“All the NewsrnUnfit to Print” ignsi of tlje QCimesirnVol. 1 No. 8 August 1999rnRegular readers of this column are acquaintedrnwith the exact terms of the Rambouilletrn”peace” accords, which Serbia refusedrnto sign, and for which reason it gotrnbombed. The details of this Americansponsoredrnplan are still unfit to print in thern”mainstream” media in the United States,rnbut the cat is out of the bag in Europe. LernMonde Diplomatique, La Repubblica, andrnothers have written about “the plan thatrnwas not meant to be accepted.” In Britain,rnJohn Pilger was the first to blow the whisdern{New Statesman, May 17):rnAnyone s c r u t i n i s i n g the Rambrno u i l l e t document i s left inrnl i t t l e doubt that the excusesrngiven for the subsequent bombingrnwere fabricated. The peacernnegotiations were stage-managed,rnand the Serbs were told:rnsurrender and be occupied, orrndon’t surrender and be destroyed.rn. . . Nato’s aim wasrnthe occupation not only ofrnKosovo, but effectively a l l ofrnYugoslavia. Nothing like thisrnultimatum has been put to arnmodern, sovereign Europeanrns t a t e . Of a l l the Hitler andrnNazi analogies that have pepperedrnthe west’s propaganda,rnone i s never mentioned—rnH i t l e r ‘ s proposal in 1938 tornthe B r i t i s h prime minister,rnNeville Chamberlain, that Germanyrnoccupy Czechoslovakia becausernethnic Germans there hadrnbeen “tortured”, “forced tornflee the country” and “preventedrnfrom r e a l i s i n g thernright of nations to self-determination”rn. As a cover forrnGerman expansion. Hitler wasrnlaying the basis for a “humanitrna r i a n intervention”, whosernfraudulence was no greaterrnthan Nato’s cover for i t s ownrnworldwide expansion.rnPilger singled out chapter seven of thernRambouillet accords (“Status of MultinationalrnMilitary Implementation Force”),rnwhich says a NATO force occupying Yugoslaviarnmust have complete and unaccountablernpolitical power,rnimmune from all legal process,rnwhether civil, administrativernor criminal, [and] under allrncircumstances and at allrntimes, immune from [all laws]rngoverning any criminal or disciplinaryrnoffences which mayrnbe committed by Nato personnelrnin the Federal Republic of Yugoslaviarn. . .rnThe accords also placed under NATO controlrnthe airwaves, broadcast frequencies,rnand “the entire electromagnetic spectrum.”rnPilger’s conclusion is simple: “Norngovernment anywhere could accept this.rnIt was a deliberate provocation.”rnTo her credit, Serbia chose bombs, andrnthe indiscriminate killing of the Serbs-as-rnSerbs (not merely as the supposed membersrnof “Milosevic’s war machine”) wasrnwell under way when the New Republic,rnin its May issue, pubhshed an article entitledrn”The New Serbia” by David Goldhagenrnof Harvard University. Now, if yournare intent on indiscriminately killing thernmembers of an ethnic, religious, or socioeconomicrngroup, the preliminaryrngroundwork is always the same—whetherrnyour name is Robespierre, Dzerzhinsky,rnHimmler, or Albright. You demonize thatrngroup, dehumanize it, and proclaim all ofrnits members collectively guilty of somerncapital crime—such as being what theyrnare. In his remarkable piece of prose,rnGoldhagen provided a textbook case ofrncollective demonization and dehumanizationrnof an entire group:rn[l]f a people’s self-understandingrnof self-determinationrnincludes conquest, mass expulsion,rnand mass murder, thernprinciple of self-determinatrni on is rendered moot. . . .rnThe majority of the Serbianrnpeople, by supporting or condoningrnMilosevic’s eliminatrni o n i s t p o l i t i c s , have renderedrnthemselves both legallyrnand morally incompetent tornconduct their own a f f a i r s and arnpresumptive ongoing danger tornothers.rnMadeleine Albright is on record as havingrncalled “the Serbs” “awful,” RichardrnHolbrooke labeled them “murderous assholes,”rnand Senator Joseph Biden routinelyrncalls them “illiterates, degenerates,rnrapists, baby killers, and cowards” on nationalrntelevision. With Professor Goldhagen,rnwe finally have a quasi-scientificrn”jusrification” for this frenzied orgy ofrnSerbophobia. His suggestion that Serbsrnshould be “occupied, rehabilitated andrnpunished” for their collective sins—sornthat Serbia could tum into a miniature versionrnof Germany, which he terms “a forcernfor democracy, cooperation, and prosperity”rn—also implies that they should experiencernHamburg and Dresden if they resist.rnRoll out more B-52’s, Wesley!rnSpeaking of General Clark, evidence isrnemerging that his treatment of the civiliansrnof Belgrade, Nis, and Pristina was foreshadowedrnby a role in subduing thernBranch Davidian aggression at Waco sixrnyears ago. According to Alexander Cockbumrnand Jeffrey St. Clair iCounterPunch,rnMay 21), in the wake of the initial disastrousrnBATF attempt to storm the compoundrnon February 28, 1993, Texas GovemorrnAnn Richards asked to consult withrnknowledgeable military personnel. Herrnrequest went to the U.S. Army base at FortrnHood, where the commanding officer ofrnthe U.S. Army’s III Corps referred her tornthe Cavalry Division of the III Corps,rnwhose commander at the time was nonernother than Wesley Clark.rn. . . Richards met with WesleyrnClark’s number two, the a s s i s ­tantrndivision commander, whornadvised her on m i l i t a r y equipmentrnthat might be used in arnsubsequent raid. Clark’s man,rnat Richards’ request, also metrnwith the head of the Texas NationalrnGuard. Two senior Armyrnofficers subsequently trav-rn26/CHRONICLESrnrnrn