Bush administration has demanded the right to edit Clark as witness

[nolabels]

http://www.antiwar.com/
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/international/europe/14BOSN.html?ex=1072363232&ei=1&en=9f41f6c141197bd9
General Clark to Testify for the Prosecution at Milosevic Trial

PARIS, Dec. 13 — Washington has agreed that Gen. Wesley K. Clark, the former NATO commander and a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, can testify in the war crimes trial of Slobodan Milosevic. But the Bush administration has demanded the right to edit videotapes and transcripts of the sessions before they are made public.

The two former opponents, the American general and the former president of Yugoslavia, will face each other in court on Monday and Tuesday.

Closed sessions are routinely held at the United Nations tribunal that deals with Balkan war crimes, but usually to protect witnesses's safety. The conditions of General Clark's appearance are new.

The court agreed to give the United States government 48 hours to review the testimony and to ask judges to suppress any it regards as sensitive. Two government lawyers will accompany the general.

"The review is to ensure there was no inadvertent disclosure of sensitive, classified information," said Pierre-Richard Prosper, the United States ambassador at large for war crimes issues, in a telephone interview from Washington. During the Balkan wars, he said, General Clark "obviously had seen a substantial amount of intelligence." But, he added, "we feel fairly confident that the bulk of the testimony and videotapes can be released."
(snip)

[IndianaGreen]

1. What does Clark know that Bush is so afraid of?

What about American dealings with Milosevich before Slobo was cast as the villain of the Balkans?

I think Clark can testify to whatever he wants to. He is an American citizen and as such he owes nothing, and I mean nothing, to an unelected American government.

[0007]

2. junior gives the okay for Clark to testify?

And the administration will see fit to what will be made public at Milosevich's trial?

[nolabels]

3. This is really getting good,

They want to make sure Clark don't let out any dark secrets in the heat of cross examination by Mr. Milosevic

See pigs really do fly

[alittlelark]

14. maybe it is simpler than that.....

Perhaps they are Terrified of the American public seeing a REAL man put a tyrannical dictator behind bars for life......BUT WAIT!!! Bush just 'caught one'. Never mind that the one that * 'caught' looks to be brain fried (we've been doin' it for years) to the Nth degree.
Never mind the GREAT timing..what with Clark's imminent testimony and our 1 week old brand spankin' new IRAQI WAR CRIME COURT.
Coincidences do happen...riiiight!!??:evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[nolabels]

19. I tend to dissaggree, and I have nothing against Clark

I think Clark is real soldier and Hero for the most case (as far as the US is concerned anyway). But making the mistake that the war in Kosovo was any thing other than a war of Corporate / Imperial hegemony I will not make. Most wars are for resources and power over others and there is continuous thread line through even thru prehistory that can prove this (imho, or at least that's the way it appears to me anyway)

But others have Ideas too

http://www.huna.org/html/whywar.html
WHY IS THERE WAR?
by Serge Kahili King

People engage in war because they want to love or be loved. Although this may sound absurd at first, let's give it a closer look, because if we can understand the motivation for war then we might be able to redirect it.

The most fundamental human need is to be accepted, and the most fundamental fear is to be rejected. The old idea that survival comes first just doesn't hold up in the light of experience because it doesn't account for those who risk their lives for others, even strangers, and for those who commit suicide. And the fear of death is the fear of the ultimate rejection: by life itself.

Acceptance can be sought from oneself, one's environment (including people), or one's God, and many different strategies are used to ensure acceptance. If these strategies are pursued without fear, including fear-based anger, the result will be peace and cooperation. But as the fear of possible rejection increases, so does the tendency to seek acceptance by control or submission. Then the result is emotional represion, social suppression, and the use of violence to prove one's power or to make others accept one whether they want to or not.

In the case of war, the leaders who make the major decisions set standards to judge behavior by the "other side" as acceptable or unacceptable, motivated by their personal or group standards of self acceptance or acceptance from those around them. And those who obey the orders to march off to death and destruction are motivated by the desire to be accepted by doing "the right thing" or the fear of being rejected, and/or punished, for not doing it. What's so sad is that the fundamental intention is so good.
(snip)

[phylla]

13. Clark testimony

Last Sunday I asked General Clark whether or not there were politics involved with his war trial testimony being sealed and edited for 48 hours.

He was really OK with the whole situation...saying that Milosevic, acting as his own lawyer, would use the occasion to grandstand for the cameras-- particularly because General Clark was the victor and Milopsevic the defeated foe.

He said that there were security reasons too.

I believe that he was totally honest about his answer. That is good enough for me.

[nolabels]

15. That flies in the face of jurist prudence

Or its a lie. You can't say he is coherent or and of sound mind to let him stand trial and represent himself, then and at the same time say he would be grandstanding like some pub hound while he himself is on trial.

This might be the only answer Clark could give in of the given fact many of things he knows that he could go to jail for revealing. Only a fool would not know that. So the question what is * afraid of? * wasn't even in office at the time.

* protecting Bill Clintons Record, what's wrong with this picture?

[Myra]

4. CheneyBushOilJunta (Inc) just gets more jaw droppingly brazen every day.

:wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow: :wow:

They're hardly bothering to pretend anymore.

[T Bone]

5. There must be something that Milosevic can cross-examine upon

that would reveal Bushco-PNAC machinations in the Balkans, eh?

[KittyWampus]

21. Considering That The PNAC'ers Enjoy Having Turmoil

And the whole Kosovo thing involved Muslims...

I can't help but wonder if the BFEE was helping Milosevic... whilst being aware that he was committing genocide.

They were certainly mighty pissed that Clinton, a Democrat, managed to score a victory.

[proud patriot]

6. WTF ?

bush is not a fucking Emperor dag nab it :mad:

[lostnfound]

17. alert the presses. but first, awaken them. n/t

[Fleshdancer]

7. My guess...

As if the govt. doesn't already review all sessions to ensure the safety of classified information. Give me a break!

The only reason Bush is doing this is to try to take Clark down a couple of notches. It's a pissing contest and Bush gets to feel like the big man telling the experienced, 4-star General what can and can not be said.

[Jerseycoa]

8. I think

That sounds just about right.


:dem:

[PurityOfEssence]

16. I think you've got Junior's mindset down pat

Macho domineering and juvenile revenge run rampant, and he needs to point this power out for all to see.

He really is a pissy little freak, isn't he?

[usregimechange]

9. Clark knows what is sensitive and what is not, what the hell!!

[AP]

10. Secret evidence is incompatible with this court's mission. However, I...

...I suspect what's really going on here is that the WH is trying to make it look like Clark might be disloyal and divulge secrets.

The other possibility is that they might be trying to help Milosevic establish the grounds for a successful appeal relating to evidence being given secretly, or something crazy like that.

[demgrrrll]

11. Control is one issue. I think Bush is a media creation and that many

of their decisions are based on his "image." They do not
take chances. They also want to make sure he does not
get any traction from his testimony or take the spotlight
away from the Chimperor.

[Lorien]

12. Yep, my thoughts exactly

Bushco wants to keep the media spotlight on themselves, and to control Clarks image in any way they can.

[lostnfound]

18. Yep, and it's another ICHDITS.

"If Clinton had done it, they'd scream."

[bobthedrummer]

20. I hope Clark has the courage of his convictions and speaks to the

public about it. I'm interested in what he has to say in testimony.

[ConcernedCanuk]

22. Oh dear oh dear - setting precedent for Saddam's trial methinks

. . "to ensure there was no inadvertent disclosure of sensitive, classified information"

and we KNOW if this indeed the real Saddam - he knows LOTSA daat sh*t !!

only Saddams "discolures" wouldn't be "inadvertant"

Bet on it !!