On a volontairement laissé entrer la grippe en France

Depuis fin avril, le premier ministre français a systématiquement ignoré toutes les mesures prévues par le Secrétariat Général de la Défense Nationale dans le "plan national de prévention et de lutte contre la pandémie grippale" (PG, version intégrale disponible sur www.umi.edu/grippe.htm), hormis quelques mesures symboliques comme le transfert du dossier au ministre de l'intérieur, la création d'une Cellule Interministérielle de Crise et la réquisition des stocks de traitements anti-grippaux.

Lundi 27 avril au soir, l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé passe au niveau 4 d'alerte et incite les pays à faire de même.

Lundi 27 avril, la France passe au niveau 4 d'alerte, qui d'après le plan national de prévention et de lutte contre la pandémie grippale (PG) prévoit notamment les mesures suivantes :

- suspension des liaisons aériennes, maritimes et terrestres avec les zones touchées (et mise en quarantaine préventive des voyageurs arrivés entretemps),

- renforcement du contrôle sanitaire aux frontières,

- mise en place d'un dispositif de traçabilité des voyageurs à leur arrivée,

- arrêtés du ministre de la santé concernant les mesures de quarantaine et d'isolement,

puis au niveau d'alerte 4B :

- activation des centres opérationnels départementaux et zonaux,

- mise en place de barrières de contrôle sanitaire et de circulation,

- suspension des liaisons aériennes, maritimes et terrestres à destination de l'étranger et de l'outre-mer,

- fermeture des crèches, établissements d'enseignement et de formation, internats, accueils collectifs de mineurs (le PG souligne "mesure indispensable dont l'efficacité est démontrée..."),

- interruption ou réduction de certains transports collectifs locaux,

- suspension des activités collectives (spectacles, rencontres sportives, foires et salons...),

- contrôle de l'accès dans les établissements hospitaliers, maisons de retraite, centres d'accueil, établissements pénitentiaires, établissements sociaux...,

- restriction des activités professionnelles, sociales, éducatives et associatives non essentielles,

- limitation des déplacements individuels aux seuls nécessaires...

De toutes ces mesures, seule a été appliquée la mise en oeuvre du dispositif de traçabilité des voyageurs à leur arrivée.

Pourtant la première mesure (suspension des liaisons aériennes, maritimes et terrestres ), à elle seule, aurait permis de retarder de plusieurs semaines l'arrivée du virus en France, comme l'a d'ailleurs constaté par exemple l'Argentine qui a interrompu toute liaison aérienne avec le Mexique pendant plus d'un mois (jusqu'à ce que le virus arrive par d'autres chemins). Alors même que le 28 avril la profession française du voyage (SNAV + CETO) décidait de suspendre ses vols vers le Mexique, la compagnie d'état Air France n'annula pas le moindre vol, et le ministère de la santé ne diffusait que des recommandations élémentaires aux voyageurs.

Mercredi 29 avril, l'OMS passe au niveau 5 d'alerte et recommande les pays à suivre.

Jeudi 30 avril, la France passe au niveau 5 d'alerte, qui prévoit notamment les mesures supplémentaires suivantes, introduites par la phrase "doit conduire à une mobilisation des autorités pour empêcher l'introduction du virus sur le territoire" :

- suspension de la délivrance des visas vers la France dans les pays touchés,

- extension des mesures de quarantaine aux ressortissants français en provenance des pays voisins de pays touchés,

- mise en place, si possible, d'un contrôle sanitaire au départ des pays voisins des pays touchés,

- suspension du système du "médecin traitant" et mise en oeuvre de mesures administratives facilitant la couverture maladie des malades,

- incitation ou restriction de mouvements de desserrement de la population urbaine ou de mouvements transrégionaux,

- coordination par le préfet de zone, en liaison avec l'officier général de zone de défense, des moyens civils et militaires mis à disposition des préfets de département,

- mise en place de structures intermédiaires d'hébergement pour regrouper les patients qui seraient isolés à domicile et dont l'état clinique ne requiert pas une hospitalisation,

- exploitation de modes alternatifs d'organisation (management de crise),

- développement du travail à distance,

- contrôle de la répartition des ressources en énergie, matières premières, produits industriels et produits nécessaires au ravitaillement,

- mise en place du contrôle des prix,

- réquisition de personnes, de biens et de services,

- rappel des réservistes de la réserve militaire opérationnelle pour assurer, en priorité, le fonctionnement de la chaîne de l'organisation territoriale interarmées de défense,

- arrêtés préfectoraux visant la mise en bière immédiate, la suspension des délais légaux, les dérogations concernant les véhicules funéraires...

Jeudi 11 juin, l'OMS passe au niveau 6 d'alerte.

Vendredi 12 juin, le premier ministre français décide de ne pas passer au niveau 6 d'alerte en France, au motif que "la France n’est pas considérée, à ce jour, comme un territoire où le virus circule activement au sein de la population". En effet l'Institut de Veille Sanitaire, désormais subordonné à la Cellule Interministérielle de Crise, recense, pour la France, 80 cas confirmés, dont 68 importés de pays où la circulation du virus au sein de la population est avérée et 12 cas secondaires n’ayant pas voyagé mais ayant été en contact avec des cas importés (en augmentation de 50% par rapport à jeudi 11 où on ne rapportait que 8 cas secondaires).

Or justement, le plan PG insistait sur la nécessité "d'empêcher l'introduction du virus sur le territoire" et concluait qu'une limitation de 99% des arrivées de tous les vols internationaux de passagers permet de retarder le pic pandémique d'environ trois à quatre semaines, avec une efficacité encore plus importante si la limitation se fait au départ des pays touchés.

Sachant que les cas importés sont venus en totalité d'Amérique du nord (dont pour moitié des Etats-Unis et pour 20% du Mexique), la mise en place le 28 avril de la principale mesure de protection recommandée par le plan PG au niveau 4 (suspension des liaisons avec les zones touchées) et de la deuxième (quarantaine), et le 30 avril de la principale mesure recommandée au niveau 5 (extension envers les pays voisins des pays touchés), aurait en effet retardé l'arrivée du virus en France de plus d'un mois, puisque selon l'Institut de Veille Sanitaire aucun cas français n'est arrivé d'ailleurs que d'Amérique du nord (alors qu'il y a de nombreux cas en Grande-Bretagne et en Espagne)...

A ce jour, les autorités françaises se contentent d'avertir les voyageurs qui partent vers les pays touchés, et d'informer les voyageurs arrivant en France sur la conduite à tenir en cas de maladie après leur arrivée...

Pandémie grippale - que nous cache-t-on ?

Depuis un mois et demi les media nous ressassent la grippe des pourceaux.

Si cette maladie est si grave, pourquoi le gouvernement français l'a-t-il laissée introduire en France, en refusant systématiquement d'appliquer les mesures judicieusement inscrites dans le plan national de prévention et de lutte contre la pandémie grippale, mis à jour il y a quelques mois ?

Est-il vraiment préférable de soumettre la population française à une maladie mortelle plutôt que de risquer d'entraver l'économie et le commerce avec l'Amérique du nord ?

Si cette maladie n'est pas grave, pourquoi le gouvernement a-t-il interrompu la livraison des traitements anti-grippaux aux pharmacies et aux grossistes, en réquisitionnant toute la production pour les hôpitaux, sous protection militaire, et en préparant la vaccination obligatoire de toute la population cet automne ?

Peut-on imaginer que les intérêts privés de quelques groupes pharmaceutiques aient pu obtenir la complicité des gouvernements les plus puissants pour alléger leur crise ?

Est-il possible qu'en cette année de nationalisations de banques on ait mis en oeuvre un niveau d'alerte prévoyant la réquisition de biens et personnes, le contrôle des prix, la mobilisation de la défense territoriale, la limitation des mouvements internes, et qu'on n'ait pas nationalisé ou réquisitionné les brevets d'exploitation commerciale des médicaments susceptibles de sauver des millions de vies ?

Doit-ont envisager qu'un gouvernement puisse être assez corrompu pour vacciner de force toute une population contre une maladie inoffensive ?

Que penser d'un gouvernement qui prétend demander à la Commission Européenne la fermeture des frontières, puis quand celle-ci répond que c'est encore du ressort de chaque gouvernement, se garde bien de les fermer ?

Que penser quand un régime, qui avait menti sur le trajet du nuage de Tchernobyl puis sur le nombre de milliers de morts d'une canicule, déclare qu'en dépit du maintien des vols et du refus du contrôle sanitaire aux frontières il n'y a eu en un mois et demi que 80 cas dans un pays entouré de voisins qui en ont eu plusieurs centaines ?

Serait-il possible que certains gouvernements se soient d'abord compromis, puis aient ensuite réalisé la catastrophe économique et sociale qu'entraînerait une paralysie injustifiée de la vie d'un pays ?

Comment expliquer les contradictions de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, qui constate statistiquement une véritable pandémie et dans le même temps signale que ce virus qui "peut encore évoluer vers une forme plus nocive" est relativement anodin ? Ou qui fournit aux gouvernements le cadre juridique leur permettant de proclamer l'état d'exception, leur rappelle leur liberté de le faire, mais n'émet aucune recommandation musclée pourtant en son pouvoir ?

Est-il rassurant ou inquiétant que si l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé incite bien les grands laboratoires à démarrer la production d'un vaccin dès qu'ils auront fini la production annuelle du vaccin contre la grippe saisonnière dans l'hémisphère nord, elle ne leur demande pas d'interrompre cette production du vaccin habituel pour travailler plus tôt sur le vaccin exceptionnel ?

Dernières nouvelles :

- Novartis est prête, grâce à sa propriété intellectuelle de l'adjuvant exclusif MF59 (www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2009/06/12/novartis-nous-sommes-prets_1206137_3244.html#ens_id=1185166).

- .des résistances au Tamiflu apparaîtront si des traitements contrefaits font leur apparition sur le marché (http://actualite.portail.free.fr/monde/12-06-2009/les-pays-pauvres-1e-front-de-la-lutte-contre-la-grippe-ah1n1/).

L'agressivité inscrite dans la constitution française

La politique du roquet consiste à compenser la faiblesse par l'agressivité.

Suivant le même principe, Nicolas Sarkozy a entrepris de remplacer la posture de défense de la France par une posture agressive. En parallèle au chantier de dépeçage des derniers restes des armées françaises il a lancé un chantier de construction institutionnelle visant à faciliter le recours à la force par le gouvernement.

Alors que la loi dite de "modernisation des institutions" avait été annoncée comme une obligation pour la mise en conformité avec le traité européen dit "constitutionnel", elle n'a pas souffert de la deuxième mort juridique de celui-ci le 13 juin mais a bien été présentée et votée le 21 juillet, sous le prétexte notamment de "renforcer le rôle du parlement" et de "rénover le mode d'exercice du pouvoir exécutif", en clair de donner de nouveaux moyens d'action au gouvernement et de nouveaux motifs de discussion au parlement.

Entre autres modifications, désormais le gouvernement "informe le parlement de sa décision de faire intervenir les forces armées à l'étranger, au plus tard trois jours après le début de l'intervention" et "précise les objectifs poursuivis". Puis "lorsque la durée de l'intervention excède quatre mois, le gouvernement soumet sa prolongation à l'autorisation du parlement".

Ainsi, un président français qui souhaiterait attaquer un pays étranger n'aura plus à choisir entre demander l'autorisation préalable au parlement (comme le prévoyait l'ancien article 35 de la constitution) ou violer la constitution comme l'avait fait Jacques Chirac en 1999. Il peut passer à l'attaque, en informer le parlement dans les trois jours, et n'a rien à demander tant que l'agression ne dépasse pas quatre mois.

Ainsi, au moment même de rentrer dans l'OTAN selon le souhait du président actuel, et au nom de l'Union Européenne (que le traité de Lisbonne inféode d'ailleurs à l'OTAN), la France devient constitutionnellement une puissance agressive.

Pour mémoire, déjà le 19 janvier 2006 Jacques Chirac avait modifié la doctrine stratégique française, remplaçant la doctrine de dissuasion dite de "non-emploi" par une doctrine d'emploi du nucléaire, ne s'interdisant plus de frapper des pays non-nucléaires (en violation du traité de non-prolifération), ajoutant entre autres à ses intérêts vitaux la garantie de ses approvisionnements, et s'autorisant désormais à recourir à des frappes nucléaires contre tout Etat qui aurait recours au terrorisme, à la menace ou au chantage.

Auparavant il avait détourné le peuple de l'armée, par la suppression du service national qui imposait l'autorisation du parlement pour engager des conscrits sur un théâtre d'opérations en temps de paix (tant que cette notion n'est pas effacée). Cette décision ne pouvait qu'entraîner les difficultés de recrutement dont l'armée n'a pas le droit de parler, et qui permettront à un prochain gouvernement de créer des armées privées, comme aux Etats-Unis d'Amérique...

Ainsi la 5° République, après avoir banalisé l'utilisation du nucléaire et alors qu'elle termine son désarmement conventionnel, devient officiellement un régime agressif.

The War in South Ossetia: Whose fault is it?

Who is to blame for what is going on in South Ossetia?

First, responsibility for this drama, of course, lies with the countries who recognized the self-proclaimed independent state of Georgia without also recognizing the self-proclaimed independent state of South Ossetia (the same is true for Abkhazia) and without demanding any kind of guarantees for minorities before recognizing the republics that claimed sovereignty upon the dissolution of the USSR. Recognition of a newly drawn international border suddenly dividing the Ossetian people (in 1991) could not prevent this people from dreaming of its reunification.

Second, responsibility for the drama lies with the European countries who rewarded Croatia for its attack and conquest of Krajina and Western Slavonia, both supposedly protected by UN peacekeepers (UNPROFOR). The admission of Croatia into the Council of Europe in 1996, just one year after Operation Storm, i.e. the expulsion by the neo-Nazi Tudjman regime of 10% of the total population of Croatia, who happened to be minority Serbs, not only guaranteed that the declared wish to return by the refugees would never be realized but also constituted encouragement for any new self-proclaimed state wishing to deprive its minorities of civil rights or even expel them militarily, as well as encouragement for the self-proclamation of "ethnically pure" states.

Third, responsibility lies with Russia for not having recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia when other big powers recognized the independence of the Albanian diaspora regime in Kosovo, which led Georgia to the conclusion that Russia cared more about maintaining good relations with the USA and NATO than about protecting Ossetian and Russian citizens.

And, of course, direct responsibility lies with the country that provided Georgia with weapons, military planning capabilities, diplomatic support, the promise of military backing and the commanding officers who were so efficient in Croatia in 1995; without these, the president of Georgia would never have launched an offensive that would inevitably result in the deaths of some Russian peacekeepers.

Ultimately, a part of the responsibility also lies with the members of the Security Council who on at least two occasions refused to vote (or voted against) a proposed resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and the return of all forces to their positions as of last Thursday, thus demonstrating their official support for the military offensive launched by the Georgian government.

The Real Radovan

What the mainstream media is not likely to tell you about the man the Bosnian Muslims and their supporters call "the Butcher of Bosnia".

Who is Dr. Radovan Karadzic, the man for whom one could hardly think of a more unlikely disguise than bioenergy guru?

A psychiatrist-physician and recognized poet, a man from the mountains far more educated than his admirer, the late Vladimir Volkoff, described and disguised in his fictionalized accounts*, he was elected the head of the political party of the Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina shortly before the president of the Islamic party asked the European Community to recognize the independence of Bosnia (December 20, 1991), subsequently proclaiming its secession (March 3, 1992) in violation of the constitutions of both the Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SRBH) and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRJ).

With Jose Cutileiro, he was one of the chief proponents of the Lisbon Agreement (accepted by the three parties on February 23, denounced by the Muslims, renegotiated thanks to Karadzic on March 16, ultimately signed on March 18) constituting a Swiss-type Bosnia and Herzegovina confederation of three cantons, Muslim, Serb and Croat, a pre-constitutional agreement intended to avoid the war. Upon the instigation of U.S. ambassador Warren Zimmermann, for whom the Muslims had more to gain from war than from peace, Islamist president Alija Izetbegovic (who had authored an Islamic manifesto as early as 1972) withdrew his signature from the Lisbon Agreement on March 28, followed on April 4 by his decree mobilizing Islamist militias (prepared secretly beforehand) and ordering them to take control of all town centers, which sparked the beginning of the war. This occurred with the encouragement of the USA, which recognized the independence of Muslim Bosnia and Herzegovina on April 6 and was followed the same day by the European Community, which wanted to avoid independent recognition by Germany, as had been the case for Croatia and Slovenia. Therefore, the next day, April 7, 1992, Karadzic proclaimed the independence of the Republic of Srpska, while his Croat counterpart Mate Boban would wait until August 28, 1993 to declare the independence of the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia.

Most importantly, President Karadzic founded the last Christian theocracy in Europe. He was among the first to return properties confiscated under Communism to the Church (since then all former Communist countries have followed suit; only France still refuses to return what had been confiscated during the Revolution). He drafted a constitution according to which Christianity was the official religion of the state, and instituted universal catechism in the public schools, which quickly became the favorite subject of the students, who were proud to bring home teachings denied their parents under Communism. At the same time, Karadzic ensured a decent existence not only for the Muslims who remained in the territory of his Christian republic but also for the thousands who sought refuge there after fleeing from the Islamic republic of central Bosnia. And he welcomed the Orthodox Serb refugees expelled from Croatia (some of whom first went to Serbia, which was bigger and at peace, but they were so poorly received there that they came to the Republic of Srpska, which was at war). Considering the Muslims to be "misled brothers" (Serbs converted to Islam during the Turkish occupation), Karadzic was nevertheless cautious of opportunistic false conversions and "prohibited" the Church from baptizing Muslims during the war, while ensuring these would be possible after the war. This resulted in some Muslims going to Serbia or Germany to be baptized before returning as Christians to the Republic of Srpska. A devout believer himself, Karadzic recommended his army and his people to the Church. One recalls how the Bishop of Tuzla and Zvornik was deemed a "war criminal" by the so-called international community (OSCE, OHR, UNHCR, SFOR, etc.) after he was reported by the Muslims to have "blessed Serb guns" during the war when, of course, his only "crime" was to have blessed soldiers going to the battlefront and perhaps to their deaths. Karadzic believed that the Serb people had sinned horribly (by its materialism) and had to suffer to redeem itself of this sin. A monarchist, Karadzic restored the royal Serb coat of arms, re-crowning the double-headed eagle which made his flag and seals easily distinguishable from those of neighboring Serbia, and the currency of Yugoslavia. But as he wrote in "The Awakening of the Crushed Soul", he believed that the Serbs would not be reunified for a long time, perhaps for decades, and that the suffering of the Serbs west of the Drina River would contribute to the redemption of all Serbdom. But Serbia, plodding slowly from socialist to capitalist materialism, which had just abandoned the Bosnian Serbs by withdrawing Yugoslav Army troops was not yet mature for such as reunion. President of a community that officially came under attack on April 4, 1992, Karadzic waited until May 12 to create an army; like his Croat counterpart Mate Boban, Karadzic accepted (and even proposed) every attempt to negotiate a peace agreement (except one), and he respected every agreement he signed, unlike their Muslim counterpart Izetbegovic. At the same time quite humane but also a responsible head of state, Karadzic decided that the Republic of Srpska would not issue passports because if it did so, the entire population would leave (a bitter saying was "would the last one to leave please turn off the light"), unlike the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, which was still issuing passports two years after its official dissolution, and the Islamic republic of central Bosnia, which gave Osama bin Laden, a leader supplier of fighters and funds, a passport in 1993. Karadzic is also accused of tolerating black market activities, though these may have been inevitable and necessary in a country emerging from Communism, subject to a strict embargo and without access to the sea, abandoned by its mother state of Serbia, and forced to barter agricultural goods with neighboring Croatia to get the fuel that both the army and the farmers needed.

The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which U.S. propaganda sought to hide was of a religious nature (presenting it as a national conflict instead) can be roughly divided into two periods. When what was left of Yugoslavia (Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia) withdrew Yugoslav Army troops after the declaration of Bosnia and Herzegovina's secession, the Bosnian Muslims launched a military conquest of all of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Bosnian Croats (who had initially accepted the idea of independence, believing it might result in union with Croatia, already independent since the previous year) understood, as did the Bosnian Serbs, that the ultimate goal of the Bosnian Muslims was not secession but islamization. This first phase of the war, which lasted about six months, was the most brutal, because it was a real civil war. It saw very few clashes between Serbs and Croats, who lived in different regions according to the old demarcation of zones of influence of Rome and Byzantium (but they made the mistake of not forming an alliance, and thus today they are dominated by the Muslim minority). Both the Serbs and the Croats, in their respective areas of population, were farmers who had retained their Christian tradition despite the Ottoman occupation, while the Muslims throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina were typically city dwellers, craftsmen, merchants or public servants whose ancestors had converted to Islam. The first phase of the war, therefore, was one where, in the best case, people who felt they were in the minority in one area moved to another area where their community was in the majority; in the worst case, they were expelled or simply executed by their neighbors. Intimidation, murder, a sense of impunity and settling of accounts between neighbors raged throughout the summer of 1992 (after the Yugoslav Army's withdrawal at the end of May). With autumn the war entered its second phase, which was to last three years, with regular armies (now constituted and wearing distinct uniforms) representing four, and later three, communities confronting each other. A quick parenthesis here: in addition to the Serbian Orthodox Republic of Srpska, the Croat republic (which was secular but predominantly Roman Catholic) and the Islamic republic, a fourth entity emerged, Muslim-dominated but secular and resolutely anti-Islamic, in the northwest, the so-called Bihac pocket. Maintaining good relations with its immediate Christian neighbors, the Republic of Srpska in Bosnia, the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia, and the Serb Republic of Krajina in Croatia, this small autonomous Muslim region was eventually cruelly crushed by the Islamic republic of central Bosnia. From the autumn of 1992 to the end of the summer of 1995, a conventional war between warring nations and their constituted states was fought with their regular armies along relatively fixed front lines, a war of positions (and trenches) between armies which, born from the reservists militia of the former Yugoslav self-defense system, had most defensive tactics and weapons, and would have had to get used to an armed but balanced coexistence. This equilibrium was disrupted when the US sent offensive weapons to the Bosnian Muslims (in violation of the embargo imposed by the United Nations), as it has repeatedly acknowledged without qualms. The Bosnian Muslims also recruited mujahedeen ("soldiers of Allah") from across the Muslim world, especially the Arab countries, Pakistan and Afghanistan, who were armed and financed by all the Islamic powers (Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Turkey, Malaysia, Pakistan, Iran, etc.) with, of course, strong support from the USA. The second part of the war, in comparison with the civil war that had preceded it, was far more civilized, in the sense of the concept cultivated by the different societies: the Bosnian Croats behaved like a professional army with leadership closely patterned on the German model; the Bosnian Serbs behaved like Christians following the Gospel and as worthy successors of the Crusades; and the Bosnian Muslims behaved like Islamist practitioners of the raid (razzia) and systematic rape taught in the Koran, as heirs of such medieval Turkish techniques as the impalement of civilian "infidels" and the collection of severed heads, and fans of all types of fellagahs that have made Algeria and Lebanon what they are today.

A major event marked this war and its history, the takeover of Srebrenica in July 1995. A predominantly Muslim town enclaved in a mainly Serb countryside, it had been designated by the UN a "demilitarized safe area" but was never demilitarized (the same was true of Gorazde, which had an arms and ammunition factory). Instead, it served as the base of an Islamist brigade of 5.000 fighters that terrorized the whole region, burning hundreds of villages and hamlets and killing some 3.000 Serb peasants. The chief of that brigade, Naser Oric, was recently acquitted by the "tribunal for the former Yugoslavia" - despite the existence of videos in which he boasts of his exploits to foreign journalists and pulls from a box several still identifiable heads of Serbs. Having asked for Srebrenica's demilitarization by the UN, and waited for several years in vain, the Republic of Srpska decided, after the destruction of the village of Visnjica and the massacre of its entire Serb population, to attack Srebrenica and remove this canker. After concentrating their troops, the Muslim fighters in Srebrenica were called on to surrender in order to avoid an attack that could potentially harm the civilian population. This call was rejected outright, and the Serbs prepared to attack the Muslim brigade entrenched in the city. They called on the civilian (also Muslim) population to leave, and this was forcibly prevented by the Islamist fighters keeping them hostage, knowing their presence would deter the Christians from attack. The Serb general in charge of the operation (a hero and a great man) brought in dozens of buses and trucks. He told the civilians they had the choice of staying after Srebrenica had been cleaned of fighters or they could be taken to a Muslim area. He asked the UN to observe the takeover of the town and to oversee the subsequent sorting of the population. When attack became imminent, the 5.000 Islamist fighters fled into the night and hid in the forest hoping to rejoin Muslim lines. They were pursued by the Serb troops: a quarter were killed (in combat), some were taken prisoner (and later exchanged), and the rest arrived in the Muslim-held town of Tuzla a few days later. The remaining population was sorted into locals who wanted to stay, refugees from other regions who wanted to be transferred to a Muslim area, and non-local men of fighting age without families, who were suspected of being fighters who stayed and therefore forcibly taken to Muslim lines. For a non-conventional and semi-police operation of its kind(extracting enemy fighters hiding among a civilian population), it was a great success, well done and cleanly carried out by military personnel. Unfortunately, it also became a great success of US pro-Muslim propaganda. Different reports on the columns that fled into the forest were added together (thus, if the same column was reported by three different organizations and there were three different reports, the total number in the column would be multiplied by three). Reports of the Muslim fighters' arrival in Tuzla and elsewhere were strangely omitted; what was broadcast to the world was that the Serbs had massacred tens of thousands of Muslims (the figure has now been reduced to 8.000), who suddenly all became unarmed civilians. Lists of "missing persons" were subsequently tacked on where some of the names were repeated as many as three times; many of these "missing persons" would reappear (miraculously) one year later to vote in the 1996 elections. In short, if one adds the numbers of the remaining population, the columns of fighters who arrived in Tuzla and the captured combatants, one gets just about the same figure as given by the UN as the total population of Srebrenica (44.000) a few weeks before the conquest of Srebrenica. The difference amounts to just over 1.000 Islamists who may have been actually killed (as were some Serbs) when they chose to fight rather than surrender. This propaganda-based version of events has been used to justify the NATO attack against the Republic of Srpska. It was followed by a specious search for the mass graves the USA claimed to have detected by satellite; when they were not located, it was explained that the bodies had been dug up and transferred. Thereafter, any corpse found within a two hundred kilometer radius around Srebrenica (including the 3.000 Serbs who had been slaughtered by Oric's men in the surrounding countryside for the three previous years) automatically became "Muslims massacred by Serbs in Srebrenica".

But one cannot say or write any of this without risking the accusation of "revisionism" and "negation of a war crime".

Radovan Karadzic withdrew from public life after the signing of the Peace Agreement initialed at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base at Dayton, Ohio, USA and signed in Paris (December 1995) after being assured by the USA that his withdrawal would ensure that he would not be pursued by the extraordinary "tribunal" created to vilify the Serbs and justify NATO intervention on the side of the Bosnian Muslims. On Saturday, July 26, at noon, the population of the Republika Srpska gathered peacefully and lit candles for the hero of its resistance to the Islamic conquest.

* Vladimir Volkoff, La Crevasse (1996) and L'enlèvement (2000).

TIMELINE

October 1991 : declaration by Muslim and Croat deputies in SR BiH Parliament of the sovereignty of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

October 24 : in reaction Serb deputies create an assembly of the Serbs of BiH.

November 18 : creation of the Croatian Community of Herzeg-Bosnia, the "political, cultural, economic and territorial" Croat entity on the territory of BiH.

December 20 : the president of BiH, Alija Izetbegovic, asks the European Community to recognise its independence.

January 9, 1992 : creation of the Serbian People's Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

February 28 : adoption of the constitution of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a part of the Yugoslav federal state (in protest against the announced referendum).

February 29 - March 1 : unconstitutional referendum on the secession of BiH.

March 3 : proclamation of the independence of BiH.

April 4 : decree of mobilization by Izetbegovic and takeover of town centres by his Islamic militias.

April 6 : recognition of the independence of BiH by the USA and the European Community.

April 7 : proclamation of the independence of RS BiH.

May 12 : creation of the Republika Srpska Army (VRS).

End of May : completion of the withdrawal of Yugoslav Army troops.

August 12 : Republika Srpska becomes RS instead of RS BiH.

July 1992 : proclamation of sovereignty by the Croatian Community of Herzeg-Bosnia (HZHB).

August 28, 1993 : proclamation of the independence of HZHB, now renamed the Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia (HRHB).