Gen. Sheehan Apologises for Gay Dutch Army Comment

(RNW) – Retired US General John Sheehan has apologised for his public remarks blaming homosexuals in the Dutch army for the Srebrenica massacre in 1995.

Speaking to a US Senate committee last week, General Sheehan said that the fall of the Muslim enclave of Srebrenica and the ensuing mass murder of Muslims was owing to the presence of gays in the Dutch military. Upon interrogation General Sheehan claimed that Dutch chief-of-staff General Henk van den Breemen had told him that the Dutch army was weak because of the homosexual presence. General Van den Breemen denies he ever made such a remark.

In an apology to General Van den Breemen, Sheehan has written that his memories of conversations held 15 years ago were “inaccurate”. The former general also wrote that the fall of Srebrenica can in no way be blamed on individual soldiers, but is solely due to the mandate given to the international force as a whole. The US general did not refer explicitly to his remarks about homosexuals.

Read more: Dutch reject claim that gays caused Srebrenica killing

(RNW) – Remarks made by former US General John Sheehan, suggesting the presence of openly gay soldiers in the Dutch military was responsible for the 1995 Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia, have been met in the Netherlands with outrage, disbelief, and above all, derision. But a new group called the Pink Army says it’s no laughing matter. They want to haul General Sheehan to court on charges of slander and defamation.

Mr Schouten has now founded the Pink Army foundation, and is aiming to bring a class action lawsuit against General Sheehan in a Californian federal court. At least seven homosexual Dutch soldiers are needed to launch the lawsuit, and Pink Army is also calling for donors to fund the estimated 190,000 euros in legal fees.

DID GENERAL SHEEHAN PERJURE HIMSELF?

The charges would be slander and defamation, and the demands are simple: a full-page retraction and apology in major US and Dutch newspapers; a press conference offering the same; mandatory sensitivity training, and compensation of legal costs.

Mr Schouten says it is too soon to say how the case will be argued, but given Mr van den Breemen’s public denial that he made the alleged initial remarks, it’s clear Mr Sheehan lied.

“One of them is lying. Now I would put my money on the fact that Sheehan’s side is then incorrect, because he also had a political reason, of course, to make these kind of remarks.

The government of Obama wanted to lighten up things for [homosexuals] more in the army, and there is a conservative push against that. My personal opinion is that therefore he made these statements.”

Because Mr Sheehan made his statements under oath, Mr Schouten says Pink Army’s lawsuit could if successful, lead to a separate perjury charge against the former general.