Replies

The BBC has reported on the ICTY's investigation of the Serb mass graves in Gospic. You know, the ones where the Serbs were buried after being executed by the Croats.

Didn't you catch that article? The exhumations there laid the groundwork for the indictments of Mirko Norac, amongst others.

Also, the BBC has written extensively about the situation in Kosovo since 1999. Just because their reporting doesn't match what you'd like to see doesn't mean you can write them off as terminally biased.

If you can prove their reporting is factually incorrect, however, that's another thing entirely. Be my guest.

If you can prove their reporting is factually incorrect

straight from psy-ops textbooks........of course the reporting is not factually incorrect.......what it does is distort, omit, and mis-inform.......

Hoplite you are getting desperate as usual when presented with difficult questions to you wild conspircy tales.

Instead of the Clintonista complex and contradictory tales of Srebrenica....why not accept the rather straight forward story.......

The 10,000 paramilitaries of the 28th BiH division under Nasir Oric simply abandoned their fortified positions and made for the hills when some 1,200 BSA soldiers attacked them. In the ensuing pursuit of the remants of the 28th, the overstretched BSA was only able to attack a few elements of the 10,000 fleeing paramilitaries. That is why there have been only 670 Bih soldiers discovered by the forensic investigations. The remaining 1,200 bodies appear to be those of Serbian villagers killed by Nasir Oric's execution sqauds between 1993 and 1995.

It is pretty straight forward and agrees with the hard evidence. The Clinonista version of events involves numerous conspiricies, hidden agendas, secret hide outs, false book keeping, moving graves, more moving graves, and then using Nasir Oric's nephew as the key witness.

Hoplite, perhaps your complex and contradictory tale would work as a made for TV crime tale. But it is just too outlandish and doesn't jive with the hard facts to be believed.

Yes, of course, I saw the article and was immediately struck by the passive reference to bodies that are reported to be buried, and victims that are said to be.... That is a nurturing, protective style reserved for "friends" who have a bit of bad history. The article is really very sympathetic and supportive of Croatia, of whom Carla del Ponte praised. Afterall, theirs was only a fledgling Croatian army accursed of wreaking a terrible vengeance. The word fledgling is very apologetic, usually reserved for murderous forces who must be forgiven: How often was that line used in Central America during the 80's? Wreaking a terrible vengeance? Again, one should note the extremely sympathetic use of the word vengeance, which, of course, does mitigate the actions.

Who wants to read something slanted, distorted, or biased, something which only serves to erode reality, truth--above all credibility?