Header Image


Bad Eagle Journal

More Serbian Truth

by David Yeagley · June 14, 2005 · 26 Comments ·

The public does not know the history of Serbia. The “war crimes” for which Serbia is accused have been isolated, dramatized, anathematized. The name Slobodan Milosevic is universally execrated. The Left once again freely associates the execution of Bosnian Muslims with the Holocaust. Hitler’s genocide against the Jews is the ultimate condemnation for any expression of nationalism, ethnic pride, or even survival.

KLA terrorists.jpg
Al-qaeda-supported Kosovo (KLA)”terrorists,” still active today.

But the story is all wrong. The indigenous people of the territory of Bosnia are Serbs and Croations. The Turkish Muslems and their descendents only fairly recently decided to call themselves Bosnians. The Serbs and Croates who intermarried and converted to Islam were onced called Turks as well.

One really has to know the history of the Balkans before accusations or justifications can be made with any accuracy at all. Such confusion is a seed bed for Leftist media spin.

Part of what led to the media condemnation of Serbia was the movement of the Kosovo region toward independece. It was a Muslem movement, but the media never brought that out. (It’s the same situation today in Chechnya. The movement for independence is a Muslim movement, and it’s not about democracy.) The ethnic Albanian Muslims living in Kosovo were demanding independence in 1998, and the Kosovo Liberation Army was violent about it.

A great deal of the problem in the Balkans has always been artificial, superimposed boundaries, which often included powerful tribes of diverse enthnicity within the assigned borders of another, averse tribe. And the Slavic tribes also migrated across different boundaries. During the 1990’s Balkan wars, 300,000 Serbians, long living in territory called Croatia,fled from there, and Croatia has been slow to assist them in returning to their homes, what’s left of the homes.

But all parties have always attacked the Christian Orthodox Serbs. Hitler used Bosnian Muslims to slaughter untold numbers of Christian Serbs (as well as Jews). The genocide of 1.9 Serbian Christians is one of the least known attrocities of modern times. Hitler’s “Nazi” Bosnian Muslims were called Ustachi.

Croates, heavily Catholic, and ‘Bosnians,’ heavily Muslim, have repeatedly slaughtered and robbed Christian Orthodox Serbs for the last century.

Bill Clinton backed the Albanian Muslims in Kosovo who wanted independence from Serbia. Who backed Serbia in her struggle against local Islamicists and Catholics on all sides?

Most versions of the story are pro-anything but Serbian Orthodox. The fact that Serbians mercifully spared women and children of Bosnian Muslims is considered a “gendercide” instead. Osama Bin Ladin supports the KLA Muslims terrorists in the Balkans, whom Clinton and NATO’s Wesley Clark also supported.

What are we missing? Why the universal execration of Serbia?

Posted by David Yeagley · June 14, 2005 · 4:15 pm CT · ·

Tags: Bad Eagle Journal

Read More Journal Posts »

26 responses so far ↓

  • 1 desertrat77 // Jun 14, 2005 at 9:03 pm   

    Well apparently the rest of world decided 66 years ago that the fascist’s needed to be stopped, then the globe was drenched in the blood of America’s sons. So it was done again 10(ish) years ago(much less blood though).

    I also find it funny that your hero of the article (Milosovich) was once a staunch Communist(read, Left) who refused to abdicate power when he was elected out of office. Since the capture of him, the situation in Serbia and Kosovo is relatively stable, so much so that the US decided to pull almost all of its troops out of IFOR.

    So you are against Muslim expansion, and Islamofacsism? OK, but do not sit here and decry the poor Christians, who have done as much good as harm in the last 2000 years. I wonder what the tribal leaders in Europe thought of the expanding influence of the Catholic church? Probly sounds much like what you are writing.

    Happy 230th Birthday to the US Army!! (14 JUN 05)

  • 2 KPS // Jun 14, 2005 at 10:56 pm   

    Mr. Yeagley,

    After reading the “comments” connected to both of the posts you currently have on your home page, it is hard to keep from laughing.

    The resistance to your position(s), related to Serbs and Slobodan Milosevic, is like “old home week” to me.

    You see, the American public has bought all of the mainstream propaganda about the Serbs and Milosevic, and they believe it in every little bone of their bodies.

    Now you come along, claiming “conspiracy,” bias, unjust propaganda and a lot of other things, and they come down on you hard.

    As I so often ask, “Why are American’s so gullible?”

    But, what makes me laugh is the similarity between your out-of-the-mainstream pro-Serb positions and my pro-German WWI and WWII positions. However, the difference is that I am a proponent of both positions … pro-Serb and pro-German. You, however, are not buying the mainstream’s anti-Serb positions, while you are buying the mainstream’s anti-German positions. And, you believe the latter “in every little bone in your body.”

    However, go ahead and continually bash your head against a wall presenting your pro-Serb arguments. It will be entertaining for me, watching you squirm, as I can so strongly relate to your condition.


  • 3 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 8:43 am   

    KPS: What position(s) do I hold which you consider anti-German?

    By the way, I was unable to find on Reuters sites any 2-19-99 article about Clark. And on the searches, the only reference that comes up is your own, same quote. You’ll have to do better than that. I get a sense of slime in this, pardon my expression.

    And people are misreading what I’m saying in these Serbian posts. I’m saying Serbia has been very misrepresented. I’m saying the media and the Clinton administration was pro-Islam. I’m not saying anyone is a hero.

    You see? Milosevic is so execrated that people can’t see passed his name.

    DR77 I forgot about flag day! This is what I get for using a cheap Canadian calander from Dollar Store. Thanks for reminding us all. We post the flag every day around our Comanche homes. My mother, her sisters and her brother always had the American flag displayed in front of their homes.

  • 4 KPS // Jun 15, 2005 at 9:53 am   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    1. John O’Sullivan “In defense of nationalism”


    3. VDARE, Sam Francis “Abolishing America (contd.): Political Class Agrees — Bring On Interplanetary Immigration!”

    4. James Owens “The Kosovo Precedent Legitimizes the New World Order”

    5. Truth in Media “2. Novi Sad TV Also Hit by NATO: An Attack on Multiculturalism”

    6. Free Republic “Words from the rulers of the world”

    7. Justin Raimondo “NO REST FOR THE WICKED”

    8. The Conservative Caucus “GENERAL CLARK SAYS ETHNIC DIVERSITY IS “CASUS BELLI” (“justification for war”)”

    Please, Mr. Yeagley …


  • 5 KPS // Jun 15, 2005 at 9:56 am   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:



  • 6 KPS // Jun 15, 2005 at 10:09 am   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    For some reason your Blog would not allow me to post my reply (URLs included) to your question about the Clark quote, so I sent it to you via email.


  • 7 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 10:24 am   

    Thanks. I can’t get the blog posts to accept the URLs when I put them in code. Orthomom did it. I know it can be done, but, mine come out simply as thick blue letters. No link with them

    So, where am I anti-German?

  • 8 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 10:32 am   

    KPS, I just went into the inner mechanisms of the blog, and found your post. I manipulated a few things, and it came out, where you originally put it. Back a few entries. See?

    Now, we can all check out these links, by hand.


  • 9 Orthomom // Jun 15, 2005 at 1:33 pm   

    Test (opens in new window)

  • 10 Orthomom // Jun 15, 2005 at 1:36 pm   

    huh…well…the link worked for me but it didn’t open in a new window.

    I am on a Mac…don’t know if that makes a difference.

    Good luck figuring out…LOL!

    I appreciate that you are bringing the Serbian situation to light.

  • 11 Pat // Jun 15, 2005 at 1:56 pm   

    “Who backed Serbia in her struggle against local Islamicists and Catholics on all sides? ”

    So you’re lumping militant Islmists with Catholics? How about I lump all American Indians with ‘Bandito’s’ or the like?

  • 12 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 4:33 pm   

    Pat, I’m only talking about the Slavic situation. I’m sure there were Italian and German Catholics who faught against British and American Catholics in WWII.

    Or, is that your point?

    I was making no special point about Catholics, but only those Slav neighbors who have fought against Serbia.

  • 13 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 4:40 pm   

    Good show, KPS. All links check out. Thank you.

    I was in the middle of music degrees and college teaching in the ’90’s. I missed a lot of what Clinton and Clark were trying to do in Kosovo. In fact, I consider myself a victim of misinformation via MSM (main stream media). I remember the “ethnic cleansing” story, and how terrible a crime that was made out to be.

    It seems to me now that the story was simple not told accurately at all.

    So, for the third time, Where am I anti-German?

  • 14 Mario // Jun 15, 2005 at 8:29 pm   

    I am suspicious when our “main stream” media picks sides, ala good guy vs bad guy. They seem not to even have a basic historic outline of the trouble region. If they had, they would have know that in that troubled region NO ONE has their hands clean.

    Many leftist media outlets never mentioned the fact that Al-Qaeda was providing training and experience in the Balkans and Chechnya for their members in their world wide jihad.

    Just look how America is being portrayed as an evil bigger than Nazi Germany and Communist Russia combined when it comes to the “abuse” of muslim prisoners in Guantamano. Yet this same media will down play the terrorist attacks on INNOCENT Iraqis in their neighborhoods while doing their day to day business.

    This same media will try to “explain or rationalized” these attacks by accusing the US as the reason why these terrorists are attacking and if we would just leave-everything would be better.

    Which all points to the idea that in today’s media- Islamic terrorism is a sacred cow that can not be touched or even commented without the usual accusations of islamophobia or racism being thrown at.

    I just am wary when the media claims to be “unbiased or neutral” when it comes to condoning terrorism.
    Yet a muslim prisoner just whispers “abuse” and seems there is a 24/7 media blitz by the networks.

    Unfortunately many people will pay attention because of the old saying-the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Therefore beware of the ‘bad guys, good guys” that the leftist media wants you to see.

  • 15 Pat // Jun 15, 2005 at 9:33 pm   

    “The Balkans aren’t worth the bones of a Pomeranian Grenadier.” (Otto von Bismarck)

    The clash of cultures had occurred there for centuries…th eonly person who was able to keep it from flaring up was Tito. (Not that I recommend his methods)

    Most of the Catholics in the area were Croatians, who were suppressed and victimised by both the Serbs and Muslims. In fact, before the Serbs went after Kosovo, it was the Croats they went after…and no one said boo!

    The ‘I’m sure there were Italian and German Catholics who faught against British and American Catholics in WWII.’ is a straw arguement. So clever was Hitler, that many Germans didn’t see the Americans and Brits as liberators…thet honestly thought they lived in a democracy.

    “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.” (G.K. Chesterton)

    That’s true of most. The terrorist fights because he hates what’s in front of him.

    Indians fought for the people behind him, his people, his land, etc. Whites fought for the same reason…as German soldiers, Italian soldiers, Japanese soldiers.


  • 16 David Yeagley // Jun 15, 2005 at 10:01 pm   

    DR77, I take it you’re confident that there’s an abundance of smart people in the world.

    Being smart is rising above conditioning?

    Are you a Kristamurti man?

  • 17 KPS // Jun 16, 2005 at 12:12 am   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    You wrote: “By the way, I was unable to find on Reuters sites any 2-19-99 article about Clark. And on the searches, the only reference that comes up is your own, same quote. You’ll have to do better than that. I get a sense of slime in this, pardon my expression.” [emphasis mine]

    No apology, Mr. Yeagley?


  • 18 KPS // Jun 16, 2005 at 7:40 am   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    Let me repeat my post, just to refresh your memory.



    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    Let’s see now … in WWII the Nationalistic-minded, Christian Serbs supported the Leftist/Internationalist-oriented so-called Allied forces, which included the Communist Stalin, against the anti-Bolshevik, Nationalist, Axis forces.

    And, when the war was over, they got the Communist government of Yugoslavia, ruled by the Jew, Tito.

    When that period was over, and Yugoslavia broke up, the Nationalistic Serbs attempted to establish a Serbian nation.

    In return for that desire, they got NATO’s massive bombing and destruction, including the loss of Kosovo which was handed over to the Albanian Muslims.

    Want to understand it all, and what Germany’s loss in WWII really means to the Western World? Try this:


    Douglas Hamilton (Reuters — 2/19/99: “NATO General Says Milosevic Holds Kosovo Key”): … “There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th century idea and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states,” [NATO’s supreme commander, American Gen. Wesley] Clark [Jewish] said.



  • 19 desertrat77 // Jun 16, 2005 at 7:57 am   

    Doc, 2 questions:

    1) What happened to my last post?

    2)I am unfamilier with who Kristamurti is, but I will find out and research him.

    being smart can only take you so far, common sense, thinking quick on your feet, and instinct ususally make up the rest. Let’s not forget deductive reasoning. Most people are sheep. To give the rest of you that believe that the media is liberal, I post this question.

    Bill Clinton get some head from an intern, BushII decided to invade Iraq in the Summer of ’02(Downing street memo), before Congress even gives him the authority, and it’s looking more and more like they bent the evidence(no WMD’s, no weapons tech exported, no Iraq-al-Qaida terroist connection) around policy instead of the other way around. Which one is getting more press? So you tell me why when one man, in a moment of weakness, [EDITED: [commits fornication], is an impeachable offense, but when 1700+ Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines are now dead, that it isn’t? So show me your [EDITED] liberal media with a political agenda!!

  • 20 David Yeagley // Jun 16, 2005 at 9:21 am   

    KPS: most definitely apologies for implying your Clark quote was bogus.

    No apology, however, for evaluating your anti-Semitism for what it is, and nor for the egregious logic that would pit one religion against another as if to invalidate both, and validate yourself in the same breath.

    Anti-Semites are notorious for fabricating information, for lying, for distorting, for promulgating false information as truth. Take Adolf Hitler as a recent example.

  • 21 David Yeagley // Jun 16, 2005 at 9:25 am   

    DR77, apologies to you also. I was cleaning off another mountain of spam from the MovableType venue, and I evidently nixed a couple of posts, yours being one. (This has happened to you before, no?) I have to remove this spam by hand, so to speak, and it’s mixed in with the real posts. Occasionally, a real post gets lost.

    Now, I disagree wholly with your evaluation of Clinton. “A moment of weakness?” Try, a life of perversion and addiction, and anti-Americanism.

    WMD’s, Al-qaeda, formed part of the reason for the invation. There is literature to read which indicates WMD’s and literature that doesn’t. Same for Al-qaeda. If you don’t see the advantage of even trying to establish democracy in a rat hole like Iraq, I don’t know what to say to you.

  • 22 David Yeagley // Jun 16, 2005 at 9:30 am   

    Oh, yeah. The liberal media of course accuses all media of having conservative bias. When I was on C-Span, my speech was preceded by a Congressional hearing of liberal, leftist media professionals, all crying their heart out because the media was Right wing, and excluded them. I never heard such a false presentation in my life.

    Yes, they chose to see their own distortion as the truth.

    Let me ask you this: do you see a battle between liberals and conservatives? Do you even acknowledge such a contest?

    KRISHNAMURTI (sp) is considered very great. No insult in the comparison.

  • 23 desertrat77 // Jun 16, 2005 at 10:19 am   

    Yes, it has happened to me before. As for the Clinton disagreement, I have said before that I am not a real big fan of his myself, I just use him as an example of Conservative hypocracy(do as I say, not as I do).

    I wasn’t insulted by what you said, I am just not familiar with that author for now.

    As for democratization of Iraq, wouldn’t have had a problem with it if that was the stated goal in the beginning. If BushII had come out and said that in the firstplace, he wouldn’t have had the authorization to spend American blood there. His reasons were that Iraq was a threat to us and our allies, now known to be true. I think that Dubya wanted to take Saddamm out from 20 JAN 01, bottom line, and that he and the neo-cons were in agreement, I don’t think that combatting Terrorism was high on the list at all. His reasons changed when it became apparent that there were no WMD’s to be found. (Before you guys start diseccting the definition of WMD’s, let me state that for the Bushies it was Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological weapons research and the wherewithall to use them)

  • 24 KPS // Jun 16, 2005 at 12:52 pm   

    Dear Mr. Yeagley:

    You state: “Anti-Semites are notorious for fabricating information, for lying, for distorting, for promulgating false information as truth. Take Adolf Hitler as a recent example.”

    Want a better example?


    John 8:

    [37] I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
    [38] I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
    [39] They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
    [40] But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
    [41] Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
    [42] Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
    [43] Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
    [44] Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


    The London Jewish World, 1923 (Issue 337): “Fundamentally, Judaism is anti-Christian!”


    Louis Finklestein, The Pharisees, p. xxi: “Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Medieval Rabbinism, and Medieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes in name, the spirit of the ancient Pharisee survives unaltered.”


    David Gelernter, Commentary Magazine (May 2002), p. 31, “Judaism Beyond Words”: “Rabbinic Judaism was created by a group of thinkers called Pharisees …”



  • 25 David Yeagley // Jun 16, 2005 at 2:17 pm   

    Again, you invalidate yourself when you do this. You can pick and chose statements from whomever you want, and pit them against any other statements.

    You declare yourself against religion.

    Therefore your statement pitting is ineffective.

  • 26 Wendy Johnson // Jun 16, 2005 at 4:52 pm   

    Dr. Yeagley, that is the best answer to KPS’ attempt to use the words of Jesus to hate Jews, rather than try to explain that scripture to him like I might have done. I hope he listens, at some point. The words he quotes from John 8: “because my word hath no place in you” is the Lord talking to him as well, by his own admission.

You must log in to post a comment.