Posted October 2, 2003

"Return to the Crime Scene"

It would be useful if Nebojsa Malic could update us on the actual state of the controversy regarding whether there ever was an exceptional systematic massacre of Muslims by Bosnian Serb military or paramilitary forces.

(I take it that crimes were probably committed by irregulars on all sides, as is the case in most civil wars, broadly using the book by General Sir Michael Rose, called I think, Fighting for Peace, and ad hoc comments on tenc.net. Such crimes might be regarded as systematic massacres, but for such a label to be correct it seems to me that they must have been directed by sizable military or paramilitary formations with a recognizable chain of command which assumed responsibility – probably platoon size or upwards.)

Following this, it is clear enough that the facts of how many people (and of what status) were killed by whom and why and in what circumstances, can add up to a sort of answer to the above question. This is not the procedure of the NATO propagandists, of course, who indeed (e.g. at the 2002 Labour Party Conference in the person of one Martin Beecroft) supported the Blair drive to war by claiming that 'if the authority of the UN is flouted, the result will be another Srebrenica'. This is far indeed from the only use of Srebrenica as a 'bloody flag'....

I tried to get in touch with the 'Bosnian Serb government', if that is the correct phrase, some months ago when it was reported that they had issued a report casting serious doubt on this allegation, and indeed I read last week that (no doubt under Ashdown pressure) it had retracted its report.

Serb representation at the Bosnian Embassy in London seems impotent or unavailable. So, many concerned persons need the help of at least one investigator with enough SerboCroat (if that language still exists) to get through the relevant bureaucracies as well as sources.

Sources such as the Guardian concentrate on the DNA search (also at work in Iraq); how this can establish the relevant facts about alleged perpetrators, circumstances, motives or indeed possible justification (e.g. armed conflict as at Racak), I have no idea.

I hope that those of us who regard the quest for truth as more important than the fear of being called revisionist can find a site, printed and/or on the web, which can supply materials for a clear judgment.

~ Ben Cosin

Nebojsa Malic replies:

I can certainly try. As you noted, though, almost all Srebrenica research has been tightly controlled by the guardians of Official Truth. That does not make the official story any more likely to be true, but it does make it much harder for alternate explanations to emerge. Yet there are some facts, so well documented that even the mainstream propaganda cannot dispute them, which cast serious doubts on the official story and lend themselves to a different explanation. I will try to present them in an organized manner fairly soon.

What Malic doesn't do but should be doing, is to give the Serbian version of what happened in Srebrenica. It is useless to just try to counteract the Nato propaganda machine which has an implicit purpose to condemn Serbs in order to justify its proper crime in Bosnia and Kosovo and thus avoid paying for "reconstruction". Anti-Serb propaganda has overwhelmed us all and just repeating "there is no evidence" without stating what the Serbian version on the happening is, doesn't do much good.

I remember reading the very first reports about the fall of Srebrenica in El Mundo (Madrid) talking about two columns of armed Muslims leaving the town separately, both in the direction of Tuzla. One of the columns broke through the Serbian lines and made it. The other fell in an ambush in the mountains and was wiped out. Some two thousand Muslim fighters perished their corpses scattered all over the hills (the scene was shown later on the Spanish TV). Nobody mentioned any civilians being among them. The civilians all went to Potocari from where they were evacuated by bus to Tuzla. The idea of seven thousand civilians executed came much later, about the time when people started getting bored with the news of ever-increasing number of Serbian raping of Muslim women, which at last count reached a hundred thousand.

Also, a factor purposely ignored in the west except to justify the killings of Serbs, is – revenge. Srebrenica was the center from which the Muslims troops (incidentally trained by American instructors) staged attacks on Serbian villages. It is not difficult to imagine the fury with which was met that unfortunate column in the mountains. These might have been the only victims in Srebrenica.

~ Peter Ristov V.

Nebojsa Malic replies:

Well, there is no 'Serbian' or 'Serb' position on Srebrenica, really. There is no such thing as a monolithic Serb opinion, either. Certainly, there are many theories about what happened, but every one of them is roundly condemned by the guardians of Official Truth. But what is really needed is not a 'counter-story,' i.e. something that counters the present perception and sounds equally plausible. No, what is needed is the truth – nothing more, nothing less.

How many people died in the battle for Srebrenica and its aftermath, in July 1995, and who were they? Where did they die, and how? And perhaps most importantly – and most difficult to prove one way or another – why?

All I have to work with are media reports; given their general poor quality and dubious credibility, that's not very helpful in trying to construct a story that makes sense (unless, of course, it doesn't have to make sense, like the presently accepted version), but only in identifying the problems with the Official Truth. As I've explained before, there are powerful people who have no interest in the truth, one way or another, and they have persistently blocked any and all efforts to even investigate the possibilities. However, there have been few such attempts to begin with. Some choose to interpret this as 'proof' that the Official Truth is accurate. I see it only as a proof that people aren't trying. And that's a shame.

"Your Money In Iraq"

Sir, with all due respect, it was your choice to go to Iraq unilaterally. No one forced you (I mean the US) and no Iraqis invited you. All levels of American governments /politicians, a dominant majority of American people (even now) and American media believe that it was the right thing to do, that is to invade Iraq and to remove Saddam Hussein – created, nurtured and supported by the US. Although, almost all world was against your decision. A decision based on cooked and sexed up information. Therefore, why are you surprised now that you have to foot the bill? It was your adventure and enjoy every bit of it.

Moreover, Americans are dreaming that once Iraq gets settled, its oil start making export revenue, the US would recover its expenses. Already there is a strong feeling, why should and would Iraqis pay for the adventure that Americans have imposed on them for their (Americans) own deep and dark motive of getting supremacy in that part of the world and deepening the hegemony of Israel? Now, no one can even think to lay an eye on Israel with bad intention. Palestinians' dream of an independent state has gone in the drain.

Good luck. More power to the US. A country which has been a beacon of democracy for more than 200 years. For the people in the East (like me) the US was a model and aspired to be emulated. But I canNOT believe that how overnight it would be turned into the most suffocating state with its draconian laws like the "Patriot" after the September 11, 2001 attack on New York and Washington. How is it possible that in the US, questioning and critique of government policies would be considered "unpatriotic"? According to our knowledge (people from the East), the greatest virtue of the West (especially the United States), was its support and encouragement of intellectual freedom. But alas, you have lost it, after just one attack. As compared to a large majority of the world population, who face it daily in one form or the other, and learn how to cope with it.

Actually by restricting (in some cases outlawing) your civilian and political independence in expressions, the US has inflicted the wound and cost on itself that terrorists could never have dreamed to achieve.

~ Falsafay Ghaalib

Ron Paul writes about what he calls a "modest" proposal by Tennessee Congressman Zach Wamp that the reconstruction costs of Iraq should be in the form of a loan to be repaid using Iraq's future oil revenues.

That proposal is seriously flawed and perhaps immoral. After all, Iraqis did not ask for their infrastructure to be wrecked by twelve years of war and sanctions, nor did they have any say in the awarding of contracts at hugely inflated prices to American companies (see
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/30/opinion/30KRUG.html ).

Furthermore, using Iraqi oil to subsidize the imperial adventure in Iraq will, in the long term, only encourage the warmongers to destroy more human life (we still hear how the US made a "net profit" out of Desert Storm).

The United States must get out of Iraq, and allow Iraqis to determine their own future. If it insists on "staying the course", then the jingoistic flag-wavers who supported the war in Iraq must understand that empire-building and crony-capitalism have serious costs associated with them.

~ James L.

Money to rebuild Iraq will not be a gift from American taxpayers to Iraqis. It will be a gift from American taxpayers to American tax receivers. They are the same people who were and are being paid by American taxpayers to protect Americans. (I wonder what they were doing on 9/11? Asleep?) They are the same people who were paid to blow up Iraq. They are the same people who are being paid to occupy and run Iraq. They are the people whose business is War. Americans must ask if these people might not be the reason we do not have Peace. I think American taxpayers need to stop paying them. They should be put out of business.

~ Morley Evans

The USA made the colossal mistake of invading a nation that was not a threat. It is the most astounding blunder in the short history of the USA. To now, not admit the mistake, take our men out of the land, and allow the people there to establish their own government, of their choice, not ours, is only a continuation of the incredible blunder.

Our resources are needed in our country, not in Iraq.

~ William G. Benedict, Visalia, California

"There Is Nothing Conservative About the US Policy in Iraq"

Great job! I used to live in Rep. Duncan's district. He was a great representative and I am glad to see his perspective on this terrible and stupid war.

~ William A Curry, Sacramento, California

Congressman Duncan displays the level of intelligence which makes one throw ones eyes to heaven. Who is he trying to kid? America invaded Iraq to enforce UN resolutions?

Did not George W. and Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice all say America and the world was in imminent danger from an Iraq attack. The average European knew there was more danger to America and the world from a Big Mac Attack than from Saddam Hussein.

I cannot believe that Cheney and Rice are idiots (though it's possible, anything is) so they must be liars. Pretending – among a myriad of constantly changing reasons for the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign country – that it was to enforce UN resolutions (Israel has violated in excess of forty such resolutions) is a thinly veiled attempt to legitimize a war crime. ...

~ Chris Cahill, Canada

What a wonderful article. As a life long Democrat, I commend you on your insight.

As a Democrat, I appreciate and, yes, even admire you for the true conservative views you hold. BUT, I cannot for the life of me understand why your party has allowed the neocons to replace your true conservative philosophy, which you so eloquently portray with a power hungry, elitist, anti-American, greed driven, and yes, fascist thirst for world domination. Where are you when the congressional votes are cast to authorize this criminal behavior?

Should you think that it's just your party I hold responsible, I have withdrawn my support for any Democrat who voted for the resolution authorizing Bush to take this insane action or who voted for the oxymoronic "PATRIOT Act."

Please go to the well and read your article. With your views as a Republican I can't imagine you would have difficulty making yourself heard. May you find the patriotic courage to do so.

~ Harold O'Leary, West Virginia

I am very proud to be represented by the very Honorable John J. Duncan in Congress. Enough said.

~ Diane Long , Oak Ridge, TN

Excellent article! Rep. Duncan is right on the money, except for one little thing: He's going to vote for the President again, in 2004.

I voted for GWB in 2000. Since then, the Republican Party has lurched into the neo-con camp and abandoned its conservative base. I now realize that I was fooled into thinking that the "R's" were actually "conservative." Well, they aren't, Representative Duncan notwithstanding. The "R's" and "D's" are merely current versions of the Tweedle brothers, made famous by Lewis Carroll in Through the Looking-Glass. In other words, both "Parties" are in on the deal.

Let me lay it out there. I would rather vote for a progressive who stands by his/her words than a person who represents himself as one thing, while being another. There is a very old statement by Achilles (Iliad) on the subject: "I hate as I hate Hell's own gate, that man who says one thing while he's thinking another."

Of course Achilles was referencing Agamemnon, but the truth still holds. Some things don't change much.

~ Richard Macintosh

"War Party Whines Over Iraq Coverage"

I listened to Congressman Jim Marshall (D-Georgia ) cheering the positive trends in Iraqi daily life. One of his points was that less soldiers are being killed in Iraq than the murder rate in Washington D.C. The conclusion from those facts was that it is safer in Iraq than in DC This was then repeated gloatingly by the talk radio host – while a thinking person must wonder, how many Iraqi civilians are being murdered in Iraq, and how many armed US soldiers are dying in Washington DC?

~ Cricket F.

"Iraq & Tet, George W. & LBJ"

While I respect much of what Pat Buchanan says regarding American politics, his statement "the postwar mess is erasing in the public's mind the brilliance of our victory...."

Brilliant victory? Hello? I don't think that I would call overrunning a broken down military machine that had been weakened by over a decade of sanctions and the slaughtering of thousands of innocent civilians "brilliant." I do not think that sending in a skeleton force, when wiser military minds had cautioned for the need for more troops, was very "brilliant" either. Americans in Iraq are undermanned and under-supplied and morale is at an all time low. There is hardly anything that could be described as splendid or distinguished about what has been, and is being, done in Iraq. We, as a nation, should be collectively ashamed of ourselves for what has transpired since Bush decided to go to war....

~ KW

"The Costs of War"

OK, you convinced me, I'll send you $30, if that times 1,000 will keep you going!

Many us competing with the increasingly avaricious demands every agency of the State grasping our grocery money, think that if we can't give $1,000 or $100,000, nothing less can make a difference.

Thank for the reminder of the "multiplier effect."

You should put that message at the top of your pitch, not at the end of your opinion article.

~ John Allan Davies, Canada

"A Nation With Questions"

Thank God someone in this government is speaking up to stop this madness. I voted for George Bush since I am a lifelong Republican and have "usually" voted Republican. I would NEVER vote for Mr. Bush again and may become a Democrat.

I no longer think Republicans can be trusted with national security issues.

I voted for Mr. Bush hoping to find a President who would know when to "keep his pants on," not to take us into some ill-advised war.

More seriously, I know this war is REALLY ABOUT OIL.

It is not about WMD, or Democracy for Iraq, nor even terrorism. It is all about OIL. That is the reason Bush will not let the UN run the Iraq operation, control of the OIL would be lost. It is also the staging ground for his second term war against Iran and possibly Syria. Bush's friends want control of the Caspian Sea oil and gas fields. This fool must be stopped before he drags us into a country of 70 million Iranians to get their oil and gas. No wonder they are racing to get their hands on some nukes.

Another thing that MUST happen for America's safety is to get Israel's hands off America's throat and out of our wallets.

~ James Richardson