Archive

Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

In hope of the Ambassadorial luck

April 6th, 2009

Serbia’s forthcoming Ambassador to the US, Vladimir Petrovic, says that he will focus on developing a close relationship with the  National Security Council in order to counterweight the State Department’s disastrous influence on the US policy making on Serbia.

So we have the NSC Affairs, for example, who prepare meetings with foreign leaders and in connection with the President’s foreign travel and advises and provides Presidential briefings on policy matters.

The presumption here is that Serbia can get more Presidential sympathy though the National Security Council (NSC) that is the tool of the President rather then with the State Department that is the tool of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

So is the Ambassador Petrovic overly optimistic and if so, what are the obstacles to Petrovic’s mission?

For starters, under Obama, the NSC is packed with the Secretary of State who brings her State Department policy along with her personal baggage to the table.

Second, that the NSC sentiments of Serbia are in a shared animus with the State Department is attested in the recent book on the NSC history by David Rothkopf who, among other things, was the managing Director of the Kissinger Associates that have handled Serbia’s car import in the 1980s, the Yugo.

Says Rothkopf in Running the World:

The Albanian majority in the province of Kosovo… had been disappointed by the agreement in Dayton, which, in their view, failed to recognize their long-standing and [in Rothkopf's and NSC's view, my point] justified demand for independence. [page 372]

Rothkopf also cites the case of Carter’s VP meeting on the Iran crisis when he “lamented that there was not a single Iranian expert in the room”.

Although Rothkopf quotes General William Odom as saying that experts are inept policy makers in the high level policy meetings because they the are “in love with the people from the area” and thus prejudice the rationality… presidents still love them.

Which raises the obvious question: who gets to pick these experts and why. Witness, for example, recent “expert” testimony of Paddy Ashdown and Ivo Banac, two individuals who made a career in bashing Serbs presumably out of hatred, to the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

There are also limits what NSC staffers can do, not only because they cannot be recipients of money, but also, as Rozanne Ridgway who worked on various Reagan teams on Soviet Union says from her experience: “Unless the decision comes from the top, nothing happens. You can’t make policy from the bottom [NSC staff] up.”

Having Biden up on top sure threads heavy against what Petrovic hopes to develop with the NSC.

Finally, we do find in Rothkopf that presidents make informal agreements with other countries, or perhaps even entities such as Kosovo’s ethnic Albanian separatists. Brent Scawcoft was, for example, adamant to find out what “kinds of informal agreements we may have with other countries” as the Reagan administration was taking over from Carter.

Then, of course, there are secret executive agreements that the US presidents make with other countries and entities and such agreements do not have to be disclosed to the Congress nor the NSC.

“In year 1889 to 1939, of 1441 international compacts 917 were executive agreements and only 524 treaties,” informs us Arthur Schlessinger, a statistic that suggests the meaninglessness of treaties bunch of which Serbia signed in the past recognizing its borders to include Kosovo.

To illustrate these secret executive agreements and their potency, for example, in 1992, James Baker summoned Lawrence Eagleberger to launch a media campaign against Serbia only after the Saudi Sultan approached the Bush senior administration to aid the Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs and to warn Milosevic on attacking Kosovo (so-called Christmas warning) in time when Albanian separatists were not even armed nor did Belgrade, preoccupied with Croatia and Bosnia, have an inkling to attack Albanians.

We wish future Ambassador luck.

Politics, US ,

Is Kosovo precedent set for China?

August 30th, 2008

As U.S. Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham held hands with Dalai Lama recently (July 25, 2008) the constant carping drumbeat on China and a cherubic portrayal of Tibetans holds flavor similar to what was done in the media with the Serbs who opposed separatists in Kosovo in order to pave the way for Serbia’s eventual decapitation.

Now that Kosovo precedent is set so that other separatists can be recognized, Washington may be debating whether to sideline Tibet in order to woo China away from Russia, as Tony Blair recently argued, or to move Tibet on the main burner now that Moscow and Beijing do not see eye to an eye on Russian recognition of separatists in Georgia.

The decision on China may have to come soon because, in the immediate future, now that the Olympics are over, it is likely that China will seek to avenge the deaths of their 16 policemen and inflict some playback for being embarrassed by Tibet. The looming prospect of violence in China could force a definitive decision on China policy.


McCain with Kosovo Albanian separatists

For China, intervention in Tibet could definitively remind them of CIAs involvement with Dalai Lama, alas through his older brother as the proxy.

The story below, substituting “freedom movement” as euphemism for separatism and decapitation of China, may very well be the preemptive media blitz prior to shifting the action away from Georgia.

With the main point of the story below being CIA’s involvement in destabilization of China up through the end of the 1960s, the subtler message is that the destabilization of China, like of Serbia in the 1990s that led to its later dismemberment, could be repeated again because, after all, CIA would have something to prove here after “Most of the agents the CIA sent into Tibet were captured or killed,” by the Chinese.

Revolt of the Monks

How a Secret CIA Campaign Against China
50 Years Ago Continues to Fester;
A Role for Dalai Lama’s Brother
By PETER WONACOTT
August 30, 2008; Page A1

DARJEELING, India — Chodak, an 83-year-old former monk, fled Tibet in the wake of a bloody Chinese invasion more than 50 years ago. Today, he spends his days trimming wool carpets at a refugee center perched above the tranquil tea plantations of this Indian hill town. The plight of Tibetan exiles like Chodak, and their Buddhist message of nonviolence, has drawn world-wide sympathy to their cause.

But Chodak’s story has a twist. He’s one of the last surviving guerrilla fighters who took up arms against the Chinese during a little-known chapter in Tibet’s history. His life has been one of war, not peace.

Starting in the late 1950s, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency trained scores of Tibetans, many of them monks, and then air dropped them back to their country with weapons and wireless radios. The linchpin of the operation was an older brother of the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of 2.7 million Tibetans and today a Nobel Prize-winning symbol of peaceful resistance.

“We were fighting to protect Buddhism from those who wanted to harm it,” said Chodak in an interview, his eyes now clouded with cataracts.

These days, armed with little more than his message of peace and the occasional chortle at Beijing’s expense, the 73-year-old Dalai Lama enjoys the upper hand in an international public-relations war. He inspires protests that embarrass the Chinese government around the world, including during the recently concluded Beijing Olympics. He also provokes over-the-top denunciations from Chinese officials. During the unrest in March, Tibet’s Communist Party Secretary, Zhang Qingli, accused the Dalai Lama of sabotaging the region’s stability and described the Buddhist leader as a “a wolf in monk’s clothes, a devil with a human face.”

The Dalai Lama deflects such accusations with dry humor, saying repeatedly that if Tibet’s freedom movement ever became violent, he’d step away from politics. “Please investigate,” he said of the charges that he inflamed Tibetan protests in March. “If we are really the instigator, we are awaiting punishment.”

He has said that he wasn’t aware of the 1950s-era armed resistance in the beginning, and that upon learning about it, he didn’t encourage Tibetans to join it. He also disavows any plan to see Tibet become independent, pressing merely for China to allow Tibetans more local autonomy to preserve their customs and language.

But the history of the resistance movement — and the Dalai Lama’s close family connection to it — remains very much a part of the ongoing tensions with China. It helps explain why even rudimentary reconciliation talks — the next round is expected in October — have gone nowhere.

* * *

John Kenneth Knaus, a retired CIA officer who led a covert Tibet command center from New Delhi in the 1960s, remembers the Dalai Lama as torn — personally sympathetic to his brave compatriots but unwilling publicly to support a bloody rebellion that ran counter to his Buddhist belief in protecting life.

“The Dalai Lama knew everything that was going on, but he couldn’t give his blessing,” says Mr. Knaus, author of the 1999 book “Orphans of the Cold War: America and the Tibetan Struggle for Survival.”

Gyalo Thondup, one of the Dalai Lama’s brothers and the former resistance leader, declined to be interviewed for this story. “It’s a very sensitive and inopportune time to talk, from the points of view of many different parties,” said one of his sons, Tempa Thondup, in a message conveyed from the elder Mr. Thondup. People who answered the door at Gyalo Thondup’s residences in New Delhi and Kalimpong, India, said the 80-year-old wasn’t at home.

Stories recounted by Tibetan resistance fighters, including six surviving guerrillas, demonstrate the deep involvement of Mr. Thondup in the CIA-backed operation.

Mr. Thondup came to the resistance movement with rare qualities for Tibetans of his generation — a fluency in Mandarin and an understanding of China’s history. In 1949, he was studying in the wartime capital of Nanjing when the People’s Liberation Army vanquished the Nationalist forces. Mr. Thondup and his Chinese wife, the daughter of a Nationalist general, eventually settled in Darjeeling, near the Indian border with Nepal.

When the CIA made contact with him in the early 1950s, Mr. Thondup had been organizing escape routes for Tibetans fleeing Chinese rule. His wife, Nancy Chu, helped establish the center where refugees learned handicrafts so they could make a living on Indian soil.

A spokesman for the CIA declined to comment on the Tibetan operation.

The refugees arrived with tales of misery and horror. Tsering Dakpa, a Tibetan farmer, says in 1954 he watched Chinese soldiers drag suspected rebels outside a village and force them to dig a trench filled with freezing water. The men were stripped, thrown into the trench and — when they didn’t answer questions satisfactorily — shot, according to Mr. Dakpa.

“My heart stopped,” the 77-year-old says of the execution. “I decided then I’d join the resistance.”

That same year, the Dalai Lama had gone to Beijing to meet with China’s leaders, including Mao Zedong, in hopes of securing more religious and political autonomy for Tibet. But back home, in the Tibetan region of Kham, an anti-China resistance had already taken root.

The Battle at Litang

It was in Kham, in 1956, that one of the most violent clashes occurred, a days-long battle at the Litang Monastery. One of the Litang monks was Chodak, who now works at the refugee center in Darjeeling. He recalls a meeting in which a Chinese general urged them to abandon their weapons. The monks carried weapons to defend themselves from bandits. Chodak says the general threatened to burn down the monastery if they didn’t comply.

“The Chinese said they were protecting us, and that there was no need to carry weapons,” says Nawang Datha, another monk. “We refused.”

Instead, the Litang monks sneaked up at night and attacked a nearby Chinese camp, according to Mr. Datha and Chodak.

The Chinese army responded by charging the monastery in a pre-dawn raid. The Tibetans fought back with homemade pistols, antique rifles, axes and knives.

“Everybody was rushing here and there,” says Chodak. “We didn’t know who we were killing.”

Mr. Datha’s younger brother, Tenlay Tenzing, managed to flee the monastery earlier on the family’s black horse. Chinese troops shot the horse, but the monk kept running. Coming upon the horse carcass later, Mr. Datha feared his younger brother had been killed — only to be reunited later at their parents’ home. When bombs from Chinese airplanes were dropped on the monastery, Chodak fled to Tibet’s capital, Lhasa, a weeks-long walk, but far from the fighting in Kham.

China’s official history of the fighting at Litang says the monks reacted violently to Chinese efforts to abolish a “feudal serf system” and “slavery,” according to the Web site of the Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture People’s Government, a part of Sichuan province that includes Litang. The government accused Tibetan rebels in the area of attacking military and government officials, damaging roads and bridges as well as raping, looting and killing. As a result, the Communist Party of China extended “important orders for the suppression of unrest,” the Web site says, calling it a “war of liberation.”

The events at Litang inflamed passions across Tibet and helped fuel the resistance movement. Many monks, left without a monastery, shed their robes to fight the Chinese. Warring Tibetan clans set aside grievances to unite in battle. The CIA later would gain several recruits from Litang, who wanted to match China’s soldiers with modern firepower and military training of their own.

Flight to Darjeeling

One of the Litang monks, who went by the name Lhotse and was the older brother of Messrs. Datha and Tenzing, fled to Darjeeling, posing as a trader. When he arrived, he knocked on the door of Mr. Thondup.

The brother of the 14th Dalai Lama, Mr. Thondup was already a prominent figure among Tibetans and his political sympathies were well known. After listening to Lhotse recount the failed uprising, Mr. Thondup responded with a proposition.

“If you want to go for training,” he said, “I may have a place to send you.”

The monk agreed to the secret mission, according to interviews with his two surviving brothers, whom he later told about the conversation.

In addition to Lhotse, Mr. Thondup recruited five Tibetan fighters and sent them in early 1957 for training with CIA instructors on the Pacific island of Saipan. The Tibetans learned how to operate a radio transmitter, fire modern weapons and set up ambushes.

The Dalai Lama’s oldest brother, Thubten Jigme Norbu, served as a translator on Saipan. Mr. Norbu, a retired professor of Tibetan studies at Indiana University, is now in poor health and unable to respond to comment, according to his youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal.

After six months in Saipan, Lhotse and a monk named Athar parachuted back into Tibet. Traveling with other rebels, the pair relayed radio requests for weapons and supplies and kept the CIA apprised of the resistance inside Tibet.

Arms Deliveries

Mr. Knaus, the former CIA officer, testified in writing to the U.S. Congress in 1999 that the CIA made two arms drops into Tibet in July 1958 and Feb. 1959. These included 403 Lee Enfield rifles, 60 hand grenades, 20 machine guns and 26,000 rounds of ammunition. By the late 1960s, Mr. Knaus estimates, the CIA had dropped 700,000 pounds of supplies to the rebels.

China’s attempts to quell unrest around Lhasa worsened tensions. In March 1959, the Dalai Lama sneaked out of the city’s Potala Palace and headed for India on horseback. The CIA-trained rebels hooked up with the Dalai Lama, sending radio updates on his whereabouts to Washington.

As Tibet’s spiritual leader was about to cross safely into India, the rebels cheered and waved. The Dalai Lama waved back.

Chodak interpreted the wave as “a long-distance blessing,” he says. “Then we went back to fighting.”

The Dalai Lama’s aides say that at the time the Tibetan leader didn’t have a good grasp of the resistance, or of how the CIA was involved. “His brother really kept him in the dark — for his own sake,” says Tempa Tsering, the Dalai Lama’s representative in New Delhi.

Secret Training

As Mr. Thondup filled out the ranks of the CIA-backed resistance, Mr. Datha and his brother Mr. Tenzing also enlisted. Mr. Tenzing recalls arriving in 1959 at a secluded training base in the Colorado Rockies called Camp Hale. He gazed at the pine forests and snow-covered peaks. “I felt I was back in Tibet,” he says. Tibetans would train secretly in Colorado until 1964, according to Mr. Knaus’s written testimony to Congress.

Mr. Thondup traveled extensively to publicize Tibet’s plight, recruit fighters and forge links with foreign intelligence agencies, according to another of his sons, Khedroob Thondup, who acted as his private secretary.

During Mr. Thondup’s rare breaks at home, the family went on picnics in the misty hills of Darjeeling. The children practiced shooting Mr. Thondup’s old Winchester rifle. He also taught them how to prune his prize roses.

But inside Tibet, the resistance was wilting. China’s superior radio communications allowed it to outmaneuver fighters. Its air power crushed Tibetan fighters. Most of the agents the CIA sent into Tibet were captured or killed.

In disarray, the rebels retreated to a mountainous base known as Mustang just beyond southern Tibet inside Nepal. Fighters at Mustang say Mr. Thondup showed up periodically to rally spirits. “You don’t have to worry about food and supplies. We have sponsors that will take care of that,” Mr. Thondup said, according to Nyima Namgyal, one of the rebels who heard the Dalai Lama’s brother speak at Mustang.

“We had an idea it was America,” added Mr. Namgyal, now 65 years old and living in a retirement home in Dharmsala.

So many arrived at Mustang that supplies were stretched thin. Chodak says he sold his sword and charm box — an amulet he wore around his neck — to buy provisions. The rebels raided farms inside Tibet for sheep that would provide food and wool to fend off the cold.

Infighting posed as grave a threat to the Mustang operation as the Chinese army. Several of the Tibetan fighters complained that the commander was pocketing funds, according to Mr. Tenzing. In 1968, disgusted with what had become of the resistance, Mr. Tenzing returned to Darjeeling and opened a dumpling restaurant.

For the Americans in the late 1960s, the operation was reaching the end of its usefulness. The CIA had closed training camps years earlier and was winding down supply runs. Mired in Vietnam, the U.S. government worried about getting drawn deeper into another Asian conflict. In 1972, President Nixon met with Chinese leader Mao Zedong, ushering in a new era of the U.S. and China relationship.

For the Dalai Lama, a new stance toward China would take shape, too. In the early 1970s, he sought to disband the rebels and end the bloodshed. Chodak says he concluded his war with the Chinese after a tearful 1972 meeting with the Dalai Lama in Dharmsala.

Not everyone agreed to leave Mustang. Some fighters shot themselves or slit their own throats rather than disobey the Dalai Lama’s orders, according to his spokesman Tenzin Taklha.

By then, the fighting with China was essentially over. In 1974, the Dalai Lama huddled with aides in a sunlit meeting room at his residence. “We made up our minds that, sooner or later, we would have to talk with the Chinese government,” he said in a recent interview. “Independence was no longer relevant.”

The man who would serve as the go-between with the Chinese government was someone both sides knew well. He was the Dalai Lama’s older brother, Gyalo Thondup.

Write to Peter Wonacott at peter.wonacott@wsj.com

Politics ,

Fighting over Georgia… in quotes

August 12th, 2008

“The Russian army is trying to enforce peace, and to do that, we have to attack the Georgian military,” which is shelling South Ossetian villages and towns from outside the region’s nominal border, Sergei Ivanov, Russia’s deputy prime minister, said on CNN.

Are there any additional reasons, usually ones denied?

“We don’t want regime change in Tbilisi. Our goal is the peaceful settlement of the conflict,” said Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Boris Malakhov. “However, the fate of Saakashvili is in the hands of his own people.”

“I’d like to say straightaway that regime change is an American expression. We do not use such an expression. But sometimes there are occasions, and we know from history, that there are different leaders who come to power, either democratically or semi-democratically, and they become an obstacle,” says Ambassador Vitaly Churkin.

Could a reverse-Milosevic await Saakashvili…

“We have to stop the genocide,” said Sergei Ivanov, Russia’s deputy prime minister.

 

Saakashvili aside, but for now…

Georgian collapse “certainly raised concerns about Georgia’s reliability as a transit route” says Julian Lee, a specialist on the Caspian at the Centre for Global Energy Studies in London so, as a result of Russia’s proximity bombing of the pipeline, British Petroleum duly closed down the pipeline it operates in Georgia, days after having BPs CEO driven out of Russia and the defeated UKs Prime Minister Gordon Brown can only wield a rhetorical scimitar that “Russia’s military actions would damage its relations with other countries.”

Such as which?

“This is clearly part of a bigger game, which is the expansion of NATO,” Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said. “Today Georgia’s entry [into NATO] is more complicated,” he said. “It doesn’t behoove us to pit ourselves against Russia. Russia is a strategic partner.”

 

Could Sarkozy’s Moscow visit confirm this?

“I think what you have confirmed here is good news,” that Russia stopped the opertions. “A cease-fire now has to take shape… We must draw up a rapid calendar so that each side can go back to the positions of before the crisis.”

Is Russia backward looking as Sarkozy?

“I cannot see us accepting this French draft of the resolution,” says Vitaly Churkin although Russia’s deputy chief of General Staff, Col.-Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn suggested that “some sort of international mediation effort to watch how both sides comply with a cease-fire agreement” is in the offing.

So who is to blame?

“It was Germany that led the opposition …for Georgia… not [to] be allowed to enter NATO. We presumably won’t know for some time what the precise calculations were inside the Kremlin when it came to the decision to send troops into Georgia, but one can surely assume that the German position did nothing to discourage Russia’s plans,” write Gary Schmitt, director of the American Enterprise Institute’s program on advanced strategic studies and Mauro Lorenzo, an AEI resident fellow.

However, unnamed sources paraphrased in the media say that “many officials in the U.S. government who have worked on the Russia relationship in recent years said, President Bush lionized Mr. Saakashvili as a model for democracy in the region to a point that the Georgian leader may have held unrealistic expectations about the amount of support he might receive from the U.S. and the West.”

“The Bush administration didn’t in any way encourage Saakashvili’s move against the Russians, but it didn’t do enough to rein him in,” said Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “It encouraged the creation of a Georgian president who was too big for his britches.”

Politics

The Gruzya opportunity

August 11th, 2008

For the West, warfare in Georgia is a wonderful opportunity to impose itself as a mediator in matters in the region and thus reduce Russia to a status of an aggressor to whom it will be dictated.

As we see no NATO troops bombing Russia on Saakashvili’s behalf, as NATO did on behalf of Kosovo Albanian separatists, Russia would be foolish to accept Western “mediation” whose nature and objectives are amply evidenced on Serbia, since Dayton through Rambulliet and as recently as with supposed talks on the Kosovo status.

On the other hand, events in Georgia are a perfect opportunity for Russia to demonstrate that it is a great power and to successfully do that it should squash Saakashvili like a worm, establish a new ruler in Georgia, then find another country that is totally innocent of anything, accuse them of something, apropos Iraq, then overthrow its ruler quicker then Saddam hung on the string… to postpone Desert Storm like armada on its southern flank which may come there anyway once Iran is taken out.

Politics

Senator who canned Holbrooke dies

July 4th, 2008
Comments Off

Senator Jessie Helms died and to Serbs he should be remembered as a man that canned Richard Holbrooke. Explained New York Times then:

Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said today that it would be ”insane” to hold confirmation hearings for Richard C. Holbrooke until the Justice Department had turned over internal documents about its ethics investigation of the longtime diplomat.

Besides Holbrooke’s morals that Helms questioned… well, lets leave it at that.

Politics

Santorum endorses Romney

February 3rd, 2008
Comments Off

Senator Rick Santorum has endorsed Mitt Romney citing Romney’s understanding of issues of Jihad.

“As you know, I’m at Ethics and Public Policy and I’m working on the Jihad issue. And I spent an hour and a half with this guy and I can tell you, he understands it,” says Santorum.

Santorum is a former Pennsylvania Senator who has said many times that what is going on in Kosovo is Jihad. Several letters that Santorum sent to Bishop Artemije express his concern for the fate of Christian Serbs. In those letters Santorum has vowed to help Serbs persevere against the Kosovo Jihad.

“I am please to hear that my staff was able to discuss with you the pressing concerns for the survival of Christianity in the face of rising terrorist violence in the Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija,” wrote Santorum to Bishop Artemije on September 28, 2006.

“In Kosovo, no less then in the United States or the Middle East, the reality of Islamic fascist violence must be called by its proper name and opposed in every way possible,” concluded Santorum.

“..there is only one place to go right now and that’s Mitt Romney,” says Santorum.

Should Romney win, it is likely that Santorum ends up in his administration.

Activism, Politics

American Serbs: Vote Romney!

January 21st, 2008
Comments Off

Yes, I’ve been torn between the one that talks the liberty talk, Ron Paul, and the one that will actually win and enhance the liberty, even for just a bit as some argue, so I endorse Mitt Romney and urge all American Serbs to get behind Romney.

For all the talk of his Mormon background, Romney actually worked on building a family as oppose to acquiring one for political benefits or holding on to one for political gain.

…and yes, Romney knows few things about making wealth rather then just spending it. As President, Romney will be more effective in creating wealth for Americans rather then just using one’s wife wealth to gain political power.

Romney is a hawk on Islamic Jihadism and seeks a world coalition of civilized nations to defeat it. As the frontal shield of Europe, Serbia figures prominently as the ally in Romney’s anti-Jihad policy.

Romney has been endorsed by Tom Tancredo, a friend of Serbia, and Tancredo’s staff has gone over to Romney along with Romney’s fellow Mormon, Bay Buchanan, sister of Pat Buchanan, an American patriot and supporter of Serbia with great deal of Serbian contacts. Bay Buchanan is and will be one of the top advisors to President Romney.

McCain is a friend of Kosovo’s Muslim Albanian separatists that will come under Jihadist spell once Muslim states such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia that are courting Kosovo separatists recognize their unilateral declaration of independence. To assure freedom to America and Serbia, McCain must end in Florida behind Romney, Giuliani and Huckabee, another candidate with campaign staff sympathetic to Serbia.

So yes, I’ve been told by friends that, in this stage of the fluid political game of primaries, I should not come out for Romney but rather wait until he becomes the clear winner and thus hedge bets. But there are no bets to be hedged here because the sake of liberty, Serbia and the civilized world has no time to wait.

American Serbs in Florida need to come out and vote for Romney in the upcoming primary so this important state will go the way of liberty, America and Serbia so that the future President Romney will have Bay Buchanan as the advisor on the matters of Kosovo, a province where Islamic Jihad has laid its siege.

I Michigan, I voted Romney. In Florida, you dear Serb sister and brother, should too!

Politics

…and they accuse Bill Clinton!

January 20th, 2008
Comments Off

From New York Times:

“Mr. McCain abandoned his [first] wife, who had reared their three children while he was in Vietnamese prisons, and he then began his political career with the resources of his new wife’s family.”

Conniving user SOB? Hecky no! McCain’s skills are so immense because after he dumped his first wife, he got her to support him politically.

McCain’s new wife is considered a “cougar

Again New York Times:

“No candidate could be luckier in his choice of an ex-wife than Senator McCain, and he must be the only politician around who could cheat on his wife and divorce her and still get her support and her campaign contributions today. Even her friends rave about him.”

Now that’s Straight Talk Express for Bill Clinton who could not dispose of Hillary.

Politics

Hillary’s oral principles

January 15th, 2008
Comments Off

Hillary has always expressed remarkable fidelity to her husband’s pervasive lasciviousness. “There are worse things than infidelity,” Hillary once reminisced about her husband’s veracious appetite for sex with many women.

Hillary’s toleration of personal indignity and treason in marriage is a remarkable display of love of disloyalty and sedition.

As a President, would Hillary love those that defile America just the way her husband defiled her marriage? Would she build the American future with those that husband infidelity against the American principles?

The repugnance of her marriage is about to be writ large upon America: a woman president that tolerates the most intimate insult against her dignity yet displays fake tears in a New Hampshire cafe about insignificant trivialities that preclude her from political power.

So we eagerly await for Hillary to remake America in the blissful image of her marriage.

Politics

Send money to Representative Dan Burton

August 20th, 2007
Comments Off

Click here to donate money to Burton election campaignRepresentative Burton is in a tough reelection fight and needs help. He is co-chair of the Serbian Caucus and hasn’t gotten very much American Serb help. Call his offices to find out how you can help.

Burton supports Serbia’s territorial integrity and questions wisdom of forcing another Islamic fundamentalist state in Europe.

“Even Albanian officials have expressed concern at the growth of radical Wahhabist influence, and the reality of a dangerously segregated society, as hundreds of Saudi-financed mosques have sprung up to replace the destroyed churches,” writes Burton in his Washington Times column.

To visit Burton’s web site go here.

More importantly, please send money to his campaign now.

You can contribute by credit card, check or directly by visiting one his fund raisers. Go here now to do any of those.

Politics