Bible prophecy predicts a forthcoming clash between a great northern power and an opposing southern power, both driven by competing imperial motives, each ruled by an ideology directly opposed to the other, yet each having a common goal—global rule!

The forthcoming trial of Bosnian Serb resistance leader Radovan Karadzic, indicted as a war criminal, has the potential to greatly aggravate relations between these two powers toward a clash over territorial possession in the strategic Balkan Peninsula.

To understand this vital phase of the emerging, post-U.S.-superpower global order, we must first consider just how the case against Karadzic (and by imputation the Serbian nation) has been manufactured and what are the forces behind it. We can then assess how the outcome of this case holds within it the potential for hastening the coming clash between pan-Islam and the European Union.

The overarching reality of the Balkans situation is that of all the ethnic groups the Balkan Peninsula contains, the Serbs are the largest nationality and were the most opposed to the German/Vatican-instigated breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Serbia and the Serb enclaves within Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, simply stood in the way of the European Union’s hegemonic goals in its southward and eastward landgrab following the reunification of Germany in 1990. The Serbs also stood in the way of pan-Islam’s efforts to establish a beachhead on European soil in Bosnia from which to further its northward push.

To justify the illegal intervention in the Balkan crisis by the EU’s proxy, nato, a case was made based on deliberately fabricated images and reports of mass rape, mass murder and genocide by the Serbs. This was greatly aided by Muslims feeding false information to Western journalists. A rabidly anti-Serb press and mass media was culpable in this as news networks aired doctored images and bogus claims against the Serbs.

The Clinton administration swallowed the bait and threw its weight behind both EU and Muslim efforts to have nato forces fight the Serbs on their behalf—the former to aid its colonizing of the whole Balkan Peninsula, the latter to consolidate Islam’s terrorist enclave on European soil.

Thus was initiated the illegal war, with nato fighting as the European Union’s proxy against the Serbs’ sovereign, independent stand against forces bent on destruction of their nation so that Bosnia, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo could be handed over to the waiting clutches of the EU empire. Meanwhile, the Islamists’ applauded in the background.

With the media spotlight turned off the real perpetrators of the Balkan wars, the fall guys became the military and political leaders of Serbia’s embattled resistance movement. These include former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, Bosnian Serb political leader Radovan Karadzic, Bosnian Serb military leader Ratko Mladic, Croatian Serb rebel leader Goran Hadzic and the late Kosovo Serb rebel leader known as Arkan, who escaped the dragnet by being gunned down in a Belgrade hotel in January 2000.

Beaten by the grim reaper in consummating their case against Slobodan Milosevic, the EU—ever so willingly supported by the U.S. State Department—has since pressured Serbian leadership into finally seizing Radovan Karadzic, found “hiding” under their noses in Belgrade, and handing him over to The Hague for trying as a war criminal. This, so the case against the Serbs could be further “legitimized” via a highly visible show trial publicized by an already rabid anti-Serb mass media.

Thus is Serbia set to be further demonized and beaten into willing submission, ultimately to be colonized by EU dictat, with the willing support of the brainwashed international community. In EU terms, Bosnian Muslims (a hotbed of Islamist terrorist training) will then be contained by EU encirclement.

So what facts support the case against the accused?

Quoting a dictum attributed to Mark Twain, British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli declared, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” As with Milosevic, the case against Karadzic has been largely built on a combination of all three, with emphasis on the latter. The statistical “evidence” involves claims of mass murder, rape and genocide ostensibly unique to Serbian aggression, together with the deliberate suppression of countervailing evidence of similar incidents perpetrated by both Croatian and Muslim antagonists.

That atrocities were committed by all sides in the Balkan wars is a given. Ample documented evidence exists to prove that. Atrocities are simply part of the nature of war.

Yet the fact that similar atrocities, involving mass murder, mass rape and attempts at genocide, were being perpetrated in a number of other countries prior to, contemporaneous with, and subsequent to those committed by all sides in the Balkan wars is also a given—witness Rwanda, Somalia, the Congo, Sudan, China, et al.

Don’t hold your breath waiting for the perpetrators of these atrocities to be arraigned before The Hague, let alone the overseer of one of this world’s greatest current horrors, the butcher of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe! The political importance of these nations’ crimes does not fit the current timing of the EU, nor the political convenience of the U.S. State Department, let alone the agenda of the moribund United Nations!

Right now the EU is keen to get on with the job of cementing its Continental empire. It will continue to be frustrated in this process till it has the Serbs under control, and the Muslim enclaves within the Balkans held at bay.

So now, with a more compliant leadership finally ensconced in Belgrade, it’s time to hold the Serbs to ransom by building a case against Karadzic and, yet once again, engage in widely publicizing the demonizing of the Serbs so as to ensure overwhelming support for the garnering of all that was once sovereign Serbian territory into the EU’s gaping maw.

The problem with which the case against the accused is presented is that too little clearly documented, provable, factual evidence for that case actually exists.

One reason for this, as political analyst Michael Parenti observed, is the greatly biased media coverage of the Balkan wars (Michael Parenti Political Archive, May 2000):

Grisly incidents of Croat and Muslim atrocities against the Serbs rarely made it into the U.S. press, and when they did they were accorded only passing mention. Meanwhile Serb atrocities were played up and sometimes even fabricated. … John Ranz, chair of Survivors of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp, usa, asks: Where were the tv cameras when hundreds of Serbs were slaughtered by Muslims near Srebrenica? The official line, faithfully parroted in the U.S. media, is that Bosnian Serb forces committed all the atrocities at Srebrenica. …The Serbs were blamed for the infamous Sarajevo market massacre. But according to the report leaked out on French tv, Western intelligence knew that it was Muslim operatives who had bombed Bosnian civilians in the marketplace in order to induce nato involvement. Even international negotiator David Owen, who worked with Cyrus Vance, admitted in his memoir that the nato powers knew all along that it was a Muslim bomb.

Still, despite the combination of proven media bias and fabricated stories about Serb alleged atrocities, the “lies, damned lies and statistics” persist. American political commentator Mary Mostert has observed that, “With the death of Slobodan Milosevic we still are getting cartoons and stories about the ‘200,000 people’ that Milosevic supposedly killed. Only no one could find the bodies” (Renew America, March 20, 2006).

The institution charged with trying these Serb leaders for war crimes, The Hague’s International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, has, over the years, received proof from the reports of multiple international forensic teams demonstrating that claims of Serb “atrocities” were exaggerated and quite often invented.

Nevertheless, anyone responsible for adjudicating the case of Radovan Karadzic will find it an impossible task to desist from allowing bias to creep into their analysis of the “facts.” Hence, judgment is bound to become impaired, justice clouded and equity destroyed amid the surrounding murk of political intrigue and media deceit. The Karadzic case is destined to become another Milosevic-type show trial, yet again underlying the oft-stated dictum, “truth is the first casualty of war.”

Having aided greatly in the creation of an anti-Serb mindset within the international community, journalistic coverage of the case is bound to follow a similar course as that which dogged the Serbs through the course of the Balkan wars and thereafter, right on through the Milosevic trial. As Michael Parenti observed of that grand charade, “In sum, through a process of monopoly control and distribution, repetition and image escalation, the media achieve self-confirmation, that is, they find confirmation for the images they fabricate in the images they have already fabricated. Hyperbolic labeling takes the place of evidence: ‘genocide,’ ‘mass atrocities,’ ‘systematic rapes’ and even ‘rape camps’—camps which no one has ever located. Through this process, evidence is not only absent, it becomes irrelevant” (op. cit., emphasis mine throughout).

Lies, damned lies and statistics ….

But the mud still sticks to the Serbs! It simply has to be made to stick, otherwise the EU/nato/U.S. State Department case against the Serbs simply fails through lack of sufficient bona fide evidence!

Stratfor, commenting on the false reports of mass murder by Serbs in the Kosovo war, spotlighted one major fact on which the case against the Serbs—albeit in Bosnia Croatia or Kosovo—truly hinges (Oct. 17, 1999):

It really does matter how many were killed. The foreign policy and political implications are substantial. There is a line between oppression and mass murder. It is not a bright, shining one, but the distinction between hundreds of dead and tens of thousands is clear. The blurring of that line has serious implications not merely for nato’s integrity, but for the notion of sovereignty. If a handful—or a few dozen—people are killed in labor unrest, does the international community have the right to intervene by force? By the very rules that nato has set up, the magnitude of slaughter is critical.

Get the point?

If the fabricated images and statistics regarding atrocities allegedly committed by the Serbs are proven false, the very case justifying the EU/nato/U.S. invasion of Serbia is null and void! Then those who colluded to initiate the illegal Balkan wars could well be said to be guilty of war crimes themselves! They simply will never allow that to happen!

The extent to which nato’s integrity (and by direct association the German/Vatican nexus which initiated the whole process) is brought into question by the pending Karadzic case is highlighted by EU watcher John Laughland, who recently wrote (Brussels Journal,July 23):

The arrest of Radovan Karadzic … has provided yet another occasion for all the tired old propaganda about the Balkans wars to be taken out of the cupboard and given one last airing. In particular, the war is presented as one between a Serb aggressor and an innocent victim, the Bosnian Muslims, and the former is accused of practicing genocide against the latter. Even if one accepts that crimes against humanity were committed during the Balkan wars, it should be obvious that both these claims are absurd.[T]he Serbs were no more the aggressors in the Bosnian civil war than Abraham Lincoln was an aggressor in the American Civil War. The Yugoslav Army was in place all over Bosnia-Herzegovina because that republic was part of Yugoslavia. Bosnian Muslims (like Croats) left the army in droves and set up their own militia instead, as part of their drive for independence from Belgrade. This meant that the Yugoslav Army lost its previous strongly multiethnic character and became largely Serb. It did not mean that Serb forces entered the territory of Bosnia, or even that the Serbs attacked the hapless Bosnian Muslims.

This is practical common sense in action. Yet practical common sense, backed up by a sense of history and clear-minded geopolitical analysis, is that which seems to be so sadly lacking in our presidential and prime ministerial advisors today (Isaiah 3:1-3). It’s almost nonexistent within the rapidly dying art of professional journalism!

As is his wont, John Laughland clears the argument of the fetid air of lies and deceit surrounding discourse on the Balkan question to lay the facts clearly on the line. He outlines the case for the defendant thus (ibid.):

In fact, the Bosnian Serb war effort was no more or less legitimate than the Bosnian Muslim war effort. The Muslims wanted to secede from Yugoslavia (and were egged on to do this by the Americans and the Europeans) while the Bosnian Serbs wanted to stay in Yugoslavia. It was as simple as that. …In any case, once the Muslims had seized power in Sarajevo, the Bosnian Serbs sought not to conquer the whole republic but instead simply to fight for the secession of their territories from Muslim control. Of course atrocities were committed against civilians during this period, especially ethnic cleansing. But the same phenomenon is observed, I believe, and by definition, in every single war in which a new state is created, whether it is the creation of Pakistan in 1947 or the creation in 1974 of what later became the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. If the Muslims had the right unilaterally to secede from Yugoslavia, why should the Bosnian Serbs not have had the right unilaterally to secede from the new state of Bosnia-Herzegovina which had never before existed as a state, and to which the Bosnian Serbs had no loyalty whatever?”

Yet Laughland clearly sees the propaganda ploy that will be behind the case about to be brought against Karadzic:

Bosnian Serbs are accused (and two have been convicted) of committing genocide against the Bosnian Muslims in the massacre perpetrated at Srebrenica. Let us leave aside for a moment the Serb claims that the numbers of people killed in that summer of 1995 has been artificially inflated for propaganda purposes; let us also leave aside the undoubted fact that the Bosnian Muslims were using the UN safe haven of Srebrenica as a safe haven from which to conduct constant attacks against the Serb villages surrounding the town, during which many atrocities were committed against Serb civilians.What is clear is that the Srebrenica massacre cannot possibly be described as genocide. Even the most ardent pro-Muslim propagandists agree that the victims of the massacre there were all men. The Bosnian Serbs claim that they were combatants (although that is certainly not an excuse for killing them) but the point is that an army bent on genocide would precisely not have singled out men for execution but would have killed women too.

So as John Laughland mused, the Karadzic show trial will present yet once again “another occasion for all the tired old propaganda about the Balkans wars to be taken out of the cupboard and given one last airing,” to the detriment of the unfortunate Serbs.

But the Karadzic case is worth watching for another very profound reason. The outcome is vitally important to two competing powers that are heading toward an inevitable clash—an ever southward- and eastward-extending European Union (Daniel 8:9), and the Iranian-backed northward-pushing pan-Islam incursion into Europe (Daniel 11:40). The Karadzic case has the potential to open a real can of maggots that could soon transmute into nasty flies in the ointment of the EU’s Balkan strategy. John Laughland demonstrates this potential for a clash between Islam and Catholic Europe over Bosnia-Herzegovina quite clearly (ibid.):

The Srebrenica massacre may well have been a crime against humanity but it is impossible to see how it can be categorized as genocide. Unfortunately, there is a very clear political reason why it has been so categorized. The Muslim president of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Haris Silaijdzic, said carefully on cnn the day Karadzic was captured that Karadzic’s trial was only the beginning of the process by which justice would be done in Bosnia. He said that there were hundreds of thousands of Muslims who had been ethnically cleansed by ‘Karadzic and Milosevic’ and that their project therefore remained in force. The clear implication of what he was saying was this: If the very existence of the Bosnian Serb republic (the autonomous region within Bosnia carved out from the republic during the civil war) is found, in a court of law, to have had as its president a man, Karadzic, who is convicted of genocide in the process of creating it, then its status would be illegitimate and it should be abolished. The Muslims continue to claim control over the whole of the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina, while the Serbs merely want the preservation of their considerable autonomy within it.In other words, far from bringing peace to the Balkans, it is quite possible that a conviction of Karadzic for genocide will reopen the Dayton settlement and egg the Muslims on to claim control over the Serb republic too.

That outcome is the last thing that the European Union would want!

For almost two decades, our editor in chief has been warning of an overt geopolitical push by pan-Islam, led by the chief sponsor of international terror, Iran, against the European Union. Both the Iran-led Islamic crescent and the German-dominated European Union are hegemonic powers that are bent on global domination. Sooner or later they are going to get in each other’s way as each pursues this common goal at the expense of the other.

Should The Hague war crimes trial of Radovan Karadzic result in a conviction for genocide, it just may add another powerful weapon to the Islamists’ armor in their northward push against the opposing force of the European Union.

The outcome of the Karadzic trial at The Hague could well contribute to the prophesied clash of opposing civilizations—the push of the Islamic south against the Catholic north—coming much sooner, rather than later!

Read our booklet The Rising Beast—Germany’s Conquest of the Balkans for more insight on the Balkans, the EU and Islam.