OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 20, 2014, 02:43:27 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Srebrenica Remembered  (Read 3277 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Timos
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 856



« on: July 11, 2005, 01:10:29 PM »

On CNN today at 12:00 pm Christian Amanpour showed the Bosnian Muslims who were victims of Serbian killings and that mroe than 8,000 were killed.

Well I am actually very disappointed by this. CNN is usually a station which has a "Judeo-Christian" mindset. After 9/11 and the London Terror, the media, assisted by the pleas of Muslims has painted this beautiful picture of Mulsims and that they are the innocent ones, the ones who are beign attacked. Well thats BS.

What about the mass murders in Kosovo, the ancient and cultural monuments destroyed? The Armenian Genocide? The genocide of milions of Middle-Eastern Christians? The Greek genocide from Asia Minor? And yet they some how come out as being the poor innocent ones.

I'm going to email CNN right now actually. Not that it would change anything but at least they hear 1 voice than nothing.

This is outrageous,
                           Timos
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2005, 01:58:34 PM »

Yup, disappointed as well.  Stupid CNN.
Logged
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2005, 03:12:05 PM »

Brothers,

    Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately), I'm stuck at work and have been unable to see any of the continued propaganda against my people.  If you want to see what I mean, read here http://www.srebrenica-report.com/

     Not surprised at all by the one-sided reporting.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2005, 03:26:06 PM »

My apologies for this post, I caution anyone with a weak stomach not to follow the link, but I am wondering why CNN or any other news agency didn't carry this story and video

http://www.serbianna.com/press/011.shtml
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
JOHNYJ82
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2005, 12:50:15 AM »

The Serbs who loose no chance to accuse the Croats of crimes during WWII.Have decided to try the Nazi ploy of denial.Well they used the Nazi system against western Europe. While they destroyed the Yugoslav Republic and it worked .France and Britan acted like they did in the 1930's,with Hitler.It wasn't till the USA got involved that Serbia was stopped. So their denials about  Srebenica  should not surprise anyone.
Logged
sin_vladimirov
ANAXIOS!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 477

ICXC NIKA


« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2005, 02:18:24 AM »

I am very slow,

just what exactly did you say JOHNY82?
Logged

Lord have mercy.
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2005, 08:18:17 AM »

The Serbs who loose no chance to accuse the Croats of crimes during WWII.Have decided to try the Nazi ploy of denial.Well they used the Nazi system against western Europe. While they destroyed the Yugoslav Republic and it worked .France and Britan acted like they did in the 1930's,with Hitler.It wasn't till the USA got involved that Serbia was stopped. So their denials aboutÂÂ  SrebenicaÂÂ  should not surprise anyone.

Said like a true ignoramus.  Croatian crimes during WWII are well documented.  Isolated Serbian wrong doing in the recent Balkan wars are also documented but in NO WAY rise to your comparison of either Croats or Nazi's.

The same day the "so called" video of the assassination of six Bosnian Muslims was released, a video depicted the abuse and murder of Goran Rogic was also made available to the world, but the mainstream media chose to only carry *one* of the videos.  Furthermore, the Kangaroo Court at the Hague also said the Rogic video was "too violent" to show in Court.  So, showing the Serbs in a negative light is not "too violent", but showing the beloved Islamic Fascist Extremists in a negative light, well, that is just too darn violent.  Give me a break.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2005, 01:50:18 PM »

[Yup, disappointed as well.  Stupid CNN.]

I'm disappointed but not surprised by what CNN (Clinton News Network) and another of their anti Serb tirades.  It's the main reason i never watch their channel.  Especially since their Kosovo coverage!

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2005, 02:04:31 PM »

[I am very slow,

just what exactly did you say JOHNY82?]

For those of you who aren't aware, Johnyj82 will become our resident troll.  He is famous for coming into Orthodox Discussion groups to troll and raise havoc.  I'm surprised to see it took him so long to find this one.

He has brought up the same subject in the 'Catholic Answers' website.  You can view some of his anti Orthodox propaganda at -

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8

Orthodox
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2005, 02:53:01 PM »

Well done Orthodoc!!!  Poor trolls, yet another disgrace to their race!
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Strelets
Стрелец
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 444


« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2005, 04:27:04 PM »

He has brought up the same subject in the 'Catholic Answers' website.  You can view some of his anti Orthodox propaganda at -

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.east-orthodox?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8

Is he as virulent as that guy who called himself "Learner"?  That's a pretty nasty list to hang in, being that it's unmoderated.
Logged

"The creed is very simple, and here is what it is: to believe that there is nothing more beautiful, more courageous, and more perfect than Christ; and there not only isn't, but I tell myself with a jealous love, there cannot be." ~ Fyodor Dostoevsky
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2005, 04:37:00 PM »

Is he as virulent as that guy who called himself "Learner"?ÂÂ  That's a pretty nasty list to hang in, being that it's unmoderated.

I read quite of few of his posts and it appears the chap *loves* many of us OCs.  Seems to have a particular affinity for the Orthodox Christians with a Slavic background.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2005, 10:41:19 PM »

I am very slow,

just what exactly did you say JOHNY82?


Hey Johnny J are you the same person on Catholic Answers?HuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuh??

JoeS
Logged
StephenG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2005, 08:58:50 AM »

 :'( Very sadly there continues a campaign and/or a marked tendency in the Western press and among many Western politicians to 'demonise' the Serb people. In saying this I do not for one minute seek to either minimise or deny the wrong doing of some Serb elements. Sadly such criminal and murderous elements appear to be a feature of all three major communities, i.e. Croats, Serbs and Muslims.
Logged
JOHNYJ82
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #14 on: July 16, 2005, 01:32:52 PM »

Virulent,anti Orthodox, Baloney ! My critics  love to lump all Orthodox churches together and than make my criticisms of one or 2.A general attack on all.Though I have the highest regard for most Orthodox churches. I do criticise those that persecute my co religionists. The Top of that list sits the Russian Orthodox church.Which thinks it should be the only christian church allowed in Russia and its former Soviet slave states.
Logged
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 16, 2005, 08:27:32 PM »

Virulent,anti Orthodox, Baloney ! My criticsÂÂ  love to lump all Orthodox churches together and than make my criticisms of one or 2.A general attack on all.Though I have the highest regard for most Orthodox churches. I do criticise those that persecute my co religionists. The Top of that list sits the Russian Orthodox church.Which thinks it should be the only christian church allowed in Russia and its former Soviet slave states.

Yes, maybe the Russians should allow the RCC some financial aid so that Russians can get a "good deal" like that of the Uniates.ÂÂ  

Or maybe those abhorrent Russian Slavs ought to open things up for the RCC so that one of the beloved fathers of the RCC can come help them with their Orthodox problem.ÂÂ  Kind of like...

Archbishop of Zagreb (later Cardinal), head of the Croatian Catholic Church, favorite of Pope Pius XII and public defender of most of the Ustase ringleaders. As a young man was an adherent of the Yugoslavist philosophy and spoke admiringly of Bishop Josip Strossmayer, one of the founders of Yugoslav intellectual movement. After being captured by the Serbian army in World War I, bargained for his release by joining their side to fight against the Austrians in a special legion made up of Croat and Slovene soldiers. King Alexander, fearing the rise of militant nationalist clergy such as Archbishop Ivan Saric in Sarajevo, supported Stepinac's appointment as Archbishop of Zagreb, the most important Catholic post in Yugoslavia and dean of the Croatian Church, in 1934.

A puritan, Stepinac harangued worshippers at mass on topics such as divorce, mixed sunbathing and the dangers of Protestantism. Turned dramatically to the right on political matters after his appointment. Despite advising clergy to steer clear of politics, on April 12, 1941 paid a visit of his own accord to Slavko Kvaternik, and on April 16 to poglavnik Ante Pavelic to give NDH and Ustase regime his personal endorsement. Also broadcast his support for the NDH in a radio address to the Croatian people, all of which occured before the Royal Yugoslav Army capitulated. Informed by letter by Bishop Alojzije Misic of Mostar of the ghastly massacres undertaken by the Ustase against local Serbs and Jews, but merely passed on the letter to Pavelic. Vigorously defended the Ustase to Pope Pius XII and the Vatican secretary of state during visits in 1942 and 1943. Catholic newspapers during the war kept to official guidelines and published appalling attacks on Jews and Serbs and effluviant praise of the poglavnik and the Ustase. As head of the Croatian Catholic Church was in charge of the mass conversion of Serbs to Catholicism and the adoption of Serb children orphaned by the Ustase massacres by Croatian, Catholic families, and certainly equated Orthodoxy with heresy.

Defenders allege he protected some Jews from falling into the hands of the Ustase and Gestapo, that he spoke privately of his displeasure to Pavelic and other Ustase leaders, refraining from speaking publicly for fear that the church would lose its influence altogether. Critics argue that after German and Italian attempts to rein in the Ustase failed, the Church was the only organ which could arrest the state terror of Pavelic, Budak, and Co, who considered themselves devout Catholics. Spoke out vehemently against Communism before Communists had even taken power, fully exhonerating the clergy of complicity in war crimes and atrocities in the NDH. Yugoslav government alleged that his office coordinated Krizari or "Crusader" guerrilla operations through 1947 with Father Krunoslav Draganovic and Maks Luburic. Found guilty of treason relating to his recognition of the NDH before Yugoslav armed forces had surrendered on October 11, 1946 before exclusively Catholic judges. Sentence of hard labor commuted to house arrest. Pope Pius XII named him Cardinal in captivity. Died on December 10, 1960. Beatified by Pope John Paul II on October 3, 1998 during Papal visit to Croatia, despite requests by Jewish organizations to delay the ceremony in order for a panel of historians to determine whether Stepinac really did help significant numbers of Jews avoid murder by the Ustase. To date, all applications to recognize Alojzije Stepinac as a "Righteous Among the Nations" by Yad Vashem have been denied.

Now run along and take your anti-Orthodox propoganda elsewhere. Punk!
« Last Edit: July 16, 2005, 08:28:07 PM by SouthSerb99 » Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2005, 01:12:22 AM »

Just wanted to add my latest avatar to this thread....
Cool, isn't it?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
cizinec
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 941


There ain't no way but the hard way.


« Reply #17 on: July 17, 2005, 01:13:33 AM »

Stop it with the pesky facts.
Logged

"Brother, your best friend ain't your Momma, it's the Field Artillery."
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2005, 11:41:20 AM »

Since when have facts ever stopped a troll?
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2005, 12:16:19 PM »

I've been meaning to start a discussion about comments made by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Prizren at a Congressional hearing, but I think I'm going to start a new thread on the subject.

Mr. Johnny Dontknowmuch, you are welcome to join the party when I create the thread.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2005, 01:39:40 PM »

Cizinec,

I'll do my best to avoid giving facts in the future.  Wink Would you quit working so much, we need some more of your sarcasm!!  Tongue
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #21 on: July 18, 2005, 09:42:37 PM »

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/generated/realtime/specialComment.html

THE GLOBE AND MAIL, Thursday, July 14, 2005 COMMENT

The real story behind Srebrenica
By LEWIS MacKENZIE

This week marked the 10th anniversary of the United Nations' second greatest
failure since its creation in 1945 -- the genocide in Rwanda being the
undisputed No. 1. With much fanfare, the ceremonies focused on the massacre
of "up to" 8,000 Bosnian men and boys by General Ratko Mladic's Bosnian Serb
army in Srebrenica in July of 1995.

In the vast majority of recent media reports, the background and
responsibilities for the disaster in Srebrenica were absent. Preferred was
the simple explanation: a black and white event in which the Serbs were
solely to blame.

As someone who played a modest role in some of the events preceding the
massacre, perhaps a little background will provide some context. In early
1993, after my release from the Canadian Forces, I was asked to appear
before a number of U.S. congressional committees dealing with Bosnia. A few
months earlier, my successor in the UN Protection Force, General Philippe
Morillon, had --against the advice of his UN masters -- bullied his way into
Srebrenica accompanied by a tiny contingent of Canadian soldiers and told
its citizens they were now under the protection of the UN. The folks at the
UN in New York were furious with Gen. Morillon but, with the media on his
side, they were forced to introduce the "safe haven" concept for six areas
of Bosnia, including Srebrenica.

Wondering what this concept would mean, one U.S. senator asked me how many
troops it would take to defend the safe havens. "Somewhere in the
neighbourhood of 135,000 troops," I replied. It had to be that large because
of the Serb artillery's range. The new UN commander on the ground in Bosnia,
Belgian General Francis Briquemont, said he agreed with my assessment but
was prepared to try to defend the areas with 65,000 additional troops. The
secretary-general of the day, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, went to the Security
Council and recommended 27,500 additional troops. The Security Council
approved a force of 12,000 and, six months later, fewer than 2,000
additional soldiers had been added to UNPROFOR for the safe-haven tasks.

Then the Security Council changed the wording of the safe-haven resolution
from "the UN will defend the safe havens" to "by their presence will the UN
deter attacks on the safe havens." In other words, a tiny, token, lightly
armed UN contingent would be placed as sacrificial lambs in Srebrenica to
"deter" the Bosnian Serb army.

It didn't take long for the Bosnian Muslims to realize that the UN was in no
position to live up to its promise to "protect" Srebrenica. With some help
from outsiders, they began to infiltrate thousands of fighters and weapons
into the safe haven. As the Bosnian Muslim fighters became better equipped
and trained, they started to venture outside Srebrenica, burning Serb
villages and killing their occupants before quickly withdrawing to the
security provided by the UN's safe haven. These attacks reached a crescendo
in 1994 and carried on into early 1995 after the Canadian infantry company
that had been there for a year was replaced by a larger Dutch contingent.

The Bosnian Serbs might have had the heaviest weapons, but the Bosnian
Muslims matched them in infantry skills that were much in demand in the
rugged terrain around Srebrenica. As the snow cleared in the spring of 1995,
it became obvious to Nasar Oric, the man who led the Bosnian Muslim
fighters, that the Bosnian Serb army was going to attack Srebrenica to stop
him from attacking Serb villages. So he and a large number of his fighters
slipped out of town. Srebrenica was left undefended with the strategic
thought that, if the Serbs attacked an undefended town, surely that would
cause NATO and the UN to agree that NATO air strikes against the Serbs were
justified. And so the Bosnian Serb army strolled into Srebrenica without
opposition.

What happened next is only debatable in scale. The Bosnian Muslim men and
older boys were singled out and the elderly, women and children were moved
out or pushed in the direction of Tuzla and safety. It's a distasteful
point, but it has to be said that, if you're committing genocide, you don't
let the women go since they are key to perpetuating the very group you are
trying to eliminate. Many of the men and boys were executed and buried in
mass graves.

Evidence given at The Hague war crimes tribunal casts serious doubt on the
figure of "up to" 8,000 Bosnian Muslims massacred. That figure includes "up
to" 5,000 who have been classified as missing. More than 2,000 bodies have
been recovered in and around Srebrenica, and they include victims of the
three years of intense fighting in the area. The math just doesn't support
the scale of 8,000 killed.

Nasar Oric, the Bosnian Muslim military leader in Srebrenica, is currently
on trial in The Hague for war crimes committed during his "defence" of the
town. Evidence to date suggests that he was responsible for killing as many
Serb civilians outside Srebrenica as the Bosnian Serb army was for
massacring Bosnian Muslims inside the town.

Two wrongs never made a right, but those moments in history that shame us
all because of our indifference should not be viewed in isolation without
the context that created them.


Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of UN
peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.

letters@globeandmail.ca



http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=74&ItemID=8244

ZMAG (USA)

The Politics of the Srebrenica Massacre*

by Edward S. Herman; July 07, 2005

"Srebrenica" has become the symbol of evil, and specifically Serb evil. It
is commonly described as "a horror without parallel in the history of Europe
since the Second World War" in which there was a cold-blooded execution "of
at least 8,000 Muslim men and boys." [1] The events in question took place
in or near the Bosnian town of Srebrenica between July 10 and 19, 1995, as
the Bosnian Serb army (BSA) occupied that town and  fought with and killed
many Bosnian Muslims, unknown numbers dying in the fighting and by
executions. There is no question but that there were executions,  and that
many Bosnian Muslim men died during the evacuation of Srebrenica and its
aftermath. But even though only rarely discussed there is a major issue of
how many were executed, as numerous bodies found in local grave sites were
victims of fighting, and many Bosnian Muslim men who fled Srebrenica reached
Bosnian Muslim territory safely. Some bodies were also those of  the many
Serbs killed in the forays by the Bosnian Muslims out of  Srebrenica in the
years before July 1995.

The Srebrenica massacre has played a special role in the politics of
Western treatment of  the restructuring of the former-Yugoslavia and  in
Western interventionism more broadly, and it is receiving renewed attention
and memorialization at its tenth anniversary in July 2005. It  is regularly
cited as proof  of Serb evil and genocidal intent and helped justify a focus
on punishing the Serbs and Milosevic and NATO's 1999 war on Serbia. It has
also provided important moral support for the further Western wars of
vengeance, power projection, and "liberation," having shown that there is
evil that the West can and must deal with forcibly.

However, there are three matters that should have raised serious questions
about the massacre at the time and since, but didn't and haven't. One was
that the massacre was extremely convenient to the political needs of the
Clinton administration, the Bosnian Muslims, and the Croats (see Section 1
below). A second was that there had been (and were after Srebrenica) a
series of  claimed Serb atrocities, that were regularly brought forth at
strategic moments when forcible intervention by the United States and NATO
bloc was in the offing but needed some solid public relations support, but
which were later shown to be fraudulent (Section 2). A third is that the
evidence for a massacre, certainly of  one in which 8,000 men and boys were
executed, has always been problematic, to say the least (Sections 3 and 4).

1. Political Convenience

The events of Srebrenica and claims of a major massacre were extremely
helpful to the Clinton administration, the Bosnian Muslim leadership, and
Croatian authorities. Clinton was under political pressure in 1995 both from
the media and from Bob Dole to take more forceful action in favor of the
Bosnian Muslims, [2] and his administration was eager to find a
justification for  more aggressive policies. Clinton officials rushed to the
Srebrenica scene to confirm and publicize the claims of  a massacre, just as
William Walker did later at Racak in January 1999.  Walker's immediate
report to Madeleine Albright caused her to exult that "spring has come early
this year." [3] Srebrenica allowed the "fall to come early" for the Clinton
administration in the summer of 1995.

Bosnian  Muslim leaders had  been struggling for several years to persuade
the NATO powers to intervene more forcibly on their behalf, and there is
strong evidence that they were prepared not only to lie but also to
sacrifice their own citizens and soldiers to serve the end of inducing
intervention (matters discussed further in Section 2). Bosnian Muslim
officials have claimed that their leader, Alija Izetbegovic, told them that
Clinton had advised him that U.S. intervention would only occur if the Serbs
killed at least 5,000 at Srebrenica. [4]  The abandonment of  Srebrenica by
a military force much larger than that of the attackers,  and a retreat that
made that larger force vulnerable and caused it to suffer heavy casualties
in fighting and vengeance executions, helped produce numbers that would meet
the Clinton criterion, by hook or by crook. There is other evidence that
the retreat from Srebrenica was not based on any military necessity but was
strategic, with the personnel losses incurred considered a necessary
sacrifice for a larger purpose. [5]

Croatian authorities were also delighted with the claims of a Srebrenica
massacre, as this deflected attention from their prior devastating ethnic
cleansing of Serbs and Bosnian Muslims in Western Bosnia (almost entirely
ignored by the Western media), [6] and it  provided a cover for their
already planned removal of  several hundred thousand Serbs from the Krajina
area in Croatia. This massive ethnic cleansing operation was carried out
with U.S. approval and logistical support within a month of the Srebrenica
events, and it may well have  involved the killing of  more Serb civilians
than Bosnian Muslim civilians killed in the Srebrenica area in July: most of
the Bosnian Muslim victims were fighters, not civilians, as the Bosnian
Serbs bused the Srebrenica women and children to safety; the Croatians made
no such provision and many women, children and old people were slaughtered
in Krajina. [7] The ruthlessness of  the Croats was impressive: "UN troops
watched horrified as Croat soldiers dragged the bodies of  dead Serbs along
the road outside the UN compound and then pumped them full of rounds from
the AK-47s. They then crushed the bullet-ridden bodies under the tracks of a
tank." [8] But this was hardly noticed in the wake of the indignation and
propaganda generated around Srebrenica  with the aid of the mainstream
media, whose co-belligerency role in the Balkan wars was already
well-entrenched. [9]

The International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) and UN also had
an important role to play in the consolidation of the standard Srebrenica
massacre narrative. From its inception the ICTY served as an arm of the NATO
powers, who created it, funded it, served as its police arm and main
information source, and expected and got responsive service from the
organization. [10] The ICTY focused intensively on Srebrenica and provided
important and nominally independent corroboration of the massacre claims
along with citable "judicial" claims of  planned "genocide." The UN is less
thoroughly integrated into NATO-power demands, but it is highly responsive
and in the Srebrenica case it came through just as the United States and its
main allies desired. [11]

This political interest in the Srebrenica massacre hardly proves that the
establishment narrative is wrong. It does, however, suggest the need for
caution and an awareness of the possibility of falsification and inflated
claims. That awareness has been entirely absent from mainstream treatment of
Srebrenica.

2. The Serial Lying  Before and After Srebrenica

At each stage in the dismantlement of Yugoslavia, its ethnic cleansing,
and before and during the NATO war over the Kosovo province of Serbia in
1999, propaganda lies played a very important role in forwarding conflict
and anti-Serb actions. There were lies of omission and lies that directly
conveyed false impressions and information. An important form of lie of
omission was the regular presentation of  Serb misbehavior as unique to the
Serbs, not also characteristic of  the behavior of  the Muslims and
Croatians or of the conflict overall. In case after case the media would
report on Serb attacks and atrocities, having neglected to report the prior
assaults on Serbs in those same towns and making the Serb behavior seem like
unprovoked acts of aggression and barbarity.

This was evident from the very start of the serious fighting in 1991 in
the republic of Croatia. In their treatment of the Eastern Croatian city of
Vukovar, for example,  the media (and ICTY) focused exclusively on the
federal Yugoslav army's capture of the town in the fall of 1991, completely
ignoring the prior spring and summer's slaughter by Croatian National Guard
troops and paramilitaries of hundreds of  ethnic Serbs who had lived in the
Vukovar area.  According to Raymond  K. Kent, "a  substantial Serb
population in the major Slavonian city of Vukovar disappeared without having
fled, leaving traces of torture in the old Austrian the spring catacombs
under the city along with evidence of murder and rape. The Western media,
whose demonization of the Serbs was well underway, chose to overlook these
events." [12] This selective and misleading focus was standard media and
ICTY practice.

Lies of omission were also clear in the attention given Bosnian Serb
prison camps like Omarska, which the media focused on intensively and with
indignation, when in fact the Muslims and Croats had very similar prison
camps-at Celebici, Tarcin, Livno, Bradina, Odzak,  and in the Zetra camp in
Sarajevo, among other sites-[13] with roughly comparable numbers,
facilities, and certainly no worse treatment of prisoners; [14] but in
contrast with the Serbs, the Muslims and Croats hired competent PR firms and
refused permission to inspect their facilities-and  the already
well-developed structure of bias made the media little interested in any but
Serb camps.

Wild allegations of  Auschwitz-like conditions in Serb "concentration
camps" were spread by "journalists of attachment" who lapped up propaganda
handouts by  Muslim and Croat officials and PR hirlings. Roy Gutman, who won
a Pulitzer prize jointly with John Burns for Bosnia reporting in 1993,
depended heavily on Croat and Muslim officials and witnesses with suspect
credentials and implausible claims, and he was a major source of   inflated,
one-sided, and false "concentration camp" propaganda. [15] John Burns'
Pulitzer award was based on an extended interview with Boris Herak, a
captured Bosnian Serb supplied to him and a Soros-funded film-maker by the
Bosnian Muslims. Several years later Herak admitted that his extremely
implausible confession had been coerced and that he had been forced to
memorize many pages of lies. Two of his alleged victims also turned up alive
in later years. In reporting on Herak, John Burns and the New York Times
(and the Soros-funded film) suppressed the credibility-damaging fact that
Herak had also accused former UNPROFOR commandant, Canadian General Lewis
Mackenzie, of having raped young Muslim women at a Serb-run bordello. [16]
These scandalous awards are symptomatic of  the media bias that was already
overwhelming in 1992 and 1993.

In a recent development of interest, on a visit to the dying Alija
Izetbegovic, Bernard Kouchner asked him about the Bosnian Serb concentration
camps, whereupon Izetbegovic, surprisingly, admitted that these claims had
been inflated with the aim of getting NATO to bomb the Serbs. [17] This
important confession has not been mentioned in the U.S. or British
mainstream media.

One of the most important propaganda lies of the 1990s  featured the
Serb-run Trnopolje camp, visited by Britain's ITN reporters in  August 1992.
These reporters photographed  the resident Fikret Alic, showing him
emaciated and seemingly inside a concentration camp fence. In fact,  Fikret
Alic was in a transit camp, was a sick man (and was sick with tuberculosis
long before reaching the camp), was not in any way representative of others
in the camp, and was soon able to move to Sweden. Furthermore, the fence was
around the photographers, not the man photographed. [18] But this hugely
dishonest photo was featured everywhere in the West as proving a
Serb-organized Auschwitz, was denounced by NATO high officials, and helped
provide the moral basis for the creation of  the ICTY and its clear focus on
Serb evil.

In the case of the siege of Sarajevo, as with conflict around many "safe
haven" towns, the Bosnian Muslim government engaged in a steady program of
provoking the Serbs, blaming them for the ensuing response, lying about
casualties, and  trying-usually successfully-to place the blame on the
Serbs. As Tim Fenton has said, "Massacre allegations by the Bosnian Muslims
followed any reported conflict as night followed day: most notoriously
Muslim Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic claimed the UN was responsible for the
deaths of 70,000 in Bihac in early 1995, when in fact there had barely been
any fighting and casualties were small." [19]

A remarkable feature of  the Bosnian Muslim struggle to demonize the
Serbs, in order to get NATO to come to Bosnian Muslim aid with bombs, was
their willingness to kill their own people. This was most notable in the
case of the ruthless bombing of Sarajevo civilians in three massacres: in
1992 (the "Breadline Massacre"), 1994 (the Markale "Market Massacre") and a
"Second Market Massacre" in 1995. In the standard narrative  the Serbs were
responsible for these massacres, and it is admittedly not easy to believe
that the Muslim leadership would  kill their own for political advantage
even if the evidence points strongly in that direction. But these massacres
were all extremely well timed to influence imminent NATO and UN decisions to
intervene more forcibly on behalf of the Bosnian Muslims. More important,
numerous UN officials and senior Western military officials have claimed
that the evidence is strong in all three cases that the actions were planned
and executed by Bosnian Muslims. [20] U.S. Army officer John E. Sray, who
was on the scene in Bosnia during these and other massacres and was head of
the U.S. intelligence section in Sarajevo, even suggested that the
incidents, and probable Bosnian Muslim official connivance in these
atrocities, "deserve a thorough scrutiny by the International War Crimes
Tribunal." [21]  Needless to say no such scrutiny was forthcoming. In short,
this view of the three massacres is not conspiracy theory, it is a
conclusion based on serious and substantial evidence,  but not even debated
in the party-line dominated accounts of recent Balkan history. [22]

Both before and after Srebrenica lying about numbers killed was also
standard practice, helpful in sustaining the dominant narrative. For Bosnia,
in December 1992 the Bosnian Muslim government claimed 128,444 deaths of
their forces and people, a number which grew to 200,000 by June 1993, rising
to 250,000 in 1994. [23] These figures were swallowed without a qualm by
Western politicians, media, and intellectual war-campaigners (e.g., David
Rieff), with Clinton himself using the 250,000 figure in a speech in
November 1995. Former State Department official George Kenney has long
questioned these figures and marveled at media gullibility in accepting
these claims without the least interest in verification. His own estimate
ran between 25,000 and 60,000. [24] More recently, a study sponsored by the
Norwegian government  estimated the Bosnian war dead as 80,000, and one
sponsored by the Hague Tribunal itself came up with a figure of 102,000
dead. [25] Neither of these studies has been reported on in the U.S. media,
which had regularly offered its readers/listeners the inflated numbers.

A similar inflation process took place during the 78-day NATO bombing war
in 1999, with high U.S. officials at various moments claiming 100,000,
250,000 and 500,000 Serb killings of  Kosovo Albanians, along with the
lavish use of the word "genocide" to describe Serb actions in Kosovo. [26]
This figure gradually shrank to 11,000, and has remained there despite the
fact that only some 4,000 bodies were found in one of the most intense
forensic searches in history, and with unknown numbers of those bodies
combatants,  Serbs, and  civilian victims of  U.S. bombing. But  the 11,000
must be valid because the NATO governments and ICTY say it is, and Michael
Ignatieff assured readers of the New York Times that "whether those 11,334
bodies will be found  depends on whether the Serb military and the police
removed them." [27]

This record of systematic disinformation certainly does not disprove the
truth of the standard narrative on the Srebrenica massacre. It does,
however, suggest the need for a close look at the claims, which have proved
so convenient, a close look that the mainstream has steadily refused to
provide.

3. The Problematic Massacre Claims

By the time of the Srebrenica events of July 1995 the stage had been well
set for making massacre claims effective. The serial lying had been largely
unchallenged in the mainstream, the demonization process and
good-versus-evil dichotomy had been well established, the ICTY and UN
leadership were closely following the agenda of  the United States and its
NATO allies, and the media were on board as co-belligerents.

In this environment, context-stripping was easy. One element of context
was the fact that the "safe area" concept was a fraud, as the safe areas
were supposed to have been disarmed, but weren't,  and with UN connivance.
[28] They were therefore used by the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica and other
safe havens as launching pads for attacks on nearby Serb villages. In the
three years prior to the massacre well over a thousand Serb civilians were
killed by Muslim forces in scores of devastated nearby villages; [29] and
well before July 1995 the Srebrenica Muslim commander Nasir Oric proudly
showed Western reporters videos of some of  his beheaded Serb victims and
bragged about his killings. [30]  Testifying before the Tribunal on February
12, 2004, UN military commander in Bosnia in 1992 and 1993,  General
Philippe Morillon, stated his conviction that the attack on Srebrenica was a
"direct reaction" to the massacres of  Serbs by Nasir Oric and his forces in
1992 and 1993, massacres with which Morillon was closely familiar. [31]
Morillon's testimony was of no interest to the Western media, and when the
ICTY finally got around to  indicting Nasir Oric on March 28, 2003, very
possibly to create the image of judicial balance, he was charged with
killing only seven Serbs who were tortured and beaten to death after
capture, and with the "wanton destruction" of nearby villages. Although he
openly bragged to Western reporters of slaughtering Serb civilians, the ICTY
reportedly "found no evidence that there were civilian casualties in the
attacks on Serb villages in his theater of operations." [32]

When the Bosnian Serbs captured Srebrenica in July 1995, it was reported
that the 28th regiment of  the Bosnian Muslim Army (BMA), comprising several
thousand men, had just fled the town. [33] The media failed to ask how such
a large force could have been present in a disarmed "safe area." Having also
succeeded in ignoring the prior abuses emanating from the safe area, this
allowed them to follow a quickly established party line of  a planned
"genocide" and inexplicable brutality rather than the vengeance which the
media allow as semi-exoneration of violence by "worthy" victims (e.g.,
Kosovo Albanians driving out and killing Serbs and Roma after the NATO
takeover of Kosovo).

A second element of context was the possible political basis for the
surrender of  Srebrenica by a force in a good defensive position,
outnumbering the attacking BSA by a 6-1 or 8-1 ratio, but retreating in
advance of the assault, their leaders having been withdrawn previously by
order of the Bosnian Muslim leadership. [34] This left the population
unprotected, and made the BMA cadres vulnerable as they retreated in
disarray toward Bosnian Muslim lines. Could this have been another
self-sacrificing maneuver by the leadership to produce victims, perhaps
designed to help meet the Clinton 5,000 target and induce more forcible NATO
intervention? These questions never arose in the mainstream media.

The Srebrenica events had a number of features that made it possible to
claim 8,000 "men and boys" executed. One was the confusion and uncertainty
about the fate of the  fleeing Bosnian Muslim forces, some reaching Tuzla
safely, some killed in the fighting, and some captured. The 8,000 figure was
first provided by the Red Cross, based on their crude estimate that the BSA
had captured 3,000 men and that 5,000 were reported "missing." [35] It is
well established that thousands of those "missing" had reached Tuzla  or
were killed in the fighting, [36] but in an amazing transformation
displaying the eagerness to find the Bosnian Serbs evil and the Muslims
victims, the "reaching safety/killed-in-action" basis of  being missing was
ignored and the missing were taken as executed!  This misleading conclusion
was helped  along by the Red Cross's reference to the 5,000 as having
"simply disappeared," and its failure to correct this politically biased
usage and claim despite its own recognition that "several thousand" refugees
had reached Central Bosnia. [37]

It was also helped along by the Bosnian Muslim leadership's refusal to
disclose the names and numbers of those reaching safety, [38] but there was
a remarkable readiness in the Western establishment not only to ignore those
reaching safety, but also to disregard deaths in fighting and to take dead
bodies as proving executions. The will to believe here was limitless:
reporter David Rohde saw a bone sticking up in a grave site near Srebrenica,
which he just knew by instinct was a remnant of an execution and serious
evidence of a "massacre." [39]  It was standard media practice to move from
an asserted and unproven claim of  thousands missing, or a report of the
uncovering of  bodies in a grave site, to the conclusion that the claim of
8,000 executed  was thereby demonstrated. [40]

With 8,000 executed and thousands killed in the fighting there should have
been huge grave sites and satellite evidence of  both executions, burials,
and any body removals. But the body searches in the Srebrenica vicinity were
painfully disappointing, with only some two thousand bodies found in
searches through 1999, including bodies killed in action and possibly Serb
bodies, some pre-dating July 1995. The sparseness of these findings led to
claims of body removal and reburial, but this was singularly unconvincing as
the Bosnian Serbs were under intense military pressure after July 1995. This
was the period when NATO was bombing Serb positions and Croat/Muslim armies
were driving towards Banja Luka.  The BSA was on the defensive and was
extremely short of equipment and resources, including gasoline.  To have
mounted an operation of the magnitude required to exhume, transport and
rebury thousands of corpses would have been far beyond the BSA's capacity at
that time. Furthermore, in carrying out such a program they could hardly
hope to escape observation from OSCE personnel, local civilians, and
satellite observations.

On August 10, 1995,  Madeleine Albright showed some satellite photos at a
closed session of the Security Council, as part of a denunciation of the
Bosnian Serbs, including one photo showing people--allegedly Bosnian Muslims
near Srebrenica--assembled in a stadium, and one allegedly taken shortly
thereafter showing a nearby field with "disturbed" soil. These photos have
never been publicly released, but even if they are genuine they don't prove
either executions or burials. Furthermore, although  the   ICTY speaks of
"an organized and comprehensive effort" to hide bodies, and David Rohde
claimed a "huge Serb effort to hide bodies," [41] neither Albright nor
anyone else has ever shown a satellite photo of  people actually being
executed, buried, or dug up for reburial, or of trucks conveying thousands
of bodies elsewhere. This evidence blank occurred despite Albright's warning
the Serbs that "We will be watching," and with satellites at that time
making at least eight passes per day and geostationary drones able to hover
and take finely detailed pictures in position over Bosnia during the summer
of 1995. [42] The mainstream media have found this failure to confirm of no
interest.

There have been a great many bodies gathered at Tuzla, some 7,500 or more,
many in poor condition or parts only,  their collection and handling
incompatible with professional  forensic standards, their provenance unclear
and link to the July 1995 events in Srebrenica unproven and often unlikely,
[43] and the manner of  their death usually uncertain. Interestingly,
although the Serbs were regularly accused of  trying to hide bodies, there
has never been any suggestion that the Bosnian Muslims, long in charge of
the body search, might shift bodies around and otherwise manipulate
evidence, despite their substantial record of  dissembling. A systematic
attempt to use DNA to trace connections to Srebrenica is underway, but
entails many problems, apart from that of the integrity of  the material
studied and process of investigation, and will not resolve the question of
differentiating executions from deaths in combat. There are also lists of
missing, but these lists are badly flawed, with duplications, individuals
listed who had died before July 1995, who fled to avoid BSA service, or who
registered to vote in 1997,  and they include individuals who died in battle
or reached safety or were captured and assumed a new existence elsewhere.
[44]

The 8,000 figure is also incompatible with the basic arithmetic of
Srebrenica numbers before and after July 1995. Displaced persons from
Srebrenica-that is, massacre survivors-- registered with the World Health
Organization and Bosnian government in early August 1995, totalled 35,632.
Muslim men  who reached Muslim lines "without their families being informed"
totaled at least 2,000, and  some 2,000 were killed in the fighting. That
gives us 37,632 survivors  plus the 2,000 combat deaths, which would require
the prewar population of Srebrenica to have been 47,000 if 8,000 were
executed, whereas the population before July was more like 37-40,000
(Tribunal judge Patricia Wald gave 37,000 as her estimate). The numbers
don't add up. [45]

There were witnesses to killings at Srebrenica, or those who claimed to be
witnesses. There were not many of these, and some had a political axe to
grind or were otherwise not credible, [46] but several were believable and
were probably telling of real and ugly events. But we are talking here of
evidence of  hundreds of executions, not 8,000 or anything close to it. The
only direct participant witness claim that ran to a thousand was that of
Drazen Erdemovic, an ethnic Croat associated with a mercenary group of
killers whose members were paid 12 kilos of gold for their Bosnian service
(according to Erdemovic himself)  and ended up working in the Congo on
behalf of French intelligence. His testimony was accepted despite its
vagueness and inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, and his suffering from
mental problems sufficient to disqualify him from trial--but not from
testifying before the Tribunal, free of cross-examination. within two weeks
of this disqualification from trial. This and other witness evidence
suffered from serious abuse of  the plea-bargaining process whereby
witnesses could receive mitigating sentences if they cooperated sufficiently
with the prosecution. [47]

It is also noteworthy how many relatively impartial observers in or near
Srebrenica in July 1995 didn't see any evidence of massacres, including the
members of the Dutch forces present in the "safe area" and people like Henry
Wieland, the chief UN investigator into alleged human rights abuses, who
could find no eyewitnesses to atrocities after five days of interviewing
among the 20,000 Srebrenica survivors gathered at the Tuzla airport refugee
camp. [48]

4. Anomalies

One anomaly connected with Srebrenica has been the stability of the
figure of  Bosnian Muslim victims-8,000 in July 1995 and 8,000 today,
despite the crudity of the initial estimate, the evidence that many or most
of the 5,000 "missing" reached Bosnian Muslim territory or were killed in
the fighting, and the clear failure to produce supportive physical evidence
despite a massive effort. In other cases, like the 9/11 fatality estimate,
and even the Bosnian killings and Kosovo bombing war estimates, the original
figures were radically scaled down as evidence of body counts made the
earlier inflated numbers unsustainable. [49]  But because of its key
political role for the United States,  Bosnian Muslims and Croats, and an
almost religious ardour of belief in this claim, Sebrenica has been immune
to evidence.  From the beginning until today the number has been taken as a
given, a higher truth, the questioning of which would show a lack of faith
and very likely "apologetics" for the demon.

Another anomaly also showing the sacred, untouchable, and politicized
character of the massacre in Western ideology has been the ready designation
of  the killings as a case of "genocide." The Tribunal played an important
role here, with hard-to-match gullibility, unrestrained psychologizing, and
incompetent legal reasoning, which the judges have applied to Serb-related
cases only. On gullibility, one Tribunal judge accepted as fact the witness
claim that Serb soldiers had forced an old Muslim man to eat the liver of
his grandson; [50] and the judges repeatedly stated as an established fact
that 7-8,000 Muslim men had been executed, while simultaneously
acknowledging that the evidence only "suggested" that "a majority" of the
7-8,000 missing had not been killed in combat, which yields a number
substantially lower than 7-8,000.  [51]

The Tribunal dealt with the awkward problem of  the genocide-intent Serbs
bussing Bosnian Muslim women and children to safety by arguing that they did
this for public relations reasons, but as Michael Mandel points out, failing
to do some criminal act despite your desire is called "not committing a
crime." [52] The Tribunal never asked why the genocidal Serbs failed to
surround the town before its capture to prevent thousands of males from
escaping to safety, or why the Bosnian Muslim soldiers were willing to leave
their women and children as well as many wounded comrades to the mercies of
the Serbs; [53] and they failed to confront the fact that  10,000 mainly
Muslim residents of Zvornik sought refugee from the civil war in Serbia
itself, as prosecution witness Borislav Jovic testified. [54]

Among the other idiocies in the Tribunal judges' argument, it was genocide
if you killed many males in a group in order to reduce the future population
of that group, thereby making it unviable in that area. Of course, you might
want to kill them to prevent their killing you in the future, but the court
knows Serb psychology better-that couldn't be the sole reason, there must
have been a more sinister aim. The Tribunal reasoning holds forth the
possibility that with only a little prosecution-friendly judicial
psychologizing any case of  killing enemy soldiers can be designated
genocide.

There is also the problem of definition of  the group. Were the Serbs
trying to eliminate all the Muslims in Bosnia, or Muslims globally? Or just
in Srebrenica? The judges suggested that pushing them out of the Srebrenica
area was itself genocide, and they essentially equated genocide with ethnic
cleansing. [55]  It is notable that the ICTY has never called the Croat
ethnic cleansing of  250,000 Krajina Serbs "genocide" although in that case
many women and children were killed and  the ethnic cleansing applied to a
larger area and larger victim population than in Srebrenica. [56]  (On
August 10, 1995, Madeleine Albright cried out to the Security Council that
"as many as 13,000 men, women and children were driven from their homes" in
Srebrenica.) [57]  Perhaps the ICTY had accepted Richard Holbrooke's  comic
designation of  Krajina as a case of  "involuntary expulsions."  [58] The
bias is blatant; the politicization of   a purported judicial enterprise is
extreme.

Media treatment of  the Srebrenica and Krajina cases followed the same
pattern and illustrates well how the media make some victims worthy and
others unworthy in accord with a political agenda. With the Serbs their
government's target, and their government  actively aiding the massive Croat
ethnic cleansing program in Krajina, the media gave huge and indignant
treatment to the first, with invidious language, calls for action, and
little context. With Krajina, attention was slight and passing, indignation
was absent, detailed reporting on the condition of the victims was minimal,
descriptive language was neutral, and there was context offered that made
the events understandable. The contrast is so gross as to be droll: the
attack on Srebrenica "chilling," "murderous," "savagery," "cold-blooded
killing," "genocidal,"  "aggression,"and of course "ethnic cleansing." With
Krajina, the media used no such strong language-even ethnic cleansing was
too much for them. The Croat assault was merely  a big "upheaval"  that is
"softening up the enemy," "a lightning offensive," explained away  as a
"response to Srebrenica" and a result of  Serb leaders "overplaying their
hand." The Washington Post even cited U.S. Ambassador to Croatia Peter
Galbraith saying the "the Serb exodus was not 'ethnic cleansing'." [59] The
paper does not allow a challenge to that judgment. In fact, however, the
Croat operations in Krajina left Croatia as the most ethnically purified of
all the former components of the former Yugoslavia, although the NATO
occupation of Kosovo has allowed an Albanian ethnic cleansing that is
rivalling that of Croatia in ethnic purification.

Another anomaly in the Srebrenica case is the insistence on bringing all
the criminals (Serb) to trial and getting the willing executioners (Serb) to
admit guilt as necessary for justice and essential for reconciliation. A
problem is that justice cannot be one-sided or it ceases to be justice, and
shows its true face as vengeance and a cover for other political ends.
Ethnic cleansing in Bosnia was by no means one-sided, and deaths by
nationality were not far off from population proportionality; [60] the Serbs
claim and have documented thousands of  deaths at the hands of  the Bosnian
Muslims and their imported Mujahedin cadres, and by the Croatians, and they
have their own group examining and trying to identify bodies at an estimated
73 mass graves. [61] This victimization has hardly been noticed by the
Western media or ICTY-the distinguished Yugoslav forensic expert Dr. Zoran
Stankovic observed back in 1996 that "the fact that his team had previously
identified the bodies of 1,000 Bosnian Serbs in the [Srebrenica] region had
not interested prosecutor Richard Goldstone." [62] Instead, there is a
steady  refrain about the Serbs tendency to whine, whereas Bosnian Muslim
complaints are  taken as those of  true victims and are never designated
whining.

Rather than producing reconciliation the steady focus on Srebrenica
victims and killers makes for more intense hatred and nationalism, just as
the Kosovo war and its violence exacerbated hatred and tensions there and
showed that Clinton's claimed objective of  a tolerant multi-ethnic Kosovo
was a fraud.  In Kosovo, this one-sided propaganda and NATO control has
unleashed serious and unremitting anti-Serb-along with anti-Roma, anti-Turk,
anti-dissident-Albanian-- violence, helped along by the willingness of the
NATO authorities to look the other way as their allies-the purported
victims-take their revenge and pursue their long-standing aim of ethnic
purification. [63] In Bosnia and Serbia the Serbs have been under steady
attack, humiliated, and their leaders and  military personnel punished,
while the criminals among the Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and NATO powers
(e.g., Clinton, Blair, Albright, Holbrooke) suffer no penalties [64] and may
even be portrayed as dispensers of justice (Clinton et al.).
  .
It is clear that the objectives of  the retribution-pushers are not
justice and reconciliation-they are to unify and strengthen the position of
the Bosnian Muslims, to crush the Republica Srpska, and possibly even
eliminate it as an independent entity in Bosnia,  to keep Serbia
disorganized, weak and  dependent on the West, and to continue to put the
U.S. and NATO attack and dismantlement of Yugoslavia in a favorable light.
The last objective requires  diverting attention from the Clinton/Bosnian
Muslim role in giving Al Qaeda a foothold in the Balkans,  Izetbegovic's
close alliance with Osama bin Laden, his Islamic Declaration declaring
hostility to a multi-ethnic state, [65] the importation of  4,000 Mujahaden
to fight a holy war in Bosnia, with active Clinton administration aid, and
the KLA-Al Qaeda connection.

These aspects of the siding with the Bosnian Muslims have always been
awkward for the war propagandists, and they  became more so after 9/11-the
U.S. 9/11 Commission Report claims that two of the 19 hijackers, Nawaf al
Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar, and a "mastermind" of the attack, Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, "fought" in Bosnia, and that bin Laden had "service" offices in
Zagreb and Sarajevo. [66]  Despite the huge focus on 9/11 and Al Qaeda these
links have not been featured in the mainstream media and have not influenced
Bosnian proconsul Paddy Ashdown, who attended Izetbegovic's funeral and
continues to push Bosnian Muslim interests. The Serbs, of course, were
complaining about the brutality (and beheadings) of the Mujahaden  in 1993,
but the media and ICTY were not interested then and remain uninterested.
Let's just talk about Srebrenica, the Bosnian Muslims as unique victims, and
Clinton's and the West's generous if belated service to those victimized
underdogs.

But didn't the Bosnian Serbs "confess" that they had murdered 8,000
civilians? This has been the take of the Western media, but again
demonstrating their subservience to their leaders' political agenda. The
Bosnian Serbs actually did put out a report on Srebrenica in September 2002,
[67] but this report was rejected by  Paddy Ashdown for failing to come up
with the proper conclusions. He therefore forced a further report by firing
a stream of Republica Srpska politicians and analysts,  threatening the RS
government,  and eventually extracting a report prepared by people who would
come to the officially approved conclusions. [68] This report, issued on
June 11, 2004, was then greeted in the Western media as a meaningful
validation of the official line-the refrain was, the Bosnian Serbs "admit"
the massacre, which should finally settle any questions. Amusingly, even
this coerced and imposed report didn't come near acknowledging 8,000
executions (it speaks of "several thousand" executions). What this episode
"proves" is that the Western campaign to make the defeated Serbia grovel is
not yet terminated, and the media's continuing gullibility and propaganda
service.

Conclusion

The "Srebrenica massacre" is the greatest triumph of  propaganda to emerge
from the Balkan wars. Other claims and outright lies have played  their role
in the Balkan conflicts, but while some have retained a modest place in the
propaganda repertoire despite challenge (Racak, the Markale massacre, the
Serb refusal to negotiate at Rambouillet, 250,000 Bosnian dead, the aim of a
Greater Serbia as the driving force in the Balkan wars), [69] the Srebrenica
massacre reigns supreme for symbolic power. It is the symbol of Serb evil
and Bosnian Muslim victimhood, and the justice of the Western dismantling of
Yugoslavia and intervention there at many levels, including a bombing war
and colonial occupations of  Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.

But the link of  this propaganda triumph to truth and justice is
non-existent. The disconnection with truth is epitomized by the fact that
the original estimate of  8,000,  including 5,000 "missing"--who had left
Srebrenica for Bosnian Muslim lines-was maintained even after it had been
quickly established that several thousand had reached those lines and that
several thousand more had perished in battle. This nice round number lives
on today in the face of a failure to find  the executed bodies and  despite
the absence of  a  single satellite photo showing executions, bodies,
digging, or trucks transporting bodies for reburial. The media have
carefully refrained from asking questions on this point, despite Albright's
August 1995 promise that "We will be watching."

That Albright statement, and the photos she did display at the time,
helped divert attention from the ongoing  "Krajina massacre" of Serbs in
Croatian Krajina, an ethnic cleansing process of  great brutality and wider
scope than that at Srebrenica, in which there was less real fighting than at
Srebrenica,  mainly attacks on and the killing and removal of defenseless
civilians. At Srebrenica the Bosnian Serbs moved women and children to
safety, and there is no evidence of  any of  them being murdered; [70]
whereas in Krajina there was no such separation and an estimated 368 women
and children were killed, along with many too old and infirm to flee. [71]
One measure of the propaganda success of  the "Srebrenica massacre" is that
the possibility that the intense focus on the Srebrenica massacre was
serving as a cover for the immediately following "Krajina massacre,"
supported by the United States, was outside the orbit of thought of the
media. For the media, Srebrenica helped bring about Krajina, and the Serbs
had it coming. [72]

The media have played an important role in making the Srebrenica massacre
a propaganda triumph. As noted earlier, the media had become a
co-belligerent by 1991, and all standards of  objectivity disappeared in
their subservience to the pro-Bosnian Muslim and anti-Serb agenda.
Describing the reporting of Christine Amanpour and others on a battle around
Goradze, U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel John Sray wrote back in October 1995
that these news reports "were devoid of any semblance of truth," that
Americans were suffering from "a cornucopia of disinformation," that
"America has not been so pathetically deceived" since the Vietnam War, and
that popular perceptions of  Bosnia "have been forged by a prolific
propaganda machine..[that has] managed to manipulate illusions to further
Muslim goals." [73]

That propaganda machine also conquered  the liberals and much of the left
in the United States, who swallowed the dominant  narrative of  the evil
Serbs  seeking hegemony, employing uniquely brutal and genocidal strategies,
and upsetting a previous multi-cultural haven in Bosnia-run by Osama bin
Laden's friend and ally Alija Izetbegovic, and with rectification brought
belatedly by Clinton, Holbrooke and Albright working closely with Iran,
Turkey and Saudi Arabia!  The liberal/left war coalition needed to find the
Serbs demons in order to justify imperial warfare, and they did so by
accepting and internalizing a set of  lies and myths that make up the
dominant narrative. [74] This liberal/"cruise missile left" (CML) combo was
important in helping develop the "humanitarian intervention" rationale for
attacking Serbia on behalf of the Kosovo Liberation Army, and in fact
preparing the ground for Bush's eventual basing of his own wars on the quest
for "liberation." [75] The Srebrenica massacre helped make the liberals and
CML true believers in the crusade in the Balkans and gave moral backup to
their  servicing the expanding imperial role of  their country and its
allies.

Former UN official Cedric Thornberry, writing in 1996, noted that
"prominently in parts of the international liberal media" the position is
"that the Serbs were the only villains," and back at UN headquarters in the
spring of 1993 he was warned: "Take cover-the fix is on." [76]  The fix was
on, even if only tacit and built-in to the government-media-Tribunal
relationship. It helped make the Srebrenica massacre the symbol of  evil
and, with the help of  Tribunal "justice," and support of  liberals and CML,
provided a  cover for the U.S.-NATO attack on and dismantling of
Yugoslavia, colonial occupations in Bosnia and Kosovo, and justification for
"humanitarian intervention" more broadly. What more could be asked of  a
propaganda system?

Notes:

*This paper is partly drawn from and cites chapters in a forthcoming book
on the Srebrenica massacre, Srebrenica: The Politics of War Crimes, written
by  George Bogdanich, Tim Fenton, Philip Hammond, Edward S. Herman, Michael
Mandel,  Jonathan Rooper, and George Szamuely. This book is referred to in
the notes  below as Politics of War Crimes. The author and his colleagues
are indebted to Diana Johnstone, David Peterson, Vera Vratusa-Zunjic, Milan
Bulajic, Milivoje Ivanisevic, Konstantin Kilibarda, and George Pumphrey for
advice. Johnstone's Fools Crusade is a fine basic statement of an
alternative perspective on the Balkan Wars; George Pumphrey's "Srebrenica:
Three Years Later, And Still Searching," is a classic critique of the
establishment Srebrenica massacre narrative and repeatedly hit the target
with facts and analyses still not rebutted.

1. "Bosnia: 2 Officials Dismissed for Obstructing Srebrenica Inquiry," AP
Report, New York Times, April 17, 2004; Marlise Simons, "Bosnian Serb Leader
Taken Before War Crimes Tribunal," New York Times, April 8, 2000; UN,  The
Fall of Srebrenica (A/54/549), Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to
General Assembly resolution 53/35, November 15, 1999, par. 506
(http://www.un.org/News/ossg/srebrenica.pdf )

2. See Ivo Pukanic,  "US Role In Storm: Thrilled With Operation Flash,
President Clinton Gave the Go Ahead to Operation Storm," Nacional (Zagreb),
May 24, 2005.

3.    Barton Gellman, "The Path to Crisis: How the United States and Its
Allies Went to War," Washington Post, April 18, 1999

4. "Some surviving members of the Srebrenica delegation have stated that
President Izetbegovic also told that he had learned that a NATO intervention
in Bosnia and Herzegovina was possible, but could occur only if the Serbs
were to break into Srebrenica, killing at least 5,000 of its people.
President Izetbegovic has flatly denied making such a statement." The Fall
of Srebrenica (A/54/549), Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to
General Assembly resolution 53/35, November 15, 1999, par. 115,
(http://www.haverford.edu/relg/sells/reports/UNsrebrenicareport.htm)
  The UN report does not mention that there were nine others present at that
meeting, and that one of them, Hakija Meholijic, former Srebrenica chief of
police, has stated that eight of them (all those living) "can confirm" the
Clinton suggestion. (Dani, June 22, 1998:
http://cdsp.neu.edu/info/students/marko/dani/dani2.html)

5. Politics of War Crimes, Bogdanich,  chapter 2, "Prelude to Capture,"
and Fenton, chapter 3, "Military Context."  See also Tim Ripley, Operation
Deliberate Force (Center for Defence and Security Studies: 1999), p. 145.

6. In his Balkan Odyssey, Lord David Owen stated that "By acquiescing in
the Croatian government's seizure of Western Slavonia, the Contact Group had
in effect given the green light to the Bosnian Serbs to attack Srebrenica
and Zepa" (pp. 199-200). Owen was mistaken; the Contact Group was serving
one side only, and the media's failure to report on and criticize the
approved aggression made it possible to present the takeover of Srebrenica
as a unique and unprovoked evil.

7. Veritas estimated that 1,205 civilians were killed in Operation Storm,
including 358 women and 10 children. In the graves around Srebrenica through
1999, among the 1,895 bodies only one was identified as female. See
"Croatian Serb Exodus Commemorated," Agence France Press, Aug. 4, 2004;
also,  Veritas at www.veritas.org.yu.

8. Ripley, Operation Deliberate Force, p. 192. See also footnotes 56 and
70.

9. The co-belligerency role was described by Peter Brock in "Dateline
Yugoslavia: The Partisan Press," Foreign Policy, Winter 1993-94. A
forthcoming book by Brock, on Media Cleansing: UNcovering Yugoslavia's Civil
Wars, shows this partisanship in greater and effective detail. In his
autobiography, U. S. Secretary of State James Baker says that he instructed
his press secretary, Margaret Tutweiler to help Bosnian Foreign Minister
Haris Silajzdic utilize the Western media to further the Bosnian Muslim
cause, noting that he "had her talk to her contacts at the four television
networks, the Washington Post and the New York Times." James A. Baker, The
Politics of Diplomacy (Putnam: 1995), pp. 643-4.

10. As NATO PR spokesman Jamie Shea stated on May 16, 1999,  when asked
about NATO's vulnerability to Tribunal charges,  he was not worried. The
prosecutor, he said, will start her investigation "because we will allow her
to." Further, "NATO countries are those that have provided the finance," and
on the need to build a second chamber "so that prosecutions can be speeded
up...we and the Tribunal are all one on this, we want to see war criminals
brought to justice."  http://www.nato.int/kosovo/press/p990516b.htm
   See  Michael Mandel, How America Gets Away With Murder (London: Pluto,
2004), chaps. 4-5; Edward Herman, "The Milosevic Trial, Part 1," Z Magazine,
April 2002.

11. See Politics of War Crimes, chap. 7, Bogdanich, "UN Report on
Srebrenica-A distorted Picture of Events."

12. Raymond K. Kent, "Contextualizing Hate: The Hague Tribunal, the
Clinton Administration and the Serbs," Dialogue (Paris), v. 5, no. 20,
December, 1996 (as posted to the Emperor's Clothes website,
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/misc/kent.htm)

13. Carl Savitch, "Celebici,"
http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/047.shtml.

14. It would be hard to surpass the savagery  of the Bosnian Muslims at
the Celebici camp, described in ibid. See also, Diana Johnstone, Fools'
Crusade (Pluto: 2002), pp. 71-72.

15. See the two works by Peter Brock, note 9 above; also Johnstone, Fools'
Crusade, pp. 70-83.

16. For details and citations see Brock's article and book (note 9 above).

17.  Bernard Kouchner, Les Guerriers de la Paix (Paris: Grasset, 2004),
pp. 372-4.

18. Johnstone, Fools' Crusade,  pp, 72-73; Thomas Deichmann,
"Misinformation: TV Coverage of a Bosnian Camp," Covert Action Quarterly,
Fall, 1998, pp. 52-55.

19. In a private communication dated November 21,  2003.

20. For a good summary of  the case that these were "Self-Inflicted
Atrocities," with further references, see the Senate Staff Report of January
16, 1997, on "Clinton Approved Iranian Arms Transfers Help Turn Bosnia Into
Militant Islamic Base,"
http://www.senate.gov/%7erpc/releases/1997/iran.htm#top. See also Cees
Wiebes, Intelligence and the War in Bosnia, 1992 - 1995, London: Lit Verlag,
2003, pp. 68-69:  http://213.222.3.5/srebrenica/toc/p6_c02_s004_b01.html ).

21.  John E. Sray, "Selling the Bosnian Myth to America: Buyer Beware,"
Foreign Military Studies, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, October, 1995,
<http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/bosnia2.htm>.

22. For exceptions to this rule, Leonard Doyle, "Muslims 'slaughter their
own people.'" The Independent, Aug. 22, 1992; Hugh Manners, "Serbs 'Not
Guilty' of Massacre," The Sunday Times [London], Oct. 1, 1995. David Binder
was unable to get his own paper, the New York Times, to publish analyses of
possible Muslim involvement in Sarajevo massacres; he had to publish these
elsewhere. See David Binder, "The Balkan Tragedy: Anatomy of a Massacre,"
Foreign Policy, No. 97, Winter, 1994-1995; David Binder, "Bosnia's Bombers,"
The Nation, October 2, 1995

23. For a good summary, Srdja Trifkovic, "Une spectaculaire revision de
chiffres," Balkan Infos (B.I.), February 2005.

24. George Kenney, "The Bosnian Calculation," New York Times Magazine,
April 23, 1995.

25. See Trifkovic, supra note 23; also,
http://grayfalcon.blogspot.com/2004/12/death-tolls-part-3.html.

26. See Edward Herman and David Peterson, "The NATO-Media Lie Machine:
'Genocide' in Kosovo," Z Magazine, May 2000:
http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/hermanmay2000.htm

27. Michael Ignatieff, "Counting Bodies in Kosovo," New York Times,
November 21, 1999.

28.  Politics of War Crimes, Bogdanovich,  chap. 2, "Prelude to Capture."

29. Detailed evidence was presented to the UN  on "War Crimes and Crimes
of Genocide in Eastern Bosnia (Communes of Bratunac Skelani, and Srebrenica)
Committed Against the Serbian Population from April 1982 to April 1993," by
the Yugoslav Ambassador to the UN; see also Joan Phillips, "Victims and
Villains in Bosnia's War," Southern Slav Journal, Spring-Summer 1992.

30. Bill Schiller, "Muslims' hero vows he'll
Logged
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2005, 08:32:05 AM »

Irish Hermit,

    Great post.  Retired General Lewis Mackenzie has been a long time advocate for the truth in the Balkans, nice piece.

     For anyone interested, I created a thread here http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=6687.0 on a related subject.  Mr. JohnnyJ is especially invited to read it.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2005, 10:47:53 AM »

Irish Hermit,

  ÃƒÆ’‚  Great post.  
Hvala na komplimentima!
Logged
StephenG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


« Reply #24 on: July 20, 2005, 09:50:41 AM »

I think johnyj82 out to be a little more care with accusing the 'Russian Orthodox Church' when he actually means the Moscow Patriarchate, or elements within the MP. Even a cursory look around will show him that some Orthodox Russians too suffer pursecution and great harassment by or at the behest of elements within the MP. A principled stand against ecumenism or some religious difference is perhaps one thing but the behaviour of the MP too often appears to be purely one of this is our patch, clear off! And if you won't we have friends who will make your life miserable.........
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: July 21, 2005, 06:41:19 AM »

I think johnyj82 out to be a little more care with accusing the 'Russian Orthodox Church' when he actually means the Moscow Patriarchate, or elements within the MP. Even a cursory look around will show him that some Orthodox Russians too suffer pursecution and great harassment by or at the behest of elements within the MP. A principled stand against ecumenism or some religious difference is perhaps one thing but the behaviour of the MP too often appears to be purely one of this is our patch, clear off! And if you won't we have friends who will make your life miserable.........

Huh?
Russia is actually the juristiction of the Moscow Patriarchate....
What you are suggesting is that Pope of Rome is also unreasonable and territorial for not allowing the Patriarchate of Constantinople to have juristiction in the Vatican City State.
Patriarch Alexii is only doing what a good shepherd should do- defend his flock against the disease of heresy, and Pope Benedict is only doing what a good shepherd should do- defend his flock against schismatics.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
StephenG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 229


« Reply #26 on: July 21, 2005, 10:26:39 AM »

Ozgeorge,

With the greatest respect may I suggest you actually do both some thinking and some homework.

Is it normal for a religious body to be able to persecute those who who seek to worship outside their control by calling in the local government authorities, the police and the tax authority? Russia is not the possession of any bishop and such a notion is alien to Christianity. Yes, if the ecumenists actually believe their notion of being 'sister' churches then it might seen odd that one might proslytise in the diocese(s) of another. However, my point is the MP is not accepted by all Orthodox Russians to be a legitimate representative body of the Russian Orthodox Church and these groups who 'dissent' face great persecution by a range of local and law enforcement officials as well assualts and attacks on property by well connected 'criminal' gangs.

My point is that it is not just 'RCs' and 'foreign' religious groups which face discrimination unknown anywhere else other than in totalitarian states and former Warsaw Pact countries. In the UK there is an established Church, Anglican dissidents and every known religious group known. And does the Church of England seek to root out any others by calling in the Revenue and Customs, or the local Police or planning authoritiy to shut them down? Does this happen in France, Germany, The Netherlands, Portugal, Italy, or the USA?

No. The MP has bishops and parishes in North America and Europe. Alluding to the peculiar Vatican City State is not comparing like with like, and I feel, Sir, you are only too well aware that such a comparison is nonsensical.

In the Russian Federation there is an unhealthy and unholy tie up between Church and State; and I note that the relationship between Church and State is the subject of one of the discussion documents being considered in the talks between the MP and ROCOR. Hopefully this unhealthy and unholy relationship will be recognised for what it is and remedied.

Forgive my directness, but this issue is both important and unhappy and needs recognising as not simply a case of 'RCs' being singled out for discriminatory treatment. As an Orthodox Christian who believes 'ecumenism' to be a best a serious error and at worst 'a dangerous heresy' I gain no comfort from discriminatory practises directed at any legitimate group including the Roman Catholic Church, whether in Russia or anywhere else.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: July 21, 2005, 06:19:53 PM »

With the greatest respect may I suggest you actually do both some thinking and some homework.
I love it when people like you start sentances with "With the greatest respect"- you ALWAYS mean the exact opposite!

Is it normal for a religious body to be able to persecute those who who seek to worship outside their control by calling in the local government authorities, the police and the tax authority? Russia is not the possession of any bishop and such a notion is alien to Christianity.
What the hell do you mean "alien to Christianity"? Perhaps alien to your version of Christianity. A bishops juristiction has ALWAYS been geographical. That's the whole debate about who the Americas should belong to. The Ecumenical Patriarchate is claiming them as the "Barbarian Lands" which are her juristiction according to the Canons.

Yes, if the ecumenists actually believe their notion of being 'sister' churches then it might seen odd that one might proslytise in the diocese(s) of another. However, my point is the MP is not accepted by all Orthodox Russians to be a legitimate representative body of the Russian Orthodox Church
And, of course, we all know that the Church is an American-style democracy......

 
and these groups who 'dissent' face great persecution by a range of local and law enforcement officials as well assualts and attacks on property by well connected 'criminal' gangs.My point is that it is not just 'RCs' and 'foreign' religious groups which face discrimination unknown anywhere else other than in totalitarian states and former Warsaw Pact countries.
Evidence?....... If an MP priest joins ROAC, I hardly think it to be "persecution" that the MP demand their Church buildings and priest's residence back....

 
In the Russian Federation there is an unhealthy and unholy tie up between Church and State; and I note that the relationship between Church and State is the subject of one of the discussion documents being considered in the talks between the MP and ROCOR. Hopefully this unhealthy and unholy relationship will be recognised for what it is and remedied.
"Seperation of Church and State" is in the American Constitution. Believe it or not, many of us don't want to live according to the American constitution. There is no constitutional seperation of Church and State in Greece either (yet). This is not a bad thing. In an ideal society- Church and State are not seperate- Provided that the Church is the Orthodox Church, and not a schism.

You are making the mistake of looking at Orthodoxy in America as though it were the norm, and imposing it around the world. Orthodoxy in America is far from the norm- for the most part, it isn't even Canonical. How could "canonical" Orthodoxy have more than one bishop in a city?
« Last Edit: July 21, 2005, 06:46:57 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.185 seconds with 54 queries.