Subscribe to Emperors Clothes
Newsletter! Please forward this
text or send
the link to a friend. Emperors Clothes * www.tenc.net =================================================== David Rohde, Srebrenica and the New
Justice
David Rohde's latest article is entitled "The Battle of Srebrenica is Now Over the Truth," and one wonders, "Is this black humor?" Because the man has made a career of lying about Srebrenica. In the article, Rhode substitutes the manipulation of prejudicial language for facts and analysis. In so doing he defines himself: he is not a journalist; he is an ad man. True, he writes copy for the richest client in the world, the US Establishment, but it is advertising copy nonetheless and the outfit he works for is only the world's most influential ad agency, the NY Times. In the article, Rhode has two goals: First, to leave readers with the impression that the official Srebrenica massacre story has been proven beyond reasonable doubt; second, to discredit those who have used the internet to ferret out and disseminate information about Srebrenica, causing many to doubt the official story. Below we've reprinted an excerpt from Rohde's article. Appeal to Prejudice Rhode writes that the Srebrenica critics are "some American and European leftists." In fact we include people from all over the political spectrum. It is not political ideology that unites us but a distaste for lies, but if the leftist label is inaccurate it is handy; it allows readers to dismiss the critics as zealots who needn't be taken seriously. Appeal to prejudice # 1: Rhode asserts that our views "radiate out from Belgrade." This is silly stuff. Does Rohde view Belgrade as the hub of a powerful political Empire? Has he confused it with Washington, London and Berlin? Speaking for myself, my source of information is the mainstream media, documents from The Hague Tribunal, and interviews with Yugoslav victims of NATO and its Yugoslav proxies. Appeal to prejudice # 2: Rohde
misrepresents our arguments, saying we support "Serb
nationalist claims that Western governments and
journalists exaggerated Serb war crimes." Aside from
the pointless "Serb nationalist" bait - who
cares whether they're nationalists or dentists; the question is whether
they are right or wrong - we don't
say that Rohde's claims are exaggerated; we say they're lies. We say that NATO has produced no evidence that
troops under the control of the Bosnian Serb government or the
government of Serbia massacred 7-8000 Muslims at Srebrenica. We say
that a person (or a people) should be viewed as innocent
until proven guilty, that this business of declaring the Serbs guilty of
a monstrous crime and then spending five years trying to fabricate evidence
of guilt is nightmare justice.
Meanwhile, we have done a little looking ourselves and
find that there is real proof that Islamist
terrorists (the 'Bosnian Muslim Army') used the UN safe
haven in Srebrenica to launch raids on nearby villages,
mutilating and killing many - perhaps several thousand - Serb villagers. Here is the confession of the 'Muslim Army'
commander, one Nasir Oric: "[On the video tape I saw] burning houses, dead bodies, severed heads, and people fleeing. [Commander] Oric grinned throughout, admiring his handiwork. 'We ambushed them,' he said when a number of dead Serbs appeared on the screen. In waging war on civilians, not soldiers, Oric's 'troops' followed an old Muslim extremist tradition. During War II, their pro-Nazi forbears murdered Serbian, Roma and Jewish civilians using so-called "cold weapons," knives, hammers, axes. They liked to be photographed displaying trophies, especially the severed heads of their victims. Here is Oric again: "Nasir Oric's war trophies don't line the wall of his comfortable apartment. They're on videocassette tape: burned Serb houses and headless Serb men, bodies crumpled in a pathetic heap. Note, first of all, that the above articles were written during the period (1993-1995) that Srebrenica was a so-called UN safe haven, when the Muslim extremist forces were supposedly disarmed and therefore at the mercy of the bad Serbs. Note, second of all, that the Bush and Clinton administrations strongly supported (and still support) the extremists in Sarajevo. The Western press calls the Sarajevo regime 'moderate Muslim,' which obscures political reality: this is a fanatical force, and their war against the Serbs has been jihad.
The correct word for the people the Serbs have fought in Bosnia is Islamist. The press shuns the term 'Islamist' because it has an unappealing ring, suggesting intolerance and an extreme goal, the creation of a purely Islamic state. Unfortunately for the media, Bosnian 'President' Alija Izetbegovic wrote a book. Republished in 1990 (as part of Izetbegovic's Presidential election campaign), it explains his views:
Izetbegovic's views were not those of most Bosnian Muslims. Thus in the 1990 elections he came in behind Fikret Abdic, a secular Muslim politician whose forces were militarily allied with the Bosnian Serbs during the fighting from 1992 to 1995. For more on Mr. Abdic, see http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/abdic.htm Note third of all, that Commander Oric was not some sort of renegade. He and his killers were an official part of the Islamist regime's army. The Washington Post story has Oric wearing a US army patch over his heart. Is that by way of recognition of all the support Uncle Sam has given the Islamists? Note that, fourth of all, the Post writer expresses no horror concerning Oric's unbelievable crimes. Is that because the victims were Serbs? Proof by Definition Getting back to Mr. Rohde, he also attempts to dismiss the critics by labeling us "revisionists." This is a big word which shows Rohde has been hitting the books. Here is the dictionary definition: Despite their control of the Western media, despite their control of NATO's armed forces, despite hiring an army of forensic experts and a full stable of War Crimes Tribunal employees - despite all this, the US and European elite have yet to provide a shred of evidence that the Bosnian Serbs committed war crimes at Srebrenica. But Mr. Rohde finesses this problem: he names us revisionists. Since a revisionist is one who revises the 'accepted' view of historical events, by so defining us Mr. Rohde 'proves' the Srebrenica charges are true. Moreover, 'revisionists' is a label applied to people who deny the Holocaust, or claim the Nazis killed a relatively small number of Jews. So by calling us 'revisionists,' Rohde smears us by analogy. The only problem is, the Holocaust that David Irving denies did in fact happen. But the claim that Serbs perpetrated something like the Holocaust in Bosnia is an outrageous lie, which demonizes the Serbs and uses the Holocaust as a political weapon against the Serbs who, ironically, were one of the main victims of Nazi atrocities. Nice trick. Having thus flailed his opponents with a variety of labels ("leftist", "Belgrade", "nationalists" and of course "revisionists") Mr. Rohde concludes with the following coup de grāce:
Indeed. One might think that the failure to produce evidence that a crime has occurred should lead one to question the validity of the charge; but that is old fashioned. In the new system of Justice, NATO need only charge an individual or group with criminal guilt for guilt to be assured; the nonexistence of the crime does not mitigate the guilt of the accused, especially if said crime is heinous. Thus fictional murder is a good deal worse than fictional theft and fictional genocide is the worst crime of all, putting one in the category, 'similar to Hitler.' A lack of evidence of guilt, or the presence of evidence of innocence, is not a legal remedy for a criminal charge; it is simply an annoyance since it encourages in some people (such as writers at Emperor's Clothes) a psychological aberration: the denial of guilt. Here's the excerpt from Rohde, followed by further comments. A link to the entire article is provided at the end.
A LOADED DECK Aside from the attacks on us revisionists, Rohde's article is structured so that the casual reader will leave with a comfortable reaffirmation of Serbian guilt. He begins:
This sensationalist sentence sets the tone. In the next paragraph he informs us that "rats were allowed to feast on the bodies" (note, they didn't just gnaw on the cadavers, horrible enough; they feasted). Another paragraph refers to "7000 Muslim soldiers" who according to Rohde were definitely massacred. It is only later that we learn a) the very existence of a massacre is challenged by "revisionists" and b) "to date, 1,866 bodies [not thousands] have been recovered from mass graves, according to tribunal investigators." And Rohde never mentions that: "After five years we have found 160 mass graves, but we have no idea who the people are." ("Mail on Sunday," June 18, 2000). (My emphasis) Five years of digging. Five years of Rohde slandering the Serbs. No idea who the bodies are. They could be massacred Muslims. They could be massacred Serbs. They could be dead Serbian soldiers, or dead terrorists. Or they could just be dead people. We all died. Five years. No evidence. And yet, the accusation is always presented in the media as a proven fact. *** The full text of Rohde's article can be read at www.nytimes.com/library/review/070900srebrenica-review.html For Emperor's Clothes
articles on Srebrenica, including an exchange with David Rohde, go to Subscribe to Emperors Clothes
Newsletter! If you find emperors-clothes.com useful, we can sure use your help... All our (many) expenses are covered by individual donations. A donation of any amount will help with our work. To use our secure server, please go to http://emperors-clothes.com/howyour.htm Or you can mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA 02461-0321. Or call 617 916-1705 and contribute by credit card. Thanks very much. Subscribe to Emperors Clothes
Newsletter! Please forward this
text or send
the link to a friend.
www.tenc.net |