Balkans under the tumor: In Serbia, 3 times more people are sick than average, and doctors forbid to speak TRUTH!

Malignant illnesses are almost three times more common in Serbia than in the world: in neighboring Serbia 10000 people are registered with 5,500 people with different types of cancer and 2,000 in the world!

Since leukemia alone, mortality has risen since 2002 by as much as 139 percent .

The number of cancers in Serbia each year grows by two percent, and in the world by 0.6 percent. This is the result of bombing!

The young people we have left this country and all the problems they face are left with problems that we can not talk about, and we can not complain about the villains who created them. Shame!

This is how Dr. Novica Grujičić, one of the best neurosurgeons, head of neurosurgery department at the Clinical Center of Serbia, says for "News".

The consequences of the bombing of the FRY, 17 years later, while the expert public, with the exception of prof. Dr Slobodan Čikarić, president of the Serbian Society for Combating Cancer, mostly "circumvents" this topic, prof. Grujic warns on social networks, video clips, public forums ...

* Many of your colleagues claim to be silent because the rise in cancer in Serbia can not directly lead to bombardment?

The facts are here. We witnessed a growing number of solid tumors occurring every 15 to 20 years after the bombing.

In addition to increasing numbers, tumors are more aggressive, and this is the reason why we are at the very top of Europe with the death of malignant diseases.

Only the aging of the population and smoking can not be explained.

* What encourages you to point out now about the consequences of NATO bombing in 1999?

Great environmental damage has been done.

In 1999, ecocide, harmful substances, not only depleted uranium, were committed in Serbia, but numerous bombed industrial chemical plant products went to large concentrations in the air, water, soil and into the food chain.

The citizens of Serbia do not know anything about it, primarily because the government has never spoken about it. Data exist and it is necessary for the citizens of Serbia to know the amount of damage they have suffered.

Why?

If not for anything else, then at least because of the preventive. Since 2000, all Serbian authorities have been severely affected by the inhabitants of these areas because they have never formed a commission from independent experts, provided them with appropriate laboratories and allowed us to tell us exactly what is being polluted and what is not.

The behavior of NATO was inadmissible, primarily because they bombarded all chemical plants that were on maps of harmful effects on the environment, meaning they were duly marked.

They deliberately shot them, which was only evidence that their intent was genocidal - to pollute the environment of Serbian citizens.

Do you say that you are suffering from a kind of pressure?

Not. I have never suffered, nor do I suffer any pressure now because I'm talking about what I think.

Some of your colleagues, however, claim that the whole story about the consequences of the NATO bombing is exaggerated, and the impoverished uranium that was then thrown into Serbia should be scared "just as much cobra and crocodile".

These are people who do not know what is cancerogenesis and how cancer is created, so you do not have to talk about it either. The damage was done at the moment when there was a bombing, that's what we claim to be true to the truth.

Alpha particles entered our bodies and damage was done.

It is difficult, but it is not impossible to prove. Instead of all of us claiming to be examining, there are colleagues who try to prove the opposite in every way. What their motives do not know. If it is a choice for the truth, I doubt it.

Do you, as a physician who is facing the cancer of the tiniest tumors on a daily basis, and personally, are such attitudes insulting?

Everyone has the right to their opinion as well as the right to prove what he is saying. People do not hurt people who do not know what cancer is.

* It seems that 17 years later somehow, at least in the majority, they have become reconcilable, as if they were bombarded with "colorful candies".

The "problem" with the citizens of Serbia is that, despite the worst possible propaganda, most of them, however, think with their head and have an excellent sense of righteousness.

I believe that most of the citizens of Serbia will hear what has been done here and therefore do not trust the "officials".

In addition, there is something called personal experience - not just malignant diseases, there are also autoimmune diseases that nobody speaks, and then an increasing number of couples treated for sterility ...

* Do the consequences of this ecological disaster also go beyond Serbia's borders?

Since the Danube is receiving water and some NATO members, such as Bulgaria and Romania, it is obvious that there are significant and less significant countries and nations within NATO.

The silence of all this corresponds only to the NATO mercenaries, to those unfortunates whose own pocket is more important than the state, and from the nation, and from the neighbors, as well as NATO itself, because if they do not speak, there is no compensation that these villains would have to pay and not just us, but Iraq, Syria, Libya ... ..

* Do you stand for a neutral commission to investigate the consequences of the bombing?

Only a neutral commission composed of domestic and foreign experts could provide all the information. People from the profession are not afraid to say their opinion anywhere in the world.

The best example for you is Senegal Bakari Kante who was in Serbia in April 1999 and wrote a report for the UN that later paid off its function, where it was clearly said that an ecological disaster had been made.

This information was subsequently received by American journalist Robert Parson, whom we can thank for anything we know from this report at all.

What can such a commission do?

It is not enough just to form a commission, with the commission having to go to an appropriate laboratory that will be able to analyze everything that is needed.

The commission must have a proper budget, because analyzes of certain chemical substances are not always cheap.

Therefore, Serbia needs to have a laboratory that is able to identify each substance so that it does not repeat the situation like aflatoxin a few years ago. It will only make the formation of the commission meaningful. By the way, the commission can not do much.

An unsafe place to live

* The consequences of environmental bombardment and population can not, however, be interpreted only through the impact of depleted uranium?

Destruction of oil stores has led to the release of enormous amounts of carbon dioxide, but also special groups of highly carcinogenic compounds that represent polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Increased quantities of dioxins and furans were registered even in Thrace in Greece in April 1999.

In Barić, 165 tons of fluorocarbon acid was discharged into Sava. In Pančevo and Novi Sad in the Danube, three tons of live were left.

Serbia and Montenegro represented one of the six European centers of diversity, and many animals and plants that were not threatened before the bombing, they became. Novi Sad, Bor, Kragujevac and Pančevo were declared insecure places to live.

• 3 Nov, 2017
• 1536 views