I think that these Serb so/called leaders can do nothing but betray the historical struggle of the Serbs against Imperialism and against the Islamic Jihad
The more I look into them the more I come to this conclusion
Julia Gorin lives in a world of her own. Single issue politics to me are absolute nonsence, and that is a generous description. You cannot fight on a principled basis in today’s world and not cover the vital issues like the ICC attacks on the Gadhafi family, the NATO war on Gadhafi, the bombs dropped by Cameron’s Tornadoes etc etc.
Looking at the Serbianna blog I had to search very hard to find anything on this, never mind a defence of Gadhafi, and the most I got was from a blog by a Lee Jay Walker of April 17 carried by Serbianna
Talk about confusion! This guy is all over the place! Some things I agree with for the simple reason he says so many things and faces so many directions at once, but this sums up the confusion. Walker writes:
It is difficult to see a democratic savior amongst the opposition to Gaddafi in Libya. This in itself does not mean that Gaddafi must be left alone to kill and attack innocent citizens but once you take sides then the situation becomes even more chaotic.
But Walker you have taken sides just there. do you not understand yourself?
You are saying that Gadhafi is killing innocent civilians, which is precisely the lies of Cameron and Obama, of NATO and of ICC, and what’s all this guff about “democratic” anyways!
When I attacked Gorin before the Serbs bloggers closed ranks and attacked me.
But so bloody what!
There is only the one correct policy to have in relation to Muammar Gadhafi against the ICC and against NATO, not to mention against the Brit Imperialists, the French Imperialists, the lie machine which was and is also used fully against the Jews and Serbs
IT IS TO GIVE OUR UNCONDITIONAL DEFENCE TO GADHAFI AGAINST THESE BRUTAL IMPERIALIST ENEMIES
Understanding of course that this does not imply political agreement (we are Trotskyists) with the politics or programme of Gadhafi. That goes without saying if you have an inch of common sense.
That is what Gorin is doing. She is even now ignoring the ICC hounding of Gadhafi. It is both amazing and absurd.
I could not imagine Milosevic or Karadzic taking the position of Gorin!
These Serb ideologues are centrists and possibly in the case of Gorin anyway with her support for US Imperialism, even imperialists, so how could they fight to defend the valiant Serbs? No way Josey!
I quote the intro and points 1 and 5 of Trotsky from many years ago (how things have not changed!) in conflict with the British labourist traitors over the issue of defence of Abyssinia against the Nazis
Only a hardened reactionary would not see the connection of that to Gorin saying that the planned murder of Gadhafi by Imperialism is not of interest (to her!!!)
It is with great astonishment that I read the report of the conference of the Independent Labour Party in the [London] New Leader of April 17, 1936. I really never entertained any illusions about the pacifist parliamentarians who run the ILP. But their political position and their whole conduct at the conference exceeds even those bounds that can usually be expected of them. I am sure that you and your friends have drawn approximately the same conclusions as we have here. Nevertheless I cannot refrain from making several observations.
1. Maxton  and the others opine that an Italo-Ethiopian war is conflict between two rival dictators. To these politicians it appears that this fact relieves the proletariat of the duty of making a choice between two dictators. They thus define the character of the war by the political form of the state, in the course of which they themselves regard this political form in a quite superficial and purely descriptive manner, without taking into consideration the social foundations of both “dictatorships”. A dictator can also play a very progressive role in history. For example: Oliver Cromwell, Robespierre, etc. On the other hand, right in the midst of the English democracy Lloyd George  exercised a highly reactionary dictatorship during the war. Should a dictator place himself at the head of the next uprising of the Indian people in order to smash the British yoke – would Maxton then refuse this dictator his support? Yes or no? If no, why does he refuse his support to the Ethiopian “dictator” who is attempting to ward off the Italian yoke?
and point 5
which deals importantly with Fenner Brockway, because that centrtist appeared to agree with Trotsky that Abyssinia should be defended against the Nazis, but then went on to see it as an incidental issue. Just as these present Serb traitors are doing…you see they are essentially all centrists!
5. Fenner Brockway’s  position on this question is a highly instructive example of the political and moral insufficiency of centrism. Fenner Brockway was lucky enough to adopt a correct point of view in an important question, a view that coincides with ours. The difference lies in this, however, that we Marxists really mean the thing seriously. To Fenner Brockway, on the contrary, it is a matter of something “incidental”. He believes it is better for the British workers to have Maxton as chairman with a false point of view than to have a correct point of view without Maxton. That is the fate of centrism – to consider the incidental serious and the serious thing incidental. That’s why centrism should never be taken seriously.
We Marxists really mean the thing seriously.
yes, that is it! Trotsky has put his finger on the very issue of today.
You see when we came out and defended the Serbs against Imperialism, when we insisted that the Srebrenica “massacre” was a piece of fakery, just as the slander of the Jews and Israel was a piece of fakery in the case of the Muhammed el Dura France 2 blood libel, we were dammed serious about our hatred for these lies of Imperialism.
Thus we now defend Gadhafi against these same lies.
That is the difference between us and them.
But will our enemies understand?