A Letter From Pope John Paul II to Fr. Jozo Zovko

Saturday Evening, August 24, 2002
Zagreb Daily Newspaper,
"The Vercernji List"

Headline Reads:
"A Surprising Gesture From the Vatican. The Pope Thanks Father Jozo for Medjugorje!"

The cover photo was taken when the Holy Father welcomed Fr. Jozo in 1992, in the midst of the Bosnian war. At that time the Pope told him: "I am with you, protect Medjugorje! Protect Our Lady's messages!"

Web site for "The Vercernji List"
http://www.vecernji-list.hr

---

The article in the paper shows Fr. Jozo at his desk, reading the Pope's letter, with a caption to the left of the picture: "The Pope has signed a thank you note to Fr. Jozo Zovko." A translation of the article from Croatian reads:

Siroki Brijeg - The world renowned Franciscan, Fr. Jozo Zovko, was more than surprised when yesterday Polish pilgrims came to thank him for twenty-one years of testifying to the Medjugorje apparitions, and especially when they handed him a thank you note personally signed by the shaky hand of their best known compatriate, John Paul II. Actually, after coming back from Poland the Pope wrote from the Vatican to personally thank and send his apostolic blessing to Fr. Jozo Zovko.

'Our Poland is grateful for your every word, for every thing that you have done for us', said the Pope's collaborator, Krystyna Gregorezyk, who personally handed the thank you note to Fr. Jozo in the Siroki Brijeg church.

'So far I have received hundreds of gifts and thank you notes but none can compare with this one. I am most pleasantly surprised,' a visibly shakened Fr. Jozo said for our paper.

Fr. Jozo Zovko is a member of the Hercegovinian Franciscan Province. As a witness to the Medjugorje apparitions, he has become one of the best known priests in the world. Many tribes have made him their chief and he is connected with many miraculous healings. According to a poll conducted by "The Daily Catholic", Fr. Jozo has been elected among twenty-nine Catholics of the century." (J.P.)

Letters of Clarification
Regarding Fr. Jozo

Below you can find the letters of Provincial Fr. Slavko Soldo and the Vicar General of the Franciscan Order Stefano Ottenbreit, that states Fr. Jozo is a Franciscan in good standing in the Order, even if he is under penalties from the Bishop.

11.21.2002 – Many people contact us regularly with questions concerning the status of the Franciscan Fr. Jozo Zovko, OFM. This is why we publish the "Attestation of Good Conduct" by Fr. Stefano Ottenbreit, OFM, Vicar General of the Order of Friars Minor (OFM) and a letter by Fr. Slavko Soldo, OFM, Provincial of the Herzegovinian Franciscan Province of the Assumption of the BVM.

Fr. Stefano Ottenbreit,
Vicar General of the Order, writes:

"I Fr. Stefano Ottenbreit, the undersigned, Vicar General of the Order of Friars Minor, testify that Fr. Jozo Zovko is a Member in good standing of the Province of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Herzegovina of our Order. I, also, declare to whom it may concern that he has never been suspended from our Order."

Signed and sealed with the seal of the Order at our General Curia in Rome on this 21st day of November in the year of the Lord 2002.

In fide, Fr. Stefano Ottenbreit, OFM, Vicar General

Fr. Slavko Soldo, OFM, Provincial of the Herzegovinian Franciscan Province of the Assumption of the BVM, writes:

"Fr. Jozo Zovko is a member of our community in good standing. He was the pastor at Medjugorje when the apparition of the Blessed Mother started in 1981. It was time of the communist regime in our country. As pastor of Medjugorje Fr. Jozo was put in prison by the communist court. After he was released from the prison, he continued to spread the message of the blessed Mother Queen of peace.

In our community Fr. Jozo Zovko is known as a charismatic priest who suffered for his faith and continues suffering. He spends long hours in prayer, counseling and preaching. Most of the time he is in the church, often for 10 hours a day.

Those who oppose the apparitions of the Blessed Mother at Medjugorje are constantly after Fr. Jozo, trying to stop his mission, but those who accept the Medjugorje consider him a dedicated priest and are inviting him to lead retreats for them and pray for them in their needs. Among those who are inviting him, are many priests and bishops. Fr. Jozo is tireless in that service. He did ask permission to travel to the United States and it was granted to him. I hope that this will be of help to you.

Peace and all things good!"

Mostar, November 14, 2002, Fr. Slavko Soldo, provincijal

With this statement I wish to awaken the consciences of those who defend Medjugorje. Their path is simple, wide and downhill all the way, while mine is difficult, thorny and uphill. The Church and Our Lady have no need of falsehoods. Jesus says: "The truth will make you free" (Din 8,32). "I am the way and the truth and the life" (Jn 14,6) "For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth, hears my voice" (Jn 18,37). For even a short description of the falsehoods about Medjugorje we would need 200 pages, but for now all I will give is this short summary without a scientific approach. I am somewhat uneasy because of the fact that in some statements my name is in the forefront, yet from the beginning of the "apparitions" I have been in the center of the events due to my episcopal position and duties. I am sorry as well for having to mention some "unpleasant things", but without them the arguments lose their strength. However, the most unpleasant things will be left out.

2. A characteristic attitude: Marina B., a tourist guide for Atlas travel, brought a priest from Panama to my office in August 1989. His name: Presbitero Rodriguez Teofilo, pastor of Nuestra Senora de Lourdes. With him came Carmen Cecilia Capriles - a journalist, Gerente General of the IATA agency, and Averrida Alberto Navarro, Apartado 1344 zona 7, Panama. Marina presented herself as a tour-guide, translator for English and a convert of Medjugorje. The priest asked me for the reasons why I do not believe in the "apparitions". I told him that I have at least 20 reasons not to believe, of which only one is necessary for those who are sober and well instructed in the faith to come to the conclusion that the apparitions are not of the supernatural. He asked me to please tell him at least one reason. I told him about the case of the ex-franciscan priest Ivica Vego. Due to his disobedience, by an order of the Holy father the Pope, he was thrown out of his franciscan religious order OFM by his General, dispensed from his vows and suspended "a divinis". He did not obey this order and he continued to celebrate Mass, distribute the sacraments and pass the time with his mistress. It is unpleasant to write about this, yet it is necessary in order to see who Our Lady is speaking of. According to the diary of Vicka and the statements of the "seers", Our Lady mentioned 13 times that he is innocent and that the bishop is wrong. When his mistress, sister Leopolda, a nun, became pregnant, both of them left Medjugorje and the religious life and began to live together near Medjugorje where their child was born. Now they have two children. His prayerbook is still sold in Medjugorje and beyond in hundreds of thousands of copies.

I asked Marina to translate this in English. Marina cannot be blamed for having fallen into a community which is concealing the truth. She spontaneously responded according to the practice in Medjugorje: "Do we have to tell them these ugly things?" I responded by saying that if you had not held back and covered these "ugly events" these people from Panama would have found out earlier and they would not have had to travel to Medjugorje for nothing. It is an injustice and a sin to hide this truth, even though it be unpleasant, it must be said.

3. The Marian theologian Rene Laurentin behaves in the same manner. He came to visit me around Christmas 1983, and I offered him dinner. He asked me why I did not believe in the apparitions. I told him that according to the diary of Vicka and the words of the other "seers" this 'Lady' has been speaking against the bishop. Laurentin quickly responded: "Don't publish that, because there are many pilgrims and converts there." I was scandalized by this statement of this well known Mariologist! This has remained Laurentin's position: to hide the truth, and defend falsehoods. He has written around ten books on the topic of Medjugorje and in almost all of them, the truth and bishop Zanic are under fire. He knows well what people like to hear. Therefore, it was relatively easy for him to find those who would believe him. "A veritate quidam auditum avertent, ad fabulas autem convertentur" - They will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths (2 Tim 4:4). The "seers" and defenders of Medjugorje led by Laurentin, from the very outset have seen that the modern believer in a communist country very quickly believes in everything "miraculous", in apparent miraculous healings and apparent messages from "Our Lady".

4. The main players on which Medjugorje rests are retired archbishop F. Franic, R. Laurentin, Lj. Rupcic OFM, Amorth, Rastrelli S.J., and some franciscans and charismatics from all over the world. Many books have been quickly published, as well as articles, brochures, films and souvenirs. On the move are tourist agencies, pilgrimages, prayer books written by two franciscans Vego and Prusina who were thrown out of the OFM Order, published in many languages in 600,000 copies, fanatical prayer groups that are inspired by the apparent messages of Our Lady and the great motivator of all - money. No one even mentions that which throws doubt on the "apparitions". The bishop has been warning everyone, but the 'machinery' has been breaking forward. There have been mentioned 50 miraculous healings, then 150, 200, 300 and so on. Laurentin chose 56 dossiers and sent them to the "Bureau medical de Lourdes". Dr. Mangiapan responded in their bulletin Avril/84, that these dossiers have no practical value, and they cannot be used or considered as serious proofs of the apparitions in Medjugorje. Much has been written about the healing of Diane Basile. I sent the dossier to Dr. Mangiapan who studied the case and then took the position: "opinion plus que reservee". It is a case of sclerosis multiplex. More will be written about this later in a book.

5. The credibility of the "seers" - Mirjana Dragicevic. One month after the beginning of the "apparitions" I went to Medjugorje to question the "seers". I asked each of them to take an oath on the cross and demanded that they must speak the truth. (This conversation and oath was recorded on tape). The first one was Mirjana: "We went to look for our sheep when at once..." (The associate pastor in the parish interrupted and told me that they actually went out to smoke, which they hid from their parents). "Wait a minute Mirjana, you're under oath. Did you go out to look for your sheep?" She put her hand over her mouth, "forgive me, we went out to smoke." She then showed me the watch on which the "miracle" occurred because the hands of the watch had gone haywire. I took the watch to a watch expert who said that the watch had certainly fallen and become disordered. After bringing the watch back to her I told her not to mention that a miracle occurred. Yet, on cassettes taped later on, she went on to speak of how a miracle occurred with the watch and that initially they had gone out to search for their sheep.

Later on, she spoke that Our Lady said that all faiths are equal. How much can we believe Mirjana?

6. Vicka Ivankovic is the main "seer" from the beginning and through her the creator of Medjugorje, Rev. Tomislav Vlasic OFM, has launched the main portion of falsehoods regarding Medjugorje. He presented himself to the Pope in a letter May 13, 1984 as follows: "I am Rev. Tomislav Vlasic, the one according to Divine Providence who guides the seers of Medjugorje." It would have been better for him that he withdrew himself into the 'desert' and that he remained silent, because his past speaks enough about him. Vicka spoke and wrote much, and in so doing she fell into many contradictions. Prof. Nikola Bulat, a member of the first commission, questioned her and wrote a 60 page study on her. He numbered all the illogicalities and falsehoods of her diary. Here I will only mention the bloody handkerchief. Word spread around that there was a certain taxi driver who came across a man who was bloody all over. This man gave this taxi driver a bloodied handkerchief and he told him to: "throw this in the river". The driver went on and then he came across a woman in black. She stopped him and asked him to give her a handkerchief. He gave her his own, but she said: "not that one but the bloody handkerchief." He gave her the handkerchief she wanted and she then said: "If you had thrown it into the river the end of the world would have occurred now." Vicka Ivankovic wrote in her diary that they asked Our Lady if this event was true and she said that it was, and along with this, "that man covered, with blood was my son Jesus, and I (Our Lady) was that woman in black."

What kind of theology is this? From this it appears that Jesus wants to destroy the world if a handkerchief is thrown into a river and it's Our Lady who saves the world!

7. On the 14th of January 1982, Vicka, Marija and little Jakov came to visit me. Vicka began to speak quite nervously because she was speaking falsehoods. She said: "Our Lady sent us to you to tell you that you are too harsh with the franciscans..." In what way? "We don't know!" Two franciscan chaplains in Mostar, Ivica Vego and Ivan Prusina, which the bishop sought to remove from Mostar because of disorder and disobedience towards the faithful of the newly established cathedral-parish in Mostar, defended themselves before their superiors by saying that they would not leave Mostar because Our Lady through Vicka, told them not to leave. This was mentioned to me by a member of the franciscan Provincial council. I asked Vicka at our meeting: "Did Our Lady mention anything about the Mostar chaplains, Vego and Prusina?" "She did not, we don't know them" responded all three. Our conversation lasted 30 minutes and I taped all of it. I repeated the question of the chaplains of Mostar several times and they always responded: "We don't know them." Later on, I found from Vicka's diary that they knew the chaplains very well. It was clear to me that they were lying, yet I did not want to mention this to them in order to maintain their confidence during our conversations.

8. On the 4th of April 1982, Vicka and Jakov came to visit me "sent by Our Lady". The chaplains of Mostar, Vego and Prusina were thrown out of the franciscan Order OFM in January of that year by the superiors of their Order. Many followers of Medjugorje and "Our Lady" defended the expelled chaplains. During our conversation Vicka very excitedly began: "The last time we were with you we didn't tell you everything and for this reason Our Lady scolded us. We spoke of many things and therefore we forgot..." "What did you forget?" "Our Lady told us to tell you that those chaplains Vego and Prusina are priests and therefore they can celebrate Mass just as other priests." "Wait a minute. Did Our Lady tell you this before our last meeting?" "Yes, that's why she sent us to you. Last time I spoke of many other things and I forgot to mention this." During that previous meeting I asked her directly several times if Our Lady mentioned anything about the two chaplains. It was clear to me that Vicka was lying and this was proof enough for me not to trust her statements. Marija and Jakov also participated in this lie.

9. Towards the end of January 1983, Rev. Grafenauer, a jesuit priest, came to me with the intention of searching out the phenomenon of Medjugorje. He listened to 20 cassettes and after having listened to them he said that he would not go to Medjugorje because he concluded that Our Lady is not there. Upon my insistence he went to Medjugorje and after a few days he came back as a "convert" of Rev. Vlasic. He brought some documents, threw them on the table and said: "Here's what Our Lady wishes to tell you!" I understood this as a plot to overthrow the bishop with the help of Our Lady. The documents he brought were a compilation of Vicka's diary, the parish chronicle and hand written documents. For this reason it is difficult to establish where they were first written. Vicka and those who defend Medjugorje hid this from the bishop for more than a year. Here are a few quotes:

Dec 19, 1981. "Our Lady said that the bishop is to blame for the disorder in Herzegovina. She also said that Rev. Ivica Vego is not to blame, yet that the bishop has all authority. Our Lady said that he (Vego) remain in Mostar and not leave.

January 3, 1982. All the "seers" together asked Our Lady about Rev. Ivica Vego. Our Lady answered: "Ivica is innocent. If they throw him out of the franciscan Order, may he remain courageous... Ivica is innocent." Our Lady repeated this three times.

January 11, 1982. We asked again about the two chaplains of Mostar and Our Lady repeated twice that which she mentioned earlier regarding them. Note: January 14, 1982 Vicka was at the Chancery office with the bishop and at that meeting she mentioned that she did not know Vego.

January 20, 1982. The children asked what Rev. Ivica Vego and Rev. Ivan Prusina were to do now that they were thrown out of the Order. Our Lady answered: "They are innocent. The bishop was harsh in his decision. They can stay."

April 15, 1982. Vicka asked Our Lady a question. "Could you generally tell me everything about Ivica Vego and Ivan Prusina?" Our Lady smiled at the first and then she said: "They are innocent." She repeated twice that: "The bishop has made a mistake... let them remain in Mostar... they can say mass sometimes but may they be careful to stay away from attention until things calm down. They have no faults..."

April 16, 1982. Yesterday while we were with Our Lady we asked her if we could pray an Our Father for them (Vego and Prusina). She answered immediately: "Yes you can", and she prayed with them. When we finished the prayer she smiled and said to me: "Those two are constantly on your mind." I answered: "You're right". April 26, 1982. Our Lady: "The bishop has no real love of God in his heart. Regarding the bishop, may Ivica and Ivan remain calm. What the bishop is doing is contrary to the will of God, yet he can do as he pleases, but one day justice as you have never seen shall be revealed."

10. Vicka never denied that Our Lady said these things or that she wrote these things down in her diary. The assurance and authenticity of this can be best confirmed by a cassette taped by Rev. Grafenauer during his talks with Vicka and Marija. He left taped copies of the cassette in the parish of Medjugorje, with the bishop and he left one with the Bishop's Conference in Zagreb. The cassette should be heard!

A conversation with Vicka: "The bishop has the duty to judge whether or not this is Our Lady..." said Rev. Grafenauer.
Vicka: He can judge as he wants, but I know it's Our Lady.

Graf: The Church says that those who are confident in themselves, that this itself is a sign that Our Lady is not in question here.
Vicka: Let those who are doubtful remain doubtful, I'm not.
Graf: This is not a good sign... you once told the bishop that he should listen more to Our Lady than to the Pope.
Vicka: Yes I did.
Graf: This means that the bishop should listen to you more than to the Pope.
Vicka: No, not me.
Graf: But the bishop doesn't know what the phenomenon is and perhaps it is not Our Lady.
Vicka: Yes it is Our Lady.
Graf: You told the bishop that he is to blame and that those two (Vego and Prusina) are innocent and that they can perform their priestly duties.
Vicka: Yes I did.
Graf: Can they hear confession? Did Our Lady mention this?
Vicka: Yes.
Graf: If Our Lady said this and the Pope says that they cannot...
Vicka: The Pope can say what he wants, I'm telling it as it is!
Graf: See, this is how one can come to the conclusion that this is not Our Lady... when the Pope says no, they cannot celebrate Mass, and they cannot hear confessions, and then on the other hand, Our Lady says they can do both, this cannot be!
Vicka: I know what is right (What Our Lady said).
Graf: This cannot be true. I would put my hand into fire to testify that this is not Our Lady speaking. When a person has a greater gift there also exists a greater danger that the devil could be at work upon this person.
What a degrading humiliation of Our Lady! From these statements she is destroying obedience in the Church, obedience to the bishop, to the heads of the OFM Order, and to the Holy father. She is defending Vego!

11. The apparition in Cerno. Cerno is a village not far away from Medjugorje. The eighth day after the beginning of the apparitions in Medjugorje there was an "apparition" near Cerno. The "seers" told Rev. Jozo Zovko, the pastor of Medjugorje at the time, of this happening the evening of the event. They mentioned that Our Lady said four or five times that she would appear three more days, that is, on July 1, 2, and 3rd. This was taped on cassette and publicized by Rev. Ivo Sivric OFM. The cassette was reproduced. A few years later Rev. Janko Bubalo published a book titled: A thousand meetings with Our Lady. This is a book of conversations with Vicka. Vicka does not mention this event, therefore Rev. Bubalo asked whether or not Our Lady said "only three more days". Vicka responded that she does not remember!

It is evident that Vicka is speaking falsehoods and that Our Lady cannot say that which Vicka is saying. Vicka is fabricating these statements. Should this remain unknown to the rest of the world? Evil (such as speaking falsehoods about Our Lady) must not be done in order to obtain a good (such as pilgrimages, prayers, etc.)

12. "Seer" Marija Pavlovic. Here is a written account of the taped conversation between Rev. Grafenauer and Marija:
Graf: Did Our Lady say that the bishop is to blame?
Marija: Yes.
Graf: Did she say that Vego and Prusina were not to blame?
Marija: Yes.
Graf: When Our Lady says that the bishop is to blame this immediately appears suspicious and we could conclude that this is not Our Lady speaking. The seers are apparently spreading word around that the bishop is to blame.
Marija: Our Lady told us this.
Archbishop F. Franic, Laurentin and many others know all this, yet they remain silent. What kind of theology can accept these statements by Our Lady through the declarations of the "seers" that their Teacher, Pastor and Liturgist - the bishop, who has legally received his duty from Christ through the Church, has no love of God in his heart, that he is declared a sinner throughout the world, that he should convert and that prayers will be said in Medjugorje for this intention? There were even statements made that Jesus himself would pray for the bishop so that the bishop would believe and then take better action in favor of the events in Medjugorje. To say that the bishop is to wait for Our Lady's judgment is an absurdity. It is an offense against Our Lady the Mother of the Church. God knows that I am not without sin, and that Our Lady could criticize me, yet God alone is the judge. I have never been reprimanded or warned by the Holy See for my episcopal service.

13. The creator of Medjugorje, Rev. Tomislav Vlasic, amongst other things has published and distributed in many languages a seventeen page booklet titled: A calling in the Marian year, Milano, March 25 1988. This regards the founding of a prayer group for young men and women (from Medjugorje) who would live together (Parma, Italy - something which has been unheard of in the history of the Church!) They would be the ones who would save the world. Our Lady apparently gave Rev. Vlasic and Agnes Heupel (a German woman supposedly healed in Medjugorje) the inspiration to establish and to lead this community together in a manner similar to saints Francis and Clare, as described by Vlasic. In order for this action to succeed, Rev. Vlasic asked Marija to add "her witnessing" on three pages. She is a member of this community and on April 21, 1988 she wrote: "Sento il bisogno..." - I feel the need... As can be concluded, Our Lady has given a set program to this community of the "Queen of Peace" and she leads this community through Rev. Vlasic and Agnes who give messages to the community. "I have been in the community for a month and a half. I have apparitions and Our Lady leads me in the mystery of suffering which is the foundation of this community. I must write down everything and publish this once Our Lady tells me to. I have understood God's plan which he began through Mary in the parish of Medjugorje." This quote is taken from pages 15 and 16 of Rev. T. Vlasic's text. The defenders of Medjugorje quickly understood that this community of young men and women living, sleeping, working and praying together in the same house would eventually destroy themselves and Medjugorje. Therefore, they sent their Provincial, Rev. Jozo Vasilj to Parma. He went together with the bishop of Parma, Msgr. B. Cochi and Rev. T. Vlasic to the Congregation in Rome. They were told there that the Church cannot allow such a community to exist and then Rev. T. Vlasic was ordered to dissolve the community and to return to Herzegovina. Vlasic did not obey immediately, yet he returned later. This is what was explained to me by Rev. Jozo Vasilj regarding the community.

14. The same Marija Pavlovic made another public declaration on the 11th of July 1988. On a single sheet of paper, distributed in the same manner as the earlier statement, she mentioned: "I feel a moral obligation to declare before God, Our Lady (the Madonna), and the Church... from the text of A calling... it appears as if I gave Our Lady's answer to the question put forward by Rev. T. Vlasic, etc. I now declare that I never sought from Our Lady (the Madonna) a confirmation of the work of Rev. Vlasic and Agnes Heupel... my first declaration... does not correspond to the truth. Rev. Vlasic suggested to me a few times (N.B.) that I as one of the "seers" should write a declaration which the world expects... Everything I said does not correspond to the truth. This I declare before the Blessed Sacrament." Marija Pavlovic.

15. Marija does not deny that she gave her first statement. Rev. T. Vlasic sought statements from her many times and this obviously turns out to be manipulating with one of the "seers". So we can conclude that Marija has consciously spoken falsehoods on the first or second occasion. She has lied and this she attributes to Our Lady. It is evident that she (Marija) is a toy in Rev. Vlasic's hands. This was clear to me even earlier yet up till now, I didn't have material proof to back this up. Rev. T. Vlasic has manipulated with all the "seers" in the same fashion. Under this type of manipulation Marija saw how Our Lady cried when someone mentioned the bishop at a prayer meeting: "From Our Lady's eye flowed forth a great tear. The tear ran down her face and disappeared into a cloud under her feet. Our Lady began to cry and she ascended to heaven crying" (Aug. 22, 1984). An obvious fabrication by Rev. T. Vlasic intended to frighten the bishop.

Why don't the defenders of Medjugorje mention these two statements of Marija? Must these "ugly" things be hidden from the world because there are many "conversions" in Medjugorje? (Laurentin). Laurentin writes in his book Dernieres Nouvelles 3, on page 27, that a certain monsignor asked Marija to pray for a message from Our Lady for his priests. Marija answered: "Our Lady said that they should read Laurentin's book and spread it around"!

It is a terrible sin to attribute one's own lies to Our Lady. When the world learns of this, who will believe them anymore? They have been discredited. No one can destroy this material evidence. It will be reproduced and spread by word of mouth. I know well that there are many who disregard such material. They accept the events of Medjugorje irrationally, with great emotion and with personal interests. They are blind, but these documents will remain a part of the history of the Church and of Mariology.

16. The "seer" Ivan Dragicevic. Regarding the "great sign", Vicka mentions this 13 times in the diaries, 14 times it is mentioned in the Parish chronicle, 52 times on the cassettes, and innumerous times in talks with the bishop. In the spring of 1982, I asked the "seers" to write everything they knew about the sign without making the "secret" public. The way I suggested they do it was to write down information on paper in duplicate. Then this would be sealed in an envelope and a copy would remain with them, and one with the bishop. When the "sign" occurs, then we would open the envelopes and see whether or not the "sign" was predicted. Rev. Tomislav Vlasic, pastor of Medjugorje at the time, told the "seers" to say that Our Lady said not to write anything down for nobody, and so they didn't. Ivan Dragicevic was in the franciscan minor seminary at Visoko, Bosna at that time and he wasn't informed of this on time. Two members of the first Commission, Dr. M. Zovkic and Dr. Z. Puljic (now bishop of Dubrovnik), went to visit Ivan in Visoko. They gave him a sheet of paper which was somewhat greenish in color with questions typed out on it. Ivan wrote down the content of the "sign", dated the document and signed it in their presence without a word or any sign of fear. A few years later, Laurentin wrote that Ivan told him personally that he wrote absolutely nothing down on that sheet of paper and that he tricked the two members of the Commission. On March 7, 1985, three members of the Commission went to ask Ivan if what Laurentin writes is true. Ivan said it was true and that they could freely go ahead and open the envelope in the chancery office because in it they will only find a white sheet of paper. They came back to Mostar where the Commission was having a meeting and before all the members, they opened the envelope. In the envelope on a greenish sheet of paper they found written the content of the sign: Our Lady said that she would leave a sign. The content of this sign I reveal to your trust. The sign is that there will be a great shrine in Medjugorje in honor of my apparitions, a shrine to my image. When will this occur? The sign will occur in June.

Dated: May 9, 1982. Seer: Ivan Dragicevic.
After having heard this lie, the members of the first Commission wanted to end all further work, yet they stayed on. Within a few days of this event Rev. Slavko Barbaric OFM, took the "seers" somewhere and instructed them all, including Ivan, to write a declaration that Ivan did not disclose the sign!
Ivan sent messages from Our Lady to the bishop. On April 24, 1984 Our Lady said the following regarding the bishop: "My son Jesus is praying for him so that he (the bishop) would believe and therefore take better action in favor of Medjugorje." She added: "How would he react if my son were to appear on earth? Would he then believe?"
Regarding the Commission, Our Lady says only the following: "Pray, pray, pray! Think over and live the messages I have given and you will see why I have come." Ivan Dragicevic, Medjugorje.

17. "Tell the bishop that I seek a quick conversion from him towards the happenings in Medjugorje before it's too late. May he accept these events with plenty of love, understanding and great responsibility. I want him to avoid creating conflicts between priests and to stop publicizing their negative behaviors. The Holy father has given all bishops the duty to fulfill certain tasks in their respective dioceses. Among these, bishops are to solve problems and arguments. The bishop is the spiritual father of all the parishes in Herzegovina. For this reason I seek his conversion towards these events. I am sending my second-last warning. If what I seek does not come about, my judgment and the judgment of my Son await the bishop. This means that he has not found the way to my Son Jesus." Our Lady told me to give you this message.

18. Ivan kept his own diary of the apparitions for a couple of years. This has not been revealed as Vicka's has not, nor the writings of the others. These are original fonts of the events, yet they are full of naive statements, clear falsehoods and absurdities. They are good proof of the fact that the "seers" do not see Our Lady or receive messages from her. These messages were written by someone else and they were given to Ivan for him to sign as his own. When Rev. Grafenauer brought excerpts from Vicka's diary to me, I later on asked Vicka to bring her diary to me. She wrote to me on May 7, 1983: "I have found out that excerpts from my diary are being distributed..." This was a very important point which the Commission accepted as good argument that the diary was written by Vicka herself or that she considered it her own. Later on, Rev. T. Vlasic, also came to this conclusion, and therefore in 1984, he declared before the Commission and myself, that Vicka did not write that letter to me but rather, that a franciscan did (probably Vlasic himself) and that he gave it to her to sign! There are many similar examples of manipulation, but none have such clear cut evidence as this.

19. Secrets and secrecy. From the beginning of the "apparitions", the "seers", (obviously having been instructed in order to escape being controlled) have said that "Our Lady" speaks differently to each of them. When the "secrets" were fabricated, each was to have his/her own (60 in total) and no one was to reveal them to anyone. Mirjana and Ivanka received a letter from Our Lady which nobody was to read. In the beginning there were no moments of ecstasy nor avoiding the community. They spoke publicly and were spoken to. They only avoided the Commission. After having admitted that they were consulted, they asked "Our Lady" if they could write down the content of the "great sign" on paper and seal it in an envelope. "Our Lady" responded: NO! Ivan though, wrote down the sign and later on he said (which has been taped as well) that "Our Lady" did not scold him for doing this. The secrets were to be given to a priest (a franciscan). Why were they not given to the Commission, the bishop, or to the Pope? In the first months they often said that the "great sign" would come: very soon, quickly, and so on... When the first year ended, they changed their tone. Vicka wrote "Our Lady's life" for a year and a half, and this is a great secret which shall be published "when Our Lady permits." The Commission asked for this diary about Our Lady, yet "Our Lady" did not comply with their demand. Can the Commission just see the diary without taking it or opening it? No it cannot! This turns out to be a plot to make fools out of all those who are naive enough to wait for this sign until the end of the world. I have already declared earlier and now I repeat the same declaration that if Our Lady leaves a sign which the "seers" are speaking of, I'll make a pilgrimage from Mostar to Medjugorje (30 km) on my knees and beg the franciscans and the "seers" for forgiveness.

20. Slander against the bishop. "The bishop also believed in the beginning". This is not true! While the communists were persecuting the franciscans, the "seers" and pilgrims, I defended all of them and therefore I did not change my mind "because of threats by the Republic commission or because the diocesan priests sought this from me." This is simply fabricated slander by many. While I was publicly defending the imprisoned franciscans, Rev. Jozo Zovko said during the investigations that the bishop is a 'wolf' and a 'hypocrite'. These are the exact words written down in his sentence. Zovko's lawyer, Vukovic, asked through a colleague what I had done to Zovko to deserve such heavy accusations. Rev. T. Vlasic often put "Our Lady's" words into the mouths of the "seers", such as "Our Lady's" affirmation that satan (in this case the bishop) is out to destroy her plan. He wrote this more clearly in a letter to friends in the Vatican. I complained about this accusation that he has called the bishop satan, in front of Vlasic and his Provincial. He did not deny my objection but rather, he justified his words by saying that he wrote this while under the influence of extreme emotion. A person can say something while under emotion, but this cannot be written down and translated into foreign languages.

21. By their fruits. The most common argument of the defenders of Medjugorje is that the fruits of the events in Medjugorje prove that Our Lady is appearing there. Those who know a bit more than the pilgrims who come to Medjugorje say: the fruits of the staunchest defenders of Medjugorje show that they themselves do not believe in the apparitions. If all the "ugly things" could be made public then surely the answer would be clearly negative to everyone. Yet, Laurentin, Rupcic, Vlasic, Barbaric and others meticulously hide the truth. If the defenders of Medjugorje come across someone who is skeptical of the apparitions, they quickly isolate this person, accuse him of something or declare him mad (J.L. Martin). The majority of the pious public has naively fallen victim of the great propaganda, the talk of the apparitions and healings. These people themselves have become the greatest propaganda for the events. They do not even stop to think that the truth has been hidden by deliberate falsehoods. They do not know that not one miraculous healing has occurred that could have been verified by competent experts and institutions such as the "Bureau medical de Lourdes". No one knows of any healed from Herzegovina. Everyone knows that little Daniel, old Jozo Vasilj, Venka Brajcic and others cited in the first books about Medjugorje were not healed.

22. Promises of healings are characteristic of the events. When they don't occur as promised, then they are denied because they were never taped or written down on paper. There have been many promises that have ended tragically. What interests us is whether or not "Our Lady" is giving these promises, or whether or not they are thought up by the "seers". The tragic end of Marko Blazevic as described by the retired archbishop of Belgrade, Msgr. Turk, says much regarding "promises" of healing. The archbishop writes May 22, 1984, that he was received as a patient of the Cardiology clinic at the Belgrade hospital. The archbishop received the bed that was previously occupied by Marko Blazevic of Buna, near Mostar, who was to go in for an operation. Mr. Blazevic told the archbishop and many other patients, doctors and hospital staff that Our Lady had promised, through the "seers", that the operation would succeed. A nun who assisted in the operating room, wrote to me later that Blazevic's wife and his daughter spoke to her with a fanatical type of faith in "Our Lady's promise". A certain doctor was also convinced in this promise. The patient did not wake up after the operation. During the operation, a group of patients prayed fervently outside the doors of the operating room. Many spoke of this incident which left many very disappointed and ashamed before people of other faiths and atheists. Rev. T. Vlasic, in his typical fashion of hiding the truth, succeeding in convincing the daughter of the late Mr. Blazevic, to go to the bishop to tell him that Our Lady only told them to pray, not that she promised them that the operation would succeed!!! I told her not to make a liar out of her late father or liars of the others to whom he spoke to.

23. The franciscan and diocesan clergy. The relations between the franciscan and diocesan clergy regarding pastoral duties in the parishes of Herzegovina were established by a Decision of the Holy See in 1899 by the suggestions of the franciscans themselves and then bishop Paskal Buconjic OFM. According to this Decision the parishes were to be divided equally into two groups of 50% of the faithful between the clergy. Since there were no diocesan clergy at the time, the parishes that rightfully belonged to them were in 1923 left to the franciscans "ad nutum S. Sedis". Bishop Cule, the first diocesan bishop of Mostar, in 1948 was sentenced to 11 years and 6 months in jail. He served eight and a half years of this sentence before being released. After his jail term the number of diocesan clergy began to rise. In 1968, the Holy See ordered the franciscans to hand over five parishes to the diocesan clergy. They barely gave two parishes. In 1975 after many years of talks and consultations a Decree of the Holy See was issued regarding the division of parishes in Herzegovina. The franciscans publicly and collectively denounced this Decree even though they administer over 80 % of the faithful in the diocese of Mostar. In 1976, due to disobedience, the hierarchy of the franciscan Province along with then Provincial Silic, lost their authority and since then, the Province has been without its independence, and the General of the Order rules directly over the Province "ad instar". Another penalty was that in 1979, the franciscans from Herzegovina were not allowed to participate in the election of the General. The first point mentioned by the new General of the Order to his brothers in Herzegovina was: 'the development or creation of obedience to, and cooperation with the bishop in Herzegovina'. Disobedience prevails today as before, and "Our Lady" from the beginning has been defending disobedient franciscans. Vicka writes in her diary of the apparitions, that Our Lady said that the bishop is to blame for all the disorder in Herzegovina. (See no. 9). This is repeated many times. The franciscans themselves are divided. The franciscan opposition that defends Medjugorje succeeded in toppling their own "ad instar" superiors that developed good relations with the bishop, and they installed a group that defends Medjugorje. The new Provincial "ad instar", Rev. Jozo Vasilj, did not succeed in creating peace and order amongst his brothers so he escaped to the missions in Zaire and won't come back! (Fruits?!) He has been replaced by the Vice Provincial and the General has called for obedience from all or else the Province shall be abolished. "It is time that everyone take their own personal responsibility before judicial sanctions are made or the Province is abolished." (Acta Ordinis F.M. fasc. 1/89). The Province will not receive its own hierarchy until the Decree is completed. Three visitors of the OFM Order who came to the Province in 1988, said that there is not one franciscan in the Province who is in favor of completing the Decree. This opinion is exaggerated yet still important.

24. This is only a portion of the "good fruits" of the events. The pilgrims, though, only know that the bishop "hates the franciscans". There are a good number of franciscans in the Province who cooperate well with the bishop and these franciscans do not believe in the apparitions either. Some of them have never set foot in Medjugorje.

A number of good franciscans have begged me to write something so that together, we could start a battle against the lies of Medjugorje because they believe that "God will punish us franciscans severely because we have spread lies and falsehoods throughout the world and made money on them".

Of the one hundred diocesan priests in the dioceses of Herzegovina, not one believes in the apparitions. Of the 42 bishops of Yugoslavia (ordinaries, auxiliaries and retired), only one has been outspoken in declaring his belief and has defended the events. Of the 15 members of the first Commission, which was formed by the bishop of Mostar with the help of there(?) bishops and provincials from Yugoslavia, 11 of the members said that there is nothing supernatural in the events of Medjugorje, 2 (franciscans) claimed that the apparitions are authentic, 1 member said that there was something "in nucleo" (in the beginning) and 1 abstained. That which the Commission worked on for three years, the Holy See (contrary to what has been spread by the defenders of Medjugorje) never asked for, or saw, or gave a judgment of. Neither did the Holy See abandon the bishop.

25. From the beginning of the events I warned the franciscans that they must wait for the judgment of the Church, so that together we can search for the truth. The leaders of the events though, had as their aim to bring the masses as soon as possible to Medjugorje, obtain a lot of money for propaganda and use Our Lady for their battle against the bishop. They fabricated miracles regarding the sun. Many pilgrims damaged their eyes from staring into the sun. They cited 50, 150, 200 and 300 healings and they spoke of all sorts of things seeing that the faithful believed everything they said, especially when archbishop F. Franic and Laurentin were there to back them up. The faithful in Medjugorje look upon the events as they are instructed, as is the case in all other places of apparitions be they true or false. The marveling and excitement here has been regarded at times as leading to great blindness and fanaticism.

26. The Italians know well the "story" of Gigliole Ebe Giorgini, the foundress of the false order of "Pia Opera di Gesu Misericordioso". Separated and remarried civilly, she spent time doing quackery. She gathered young women for their order and she received and earned great amounts of money. She had two priests in her service and many houses. She led a double life and had false stigmata which she made herself. Her "sisters" followed her fanatically and they called her Mamma Ebe. She had male vocations as well, but some who left her later on, declared that she led an immoral life. She had many jewels and gold, two yachts, 32 furs, etc. Many in the Church objected to her way of life, while others fanatically defended her, citing good fruits. She even received praise from two bishops. Twice during the night police raided her room in the mother house and they found her in bed with one of her seminarians. A scandal broke out and she was sentenced twice to many years in prison along with a franciscan who was her confessor. The press wrote for years about this scandal. An illicit film was made as well, yet her followers fanatically and blindly defended her even when the order fell apart. According to them, she was a saint who attracted many vocations and this was argument enough for many that from the "fruits" she was obviously inspired by God! Religious blindness is extremely hard to cure. Fanaticism brought the beginning of the heresies in the church, today it's the foundation of sects.

The Protestant pastor Rev. Jim Jones developed a great charitable organization in southern Chicago and he gathered great sums of money and many fanatical followers of his sect. In order to be freer in their work, about 1000 of them, went to Guyana, South America where they established "Jonestown" as their new home. They established a dictatorship and fanatical obedience to their "Messiah". Much was written about terrible things that went on, about the immorality of Jones and how some tried to escape the community but were caught and killed. Then they were without money. Rumors spread that the American army would intervene, so Jones ordered them to retreat to the jungle. Seeing no way out, he called on everyone to give up their lives in order to travel to eternity. Over 900 of them came with cups to a huge pot in order to drink poison and then fell dead. What gave them the strength to commit suicide? Fanaticism! Yet when the Christian faithful hear of apparitions and miracles they easily accept these events as facts without being at all critical of the events. They are then caught up in their blindness and fanaticism. Whatever is spoken is believed automatically, such as, that ordinary rosaries in Medjugorje turn to gold! And people actually believe this!

27. This blindness towards the events in Medjugorje has also caught some priests and bishops. Many priests from Italy, (such as Amorth, Rostral and others), easily could have heard that the bishop, the Commission, the bishops of Yugoslavia, a portion of the franciscans and all the diocesan priests do not believe in the events. Yet, they avoided the truth, even though I received everyone who inquired about the events and gave them my time. I'm particularly surprised by the lack of collegiality by some bishops. Nobody has to accept my judgment, but everyone is obligated by conscience to study well the events of Medjugorje before taking a portion, especially if that person has a position of authority in the Church, as bishops do.

"What have they done to you Our Lady!" For nine years they have been dragging you along as a tourist attraction. They have been speaking with you whenever it pleased them, as if you were a bank teller. They have fabricated messages, and they say that you come and appear there, but beyond their own arguments they have nothing to prove that what they say is true. The whole world is in expectation of a "great sign" and the naive still wait and believe. Unfortunately this false sensation will bring great disgrace and scandal upon the Church. Those who lead the events are not converting even though the threat of the abolition of the Province by the General hangs over them.

This is only a small compilation of that which I would like to write about. Hopefully, I will have the opportunity to expand further, with precise documentation and publish a book on these events.

28. There are many prayers and pious activities in Medjugorje. Some say that there have been conversions as well. I have received indeed many truly touching letters, and I feel sorry for those who will sooner or later be disappointed. But there has also been fanaticism, superstition and misinformation in the events of Medjugorje. I have also received many rude accusations in the mail which I cannot mention, all in the name of the "Queen of Peace". That which is positive in these events cannot justify the falsehoods and lies that have been spread in order to win the world over for God. Jesus said: "I have come into the world to witness to the truth." The Church would easily be able to attract the masses if it dropped the sixth commandment, if divorce were allowed, if it let everyone believe and do what they wanted. But, Jesus went on the cross for the truth, and the martyrs gave up their lives for the truth. St. Paul writes to his faithful: "If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed." (Gal 1,9). Today, many prayer groups all over the world pray from Rev. Ivica Vego's prayer book and meditate over the supposed messages of Our Lady as it these things were more important than the Bible and the teaching Magisterium of the Church. I do believe despite these events, th

08-01-2010 om 23:08 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Jozo Zovko, the living Saint of Medjugorje There is a big controversy in the Roman Catholic Church, but it is not so that all priest have sex-affairs with little Choir- or Altarboys Thank God that there are known hetrosexal priests as well, and one of these outstanding persons is father Jozo Zovko o.f.m., the curate in Medjugorje when the apparitions of the Mother of God (known as the ‘Gospa’ started in June 1981. The Utmost Holy immediately recognized the greatness of Father Jozo. Just a few moths after Her first apparition, on October 21 1981 the’ Gospa’ said that this Franciscan Zovko is a ‘ saint’. It was a Belgian Medjugorje-fan, called Mark Waterinckx, who started a sleazy campaign about assumed sex affairs of Father Jozo. Waterinckx knowledge was only based on hearsay about hetero sex-affairs with adult woman only. Without knowing the reason why Jozo was suspended,. he published about it in French, Italian, English, German, Dutch, Croatian. Claiming he know all bout these suspensions of Jozo. Since the motives for the sanctions against Zovko were not made public, we must try to answer delicate questions. More interesting might be to find an answer on what fuelled the Belgian Waterinckx to start such an international hate campaign against Father Jozo. Resulting in temporarily suspensions of clerical services by bishop Zanic in 1989 and by bishop Peric in 1994. That Jozo has been suspended only two times, can hardly be marked as sound reason to proclaim him a sex maniac, as Waterinckx does. Recognized Saints as Padre Pio were suspended many more times.. Before pointing at Father Jozo Zovko, you must know that the Belgian Mr. Waterinckx was a real Medjugorje-freak, who went no less than 24 times to this sanctuary near Mostar to venerate the apparitions of the Gospa. He experienced there “a kind of collective psychosis” and developed “a fanatic faith, which does not tolerate any contradiction.” So you are warned. Waterinckx lowered himself to coarse lies, manipulations and flinging mud at Jozo Zovko. The title of an anonym article about the “Waterinckx Investigation” on the website of the extreme conservative Unity Publishing was “The ‘ Saint ‘ Jozo Zovko And His Many Sex-Affairs” You have to deal with evidence as: “In 1986 already a Dutch business-man who lived in Yugoslavia said to Mark Waterinckx that Jozo had a special interest for beautiful ladies “ As if this is a sin, and great secret. And who is that anonymous Dutch businessman? How he found out? On the suspencion of Jozo in 1989 by bishop Zanic we read: “Officially it was not mentioned, but insiders do know”. Yeah, guess who is this insider? Right! Mr. Waterinckx himself! As: “Bishop Peric himself spoke during a tape-recorded interview with Mark Waterinckx on August 4 1997 about these 2 suspensions”. We do not learn what Peric said about the sexlife of Jozo, just that he “later repeated (his interview on tape) in letters” to a Dutch villagepriest “and to the Rector of the Basilica National Shrine of Our Lady in Washington” and that as “a result of these 2 last letters, it was forbidden to Jozo Zovko even to enter the church”. And that on October 15 1996 “the bishop of Mostar had confirmed to Mark Waterinckx by letter the suspensions of Frs. Jozo Zovko and Leonard Orec” and more smoke, but still no word about why Father Jozo was suspended. This article puts Waterinckx in a specialist-position with even more smoke. “In 1994 already Mgr. Peric had sent the ‘declarata’ to Jozo himself and warned all dioceses of Bosnia-Hercegovina and put the official publication in his diocesan bulletin “ Crkva na Kamenu “ (“ The Church on the Rock”)”. Very interesting, but why? The anonym article about ‘ Saint ‘ Jozo Zovko And His Many Sex-Affairs” states that Jozo was since 1984 Mark’s confessor. “At that time Mark was shocked and scandalized by such a slander. But later more and more such rumours came to his ears.” So in the summer of 1989 an American woman came to Waterinckx “and told him with all details how Jozo had sexually assaulted her”. This American lived with three other girls in the parishhousing of Zovko in Tihaljina, a village 32 km from the sanctuary in Medjugorje. A rather safe place for girls, as most of the priest there are at least latent homosexual and heavy into penitention. There is a local saying: If you like to suffer, go to Tihaljina. Instead of informing the police about this assault, Waterinckx went the next day to Jozo to tell him what the American woman told him. Zovko denied everything but was “pale and in a terrible state”. he was terrified and “ lied 3 times” about the girl. More interesting is the statement that the Franciscan lived with “4 young girls (!)” in his parish of Tihaljina. According to the article one of those four stated that nothing had happened, but “Mark was very worried about Jozo’s behavior.” So the next day Waterinckx “decided to walk (partially barefoot) the 32 km. to Tihaljina.” When he arrived, Jozo “was cynical” about the “severe burns of Mark’s feet ( what resulted in 10 days of hospital)” and since then “Jozo will say that Mark and all the girls and women who accuse him are crazy.” What else can you say on all this hearsay? We wanna know facts, not whispering! Mark Waterinckx however, did not helped the girl to legal action against the of rape accused priest, but told the story to the curate of Medjugorje,” but he “seemed unconcerned”. More concerning is the serious scandalizing of the secret of confession. The unknown author of the article: “But meanwhile the American girl had told her nightmare to her confessor, the American Fr. Filip Pavic”, who also refused the girl to undertake legal action, but contacted Waterinckx “and told him that he had already heard different similar accusations against Jozo earlier.” So we are involted in sleazy accusations in a so called “Jozo’s sex-problem”.Also the American Pavic “really puzzled”, refused to undertake legal action. Instead he told another priest about what he heard. “who immediately shouted 2 times: He did it again!” according to this anonymous article. Waterinxk continued to spread the rumors about Jozo. “When Mark spoke later to Frs. Ljudevit Rupcic and Slavko Barbaric” and “these 2 Franciscans seemed to be very embarrassed”. So they just seem to be? Who wrote this article? What is the reason that Waterinkcx refused to undertake legal. Why this raped American woman did not undertake action against her assaulter? . The more as, according to Mark Waterinkcx, there are many more “Sex Problems in Medjugorje.” This article contributed by Jane Turner.

unitypub@unitypublishing.com

There is a big controversy around Fr. Jozo Zovko o.f.m. He was the curate in Medjugorje when the ‘ apparitions’ started in June 1981. Already on October 21 1981 the’ Gospa’ said that Zovko is a ‘ saint’. But in reality this Franciscan has been suspended already twice. A first time by bishop Zanic on August 23 1989(diocesan letter Nr. 622/89) and a second time by bishop Peric on June 14 1994 (diocesan letter Nr. 423/94).

Many Medjugorje-fans go crazy when they hear about these suspensions of their ‘ saint’, but nobody has the courage to put these two questions to Fr. Jozo : 1- Is it true that you have been suspended ? 2- For what reason have you been suspended ? Let’s now try to answer these delicate questions.

The fact that Jozo has been suspended has already been published in many languages i.e. french, italian, english, german, dutch… in more than 10 occasions. Mark Waterinckx, who went 24 times to Medjugorje, has this list. Even the French priest and big promoter of Medjugorje, Fr. René Laurentin, wrote in his book “ Dernières Nouvelles de Medjugorje “The 15 of June 1996 on p.34 that, since the motives for the severe sanctions against Zovko were not made public, it must be serious. Also Fr. Slavko Barbaric (another Franciscan already declared ‘ saint’ by the Gospa one day after his death !) confirmed in a tape-recorded interview with Mark Waterinckx on August 8 1997 that Jozo was suspended twice.

Bishop Peric himself spoke during a tape-recorded interview with Mark Waterinckx on August 4 1997 about these 2 suspensions, what he later repeated in letters to the Dutch priest Fr. Rudo Franken on February 7 2000 (prot. 131/2000) and to the Rector of the Basilica National Shrine of Our Lady in Washington, Mgr. Michael Bransfield on November 18 2002 (prot. 1942/2002). As a result of these 2 last letters, it was forbidden to Jozo Zovko even to enter the church. Already on October 15 1996 (prot. 1405/96) the bishop of Mostar had confirmed to Mark Waterinckx by letter the suspensions of Frs. Jozo Zovko and Leonard Orec.

In 1994 already Mgr. Peric had sent the ‘declarata’ to Jozo himself and warned all dioceses of Bosnia-Hercegovina and put the official publication in his diocesan bulletin “ Crkva na Kamenu “ (“ The Church on the Rock”)

Second question : Why has Jozo been suspended in 1989 by bishop Zanic ? Officially it was not mentioned, but insiders do know. In 1986 already a dutch business-man who lived in Yugoslavia said to Mark Waterinckx “ that Jozo had a special interest for beautiful ladies “

At that time Mark was shocked and scandalized by “ such a slander “. But later more and more such rumours came to his ears. In the summer of 1989 an American girl came to him and told him with all details how Jozo had sexually assaulted her. Next day Mark went to Tihaljina to confront Jozo with this story. Zovko denied everything but was pale and in a terrible state. He trembled and accused his good friend Mark ( since 1984 he was Mark’s confessor) of bringing him in such a situation while the church was full of pilgrims waiting for his service. He lied 3 times about the girl and let Anka swear that nothing had happened. Anka was one of the 4 young girls (!) who lived together with this Franciscan in that time in the parish of Tihaljina… Mark was very worried about Jozo’s behavior.

Next day, after praying in front of the Blessed Sacrament in Medjugorje, he decided to walk (partially barefoot) the 32 km. to Tihaljina. But this time Jozo had regained his composure. In spite of the severe burns of Mark’s feet ( what resulted in 10 days of hospital) , Jozo was cynical and laughed at him. Since then, Jozo will say that Mark and all the girls and women who accuse him are crazy. When Mark told the whole story to the then curate of Medjugorje, Fr. Leonard Orec, this collegue of Jozo seemed unconcerned. But meanwhile the American girl had told her nightmare to her confessor, the American Fr. Filip Pavic.

This Franciscan contacted Mark and told him that he had already heard different similar accusations against Jozo earlier. Also Pavic was really puzzled and told about Jozo’s sex-problem to Fr. Svetozar Kraljevic, who immediately shouted 2 times : “ He did it AGAIN !”

Also this Franciscan had already confronted Jozo with accusations from other women , but Zovko denied everything. When Mark spoke later to Frs. Ljudevit Rupcic and Slavko Barbaric about ‘ Medjugorje’s best kept secret ‘, these 2 Franciscans seemed to be very embarrassed with the whole problem around Jozo.

Bishop Peric told Mark (on tape-recorder) that since it was forbidden by bishop Zanic in 19989 to Jozo to hear confessions and since Jozo still continued, that Jozo was suspended ‘latae sententiae’ (automatically) a divinis because of pertinacious disobedience.

Other Sex Problems in Medjugorje

But Jozo Zovko is not the only Franciscan in Medjugorje having sex-problems. Fr. Tomislav Vlasic ( the creator of Medjugorje, says bishop Zanic), had made Sister Rufina ( Manda Kozul) pregnant already in 1976. The child Toni was born in Germany on January 25 1977.

Crackdown: Pope Benedict XVI has authorised 'severe cautionary and disciplinary measures' against Father Tomislav Vlasic

Manipulated? pilgrims pray in Medjugorje, Bosnia

Strong belief: About 20,000 pilgrims at Medjugorje in 2001 celebrating the twentieth anniversary of when six children said they had seen the virgin there

07-01-2010 om 22:25 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

06-01-2010 om 21:57 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Koningin van de Vrede: in Hrasno of in Medjugorje? Zowel het Bosnische Hrasno als Medjugorje zijn plaatsen van Mariaverering. De ene is erkend, maar onbekend. De andere is niet erkend, maar immens populair. Het lijkt op een strijd om de titel Koningin van de Vrede, vindt Mark Waterinckx. Hrasno wordt ook wel het Fatima van Hercegovina genoemd. Het officieel erkende heiligdom van de Koningin van de Vrede ligt op veertig kilometer van Medjugorje, dat haar eigen Koningin van de Vrede heeft. Hrasno is vier jaar eerder dan het begin van Medjugorje in 1981 opgericht. Medjugorje is nooit door de Heilige Stoel erkend en ook de nationale bisschoppenconferentie en de bisschop van Mostar erkennen de verschijningen in Medjugorje niet. Beide plaatsen vallen onder het bisdom Mostar-Duvno. Hrasno ligt in het bisdom Trebinje. Het bisdom Trebinje had tot 1819 een eigen bisschopszetel. Tot 1890 werd het bisdom toevertrouwd aan de bisschop van Dubrovnik en vervolgens aan de bisschop van Mostar-Duvno die nu de apostolische administrator van Trebinje is. De twee bisdommen functioneren als één geheel onder de bevoegdheid van de bisschop van Mostar. Het idee voor een Mariaheiligdom in Hrasno kwam oorspronkelijk van de lokale pastoor, mgr. Stjepan Batinovic. Vanaf het begin van zijn pastoraat in 1947 wilde hij een ereplaats voor Maria bouwen. Er waren een aantal redenen waarom de pastoor dat wilde. Een eerste reden is historisch van aard. In verband met de voortdurende onrust in het gebied voelde hij de drang voor gebed ter ere van Maria, Koningin van de Vrede. Tegelijkertijd zijn er drie religies in het gebied (katholiek, orthodox en moslim), waardoor het heiligdom interreligieuze dialoog kon bevorden. Een derde reden is cultureel-economisch: om de mensen er van te weerhouden naar het buitenland te emigreren of om ver te moeten reizen voor een bedevaartplaats. OLV Koningin van de Vrede in Hrasno OLV Koningin van de Vrede in Medjugorje In 1957 liet Batinovic op de binnenplaats van de pastorie een kleine grot voor Onze Lieve Vrouw van Lourdes bouwen. In 1975 was hij van plan om een groot heiligdom op de berg Budisavina te bouwen, maar dat ging niet volgens plan. Daarom begon hij prompt de heuvel Gradina naast de kerk van Hrasno voor te bereiden voor zijn project. Uiteindelijk werd het heiligdom van de Koningin van de Vrede in 1977 opgericht. Op 8 mei 1977 zegende de bisschop van Mostar mgr. Cule het nieuwe beeld van Onze Lieve Vrouw Koningin van de Vrede, in aanwezigheid van drie andere bisschoppen, veertig priesters en vijfduizend gelovigen. “De belangrijkste reden hiervan is dat men in Hrasno Onze Lieve Vrouw, Koningin van de Vrede, wilde vragen om verzoening van de mensen die in dit gebied wonen en voor de eenheid van de kerk. De Gospa van Medjugorje neemt het vanaf het begin op voor een aantal Franciscanen die tegen de bisschop van Mostar rebelleren en tegen het decreet "Romanis Ponificibus' door paus Paulus VI van 6 juni 1975,” zegt Mark Waterinckx, die de ontwikkelingen in Medjugorje met een kritisch oog volgt. Waterinckx zegt hierover: “Reeds in de tachtiger jaren, toen ik met de bus op weg was van Medjugorje naar Dubrovnik, had ik net ten noorden van Metkovic, een richtingaanwijzer gezien waarop “heiligdom Koningin van de Vrede Hrasno 20 km" stond. Maar in Medjugorje houdt iedereen zich muisstil over deze plaats.” Mark Waterinckx stelt zo zijn vragen. “Waarom heeft bijvoorbeeld marialoog en Medjugorje-voorstander Rene Laurentin Hrasno nooit vernoemd? Waarom heeft de Gospa van Medjugorje het nooit over Hrasno? Zouden er twee verschillende heiligdommen kunnen zijn met dezelfde titel in dezelfde kerkelijke provincie?” “Op 9 mei 1997 stuurde paus Johannes Paulus II een telegram met gelukwensen voor de twintigste verjaardag van het erkende heiligdom 'Kraljica Mira' in Herzegovina. Hij gaf zijn bijzondere apostolische zegen aan dit 'vero centro di devozione Mariana' (echt centrum van Mariale devotie). Dit moet voor elke Franciscaan in Medjugorje toch wel duidelijk zijn. Eens vroeg ik in Medjugorje aan een Franciscaan om met mij mee te gaan naar Hrasno. Hij weigerde. Waarom? Omdat 'Hrasno een diocesaan Heiligdom is en niet een Franciscaans', zei hij. Heel typisch voor deze vreemde situatie in dit gebied van rivaliteit en fanatisme.” Waterinckx meent dat het er alle schijn van heeft dat in 1981 de Franciscanen het erkende heiligdom in Hrasno hebben overgebracht naar Medjugorje voor aldaar verblijvende valse zieners. “In die tijd waren de paters Vlasic en Slavko Barbaric allebei kapelaans in Capljina, een kleine stad halverwege tussen Medjugorje en Hrasno. Dat kan haast geen toeval zijn.” De Franciscaanse paters en de bisschop van Mostar leveren al jaren een strijd. Naar het idee van Mark Waterinckx wordt Medjugorje hiervoor ingezet. Veel van de Medjugorje-paters zijn op hun vingers getikt, of zelfs gesuspendeerd. Vorig jaar pater Vlasic, de eerste geestelijke leider van de Medjugorje-‘zieners’, door Rome zwaar gestraft voor gewetensmanipulaties, twijfelachtige doctrines, verdacht mysticisme, ongehoorzaamheid, schandalig seksueel wangedrag en verdenking van ketterij en schisma. “Het is merkwaardig dat Maria van Medjugorje in haar boodschappen deze pater altijd bemoedigde in haar boodschappen aan de zieners.”

» link | | 7-3-2009 Waterinckx vervolgt: “De Franciscaan Bozo Rados, kapelaan in Capljina, zei me in 1997: ‘Ik word geleid door de Heilige Geest. Ik heb geen paus nodig, ik heb geen bisschop nodig’. Rados is thans uit de Franciscaanse orde verwijderd door de Franciscaanse Generale Overste in Rome. Het is eveneens merkwaardig dat pater Jozo Zovko, de voormalige pastoor van Medjugorje en beschermeling van de zieners, driemaal werd gesuspendeerd door de bisschoppen van Mostar, maar een ‘heilige’genoemd door de Franciscaanse Maria, nu plots verdwenen is uit de provincie Mostar. Officiëel wegens gezondheidsredenen.”

Medjugorje? Ja, tenzij...

Foto: KN Archief

Vaticaanse Commissie Medjugorje

Foto: AP

The Catholic Herald (UK) (www.catholicherald.co.uk/)

Advertisement

06-01-2010 om 21:44 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

05-01-2010 om 22:25 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Father Jozo Zovko O.F.M., a Franciscan priest has been a part of the history of the phenomena of Medjugorje since the very beginning. As a young priest, Father Jozo enjoyed the assignment as Parish Priest for the Saint James Church in Medjugorje, Bosnia-Hercegovina when the first apparition occurred on June 24, 1981.

When the children first started to speak of the apparitions, Father Jozo was doubtful that it was more than the excited imaginations of the young. Still, talk of the apparitions was dangerous in an area of Communist oppression. He was torn between trying to keep his parish and the suddenly arriving pilgrims calm and centered and taking care of their spiritual needs and making sense out of the stories of the apparitions.. if indeed they had occurred. It wasn't long before he was convinced that the children were seeing the Gospa and that something wonderful was happening to his St. James parish that would soon affect the world through the Gospa's messages given there.

Towards the end of July, 1981, while Father Jozo was praying inside of St. James, he heard a male voice tell him: "Go outside and protect the children.". Upon opening the door of the church, he found all six visionaries, Ivanka, Ivan, Jakov, Marija, Mirjana and Vicka frightened of the police and begging for help. He gave them sanctuary in the rectory.

After refusing the order to close St. James, Father Jozo Zovko was arrested on August 17, 1981.. barely two months after the first apparition. He was tried and convicted on charges of subversion against the (Communist) state. He was sentenced to three and a half years hard labor.

Despite the many cruel and horrendous tortures he endured while imprisoned, his faith remained strong and grew. Unable to cope with such devoutness in the face of their extensive cruelty as well as the increasing political pressure against his imprisonment, the Communists released Father Jozo after 18 months on the condition he never return to St. James as pastor.

Father Jozo now travels through the world and speaks of the Gospa's messages. He speaks of the immeasurable love of Jesus and he asks us all to respond to the call with all of our hearts. And he teaches these very things by his words and his example.

One project that is very close to Father Jozo's heart is taking care of the many children who became orphans through the Bosnian War. He has established the non-profit "International Godparenthood for the Herceg Bosnian Child." and all fees from his speaking engagements go to help the orphans. You may find a link to learn more about Father Jozo's Godparenthood program on our Favorite Links page. Father Jozo Zovko O.F.M. is also author of the book "as she asks" with Geraldine Hemmings and Carrie Swearingen.

Below are excerpts of a speech Father Jozo gave to the pilgrims visiting Medjugorje on October 4, 1998, the day after the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi. In the interest of keeping the flavor and the intent intact, there has been no editing of the vocabulary or syntax changed as Father Jozo's comments were translated into English as he spoke.

I am overjoyed that I am able to greet you and I thank you for having responded to the call. The call of Our Lady, the Queen of Peace. . Thankful that it was not too far for you to come. Thank you for not being afraid that your plane would not crash into the ocean.

Yesterday was the feast day of a great man.. You see how he stands in our midst. Our brother, our interceptor, St. Francis. He, after inspiring us for 8 centuries.. inspiring the young and the old the sick and the healthy and when he felt that his generation was destroying everything. When even in our generation we are destroying our nature, it has come to mind to consecrate and dedicate everything to him. And this our hope. A desire to have a great dialog amongst religions and his, too.

The Holy Father came to the tomb of this great man, this little brother Francis, to start this great dialog amongst religions. And it is a great state, a monumental state when all people from various religions, various parts of the world came and prayed at his tomb together. He is the man who left behind his sword and his sheath and he took the crop. Here is a man who left his precious horse and replaced him with bare feet and sandals. Here is the man who exchanged his very precious garments all decorated with real gold and even fur and instead has taken on poverty. This is what we dont know how to do. This is what I can not do and I dont know how to do. And this man that stands before me in inspirations saying to me: "You also can." And I'm deeply convinced that I can. And each time I think of him.. when I look at him, when I meet him in my heart, he tells me: "Do not be afraid, you can do likewise."

I'm so glad that you came on this precious saint's feast day. After today, I am certain you will love him more, you will respect him more. St. Francis as a young man was always in tears. A man filled with the greatest joy, always wiping away tears. And his brothers asked him.. why are you crying? Why are you always crying? You look at the cross and you cry. You teach an assignment and you cry. You see the sign as you cross the road and you cry and you wipe away your tears. Why are you crying?

And St. Francis responded and said: "Because I don't love. I don't know how to love. It is my desire that I learn how to love. And then he turned to his brothers and said: "My brothers look.. as he pointed to Jesus saying .. Love is not love. I desire to learn how to love."

Eight centuries later in Medjugorje, Our Lady speaks to us and says: "Dear children. How is it that you dont know how to love Jesus? How is it that you dont know how to love his cross and his wounds? Look at his wounds. Looks at the cross and learn how to love." And what we do we learn when we look at the cross. We learn so much. We learn most that we can learn.. we gain the greatest lessons of love. Before the cross we learn how to love. And love means to give our life for others. I live live for others. Yes, I can learn to live for others. And it is a continual event to do more. To be more an image of Jesus. In the last message Our Lady says to us: "Dear children. I desire to call you to live the faith of your fathers. To return to the faith of your fathers."

Yesterday you were in Split. Why? That you may learn together with the Holy Father the faith of a nation.. of the church. In that city where many of you were yesterday with the Holy Father, the oldest known cathedral today is there. An older cathedral does not exist. The persecutor of the church 1100 years ago made himself a most beautiful tomb, like a Roman Emperor on the site. And he wanted to die in the most beautiful city of his kingdom. And then thats why he has placed his castle on the edge of the ocean. He built on the land his tomb. But he was talked into murdering the bishop who was found in the vicinity of that village. There, where the Holy Father was with the young yesterday afternoon. And he was the one who was talked into persecuting the followers of Christ. And the Roman Emperor became an executor and a murder. And he died. And it is in his tomb that the Christians brought their martyr, their saint, their bishop. In the mean time freedom came. And the successor of the Emperor said: "No Christians are allowed to be persecuted by decree." And in the mausoleum that the king had built for himself, the Christians placed their bishop. And to the living bishop at the time they built everything next to their cathedral. And thats why Our father came to celebrate the great strength of faith of martyrdom in this city. But, the city does celebrate 1700 years of its diocese of its city . That is the faith of your father who was prepared to die for Jesus.

Today, you are in relatively desolate area. For us, who are born here, it is beautiful. For example we have other Brother Eustive here.. and he's been a priest for 33 years and he lives in the diocese in the US. And although he no longer lives here, he's always happy to return here. Because it the love of this beautiful place always remains. And for those that loves this place, it is never desolate, it is never a desert but, it is always home.

And for you it will become that place. And do you know why? Because this place was consecrated to Our Lady. 150 years ago it was consecrated to her. The church was built at that time. 50 years ago when the communists came, when the church was celebrating its 100th anniversary of the monastery. It was the communists that came and said there was no more God. And when they came they found 30 Franciscans. 30 professors of the adjacent seminary. And they told them there was no more God. That their church was dead. And there was no more church and no more pope and that there was no more need for that. They told them that their life was superficial. They told the Franciscans to remove their habits. To leave their faith and go into the world.

But, they could not. and they said: "No, we can not leave." When the enemy recognized that the Franciscans were so full of faith and conviction, an enraged soldier took the crucifix from the wall and threw it at the feet of the Franciscans. Present were the children who were in the school of students they were teaching. And it was before those children, the communists said to the Franciscans: "Now you may choose. Life or Death." Each one of them chose Jesus. So warmly they embraced Him! They kissed Him. And the confessed the great one thing. And they said: "You are my Father and my everything. You are everything and I am nothing." One by one they were taken outside and thrown into the flames. But, some they went knowing full well where they were going. They went with blessings. And the enemies that are alive today, witnesses say.. "As we were persecuting them, they were praying for us. As we cursed them, they rejoiced and celebrated God and they sang." What a great step that was. Being thrown into flames. This is the faith of the your Fathers. This is the faith of your fathers.

2/20/09

Father Jozo Zovko on Sabbatical.

Father Jozo Zovko on Sabbatical.
Here is the official letter circulated on Father’s behalf by his assistant, Mrs. Vesna Curic:Siroki Brijeg, February 9, 2009 With this notice we desire to inform you that due to health reasons, the need for rest and recuperation, and due to the commencement of construction on Badija, Fr Jozo Zovko has asked his superiors for permission to reside outside of the Province. The Province Board approved this request. For this reason, we are canceling all programs planned for the ensuing year. We kindly ask all our co-ordinators and co-workers, organizers of pilgrimages to Medjugorje, organizers of prayer meetings and seminars, and all Medjugorje Centers and pilgrims to respect this and not to plan or ask for a meeting with Fr Jozo during this time. We thank you for your understanding, and united in prayer we remain yours truly in Christ.-Vesna Cuzic-on behalf of Fr JozoInternational God-Parenthood for the Herceg-Bosnian Child.

The Lord knows why He sometimes allows a gap or a painful absence to enter into our lives – He always has a plan. Remember when Abraham renounced his son Isaac, only to bear even greater fruit for humanity? When Saint Joseph thought that he had to give up marrying Mary, it was to finally find her in a more pure and beautiful way. But he had to go through an agony so that his own heart would enlarge to match hers!
If Fr. Jozo’s absence is a painful pruning process for the pilgrims and for each one of us here, it would be good nevertheless for all of us to welcome the event with a positive attitude, not as a calamity, but rather as a gift from God Who will use it for a greater purpose. Just imagine, it is quite possible that this time of sabbatical may save Fr. Jozo’s life, and prevent him from collapsing from exhaustion without warning as Fr. Slavko did! Isn’t it also possible that a change in his life pattern may permit him to perceive other aspects of Mary’s plan for Medjugorje that he may reveal to us later on? The possibilities for why God chose this time to give Father Jozo a break are endless.
One thing we can be sure of is that if we welcome this time of trial with faith and even with gratitude, we will free the way for the Lord to harvest all its fruit, in our day and in Eternity. But if we mourn what was ours before and now seems lost, or even worse, if we attempted to blame someone for having robbed us of it, we certainly would be wasting our time and ruining God’s plan.
I’m sure that Fr. Jozo is expecting us to display an attitude of faith. Let’s make this our way to thank him for his 27 years of service to us! Let us also pray for him, and continue to study his teachings that are still available on CDs, DVDs and books at Siroki Brijeg.
Dearest Gospa, we dearly love you! In the midst of all the tribulations of this life, you are our resplendent star!
Sister Emmanuel +

The worst atrocities, strange as it may seem, were carried out by members of the intelligentsia. The case of Peter Brzica is undoubtedly one of the most incredible in this category. Peter Brzica had attended the Franciscan College at Siroki Brijeg, Herzegovina, was a law student, and a member of the Catholic organization of the Crusaders (Krizari). In the concentration camp at Jasenovac, on the night of August 29, 1942, orders were issued for executions. Bets were made as to who could liquidate the largest number of inmates. Peter Brzica cut the throats of 1,360 prisoners with a specially sharp butcher's knife. Having been proclaimed the prize-winner of the competition, he was elected King of the Cut-throats. A gold watch, a silver service, and a roasted sucking pig and wine were his other rewards. A doctor, Dr. Nikola Kilolic, himself a Croat, was an eyewitness in the camp when the event took place, and subsequently testified to the authenticity of this astonishing deed.[2]

Father Jozo Zovko, O.F.M., the priest most recognized with the apparitions and spiritual phenomena of Medjugorje. His selection came from the many readers who believe in the message of Medjugorje which Father Jozo continues to emphasize today, the same message imparted to saints for centuries including Saint John Bosco through his vision of the two pillars - the Eucharist and devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary's Immaculate Heart. He has often been called the "Eucharistic priest." While this term should apply to all priests because of the immense privilege and right they are afforded through the Sacrament of Holy Orders, Father Jozo is constantly upholding the Eucharist as the answer to all our questions.

How fitting it was that he was called Jozo for in Croatian it means Joseph and he was born on that great saint's feast day - March 19, 1941 in the village of Uzari in the parish of Siroki Brijeg, where he is assigned today at the Franciscan monastery. He was the eighth of ten children born to Mate and Milka Zovko and the times were tough for World War II was in full force, but the family survived and little Jozo finished his primary grade school first in Uzari, then Siroki Brijeg before realizing he had a vocation to the priesthood. He entered the seminary in Bol on the island of Brac directly south of Split in the Adriatic Sea. He transfered to the major seminary in Sarajevo after Novitiate and at the age of 26 was enrolled at Ljubljana University receiving his degree in Theology. He was ordained in Sarajevo on August 6, 1967. He was assigned to the Gratz University in Austria to continue studies.

Upon graduating in the early seventies he returned to his homeland of Yugoslavia where communism ruled. Though the communist regime allowed worship, they frowned on those who were too faithful. One of those was Father Jozo. Because of his deep faith, his devotion to God and because of his tremendous influence in the parishes where he was assigned, the communists influenced the local bishop to transfer him often. It must be understood that the bishops were selected at that time and all the way up until after the fall of the communistic regime in the early nineties, by approval of the communist authorities in Belgrade. This included Bishop Zanic and the present prelate Bishop Peric. It was often a tough call for the Vatican but the Holy See realized it was the only way to prevent total persecution of the Church. It's also interesting to note that the two bishops in question who have ruled against Medjugorje, the Vatican has taken jurisdiction on ruling on Medjugorje out of their hands in unprecedented moves. That and the long history of the Franciscans' loyalty to the people and the Church should shed some light on the current flap between the bishops and Franciscans regarding Medjugorje and which have been totally blown out of proportion in accusing the Franciscans of being disobedient. Nothing could be further from the truth and the Franciscans continue to operate in Medjugorje at St. James and surrounding areas of Bosnia within the Diocese of Mostar because of Vatican intervention. The Holy See is well aware of the politics and corruption of past bishoprics because of communist influence.

It was into this atmosphere that Father Jozo was transferred to St. James parish in Medjugorje, which, in Croatian means "between two mountains." This agricultural valley was a small village where the Faith was practiced but not with the devotion expected. Father Jozo began to preach and entreat the people to return to the Sacraments, to live their Faith. He was like "John the Baptist" if you will for, without him realizing it, he was preparing the parish for what was to come eight months after he had been assigned to St. James as the new pastor. On June 24, 1981, while he was on retreat in Croatia, the Blessed Mother is reported to have appeared on the Podrbo, also called "Apparition Hill." Medjugorje would never be the same, nor would Father Jozo.

When he first was told of the apparitions, he felt the children - Mirjana Dragicevic, Ivanka Ivankovic, Maria Pavlovic, Ivan Dragicevic, Vicka Ivankovic and Jakov Colo - were all pulling a prank. He chastised them for such tales and the seriousness of such claims. To his surprise, rather than the children coming clean and admitting it was a hoax, they stuck to their story insisting the "Gospa" had appeared to them. Still he didn't believe until he knelt in St. James alone one morning after Mass and heard a Heavenly voice say, "Protect the children." Almost immediately they came flying into the rectory, out of breath with the communist soldiers in pursuit. He knew instantly it was no hoax and sought to give the six young ones sanctuary. For this he paid the price. He was summoned to communist headquarters in Mostar where he was accused of provoking an uprising by spurring the children to fabricate the apparitions and get the parishioners stirred up against the communists. They ordered him to suppress the movement in Medjugorje as more and more were flocking to this village as news spread. Had they called him in one week earlier, before he heard the voice which he knew instinctively was from God, he might have complied. But he could not go against God's charge. Therefore he refused and, after a kangaroo court, was sentenced to three years of prison. The sentence in communistic incarceration was commuted to half that following the pressure applied on the Yugoslav government by the faithful in Medjugorje and surrounding areas as well as others outside the country who had heard of the phenomena and the travesties against him.

In the spring of 1983, Father Jozo was released and transferred to St. Elijah in Tihaljina. It was here where we first came in contact with this holy priest. It was May of 1990 during our first pilgrimage to Medjugorje, one that would forever change our life. We were kneeling at the communion rail after his inspiring two hour talk in which he blessed each person afterwards. It was a throwback to the old way of receiving Our Lord at Holy Communion, except this time it was the Holy Spirit Who came through the charisma of Father Jozo; for as we knelt immediately in front of that beautiful, famous statue of Our Lady, known as "Our Lady of Tihaljina" we could feel the power of the Advocate. As he placed his hands on our head, a warmth never before felt came over us and were slain in the Spirit for the first time ever in the most relaxing, peacefilled mode ever experienced.

This charism has been experienced by millions who have flocked to Medjugorje and made side trips to Tihaljina and now the monastery in Siroki Brijeg to hear and be touched by this amazing priest. He continued to receive pilgrims, preaching and touching them until 1992 when the war in Croatia and then Bosnia-Herzegovina prevented this. He turned his attentions to helping his people, making trips to London, Washington, New York, Paris, Brussels, Strasbourg and Rome on a peace mission trying to persuade political leaders to help stop the killing and suffering of innocent people. It was the same kind of mission Bishop Carlos Ximenes Belo just returned from concerning his beleaguered and suffering flock in East Timor. Just as he had been called by Heaven to "Protect the children" when the six visionaries were threatened, so also he has been called by God to protect the children ravaged by war and hate. He helped establish the International Godparenthood which served as a vehicle for people the world over to adopt a Godchild from among the many whose parents were killed in the devastating war that slaughtered 280,000 over a four-year period and destroyed countless homes and churches throughout Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was established on December 20, 1992 with Father Jozo as president of the association. Today over 4,000 children are cared for spiritually and financially in Siroki Brijeg through this organization. There is also the Holy Family Institute which he is involved with which sponsors a children's renewal center in Siroki Brijeg serving as a clearing house for people of all faiths in rebuilding and getting back on their feet after the devastation of war. The center provides food, shelter, clothing and the opportunity to educate all as to the sacredness of human dignity. The center is, as Father Jozo explains, "a monument of love..the monument that speaks to all generations here as to what love has done by reestablishing themselves in society for the good."

While he has sponsored and approved of many organizations, he has also been used by some. One such was the "Nine Novenas of Prayer" in which the organizers illegally signed his name to it. He took umbrage for much of the appeal dealt with a forboding apocalyptic tone full of fear and fatalistic threats. Father Jozo renounced that as he wrote, "In through these fatalistic and threatening texts are obviously contrary to the messages of the Queen of Peace who for eighteen years as a mother has been arousing, instructing and inspiring millions of pilgrims and followers toward an apostolate of prayer and fasting."

Another project that did not have his blessings and which he was not consulted on was the movie "Gospa", a poorly done portrayal of him played by Martin Sheen in which the facts were misrepresented and he was made to look like a priest more interested in his image than souls. Nothing could be further from the truth for he is a man who speaks from the heart - a heart that reveals a selflessness and total surrender to God's Will. Even though "Gospa" was promoted to aid the refugees, it died a quick death because it was not faithful to the life of Father Jozo and his own sister Sister Fabiana, a humble, obedient nun who in no way represents the Hollywood image conveyed by Morgan Fairchild in the part of Sister Fabiana. In an interview in 1995, Father Jozo refuted most of what was in the movie.

Since 1992 he has been stationed at the Franciscan monastery in Siroki Brijeg just a short way from where he was born. But he has also traveled the world, from the far east, the mid east, Americas and throughout Europe and Africa spreading the message of Medjugorje and the vital importance of the Eucharist which are intrinsically linked as Father says, "Place your life upon the altar. You will witness how a priest will place a drop of water within a chalice full of wine. That drop of water intermingles with the wine and signifies you in the Holy Mass. You can become one, unite with and intermingle with Jesus. That is why the Holy Mass is called Communion - union with God - you and your God together - that is the Holy Eucharist." He also pointed out this link before Mass in Portland, Oregon a few years ago which we have taken from www.medjugorje.org, "Why is it that churches and sects do not tolerate the Mass, do not respect Our Lady? Because they go hand-in-hand. Yes, they go together. Our Lady teaches to come to love Jesus, to fall in love with Him, and that is why she places us before the Holy Eucharist, and pleads with us to pray before this holy, Blessed Sacrament, so from Jesus we may learn to become bread for others; so that I not have fear to say, 'Take this, all of you, of Me, and eat of it.'...Our Lady works in miraculous ways. She was always the sign, the sign of a better world, the sign of peace and unit in the Church, the sign of our salvation."

Father Jozo has been persecuted, imprisoned, denigrated and accused of unspeakable sins from graft to child abuse. What is his defense against all of this? "Father, forgive them. They know not what they do." He can be found innumerable hours a day before the Tabernacle in prayer, pleading not for his own will and reputation but for God's Will to be done no matter the consequences. He epitomizes the priests of Medjugorje who day-in-day-out are ridiculed and placed under the magnifying glass of scrutiny - men like Father Svetozar Kraljivec, OFM, another very humble and holy priest whose heroic acts during the war have gone untold at his request; Father Ivan Landeka, OFM, the current pastor of St. James, Father Slavko Barbaric, OFM, who was the voter's choice for the 41st selection of the TOP 100 CATHOLICS OF THE CENTURY on October 14th; Father Petar Ljubicic, OFM, the priest whom visionary Mirjana Dragicevic has selected to receive and announce the ten secrets when Our Lady says to do so; Father Philip Pavic, OFM, the American-born Franciscan who serves the English-speaking pilgrims in Medjugorje and has come to be known as the loveable ol' curmudgeon with a cynical streak; Father Tomislav Vlasic, OFM, Father Ivan Dugandzic, OFM;Father Tomislav Pervan, OFM, now the Franciscan provincial, and Father Ljudevit Rupcic, OFM who we personally interviewed extensively along with Archbishop Frane Franic, the former Archbishop of Split who was instrumental in the Vatican taking the matter out of the local ordinary of Mostar's hands.

Today, at 58 Father Jozo continues to minister to the people of Siroki Brijeg and the countless pilgrims who come to hear and be inspired. He also continues to travel the globe bringing Our Lady's message to all. When asked about the criticism that Medjugorje has become a commercial venture, he winces but admits, "Our Lady is so pure that I would like the entrance to her shrine to be clean, with no shops at all. But I also understand that the people want to take something home, to remember their visit. This is something that happens in all famous places." He is truly correct in this which can be corroborated if one ever visited Guadalupe, Lourdes or Fatima. They all have vendors coming out of the woodwork, as does the Vatican.

05-01-2010 om 22:20 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Why we have convened the conference

Letter of Ambassador Miloš Pojar, Chairman of Organizing Committee, from February 9, 2009:

"More than six decades after World War II the terrible ghosts of the Holocaust have not disappeared. The perverse ideology that led to the horrors of the Holocaust still exists and throughout our continents racial hatred and ethnic intolerance stalk our societies. Therefore, it is our moral and political responsibility to support Holocaust remembrance and education in national, as well as international, frameworks and to fight against all forms of intolerance and hatred.

The Government of the Czech Republic, in cooperation with the Documentation Centre of Property Transfers of Cultural Assets of WW II Victims, the Federation of Jewish Communities in the Czech Republic, the Jewish Museum in Prague, the Terezín Memorial, the Institute of Jewish Studies at the Hussite Theological Faculty of the Charles University in Prague and the Forum 2000 Foundation, will host a ”Holocaust Era Assets” conference in Prague on June 26-30 2009. The objectives of the conference are:

• To assess the progress made since the 1998 Washington Conference on Holocaust Era Assets in the areas of the recovery of looted art and objects of cultural, historical and religious value (according to the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art and the Vilnius Forum Declaration 2000), and in the areas of property restitution and financial compensation schemes.
• To review current practices regarding provenance research and restitution and, where needed, define new effective instruments to improve these efforts.
• To review the impact of the Stockholm Declaration of 2000 on education, remembrance and research about the Holocaust.
• To strengthen the work of the Task Force on International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research, a 26-nation body chaired by the Czech Republic in 2007-2008.
• To discuss new, innovative approaches in education, social programs and cultural initiatives related to the Holocaust and other National Socialist wrongs and to advance religious and ethnic tolerance in our societies and the world.

We sincerely hope this conference will mitigate the injustices caused by the Holocaust and other National Socialist wrongs and prevent them from recurring.

We look forward to welcoming you at the Prague Conference in June.

Stuart E. Eizenstat will head the US delegation at the Holocaust Era

04-01-2010 om 21:50 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

03-01-2010 om 22:47 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

TESTIMONY FOR UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE

STUART E. EIZENSTAT

HOUSE BANKING COMMITTEE
On the U.S. Government Supplementary Report on Nazi Assets

June 4, 1998

Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank the Committee for giving me the opportunity to discuss with you a subject that has captured the world’s attention due in some measure to the pioneering work of this Committee.

I particularly want to single out the efforts and the leadership of Chairman Leach and the Committee beginning with your first hearing on this issue in 1996. You have been a leader from the outset in raising the consciousness of America and the world on Holocaust assets issues. You exhibited leadership in convening a very useful hearing last June in the wake of our preliminary report with historians from many of the affected countries to comment on our findings. Your efforts continued with last February’s pathbreaking hearing in February which focused on art and insurance. And today’s hearing, with the gathering of such distinguished panelists, is yet another example of this Committee’s work to ensure that this complex and emotional issue receives both the proper attention and consideration by the U.S. Congress in an appropriately bipartisan fashion.

This supplementary report that we released this week, like our preliminary study completed in May 1997, reflects a solemn commitment by the United States to confront the largely hidden history of Holocaust-related assets after five decades of neglect. I would like to acknowledge the tireless work and dedication of the State Department Historian Dr. William Slany and my Senior Advisor Bennett Freeman in preparing this report. I would also like to acknowledge the work of the World Jewish Congress, the World Jewish Restitution Organization, the American Jewish Congress, the Jewish Agency, American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and Eli Rosenbaum and Dr. Barry White of the Justice Department.

Our preliminary study was prepared by Dr. Slany in cooperation with ten other agencies of the U.S. Government and released in May 1997.

Our most significant findings were the overall movement of looted gold flowing to and through Switzerland from Germany; the fact that the Swiss National Bank must have known that some portion of the gold it was receiving from the Reichsbank was looted from occupied countries; and that the gold received by the Swiss National Bank from the Reichsbank included some stolen from Holocaust victims, although there is no evidence that the Swiss National Bank knew this fact.

These findings were confirmed by the bold and probing gold report that Switzerland’s Bergier Commission presented initially at the London Nazi Gold Conference in December 1997 and now by its more conclusive report released on May 25, 1998.

SCOPE OF THIS STUDY

Before highlighting for you the major new substantive findings of the report, let me first explain the relationship between the new, supplementary report and the preliminary study we released last May. This supplemental study is the substantively appropriate follow-up to the first report. The preliminary report focused on how Nazi Germany financed its war effort using looted gold. Switzerland figured so prominently because our focus was on looted gold and the key role it played in the German war effort. This report focuses on the uses to which that looted gold was put – that is, the ability of the Nazis to use the Swiss francs they obtained in exchange for the gold they looted to purchase, in turn, critical war supplies from the other neutral countries necessary to sustain the war effort. In this way, by illuminating the trade as well as the financing side of the equation, our two reports together provide a comprehensive view of the important part the wartime neutrals cumulatively played in the structure of the German war economy.

Further research has allowed us to provide a more detailed analysis of the economic roles played by other wartime neutrals – Argentina, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Turkey – and the factors that shaped those roles. We have focused on these countries’ trading links with both the Axis and the Allies, as well as on their handling of looted assets——especially gold. Let me begin by highlighting our findings in this respect.

NEUTRALS SUPPLYING GERMAN WAR EFFORT

This report makes clear that whatever their motivations, and however acceptable by the standards of the time for neutrals, the cumulative trade of the World War II European neutral countries helped to sustain the Nazi war effort by supplying key materials to Germany essential to their conduct of the War -- in many cases well past the point where, from the Allied perspective at the time, there was a genuine threat of German attack.

As you can see from Chart 1 (Appendix) on the Neutral Countries’ Supply of Germany’s Major Resources, Portugal and Spain together provided Germany with almost 100 percent of Germany’s wartime supply of vitally-needed wolfram, the essential mineral in processing tungsten for steel alloys used in machine tools and armaments, especially armor-piercing shells. The strategic significance of wolfram was not lost on the Portuguese. Prime Minister Salazar himself acknowledged in early 1944 that denying wolfram to Germany "would reduce her power of endurance, and the war would be accordingly shortened."

Sweden provided Germany’s wartime industry with a major portion -- as Chart 1 shows, in some war years up to 90-100 percent -- of its requisite iron ore (including a high proportion of the high-grade ore needed for the production of the specially hardened steel used in German weapons and armored vehicles) and ball-bearings.

Turkey conducted a robust commerce (in chart 1) with both sides that raised its gold reserves from 27 tons to 216 by the end of 1945. In 1943, for example, Turkey provided essentially 100 percent of German requirements. Chart 1 shows that in 1943 Turkey’s exports supplied Germany with up to 100 percent of its annual requirements. According to Hitler’s Armaments Minister Albert Speer, the German war machine would have ground to a halt without chromite ore. Indeed, Speer wrote in his memoirs that he told Hitler in November 1943: "Should supplies from Turkey be cut off, the stockpile of chromium is sufficient for only 5-6 months. The manufacture of planes, tanks, motor vehicles, tank shells, U-boats, almost the entire gamut of artillery would have to cease from one to three months after this deadline, since by then the reserves in the distribution channels would be used up."

Implicitly or explicitly, the neutrals resisted Allied economic diplomacy and expressed fear of German reprisal if their economic relations were curtailed. This invocation of force majeure by the neutrals could not be easily countered by the Allies in the early years of the War when their vulnerability was all too apparent. But the invincibility of the German war machine was belied during 1943 with a series of major defeats that foreshadowed the Allied victory. The neutral nations recognized the turn of the tide and the receding danger of German attack or reprisal, and began, at Allied demand, to curtail trade and other measures that supported the German war effort. By late 1943, the Allies were less willing to accept neutral claims of the threat of force majeure as a reason to justify their continuing economic interaction with the Nazi regime.

Chart 2 (appendix), which presents a Timeline of Trade, Belligerency and Postwar Gold and Asset Negotiations and Agreements between the Allies and the neutrals, summarizes the key information in our report about the international legal and economic relationships of the neutrals.

The first three columns summarize these major exports of the neutrals to Germany, the other contributions of the neutrals to the German war effort, and, in this third column, those major contributions of the neutrals to the allied war effort.

The next three columns in the timeline show, based on the information presented in the report, how the allies perceived the diminution of German military threat to the neutrals in the course of the war, how [in this next column] this is related to the significant concessions the neutrals eventually made to the allies, and [in the adjoining column] when the neutrals in fact finally ceased their exports to Germany. Another column indicates that two of the neutrals, Argentina and turkey, actually declared war on Germany in the closing months of the war.

The final four columns show the dates when the various neutrals began the gold restitution and assets negotiations with the allies, when they were completed, and when gold and assets were actually delivered to the allies. The details of the results of these negotiations are presented in this chart.

COMPLEXITY OF NEUTRALITY

The report also sheds light on the complexities of "neutrality" – the different forms that neutrality took in different countries for different reasons – in ways that should dispel any monolithic concept of neutrality during World War II. The wartime neutrals often faced similar pressures and counter-pressures but reacted to them in varied ways, reflecting their specific wartime circumstances, the attitudes of their leaders, and the more enduring features of their own economies and geography.

There was no such thing as a uniform or absolute neutrality during World War II. The ideological leaning of Franco’s regime in Spain was clear and unmistakable; Franco’s dispatch of the Blue Division to join the Wehrmacht at the Russian front underscores this pro-Axis tilt. So, too, leading members of the Argentine military regimes were also openly sympathetic to the Axis. Sweden’s permission for German troops to regularly transit its territory and to protect German shipping in the Baltic were hardly "neutral" acts; neither was Portugal’s granting access to the British to bases in the Azores, even though it was a welcome and important contribution to the Allied war effort.

Different factors shaped the "neutrality" of Argentina, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey, ranging from long-standing policies of avoiding entanglements in European wars to the fear of invasion and the desire to reap economic rewards. These interests, in turn, produced decisions and actions which were at various times both consistent and inconsistent with their claims of neutrality. These inconsistent decisions and actions were at times helpful to Nazi Germany and at other times helpful to the Allies. They were often based on their own strictly legal interpretations of what was permissible under existing international law, as distinct from moral considerations of what was right or wrong. All these seemingly inconsistent decisions and actions co-existed and contributed to the complex phenomenon of neutrality during World War II——a war which was in many ways different from previous wars because of the unprecedented scope of the assault on human values and the horrors of the Holocaust.

There are a number of questions that should be addressed today by all the nations involved in World War II, including the wartime neutrals, questions which can help them come to terms with their role in the War. For example, at what point during World War II did it become evident that Nazi aggression was not just another in an endless series of European wars, but was qualitatively different in its brutal treatment of civilians and its threat to basic human values? At what point did the threat of a Nazi invasion recede sufficiently so that with little risk, trade with Germany in critical commodities could have been sharply curtailed or stopped? If neutrality was defended during the War as a way of self-defense, why was there so little cooperation with the Allies after the War in returning looted Nazi assets which had come into the possession of the wartime neutrals or in liquidating German assets for the benefit of stateless refugees and the reconstruction of war-torn Europe? These are difficult questions to which there are no easy or certain answers, with or without the benefit of hindsight.

There appears to have been a clear preponderance of sympathy for the Allied cause in several of these countries, and significant elements of sympathy in the others.

Consistent with this mixed pattern of actions was the refuge offered by the neutral nations to more than 250,000 Jews fleeing the Holocaust. Acts of humanity and even heroism rose above the harshness or insensitivity of wartime refugee policies and reflected well on their governments and peoples:

• An estimated 100,000 refugees, mostly Jews, fled through or into the Iberian peninsula. Spain allowed 20,000 to 30,000 refugees to cross the French border from the fall of France until the summer of 1942, and another 7,500 refugees entered Spain by the end of 1944. The Portuguese Government allowed Jewish organizations to relocate from occupied Europe to Lisbon during the War. During 1941 and 1942 the Portuguese Government allowed 5,000 refugees to pass through Portugal to the United States.

• The Swedish Government provided refuge for about 7,000 Danish Jews who fled to the safety of Swedish shores. Sweden’s protection, spearheaded by the personal heroism of Raoul Wallenberg, was extended to 20,000 to 30,000 Jews who faced extermination in the last phase of the Holocaust.

• Turkey, which had protected Jews since their expulsion from Spain in 1492, had, it is estimated, more than 100,000 Jewish refugees pass through its borders during the War.

• Argentina received a large number of Jewish refugees between 1933 and 1945. Many of these 25,000 to 45,000 refugees reached Argentina before and during the War, more than any other country in the Western Hemisphere (including the United States).

• Switzerland admitted over 50,000 Jewish refugees from 1933 until the end of the War, of whom some 30,000 remained and survived in Switzerland during the War.

NAZI GOLD

Now let me address the new findings in this report that bear on the issue of Nazi Gold as distinct from the broader role of the wartime neutrals that I have just highlighted.

We have arrived at new figures of looted gold. Our first report estimated that Switzerland received as much as $414 million in total (looted and non-looted) gold from Nazi Germany. These estimates were confirmed by the recently released Bergier Report which estimated that some $440 million in total gold went through Switzerland. These figures, taken together, now give us a higher, more definitive range on total gold that flowed through Switzerland.

One other new finding is presented as a separate annex prepared by the U.S. Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations. New sources have come to light that provide additional information about the Melmer account at the Reichsbank, in which the SS deposited the gold and other valuables that it looted from individual citizens and from its victims at killing centers and concentration camps. These sources provide the most detailed data currently available for the value of the gold in the Melmer account and yield an estimate for the total value of this gold ($4.6 million in wartime value, $40.5 million in today’s gold values) that is markedly higher than previous estimates -- indeed, two times the Melmer estimates in the Bergier Report.

These new, more definitive figures are based in part on our assessment of the records of the DeGussa company and Reischbank microfilm found in Vienna. Of particular importance is the analysis of the postwar study by Albert Thoms, the head of the Reischbank’s Precious Metals Department, that details the Melmer Shipment of SS loot to the Reischbank. The Thoms’ study lists in gruesome detail in 29 columns the loot of victims under such headings as Gold Bars, gold and silver coins, (Purses, knives and forks, jewels, gold and diamond rings, watches, Dental Gold, broken gold, etc.).

If the analysis of the Thoms Report is correct, the total value that the Reischbank credited to the SS for the gold in its loot shipments was between $3.9 million and $5.4 million. The Justice Department historians make the conservative estimate for the gold in the loot shipment at $4.65 million. And this does not include the estimated $3.9 million in gold bullion and coins forwarded to the Reischbank as a result of Operation Reinhard, the Nazi program to exploit Jewish property and labor and murder millions of Jews in killing centers in eastern Poland.

This supplemental study further reveals that victim gold from the Melmer account was also included in gold that the Dresdner Bank and the Deutsche Bank -– both German commercial banks -- sold on the Turkish free market as part of a scheme to supply the Reichsbank with foreign currency, and to help Axis diplomats and agents finance their operations in Turkey. Some of the nearly $1 million in victim gold from the Melmer account obtained by Dresdner Bank and Deutsche Bank likely was part of the gold sold by those banks on the Turkish free market.

Nazi Germany financed a substantial portion of its war effort by paying for its wartime imports from the neutral nations in gold, much of it looted from occupied Europe and some of it stolen from the millions of victims of the Holocaust. Most of this looted gold was sent to the Swiss National Bank, which converted it into Swiss francs or deposited it in the accounts of other central banks.

In this trade, more than $300 million ($2.6 billion in today’s values) in Nazi gold reached Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey during the War. We arrived at this figure by adding up all the allied estimates of the gold the individual neutral countries received from Germany. Chart 3 (Appendix) on Allied assets and gold presents these estimates. Three-quarters of this amount was transferred from Germany through the Swiss National Bank, the principal gold trading center on the continent.

This flow of gold from Germany to the neutrals persisted through the War despite Allied warnings in January 1943 and February 1944 against accepting transfers of assets from Nazi Germany that had been looted from occupied countries. The European neutral countries continued to accept looted gold from the Reichsbank even after 1942 when it became clear that the Reichsbank had long since exhausted its own prewar gold reserve and was using the reserves of the looted central banks of the countries overrun by Nazi forces.

The Allies estimated that Germany financed its imports from Spain and Portugal with as much as $204 million in looted gold; more than $20 million in gold financed German trade with Sweden. Almost all of the gold that reached Turkey was traded through the free commercial market, not through the Turkish Government. Chart 3 also includes Allied estimates of looted gold that reached each neutral country.

Postwar Negotiations

The next new set of findings I want to highlight is the postwar negotiations that the United States, Britain, and France conducted with the wartime neutrals were protracted and failed to meet fully their original goals: restitution of the looted gold and the liquidation of German external assets to fund the reconstruction of postwar occupied Europe and to provide relief for Jewish and other non-repatriable refugees. This resulted from the intransigence of the neutrals after the War, conflicts within Allied ranks and between the State and Treasury Departments, as well as from competing priorities stemming from the onset of the Cold War. Less than $20 million ($14.9 million from Sweden alone) of the up to $240 million in looted gold acquired by the wartime neutrals, apart from Switzerland, was returned to the Tripartite Gold Commission to meet the claims from the central banks of 15 countries.

Chart 3 also summarizes the terms of the various accords that the allies and the neutral countries reached after the war regarding the restitution of gold and the liquidation of German external assets.

Ustasha Gold

Finally, the report deals with the question of Ustasha Gold. We became aware that the U.S. Government possessed important documents bearing on Ustasha gold in particular. The chapter raises questions about aspects of the Vatican’s record during and immediately after the War, to which answers may only exist in Vatican archives.

The Ustasha regime in Nazi Germany’s wartime puppet state of Croatia systematically and mercilessly robbed, murdered, or deported its Serbian, Sinti-Romany, and Jewish populations. Gold and other valuables of the victims became a part of the Ustasha treasury, which may have been as much as $80 million. Portions of this treasury appear to have been transferred to Switzerland in the last year of the War. Very little of it was accounted for in the postwar arrangements made by Yugoslavia with the Allies and Switzerland.

With the defeat in May 1945 of Hitler and his satellites, including puppet Croatia, the leaders of the Ustasha regime fled to Italy, where they found sanctuary at the pontifical College of San Girolamo in Rome. This College was most likely funded at least in part by the remnants of the Ustasha treasury, and may have operated with at least the tacit acquiescence of some Vatican officials. It helped fugitive Croatian war criminals escape to the Western Hemisphere in the early postwar years, and cooperated with the "rat line" being used by the U.S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps after the War to assist the escape from Europe of anti-Communists including the Nazi war criminal Klaus Barbie.

The record of the terrible legacy of the Ustasha assembled for this study is very incomplete. A full accounting should be made now to achieve a complete understanding of these issues. The opening of relevant archives in Croatia, Serbia, and the Vatican and cooperative international research will be essential in this effort.

OTHER HISTORICAL RESEARCH EFFORTS

These conclusions are based largely on the limited perspective of our almost exclusive reliance on U.S. documents (as well as captured Nazi documents in possession of the U.S.) which our interagency team has located, declassified, and evaluated. We hope that each country with a stake in these issues will intensify its efforts to examine its own record and confront its own history on its own terms and in its own way. It is essential that these studies move forward quickly so that a more comprehensive historical record of the looting and ultimate disposition of Holocaust-era assets can finally be completed.

I want to salute those countries who are already undertaking such efforts – not only Switzerland with its Bergier Commission – but also the commissions which have been established, in Argentina, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Turkey and Croatia - to address these issues which are the focus of our report. It is our hope that our two studies combined with these and other efforts underway in other countries will complete the historical record on these complex and painful issues. We share a common commitment -- not only to come to terms with the past, but to galvanize the urgent quest for justice for Holocaust victims and survivors.

U.S. HOLOCAUST ASSETS HISTORICAL COMMISSION

This second and final report that I will personally direct will not end our search for truth and our quest for justice. Under your leadership Chairman Leach, you have introduced and been the principal sponsor in the House of Representatives HR 3662 that would establish a U.S. Holocaust Assets Historical Commission – the counterpart to the bill introduced in the Senate by Senator D’Amato. We urge this Committee and the House to act as soon as possible on this legislation which has the strong support of the President.

This legislation was introduced in Congress on April 1 to create a Presidential Commission to examine the fate of Holocaust assets in the United States. The bill was introduced with bipartisan support and the strong backing of the Clinton Administration. The substantive mandate of the Commission will focus on two key areas: first, to conduct original research on the collection and disposition of Holocaust-era assets that came under the control of the U.S. Government after Hitler came to power in 1933 (assets such as gold, gems, bank accounts, financial instruments, and art works); and second, to review research being conducted more broadly in the public and private sectors. The Commission will be charged with issuing a final report to the President summarizing its findings and making recommendations no later than December 31, 1999. Establishing a strong Commission that can meet its mandate by this deadline will send a message that the United States Government is determined to address the fate of Holocaust assets here at home.

WASHINGTON CONFERENCE ON HOLOCAUST-ERA ASSETS

Mr. Chairman, we will also maintain our historical research efforts in other ways as well. In order to build on the landmark London Nazi Gold Conference held last December, and continue the international search for truth, the Department of State and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum will co-host from November 30 to December 3 the Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets. The objective will be to review our progress on the gold issue, to renew the drive to open archives and to share research on other assets, especially on artworks and insurance.

As at London, the Washington Conference will not be a forum for governmental decision-making. But we plan to use the conference and our preparations to work with a wide range of governments and NGO’s to help shape a non-binding international consensus on principles and processes for redressing injustices in these categories of assets. We hope that this consensus can give new impetus to the encouraging initiatives already underway in many countries and that this intergovernmental forum can be a catalyst for many other related efforts to address this great unfinished business of the twentieth century.

Mr. Chairman, your personal leadership and the activity of this Committee have played an important role in encouraging the international community to make significant progress in exploring issues of Holocaust-era assets. The hearing conducted in February, which shed much light on the art and insurance issues, was itself a landmark event in focusing long-overdue attention on these areas. I personally appreciate your contribution, and as we prepare for this important international conference, we want to work very closely with you, this Committee, and your staff, as well as with other interested Members of Congress.

Mr. Chairman, the examination of the complicated issues of Holocaust-era assets is a difficult undertaking. While archival research and international conferences have provided the framework for achieving a greater understanding of the fate of Holocaust assets, these issues have naturally had a vast public political impact beyond the academic and diplomatic arenas. They have come to command the attention of the world and touch the conscience of humanity.

03-01-2010 om 22:27 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

02-01-2010 om 23:10 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

02-01-2010 om 22:49 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

02-01-2010 om 22:36 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Land	Percentage
België	50,9 % (15109)
Nederland	39,6 % (11738)
Verenigde Staten	1,8 % (545)
Frankrijk	1,5 % (431)
Duitsland	1,2 % (364)
Verenigd Koninkrijk (Groot-Brittannië)	0,8 % (235)
Zweden (Sverige)	0,3 % (101)

Categorie Politiek

TOP 20

Kitokojungle

Krisvandijck

Tafelspringer

Argumenten

Bertblikt

Weylerweyler

Theotuurt

Derodevoorzitter

Willysegers

Ekeren_slp

Piessensalfons

Paulvanmiert

Lierpolitiek

Geertdessein

Doomst

Lopendezaken

Bertranddemiddeleer

Rozeleeuw

Patrick4genk

Vrijechristendemocratenwervik

TOP 200

1 . Wrestling

2 . Treetje

3 . Mediablog

4 . Rodeden

5 . Guidoenyvette

6 . Polderrenners

7 . Blogtips

8 . Mtblily

9 . Twelvepointsdouzepoi

10 . Brandweerantwerpen

11 . Medialand

12 . Hokalken

13 . Philippinenews

14 . Jenszijnverhaal

15 . Movie

16 . Tlissewegenartje

17 . Snor

18 . Deinze

19 . Nieuwjaarsbrievensis

20 . Medjugorje

21 . Zomersproeten

22 . Mooiewagens

23 . Minnares

24 . Matthieumatton

25 . Hetlottedagboek

26 . Amiciditilrodabici

27 . Hetseppedagboek

28 . Catan

29 . Sexyredfox

30 . Keukenrecepten

31 . Inanna

32 . Ella1997_cheats

33 . Levensgenieters

34 . Supclub35

35 . Kerstkaarten

36 . Runningdanny

37 . Tilloenk

38 . Dirkjogt

39 . Keukengeheim

40 . Meesterjurgenfanclub

41 . Delijnvanstijn

42 . Anubis4ever1

43 . Motorrijder

44 . Vmd

45 . Plietsplets

46 . Joggerke

47 . Jopieradio

48 . Natalietijtgat

49 . Ortisi

50 . Radionieuws

51 . Mbn

52 . Accentfm

53 . Telebizzsite

54 . Naturistman

55 . Anneke

56 . Zeezenders

57 . Beautystatement

58 . Neroameee

59 . Vlaanderen

60 . Voetbaltrainingzoals

61 . Pattayablog

62 . Barmsijspassie

63 . Anubislover

64 . Kitokojungle

65 . Kyranicks

66 . Gosupermodel

67 . Dekampioenen

68 . Romantica

69 . Corneel1996

70 . Jodenvervolging

71 . Vtm

72 . Bennyblog

73 . Snoopy50

74 . Wimvermeer

75 . Noellavanoverloop

76 . Fictiereeksen

77 . Radiofan

78 . Whisperer

79 . Pimpernellakakim

02-01-2010 om 22:04 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

31-12-2009 om 16:51 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

30-12-2009 om 23:29 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

U.S. News and World Report

Monday, March 30, 1998

A vow of silence

Did gold stolen by Croatian fascists reach the Vatican?

BY SUSAN HEADDEN, DANA HAWKINS, AND JASON VEST

Through the nightmare of World War II that would end with 56 members of her family perishing in concentration camps, there were two days that Eta Najfeld will never forget. The first was April 10, 1941, when Najfeld, a 25-year-old Jewish medical student, watched as exuberant crowds lined the streets of Zagreb to cheer the Ustashas—the ultranationalist fascist party that the Nazis had just installed at the helm of an "independent" Croatian state. The other was three months later, when a band of Ustasha soldiers burst into her family's shop, an elegant emporium stocked with Oriental rugs, English linens, and French silks. "They took everything," says Najfeld, now 82 and living in Belgrade.

As the Nazis and their allies sent millions of Jews and others to their deaths, they stole billions of dollars from their victims. In the postwar chaos, and the horror of their anguish, Najfeld and most other survivors cast from their mind any thought of recovering the property they had lost. Najfeld still worries that any talk about lost wealth will somehow diminish the enormity of the Holocaust.

But in recent months, new evidence has forced victims and accomplices alike to confront that nearly forgotten question: What happened to the loot? The Nazi plunder has been traced to banks in Switzerland, Sweden, Portugal, and other neutral countries that were secretly helping the Nazis stash stolen gold or launder it to buy war materiel. One state after another has opened its archives and banking records to aid the search, with one glaring exception: the Vatican.

The Vatican's continuing secrecy means the evidence is incomplete, but already declassified documents from the archives of the United States and other nations suggest that—with the aid of Croatian Catholic priests—Ustasha plunder made its way from Croatia to Rome, and possibly to the Vatican itself. Some of the stolen wealth was used to help Croatian war criminals flee to South America.

"We make no charges against the Vatican, but we keep building a very damning picture," says Elan Steinberg, executive director of the World Jewish Congress. "Because of their silence in the face of accumulated evidence, the failure to uncover the truth can only be laid at the doors of the Vatican."

Next month, a task force headed by Under Secretary of State Stuart Eizenstat that is investigating the role of the neutral countries is expected to issue a report that raises questions about the Vatican's wartime financial dealings. Among the documents reviewed: a declassified 1944 intelligence report noting a transfer of funds, via a Swiss bank, from Berlin's Reichsbank to the Vatican. Although there may be innocent explanations for such dealings—church assets being moved out of Germany, perhaps—the discovery of similar transactions by Swiss banks led to revelations of a huge Nazi operation to launder stolen gold with the help of neutral countries.

Church blessing. The Croatian connection, however, is the core of the new evidence that suggests the Vatican might have directly handled funds stolen from the victims of the Nazis and their allies. From 1941 to 1945, the Ustashas exterminated an estimated 500,000 Serbs, Jews, and Romany (Gypsies) and looted their property. They demanded ransom amounting to 1,00 kilograms of gold from all the Jews in Zagreb, only to ship them to concentration camps and kill them anyway. It is a matter of historical record that the Croatian Catholic Church was closely entangled with the Ustashas. In the early years of World War II, Catholic priests oversaw forced conversions of Orthodox Serbs under the aegis of the Ustasha state; Franciscan friars distributed Ustasha propaganda. Several high Catholic officials in Yugoslavia were later indicted for war crimes. They in eluded Father Dragutin Kamber, who ordered the killing of nearly 300 Orthodox Serbs; Bishop Ivan Saric of Sarajevo, known as the "hangman of the Serbs"; and Bishop Gregory Rozman of Slovenia, a wanted Nazi collaborator. A trial held by the Yugoslav War Crimes Commission in 1946 resulted in the conviction of a half-dozen Ustasha priests, among them former Franciscan Miroslav Filipovic-Majistorovic, a commandant of the Jasenovac concentration camp where the Ustashas tortured and slaughtered hundreds of thousands with a brutality that shocked even the Nazis.

As more secret documents become public, however, one priest emerges as the most significant player of all. The Rev. Krunoslav Draganovic, a Franciscan, had been a senior official of the Ustasha committee that handled the forced conversion of Orthodox Serbs. In 1943, the Ustasha arranged with the Croatian Catholic Church to send Father Draganovic to Rome. There he served as secretary of the Istituto San Girolamo, a seminary for Croatian monks that was in fact a center of clandestine Ustasha activity. Draganovic also became Ustasha leader Ante Pavelic's unofficial emissary to the Vatican, and de facto liaison to the Pontifical Relief Commission, a Vatican organization that aided refugees during and after the war.

The ratline. According to secret reports from the U.S. Army's Counterintelligence Corps (CIC), written just after World War II and since declassified, Draganovic and his collaborators at San Girolamo provided money, food, housing, and forged Red Cross passports for a number of Ustasha war criminals seeking to escape justice. Through an underground railroad of sympathetic priests, known as the "ratline," the Ustashas could move from Trieste, to Rome, to Genoa, and on to neutral countries—primarily Argentina— where they could live out their days unpunished and unnoticed. Along the ratline, virtually the entire Ustasha leadership went free. "All these people were escaping—and this at a time when just getting a meal in Rome was a major accomplishment," recalls William Gowen, a CIC officer in Rome after the war.

The copies of memos filed by Gowen and other members of the counterintelligence corps, now stored in U.S. Army archives at Fort Belvoir, Va., contain a wealth of detail on suspicious comings and goings at San Girolamo. The dispatches leave little doubt that the ancient walled compound at Via Tomacelli 132 was more than an ordinary monastery. "San Girolamo is honeycombed with cells of Ustasha operatives," Gowen wrote on Feb. 12, 1947. "In order to enter this monastery, one must submit to a personal search for weapons and identification.... The whole area is guarded by armed Ustasha youths in civilian clothes, and the Ustasha salute is exchanged constantly." From a source inside the compound, Gowen even managed to obtain Draganovic's secret files, which, Gowen reported on Sept. 5, 1947, "indicate clearly Draganovic's involvement in aiding and abetting the Ustasha to escape into South America."

Another Croatian priest living at San Girolamo was also active in smuggling war criminals, documents show. A recently declassified memo, believed to have been written in 1946 by an agent of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS)—the precursor of the CIA—reports that a priest called Father Golik was supplying false passports and money to members of the Ustasha. Golik, the memo says, was alleged to be "chief sponsor of all Croats resident in Rome, with special attention to the needs of former Ustasha members." The memo reports allegations that the Ustashas "are given a monthly allowance of 6,000 fire per person [the equivalent of $2,700 today], in addition to the privilege of cheap meals at the San Girolamo mess."

Croatian Catholic officials were funneling money to war criminals even after they escaped to Argentina, documents show. According to cable intercepts cited in a 1947 U.S. diplomatic report, Pavelic escaped in November 1947 to Buenos Aires, where he was said to have been met by a retinue of Catholic priests. Newly declassified documents also show that Bishop Rozman was funneling money to South America from a Swiss bank account set up "to aid refugees of the Catholic religion." U.S. military attaché Davis Harrington reported on March 9, 1948, that Rozman "is going to Bern to take care of these finances. The money is in a Swiss bank, and he plans to have most of it sent through to Italy and from there sent to the Ustashas in Argentina."

Further clues about the path of Ustasha gold are provided by Croatian National Bank records uncovered last fall by an American historian of Croatian descent. According to Jere Jareb, author of Gold and Money of the Independent State of Croatia Moved Abroad, the documents show that 288 kilograms of gold was removed from the Croatian National Bank and the state treasury on May 7,1945—the day that Germany capitulated. By Draganovic's own testimony, part of that treasure landed in his hands. The "Golden Priest," as Draganovic was known, acknowledged to the Yugoslav War Crimes Commission that he doled the money out to Ustasha soldiers and Croatian civilian refugees. (Though called to testify, Draganovic was never charged. He later returned to Yugoslavia and died there in 1983).

When in Rome. But does any of the evidence implicate the Vatican itself? The strongest indication so far is a memo that first prompted the State Department's interest. The memo, dated Oct. 21, 1946, was discovered last summer in the declassified files of the U.S. Treasury Department. Written by OSS agent Emerson Bigelow, it reports that money sent by Ustasha from Croatia to Rome after the war had been partly intercepted by the British, but that 200 million Swiss francs—the equivalent of $170 million today—were being held in the Vatican for safekeeping. According to "rumor," the memo says, the money was being used to finance Croatian war criminals in exile.

When the Bigelow memo was released last year, the Vatican swiftly dismissed it, insisting that the charges could not be true. But some researchers who have studied World War II intelligence matters note that other archival documents counter the notion that a Vatican-Ustasha link is implausible on its face. One is a British diplomatic memo from Oct. 17, 1947, cited in the 1991 book Unholy Trinity by journalist Mark Aarons and former Justice Department Nazi-hunter John Loftus. According to the memo, a San Giralomo priest named Father Mandic was a "liaison to the Vatican" who was involved in converting Ustasha gold, jewelry, and foreign exchange into Italian fire.

Other reports mention Ustashas meeting with Vatican officials or even living in the Vatican. The British Foreign Office reported in January 1947 that Pavelic himself, by that time a wanted war criminal, was living "within the Vatican City." An earlier report by Gowen, in October 1946, noted that Pavelic was in Rome and in contact with Draganovic. Documents include accounts of Ustashas being hidden at the pope's summer residence at Castel Gandolfo and being seen driving in Rome in cars with Vatican license plates. The recently declassified Golik memo reports that Ustashas ate at the papal mess and that Father Golik was "declared to be in close contact with the Vatican."

The Vatican's tolerance of the Ustasha during the war was no secret. On the recommendation of Zagreb Archbishop Alojzije Stepinac—who had blessed Pavelic at the opening of the Croatian parliament—the pope established informal diplomatic relations with the independent state of Croatia, and his envoy made regular rounds of Ustasha headquarters. In 1941 and in 1943, at a time when his excesses were known, Pavelic was granted two private audiences with Pius XII. The pope explained that he received the Ustasha leader simply as a Catholic, not as head of the Croatian state. The pontiff's decision was widely reported—and widely deplored—at the time. In July 1941, Francis D'Arcy Osborne, the British ambassador to the Vatican, wrote: "[Pius's] reception of Pavelic ... has done more to damage his reputation in this country than any other act since the war began."

Bound to silence. What all this intelligence means is at the heart of the State Department-led investigation. Vatican officials insist they are hiding nothing because they have nothing to hide. But they say they cannot allow outside researchers free access to their archives because the collection contains sensitive personnel files. As a general rule, the Vatican releases church documents only after about 75 years. "I am bound to silence," said the Rev. Marcel Chappin of the Vatican Secretariat of State, when pressed to comment. Chappin said that the Vatican has already published a voluminous account of its role in World War II, including a discussion of the controversy surrounding Pius XII, who kept silent on the Nazi atrocities because he believed provocation of the Nazis would lead to more persecution and because he considered the greater enemy to be atheistic communism. Vatican defenders note that the church saved tens of thousands of Jews during the war, and they urge that current suspicions be viewed in the context of the chaotic times: Refugees were streaming into Vatican City after the war, and it is quite possible that funds intended for these refugees were used to help war criminals without the pope's knowledge." The question is what did the Vatican's own leadership know?" says William Slaney, the State Department's historian and author of the Nazi gold reports. "We want the Vatican . . . to deal with [its] share of this dreadful event."

30-12-2009 om 23:18 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

30-12-2009 om 21:36 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

Miroslav Filipović

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Miroslav Filipović (1915 - 1946) was a Herzegovina-born Croatian nationalist and Roman Catholic priest (later known as Tomislav Filipović and Tomislav Filipović-Majstorović) who was convicted of war crimes by both a German military court and a Yugoslav civil court and hanged in Belgrade.

Early life

Filipović's date of birth was 5 June 1915, but little else about his early years has been recorded.^[1]. In 1938 he joined the Franciscan Order at Petrićevac monastery, Banja Luka, and took “Tomislav” as his religious name.^[2] During 1941 his superior at the monastery reportedly urged Filipović to distance himself from the Ustaša,^{[citation needed]} an organisation of extremist Croatian nationalists installed by the Axis Powers in April 1941 to rule in the Independent State of Croatia (ISC), a puppet state embracing Bosnia-Hercegovina as well as most of Croatia.^{[citation needed]}

Filipović was assigned to a chaplaincy in the Rama-Šćit region (in northern Herzegovina).^[3] He did not take up the assignment and in January 1942, after completing his theological exams in Sarajevo ^[4], he became a military chaplain with the Ustaša.^[5]

Ustaša Chaplain

Tomislav Filipović (later known as Tomislav Filipović-Majstorović) was assigned to II Poglavnik Bodyguard Battalion. Statements by two eyewitnesses and a senior German general alleged that on 7 February 1942, Filipović accompanied elements of his battalion in an operation aimed at wiping out Serbs in the settlement of Drakulić, on the northern outskirts of Banja Luka, and in two neighbouring villages, Motike and Šargovac. A few Serbs survived, but overwhelmingly the operation achieved its objective and more than 2,300 Serb civilians - men, women and children - were killed, usually with axe or pick-axe. He was nicknamed by his troops "the glorious one", and he ordered that little Serbian children be brought before him, so that he could laughter them with the traditional Ustaše weapons: the knife and gun. He and Father Zvonimir Brekalo would kill these children by cutting their necks.^[6]

Reports sent to Eugen Dido Kvaternik, head of the state internal security service, from his Banja Luka office and dated 9 and 11 February 1942, noted that the victims at Šargovac included 52 children killed at the village primary school. The first of these reports gives death tolls at the mine, the school and the three villages which together total 2,287. The second revises the death toll at the school from 37 to 52, bringing the toll to 2,302. ^[7] Two teachers survived the school massacre: Dobrila Martinović, who subsequently suffered a nervous breakdown, and Mara Šunjić (shown as Tunjić in some documents) who gave evidence against Filipović at his postwar trial in Belgrade. According to Šunjić's trial testimony Filipović not only participated in the atrocity but also incited fellow Ustaše to act with extreme cruelty.^[8]

By 1955 Martinović was teaching again, in the Bosnian village of Siprage southeast of Banja Luka. She described the Šargovac school massacre in conversations with a university professor, Jovo Jovanović and with her headteacher, and her account was published in 1968. She explained that she had no reason to be alarmed when Filipović arrived at the school because he was based at the nearby Prebićevac monastery and was often seen passing through the villages. On previous occasions his manner had been friendly. The teacher recalled that when Filipović and some Ustaše entered her classroom, the children looked on with curiosity but no fear. But Filipović took a child, Vasilija Glamočanin, and "slaughtered her with a knife" in front of the class. He urged the Ustaša troops who accompanied him to deal similarly with the other children and assured them that he would take the sin upon himself.^[9] Viktor Novak had attributed a similar account to Martinović in Magnum crimen, but embellished it, like some other passages in the same book, with grotesque and sometimes improbable detail: “As each child passed, an Ustaša would gouge out an eye and push it into the child's slit belly” etc. Similar atrocities occurred on 12 February 1942 at two more villages in the area, Piskavica and Ivanjska (now Potkozarje), but there is no concrete evidence that Filipović was involved in those events.^[10] Also available, as of August 2008, in English at www.serbianunity.net.

Officers of the German occupying authority were dismayed by the February massacres, fearing that they would provoke uprisings among the civilian population of the region.^[11] Filipović was court-martialed by the Germans for his involvement, possibly at the request of the Italian army which was then occupying part of the ISC territory.^[12] In his testimony to a Croatian state commission set up after World War II to investigate war crimes “by the occupation forces and their collaborators”, Filipović said he neither participated in, nor even attended, the 7 February massacres.^[13] However, General Edmund Glaise-Horstenau, the senior German officer in the region, implicated Filipović in a report where he stated that as well as being present "during the slaughtering" the priest had attended a planning meeting prior to the massacres, along with certain other Catholic priests. He reported that the Ustaša's former city chief in Banja Luka, Viktor Gutić, and the city's court president, a Dr. Stilinović, were also at the meeting.^[14] On 4 April 1942 Filipović was suspended from his chaplaincy post^[15] by the papal legate in Zagreb and jailed in Croatia.^[12]

Responsibilities at the Jasenovac camps complex

Appointment

Ustaše execute prisoners near the Jasenovac concentration camp.

Through the direct intervention of Vjekoslav "Maks" Luburić,^[16] who then headed Section III of the ISC internal security service (Ustaška Narodna Služba), which was responsible for administering the puppet state's system of prison camps ^[17], Filipović was quickly released and posted to the Jasenovac complex of labour and death camps where he was at first an inmate with benefited status, who aided the Ustase, and later appointed Ustase, commanding a small transit camp nigh Jasenovac, in early 1942, He reportedly killed an inmate there for hiding a loaf of bread.^[18] Shortly thereafter he became chief-guard, responsible for mass-executions and lieutenant of the commander Ljubo Milos and administrator Ivica Matković, and later, on 10 June 1942, administrator of the main camp in their stead, until the return of Matković, in March 1942.^[16][19] Luburić gave Filipović a new surname, "Majstorović", derived from a local word meaning "master" or "craftsman". From then on documents referred to him sometimes by that name and sometimes as Filipović-Majstorović. One event that had him noted for being overly-cruel, was his apparent victory in a bet placed by him, Marinko Polić and Jerko Maricić, both infamous NCOs in the camp. Witness Josip Riboli stated:

Majstorović, Polić and Maricić competed over which of them was a better butcher. Victims had to kneel in front of them until they were touching their foreheads to the ground, and the executioners would fire their revolvers at the backs of their heads. If death wasn't instant, one of them would grab a knife and slit the victim's throat.^[20]

Commandant of Jasenovac

After the war Filipović admitted that he had personally killed about 100 prisoners and had attended mass executions of many more. He estimated that under his command some 20-30,000 prisoners were liquidated at the main Jasenovac camp. He said prisoners would often be made to stand in prepared trenches where each was then killed with a sledgehammer blow.^[21] Filipović went on to describe his tenure in command of Stara Gradiška, a prison camp primarily for women which was designated Camp V within the Jasenovac system:

After hearing from 62 Jasenovac survivors, whom it listed usually with complete addresses, the war-crimes commission in 1946 counted Filipović among 13 Ustaše who “stood out” for their brutality and direct involvement in the killing. It reported that even the cruelty of Ljubo Miloš, notorious for slashing prisoners to death in a mock clinic, was “surpassed in sadism” by Filipović. The commission saw Filipović's statement as a “crucial” acknowledgement of his participation in atrocities, but in respect of the numbers he had given it noted: “All witnesses interviewed, who were prisoners themselves, speak with complete consistency and certainty of a far greater number, especially in regards to the number of victims killed by Majstorovic himself." The commission cited one witness, Tomo Krkac, who had described seeing Filipović “very often” shooting prisoners during so-called public executions and forcing prisoners to kill other prisoners with sledgehammers.^[22]

In one of the first published memoirs about life and death in the Jasenovac complex, a Croatian medical doctor and academic, Dr. Nikola Nikolić, who had been imprisoned in Camp III, described his first meeting with Filipović: “His voice had an almost feminine quality which was at odds with his physical stature and coarse face.” Nikolić recalled standing in the second row of a group of prisoners who had been lined up to watch as another group of prisoners were herded in front of Filipović. Filipovović called Nikolić to the front so that, as a doctor, he could witness “our surgery being performed without anaesthetic.” Filipović then shot dead two prisoners and told a colleague to “finish off the rest.”^[23]

Nikolić quotes another survivor, Josip Riboli: “Compared with Matković and Miloš, whose faces revealed the baseness of their inner natures, Filipović Majstorović seemed kind and gentle - except when the slaughtering was going on. Then he was incomparable. He was the leader of all the mass killings at Gradina. He went off to conduct the slaughtering every night and came back covered with blood.”^[23] Riboli also gave evidence to the Croatian war-crimes commission. According to the accounts of some survivors, Filipović continued to act as a chaplain while commanding the camp and sometimes wore his Franciscan robes while carrying out his crimes.^[24] As a result he came to be known among prisoners as “Fra Sotona” (”Brother Satan”). There is no evidence that he was excommunicated by the Catholic Church, but he was removed from the Franciscan order on 22 October 1942, the date on which he was transferred to Stara Gradiška.^[15] In 1981 a Banja Luka priest stated that Filipović told him, in the month after he relinquished command at Jasenovac, that he was guilty of crimes at the camp but was innocent of involvement in the massacres in and around Drakulić in February 1942.^[25] In September 1944, Filipović, along with Dinko Šakić and others, was appointed to sit on an ad hoc court-martial convened to try prisoners accused of forging links with the Partisans and plotting an escape. The Croatian War Crimes Commission in its report was at a loss to explain why such a process had been deemed necessary when Ustaše had already killed thousands of people “by heinous means, without any justification or procedure”. It reported that all 31 accused prisoners were hanged after undergoing severe torture including blindings, crushed fingers and blow-lamp burns. Filipović in his testimony said: “We (the court-martial) didn’t investigate anything, we only signed the verdicts.” A witness, Dervis Sarać, recalled how three gypsies were brought to play music before Filipović, who, disappointed by the music, shot one and sent the others to death.^[26] Another witness accuses him of having shot an inmate while eating lunch, after which deed he resumed eating.^[27]

Commandant of Stara Gradiška

As chief of camp Stara Gradiška, which predominantly housed women and children, Miroslav Filipović-Majstorović excelled in sadism. A Jewish survivor of Jasenovac, Egon Berger, has described Filipović’s sadistic killing of children,^[28] while two other witnesses, Šimo Klaić and Dragutin Škrgatić: Klaić recalls that in Christmas 1942, Miroslav ordered mass and later a muster, where he killed four inmates with a knife, while forcing a Jew of Sarajevo, Alkalaj, to sing, then ordering Alkalaj to near him, stabbing him in the chest and slashing his throat. Then he killed 56 Bosnian Jews by tying them with wire, hitting them with an axe so they all fell into a well. Then he shot 42 Bosnian villagers in the head^[29] Škrgatić confirmed that Filipović shot 40 villagers in the head after mass, adding:"In Majstorović's time, musters and executions were frequent. Friar Majstorović favored a mystical approach to the killings.... After he killed them, sat on a chair and said 'justice has been done".^[30] Ivan Palcec, a witness, added that Filipović shot nine inmates that day for an escape attempt^[31]. Witness Josip Erlih recalls Miroslav shooting at eight inmates to death.^[32]

Post-WW2

29-12-2009 om 22:15 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

De armen hebben hun geld aan de rijken gegeven

De Tijd schrijft:
"Auteur is Joseph E. Stiglitz is hoogleraar aan de Columbia University en kreeg in 2001 de Nobelprijs voor economie. Zijn jongste boek, ‘Freefall’, komt uit in januari.
Het beste wat we over 2009 kunnen zeggen, is dat het erger had gekund, dat we niet in de afgrond zijn gestort waar we eind 2008 leken voor te staan, en dat 2010 voor de meeste landen bijna zeker beterschap brengt. De wereld heeft ook een paar waardevolle lessen geleerd, weliswaar ten koste van onze welvaart. Eigenlijk hadden we daar niet zo’n hoge prijs voor hoeven te betalen, aangezien we die lessen al hadden moeten kennen.

De eerste les is dat de markten zichzelf niet corrigeren. Zonder een adequate regelgeving zijn ze geneigd tot excessen. In 2009 hebben we opnieuw vastgesteld waarom de onzichtbare hand van de Schotse econoom Adam Smith vaak onzichtbaar lijkt: hij is er niet. De bankiers jagen hun eigenbelang na (hebzucht) en dat heeft de samenleving weinig goed gedaan. Zelfs hun aandeel- en obligatiehouders hebben er weinig baat bij gehad. En de woningeigenaars die hun huis verliezen, de werknemers die hun baan kwijt zijn, de gepensioneerden die hun pensioenfondsen in rook zagen opgaan of de belastingbetalers die honderden miljarden hebben betaald om de banken te redden, al helemaal niet.

Door het dreigende vooruitzicht dat het hele systeem ineen zou storten werd het vangnet, dat bedoeld was om onfortuinlijke personen te helpen het hoofd boven water te houden, op gulle wijze ook gespannen onder commerciële banken, en vervolgens onder zakenbanken, verzekeringsmaatschappijen, autobedrijven en zelfs verstrekkers van autoleningen. Nooit eerder is zoveel geld van zoveel mensen getransfereerd naar zo weinigen.

We zijn gewend aan het idee dat de overheid geld van de rijken aan de armen geeft. In dit geval zijn het de armen en de middenklasse die hun geld aan de rijken hebben gegeven. De al onder een zware last gebukt gaande belastingbetalers moesten toezien hoe hun geld, dat de banken moest helpen weer krediet te verschaffen om de economie nieuw leven in te blazen, voor buitensporige bonussen en dividenden werd gebruikt. Dividenden zouden een deel van de winst moeten voorstellen, in dit geval was het gewoon een blijk van de vrijgevigheid van de regering.

De rechtvaardiging was dat het redden van de banken, hoe stuntelig ook, de kredietverschaffing weer op gang zou brengen. Maar dat is niet gebeurd. Het enige wat is gebeurd, is dat de gemiddelde belastingbetaler zijn geld heeft gegeven aan dezelfde instellingen die hem jarenlang hebben uitgeknepen door middel van roofleningen, woekerintresten op kredietkaarten en ondoorzichtige commissies.

De reddingen hebben overal een diepgewortelde hypocrisie blootgelegd. Wie voor budgettaire beheersing had gepleit als het om kleinschalige welvaartsprogramma’s voor de armen ging, stond nu te juichen om ’s werelds grootste welvaartsprogramma. Wie de transparantie van de vrije markt had geroemd, creëerde uiteindelijk financiële systemen die zo ondoorzichtig waren dat de banken niet meer wijs geraakten uit hun eigen balansen. En ten slotte stortte ook de overheid zich in steeds minder transparante reddingsoperaties, om haar vrijgevigheid ten aanzien van de banken te verdoezelen. Wie gepleit had voor ‘verantwoording’ en ‘verantwoordelijkheid’ vroeg de schulden van de financiële sector kwijt te schelden.

marktfalen

De tweede belangrijke les is begrijpen waarom markten vaak niet functioneren zoals bedoeld. Er zijn vele redenen voor marktfalen. In dit geval hadden de financiële instellingen die ‘too big to fail’ waren een perverse incentive: als ze succes hadden met gokken, staken ze de winst op zak. Als ze verloren, zou de belastingbetaler wel betalen.

Bovendien functioneren markten vaak niet goed als de informatie niet helemaal klopt, en laat het nu net daar schorten in de financiële sector. Externe factoren werken ver door: het faillissement van één bank zadelt andere banken op met kosten, en het falen van het financieel systeem deed belastingbetalers en werknemers overal ter wereld daarvoor opdraaien.

Stimulansen

De derde les is dat Keynesiaans beleid wel degelijk werkt. Landen, zoals Australië, die al vroeg omvangrijke en uitgekiende stimulansprogramma’s hebben uitgevoerd, zijn de crisis sneller te boven gekomen. Andere landen zijn bezweken voor de oude economische orthodoxie, daarbij geholpen door de financiële tovenaars aan wie we deze knoeiboel te danken hebben.

Wanneer een economie in recessie is, verschijnen de begrotingstekorten, omdat de belastinginkomsten sneller dalen dan de uitgaven. De oude orthodoxie hield voor dat je het begrotingstekort moest dichten - door de belastingen te verhogen of in de uitgaven te snoeien - om ‘het vertrouwen te herstellen’. Maar dat beleid heeft er bijna altijd toe geleid dat de geaggregeerde vraag daalde, de economie nog verder in het slop geraakte en het vertrouwen nog meer ondermijnd werd. Dat hebben we onlangs nog gezien toen het Internationaal Monetair Fonds (IMF) in de jaren 90 op zo’n beleid hamerde in Oost-Azië.

inflatie

De vierde les is dat een monetair beleid voeren meer omvat dan inflatiebestrijding. Te veel de nadruk leggen op inflatie betekende dat sommige centrale banken niet wisten wat er met hun financiële markten aan de hand was. De kostprijs van een milde inflatie is miniem in vergelijking met de kosten voor de economie als de centrale banken vermogensbubbels ongecontroleerd laten groeien.

innovatie

De vijfde les is dat niet alle innovatie een efficiëntere en productievere economie voortbrengt, laat staan een betere samenleving. En wanneer privé-incentives niet goed afgestemd zijn op het maatschappelijk rendement kan dat leiden tot het nemen van overdreven risico’s, tot overdreven kortzichtig gedrag en tot scheefgetrokken innovatie. Een voorbeeld: hoewel de voordelen van de vernieuwingen op het gebied van financiële financieringstechnieken van de voorbije jaren moeilijk kunnen worden aangetoond, laat staan becijferd, zijn de maatschappelijke en economische kosten die eraan verbonden zijn duidelijk en enorm.

De financiële engineering heeft geen producten opgeleverd die gewone burgers zouden helpen om het eenvoudige risico van het bezitten van een woning te beheren. Bijgevolg zijn miljoenen hun huis kwijt en zullen nog een paar miljoen hun huis waarschijnlijk verliezen. In de plaats daarvan waren de nieuwe producten bedoeld om wie niet zo hoog opgeleid is nog meer uit te buiten, en om regelgevingen en boekhoudkundige normen te omzeilen, terwijl die bedoeld waren om de efficiëntie en de stabiliteit van de markten te verhogen. Als gevolg daarvan hebben de financiële markten, die verondersteld worden risico’s te beheren en kapitaal efficiënt aan te wenden, risico’s gecreëerd en lukraak geld uitgegeven.

We zullen snel genoeg ontdekken of we deze keer meer van de crisis leren dan in het verleden. Maar als de hervormingen van de financiële sector in de Verenigde Staten en de andere geavanceerde industrielanden in 2010 niet sneller vorderen, zouden we jammer genoeg nog een tweede zittijd kunnen krijgen.

Bron: De Tijd 24/12/2009

29-12-2009 om 20:38 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever  

28-12-2009 om 21:30 geschreven door Vorser-Raadgever