The so-called "trial" of President Milosevic resumed at The Hague on Monday. The testimony of Fadil Banjanovic was concluded and the testimony of Runo Delabros was begun. The "judges" issued a "judgement" on Tuessday which allowed the "prosecution" more time to present its pathetic "case". The new deadline is 100 hearing days from 16 May 2003.

The conclusion of Fadil Banjanovic was interesting. This self-professed friend of Nasir Oric testified about how  1,822 Muslims (including him) left Kozlok and went to Serbia.

In spite of the fact that Banjanovic didn't want to admit it; his testimony demonstrated that the authorities in Serbia behaved in an admirable fashion towards Muslim refugees.

The Serbian Police protected the Muslim refugees from criminals who wanted to harm them. The Serbian Red Cross gave the refugees medical treatment and food. The municipal authorities issued passports to people in a timely manner, never taking more than 8 days.

In spite of Banjanovic's best efforts to the contrary, his testimony demonstrated that the Government of Serbia treated Muslim refugees in an exemplary manner.

Delabros was the same way as this bunch of drug-addicted hippies. He had the ability to run his mouth for long periods of time and still never quite manage to answer the question he was asked.

President Milosevic asked him if he regarded his report as a scientific report produced for the so-called "tribunal." The answer to this question is either yes or no. This witness ran his mouth for almost 10 minutes yammering on and on about how he didn't speak Serbo-Croat, and about how some team of people in Belgrade fed him the data that he used in his report.

One of President Milosevic's next questions was if this witness had done a content analysis of the Serbian media. Judge, Richard "Dick" May got angry with the question because "the trial chamber didn't understand it."

"Judge" Dick, is just playing dumb here (or maybe it isn't an act) because the answer to the question is so obvious. How could this witness, who didn't speak the language, and who had all of his data fed to him by some team, have done any content analysis of the Serbian media, and having not done a content analysis how can he consider his thesis to be scientific?

The witness tried to claim that the terms like "Ustasha fighter," "Muslim extremist," and "Albanian terrorist." were all terms designed to degrade Albanians, Muslims and Croats as entire ethnic groups.

I don't know how this could be the case since those particular terms suggest individual criminals and not entire ethnic groups. In fact there are numerous examples from Slobodan Milosevic's speeches where he specifically points out that those criminal elements do not represent the ethnic groups of which they are members.

During the examination in chief Delabros claimed that memorials held for Serbs killed by the Ustasha was "propaganda." Apparently President Milosevic is guilty of letting the Serbian people remember the sacrifices they made during World War Two.

This witness claimed twice not to be an expert on the Yugoslav conflicts. The logical question arising from this would be, how then does he know what is propaganda and what is the truth? What was the Serb media supposed to do if Serbs were attacked, not report on it, lest they be accused of making propaganda?