Talk:Kosovo Liberation Army/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Regarding your pictures

If you can find any pictures or even a reliable statement that says that UCK themselves destroyed serbian orthodox churches then i think you should go ahead.

Furthermore; it is a well known fact that it was not UCK that destroyed the churches but angry albanian mobs who had come back from their mass exodus. --Durim Durimi (talk) 21:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Angry Albanian mobs who had come home back from their mass exodus and had explosives ready at hand? Nikola (talk) 14:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I think this is worth reading

This article put the multi-billion dollar opium-herion industry into scope in regards to Afghanistan. If you want to learn more about this aspect of Afghansitan and how it ties in with Kosovo, the KLA, and the rest of the world and the world economy read this article.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20061017&articleId=3516

Protection against nationalistic vandalism on Kosvar related links

There should be some sort of of protection against nationalistic propaganda and vandalism on Kosovo related articles. I edited the following from this article:

"CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE! CEKU IS A WAR CRIMINAL WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HAGUE!"

It was pervasive throughout the article

KLA as a terrorist organisation

According to our very own definition, Terrorism is a tactic of violence that targets civilians, with the objective of forcing an enemy to favorable terms, by creating fear, demoralization, or political discord in the attacked population. That the KLA has used terrorist tactics (atrocities agsainst civilians, house burnings, executions, torture etc) to achieve its political goals is well documented by authoritative independent human rights organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. HRW has an extensive report [1] on this.

"The US-based Human Rights Watch organisation released a report at the beginning of August, entitled "Abuses against Serbs and Roma in the new Kosovo", which documents an apparently coordinated campaign of abductions, beatings, house-burning and murders of Serbs and Roma by the KLA. In addition to the widely publicised killings in Gracko and Prizren, the report describes many other little known atrocities.

Researchers viewed the bodies of three Serbs killed on June 19 in the village of Belo Polje, near Pec. Villagers claim that 10 uniformed KLA soldiers entered the village and executed Radomir Stosic, aged 50, his uncle Steven Stosic, 60, and their friend Filip Kosic, 46. Each of the men was killed by a shot between the eyes at point-blank range. According to the Serbian Orthodox Church in Pec, 30 Serbs were killed in the municipality during June and July.

KLA soldiers in the village of Pones in the Gnjilane municipality abducted six cowherds on June 19. The men were beaten and interrogated, and two of them—Momcilo Dimic, 60, and Cedomir Denic, 50—were later found dead. KFOR officers in the town of Obilic reported that eight Serbs have been killed there since early June in what are described as "organised attacks" in which "KLA units were implicated".

In the town of Lipljan, KFOR officers reported that a male Serb was decapitated in the middle of the busy town market on July 9, between 11 am and 3 pm. One week later, four grenade attacks were carried out against Serb homes in the town in the early afternoon, killing one person. The attacks were carried out within the space of one hour and at regular intervals.

Four elderly Serb men in the village of Slivovo were reportedly abducted and killed in the third week of June. Two Roma men, Bajram Berisha, 34, and Vesel Berisha, 24, were killed by unknown assailants in Mitrovica in late June. Three Roma are believed to have been murdered in the town of Djakovica and three families burned in their homes in the village of Dubrava, also in June.

Researchers also document the abduction, interrogation and torture of numerous Serb and Roma civilians—mostly elderly men. The purpose of abductions and beatings appears to be to terrorise people into leaving Kosovo, as most are subsequently released. Many victims exhibited extensive bruising and knife cuts when interviewed by Human Rights Watch researchers. Those reported abducted by the KLA but not released are "presumed dead". The report describes the following testimony of 71 year-old S.B. as typical: "[KLA soldiers] grabbed me, brought me down to the cellar and took turns hurting me. There were several of them, all in uniform... While they were beating me, they insulted me, called me ‘Chetnik,' and told me to leave forever."

House-burnings are a commonplace occurrence. Thirty Roma homes were torched in the Brekoc neighborhood of Djakovica within the space of three hours on July 12. Uniformed KLA soldiers told the families to leave their homes a few days before. The Roma neighbourhood in Pec was almost entirely looted and burned in late June. Most Serb and Roma homes in the village of Slovinje suffered a similar fate, as did the local Orthodox Church. Other targets of arson include the Serb areas of the villages and towns of Lipljan, Magura, Dolac, Drenovac, Brestovik, Vitomira, Istok, Belo Pojle, Veric, Srbobran and Obilic. There has also been widespread burning and looting of former Serb and Roma areas of Pristina. Recent reports tally at least 200 villages and 41 Serbian churches have been destroyed since KFOR established control over the province.

Human Rights Watch observed: "The most serious incidents of violence... have been carried out by members of the KLA. Although the KLA leadership issued a statement on July 20 condemning attacks on Serbs and Roma, and KLA political leader Hashim Thaci publicly denounced the July 23 massacre of 14 Serb farmers, it remains unclear whether these beatings and killings were committed by local KLA units acting without official sanction, or whether they represent a coordinated KLA policy..."

The report concluded: "The intent behind many of the killings and abductions that have occurred in the province since early June appears to be the expulsion of Kosovo's Serb and Roma population rather than a desire for revenge alone. This explanation is borne out by more direct and systematic efforts to force Serbs and Roma to leave their homes." It cites the fact that large numbers of Serbs and Roma report being directly warned by ethnic Albanians, under threat of violence, to leave Kosovo and never return.[2]

(ai): Amnesty International today called on Hashim Thaçi, former political representative of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), to take a strong and visible stand against all killings, abductions, ill-treatment, house burnings and attempts at expulsion committed against members of ethnic minorities in Kosovo.[3]

So in conclusion, there can be little doubt that the KLA belongs in the category of terrorist organisations, it is perfectly NPOV. Note that I use "terrorist organisation purely in a descriptive way, not as a moralistic label. Maybe the controversy is based on the unfortunate propagandistic way in which "terrorist" is often used. If so, I suggest we rename the category "terrorist organisation" to something different. But the KLA definately belongs in this category.pir 10:00, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

To the above posting: Here is your great flaw. You use the definition of terrorism as the following: "According to our very own definition, Terrorism is a tactic of violence that targets civilians, with the objective of forcing an enemy to favorable terms, by creating fear, demoralization, or political discord in the attacked population". If we all agree to this, then who is not to say that Yugoslav and Serbian army was not a Terrorist Army. After all, they did all the above things in a terrifying scale. Using the same quote from teh HRW in this article:

"The vast majority of these abuses were committed by Yugoslav government forces of the Serbian special police (MUP) and the Yugoslav Army (VJ). Under the command of Yugoslav President Slobodan Miloševic, government troops have committed extrajudicial executions and other unlawful killings, systematically destroyed civilian property, and attacked humanitarian aid workers, all of which are violations of the rules of war. The Albanian insurgency, known as the Kosova Liberation Army (KLA, or UÇK in Albanian), has also violated the laws of war by such actions as the taking of civilian hostages and by summary executions. Although on a lesser scale than the government abuses, these too are violations of international standards, and should be condemned." So the bottom line is that both the KLA and Yugoslav/Serbian army have violated laws of war, but the later has done in it in a much more systematic way. If you want to use terrorist label on either one of these two groups, then Yugoslav/Serbian army is first in line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luftetari07 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Point taken. But I'm very uncomfortable with putting what is essentially a guerilla movement in with the likes of Al-Qaida. The KLA didn't bomb buildings, it didn't crash airplanes into buildings, didn't hijack cruise ships, and didn't have a great record of taking hostages.
I have somehow missed this discussion. The KLA did bomb buildings, and does have a great record of taking hostages. Nikola 02:47, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Interesting - have you got links to credible reports of these? pir 11:11, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Simply see Google:KLA destroyed and Google:KLA abducted. Nikola 06:47, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
As far as I can see, the KLA is a lot closer to Falantil (now the governing party of East Timor) than ETA, Hamas, Aum Supreme Truth or Al-Qaida. If the term terrorist organisation was commonly measured by your definition, I'd be prepared to accept this.
Alas, I think we both agree that the label, in this day and age, means otherwise. In the interests of peace, I'm not going to revert you - yet - but if we're going to follow this definition, methinks the terrorist organisations category needs a rename. Ambi 10:38, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
OK, I see your point for sure. I think the Category:Terrorist organisation is quite unfortunate, but I can't think of a different term that still has the precise meaning of terrorist (i.e. violence targetting civilians to achieve political aims) - maybe you have a good idea? I tried to achieve NPOV by adding a lot of militant organisations that use terrorist methods from a broad range of political ideologies (communist, anarchist, nationalist independence, Islamist, Zionist, pro-US, pro-Soviet, etc.). Maybe this ought to be comibined with a clear definition of the category, dealing with the difficulties. Can you think of a better solution? I'm very open to that. pir 11:53, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
For starters, it might be an idea to put your suggested definition on the category page itself.
I guess the key point here is where the borderline is between a guerilla group and a terrorist organisation. The vast majority of entries in that category would seem to me to be fairly indisputable. There's a handful, however, that seem to straddle the line, due to their lack of typically terrorist tactics. Of these, it seems to me that the KLA is the hardest to call.
I guess what I'm trying to avoid is having every seperatist group, every group that a recognised government does not like, in this category - as I believe Morocco thinks the Polisario Front a terrorist organization, and China the same with the Falun Gong. Ambi 12:27, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that it is not acceptable to take any government's POV on a particular group. I think the point here is that the KLA mounted an terror campaign against an ethnic group, through killing civilians and burning houses for example, with the aim of achieving ethnic cleansing. This is not a guerilla tactic, it is a terrorist tactic (although the KLA could at the same time also be classified as a guerilla group) which has also been used by Zionist terrorist groups like Lehi (group) or Irgun (Deir Yassin massacre). I don't think the technical means used (bomb attacks vs. burning houses, hijackings vs. massacres e.g.) matter, what counts is that it is violence targetting civilians leading to an atmosphere of terror. I'll add a description to the category soon pir 12:53, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Fair enough. I can accept that. Ambi 12:59, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Do you think this is a sensible definition of the category? pir 13:23, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
What complete rubish you people write. How come then that there is not a single Serb armed group in your list? How come the Serb army, Serb policy, Bosnian Serb Army, Arkan's Tigers, The Red Berets, Sokolovi, Kobre... are not in the list of terrorist organisation? If Kosova Liberation Army were a terrorist group how come then NATO and the United Nations signed peace agreements with them. How can one judge an army based on the actions of very few individuals. Are you suggesting that the U.S. Army and the British Army soon be added to the list of terrorist groups because some of their members abuse and terrorise innocent civilians. The leadership of the KLA always condemned acts of revenge against the Serb minority in Kosovo, and it has never been the policy of KLA to terrorise innocent civilians. But more importantly, I have a question for you: today Serbs refer to Milosevic as a brutal dictator who was ruthless against his enemies, including the Serbs. How come then that a group who fought against this dictator and his many followers be called a terrorist group? Can you name one single action of the Kosova Liberation Army outside the bounderies of Kosovo? No! The KLA has the support of the vast majority of the local population and is seen as a liberation movement or freedom fighters. Did the KLA ever attack anyone in Belgrade, or in Nis, or in Novi Sad... Did the KLA ever blow up bridges in Serbia? Or hijacked buses or trains?
How on earth you can say that you have a neutral point of view when 90 per cent of the local population, i.e. Kosovars who suffered the most in the war, see the Kosova Liberation Army as freedom fighters. Surely their opinion matters. Now I urge you to go back to the list of your terrorist organisations and add all the Serb groups that committed the massacres of Sarajevo, Srebrenica, Prekaz, Recak, Krusha e Madhe, Besiana, and many many others. --Kosovar 16:59, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)
To Kosovar: I am a Borderlander (Serb) that had to leave his home (in which now a stranger lives), the life of his only sister and many other things in Croatia, after I was exiled from my homeland... ONLY because I was of Serbian blood, and I know what the Kosovars (Serbs AND Albanians) have to pass through, for their lives are being destroyed by several foul, evil faces that hide under their "iron curtains" in Tirana, Priština and Belgrade. I must agree with Kosovar, for you people DO REALLY write rubbish, even though I must DISAGREE at several matters with him. The SerbIAN (please, don't mix the rest of us with the SerbIANs) Army is the present army of Serbia and Montenegro, formed only recently, so you probably mean on the Yugoslav People's Army, for it, during the early 1990s committed serious crimes against the Albanian population of Yugoslavia's most southern regions. THEN it called the evil cluches of TERRORISM. The Bosnian Serb Army, even though in response to the ethnic cleansing that the muslem Bosnaques implied on the Bosnian Serbs before the war, had no justification to seize 4/5 of Bosnia and besiege Sarajevo. And what is for the Red Berrets, Arkan's Tigers, etc. those are simply paramilitary organs of the Army that "cleaned the dirt" for the country (calling for terrorism, ofcourse). I must diesagree, though, with Kosovar mentioning "Serb minority", for it was more-than-a-minority before they were chased away from their homes. You might get mad at me for mentioning this, Kosovar, but I rally do have to: We can all remember the terrible March's dying of the Kosovar Serbs; the Kosovar Albanians were INDEED chased terrorised constanly through the decades; but the March's Dying was completly a terroristic act. Several Kosovar Serbs were accused to have killed several little Albanian boys. The Albanian civilian population protested, claiming that not even while the USA keep them under the proctatorate, they are still in danger. The killings started. MASSIVE killings of innocent Serbs. The Serbian government appealed the population of Kosovo to wait until the investigation was complete. Several centuries old monasteries were either damaged or COMPLETLY ruined. Havier Solana denied that this is "ethnic cleansing", but when the Belgrade authorities called him to come and see with his own lives, his look was terrifyed. A little while later, he quitted his job because of "health regulations". It turned out later that the Kosovar Serbs weren't responsible for the crime.... LONG after the March's Slaughter. It is THEN that KLA became a terroristic organisation (in fact, after that, the US claimed that they put them under the list of terrorists, although they pulled it later, when most of the ethnic cle..... "civil disorder" stopped. As for your point on KLA's only limitation to the boundries of Kosovo and Metochia, I must disagree there as well. You probably haven't heard of the Vranje disorder, though to be an act of KLA. Later, the Kosovar authorities claimed that it was only an act of "several primitive Kosovar brigands and outlaws". And, plus that, a large portion of KLA was trained in Albania and sighted in Macedonia. If not for the clever Macedonian authorities in Skopje, war could've broken out there, as well. As for your 90% Albanians of Kosovo, you should look for other info, as the number was lower before the didsorder. For instance, we all know of Janjevo, a place in Kosovo where mostly Croats lived. They all went back to Croatia as soon as the problems started.
As for the Bosnian war, my friend, ALL armies have comitted crimes: The Army of the Republic Serbian (Bosnian Serbs), The Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Muslem Bosnaques), The Army Of Herzeg-Bosnia (Bosnian Croats)=ALL Terrorists. (P. S. Sarajevo was indeed bombed by the Bosnian Serbs' Army, but then also would NATO be a terrorist organisation when it bombed Belgrade and numerios other Serbian-populated cites in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo and Metohija; the muslim authorities slaughtered all Serb citizens in Sarajevo as a response to the siege) I only pray that there would be more Kosovars like you, for if all Albanians were like you, my friend, and all Serbs were like me, entire western Balkans would be now a gigantic Federation between our two nations, that would greatly ecxede the glory of Tito's Yugoslavia.
                                      Truly yours, my Kosovar friend, a Serbian Borderlander


You miss the point. The only question which matters here is whether or not the KLA has used terrorist tactics, i.e. targetted civilians with violence to create a climate of terror to achieve its political aims. There is very solid evidence for that (see above). To classify the KLA as terrorist is not equivalent to making a moral judgement about the KLA (a lot of people seem to think terorism is legitimate, judging by its frquent use by many political groups), or about any other people/groups you mention above. I do agree with you that other groups (in particular Serb groups) need to be included in this category too. Unfortunately the articles don't seem to exist yet - maybe you'd like to create them? pir 23:05, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

KLA never targeted Serb civilians per se. Were there civilians killed by KLA? Sure. If KLA had wanted to kill civilians tough it could have killed 10's of thousands of them. Serbs were spread all over Kosovo and Serbian army did not safeguard every Serbian village. So this talk about KLA having deliberately attacked civilians is not substantiated by any reliable and independent source. On the other side there is a lot of evidence that suggest the Serbian Army, Police and paramilitaries did target civilians deliberately [see mass graves in Serbia 6 years after the conflict]. Now the question is: can the Serbian Army and police (of that time) be classified as terrorists? They clearly inflicted terror in the harts of the civilian population. Seems to me that is a good enough reason to put them in this category. No?--Ferick 01:58, 30 October 2005 (UTC) 


            Dear Serbian BorderLander and any other Serbians, it is very sad that you had
 to experience the outcomes of a war.

With absolutely no doubt, everyone would agree with
me when I say that nothing good resolves out of a bloody war. Unfortunately you had to see
it with your own eyes, but do not assume that the rest are blinded by some rubbish,
presented on air by some media that is owned by some political power and serves only
itself. Unfortunately I also had the chance to personally encounter this conflict,
(not to the same degree as you might have). Maybe it was because of the neutral perspective that
I observed things happening, since I was residing in Albania at the time. But if anyone wants
to talk about “ethnical cleanse”, I must have to mention those thousands Kosovar that came
to my country, Albania, because they were thrown out of their homes and lands, and their
houses were burned down till the last ash. Anyone wants to talk about massacre? Well, allow
me to introduce the latest technique (invented and used only by Serbs), in which involves
the caring of a pregnant women. In other words Serbian troops raped them, slit their
stomach and the inside, which as you may assume by now was nothing but innocent life,
was thrown out and fed to dogs. And when these troops were retuned home, they were called
heroes. On the other hand, KLA which was established after such massacre occurred, was
faced with the title “terrorist group”, why? My only guess is because desperately they
were trying to protect their wives and daughters from being raped and killed, their houses
from being burned down, and their lives from being thrown away. If anyone finds such deeds
to be sinful then go ahead and call them “terrorist”. But remember that there is always two
sides of a story, not to mention in a war, in which there is only two sides. But this does not
allow anybody to be historically and politically incorrect. Using the term “terrorist”
includes the most brutal and diabolic interventions done to innocent civilians by
individuals for a cause, an idea or belief, which in the case of Serbs, was formulated
completely wrong, and based on the above example of the merciless interventions of Serbian
troops, they are the ones who should be affiliated with title “terrorist”.


The KLA is a terorist group.Lord feanor 01:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The KLA WAS a terrorist group. Read http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA457903&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf (Serb police action is termed "Anti-Terrorist" by NATO sources. Various times the KLA is refereed to as terrorist and insurgent. Albanian terrorist networks are said to operate on a criminal clan culture, KLA is accused of killing and driving out competing Albanian civilian NGOs such as the LDK etc) , http://www.core-hamburg.de/documents/CORE_Working_Paper_14.pdf (Terrorist attacks existed previous to 2004, which was the first year without them. Albanian Judges were lenient against Albanians who committed crimes against civilians. KLA is accused of committing murder and ethnic cleansing against the Serb civilian victims.) So yes, the KLA organization can clearly be labeled as terrorist. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 01:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Terms

You said that the term was used by US. OK, then we can you the term Serb aggression also used by US. --Emir Arven 13:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

No. At the time, US started war against Serbia. This is why every their statement can be suspected, as a part of wartime propaganda. However, if even the US, which started the war, and sided with KLA in it, used the term terrorist to describe it, we can trust that, at it doesn't follow their propaganda efforts. Nikola 05:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Crap. Silly logic. And not true. --Emir Arven 16:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the same logic used when discrediting Serbian sources... 99.236.221.124 (talk) 02:00, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Who says the KLA is extremist?

I've just read the first paragraph, and ther i found the word “extremist” pinned to the KLA. Is there any reliable Western, non-Russian, non-Greek, non-Cypriot and non-Serb source to assure this? Because as far as I know, to defend the Kosovar people and be in favor of Kosovo independence are not “extremist” positions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.42.20.236 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Isn't terrorism considered extremism? Rugova was not an extremist, but the KLA terrorists were. (LAz17 15:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)).

So you consider the KLA a terrorist group for defending Albanian civilians in Kosovo from ethnic cleansing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vepton (talk • contribs) 02:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

No he considers KLA terrorist for killing Albanian, Serb, Gypsy, Jewish and other civilian groups. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 01:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality

To be fair I only scim-read this article, but does not seem to represent a neutral point-of-view. Seems very pro-Serb. The KLA may well have been involved in terrorist activity, but to some Albanians out there they represented freedom fighters, etc. and I think this needs to be more clearly shown in the article rather than what seems to be demonization of the group and the Albanian take on the situation.

13:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)~

An "Albanian take" would be POV 99.236.221.124 (talk) 02:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Aftermath

I've been bold and hidden the following paragraph from the aftermath section:

A group of dissidents of KLA have formed a small new group that is opposing the UNMIK in Kosovo. In 2007 it placed a bomb below a UN truck. It is closely associated with the Albanian National Army, viewed as terrorists by the government of the Republic of Macedonia and some western countries. It is apparent that forces with KLA origin have been behind the systematic destruction of Serbian Orthodox churches in Kosovo and harassment of individuals of various ethnicities opposed to them in the territory. [4]

I think this a series of extraordinary claims and needs much better sourcing than kosovo.net, which I would argue should not count as a reliable source at all. I'd be happy to take this to the reliable sources noticeboard if anyone disagrees. // Chris (complaints)•(contribs) 06:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I second that, these claims must have better sources than Kosovo.net. --DavidD4scnrt (talk) 04:23, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

yeah. Kosovo.net really shouldn't be considered a reliable source. Ossicle (talk) 04:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed the word "terrorist" because it's neutrality is disputed. One man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Perhaps it would be more fair if you would say "Serbian government considered KLA a terroist organization". But Albanian people considered KLA a freedom fighting movement fighting against Serbian sponsored state terrorism.Fieraku (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

That's been discussed below. --Local hero talk 20:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I read the discussion but that doesn't solve anything. That the article is ultimately biased.Fieraku (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


Perhaps, we should it an insurgency. link:http://books.google.ca/books?id=SlHqkxGk4Q8C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_navlinks_s#v=onepage&q=&f=falseFieraku (talk) 04:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Terrorist group claim

Would any interested editors wish to discuss this matter rather than continue edit warring? raseaCtalk to me 23:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I think I'd like to comment on this. I think it's more than appropriate for the KLA to be described as a terrorist group as there are very reliable references pointing to the fact that the Yugoslav authority, as well as the US State Department and French, UK governments considered the KLA as such before those same Western governments decided to call them freedom fighters. Making the switch from "terrorists" to "freedom fighters" and vice versa is nothing new, especially in US foreign policy, for example, in Afghanistan, or even Iraq (the Taliban were freedom fighters while fighting the Soviets, but then became terrorists, as well as Saddam Hussein being a friend of the US while he was fighting Iran, but then became the enemy).
Of course, if you look at the KLA self-declared goals, they wanted to form a Greater Albania, they made no secret of it. Let's say we assume that their goal was to "liberate" the Albanian people, they still used terrorist means to do so - by attacking Serbian civilians and security forces. The KLA officials themselves admitted that their goal was to provoke the Yugoslav Army. When the full-blown conflict finally did erupt, the Yugoslav Army was much too harsh on the Albanian population and committed many war crimes against them. However, that doesn't annul the KLA's actions.
One can argue on whether the KLA were "liberators" or "occupators", but it's clear that they used terrorist methods to achieve their goals and, regardless of whether anyone is sympathetic to those goals or not, that makes them a terrorist movement. --Cinéma C 02:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The standard solution we have for this kind of issue is that we avoid identification as "terrorist" as an outright editorial claim (heck, not even Al-Qaeda is described as "terrorist" in this way in its lead sentence). A frequently chosen neutral descriptor for the lead would be "militant group", followed by a description of "... has been classified as a terrorist organisation by X, Y, Z...". See WP:TERRORIST for guideline. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree I propose this sentence as the lead sentence: "The Kosovo Liberation Army or KLA (Albanian: Ushtria Çlirimtare e Kosovës or UÇK) was a Kosovar Albanian guerrilla group which sought the separation of Kosovo from Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the 1990s.".
Then I propose to concentrate on the section "Status as terrorist group" and deal with the terrorism saga there. What do other editors think?
Thank you. kedadial 11:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Well then you would have to find sources claiming that KLA attacked only the JNA military, since the definition of "guerrilla" requires it. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 02:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
The result of the discussion seems to be a "positive" on the terrorist accusation. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 02:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
It looks good to me. --Enric Naval (talk) 12:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe to describe it as paramilitary formation? --Mladifilozof (talk) 17:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Here are some options to consider: Paramilitary, Insurgency, Belligerent, Guerrilla warfare. Let's find the most appropriate one. I still think that Guerrilla warfare fits the profile of KLA but anyways let's find a consensus. Thank you. kedadial 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Paramilitary, Belligerent and Guerrilla are not usable for various reasons. Insurgency is fine (since it was technically a rebellion against the Yugoslav government) for the intro, but the current citations will have to get transferred in "Terrorism" section. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  • "Paramilitary, Belligerent and Guerrilla are not usable for various reasons." -Can you please say why Paramilitary, Belligerent and Guerrilla are not usable.
  • "...but the current citations will have to get transferred in "Terrorism" section." -Yes sure, we'll get to that later. For now, let's fix and trim (for quality standards) the intro.
Thank you. kedadial 23:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
It doesn't fit the definitions. Belligerent means a recognized country at war, paramilitary is a group of civilians assisting an actual military, guerrilla is a military or paramilitary unit using guerrilla tactics in occupied territory (Jugoslavia did not have full control of the AOI)(as previous definition of paramilitary and military shows, KLA was neither). So the only definition that really fits is "Insurgent": a non-military rebel force not recognized as belligerent and acting against a central government, a rebel against a government. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 03:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I've got your point and I agree with your proposition. Let's see what do the other editors think about it. Thank you. kedadial 11:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
After the discussion that we had, I'm proposing this sentence as the lead sentence of the article: "The Kosovo Liberation Army or KLA (Albanian: Ushtria Çlirimtare e Kosovës or UÇK) was a Kosovar Albanian insurgent formation which sought the separation of Kosovo from Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the 1990s.".
Do we agree on this?
Thank you. kedadial 18:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually, we don't yet. Instead of terrorist, secessionist and irredentist, guerrilla organization, we place just insurgent? That cannot be NPOV. --Tadija (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  • "Actually, we don't yet." -I don't know if you already know it but let me remind you: Tadija is not equal to all editors engaged in the discussion (something that you were not part of btw), so speak for yourself.
  • "Instead of terrorist, secessionist and irredentist, guerrilla organization, we place just insurgent? That cannot be NPOV." -This is not a trade market, we're just following guidelines and trying to find the most appropriate words. POV pushing would be if I would insist on words like "freedom fighters" but I'm insisting on something that is actually NPOV.
Thank you. kedadial 19:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
  • "Tadija is not equal to all editors engaged in the discussion" - Please withdraw your statement or write it in a way that makes more sense. Every Wikipedia editor is equal to all other editors, and of course, his opinions do not equal the opinions of all others, but you should respect it just as much as you would respect anyone else's. We all speak for ourself, no need to be rude towards Tadija.
  • "I'm insisting on something that is actually NPOV" - I actually agree with you that calling the KLA an insurgent formation is NPOV. I'd like to hear more reasons as to why you don't think calling the KLA terrorist isn't NPOV. Did they use terrorist measures to achieve their goals? I would say they did. However, since that's not all they did, I would suggest adding "through terrorist attacks on Serbian security forces, civilians and Albanians allied with the Belgrade government". What do you think about that? --Cinéma C 06:28, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • "Please withdraw your statement or write it in a way that makes more sense." -Oops, my bad. What I was trying to say was merely "speak for yourself as you do not represent the opinion of the other editors" and in no way as "you as an editor are not equal to other editors". Sorry about that.
  • "I'd like to hear more reasons as to why you don't think calling the KLA terrorist isn't NPOV." -That would be the same as I'd fight for calling KLA "freedom fighters", because as there are sources that say that KLA was a terrorist organization there are also sources that say that KLA was fighting for freedom. These are the sides of the fence so we have to find the NPOV words for it.
This article is very one sided, most of it is written about the dark side of the KLA (Terrorism is mentioned three times: 1. The lead sentence, 2. Intro of the article in the fourth paragraph, 3. In the "Status as terrorist group" section; Reported abuses; Drug traffic) and very little of what it really was about (the Kosovo War). I am not fighting to remove things regarding terrorism but I'm just trying to put it on it's own section and deal with it there. As Fut.Perf. noted, KLA is being presented as more terrorist as the notorious Al-Qaeda, which the whole article deals with it's history, ideology, structure, leadership, attacks while the status as a "terrorist organization" is ONLY on it's own section.
Thank you. kedadial 13:23, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
  • most of it is written about the dark side of the KLA... what? Is there a silver lining to this mustard gas cloud that hasn't been mentioned? Have they built any schools for Serbian children? Sold their weapons and used the money to support starving farmers? Please, if the majority of KLA actions are something samaritan, don't hesitate to mention them. Thank you. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 22:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Instead of trying to create a flame war I need your opinion for what I proposed earlier. If you and other editors who were engaged in this discussion do not want to participate, I'll request a WP:RFC and will have some neutral input but I'll wait until tomorrow for that. Thank you. kedadial 22:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Who said we did not want to participate? And who are you to impose a deadline? Comments are requested when people can't agree on something, not when one side doesn't want to participate, so please don't present the situation as such. I have already said that I agree on calling the KLA an insurgent group, but you haven't commented on my proposed additions to that sentence. Yet, I don't go around accusing you or anyone else that they're "not participating". Please stop creating unnecessary tension. Thanks, --Cinéma C 05:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I really do want to solve the issue with you guys which I believe we can if there is goodwill. Regarding your additions to the sentence that I propose, I don't support it in it's current form, as I said earlier "anything that has to do with terrorism should go to it's own section". Thank you. kedadial 12:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any good arguments for such a position. I can agree to your proposal if you agree to mine, as I believe it's absolutely essential to describe the means they used to achieve their goals in the very beginning. This is the essence of the KLA - something even the U.S. State Department acknowledged early on and I don't see why you'd like to present the KLA as less extremist in the opening sentence. --Cinéma C 00:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I don't agree with your proposition. Looks like we'll need some neutral input. Thank you. kedadial 01:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
I too am sorry you don't see things from a neutral perspective, so I guess you may feel free to go ahead and request comment, not on describing the KLA as a terrorist organization, as we agree on the 'insurgent' description (under condition), but the part where I claim their means of achieving their separatist ambitions should be mentioned in the opening sentence. If you don't mind, please do this, as I'm sure you have more experience with such matters, I'll provide my input where needed :) Best, --Cinéma C 02:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What you proposed, is not NPOV because it incorporates "terrorism" and leaves "freedom fighting" out of the game. This would be NPOV: "... was a Kosovar Albanian insurgent formation which fought for freedom using terrorist measures", but these things should stay out of the game. kedadial 09:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, they didn't fight for freedom though. They fought for control of an area, not the freedom of people living in Kosovo.99.236.221.124 (talk) 05:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
No,they didn't fight for the freedom of the serbian people(10% of people in kosovo).Because they didn't need freedom.The albanians need it.And they have it now,thanks to KLA.Ujkaj4president (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Depends on if you consider freedom a self appointed government supported by a foreign occupational force. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 20:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

innocent muslims

http://4international.wordpress.com/2008/04/05/usnato-owned-hague-icty-kangaroo-court-frees-kla-mass-murderer-ramush-haradinaj/ What about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.12.91.242 (talk) 14:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You are not allowed to delete other peoples conversations, kedadi. That is regarded as vandalism. --Tadija (talk) 15:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually I'm allowed under some circumstances, such as this one (see WP:TALKO). It is called vandalism and is regarded as spam (adding web links that are controversial and do not help this article at all). Why do you think that it is necessary in here? Thank you. kedadial 17:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Because this link does not fall under WP:TALKO. This is KLA related link. --Tadija (talk) 17:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
See Removing harmful posts at WP:TALKO.
It's a blogspam, which accuses the West, KLA, Ramush Haradinaj, etc. And you still didn't answer my question, what good is it for this article? Should we cite anything from it and include in the article?
Thank you. kedadial 17:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. 99.236.221.124 (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

links to Al-Qaeda / Osama Bin Laden

It looks like Osama sent weapons to Kosovo and Bosnia, and trained people in camps in Afghanistan and Albania, and Osama himself might have gone to Kosovo in 1998, so there were material ties. However, there were no ideological ties, the ideologies were completely different, had completely different final goals, and KLA followers didn't join Al-Qaeda. --Enric Naval (talk) 07:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

What's the rationale behind the reversion of my two deletions?

Let me explain again. I deleted the first quotation because it did not correspond to the actual content of the two pages of the book it was linked to. The paragraph of the article was nowhere to be found in the book!
How can you consider a quote something which isn't? And Enric Naval's explanation is completely hypothetical: "and Osama himself might have gone to Kosovo in 1998" - "might"?! What kind of information reliability is this?)


Regarding the second one, it is just a biased opinion piece with no official references, and it does not quote any sources or reports from the Department of State.
And the website GlobalResearch.ca is a joke. Here are some of their titles:
- "Media Fabrications: The "Srebrenica Massacre” is a Western Myth";
- "The Milosevic Trial: Corruption of International Justice";
- "The United Nations Contributed to the Establishment of a Mafia-State in Kosovo";
- "11 Years Later: NATO Powers Prepare Final Solution In Kosovo";
- "Kosovo: Hotbed of international terrorism, gangster crime, arms trade, and trafficking";
- "The Criminalization of the State: "Independent Kosovo", a Territory under US-NATO Military Rule";
Just a clear-cut propaganda which wipes away the credibility and the quality of this Wikipedia article. --User:Gjakova —Preceding undated comment added 01:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC).

Re: first paragraph. That quote is actually in the book, but the link went to page 176 instead of page 178.
Re: Osama Bin Laden. The book textually says that he might have gone, have you considered that there might be string indications that he has gone, but that the authors can't assert that "he went to Kosovo" because there is no solid proof that he actually did? --Enric Naval (talk) 07:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


When talking about the most wanted person on Earth, the No.1 of the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives, wanted for "Murder of U.S. nationals outside the United States; conspiracy to murder U.S. nationals outside the United States; attack on a federal facility resulting in death," it makes a fundamentally essential difference between providing facts that "He was there" and asserting that "He might have gone". Clearly there is no sufficient information provided or cited here in order to sustain this claim.
In it's current formulation, it is just a biased attempt to create a hypothetical link between Osama Bin Laden and KLA. And you know it.
Is there a neutral editor responsible for this article somewhere?
P.S.
I still didn't get an answer about the issue of the opinion piece on GlobalResearch.ca. Why was the deletion of this propaganda piece reverted?

--Gjakova (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Non-Albanians who joined KLA

Here’s an example: an Australian doctor of Yugoslav origin, Craig Jurisevic, in the BBC World Service.--189.62.202.58 (talk) 18:37, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

About the article

I find it extremely biased and non-suitable for Wikipeadia standarts. It seems like it was written by the hands of an extreme serbian nationalist. Please leave Wikipeadia out of the so called idiotic "internet-wars" of people from the Balkans in general. Wikipeadia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a fight club.

If you don't like this article check other articles related to Kosovo and you will find they more less the same.Unfortunately almost all of them in current state are close to the truth and some people such as you might not find them pleasant to read as real facts are different then ones presented by media. How can you know that this article is biased or written by so called "serbian nationalist" if you weren't involved in Kosovo War? Good day to you. ="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.132.190.240 (talk) 02:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

State Department's Terrorism List

The sources in this article asserting that the KLA was de-listed as a terrorist organization by the State Department in February 1998 are not based on physical State Department documents. If one goes to the State Dept. web site at http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/ one will see that the KLA was never listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Whether or not it functioned as a terrorist organization is another matter of debate. Klesteve (talk) 07:33, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

In fact, Timothy W. Crawford in "Pivotal Deterrence and the Kosovo War: Why the Holbrooke Agreement Failed" in Political Science Quarterly (pp. 499-523) made the point that not adding the KLA to the 1997 terrorism list was a missed opportunity to use leverage on the Kosovars during the 98-99 negotiation process. Therefore, it is a factual error to assert that the KLA was ever on the State Deptartment's list of Foreign Terrorist Organization Designations let alone de-listed from it. ="autosigned">— Preceding unsigned comment added by Klesteve (talk • contribs) 07:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I tried to find more sources and rewrite that section. Tell me what you think. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:59, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Grey Wolves Connection

Apparently there is a connection between the Grey Wolves organization and the KLA. Does anyone know more about this?

Twillisjr (talk) 14:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Strong connections seem unlikely. Do you have any sources? bobrayner (talk) 15:36, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Bottom line KLA is a terrorist organiation, this wiki is bullshit, and one sided propaganda just like during the war, educated people thank god know better then to listen to this made up bullshit... you speak of albanians being kicked out of serbia what about of hundred thousands of serbs butcherd for organs and sent to mass graves fuck you all who support albanians they were helping the nazzies in ww2 fuck uck fuck kla fuck u albanian.. grey wolvs lol albanians steal all fucking peoples ideas etc they also think they are illirian hahahahhaghahahahhahahahhahahhaha

Nasserism Ideology

Is there any connection between their points of view and Nasserism?

Twillisjr (talk) 14:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Why would there be a connection between the KLA and cold-war Arab Nationalism? That sounds a little odd. bobrayner (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage.) Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.globalresearch.ca/from-afghanistan-to-yugoslavia-transplanting-cia-engineered-terrorism/381. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Psychonaut (talk) 07:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Panda Bar Massacre

It is not at all mentioned in this article that the Yugoslav government at the time ordered an attack which killed 6 serbian teenagers in an effort to make the KLA appear terrorist. In fact it is not at all mentioned that that were such attempts. Please see to it that facts are shown — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.76.195 (talk) 15:58, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Radical Terrorist?

This is stupid. The KLA just fought against Serbia because the albanians were under pressure. The Allies who fought against Adolf Hitler, they also werent terrorists. The KlA just wanted to protect the albanians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.130.161.115 (talk) 13:04, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


Yes, they fought not for Islam, just for opportunity to make an independent drug market in Europe. 91.196.99.176 (talk) 17:37, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


KLA is a terrorist organization. They had no reason to protect Albanians from anything, because Albanians were not jeopardized. The sole numbers of Albanian immigrants on Kosovo from 1945-1990 proves that. If it were different they wouldn't have come there is such a large numbers. KLA are irredentists which use guns,bombs, fear and terror to obtain their goal. Mike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.82.152 (talk) 17:09, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


Albanians were not jeopardized?So the expelling of Albanians from workplaces and locking of schools leaving Albanians to educate secretly at homes and serbs enabling a almost military regime in the streets.I would have liked you to live in Kosovo at that time to see how albanians were treated and not have sources and references from Serbian or Serbian-supporting websites.Yes,the KLA was listed as a terrorist organization for a period but they were not radical terrorists


Amendment which states that the KLA terrorist An organization has changed .This amendment is supported Americanсајтом,http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/terrorist-groups-political-legitimacy/p10159.Objectiviti is an essential pillar vikipedije.Text who glorifying Albanians are not objective and is not allowed to hear the Serbian side. Neutral point of view.....--Dima73 (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You duplicated the same sentence and POV pushed so it was removed. Also stop using google translate. IJA (talk) 23:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Serbia

− Amendment which states that the KLA terrorist An organization has changed .This amendment is supported Americanсајтом,http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/terrorist-groups-political-legitimacy/p10159.Objectiviti is an essential pillar vikipedije.Text who glorifying Albanians are not objective and is not allowed to hear the Serbian side. Neutral point of view.....--Dima73 (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

You duplicated the same sentence and POV pushed so it was removed. IJA (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Clans in Albania and the KLA

  • Motivated by fear of inter-fis blood feuds over the limited Balkan criminal turf, the 15 fis reportedly made a deal to accept a common, in order to incite violence in Kosovo with the dual objectives of making money in the war... Lyubov Grigorova Mincheva; Ted Robert Gurr (3 January 2013). Crime-Terror Alliances and the State: Ethnonationalist and Islamist Challenges to Regional Security. Routledge. pp. 33–. ISBN 978-1-135-13210-1.--Zoupan 01:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

To Remove biased and not reliable sources

Dusti there are to many things that are not well sources most of the edits are based on allegd accusations that were never confirmed and we dont need sources like B92 who is a biased source who is a pro-serbian source.Lindi29 (talk) 19:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

What is wrong with B92? Can you please back up your claim that B92 is biased source. FkpCascais (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

The Kla Tribunal is a false information by B92 and has nothing to do with KLA Page, there will be only a Special Court that will be found and approved for crimes that happend in kosovo on allegd charges of senator Dick Marty.here.Lindi29 (talk) 17:10, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

It seems like it is relevant to the KLA. I've found a couple other articles on the subject: [5] [6]. We have no reason to remove it from the article. --Local hero talk 03:37, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
local hero Even this source that you provided says Speacial Court there is planty reason and more neutral and relibale source like HWR.here if you keep ignoring reliable and neutral sources and not following rules and making edit without knowledge and sources i will report you for vandalism.Lindi29 (talk) 15:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Please stay logged into your account when editing. Why do you keep on removing the entire section? All of the sources state that some sort of court will be created and the Kosovo Liberation Army is related to it. It seems you just don't personally like having the section in the article. --Local hero talk 15:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Don't know if this right talk section but referring to a source which self refers to a dead link should not be counted as a valid source. You guys should use live and relevant sources. We can't have it like "He said, she said, they said, now I'm quoting" level here. I'm talking about the section about child soldiers. The content of that section was wrongly quoted from a page which uses a dead link. Either we should be able to follow sources to its origin or sections are going to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.219.217.77 (talk) 09:29, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kosovo Liberation Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kosovo_Liberation_Army/Archive_2&oldid=1148049902"