Корисник:FkpCascais/песак

Serbian influence over the events and over the Skanderbeg´s Kastrioti family is wrongly disregarded in this video. Skanderbeg didn´t became Albanian ruler because he was chousen ammong the people, but he became ruler because he inherited the position from his family when his grandfather was given land from Serbian emperor which gave him land and title for his bravery as fighter in the Serbian military. His grand-grandfather was known as Branilo Kastrioti and historiographers agree he was Serbian. The only ones disputing this are modern-day Albanian historians which are obviously driven by nowadays events in which Serbs are considered enemies of Albanians, but in history that was NOT the case. There is a major missconception that Serbs and Albanians are centuries long enemies. The truth is that Serbs and Albanians were troughout history friends and allies, and the first ever recorded conflict between the two was only in 1913! Even then, in 1913 when Balkan War was raging, Serbian troops were receved as liberators in Durres and most northern and central Albania where Albanians were mostly Christians, the only ones that fought Serbs were the Albanians from Kosovo and Macedonia which were mostly of Islamic faith and were fighting on Ottoman side against Serbian army. Since that year Germany and Vatican agreed that it was too dangerous to allow Serbia to have access to the open sea trough northern and central Albania, they first allowed Austro-Hungary to annex Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then agreed on fueling this idea of Albanian nationalism against Serbs by supporting the Islamic Albanians fighting on Ottoman side against Serbs and supporting the idea of an independent Albania which would stand as barrier for Serbia to access sea. This is THE FIRST EVER RECORDED CONFLICT BETWEEN SERBS AND ALBANIANS; no record before 1913 exists! At that point the several Christian kingdoms ammong which Serbia, were fighting against Islamic Ottomans to expell them from the Balkans, and were successfully driving them out. Kingdom of Serbia expanded southwords conquering all of what is today northern and central Albania and Macedonia. Albanians at time were not numerous, hardly had any reivindications, and were fragmented ideologically. Vatican, germany and Austria needed Albanians not to accept Serbian rule and fight for independence. For that, they needed to provide Albanians with claims and came with the concept of Albanians being the deshendants of Illyrians and since Illirians are not even well defined in historiagraphy and not much is known about them even nowadays, they further needed some sort of historical lider, or hero, and they searched the local leaders of what is now Albania and found in Skanderbeg a great choice. However, lets see exactly who was Skanderbeg.

Nowadays Albanians tend to believe in Skanderbeg as if he was some ruler choused ammong locals, but that was not the case. Skanderbeg became ruler because he inherited the title. He was the third ruler of the Kastrioti domains/principallity. The first ruler was Skanderbeg grandfather, Pavle Kastrioti (Pal in Albanian). We lack records of the origins of the family, but we know Pavle was the son of Branilo Kastrioti. Historiography has consensus that branilo was Serbian. The only ones challenging this are modern-day Albanian historians, clearly driven by the current-day relation of animosity between Serbs and Albanians, but as I said, during history that was not the case at all, and Serbs and Albanians lived quite happily side-by-side frequently being allies specially during this medieval times. Even notable Albanian historiographer, Gjon Muzaka, refers to Skanderbeg refering to his origins as "of Serbian nature" which is, lets admit it, a very sneaky way of avoiding saying simply he was Serbian. Branilo had a son, Skanderbeg´s grandfather Pavle, who was in the Serbian army. At that time, late 13th and 14th centiry, Serbia was expanding south, conquering all of what is today Albania, Macedonia, eastern Bulgaria and all of northern Greece. Skanderbeg´s grandfather Pavle was brave and fought in the battles in which Serbia conquered Berat, Valona and Kanina, thus Serbian emperor Stefan Dushan condecorated him by making him Lord and giving him land. The land he receved from Serbian emperor was a land within Serbian domains which was scarselly populated, didn´t included any significant town or city, and was mostly populated by rural population speaking Albanian. It became the Kastrioti domain or principallity, one of the many domains Serbian empire was divided internally. Pavle had a son, Jovan (Gjon in Albanian), which married a Serbian woman named Voisava, and had four sons Gjuradj, Stanisha, Reposh and Constantine, and five daughters, Mara, Jelena, Angelina, Vlajka and Mamica. They spoke and wrote Serbian-Slavic and were Christian Orthodox. Jovan also fought in the Serbian army, with his most notable archivement being at the Battle of Plocnik in 1386. They lived as lords of a domain within Serbian state, and Jovan fought on several battles in the Serbian army against the ever increasing danger which were the Ottomans which were conquering the region. At this time Serbian empire collapses, and local nobles start acting independently. When old, Jovan went to live in Serbian monastery Hilandar in Athos, and donated to the expansion of the monastery and asked to be burried there. Only Serbs build Serbian monasteries and ask to be burried in them. So, with his death, his son Djuradj (Gjergi in Albanian), known as Skanderbeg, becomes the ruler of that principality known as Kastrioti principality. Skanderbeg manteins conflict with Ottomans just as most other Serbian principalities do.

All this is to debunk this Albanian idea of presenting Skanderbeg as if he was a ruler choosen ammong the people, no he was not, he was a nobleman that inherited the title and land which were atributed by the Serbian empire to his grandfather. The people he ruled was Albanian, but Skanderbeg family was not. They were Serbian which were brought to that land located in nowadays central Albania to rule over it. The fact is that after Ottoman invasion of the region, Skanderbeg became a simbol of Albanians because he was their leader.But, as Gjon Muzaka, an Albanian noble and Skanderbeg contemporary said: "Scanderbeg huome valente e per nature Serviano". I welcome everyone to check and confirm everything I said.

Hrvati su 1990. prevarili srbe, oteli im sva prava i zemlju, i jos ocekuju da svi reaguju kao da nije bilo nista! Danasnja Hrvatska je stvorena 1943. kao SR Hrvatska i njena teritorija obuhvata zemlje koje su hrvatske plus one koje su od srba iz Hrvatske. Zato kad se stvarala je zapisana kao zemlja u kojoj su konstitutivni narodi hrvati i srbi, jer su je konstituisale zemlje hrvata i srba iz Hrvatske. Onog trenutka kada ste odlucili da oduzmete srbima pravo konstitutivnog naroda i pretvorite drzavu u samo hrvatsku, morali ste videti sta je od te zemlje hrvatsko a sta srpsko, i DATI srbima njihovu zemlju, a ne OTETI zemlju i pretvoriti sve u hrvatsku zemlju. Razumete?

Hrvatska je 1943 stvorena sa ovim granicama samo zato sto se srbima dalo kao garancija da im status konstitutivnog naroda osigurava prava i zemlju koje imaju. Inace da su znali da ce ih hrvati prevariti kasnije i uzeti sve, sigurno NE BI pristali i Hrvatska ne bi postojala ovakva. Danasnja Hrvatska, ta koja je stvorena hrvatskim i srpskim zemljama 1943. obuhvata zemlje koje su trebale biti podeljene izmedju srba i hrvata (Vojna Krajina) plus Baranja koja je 1918. proglasila SJEDINJENJE sa Kraljevinom Srbijom, plus delovi bivseg Austrougarskog carstva koji nisu bili deo hrvatske kao Dubrovnik i Dalmacija koji bi u ovom slucaju trebali sami odluciti da li zele da budu deo jedne samo hrvatske Hrvatske ili ne (1990. verovatno bi odlucili da da) plus Zadar, Rijeka i Istra koji su dati Hrvatskoj zahvaljujuci snazi Jugoslovenske vojske i kao deo reparacije Italije Jugoslaviji (a ne Hrvatskoj koja cak nije ni bila saveznik u ratu, nego naprotiv, i nije ni platila ratne reparacije koje bi sad mogli da vidimo koliki bi trebali da budu, jer ste se reparacija spasli kao deo Jugoslavije i postujuci prava srba, a sad kad to ne zelite, sad se to pitanje otvara).

I am from Serbia. For about 70 years the country was known as Yugoslavia, and 50 of those were under some unique style socialism-communism known as Titoism (because the leader was Tito). Soon after WWII ended, Tito had a dispute with USSR supreme leader Stalin. Stalin was invading all central and eastern European states, basically because it was the Russians with the Red Army that liberated them by kicking nazi Germans out. However, Yugoslavia menaged to free itself by its own forces, and that gave Tito a much superior position. Stalin wanted total control and centrlaised sistem, while Tito favored a sort of "open"-socialism based on self-menagement. Stalin was infuriated that someone dared to challenge his ideas and propose alternatives, so Yugoslavia exited Eastern-block and became a socialist neutral country oriented towards prosperity and respect ammong nations. Yugoslavia became the leading force behind the Non-Alligned Movement which gathered Yugoslavia plus India, Egypt, Indonesia, and a bunch of Asian and African countries. Yugoslavia activelly supported militarly independentist movements still happening furing second half of 20c. such as Angola or Mozambique. Internationally Yugoslavia enjoyed quite a reputation, and internally things were going great. With all major production nationalised, it was the self.menagement cometees that ruled the companies, and obviously workers of one firm wanted the best for their firm so initially everything went fine. Yugoslavia enjoyed a unique geopolitical position which enabled her to access both east and west markets, plus, put its products in the non-alligned nations around the world. Yugoslav engeneering and building companies became giants constructing riverdams in Iraq, pipelines in Lybia, minning in Ethiopia, congress centers and hotels in Zambia and Zimbabwe, etc. Internally, health-care and education were free, unemployment was low, and a vast middle clas was formed which yearly enjoyed hollydays either in domestic Adriatic coast or anywhere around the globe, plus the winter sky resorts. In sports results were impressive, and Yugoslavia was the first non-Western nation to be host of the 1976 UEFA European championship, several Mediterranean Games, and the 1984 Winter Olympics. The motho internally was "Brotherhood and unity". Serbs formed roughly half of the population and had a sort of status Castillians have in Spain, or a bit less than Russians in USSR.~

Since Yugoslavia was created in 1918 when Kingdom of Serbia won Austro-Hungary and became entitled to expand to vast areas of land, several former A-H provences started declaring union with Serbia. Powers decided it was too dangerous to have a strong Cheristian Orthodox slavic country right in Italy´s back, so the inclusion of Croats and to less extent Slovenens, was used as pretext to counterbalance enough the ethnic reality of this new country to justify its name change from Serbia to Yugoslavia. Serbian capital Belgrade was the metropole and capital and the royal seat of the Serbian Karadjordjevic dinasty which had been rulling Serbia and just kept rulling Yugoslavia now. Yugoslavia took the place Serbia already had in all international organisations. The monarchy lasted from 1918 till start of WWII in 1941 and was characterised by the internal struggle between Serbs wanting a centralised strong state, versus Croats wanting a descentralised state with more powers given to provences. To further make the divisions inside, Serbs were along Montenegrins and Macedonians Christian Orthodox, while Croats, Slovenens and the Hungarian and Italian minorities were Christian Catholic. To complicate further thngs, 500 years of Ottoman rule made many local Slavs convert to islam, that is why the Bosnians appeared as Islamic Slavs. and als Albanians which were majoritarly of Islamic faith in Kosovo and Macedonia. Jews lived in Belgrade, Zagreb, Sarajevo and most major cities. So, one can easily see how religions played an important role in an ethnic identification. After WWII ended and communist took the power, they allowed religion to keep its activities, but religion started being seen as obsolete and undesired, and something to be kept inside home if someone insisted in practicing. Yugoslavia in few decades became a very well developed atheistic society. In schools religions were mentioned in their important social rule and charity work, but the matter of religion itself became unworth mention. People would mark the festivities with the awarness of the celebration meaning more of a continuation of a tradition that kept certain community together and helped them survive, rather than a religious experience.

Unfortunatelly, with the fall of Berlin War, USA became the dominant power, however, Yugoslav politicians unwiselly miscalculated that the continuity of a leftist Non-Alligned regime defending neutrality and self-sostainability would be supported. Altough officially insisting on supporting a united Yugoslavia, USA via FMI directed that the democratization process of Yugoslavia should be made separatelly by the republics forming the country, and not on national level. This obviously creted greed of power in each republic and descentralization of the country. Allmost all republics at their elections in 1990 saw as major opponents old socialists against the new nationalistically motivated parties. And here is that decades of healthy atheistic development is swepted off by populistic religious iconography. People didn´t even knew what religion was about, but they were rushing up to the stores to buy the bigest and brightest cross of half moon available. People that a week earlier had been progressive and tolerant were now radical racist homophobic partisans. When reasoning with them they would say how the West is intentionally imposing Gayness to prevent "us" from procreating and to destroy our family. When confronted on how allways everywhere there was allways a girly boy and a bully girl in every classroom, they suggested they were ill and needed treatment, like if sexuality is changable or curable!!! When confronted with the question if homosexuality should stop being a taboo, massivelly people responded that should not because their children may become gay if they are tought since young that is normal to be one., The missconceptions were so huge adn so hard to even beging debunking, and what most hurted is that all it needed was a political change and in 5 years you saw a prgressive liberal society turned into a dark ages witch hounting masses.

Jos malo o Bata Djori i u stvari pismo Kokezi

Kokeza, celo to drustvo iz saveza, fudbalski svet u Srbiji, i obicni navijaci i gradjani, moraju da shvate da je resenje nasem fudbalu u pravcu veceg nivoa profesionalizacije i modernizacija u svim oblastima. Nama ne treba jedna pobeda reprezentacije, nama trebaju korenite promene u celom sistemu i strukturi, od nacina rada, nagradjivanja kvaliteta, stvaranja visih objektivnih ciljeva i zacrtavanje rokova za njihovo dostignuce, i najvaznije, nagradjivanje inovacija. Nas srpski problem je vecna zelja za ambicioznim rezultatima ali pod uslovom da se nista ne menja. Evo Djora ce da spase Slobodu zamislite cime? Forsiranjem uzicke dece. Nemam ja nista protiv uzicke dece, uzicani su izvanredni ljudi, imaju svojevrsnu narav, postenje i dobrotu poznatu nadaleko. Vec je problem u tome sto ce tipican srpski fudbalski radnik Djorin ucenik izmisljati sve izgovore samo da izbegne bilo kakvu inovaciju, modernizaciju, nove metode rada, sve ce uciniti da ubedi sve kako "Forsiranje dece", "Oslanjanje na sopstvene snage", "Vracanje u tradiciju", itd. ce ovaj put pod njegovom palicom biti ono pravo resenje... iako svaki trener za trenerom to isto rade vec decenijama sa veoma malim razlikama u rezultatu. Trenutna garnitura fudbalskih radnika u Srbiji zivi na staroj slavi i zajednicko ih drzi branjenje politika koje ce odloziti modernizaciju i napredak da se njima ne bi ugrozila pozicija i ugled. Sta bi drugo Djora i predlozio kad jedina metoda rada za koju zna je da okupi u klubu lokalne momke, primeni treninge kakve je on jos kao decko iste radio, i taktiku daj sta das. Skauting ne postoji nego se cela aktivnost kluba sto se kadra tice svodi na forsiranje odabranih momaka (obicno onih ili sa vec jakim vezama sa upravom kluba, ili onih najbucnijih kad dodje red smejanju nekoj Djorinoj anegdoti). Cilj je njihova prodaja i neko oparivanje kojem brzo sledi poruka uprave da ce te pare jedva pokriti troskove dela sezone i da mora da se nastavi da ovakvim radom treneru tipa Djore takva izjava upravo ide pravo u korist, jer sta bi on znao da kupi kad bi morao? To bi mu samo napravilo problem. Iako naizgled veoma zainteresovan u domaci fudbal, malo cega on realno zna van svog tima sem kafanskih prica, a o inostranstvu i angazovanju nekog stranca, to mu je nocna mora. Pored ceste netolerancije prema strancima, takodje se javlja i praktican problem komunikacije, jer neki jadan Ganac natera Djorinog trenera da bukvalno izigrava majmuna da mu nesto objasni jer nazalost neskolovan africki mladic bolje zna engleski i frnacuski od boze moj, svetski poznatog naseg strucnjaka iz vremena kada je harao drugom ligom Kuvajta... Uostalom, stranac bi i upropastio vec od ranije dogovorenu semu da na toj poziciji igra regularni omladinac ciji tata vec vise od par sezona daje sve sto moze i treba da bi sinu zagarantovao mesto u prelasku u seniore. Sami momci u ovakvom ambijentu rano dobijaju pogresne signale, poruke i navike. slusajuci od malena tu frazu "forsiranja nase dece", mladici potpuno nerazvijeni jos uvek intelektualno kao osobe, stvaraju svoje grupice u kojima odredjeni postaju lideri, sto ne bi bilo problem da je iz razloga kvaliteta, vec neretko iz vanterenskih razloga. U ovakvom ambijentu se kreira idealna losa situacija koja potencira sabotiranje igraca sa strane zbog prijateljstva i solidarnosti sa drugom sa kojim su odrasli. Ovo samo po sebi urusava sistem u startu jer domaci igraci shvataju klub kao svoju prciju a cesto i sabotiraju autoritet trenera. Umesto da savez sve cini da stvori uslove u srpskom fudbalu gde ce profesionalizam biti akcenat, rezultat je obrnut, kvalitet fudbala je los, a igraci gube cenu na trzistu i dozivljavaju velike teskoce pri suocavanju sa profesionalnim nacinom rada vani. Ovaj ambijent cini da igraci ne daju svoj maksimum jer ni ne moraju, vec su im misli u snovima o nekim uspesima u jakim ligama do kojih ovako retko koji ikad dodje. Ovo sto sam opisao je surova realnost nasih klubova u kojima naizgled bezazleni potezi kreiraju nastavak stagnacije koja odgovara mnogim aktivnim ucesnicima u ovom sistemu, ali ne odgovara ako ce mo iskreno zeleti napredak. Primer ovakvog naizgled bezazlenog stava se video u clanku gosp. D. Todorovica u Politici 29.11.2018 pod naslovom "Sistematsko unistavanje mladih igraca". Clanak dobija jedan surealan oblik kada se vidi da je taj naslov povod za ceo jedan tekst u kojem se krive iskljucivo stranci i detaljno nabrajaju. Poenta je da "čak 25 fudbalera iz inostranstva" (nezaboravimo, podeljenih u 16 klubova, od kojih ni desetorica nisu regularni starteri) sistematski unistavaju nasu decu. Znaci prosecno 1,5 stranaca po klubu vrse nekakav genocid nad nasom decom. Valjda Tanko i Ju u Bezaniji cine da bezanijska deca ne mogu da igraju fudbal... zbog bezobraznih njih dvojice! Ali uzmimo ukupan broj u ligi, 25, u ligi sa 16 klubova i 416 registrovanih fudbalera. Je li moguce da neko stvarno misli da od 416. mesta, 391. nisu dovoljna nasoj deci da se dokazu, i da bas tih 25 stranaca snose svu krivicu? Tragicno je da je nekome palo na pamet da u nasem najtiraznijem dnevniku izvede celu teoriju ubedjujuci da 1 ili 2 stranca po klubu su opasnost nasoj deci? Ja se stvarno izvinjavam, ali ako su tih 25 jadnih stranaca koji su dosli u nasu zemlju i krajnje ce makar pomoci da vise ljudi vani cuje i zna za nas, ako oni koce neko nase dete da se probije, pa neka onda tako i bude, jer ako je taj stranac dosao za sitne pare da igra u nasoj drugoj ligi i bolji je od tog deteta, onda je to plus nasem klubu, ima boljeg igraca, a nase dete ima sem ostalih 390 mesta, jos i 2.770 klubova u kojima moze sav svoj talenat da pokaze. Zar neko hoce da me ubedi da ni to nije dovoljno? Nego nasoj deci smetaju bas tih 25 stranaca? Autor clanka prati jednu opasnu ideologiju u nasem fudbalu koje ako se ne oslobodimo reskiramo da tonemo u nonsens. Nas savez mora da bude taj koji ce pokrenuti konkretne promene na ovom planu. Sve zemlje Evrope su brze ili sporije nasle svoje mesto u globalizaciji, samo mi i dalje zivimo u nekoj zabludi okruzeni ljudima koji nas ubedjuju da treba da radimo obrnuto. Savez mora da postavi kao prioritet modernizaciju u svim nivoima. Takodje drugi prioritet treba da bude profesionalizacija. FSS je na papiru stavio da su SL i PLS profesionalne, ali znamo da je to daleko od realnosti. Savez bi treba da shvati da je vreme trenera koji forsiraju "nasu decu" i klubova likalpatriota u nasoj najjacoj ligi prosao. FSS bi treba da ima zadatak da od Superlige napravi ligu u kojoj bi bilo koji igrac odakle god bio osetio pun profesionalizam. Istovremeno treba da ulaze u visoko obrazovanje trenera. Inovacija mora da bude pozitivna rec a ne bauk. Mora da dodje neko hrabar i da okrene plocu. Treba zacrtati prioritete i raditi na njihvom ostvarenju bez populizma i laganja. Pre svega savez treba da prestane da trosi vreme u secanju na proslost. Uvek ponavljam, kad god smo bili uspesni u proslosti, bili smo ga jer smo upravo u tim vremenima bili savremeni. Recept za ponovni uspeh nije u tim uspesima iz proslosti, vec ponoviti situaciju da budemo savremeni u novom danasnjem dobu. Moramo da stvaramo kooperaciju sa drugim zemljama i gledamo sve modele i biramo nama najbolje, ili stvorimo svoje. Ali ne mozemo i dalje da stojimo stagnirani i pricamo o deci. Nasa Superliga mora da se dovede na sto visi nivo, a za to treba saradjivati sa stranim firmama. Sam izgled i imidz lige su pola cene igraca. Dovedimo ljude koji ce uvesti inovacije u tv prenosima, inovacije u kamerama, statistikama tokom igre. Zvuci smesno, ali napravimo Superligu SPEKTAKL. Prestanimo sa rigoroznim ogranicenjima stranaca koji pravi da svi klubovi izgledaju isti, naprotiv, dozvolimo da bude raznovrsnih klubova. Neka ostane ogranicenje 5 stranaca najvise na terenu tako da ce svaki tim uvek imati barem 6 domacih. Ali neka bude klubova sa vise stranca a neka bude sa nijednim. Trenutno tragicno stojimo sa trenerima. Za 3 decenije od avangarde smo pali na to da sem par trenera ostali vecina gaje prastar fudbal, svemirski su udaljeni od modernih metoda rada, ne znaju jezike niti prate puno vani ista, i zato sem nasih klubova nigde nas vise ni nema. Moramo da dovedemo strane trenere i naucimo od njih ono gde smo zaostali. FSS bi trebao da se potrudi ozbiljno da poboljsa Superligu a za to treba da potpuno preokrene tendencije branjenja dece od stranaca i takvih struja. Nece nasa deca izginuti, imamo talenta i u boljoj ligi ce biti jos bolji, i sto vaznije, znatno skuplji i spremniji ici vani! Obozavam fudbal ali ne razumem to ludilo sa decom. Hocu da gledam kvalitet pre svega! U mom Partizanu prica o deci samo stetu je donela. Briga me za decu, volim svakog ko nosi moj grb na dresu! Kod nas ljudi stalno zele da menjaju broj klubova. Tome nikad nema kraja a njime se nikad nista nije resilo. Trenutni format 16 u Superligi i 16 u PLS mi se cini idealnim. Ligu ne treba smanjiti da bi se dobio kvalitet, vec u delovima gde fali kvalitet, treba ga povecati na zadovoljavajuci nivo. Superliga bi mnogo trebala da radi na marketingu i imidzu. Mora kvalitetnije, ali mora sve i da izgleda kvalitetnije. Povecanje stranaca treba izvrsiti i u PLS, a uvesti ih i u srpske lige do 2-3 recimo. Treba naterati trenere da znaju da rade u medjunarodnom ambijentu i da uce istovremeno od drugih. Imas brazilca koji je bio u Nantu, pitaj ga kako tamo i sta. Povecace se konkurencija, domaci ce shvatiti da im klubovi nisu prcije gde se igraju sa drugovima, nego ima da igraju kao da su na zapadu, jer ako ne, tu je ganac, a ti druze srpska liga. I prekinimo sa tim da svako deriste mora da igra Superligu, sta fali srskim ligama? Ima tu puno posla, ali treba volje. I nije sve u parama, moze tu puno cega da se uradi bez velikih investicija. Ali glavna borba u nasem fudbalu je protiv zaostalog mentaliteta brojnih vec u godinama "legendi" koji ni nemaju iskrenu volju da poboljsaju situaciju, jer stavise, u ovim se vodama oni jedino i umeju kretati, a i usput im ide ono "jadni smo mi sada, sve je propalo, u moje vreme smo bili najbolji i to se nece ponoviti". Tako je i Euebio pricao o slavnoj Benfici i izgledalo je da Portugal nece vise nikad ponoviti slican uspeh, kad ono dodje nova generacija, Mendes menadzer igraca, Morinjo uveo najvise inovacija u trenerski rad, i Ronaldo i drustvo. Porto pobedio LS. Ali su sve postigli kad su posle mondijala 2002 morali da promene generaciju i primene nove metode. Kokeza nadam se da razumes o cemu pricam. Patriota nije braniti decu vec ciniti da Srbija ima uspeha!

that question is very interesting. By our name I guess you are Turkish or you have Turkish ascendency, so i can also guess that ou simpatize with Bosniaks. I am Serbian, from Belgrade, my father side are long generation Belgradeans, while from my mother side her both parents are Serbs from Sarajevo. On her side of the family I have many cousins who fought in the war because besides most of them living in Sarajevo, we have family land in rural areas which is where the elders usually return when old and menage several activities there from agriculture, licour production, farming and we even had horse creation. When war started part of my family found themselves defending our property because it was constantly under attack from Bosnian forces because the land is south of Sarajevo preciselly in the region that became the coridor to Gorazde (if you see a map you will immediatelly see what I am refering to).

I was a teenager at that time and I wanted to go there and fight, however, since I am only child and I have lost my father in a car acident years before, my family prohibited me to risk my life possibly leaving my mother alone. So I found myself living with my mother in the West (she was a diplomat) literally spending 24/7 time watching the news. CNN, BBC, SKY, Euronews and then the rest of national televisions like RAI, TVE, RTP, etc. We are talking about 1992,93, 94, there was no internet yet, so the news agencies such as Reuters placed their reports at the tv stations and the stories became the unquestioned truth. Since I was allways an excellent student in history and geography, and loved geopolitics, I spoted since very early how all these stations menaged the news comming out in a coordinated fashion clearly with intention of manipulating public opinion. Of course, you must be screaming already that I am Serb and we were the "bad guys" so why am I complaining, however, despite being Serb on both sides of my family, I was raised in a family with diplomatic tradition (my grandfather was also a diplomat) and we had a strong pro-Yugoslav feeling. This may sound strange to unfamiliarised people nowadays, but not only me, but actually majority of Serbs at that initial years were more pro-Yugoslav than pro-Serbian, although, at one point, since Serbs and Montenegrings were the only ones fighting for the integrity of Yugoslavia, the two became the same. It is funny how Serbs were labeled as the most nationalists, however, Serbs opted for keeping Yugoslavia as nations name all the way until the West actually forced us to implement a package of reforms in 2003 one of which included dropping the name Yugoslavia and descentralising the country clearly giving way to separate Montenegro from Serbia.

So, despite this fame Serbs were atributed of nationalists and patriots, for much of the wars of the 1990s Serbs actually fought as teached by decades long defense doctrine Tito implemented of how to resist foreign agression and defend Yugoslavia. Unlike most others, Serbs indeed perceved Yugoslavia as their one and only country, since Yugoslavia was created in 1918 as an alternative to an enlarged Serbia which had exited triumphally from WWI and finally got its right to unite all its lands, because despite almost century long reestablished independence, at start of WWI in 1914 more than half of Serbs still lived outside Serbia either under Austro-Hungary or Ottoman empire. Serbs entered 20 century determined to fix its territorial problems, and had none less than 3 consecutive wins in wars; first Balkan war over Ottomans, second Balkan war repelling a surprise attack by Bulgarians, and the trully speactacular win over a 5 times larger Austro-Hungary which intentionally provoked the war in 1914 being certain that after two balkan wars with 1/3 of male military fit population killed, Serbs would not even be able to give resistance, however, despite the sacrifices in Balkan wars, they provided Serbian army a tremendous experience, while Austro-Hungarians so confident of their superiority ended up caught in surprise. I am not sure if you see how it was for Serbs to fight for survival after already years of wars, now being directly attacked by a European superpower which. as if it wasn´t enough, counted with help from Bulgarians at Serbia´s back. After many battles, over million of Serb deaths, with Allied help, Serbs initiate a decisive offensive from the south, driving all enemies out of Serbia and Montenegro and causing the collapse of Habsburg empire, a scenario not even imagined at start of war. Serbian troops kept marching entering Austro-Hungary and liberating the Serbs and other South Slavs which now saw themselves free from centuries of Austrian domination.

The feeling of Serbia being the regional Piedmont was contagious. Kingdom of Montenegro declared its union with Serbia renouncing its independence, same did Vojvodina, Macedonia and Kosovo were already part of Serbia before the war, Slovenians were enthusiastic with Serbian victory, Bosnia and Herzegovina at time had a Serb majority, and much of what are today Bosniaks back then had the perception of being Serbs converted to Islam during Ottoman period. However, Serbian destiny was sealed much earlier, still during medieval times, when Nemanjic dinasty ruling the back then strong Serbian kingdom which even arose to become a short-lived empire choused Orthodoxy over Catholicism. That one decition will affect the entire history of the region from then on. Since Western powers major fear was Russia, during the collapse of Ottoman empire Western powers main goals were to prevent Russia to take Constantinople, and to prevent Serbia and Bulgaria to gain access to open sea, since both Serbia and Bulgaria by sharing Slavic origin and Orthodox faith were perceved as logical possible/probable Russian allies. After securing that Ottomans kept Istambul, the major task was to prevent Serbia to access sea. Vatican´s major nightmare was to have Serbian/Russian Orthodox naval bases right on the Adriatic across Italy. While Serbia advances pushing Ottoman troops to the south, Western powers, namelly Berlin, London and Vatican, agree (with Russia´s blessing) that Austro-Hungary occupies Bosnia and Herzegovina despite clear desire of the majority of the population to unite with Serbia. This move clearly puts a limit on Serbia regarding expanding to the West, since that border simultaneously meant a border between Eastern and Western Christianity. Austrians introduce numerous anti-Serbian policies, keep the ones Ottomans already applied for long and against which Serbs revoltet in Bosnia and herzegovina so often, and favours the back then diminute Croatian factor in Bosnia making them the privileged group. Simultaneously, a strong policy of deserbianization is implemented on Bosniaks. Besides Bosnia, Austro-Hngary is allowed to occupy and administer a strip of land named Sandzak (although you surelly know Sanjak is just a Turkish name for an administrative unit , Ottoman empire was divided internally in numerous sanjaks) meaning, this territory lacked till then any own identity, it was formed intentionally just to keep Serbia and Montenegro separated, again, so Serbia could not access Montenegro sea (which was also maximally diminished, with Bay of Kotor occupied by Austrians, and Montenegro accessing only a strip of coast where no ports could be made). This obssession with keeping Serbia away from the sea goes even further! In 1912 Serbian troops advancing to the south gaining terrain to Ottomans enter northern and central Albania. Serbian troops are receved as liberators by the mayor of Durres and welcomed by the Catholic and Orthodox Albanian population. Serbian kingdom set a district with Durres as capital. Unlike the nowadays massivelly popular myth saying how Serbs and Albanians are centuries-long enemies, I made a research and found that Serbian troops were welcomed in Albania because till then not a single battle or confrontation had occured between the two. Actually, Serbs and Albanians in what is nowadays the region where Serbia, Montenegro, Albania and Kosovo come together, allways lived peacefully and were close. Troughout history Serbs finding themselves in the central part of the Balkans which is highly disputed, ended up having more or less confrontation with all neighbours at some point, however, till 1912 Serbs and Albanians had allways been allies. Albanians lived in remote scarselly-populated areas, they lacked unity, they were separated by different religions, and even Albanian as language was a mess with speakers from diferent areas hardly understanding eachother. Isolation allowed them to keep their own traditions, and, while lacking centralised organisation and even pretentions of statehood, they followed a strict code of honour in a clans organised society. Except the coastal fortifications which were usually held by Venetians or Napolitanians, the rest was usually part of Bizantine or Serbian states which would usually mantain peace by allowing wide authonomy to the local lord, which in turn would be part of Byzantine or Serbian nobilty. 1912 is a specially important year, because Austrians play a key role which will affect events we still feel strongly today. While Christian Albanians in Albania felt simpathy towards Serbs and the result was Serbia acessing Adriatic and getting an important port in Durres, Austrians turned their entire attention to the Albanians from Kosovo and Macedonia, which unlike their brothers from Albania, massivelly converted to Islam and mostly fought along Ottomans against Serbian forces. Austrians with help of Germans and Catholic missionaries (mostly Croatian and very anti-Serbian) start an dramatical and emmotionally charged reporting with the intention of exharcebating feelings of hate and retaliation between Serbs and Albanians. Since converted Albanians were fighting under Ottoman command, Serbian advances were forcing them to retreat further and further away, a situation cleverly explored by Austrians to be presented as ethnic cleansing. Making Albanians bloodiest Serbian enemies was fundamental for arguing in favor of an Albanian state and demanding Serbian troops to leave what became Albania. By leaving Albania, Serbia was to be compensated by receving more land in Macedonia (a clever move to poison relations between Serbs and Bulgarians) and the result of this was the creation of the neverending Macedonian question.

To see how Austrian and Vatican policies are so selfish thinking only about their goals and so hypocritical regarding the nations they allegedly care so much about, the entire campaign to build animosity between Serbs and Albanians, and to "save Albanians from evil Serbs" just see the result. Serbs were forced to remove from northern Albania where they had been welcomed and where no problems existed, while the territories inhabited by converted Albanians in Kosovo and Macedonia which were the ones that created conflict with Serbs and demanded not to fall under Serbian authority, were left under... Serbian authority! Austrians didn´t cared at all about Albanians, all they wanted was to make up an urgent solution to remove from Serbia Durres port. To add some better context to this mess they created, Austrians gathered historians and all sorts of people to create in little ammount of time an entire story of a nation. Despite little knolledge about Illyrians, which seem to have been just a denomination Romans gave for a bunch of different peoples that lived in western Balkans and that lacked strong states or noticeble leaders they could be known for, as such seems to have suited the purpose quite fine for the Albanian story. No information about Illyrians meaning no information to be verified and challenged, and the very important notion of "autochtonous people" a sort of argument to be used against Serbs as "we came here first, thus this is all ours!" But, then there was a problem of lack of statehood of Albania. Serbs have a clear continuity linking directly today state with the first ones ever since arrival at Balkans in 6c. Initially characterised as non-centrical hierarchy, in which typically each son would become ruler of a different land, and would even follow different policies and alliances, it was often wars against external treath that would bring them together. Several dinasties ruled over medieval periods, several more-less powerfull states emerged, and with Nemanjic dinasty Serbia reaches a statute of empire. Although relativelly shortly-lived, this empire gains its meaning by seing how progressive and complete his building was. Emperor Stefan Dushan made himself a low codex/constitution which was ammong the most complete and modern at time. Educated in Constantinople, he was master in using his leading and diplomatic skills. After initially distinguishing himself at the battles, his army became so strong and respectable that during his second phase of expansion most land was not even conquered, but incorporated by the own will of the opposing lord. Although during Yugoslavia everything was done to diminish this Serbian archivement (because of several reasons) and maps were remade in their smallest possible extension, the fact is that the empire streched from Adriatic, to Danube, to Black and Aegean seas. Most neighboring countries were vassals. All this was possible because Nemanjic´s developed trade and exploited maximally the minning resources. Dushan was sophisticated to a point of bringing the best European experts in all fields. German minners were brought with their innovations and Dushan made Serbia a leading exporter of heavy metals, which, using Dubrovnik as its offshore trading post, plus the important land rutes Serbia was laying on, became an efficient sistem of accumulating coins, goods and values. Minning ws also crutial for the military equipment like armory, swards, shields, most advanced for its era. This created a vast and powerfull local nobility, with Serbia becoming sinonim of a culture and way of life. I am skipping the obvious generally known part regarding the elevation of Serbian Orthodox church to the highest rank and the collective mission of the nobility of building monasteries and spreading and collecting knolledge.

Dushan near his death held the title of emperor of Serbs, Greeks and Latins. He created what could easily be seen as the first Yugoslavia. At its peak, Dushan manipulated internal politics within Bizantium, and was seen as the probable successor by taking Constantinople. You surely know that Turks first entered Europe when Bizantines invited them to help them reppel Serbian advance. Dushan was one step from taking Constantinople and making Serbia the next Roman Eastern Empire. Having Dushan grown up and lived as younster there, plus having Serbian empire been built much with the influence of Bizantium only with a Serbian touch, the adaptation would not have been difficult, and tired of endless civil was between the two Bizantine dinasties, the population would had probably welcomed Dushan as their new leader, as he already ruled most of Greece and had their nobility included in Serbian one, he wouldn´t even had been seen as foreigner. It would have put Serbia in a total higher level and it would have certainly changed entire history. I know you must be thinking "Yes, but Turks were also there, who says Dushan would have defeated them?", yes, I know, but who knows. Dushan sudden misterious death at its peak of power at age 47 right in a step from reaching its goal will remain an historical mistery for eternity. His death was so unexpected that he didn´t even prepared his son, who, poor soul, after such a "Mighty" leader as he was known, emperor Uros was predestined to be "The weak". Dushan death paralized the empire. The strategy, the goals, their execution, were Dushan´s endevour, no one was capable of replacing him at that point. One of the major strenghts of Dushan was his ability to rule and control the vast powerfull nobility he partially inherited, partially created. The empire was internally divided ammong lords rulling over lands which by themselves were most previous independent kingdoms. Uros was unable to control them and the empire collapsed. Local nobles start acting independently making alliances and wars on their own. Some of them became actually the first incarnations of some of today countries, such as provinces of Serbian empire like Kingdom of Marko Kraljevic becoming nowadays Macednia, or Kastrioti principality being considered Albania. Besides the southern provinces which were ethnically Greek, and the possessions in Bulgaria, most of the rest of the provences kept being Serbian. However, old rivalries and animosities arised between them, a period of decadence was evident, and Ottomans enjoyed this situation as if they ordered it a la carte. Although some oportunistically sided with Ottomans in order to fight a rival, still what united most of these newly formed states was their strugle to defend the existing order against Ottomans. Different states held the status of stronger Serbian state at different times, until, for instance Moravian Serbia of czar Lazar took the lead and initiative to unite as much allies as possible and to confront Ottomans in a decisive way. The Battle of Kosovo 1489, certainly decisive ending all aspirations of reverting the situation and restoring the Serbian empire. Even afterwords, numerous Serbian entities with higher or lower levels of independence still exist for a while before a period of total Ottoman domination comes. Despite that, there are continuos revolts challenging Ottoman authority, and when by early 19 century Serbian First and Second Uprisings happend, they restore Serbia, officially becoming a kingdom in 1878.

This illustrates that despite all events, Serbia clearly has a line of continuity in its statehood streching back to 7 century. That is a problem for Austrians that in 1913 came with the Illyrian origin theory for Albanians, but still lack any real state or leader to show off. By digging into history the solution they find is Skanderbeg. It is appealing to Vatican because suggests Albanians fought Ottomans and defended Christianity (despite Skanderbeg being from an Orthodox family and not Catholic, but for Vatican its good enough). It is also acceptable and appealing to Albanians, which, after having been promoted as Islamic and pro-Ottoman, with Skanderbeg have a counter-balance providing them arguments that they too were part of the pre-Ottoman existing order and defended it against invaders. Albanians addopt Skanderbeg enthusiastically starting a massive building of monuments and honoring him everywhere. However, Skanderbeg myth of Albanian hero has massive problems, but Austrians simply couldn´t go along any other option since Karl Thopia called Ottomans for help. Skanderbeg was the choice but he needed an almost total refurbushment since the goal was to present a pure Albanian hero and if possible anti-Serb. But most famous Albanian historian of 15 century in his presentation of Skanderbeg says "Scanderbeg huome valente e per nature Serviano" (Skanderbeg, a brave man, Serbian by nature). All this connections with Serbia must be erased. To begin, he must be presented as a local hero, as someone like ordinary Albanian who suddently took upon him the role of leader and bravely fought for Albania. To archive this, it should be avoided to speak about his origin and family. Because if we do it, we find out that Skanderbeg was no ordinary man at all, but rather the third ruler in hereditary line of the so called Kastrioti domain/principallity. The Kastrioti´s nobility comes from Skanderbeg grandfather, Pavle (Pal in Albanian) who was a military in the Serbian imperial army and records say that at taking Berat, Valona and Kanina, his bravury stood off so much that emperor Dushan reworded him with title and land. Since those were times Serbia was expanding rapidly towards south, this practice of awarding people for their remarcable archivments with land was commun practice. Often, if an area had a lord and he would cooperate and be friendly, he would keep his position, but if a local ruler would challenge and be defeated, someone loyal either from Serbian nobility or military would be appointed as the new ruler. Other cases included also remote scarselly-inhabited territories, and Albania in 14 century included most of those. What was exactly the case of the territory in central Albania Kastrioti´s were appointed to rule was, is uncknown, but there are no references to battles at that area, so seems the area simply lacked leadership. Whatever it was the case, Jovan Kastrioti seems to have been very well accepted by local people. The most we have documented about further in the past is a text in Dubrovnik archives which mentions Jovan Kastrioti and says his father was named Branilo and was Christian Orthodox. Branilo is an old Serbian name which comes from the Serbian verb "Braniti", Branilo thus meaning "The defender". Despite Albanian historians majoritarly denying it, it is hard not to conclude that a person named Pavle, which was also Orthodox as his father Branilo, and fought in Serbian army so bravelly that ended receving a title and land, is not Serbian. Documents differ about the form of the surname, most write Kastrioti, but some use the form Kastriotic. We lack information about their origins, but we know for sure he was a foreigner in the land he was given to rule. He was Serbian, Christian Orthodox, and he wrote and signed documents in old-Serbian. While the population of his domain was Arberes (Albanian), Christian Catholic, spoke Albanian but were analfabet. So, as much as modern Albanian historiographers do their best to present Kastrioti´s as locals, they were just another foreign family that came to rule over a territory inhabited by Albanians. There is a major effort to describe some Albanian principalities during medieval times, and insistance on some Albanian nobility, however, until Skanderbeg, all rulers were foreign, either Italian, Serbian or Greek. What makes Skanderbeg different is that he was born in what was his principality, but still doesn´t change the nature of being an inherited ruler of an originally foreign family. I will skip the listing of spouses and brothers and sisters, you can see them easily online, and you can see all habe Serbian names. What happends today is that since Albanians addopted the Skanderbeg story as of national identity importance, they insist in using Albanian versions of the names, so Pavle is Pal, Jovan is Gjon, and Skanderbeg himself, originally Djuradj, is Gjorgji. Since Branilo is too Serbian name and has no correspondance, they don´t have an Albanian version for him, so instead they decided to claim that Branilo doesn´t exist and is a Serbian forgery... Anyway, to finish with Skanderbeg, his grandpa seems to have established great relations with locals, he was succeded by his son Jovan, who also followed the tradition of serving in Serbian military, and Jovan fought in Battle of Plocnik in 1386 against Ottomans. During his rule the domain expanded and started including some towns. He marries Voisava which comes from Serbian Brankovic family, and have 9 children, all with Serbian names. Skanderbeg is alive

that question is very interesting. By our name I guess you are Turkish or you have Turkish ascendency, so i can also guess that ou simpatize with Bosniaks. I am Serbian, from Belgrade, my father side are long generation Belgradeans, while from my mother side her both parents are Serbs from Sarajevo. On her side of the family I have many cousins who fought in the war because besides most of them living in Sarajevo, we have family land in rural areas which is where the elders usually return when old and menage several activities there from agriculture, licour production, farming and we even had horse creation. When war started part of my family found themselves defending our property because it was constantly under attack from Bosnian forces because the land is south of Sarajevo preciselly in the region that became the coridor to Gorazde (if you see a map you will immediatelly see what I am refering to). 

I was a teenager at that time and I wanted to go there and fight, however, since I am only child and I have lost my father in a car acident years before, my family prohibited me to risk my life possibly leaving my mother alone. So I found myself living with my mother in the West (she was a diplomat) literally spending 24/7 time watching the news. CNN, BBC, SKY, Euronews and then the rest of national televisions like RAI, TVE, RTP, etc. We are talking about 1992,93, 94, there was no internet yet, so the news agencies such as Reuters placed their reports at the tv stations and the stories became the unquestioned truth. Since I was allways an excellent student in history and geography, and loved geopolitics, I spoted since very early how all these stations menaged the news comming out in a coordinated fashion clearly with intention of manipulating public opinion. Of course, you must be screaming already that I am Serb and we were the "bad guys" so why am I complaining, however, despite being Serb on both sides of my family, I was raised in a family with diplomatic tradition (my grandfather was also a diplomat) and we had a strong pro-Yugoslav feeling. This may sound strange to unfamiliarised people nowadays, but not only me, but actually majority of Serbs at that initial years were more pro-Yugoslav than pro-Serbian, although, at one point, since Serbs and Montenegrings were the only ones fighting for the integrity of Yugoslavia, the two became the same. It is funny how Serbs were labeled as the most nationalists, however, Serbs opted for keeping Yugoslavia as nations name all the way until the West actually forced us to implement a package of reforms in 2003 one of which included dropping the name Yugoslavia and descentralising the country clearly giving way to separate Montenegro from Serbia.

So, despite this fame Serbs were atributed of nationalists and patriots, for much of the wars of the 1990s Serbs actually fought as teached by decades long defense doctrine Tito implemented of how to resist foreign agression and defend Yugoslavia. Unlike most others, Serbs indeed perceved Yugoslavia as their one and only country, since Yugoslavia was created in 1918 as an alternative to an enlarged Serbia which had exited triumphally from WWI and finally got its right to unite all its lands, because despite almost century long reestablished independence, at start of WWI in 1914 more than half of Serbs still lived outside Serbia either under Austro-Hungary or Ottoman empire. Serbs entered 20 century determined to fix its territorial problems, and had none less than 3 consecutive wins in wars; first Balkan war over Ottomans, second Balkan war repelling a surprise attack by Bulgarians, and the trully speactacular win over a 5 times larger Austro-Hungary which intentionally provoked the war in 1914 being certain that after two balkan wars with 1/3 of male military fit population killed, Serbs would not even be able to give resistance, however, despite the sacrifices in Balkan wars, they provided Serbian army a tremendous experience, while Austro-Hungarians so confident of their superiority ended up caught in surprise. I am not sure if you see how it was for Serbs to fight for survival after already years of wars, now being directly attacked by a European superpower which. as if it wasn´t enough, counted with help from Bulgarians at Serbia´s back. After many battles, over million of Serb deaths, with Allied help, Serbs initiate a decisive offensive from the south, driving all enemies out of Serbia and Montenegro and causing the collapse of Habsburg empire, a scenario not even imagined at start of war. Serbian troops kept marching entering Austro-Hungary and liberating the Serbs and other South Slavs which now saw themselves free from centuries of Austrian domination.

The feeling of Serbia being the regional Piedmont was contagious. Kingdom of Montenegro declared its union with Serbia renouncing its independence, same did Vojvodina, Macedonia and Kosovo were already part of Serbia before the war, Slovenians were enthusiastic with Serbian victory, Bosnia and Herzegovina at time had a Serb majority, and much of what are today Bosniaks back then had the perception of being Serbs converted to Islam during Ottoman period. However, Serbian destiny was sealed much earlier, still during medieval times, when Nemanjic dinasty ruling the back then strong Serbian kingdom which even arose to become a short-lived empire choused Orthodoxy over Catholicism. That one decition will affect the entire history of the region from then on. Since Western powers major fear was Russia, during the collapse of Ottoman empire Western powers main goals were to prevent Russia to take Constantinople, and to prevent Serbia and Bulgaria to gain access to open sea, since both Serbia and Bulgaria by sharing Slavic origin and Orthodox faith were perceved as logical possible/probable Russian allies. After securing that Ottomans kept Istambul, the major task was to prevent Serbia to access sea. Vatican´s major nightmare was to have Serbian/Russian Orthodox naval bases right on the Adriatic across Italy. While Serbia advances pushing Ottoman troops to the south, Western powers, namelly Berlin, London and Vatican, agree (with Russia´s blessing) that Austro-Hungary occupies Bosnia and Herzegovina despite clear desire of the majority of the population to unite with Serbia. This move clearly puts a limit on Serbia regarding expanding to the West, since that border simultaneously meant a border between Eastern and Western Christianity. Austrians introduce numerous anti-Serbian policies, keep the ones Ottomans already applied for long and against which Serbs revoltet in Bosnia and herzegovina so often, and favours the back then diminute Croatian factor in Bosnia making them the privileged group. Simultaneously, a strong policy of deserbianization is implemented on Bosniaks. Besides Bosnia, Austro-Hngary is allowed to occupy and administer a strip of land named Sandzak (although you surelly know Sanjak is just a Turkish name for an administrative unit , Ottoman empire was divided internally in numerous sanjaks) meaning, this territory lacked till then any own identity, it was formed intentionally just to keep Serbia and Montenegro separated, again, so Serbia could not access Montenegro sea (which was also maximally diminished, with Bay of Kotor occupied by Austrians, and Montenegro accessing only a strip of coast where no ports could be made). This obssession with keeping Serbia away from the sea goes even further! In 1912 Serbian troops advancing to the south gaining terrain to Ottomans enter northern and central Albania. Serbian troops are receved as liberators by the mayor of Durres and welcomed by the Catholic and Orthodox Albanian population. Serbian kingdom set a district with Durres as capital. Unlike the nowadays massivelly popular myth saying how Serbs and Albanians are centuries-long enemies, I made a research and found that Serbian troops were welcomed in Albania because till then not a single battle or confrontation had occured between the two. Actually, Serbs and Albanians in what is nowadays the region where Serbia, Montenegro, Albania and Kosovo come together, allways lived peacefully and were close. Troughout history Serbs finding themselves in the central part of the Balkans which is highly disputed, ended up having more or less confrontation with all neighbours at some point, however, till 1912 Serbs and Albanians had allways been allies. Albanians lived in remote scarselly-populated areas, they lacked unity, they were separated by different religions, and even Albanian as language was a mess with speakers from diferent areas hardly understanding eachother. Isolation allowed them to keep their own traditions, and, while lacking centralised organisation and even pretentions of statehood, they followed a strict code of honour in a clans organised society. Except the coastal fortifications which were usually held by Venetians or Napolitanians, the rest was usually part of Bizantine or Serbian states which would usually mantain peace by allowing wide authonomy to the local lord, which in turn would be part of Byzantine or Serbian nobilty. 1912 is a specially important year, because Austrians play a key role which will affect events we still feel strongly today. While Christian Albanians in Albania felt simpathy towards Serbs and the result was Serbia acessing Adriatic and getting an important port in Durres, Austrians turned their entire attention to the Albanians from Kosovo and Macedonia, which unlike their brothers from Albania, massivelly converted to Islam and mostly fought along Ottomans against Serbian forces. Austrians with help of Germans and Catholic missionaries (mostly Croatian and very anti-Serbian) start an dramatical and emmotionally charged reporting with the intention of exharcebating feelings of hate and retaliation between Serbs and Albanians. Since converted Albanians were fighting under Ottoman command, Serbian advances were forcing them to retreat further and further away, a situation cleverly explored by Austrians to be presented as ethnic cleansing. Making Albanians bloodiest Serbian enemies was fundamental for arguing in favor of an Albanian state and demanding Serbian troops to leave what became Albania. By leaving Albania, Serbia was to be compensated by receving more land in Macedonia (a clever move to poison relations between Serbs and Bulgarians) and the result of this was the creation of the neverending Macedonian question.

To see how Austrian and Vatican policies are so selfish thinking only about their goals and so hypocritical regarding the nations they allegedly care so much about, the entire campaign to build animosity between Serbs and Albanians, and to "save Albanians from evil Serbs" just see the result. Serbs were forced to remove from northern Albania where they had been welcomed and where no problems existed, while the territories inhabited by converted Albanians in Kosovo and Macedonia which were the ones that created conflict with Serbs and demanded not to fall under Serbian authority, were left under... Serbian authority! Austrians didn´t cared at all about Albanians, all they wanted was to make up an urgent solution to remove from Serbia Durres port. To add some better context to this mess they created, Austrians gathered historians and all sorts of people to create in little ammount of time an entire story of a nation. Despite little knolledge about Illyrians, which seem to have been just a denomination Romans gave for a bunch of different peoples that lived in western Balkans and that lacked strong states or noticeble leaders they could be known for, as such seems to have suited the purpose quite fine for the Albanian story. No information about Illyrians meaning no information to be verified and challenged, and the very important notion of "autochtonous people" a sort of argument to be used against Serbs as "we came here first, thus this is all ours!" But, then there was a problem of lack of statehood of Albania. Serbs have a clear continuity linking directly today state with the first ones ever since arrival at Balkans in 6c. Initially characterised as non-centrical hierarchy, in which typically each son would become ruler of a different land, and would even follow different policies and alliances, it was often wars against external treath that would bring them together. Several dinasties ruled over medieval periods, several more-less powerfull states emerged, and with Nemanjic dinasty Serbia reaches a statute of empire. Although relativelly shortly-lived, this empire gains its meaning by seing how progressive and complete his building was. Emperor Stefan Dushan made himself a low codex/constitution which was ammong the most complete and modern at time. Educated in Constantinople, he was master in using his leading and diplomatic skills. After initially distinguishing himself at the battles, his army became so strong and respectable that during his second phase of expansion most land was not even conquered, but incorporated by the own will of the opposing lord. Although during Yugoslavia everything was done to diminish this Serbian archivement (because of several reasons) and maps were remade in their smallest possible extension, the fact is that the empire streched from Adriatic, to Danube, to Black and Aegean seas. Most neighboring countries were vassals. All this was possible because Nemanjic´s developed trade and exploited maximally the minning resources. Dushan was sophisticated to a point of bringing the best European experts in all fields. German minners were brought with their innovations and Dushan made Serbia a leading exporter of heavy metals, which, using Dubrovnik as its offshore trading post, plus the important land rutes Serbia was laying on, became an efficient sistem of accumulating coins, goods and values. Minning ws also crutial for the military equipment like armory, swards, shields, most advanced for its era. This created a vast and powerfull local nobility, with Serbia becoming sinonim of a culture and way of life. I am skipping the obvious generally known part regarding the elevation of Serbian Orthodox church to the highest rank and the collective mission of the nobility of building monasteries and spreading and collecting knolledge.

Dushan near his death held the title of emperor of Serbs, Greeks and Latins. He created what could easily be seen as the first Yugoslavia. At its peak, Dushan manipulated internal politics within Bizantium, and was seen as the probable successor by taking Constantinople. You surely know that Turks first entered Europe when Bizantines invited them to help them reppel Serbian advance. Dushan was one step from taking Constantinople and making Serbia the next Roman Eastern Empire. Having Dushan grown up and lived as younster there, plus having Serbian empire been built much with the influence of Bizantium only with a Serbian touch, the adaptation would not have been difficult, and tired of endless civil was between the two Bizantine dinasties, the population would had probably welcomed Dushan as their new leader, as he already ruled most of Greece and had their nobility included in Serbian one, he wouldn´t even had been seen as foreigner. It would have put Serbia in a total higher level and it would have certainly changed entire history. I know you must be thinking "Yes, but Turks were also there, who says Dushan would have defeated them?", yes, I know, but who knows. Dushan sudden misterious death at its peak of power at age 47 right in a step from reaching its goal will remain an historical mistery for eternity. His death was so unexpected that he didn´t even prepared his son, who, poor soul, after such a "Mighty" leader as he was known, emperor Uros was predestined to be "The weak". Dushan death paralized the empire. The strategy, the goals, their execution, were Dushan´s endevour, no one was capable of replacing him at that point. One of the major strenghts of Dushan was his ability to rule and control the vast powerfull nobility he partially inherited, partially created. The empire was internally divided ammong lords rulling over lands which by themselves were most previous independent kingdoms. Uros was unable to control them and the empire collapsed. Local nobles start acting independently making alliances and wars on their own. Some of them became actually the first incarnations of some of today countries, such as provinces of Serbian empire like Kingdom of Marko Kraljevic becoming nowadays Macednia, or Kastrioti principality being considered Albania. Besides the southern provinces which were ethnically Greek, and the possessions in Bulgaria, most of the rest of the provences kept being Serbian. However, old rivalries and animosities arised between them, a period of decadence was evident, and Ottomans enjoyed this situation as if they ordered it a la carte. Although some oportunistically sided with Ottomans in order to fight a rival, still what united most of these newly formed states was their strugle to defend the existing order against Ottomans. Different states held the status of stronger Serbian state at different times, until, for instance Moravian Serbia of czar Lazar took the lead and initiative to unite as much allies as possible and to confront Ottomans in a decisive way. The Battle of Kosovo 1489, certainly decisive ending all aspirations of reverting the situation and restoring the Serbian empire. Even afterwords, numerous Serbian entities with higher or lower levels of independence still exist for a while before a period of total Ottoman domination comes. Despite that, there are continuos revolts challenging Ottoman authority, and when by early 19 century Serbian First and Second Uprisings happend, they restore Serbia, officially becoming a kingdom in 1878.

This illustrates that despite all events, Serbia clearly has a line of continuity in its statehood streching back to 7 century. That is a problem for Austrians that in 1913 came with the Illyrian origin theory for Albanians, but still lack any real state or leader to show off. By digging into history the solution they find is Skanderbeg. It is appealing to Vatican because suggests Albanians fought Ottomans and defended Christianity (despite Skanderbeg being from an Orthodox family and not Catholic, but for Vatican its good enough). It is also acceptable and appealing to Albanians, which, after having been promoted as Islamic and pro-Ottoman, with Skanderbeg have a counter-balance providing them arguments that they too were part of the pre-Ottoman existing order and defended it against invaders. Albanians addopt Skanderbeg enthusiastically starting a massive building of monuments and honoring him everywhere. However, Skanderbeg myth of Albanian hero has massive problems, but Austrians simply couldn´t go along any other option since Karl Thopia called Ottomans for help. Skanderbeg was the choice but he needed an almost total refurbushment since the goal was to present a pure Albanian hero and if possible anti-Serb. But most famous Albanian historian of 15 century in his presentation of Skanderbeg says "Scanderbeg huome valente e per nature Serviano" (Skanderbeg, a brave man, Serbian by nature). All this connections with Serbia must be erased. To begin, he must be presented as a local hero, as someone like ordinary Albanian who suddently took upon him the role of leader and bravely fought for Albania. To archive this, it should be avoided to speak about his origin and family. Because if we do it, we find out that Skanderbeg was no ordinary man at all, but rather the third ruler in hereditary line of the so called Kastrioti domain/principallity. The Kastrioti´s nobility comes from Skanderbeg grandfather, Pavle (Pal in Albanian) who was a military in the Serbian imperial army and records say that at taking Berat, Valona and Kanina, his bravury stood off so much that emperor Dushan reworded him with title and land. Since those were times Serbia was expanding rapidly towards south, this practice of awarding people for their remarcable archivments with land was commun practice. Often, if an area had a lord and he would cooperate and be friendly, he would keep his position, but if a local ruler would challenge and be defeated, someone loyal either from Serbian nobility or military would be appointed as the new ruler. Other cases included also remote scarselly-inhabited territories, and Albania in 14 century included most of those. What was exactly the case of the territory in central Albania Kastrioti´s were appointed to rule was, is uncknown, but there are no references to battles at that area, so seems the area simply lacked leadership. Whatever it was the case, Jovan Kastrioti seems to have been very well accepted by local people. The most we have documented about further in the past is a text in Dubrovnik archives which mentions Jovan Kastrioti and says his father was named Branilo and was Christian Orthodox. Branilo is an old Serbian name which comes from the Serbian verb "Braniti", Branilo thus meaning "The defender". Despite Albanian historians majoritarly denying it, it is hard not to conclude that a person named Pavle, which was also Orthodox as his father Branilo, and fought in Serbian army so bravelly that ended receving a title and land, is not Serbian. Documents differ about the form of the surname, most write Kastrioti, but some use the form Kastriotic. We lack information about their origins, but we know for sure he was a foreigner in the land he was given to rule. He was Serbian, Christian Orthodox, and he wrote and signed documents in old-Serbian. While the population of his domain was Arberes (Albanian), Christian Catholic, spoke Albanian but were analfabet. So, as much as modern Albanian historiographers do their best to present Kastrioti´s as locals, they were just another foreign family that came to rule over a territory inhabited by Albanians. There is a major effort to describe some Albanian principalities during medieval times, and insistance on some Albanian nobility, however, until Skanderbeg, all rulers were foreign, either Italian, Serbian or Greek. What makes Skanderbeg different is that he was born in what was his principality, but still doesn´t change the nature of being an inherited ruler of an originally foreign family. I will skip the listing of spouses and brothers and sisters, you can see them easily online, and you can see all habe Serbian names. What happends today is that since Albanians addopted the Skanderbeg story as of national identity importance, they insist in using Albanian versions of the names, so Pavle is Pal, Jovan is Gjon, and Skanderbeg himself, originally Djuradj, is Gjorgji. Since Branilo is too Serbian name and has no correspondance, they don´t have an Albanian version for him, so instead they decided to claim that Branilo doesn´t exist and is a Serbian forgery... Anyway, to finish with Skanderbeg, his grandpa seems to have established great relations with locals, he was succeded by his son Jovan, who also followed the tradition of serving in Serbian military, and Jovan fought in Battle of Plocnik in 1386 against Ottomans. During his rule the domain expanded and started including some towns. He marries Voisava which comes from Serbian Brankovic family, and have 9 children, all with Serbian names. Serbian empire by then had collapsed, and after being defeated by Ottomans at several battles, Jovan moves permanently to Serbian monastery Hilandar on Mount Athos, where by sharing the tradition of Serbian nobility, he donates and buids a tower which became known as "Arbanaski pirg" (Tower of the Arbanasi). Albanians claim the name of the tower indicating he was Albanian, although, the name could also derive from the fact of Jovan being known as the ruler of a principality majoritarly populated by Arbanasi, so by logic he is Arbanas ruler. Anyway, the Albanian nationalistic narrative of Skanderbeg must include all components Albanian ntionalism means today, however, if we are going to make a serious understanding, we must exclude all modern-day bias, and understand that at that time the very notion of nation, nationality and ethnicity was much different. Stricking is to see how Serbs and Albanians seemed to have no problems whatsoever back then. Skanderbeg father fought the Ottomans along other Serbian rulers. Ottomans take Kastrioti principality, and further take Skanderbeg and several of his brothers as hostages to Constantinople. Later he spends time loyal to the Sultan, but by 1443 he deserts and begins rebelion. Along 300 Albanian deserters from Ottoman army, he goes to Kruje where with a clever trick using a forged letter, becomes governor of the city same day. However, Skanderbeg proclaimed himself heir of Zeta, a Serbian principality in nowadays Montenegro ruled usually by the Balsic family. This indicates how confused the ethnic identity issue is. He takes part in the League of Lezhe (1444) nowadays presented as an Albanian nationalist symbol, however, it was a military alliance ammong local rulers, nothing unusual at that time, only that this one was formed by a majority of ethnically Albanian rulers, but included Serbian ones as well. The league had no ethnic character whatsoever. The way is tought nowadays in Albania is distorted and fails to see that Albanians and Serbs fought together for quite long being allways allies. As much as Albanians nowadays want to see Skanderbeg as that great Albanian hero who fought for Albania, we miss evidence that there was any desire or determination about independent Albania. Seems obvious they all want to defend their domains, but rather then claims for Greater Albania, they actually defend the order they live in with their social structure, nobility, Bizantine culture, Serbian code of laws (which was kept in use long after Dushan died). This is what Albanian noble and historian Gjon Muzaka ment when he described Skanderbeg as "of Serbian nature". Despite me personally thinking he was ethnically Serbian by both sides, paternal and maternal, I will not even claim that Muzaka was confirming that, but rather that his description is based in the believe that Serbs and Albanians are not ethnically separated and that Skanderbeg fought for a sistem in which Bizantine culture is dominant and Serbian statehood and nobility the place Albanians should naturally be part of. The black double-headed eagle had no ethnical meaning as Albanians nowadays think, actually, at that time the double-headed eagle was originally Bizantine, then addopted by Serbs, which at medieval times was depicted in several different colors, including black. Skanderbeg eagle confirmed he was just one more of the entities sharing Bizantine culture. Its actually inclusive, rather than exclusive. Obviously that 4 centuries later, Serbia lost its statute of culturally cominant in the region, nationalism has been invented and introduced just a century earlier, and with Albanians massivelly converting to Islam while Serbs mostly staying Orthodox, the differences became much more accentuated, to a point that a white and black eagle are no longer simbols of one same identity, but the opposite.

So there we have how the history of entire nations is manipulated in historical laboratories which create content not in search of truth as naivelly humans generally are guided to think, but rather provide content with specifical purpose to influence the future.

Now, after this huge trip of mine into middle ages, I shall return to the actual topic, about the tapes from the Bosnian war. Interestingly, they were never seen on Western TV at time of the war. The rethoric to all news channels was to force the idea Serbs were fighting woman, children and elderly people. Funny how most of the military images of Serbian soldiers were well known since the begining, and were over and over repeated. I have a testimony from a Western journalist who was in Bosnia at that time who told the awfull truth on freedom of information today. Journalists there were not allowed to explore by themselves and search for stories. But rather with the excuse of violence and possibly being hit (you actually think if he is telling you not to dare to improvise or do anything beside they have planned for you because... "bad Serbs" will shoot me? Or you will shoot me?). Those were big strong western guys contracted as security for journalists, but seemed more they were there to control all journalists. Most journalists would receve a paper with main lines of what must be your story. Emphasis was given to specific expressions. Then they will be taken in a convoy to already preplaned destinations to take specific shots. And the highlight would be the chance of inteviewing survivors, rape victims, widows, children... He remembers how these big guys would interrump an interview and correct the "witness" of what sheforgot to say. They were paid for the interviews. There were many and some were clearly awfully trying to make up a story to earn more bucks. Many would end up contradicting themselves, some would loose 10 minutes telling how they were affraid to cross the street, and then suddently remembering how her daughter was rapped by Serbian soldiers.... seevral times..... several days..... y many of them.... and raped her too!!! .... both in same time! Wanderfull was one time when an old lady was telling in tears how Serbs stole absolutelly everything from her, but somehow didnt noteced her golden teeth and earings.... What was really disgusting was that in middle of war civilians really suffered a lot and had to live as crazy just to get the basic necessities. Believe it or not, Serbs opened camps where all people was accepted regardless of ethnicity or anything. Civilians complained about feeling unsafe at night and being unable to sleep, so beds were provided. Doctors were there to provide medical care. Serbs did their best to show how Yugoslavia was the country all are welcome. And invited Western journalists for the world to see how help is being provided despite USA imposed sanctions..... and at news report you will hear "And we have exclusive images of Serbian concentration camp!" ... One case was great: an English journalist is in the car with a translator, they are on some rural road, when sudenly they spot a muslim lady with a bay in her hands. They open the window and interview her, but she deosnt speak any English so the translator had to work it out. Journalists asks "What happened?" she says in Bosnian "There is fighting in my village and I need to get food and medication for my baby" the translator says "She said Serbs are bombing the village killing inocent people and she is running away with her baby to save her"... after few nonsensical intentional lies such as that one, the journalist asks where is she going, and the lady says "To the camp. I told you, I have to go tere everyday so doctors check my baby and I receve food." the lady was annoyed with the journalist delaying her walk, and the journalist couldn´t make up anythibg from what she said, so the journalist concluded the story by looking at the camera with a dramatic face and saying: "Here is another exemple of ethnic cleansing. Serbian forces are cracking down the village which can fall at any moment and thousands will be dead. This lady is an exemple of desperation, she is going to the Serbian camp where most probably will be rapped and killed. An estimated XXXXXXXXX were rapped and killed acording to ONGs".

Wait a sec. Would a mother take her own baby to a concentration camp on her own will? ... That just by itself is prove that was no concentration camp at all and the mother and baby were actually having a doctor and food there.