Serbian Mafioso Arrested on Drug Charges: Kristijan Golubović

Serbian Mafioso Arrested on Drug Charges

Belgrade | 18 January 2010 | Bojana Barlovac

 

Kristijan Golubovic (archive)

Kristijan Golubovic (archive)

The Serbian Interior Ministry confirmed that it has arrested a famed mafia man from the 1990s, Aleksandar “Kristijan” Golubovic, on suspicion that he had organised a drug trafficking group. In a joint action, Belgrade’s police and Serbian security agency, BIA, on Saturday arrested six members of the criminal group, including Golubovic, accused of illegally producing and selling drugs. Three of them were arrested while exchanging drugs in front of a Belgrade Orthodox church.
Some 100 grams of heroin was found during the action, along with 100 grams of paracetamol, a measuring scale, several mobile phones, and a gun.Golubovic was one of the main mafia men in Serbia during the 1990s, portrayed in a popular 1996 documentary on the Serbian underworld  entitled „See You in a Obituary“. Today, he is one of only few individuals, out of dozens featured in the movie, who is still alive. In 2002, Golubovic escaped from a Greek prison Malandrino where he was serving a 14-and-a-half-year sentence for stealing two Mercedes-Benz cars and an armed robbery.The arrested are believed to had been distributing drugs from the town of Novi Pazar to Belgrade. A package of heroin and paracetamol would be sent from Novi Pazar to the home of Milanka Golubovic, Kristijan’s mother, in Belgrade. She would then break the drugs down into smaller packages and Kristijan would allegedly give the drugs to someone to sell.During the arrest, police also found weapons in illegal possession at Golubovic’s place.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Kristijan Golubović
Born 30 November 1969
München, West Germany
Status Married
Occupation Criminal

Aleksandar „Kristijan“ Golubović (Serbian Cyrillic: Александар-Кристијан Голубовић) (born 30 November 1969 in Munich, Germany) is a Serbian mafioso.

After spending 4.5 years in prison in Požarevac, Serbia, he was released on January 9, 2009.[1] As of January 2010, he is in police custody again after getting arrested on a charge that he was involved in narcotics trade.[2]

aus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristijan_Golubovi%C4%87

Kristijan Golubovic 2/2
10 Min. – 16. Nov. 2008
www.myvideo.de

Kristijan Golubovic
3 Min. und 24 Sek. – 30. Sept. 2007
www.youtube.com

andere videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtGKREv9ar8

 

SETimes

Published on SETimes (http://www.setimes.com)

http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2010/01/19/feature-03

Serbia takes millions from the mafia

19/01/2010

Serbian authorities seize valuable property from criminals with a new law passed last year that allows them to confiscate ill-gotten goods.

By Igor Jovanovic for Southeast European Times in Belgrade – 19/01/10

 

photoInterior Minister Ivica Dacic declares the battle against organised crime this year to be a top priority for Serbian police [File]

Police have taken property valued in the tens of millions from organised crime figures with plans to sell the goods and use the money to fund social programmes, such as new kindergartens, schools and primary health care facilities.

Serbian Justice Minister Snezana Malovic said on Sunday (January 17th) that 21 financial investigations against 208 organised crime suspects have been launched since the law allowing the measures went into effect in March.

It defines property eligible for confiscation as that whose legitimate origin cannot be proven, putting the legal burden squarely on the suspects rather than the prosecutors. During the process, defendants cannot sell or give away their property.

Driving home the point, Malovic spoke in front of about 30 luxury cars — Porsches, Audis and BMWs — seized by the authorities.

„Those vehicles have been confiscated from individuals who have not spent a single day working and have never done any kind of legal business,“ said organised crime prosecutor Miljko Radisavljevic, noting that most property has been confiscated from drug traffickers.

Especially damaging to Serbia and its economy, Radisavljevic said, is that crime money was being invested in private companies and the housing industry.

Confiscated property includes the former headquarters of the Zemun gang, whose members were convicted of assassinating Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic in 2003. Part of a residence owned by Milorad Ulemek, the architect of Djindjic’s murder, was temporarily seized and may be confiscated permanently in court.

Noting that 2010 will be a big year in Serbia’s war against organised crime, Interior Minister Ivica Dacic said police busted seven organised crime groups last year. About 1.3 tonnes of narcotics were seized in 2009.

noch mehr Videos über diese Gangster Legende aus balkaninfo.at

http://wikileaks.org/ : We protect the world—but will you protect us?

We protect the world—but will you protect us?

Secure submission here.

“

Wikileaks has probably produced more scoops in its short life than the Washington Post has in the past 30 years

”
—  The National, November 19. 2009

To concentrate on raising the funds necessary to keep us alive into 2010, we have reluctantly suspended all other operations, until at least Jan 18.We have received hundreds of thousands of pages from corrupt banks, the US detainee system, the Iraq war, China, the UN and many others that we do not currently have the resources to release. You can change that and by doing so, change the world. Even $10 will pay to put one of these reports into another ten thousand hands and $1000, a million.We have raised just over $130,000 for this year but can not meaningfully continue operations until costs are covered. These amount to just under $200,000 PA. If staff are paid, our yearly budget is $600,000.The Sunshine Press (WikiLeaks) is an non-profit organization funded by human rights campaigners, investigative journalists, technologists and the general public. Through your support we have exposed significant injustice around the world—successfully fighting off over 100 legal attacks in the process. Although our work produces reforms daily and is the recipient of numerous prestigious awards, including the 2008 Economist Freedom of Expression Award as well as the 2009 Amnesty International New Media Award, these accolades do not pay the bills. Nor can we accept government or corporate funding and maintain our absolute integrity. It is your strong support alone that preserves our continued independence and strength.

Support us financially

http://wikileaks.org/

Eine der wichtigsten Website, wo geheime Papiere veröffentlicht werden

Support us legally

Individuals or organizations wishing to donate lawyer time write to wl-legal@sunshinepress.org . We provide unique legal challenges in an ongoing fight for global justice and freedom of speech. If you support our mission, join our legal team to help defend those values.

WikiLeaks would like to thank the following 18 steadfast supporters (unordered):

1. Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press (RCFP)
2. The American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE)
3. The Associated Press – world wide news agency, based in New York
4. Citizen Media Law Project – Harvard university
5. The E.W Scripps Company – newspapers, TV, cable TV etc.
6. Gannet Co. Inc – the largest publisher of newspapers in the USA, including USA Today
7. The Hearst Corporation – media conglomerate which publishes the San Francisco Chronicle
8. The Los Angeles Times
9. National Newspaper Association (NNA)
10. Newspaper Association of America (NAA)
11. The Radio-Television News Directors Association (RTNDA)
12. The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ)
13. Public Citizen – founded by Ralph Nader
14. together with the California First Amendment Coalition (CFAC)
15. The Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF)
16. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
17. The Project on Government Oversight (POGO)
18. Jordan McCorckle, the University of Texas

Recently released documents

15. Mar. 2010: U.S. Intelligence planned to destroy WikiLeaks, 18 Mar 2008
This document is a classifed (SECRET/NOFORN) 32 page U.S. counterintelligence investigation into WikiLeaks. „The possibility that current employees or moles within DoD or elsewhere in the U.S. government are providing sensitive or classified information to Wikileaks.org cannot be ruled out“. It concocts a plan to fatally marginalize the organization. Since WikiLeaks uses „trust as a center of gravity by protecting the anonymity and identity of the insiders, leakers or whisteblowers“, the report recommends „The identification, exposure, termination of employment, criminal prosecution, legal action against current or former insiders, leakers, or whistlblowers could potentially damage or destroy this center of gravity and deter others considering similar actions from using the Wikileaks.org Web site“. [As two years have passed since the date of the report, with no WikiLeaks‘ source exposed, it appears that this plan was ineffective]. As an odd justificaton for the plan, the report claims that „Several foreign countries including China, Israel, North Korea, Russia, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe have denounced or blocked access to the Wikileaks.org website“. The report provides further justification by enumerating embarrassing stories broken by WikiLeaks—U.S. equipment expenditure in Iraq, probable U.S. violations of the Chemical Warfare Convention Treaty in Iraq, the battle over the Iraqi town of Fallujah and human rights violations at Guantanamo Bay.


15. Mar. 2010: Turks & Caicos Islands government asks for US$85M credit line from FirstCaribbean, 28 Jan 2010
Quote for a US$85 million line of credit from FirstCaribbean to the government of the Turks & Caicos Islands. The loan is to be used for refinancing existing liabilities held by FirstCaribbean & Citibank ($26M), reduce an overdraft facitility ($15M), cash reserves (US$10M), pay creditors $(US$33M) and „transactions costs“. The interm TCI Government is controlled by the Consultative Forum. Our source states that fourm members demanded access to this document but were denied access to it.


15. Mar. 2010: Over 40 billion euro in 28167 claims made aganst the Kaupthing Bank, 23 Jan 2010
This document contains a list of 28167 claims, totaling over 40 billion euro, lodged against the failed Icelandic bank Kaupthing Bank hf. The document is significant because it reveals billions in cash, bonds and other property held with Kaupthing by a vast number of investors and asset hiders, including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanly, Exista, Barclays, Commerzbank AG, etc. It was confidentially made available to claimants by the Kaupthing Winding-up committee.
 
Secrecy News Blog:  http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

**      WIKILEAKS FAILS „DUE DILIGENCE“ REVIEW

WIKILEAKS FAILS „DUE DILIGENCE“ REVIEW

In the past week, both the Washington Post and the New York Times have referred to WikiLeaks.org, the web site that publishes confidential records, as a „whistleblower“ site.  This conforms to WikiLeaks‘ own instructions to journalists that „WikiLeaks should be described, depending on context, as the ‚open government group‘, ‚anti-corruption group‘, ‚transparency group‘ or ‚whistleblower’s site‘.“

But calling WikiLeaks a whistleblower site does not accurately reflect the character of the project.  It also does not explain why others who are engaged in open government, anti-corruption and whistleblower protection activities are wary of WikiLeaks or disdainful of it.  And it does not provide any clue why the Knight Foundation, the preeminent foundation funder of innovative First Amendment and free press initiatives, might have rejected WikiLeaks‘ request for financial support, as it recently did.

From one perspective, WikiLeaks is a creative response to a real problem afflicting the U.S. and many other countries, namely the over-control of government information to the detriment of public policy.  WikiLeaks has published a considerable number of valuable official records that had been kept unnecessarily secret and were otherwise unavailable, including some that I had attempted and failed to obtain myself.  Its most spectacular disclosure was the formerly classified videotape showing an attack by a U.S. Army helicopter crew in Baghdad in 2007 which led to the deaths of several non-combatants.  Before mostly going dormant late last year, it also published numerous documents that have no particular policy significance or that were already placed in the public domain by others (including a few that were taken from the FAS web site).

WikiLeaks says that it is dedicated to fighting censorship, so a casual observer might assume that it is more or less a conventional liberal enterprise committed to enlightened democratic policies.  But on closer inspection that is not quite the case.  In fact, WikiLeaks must be counted among the enemies of open society because it does not respect the rule of law nor does it honor the rights of individuals.

Last year, for example, WikiLeaks published the „secret ritual“ of a college women’s sorority called Alpha Sigma Tau.  Now Alpha Sigma Tau (like several other sororities „exposed“ by WikiLeaks) is not known to have engaged in any form of misconduct, and WikiLeaks does not allege that it has.  Rather, WikiLeaks chose to publish the group’s confidential ritual just because it could.  This is not whistleblowing and it is not journalism.  It is a kind of information vandalism.

In fact, WikiLeaks routinely tramples on the privacy of non-governmental, non-corporate groups for no valid public policy reason.  It has published private rites of Masons, Mormons and other groups that cultivate confidential relations among their members.  Most or all of these groups are defenseless against WikiLeaks‘ intrusions.  The only weapon they have is public contempt for WikiLeaks‘ ruthless violation of their freedom of association, and even that has mostly been swept away in a wave of uncritical and even adulatory reporting about the brave „open government,“ „whistleblower“ site.

On occasion, WikiLeaks has engaged in overtly unethical behavior.  Last year, without permission, it published the full text of the highly regarded 2009 book about corruption in Kenya called „It’s Our Turn to Eat“ by investigative reporter Michela Wrong (as first reported by Chris McGreal in The Guardian on April 9).  By posting a pirated version of the book and making it freely available, WikiLeaks almost certainly disrupted sales of the book and made it harder for Ms. Wrong and other anti-corruption reporters to perform their important work and to get it published. Repeated protests and pleas from the author were required before WikiLeaks (to its credit) finally took the book offline.

„Soon enough,“ observed Raffi Khatchadourian in a long profile of WikiLeaks‘ Julian Assange in The New Yorker (June 7), „Assange must confront the paradox of his creation: the thing that he seems to detest most–power without accountability–is encoded in the site’s DNA, and will only become more pronounced as WikiLeaks evolves into a real institution.“

Much could be forgiven to WikiLeaks if it were true that its activities were succeeding in transforming government information policy in favor of increased openness and accountability — as opposed to merely generating reams of publicity for itself.  WikiLeaks supporter Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com wrote that when it comes to combating government secrecy, „nobody is doing that as effectively as WikiLeaks.“ But he neglected to spell out exactly what effect WikiLeaks has had.  Which U.S. government programs have been cancelled as a result of Wikileaks‘ activities?  Which government policies have been revised?  How has public discourse shifted?  (And, by the way, who has been injured by its work?)

A less sympathetic observer might conclude that WikiLeaks has squandered much of the impact that it might have had.

A telling comparison can be made between WikiLeaks‘ publication of the Iraq Apache helicopter attack video last April and The New Yorker’s publication of the Abu Ghraib abuse photographs in an article by Seymour Hersh in May 2004.  Both disclosures involved extremely graphic and disturbing images.  Both involved unreleased or classified government records.  And both generated a public sensation.  But there the similarity ends.  The Abu Ghraib photos prompted lawsuits, congressional hearings, courts martial, prison sentences, declassification initiatives, and at least indirectly a revision of U.S. policy on torture and interrogation.  By contrast, the WikiLeaks video tendentiously packaged under the title „Collateral Murder“ produced none of that– no investigation (other than a leak investigation), no congressional hearings, no lawsuits, no tightening of the rules of engagement.  Just a mild scolding from the Secretary of Defense, and an avalanche of publicity for WikiLeaks.

Of course, it’s hard for anyone to produce a specific desired outcome from the national security bureaucracy, and maybe WikiLeaks can’t be faulted for failing to have done so.  But with the whole world’s attention at its command for a few days last April, it could have done more to place the focus on the victims of the incident that it had documented, perhaps even establishing a charitable fund to assist their families.  But that’s not what it chose to do.  Instead, the focus remained firmly fixed on WikiLeaks itself and its own ambitious fundraising efforts.

In perhaps the first independent review of the WikiLeaks project, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation considered and rejected an application from WikiLeaks for financial support.  The Knight Foundation was actively looking for grantees who could promote innovative uses of digital technology in support of the future development of journalism.  At the end of the process, more than $2.7 million was awarded to 12 promising recipients.  WikiLeaks was not among them.

„Every year some applications that are popular among advisors don’t make the cut after Knight staff conducts due diligence,“ said Knight Foundation spokesman Marc Fest in response to an inquiry from Yahoo news.  „WikiLeaks was not recommended by Knight staff to the board.“

Albania to Emit €300 Million in Eurobonds

Albania to Emit €300 Million in Eurobonds

Tirana | 15 January 2010 |

 

Minister of Finance Ridvan Bode

Minister of Finance Ridvan Bode

The Albanian Ministry of Finance has opened a tender for a bond management company in a bid to emit 300 million in euro denominated bonds.This is Albania’s second attempt to emit eurobonds after an effort in early 2009 was abandoned due to the global financial crisis, forcing the Ministry of Finance to opt for a costly syndicated loan.

The Ministry  selected two international banks in March from which it borrowed 250 million euros.

“We intend to refinance this loan in the next few years, after that the global turmoil calms,” Bode said at the time.

The loan was intended to finance the Rreshen-Kalimash highway which links Albania with Kosovo, with a price tag of one billion euro and marred by allegations of corruption.