Bill Clinton’s War on Serbia

20 Years Ago: Bill Clinton Bombs Serbia, Killing Hundreds of Civilians

Twenty years ago, President Clinton commenced bombing Serbia for no good reason. Up to 1500 Serb civilians were killed by NATO bombing in one of the biggest BS morality plays of the modern era. Clinton sold the bombing as a humanitarian mission, but the resulting carnage resulted in the takeover of Kosovo by a vicious clique that was later condemned for murdering Serbs and selling their kidneys, livers, and other body parts.

But Clinton remains a hero in Kosovo;  a statue of him was erected in the capitol, Pristina.  It would have been a more accurate representation if Clinton was shown standing on the corpses of the women, children, and others killed in the U.S. bombing campaign.

The U.S. bombing of Serbia was a crime and an outrage from the start.  Editors were chary of articles bashing the bombing campaign so much of my venting occurred in my journal:

April 7, 1999 Much of the media and most of the American public are evaluating Clinton’s Serbian policy based on the pictures of the bomb damage — rather than by asking whether there is any coherent purpose or justification for bombing. The ultimate triumph of photo opportunities…. What a travesty and national disgrace for this country.

April 17 My bottom line on the Kosovo conflict: I hate holy wars. And this is a holy war for American good deeds – or for America’s saintly self-image? Sen. John McCain said the war is necessary to “uphold American values.” Make me barf! Just another … Hitler-of-the-month attack..

May 13 This damn Serbian war… is a symbol of all that is wrong with the righteous approach to the world… and to problems within this nation.

I had a chapter on the Serbian bombing campaign titled “Moralizing with Cluster Bombs” in Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years (St. Martin’s Press, 2000), which sufficed to spur at least one or two reviewers to attack the book.  Norman Provizer, the director of the Golda Meir Center for Political Leadership, scoffed in the Denver Rocky Mountain News:  “Bovard chastises Clinton for an illegal, undeclared war in Kosovo without ever bothering to mention that, during the entire run of American history, there have been but four official declarations of war by Congress.”

As the chaotic situation in post-war Kosovo became stark, it was easier to work in jibes against the debacle.  In an October 2002 USA Today article (“Moral High Ground Not Won on Battlefield“) bashing the Bush administration’s push for war against Iraq, I pointed out: “A desire to spread freedom does not automatically confer a license to kill…. Operation Allied Force in 1999 bombed Belgrade, Yugoslavia, into submission purportedly to liberate Kosovo. Though Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic raised the white flag, ethnic cleansing continued – with the minority Serbs being slaughtered and their churches burned to the ground in the same way the Serbs previously oppressed the ethnic Albanians.”

In a 2011 review for The American Conservative, I scoffed: “After NATO planes killed hundreds if not thousands of Serb and ethnic Albanian civilians, Bill Clinton could pirouette as a savior. Once the bombing ended, many of the Serbs remaining in Kosovo were slaughtered and their churches burned to the ground. NATO’s “peace” produced a quarter-million Serbian, Jewish, and Gypsy refugees. At least the Serbs were not murdering people for their body parts, as the Council of Europe recently accused the Kosovo Liberation Army of doing to Serb prisoners in recent years. (“When the transplant surgeons were confirmed to be in position and ready to operate, the [Serbian] captives were … summarily executed by a KLA gunman, and their corpses transported swiftly to the operating clinic,” where their kidneys were harvested for sale.) Perhaps even worse, Clinton’s unprovoked attack on Serbia set a precedent for “humanitarian” warring that was invoked by supporters of Bush’s unprovoked attack on Iraq.”

Reposted below are a Washington Times piece on post-war body harvesting and a couple of Future of Freedom Foundation pieces on Clinton’s lies.

Washington Times, August 5, 2014

When the spoils of war are human organs

by James Bovard
Bill Clinton’s Kosovo ‘freedom fighters’ trafficked in body parts

Former President Bill Clinton continues to be feted around the world as a progressive champion of human rights. However, a European Union task force last week confirmed that the ruthless cabal he empowered by bombing Serbia in 1999 has committed atrocities that include murdering individuals to extract and sell their kidneys, livers and other body parts.

A special war-crimes tribunal is planned for next year. The New York Times reported that the trials may be stymied by cover-ups and stonewalling: “Past investigations of reports of organ trafficking in Kosovo have been undermined by witnesses’ fears of testifying in a small country where clan ties run deep and former members of the KLA are still feted as heroes. Former leaders of the KLA occupy high posts in the government.” American politicians have almost entirely ignored the growing scandal. Vice President Joe Biden hailed former KLA leader and Kosovo Prime Minister Hashim Thaci in 2010 as “the George Washington of Kosovo.” A few months later, a Council of Europe investigative report tagged Mr. Thaci as an accomplice to the body-trafficking operation.

The latest allegations might cause some Americans to rethink their approval of the 78-day bombing campaign against Serbia killed up to 1,500 civilians. In early June 1999, The Washington Post reported that “some presidential aides and friends are describing [bombing] Kosovo in Churchillian tones, as Clinton’s ‘finest hour.’” Clinton administration officials justified killing civilians because the Serbs were allegedly committing genocide in Kosovo. After the bombing ended, no evidence of genocide was found, but Mr. Clinton and Britain’s Tony Blair continued boasting as if their war stopped a new Hitler in his tracks.

The KLA’s savage nature was well-known before the Clinton administration formally christened them “freedom fighters” in 1999. The prior year, the State Department condemned “terrorist action by the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army.” The KLA was heavily involved in drug trafficking and had close to ties to Osama bin Laden. Arming the KLA helped Mr. Clinton portray himself as a crusader against injustice and shift public attention after his impeachment trial. Mr. Clinton was aided by many congressmen anxious to portray U.S. bombing as an engine of righteousness. Sen. Joe Lieberman whooped that the United States and the KLA “stand for the same values and principles. Fighting for the KLA is fighting for human rights and American values.”

After the bombing ended, Mr. Clinton assured the Serbian people that the United States and NATO agreed to be peacekeepers only “with the understanding that they would protect Serbs as well as ethnic Albanians and that they would leave when peace took hold.” In the subsequent months and years, American and NATO forces stood by as the KLA resumed its ethnic cleansing, slaughtering Serb civilians, bombing Serbian churches and oppressing any non-Muslims. Almost a quarter-million Serbs, Gypsies, Jews, and other minorities fled Kosovo after Mr. Clinton promised to protect them. By 2003, almost 70 percent of the Serbs living in Kosovo in 1999 had fled, and Kosovo was 95 percent ethnic Albanian.

In 2009, Mr. Clinton visited Kosovo’s capital, Pristina, for the unveiling of an 11-foot-tall statue of himself. The allegations of the KLA’s involvement in organ trafficking were already swirling, but Mr. Clinton overlooked the grisly record of his hosts. Instead, he stood on Bill Clinton Boulevard and lapped up adulation from supporters of one of the most brutal regimes in Europe. A commentator in the United Kingdom’s The Guardian newspaper noted that the statue showed Mr. Clinton “with a left hand raised, a typical gesture of a leader greeting the masses. In his right hand he is holding documents engraved with the date when NATO started the bombardment of Serbia, 24 March 1999.”

Shortly after the end of the 1999 bombing campaign, Mr. Clinton enunciated what his aides labeled the Clinton doctrine: “Whether within or beyond the borders of a country, if the world community has the power to stop it, we ought to stop genocide and ethnic cleansing.” In reality, the Clinton doctrine was that presidents are entitled to commence bombing regardless of whether their accusations against foreigners are true. As long as the U.S. government promises great benefits from bombing abroad, presidents can usually attack whom they please.

Mr. Clinton’s war on Serbia was a Pandora’s box from which the world still suffers. Because politicians and most of the media portrayed the war against Serbia as a moral triumph, it was easier for the Bush administration to justify attacking Iraq and for the Obama administration to bomb Libya. Both interventions sowed chaos that continues to curse the purported beneficiaries.

Unfortunately, Bill Clinton will never be held liable for killing innocent Serbs or for helping body-snatchers take over a nation the size of Connecticut. Mr. Clinton is reportedly being paid up to $500,000 for each speech he gives nowadays. Perhaps some of the well-heeled attendees could brandish artificial arms and legs in the air to showcase Mr. Clinton’s actual legacy.

From Lewrockwell.com, here.

תיקוני עירובין גליון #205

גליון שאלות הלכתיות המתחדשות מדי שבוע בבדיקת העירובים השכונתיים

Download (PDF, 264KB)

Reprinted with permission.

הערה: ניתן גם להרשם לקבלת עלון “פתח העירוב” על סדר שו”ע ומשנה ברורה בהלכות עירובין במייל:a83320@gmail.com

‘Kiymu Vekiblu Hyehudim’ – What’s Been HOT This Month

  1.  מעשה ביהודי שחשב שהוא ירודי – הינדיק
  2.  Did You Know Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan’s ‘Living Torah’ Is Online?
  3.  מצע מפלגת זהות – 300 דפים
  4.  קול החינוך Kol Hachinuch Archives
  5. CHASSIDIC Requiems for Chassidus…
  6.  ‘The More Pleasure During the Mitzvah, the Better the Character of the Offspring’
  7. Partial Purim Post Compilation
  8. Science Must Become the Handmaiden of Religion!
  9. FREE – Short, Down-to-Earth English Guide to Shalom Bayis for Men
  10. Are You Allowed to Say ‘Today Is Wednesday’?
  11. So, How Will Zehut’s Planned ‘Aliyah Ministry’ Be ANY Different Than the Jewish Agency?!
  12. איש יהודי: פסקי השו”ע ובית יוסף ומנהגי האר”י האמתיים, ופירוש המגילה בדרך פרד”ס
  13. תיקוני תשובת המשקל לפגם הברית ועוד – חלק שני
  14. Popular Posts
  15. חילונים, חרדים, והאשמות גזענות – יהודה סגל מצליף

Atzavim, Shikutzim, Chamanim, Asherim

Top Ten Words for Idols

The classical rabbinic work Avos d’Rabbi Nosson (ch. 34) writes that just as there are ten names which refer to G-d, so too there are ten words for idolatry. Malbim explains that these ten words of idolatry correspond to the ten names of G-d because G-d created the world such that there is equal power to the forces of good and the forces of evil. This equalization serves to allow each individual to choose his own path, without prejudice towards one option over the other. As you might know, man’s ability to choose his own path is the basis for all reward and punishment.

Before we go on to explain these ten words, Rabbi Yom Tov Tzahalon (1559-1638), sometimes known as Maharitatz, points out the obvious: While the ten names of G-d refer to One Entity who is called by ten names, the ten words for idolatry represent ten distinct types of idol worship, and do not refer back to one unified idea. In other words, the Bible uses these ten words to disparagingly refer to idolatry, but these words are not contextually interchangeable because they may refer to different aspects of idolatry. Still, the Sages understood that conceptually all of these words allude to various negative properties of idolatry in general.

We will now visit each of these ten synonyms and explain how they relate back to idol worship or idolatrous deities. Idolatrous deities are called elilim because they are “hollow” (chalulim). Malbim explains that idolaters pretend that idols have holy spirits within them, but, in reality, they are hollow and empty. Two different versions of Rashi (to Shabbat 149a) give two different explanations as to the meaning of elilim. In the printed edition of Rashi he explains that the word elilim is related to the word chalalim (“corpses”), ostensibly because idols, like corpses, are inanimate objects that have no life. An alternate version of Rashi (cited by Rabbeinu Nissim and Ritva there) explains that elilim is related to chalulim (“hollow”) because their existence was imagined in the “empty cavity of the hearts” of those who worship them.

Elsewhere, Rashi (to Lev. 19:4, Jer. 14:14, Zech. 11:17, Job 13:4), as well as Ibn Ezra (to Lev. 19:4) and Nachmanides (to Job 13:4), explain that the word elil is derived from the Hebrew word al (“not”), and refers to the nothingness and non-existence of idols’ powers.

One type of idol is a pesel because it is considered “disqualified” (nifsal or pasul) from the range of legitimate expressions of worship.

Another type of idol is called a masecha because it is “poured” (nisuchim).Malbim (1809-1879) and Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim of Breslau (1740-1814) explain that this refers to metal idols that were formed through molten metal poured into cast molds. Rabbi Eliyahu Benamozegh (1822-1900) writes that the word masecha is related to sichah (anointment), and refers to the ritual anointing of idols for their “consecration” (which was said to bring the spirit of the deity into the physical idol).

An additional type of idol worship is called a mazteivah (“single-stone altar”), because idols must remain “standing” (nitzavim) in their place and cannot move on their own.

Idols are also called atzavim (literally, “bones”) because they are made up of multiple parts, like the bones of a person (as opposed to G-d, Who cannot be broken down into multiple components). Malbim writes that idols are called atzavim because they “sadden” (atzuv) those who worship them, for they cannot deliver the expected results.

The Bible sometimes refers to idols as gilulim because they are “disgusting” (megualim) and are comparable to “excrement” (glalim). Rabbeinu Shimshon of Shantz and Pirush ha’Raavad (in their commentaries to the Toras Kohanim) clarify that these expressions of disgust and repulsiveness do not refer to the sin of idolatry. Rather, this term reflects the physical attributes of the idols themselves. For example, if rain falls upon idols left outside, then wooden idols become moldy, and metal ones rusty; if they are singed by fire they can also become filthy and repulsive.

Malbim explains that the disgust refers to the face of the images, which are sometimes portrayed as such disgusting creatures as insects, moles, and bats.

The execrable properties of idols are reflected in another two synonyms for idols: They are sometimes called terafim because they can become “rotten,” and sometimes called shikutzim because they are indeed an “abomination” (sheketz).

Idols are also called chamanim (a derivative of the word chamah — “sun”) because they are left outside to stand in the sun. Interestingly, Rav Achai Gaon (680-752) in Sheiltos d’Rav Achai Gaon explains that idols are called chamanim because they die like animals.

What is the connection between the word chamanim and animals? The Netziv, Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin (1816-1893), explains that when people die, thereby losing their ability to continue functioning, they are customarily buried in order to conceal their embarrassment. Animals, on the other hand, are not given that respect. Rather, their corpses are allowed to remain out in the open and continuously rot under the heat of the sun. Based on this, the Netziv explains that Rav Achai means that idols are most comparable to dead animals inasmuch as both are not buried when rendered useless, but are simply left out in the sun.

Finally, some idols are called asherim because they receive their “validation” (ishur) through other forces. This is because idols only receive their validation (i.e. praise) from others, but are not worthy of praise on their own merits, for they do not actually have any powers. Malbim explains this slightly differently. He writes that the “validation received through others” refers specifically to moon-worship because even though the ancient idolaters acknowledged that the moon does not possess any light of its own, but rather receives its light from the sun, they still continued to worship the moon.

Pirush ha’Raavad writes that idols are called asherim because they receive their “straightening out” (yashar) from outside forces. In other words, if the idol falls down for some reason, it cannot pick itself up, but rather needs to be set up again by someone else.

For more information about the different types of idolatry and how the struggle against Avodah Zarah played out in Biblical times, check out my new book G-d versus Gods: Judaism in the Age of Idolatry (Mosaica Press, 2018). Available online and at Jewish bookstores.