Milosevic vs Clark: From the Heavily Edited Transcripts

un.org/icty ^ | 15-16 December 2003 | ICTY

[Destro]

The UN kangaroo court would not even let Slobo use Wesley's own book to cross examine him!!

"this is truly nothing more than a farce."

[Destro]

bump

[XHogPilot]

CLARK: Well, Your Honour, I gave the testimony to the best of my recollection. The facts are exactly as I recollect them, and those are the facts I gave the Court.

99.999% Pure Clinton!

[endthematrix]

The A$$hole Judge: Your fate has already been decided. If you wish to comment, only strict limits on what you say will be enforced. And you have a time restriction. I'm truly sorry, that is not relevant to the issue at hand. Try again. Time is up.
Thank you for the post. Power hungry globalists know the power they wield. Do Americans?

[G.Mason]

This is right out of Alice in Wonderland.

[G.Mason]

From Alice in Wonderland .......

" At this moment the King, who had been for some time busily writing in his note-book, called out "Silence!" and read out from his book, "Rule Forty-two.

All persons more than a mile high to leave the court."

Everybody looked at Alice.

"I'm not a mile high," said Alice.
"You are," said the King.

"Nearly two miles high," added the Queen.

"Well, I shan't go, at any rate," said Alice; "besides, that's not a regular rule: you invented it just now."

"It's the oldest rule in the book," said the King.

"Then it ought to be Number One," said Alice."

[Democratshavenobrains]

I was hoping this trial would have a "Law and Order Surpise Ending", like Slobo breaking Clark down on the stand, and making him admit he was Clinton's gay boyfriend.

[A. Pole]

At this moment the King, who had been for some time busily writing in his note-book, called out "Silence!" and read out from his book, "Rule Forty-two.

All persons more than a mile high to leave the court."

Everybody looked at Alice.

"I'm not a mile high," said Alice. "You are," said the King.

"Nearly two miles high," added the Queen.

"Well, I shan't go, at any rate," said Alice; "besides, that's not a regular rule: you invented it just now."

"It's the oldest rule in the book," said the King.

"Then it ought to be Number One," said Alice.

Here comes the judge!

[RAY]

So much for those vaunted international tribunals!

[Lawgvr1955]

I am not writing this because I am anti-Clark, though that would be an accurate description. However, I have to agree with Slobo that his right of cross-examination is no right at all. How is he to cross Clark under the rules of this "court"? "We didn't have a meeting", "yes, we did", "no we didn't", "yes, we did", for two and a half hours. Apparently he can't cross Clark on such apparently relevant statements as Clark saying the war against Slobo was illegal.

This "show trial" doesn't pass the smell test.

[Hoplite]

Slobo was allowed to cross examine Clark upon evidence which Clark had given to the court.

He was not allowed to wander off into irrelevance as is his wont.

Picture Saddam on trial for invading Kuwait or murdering his countrymen and attempting to waste the court's time with lectures on UN Sanctions or civilian casualties of our bombing - it would play well with the Ba'athists back home and to the leftist antiwar crowd, but wouldn't be pertinent to the charges against him.

Same deal with Slobo.

The pertinent points of Clark's testimony, being Slobo's control over the Bosnian Serbs, and the nature of Serbian actions in Kosovo, were not addressed by Slobo, merely reinforcing the fact that he has a fool for a lawyer.

[Seselj]

You obviously know nothing about law. Such rules do not exist in any other court.

[BigBobber]

Slobo wanted to attack Clark's credibility. He sought to do so by using Clark's own book and his CV as presented by the Clark. Certainly seems like the thing a court should allow.

I haven't seen all of Clark's testimony, but it appears all he presented to the court was hearsay - this is what Slobo told me in a meeting. What court allows hearsay evidence like this?

[faithincowboys]

Clark ia a National embarrasment. He wouldn't know the truth if it slapped him across his Rat bastard face. He should have to defend his "technically illegal" War in Kosovo. This is a show trial.

[breakem]

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think first person reporting of a meeting or conversation is considered hearsay. I will defer to someone who comes along with an authoritative answer.

[faithincowboys]

I think Clark's statements on the illegality of the War he waged are germane to the proceeding. It should interest the Court and the world community if Clark (self proclaimed expert on international law) waged a war in defiance of the UN and all international norms. If Clark wants to denigrate and criminalize America's War against Saddam, it is mandatory that he face similar scrutiny.


The truth of the matter is that Clark waged a War without UN approval. He morphed a strictly defensive alliance (NATO) into an offensive war machine. Isn't that how our friends on the Left would describe the foreign policy that led to the war in Kosovo had the President in charge not been a Democrat? Clark and Clinton bombarded infrastructure and civilian centers. The passenger train of Serb innocents that was bombed should be relevant.

The fact that Clark and Clinton and the Left refuse to stand for Kosovo is telling. Every moment they sling arrows at the just war against Saddam, yet they are unwilling to have their actions judged against international law--the hypocrisy of it is chilling. Who could have predicted that their actions in Kosovo could defeat all of their arguments against Bush? The inconsistency and hypocrisy of the Left will damn them for years to come.

[mark502inf]

As Hoplite said:

Slobo was allowed to cross examine Clark upon evidence which Clark had given to the court.

Exactly. And that is normal in a court. The ICTY has already allowed too much Milosevic grand-standing.

One of the reasons I am dead-set against the ICTY and similar type courts is because of exactly what we are seeing here--we have an indisputably guilty war criminal on trial and in a year and a half all they've managed to do is make him a hero back in the country that only a few years ago threw him out of office and delivered him to the court. And when all is said and done, they don't even have the death penalty--something Milosevic richly deserves.

Unfortunately, I don't what the alternative is to the ICTY at this time and in this particular case.

BTW, just because Clark and Clinton are who they are and you disagree with the Kosovo intervention and the ICTY, it does not follow that Milosevic is a victim or innocent or anything other than a mass-murderer

[faithincowboys]

If I were Slobo, a dreadful thought, I would say that Clark told me in private that Clinton was bombing Kosovo to distract from his domestic problems and to establish a legacy that consisted of more than BJs in the Oval Office.
Who could refute that? I would use Clark's picture with the war criminal's hat on to buttress my contention-- Clark wasn't repulsed by war crimes and butchery, he was merely following orders to save the skin of a a domestic and international criminal leader, William Jefferson Clinton.

It's so funny. If Saddam were questioning Tommy Franks at the Hague, the judges at the Hague would make Judge Ito look like he ran a tight ship. I assure you, Franks would be subjected to a body cavity search and nothing would be declared beyond the scope. Didn't our Euro-leftists friends in Belgium recently try to indict Franks and Rumsfeld and Bush on war crimes? I assure you, they would let Saddam ask anything. They would have Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal as Saddam's lawyers.

The Left is sickening!

[Destro]

it is hearsay because no back up exists. It is only recollection.

[breakem]

D is yours a legal definition?