The United States, under Bill Clinton, who was apparently led by his virulently anti-Serb Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, turned a blind eye to Croatian arms dealing and led NATO in bombing Serbia.

Since Croatia is now in the EU, its government and judiciary has had little or no motivation or reason to mete justice out against Croatian war criminals. It seems, perhaps I am just a cynic (LOL), that whatever actions were taken were minimal overtures, relatively easy to later overturn or rescind, to help ensure Croatia’s accession to the EU. (http://www.cultures-of-history.uni-jena.de/debating-20th-century-history/croatia/the-acquittal-of-the-croatian-generals-ante-gotovina-and-mladen-markac/)

We’ve all read Animal Farm, right?

The terrifying nature of Croats, Europe’s Hutus

There is something terrifying about a race of people who have never moved past the Middle Ages, even in 2016, and I am not referring to the Taliban or ISIS/ISIL, although they obviously qualify. The terrifying crimes of Croatian nationalists, known as the Ustaše, supported by the Catholic church culminating in the Serbian Holocaust, in which some 500,000 Serbs, Jews and gypsies, and some Croatian and other dissidents, were murdered, mostly by being tortured or starved to death, although some were lucky enough to be shot.

Roman Catholic clerics (mainly Croats, Germans, Austrians, and Italians) helped many “anti-communist” war criminals flee Europe after the Holocaust for havens in Argentina, Spain, and sadly, parts of the British Commonwealth and even the USA. One high-ranking Ustaše bureaucrat, Andrija Artuković, even made it to California, where he lived for decades, protected as an “anticommunist” by the Catholic church, before the U.S. government could finally expel him to Yugoslavia decades later. Artuković, Minister of the Interior in the Nazi-affiliated Ustaše government, was quoted as saying, “Kill all Serbs and Jews including children so that not even the seeds of the beasts are left.”  (see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2227644/replies?c=6, http://alanpetersroundup.blogspot.com/2009/02/letter-to-washington-post.html)

By that time, however, having evaded extradition for decades, he we was in his 80s and demented (more than he had been previously), thus spared the death penalty. His son, Radoslav, is now on a quest for his father’s remains so his dad can have a Mass of Christian Burial. I doubt they’ll ever find the remains, which must have been cremated and flushed down a Zagreb toilet decades ago, as just and proper. Radoslav claimed that his father died “where he wanted to die, in Croatia”. Of course, this is untrue. Had he wanted to die in Croatia he would have gone back. What he wanted was to be buried with all the sacraments in Croatia. Good to know the old bastard did not get his way on either. (I wonder how Andrija Artuković would have fared if Theodor Meron had been the judge hearing his case.)

And now, nonsensical and moronic figures (600,000 Croat dead, starting in an Austrian field at Bleiburg!!) are being bandied about by revisionists of Croatian descent, such as Jeffrey Kuhner, Tomislav Sunjic, Ivo Omrčanin, and J. Ivan Prcela — who only see Tito’s crimes and are literally blind, deaf and dumb to the hundreds of thousands sadistically slaughtered by the Ustaše in a  genocide without parallel aside from the Jewish Holocaust or Rwanda — are some of these propagandists. (Like-minded people also enjoy a heavy presence on Stormfront.) The actual figure of Croats killed during or in the aftermath of the Holocaust is between 10 and 20 times smaller than 600,000. Estimates range from 30,000 to 50,000, a large if inexact percentage of whom were in fact combatants. Contrast that to the 350,000-500,000 Serbs, Jews, Roma and dissidents slaughtered by the same forces that undergird present-day Croatian politics, which becomes, long after Croatia attained all of its goals more than two decades ago, increasingly radical, xenophobic, sectarian, corrupt, triumphalist, constantly shifting the goal posts, occasionally feigning moderation (mighty hard for this bunch) towards some end that is not available for general public consumption but exists in some unspoken understanding by the majority. What can it be? What else do they want? To annex Herzegovina. Yes, but that’s not possible, at least in the near term. If it does ever happen don’t count on the pro-Croat partisans of central and western Europe and the clueless and/or craven and/or insipid rest in Scandinavia, the UK, and Benelux to do much about that. What else? Having allowed Croatia accession to the European Union, the rest of the EU is either indifferent or cowed, or both. And judicial victories by ICTY appeals panels which controversially completely overturned previous war crime convictions (Ante Gotovina, Mladen Markač) has given Croat apologists, particularly of the mealy-mouthed and/or snarky variety (like Marko Attila Hoare) the high ground (from atop a soap box) on touchy issues.

Ina Vukić, a Croat hypernationalist and HDZ (or whatever party she supports nowadays that even more extreme political options exist) propagandist, albeit neither mealy-mouthed nor snarky, preaches to the choir online who, for the most part, unquestioningly accept her narrative. She doesn’t really like being questioned, and simply refuses to answer anything that would interfere with her fixed narrative, a narrative that can never change because it is cemented into her vocabulary and she can never be wrong. I get it, it’s a blog, not the Encyclopaedia Brittanica, but still. In one particular screed (referring to “Israel’s wild beasts”), she assails NGOs whose opinion she dislikes (http://inavukic.com/2016/02/14/israels-wild-beasts-and-political-persecution-of-croatias-minister-zlatko-hasanbegovic) but I guarantee that any NGO that does and says what she likes, i.e. bashing Serbs, exonerating Croats, etc, will get her personal seal of approval.

Vukić refuses to accept or to post any data from Yad Vashem or the USHMM, whose description of the martyrdom of Serbian Jews (almost ninety percent perished in the Shoah) with which she finds fault. She has drawn this ridiculous line in the sand because she claims insufficient attention has been paid to the collaborationist Nedić government. Why is she so obsessed about the fate of Serbian Jews? Not good will or integrity. Just a subterfuge to avoid/evade discussing what she refuses to allow to percolate in her head. 75-90% of Croatian Jews also perished, but aside from some boilerplate nonsense about Archbishop Stepinac helping save Jews, she has nothing to say. Nor under any circumstances will she address the 500,000 or so Serbs, Roma and dissidents slaughtered by the Ustaše. Any narrative she cannot control and which could lead to a potential “thoughtcrime”, as Orwell would have put it, is verboten.  I read another subscriber to her blog trying to engage in a larger European picture, any larger picture, but she wasn’t having it. Having found some relatively (in the great scheme of things) trivial discrepancy on which she can hang her hat, that’s all folks. Only bilious propaganda. Garden variety hypocrisy? No, because her pulpit reaches out to the rabid diaspora, which equally will never acknowledge anything that redounds negatively in any way on Croatian nationalism. Small scale executions of suspected or actual collaborationists in Daksa and Korcula (combined deaths 150 or fewer) allegedly perpetrated by certain Partisans units are now morally equivalent (or actually worse in the eyes of Vukić and her ilk) to Glina, Kragujevac, Gospić, and the other massacre sites, which she and her cybersupporters refuse to acknowledge. Yes every life is precious but there is no comparison between Korcula and Daksa and Jasenovac and Stara Gradiška, although Vukić, to the extent she even acknowledges the latter two, lumps them all together. I know the old saying goes, “the best defense is a good offense”; apparently she does too. (I guess it’s universal.) As Orwell put it, “thoughtcontrol” to deal with pesky facts that might tarnish the “beautiful homeland”. No wonder there are so many wine bottles and sugar packets with pictures of Hitler’s face in Croatian cafes (http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/photos-of-branimir-glavas-with-hitler-wine-online-08-12-2015, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-croatia-hitler-idUSL1928296120070220).

Speaking of Herr Hitler, as the late venerated A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times put it in 1997 in an-oped titled “Fascists Of Croatia Back From The Grave”: “In World War II, Hitler had no executioners more willing, no ally more passionate than the Fascists of Croatia. They are returning, 50 years later, from what should have been their eternal grave, the defeat of Nazi Germany. The Western allies who dug that grave with the bodies of their servicemen have the power to stop them, but do not.” (http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1997-04-20/features/9704210080_1_croatian-fascists-ustashe-franjo-tudjman).  But Rosenthal, across the pond, was a Johnny-Come-Lately. Two years earlier, the London Evening Standard’s Edward Pearce had already posited that “you can understand Croatia best by saying flatly that if there is one place in the world where a statue of Adolf Hitler would be revered, it would be Zagreb”. (http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2007-01-16/news/0701160085_1_croatia-serbs-war-ii) Of course, the Axis powers didn’t really “invade” or “occupy” Croatia. They were largely welcomed, in the same way that most German speaking Austrians welcomed Hitler’s “Anschluss”. To put either Croatia or Austria in the same category as Poland, Belgium, the Netherlands, or even France is patently absurd.

Franjo Tudjman, who had developed a pathological hatred for Serbia (the country in which his three children were all born), went out of his way to assail, humiliate, and antagonize Serbs almost from the start, in both word and deed: the demotion and eventual evisceration of the Jasenovac memorial, the toleration/encouragement of Ustasha symbology, the visits to war criminals who had escaped justice in Europe, likely through the Vatican ratlines, in Argentina (one of whom, Ivo Rojnica, Tudjman proposed as the Croatian envoy to Argentina, which declined to accept Rojnica’s credentials) and elsewhere, and the termination of employment of all Serbs therein by Tudjman’s factotum, Antun Vrdoljak, an actor and film director who became director general of Croatian Radiotelevision (HRT) from 1991 to 1995. On  September 16, 1991, guards at the entrances of the HRT building told more than 300 employees that their passes were no longer valid. The move was attributed to “security reasons”. Most of those on the security blacklists were Serbs or married to Serbs. Others may have had a relative in the Yugoslav Army or did not publicly support the HDZ. (Kemal Kurspahić. “Serbo-Croatian War: Lying For The Homeland”, Prime Time Crime: Balkan Media in War and Peace, pg. 67; ISBN 1929223382)

Vrdoljak is also the father in law of actor Goran Visnjic. (Visnjic’s first film role was a small one in a Vrdoljak film as a neo-Ustashe youth; ironically this was just before he began his year-long mandatory military service in Yugoslavia’s JNA. Shortly after that ended the wars had begun and he joined the separatist Croatian Army employing the training he received in the JNA). When Visnjic, now a naturalized US citizen, appeared on the American television series ER as some sort of refugee, the war was the backstory for his character and he played the martyred victim of Serb aggression, complete with PTSD and steely dysfunction. As a matter of fact, not only ER, but other American and Canadian television shows (including, most notably, NCIS and NCIS: Los Angeles) often had anti-Serb plotlines. Wonder why. Some television executives or writers ethnicity? Ignorance? Inability to encapsulate the complexity of decades if not hundreds of years of history into 44 minutes in prime time?

I remember many years ago a letter to the editor of the New York Times that was actually published. I was lucky enough to be able to access it for free from the Times’ website. It was written by one Alan Fabyancic (born November 22, 1946 – died April 25, 2010; from Martinez, California by way of Montana) in 1991 at the onset of the Balkan wars that would end with the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, and goes as follows (verbatim, see http://www.nytimes.com/1991/07/10/opinion/l-yugoslav-marriage-needs-a-trial-separation-the-croatian-bulwark-769291.html);

“To the Editor: I am a Croatian-American looking at how the Bush Administration deals with the Croatian independence movement. I see historical ignorance and foreign policy inconsistency. Since the Slavic tribes took over the region 1,300 years ago, the Croatian people have been independent or, until the Versailles Treaty, under Austrian or Venetian hegemony.

Two important facts separate and distinguish Croatians from the peoples to the east and south: (1) They are Catholic, and (2) for years, Croatia was a large series of armed fortresses forming the last bulwark between Christian Europe and the invading Muslims or the schismatic Eastern Orthodox. Croatian citizens were free citizen-soldiers who marketed themselves as soldiers of fortune throughout Europe. Even today, some dictionaries define the word Croatian as a mercenary soldier.

My ancestors in the Fabijancic clan were granted a heraldic coat of arms for saving the Austrian emperor in battle. Then, after half a millennium of antipathy between Croatia and its enemies, the Versailles Treaty, which the United States never ratified, joined an unnatural Serbian empire euphemistically called Yugoslavia, which means South Slav. How can Washington remember the Holocaust when it so easily forgets the hundreds of thousands of Croatians slaughtered by the Serbians after World Wars I and II?

Although in this day of ecumenical sentiment it may be politically incorrect to say this, one can only scorn Christian Europe for forgetting that it might have been Muslim but for the blood and courage of the Croatian warriors. One must also wonder how Washington could support the creation of Israel for a people who had not been dominant there for the previous 1,800 years and yet will not stand behind the independent sovereignty of the Croatian people, who have significantly more reasons to claim it. How can Washington commit half a million troops to rescue the medieval dictatorship of Kuwait while turning its back on the democratic yearnings of Croatia?

What we have in Washington is a group of Northern European Protestants who are too arrogant and racist to recognize the freedom of the Slavic Croatians. I base that statement on history, not opinion. I call on George Bush to be a product, not of the prejudices of history, but rather of the history of real freedom-loving men and women. ALAN F. FABYANCIC, San Francisco, June 27, 1991.

Extreme, sure. Bizarre that the Times published it, sure. (Maybe they were waiting in vain for more “moderate” diaspora folks to condemn Fabyancic, which never happened, although some apologists weighed in generally on the situation.) But unique or aberrational, no, I don’t think so. He had to learn what he expressed somewhere. Family, friends, school, church?