by Bob Djurdjevic (6-18-00)
BUDVA, June 17 - The plot is as old as politics. A failing politician needs a boost in ratings. His sponsors need an excuse for intervention on his behalf. So they engineer an "assassination" attempt on the politician in the hopes of garnering a sympathy vote.
In Vuk Draskovic's case, they also do it at a place where they can control the police "investigation" (in Montenegro, Yugoslavia republic headed by Draskovic's fellow-western vassal Milo Djukanovic). Except that the plotters botch the "assassination" so that anyone with minimal amount of common sense, let alone sleuths like Sherlock Holmes or Columbo, can see large holes in their plot.
In short, people who are buying Draskovic's story loudly heralded by the western media - that the Belgrade regime is behind an alleged Thursday evening assassination attempt on the Serb opposition politician in the coastal town of Budva - probably still believe in Santa Claus, too.
Let's start with a motive for the assassination. There isn't one. Why would Slobodan Milosevic waste a bullet on a politician who has distinguished himself throughout his career by the ability to shoot himself in the foot? Repeatedly. Or get it in the ear when he misses the foot?
Only the western neo-colonialists and their Serb quislings have something to gain from such "assassinations," especially when they fail. Which is why they fail. They were meant to fail. Dead martyrs are useless as vassals.
The entire assassination scenario, as outlined to the western media last night by Draskovic himself, reads like a bad plot for a third-rate fiction novel. And to think that the man (Draskovic) was once a fairly decent writer!?
Draskovic claimed he had received a warning from a high-level contact in the Serbian government a few days ago that an "order" had gone out to kill him, according to today's New York Times story, prominently headlined "Wounded Serb Opponent Blames Milosevic." "People in Moscow also knew about this," Draskovic added, alluding to his recent failed trip seeking Russia's support against Milosevic.
"He did not explain further," the Times said, without explaining why this New World Order lapdog newspaper did not demand further explanations of Draskovic, as any half objective journalist would have done.
But let's accept Draskovic's claim at its face value. Let's put ourselves in his shoes...
You believe the regime in Belgrade is about to kill you. You leave Serbia and go to a supposedly safer Montenegro where your pal Djukanovic is in charge. You even leave your wife in Serbia, presumably for her own safety. And then you sit around at 11:30PM watching television all alone in your unguarded home? No personal bodyguards (1). No security detail provided by your pal Djukanovic. Nothing. Nada (2)
Is that how you would behave if you thought you were in mortal danger?
Of course, not. But that's what happened in Draskovic's case.
And then, two alleged assailants come by and start shooting from the terrace through the shutters of the living room in which Draskovic is sitting. Five or six shots are fired, leaving two bullet holes in the wall above the sofa where he sat, and several more holes in the wall to the side, according to the Times.
"I threw myself to the ground, rolled over and crawled up the steps," Draskovic said, showing how he had scrambled into the adjoining kitchen area and sought cover behind a pillar. "There was a trail of blood on the floor to the front door he used to escape to a neighbor's home," the Times reporter writes.
Now, which parts of the above statements don't seem to add up?
Well, to start with, everyone could see that Draskovic's wounds were superficial at the worst. They required what looked like a couple of band-aids (see the photo). And those kinds of wounds left "a trail of blood on the floor?"
Second, why was the blood still there on the fl or more than a day after the shooting? Even if Draskovic was busy rehearsing his fairy tales, was Draskovic's wife also too busy to clean it up when she got to Budva from Belgrade? Or was the blood left there to help embellish and dramatize Draskovic's lavish claims about the supposed assassination?
Third, if Draskovic threw himself on the floor, and the bullet holes were visible ABOVE the sofa, wonder how he managed to get hit by - not one, but two of them? Ricocheting off the wall, straight down to the floor?
Fourth, Draskovic told the Times he had escaped to a neighbor's home. Any self-respecting reporter would have at that stage walked next door to that neighbor and asked for his version of the story. Yet no mention of that in the Times' report, nor in any other western reports filed about the Draskovic interview. Why not? Was the media bought off, or was the neighbor silenced, so that Draskovic could spin his tale unhindered by the truth?
The Montenegro police said last night (June 16) that they had arrested the suspects. Identities of the men will be disclosed on Saturday, Montenegrin Deputy Interior Minister Vuk Boskovic told the state television in the capital, Podgorica, adding that the men had followed Draskovic from Serbia to carry out the attack.
But Saturday has come and gone without any such "evidence" being presented. "They also did not provide any evidence to support the claim that the assailants had come from Serbia," the Associated Press reported today.
No surprise there. A TiM source in Belgrade said that today's scuttlebug in the Serb capital is that the would be-Draskovic killers were his former bodyguards. (So they did get their firearms back, after all! ). If so, people like that would be perfect recruits for foreign agencies plotting a real or a pretend hit (the CIA has already been implicated in the May 31 assassination of a Montenegro security official).
In Belgrade, Yugoslav telecommunications minister, Ivan Markovic, ridiculed the allegations of his government's involvement, saying Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, Djukanovic and "terrorists" from "Otpor" (a militant student organization) had all decided "to publicly support Draskovic, with the aim to disrupt his vacation."
"Indirectly, he was inferring that the U.S. and pro-western opposition had staged the shooting to drum up popular support for Draskovic and discredit the Yugoslav government," the AP explained.
The Yugoslav state news agency also sought to dismiss Draskovic's accusations and cast doubts on his account of the attack. "It is strange that Draskovic was shot at four times from the terrace of his house, and that he suffered only a pierced ear and a light flesh wound on his head," Tanjug said.
Tanjug added that "nobody in his right mind" would want to solve political conflicts "through violence and assassinations." Well, maybe nobody in his right mind would. But Draskovic did. He urged last month an armed rebellion against the Yugoslav government (see "Opposition Rally Fizzles as Belgrade Sizzles"). It was such calls for a violent uprising, also aired by the Draskovic-controlled Studio B and others, that led to the Belgrade government's subsequent crackdown on the opposition media.
In the end, Draskovic's botched "assassination" has so far managed to kill only the target's own character and credibility. Not for the first time. And probably not for the last time, either.
(1) The Times lamely explained that some Draskovic bodyguards had been supposedly arrested in Belgrade for possession of firearms. But what about all the others he has? Nowadays, bodyguards are a dime a dozen in Serbia. Except when they are not wanted by the boss as possible witnesses.
(2) Okay, maybe not "Nada." "Nada" means "hope" in Serbian and is also a female name.
or more on Montenegro, its government's reliance on organized crime and the U.S. government see:
Concerning the believability of claims by the US government and its proxies in Yugoslavia, see:
During the July 29 Senate hearings on 'Bringing Democracy to Serbia' US officials discussed the importance of Montenegro's boss Milo Djukanovic for destabilizing Yugoslavia. Go to http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/hearin.htm