vava Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 I have no specific sympathies with any of the groups involved in the turk/azeri/Armenian conflict. The Armenians did some very bad things - as did the turks, as did the azeris etc... style_images/master/snapback.png Vergine, this has nothing to do with Turks or Armenians, please don't try and muddy the issue. That parallel simply doesn't exist. The situation IS black and white, there are NO shades of grey. One side is clearly in the right and one side is clearly in the wrong. style_images/master/snapback.png I'm glad that life is so simple for you. But if you make a habit of jumping blindly to conclusions you may end up hitting something on your way back down. Bottom line...do these people LIE or don't they? This is serious because people are being killed due to LIES. style_images/master/snapback.png And the Serbs didn't lie? Neither did the Croats? NATO perhaps? No one told lies but the Bosnians, or 'these people' as you so put it? C'mon dude, look around. Lies were (and perhaps still are) flying around like flies in a cow field. I don't pretend to know the 'whole truth', I never have. It's fairly easy to judge by the sheer multitude of conflicting reports over the years that the involved parties all may be lying. It's hard to take any of it without a liberal dose of salt. Nothing can be projected as the ultimate objective of an entire ethnic group. Nothing can. So one has to look at the relevace of this publication. style_images/master/snapback.png Agreed entirely skhara. And in order to be capable of judging the article's relevance, we need to know more about the context under which it was published. When was it published? By whom? What sort of publication is VOX? Who wrote "The Eradication of Serbs" and under what context? These elements are all unfortunately missing from Veginnes post. Everything is a shade of gray. But more often than not, when it comes to making a choice, it is just black and white. One can look at the shade of gray, and decide which shade of gray it is, to make a black and white decision. style_images/master/snapback.png Agreed again (on the most part). Although I still believe that under most (not all) circumstances it's possible to make decisions that are not at polar extremes. Amongst the shades of grey there must surely be options for reasonable folks, at least I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verginne Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 In my experience, I have never seen the Serbs lie. I have seen them vindicated on every single occasion. I have watched this situation very closely since the very beginning. If you do not see a similarity between the situation with the Serbs and Armenians, then I can't help you. Talk about being blind. Careful, there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 Here's an excerpt from the Balkan Crisis Report (#558 from June 2nd 2005) published by the Institute for War & Peace Reporting. Balkan Crisis Report Balkan War Crimes Justice Breakthrough A new regional coalition aims to set wartime atrocity record straight and bring justice to victims. By Aida Alic, Aida Sunje and Hugh Griffiths in Sarajevo (BCR No 558, 02-Jun-05) Three organisations from Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro are joining forces to research and document war crimes committed in the countries during the former Yugoslav wars of the Nineties. Belgrade's Humanitarian Law Centre, HLC, Zagreb's Documenta office and Sarajevo's Research and Documentation Centre, RDC, are working to establish historical fact in a region bedevilled by mutually exclusive versions of recent history. They are building the region's largest and most accurate war crimes database, detailing crimes committed, witness statements and documentary evidence against possible perpetrators which will be made available to local war crimes prosecutors in Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro. The organisations are also creating cross-border war crimes trial monitoring teams, supporting witnesses coming from Balkan states to testify in courts in each others' countries, as well as bringing victims' families from abroad to local courts so they see that justice is done. It is hoped that these efforts to reveal the truth and seek justice for victims will lead to a better understanding and acceptance of crimes committed throughout the region, paving the way for reconciliation. But the organsations warn that widespread public denial, the manipulation of recent history by political elites and the scarcity of local war crimes trials means that reconciliation is still a distant prospect. “Unfortunately, nationalist politicians continue to manipulate historical truth for their own political purposes throughout this region,” said RDC director Mirsad Tokaca. “For them it is a numbers game to show that 'their' people are innocent, and that the 'others' are guilty. Our project is made more important by the fact that none of the governments are trying to establish an accurate record of what actually occurred.” Documenta's Vesna Terselic agreed. “The Bosnian Muslim, Croat and Serb victim numbers are being manipulated by the various governments to heighten grievances and deepen divisions between people of different ethnicities,” she said. ...... The coalition believes it will then be able to present a comprehensive figure for all those killed in the wars in Bosnia and Croatia, together with their names, and for many, their photographs. As well as factual accuracy, the coalition is seeking justice for the victims through local war crimes trials, as the tribunal in The Hague begins winding down. However, the authorities in Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro have sometimes proved reluctant to investigate and prosecute those accused of war crimes. ...... Aida Alic and Aida Sunje are trainees in IWPR/BIRN office in Sarajevo. Hugh Griffiths is IWPR/BIRN investigations coordinator. For the entire article please see the SOURCE at the IWPR website. I regard this source as one of the more objective and neutral resources for news about international/inter-ethnic conflict. A breif browse through their balkan article database, and you'll quickly see that all sides are guilty of war crimes to some extent, and all the ruling governments have tried to blur the truth and leverage their own side of the story. I think with more inititives be impartial international organizations like the IWPR, we may one day arrive at a common truth that will be accepted by all sides, and perhaps at that time reconciliation may begin. Never seen the Serbs lie Vergin? I guess that depends where you look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 (edited) I have no specific sympathies with any of the groups involved in the turk/azeri/Armenian conflict. The Armenians did some very bad things - as did the turks, as did the azeris etc... no one group was entirely 'in the right'. My problem lies with you taking what is obviously a pro-islamist 'manifesto' and project it as the ultimate objective of an entire ethnic group (perhaps even out of context). It's incorrect to generalise to that level - there are so many shades of grey between your black and white. The situation IS black and white, there are NO shades of grey. One side is clearly in the right and one side is clearly in the wrong. Bottom line...do these people LIE or don't they? This is serious because people are being killed due to LIES. Because of nato intervention, the wholesale murder of Serbs continues and their native lands are being ethnically cleansed of Serbs. It is the intention of islamic expansionists to ethnically cleanse the world of those not adhering to their sick religion. Of all people, you should realize that it was the intention of the turks, or maybe you don't think so?? style_images/master/snapback.png Who in his right mind would compare the Turkish/Armenian issue with what is happening in the Balkans? When the Armenians had ever the upper hand over the Turks, like the Serbs had after the fall of Titos regime??? There is no way to compare the situation, the Armenian cases is entirly different. The situation in the Balkans was much, much much more balanced, there was no such balance with the Armenian issue. Even the conflict over Nagorno Artsax can not be comparable. Kossovo is historically Serbian, but it has Abanian majority, Artsax is historically Armenian AND has Armenian majority. Armenians have the two prerequist conditions to form a nation over there. While Serbs were victims in WWI and WWII, they've been agressors later, Armenians never had been the agressors the Serbians were. Don't compare apples with oranges. Edited July 17, 2005 by QueBeceR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verginne Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 Who in his right mind would compare the Turkish/Armenian issue with what is happening in the Balkans? When the Armenians had ever the upper hand over the Turks, like the Serbs had after the fall of Titos regime??? There is no way to compare the situation, the Armenian cases is entirly different. The situation in the Balkans was much, much much more balanced, there was no such balance with the Armenian issue. Even the conflict over Nagorno Artsax can not be comparable. Kossovo is historically Serbian, but it has Abanian majority, Artsax is historically Armenian AND has Armenian majority. Armenians have the two prerequist conditions to form a nation over there. While Serbs were victims in WWI and WWII, they've been agressors later, Armenians never had been the agressors the Serbians were. Don't compare apples with oranges. style_images/master/snapback.png How were Serbs the aggressors??? For preventing the illegal breakup of their country by outside forces? There was a constitutional procedure for leaving FRY, but it was NOT followed. As to albanians being the majority...you saying they ought to be rewarded for ethnically cleansing Kosovo since WWII with the aid of Hitler and Mussolini? In both cases, muslims who don't belong there were trying to get rid of the people the land belonged to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verginne Posted July 17, 2005 Report Share Posted July 17, 2005 Vava, did you check into WHO IS BEHIND your so-called neutral source? HRW - Soros Ford Foundation Euro Commission US AID Sam Rubin Foundation Reuters There's more, but I won't list all of them. Pfffffffffffffffttttt NOT NEUTRAL AT ALL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 (edited) Who in his right mind would compare the Turkish/Armenian issue with what is happening in the Balkans? And who in their right mind would compare the Bakan wars to WWII? When the Armenians had ever the upper hand over the Turks, like the Serbs had after the fall of Titos regime??? At which point in time and where speciffically? In some points in time and in some places they have the upper hand, in other's they didn't. "Operation Storm" was a defeat for Serbs that led to the exodus of half a million Serbs from Krajina. There is no way to compare the situation, the Armenian cases is entirly different. The situation in the Balkans was much, much much more balanced, there was no such balance with the Armenian issue. So it was much more balanced, and yet Serbs were aggressors? Even the conflict over Nagorno Artsax can not be comparable. Kossovo is .... Well it isn't comparible to Kosovo (although there are always things to compare), but it is comparible to Bosnia. Not only the bloody type of fighting, but the circumstances under which these things came about. Kosovo on the other hand is joke, and the only thing that should ever be mentioned are the anti-Serbian pogroms, and the deliberate desctruction of old cemetaries, monestaries, and churches and the renaming and "bastardisation" of old toponyms, in order to "eradicate" any kind of signs of Serbian presence on the land. historically Serbian, but it has Abanian majority, Artsax is historically Armenian AND has Armenian majority. Armenians have the two prerequist conditions to form a nation over there. And what are all the prerequisit conditions? Isn't there a prerequisit condition of "recognition" by the self-proclaimed, criminal, "international" community? And isn't that the most important pre-requisite? So Albanians succeeded in changing the demographic composition of Kosovo through the aid of various imperialist/colonialist powers (Ottomans, Austro-Hungarians, German-Italians, NATO), and Titos communist regime. That's the way to do it I guess. While Serbs were victims in WWI and WWII, they've been agressors later, Armenians never had been the agressors the Serbians were. Don't compare apples with oranges. And yet apples and oranges are both fruit are they not? And one can point out the similarities between apples and oranges. Armenians never were agressors? What exactly are you refering to? Ever in history? According to all Turkish and Azeri sources not only were Armenians agressors, but the Republic of Armenia invaded Azerbaijan. The UN painted Armenians as the agressive side and demanded that Armenians withdraw from discricts around Artsax. Would you like to think again, or maybe explain in exactly what way and where were Serbs agressors? Edited July 18, 2005 by skhara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Vava, did you check into WHO IS BEHIND your so-called neutral source? .... Pfffffffffffffffttttt NOT NEUTRAL AT ALL. style_images/master/snapback.png Vergiin, Yes there are many more supporters of that organization, including the departments of foreign affairs of Denmark, Switzerland, Canada, the European Commission, UNESCO and so forth. All in all I stand by what I said, it's a source that "more objective and neutral resources for news about international/inter-ethnic conflict." - more than the predominant western media sources like, say, Fox news? And it's more neutral than the fanaticism you posted earlier I might add. Anyways, International NGO/non-profit type groups have to depend on someone to help pay for their operating costs, we just have to hope that they take the money ethically (and not subvert their coverage because of the money train). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verginne Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Vergiin, Yes there are many more supporters of that organization, including the departments of foreign affairs of Denmark, Switzerland, Canada, the European Commission, UNESCO and so forth. All in all I stand by what I said, it's a source that "more objective and neutral resources for news about international/inter-ethnic conflict." - more than the predominant western media sources like, say, Fox news? And it's more neutral than the fanaticism you posted earlier I might add. Anyways, International NGO/non-profit type groups have to depend on someone to help pay for their operating costs, we just have to hope that they take the money ethically (and not subvert their coverage because of the money train). style_images/master/snapback.png NO ONE but no one gets funded by HRW or the US govt. unless they spread their lies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 NO ONE but no one gets funded by HRW or the US govt. unless they spread their lies. style_images/master/snapback.png That's your opinion, and may what an opinion it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z'areh Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 Very amusing Zareh, but an entirely invalid comparison. Especially coming from the number one defender of the jews/israel. Do tell us why the Hague is taking a major beating because ALL of their evidence against Milosevic and the Serbs is being handily shown for the total garbage and lies that it is and always will be? If you are so knowledgeable about the situation, do tell us what you know about the Ruder Finn fiasco. Only then will I accept that you have examined all of the evidence. I also expect to hear what you know about what is going on in the Hague. style_images/master/snapback.png defender of jews/Israel??? and number 1 at that, wow how observant! As for my ideas being acceptable by you, verggine, please out of all the people you are in the least position in "testing" others. not being acceptable by you is an honour for me and for all those who fight against pestilence and biggotry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z'areh Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 (edited) As far as crimes. I do not believe for a minute the official story of Srebrenica. I don't know if I should go into it or not and if you care whether I go into or not. I do know there were crimes committed by all the sides. I can't possibly know what exactly they were and who deserves to be condmed more for individual crimes. The only state-sponsored crimes were ones conducted by the Croatian state and the Bosnian state. Serbs were stuck in these states and didn't have a state. What I can do, is look at the big picture of the violent breakup of Yugoslavia. style_images/master/snapback.png What can I say skhara, I guess we all believe what we want to believe. ANd some people think the Jewish Holocaust did not happen. "The way I see it, is if individuals have committed crimes, take it up with the individuals" I cannot permit myself in reconciling with the above expression of letting a government off the hook so easily, I don't want to offend you but I have to say that you sound just like Turkish apologists who absolve the government by blaming rogue groups who might have killed some Armenians, after all the Malta tribunals couldn't find culprits...the same way that Milosovic trials are being bungled up....right? As for historical background, the Kosovo Albanians where there long before the communists rearranged borders, they were there long before the Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes was declared, the promise of the allies to Italy after WWI of Serbian and Croatian lands aggravated the situation where the Kosovo Albanians were armed and started pushing the Serbs out. These were Kosovo Albanians who were Islamized by the Ottomans, they are indigenous to the place we are talking about. But regardless of History and regardless of the 1389 loss to the Ottoman Empire what the Serbs did in the 1990s was ruthless and unjustified, you can always call upon the terror that the KLA caused as justification but then you are smart enough to see the uncanny parallels such justifications would lead to. Plus the Serbs were at war with everybody not just the Albanians, this war was caused by Serbian nationalism that could not swallow loss of Yugoslavia, a country that was so tightly controlled by Tito slip through their hands. This whole subject started with the Srebrenica massacres and that's where I end it by saying the perpetrators should be brought to justice. And your words "if individuals have committed crimes, take it up with the individuals" brings to what I said at the start, which also validates my original description of them as being "murdering thugs". Edited July 19, 2005 by Z'areh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 (edited) What can I say skhara, I guess we all believe what we want to believe. ANd some people think the Jewish Holocaust did not happen. "The way I see it, is if individuals have committed crimes, take it up with the individuals" I cannot permit myself in reconciling with the above expression of letting a government off the hook so easily, I don't want to offend you but I have to say that you sound just like Turkish apologists who absolve the government by blaming rogue groups who might have killed some Armenians, after all the Malta tribunals couldn't find culprits...the same way that Milosovic trials are being bungled up....right? Which government? The newly created one in Zagreb? The Muslim government? Which one? Or the self-proclaimed government of Republica Srpska? As for historical background, the Kosovo Albanians where there long before the communists rearranged borders, they were there long before the Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes was declared, the promise of the allies to Italy after WWI of Serbian and Croatian lands aggravated the situation where the Kosovo Albanians were armed and started pushing the Serbs out. These were Kosovo Albanians who were Islamized by the Ottomans, they are indigenous to the place we are talking about. I wasn't talking about Kosovo, I was talking about the Bosnian regions, and the Krajna region. As far as Kosovo, what most people fail to grasps is that a slavic-speacking tribe was settelled in the region called Kosovo and assimilated the local population thus finalising the ethnogenesis of the Serbs. All the inhabitants of Kosovo were Slav-speaking Christians, but they lived in close proximity with others. Serbs were sedentary farmers, Albanians were mostly wondering sheppards. Albanians were Islmisized by Turks and were used as terror squads against Greeks, Serbs, and Macedonians. Albanians populated the region in massive number when the Serbs forced north by the Turks. But regardless of History and regardless of the 1389 loss to the Ottoman Empire what the Serbs did in the 1990s was ruthless and unjustified, And to what exactly are you refering too? Are you calling ruthless and unjustified that what you think they did, or what they actually did? And what exactly do you think they did? Do you accept the fact that Serbs went around ethnically cleansing Albanians? If they did, they must have been extremely talanted to do so. I mean there were plenty of opportunity for them do it while they could easily form armoured formations and truly go around using force against villages. But no, they had to wait till the air-strikes begin to start their ethnic cleansing. They were especially encouraged by the fact that the NATO promised "to bomb anything that moved". So instead of digging in and camoflauging their positions like they should have, they went around with smiles on thier faces, ethnically cleansing the Albanians. Now how about a dose of reality? You appear to accept that the KLA is a terrorist organisation. In fact, in 1997, they were listed as one the more dangerous ones by the state department. Do you believe that they gave a crap about Albanian villagers? Do you also believe that there were no alterior motives by outside forces other than humanitarianism? Kosovo was crawling with all kinds of "observers" (by the way there was scandel raised later that some of these observers were spies planting electronic devices for future bombing targets). Serbs were extremely careful in all that they did. Or do you not believe that? Isn't it possible that KLA heavily increased their activity in every single way to provoke the Serbs knowing full well that they had their NATO allies to back them? I paid attention to the complaints comming from the Serbian side during these "negotiations". And their complaint was that they are trying to tie their hands behind their back while the KLA would be allowed to continue punching them in the face. you can always call upon the terror that the KLA caused as justification but then you are smart enough to see the uncanny parallels such justifications would lead to. Plus the Serbs were at war with everybody not just the Albanians, this war was caused by Serbian nationalism that could not swallow loss of Yugoslavia, a country that was so tightly controlled by Tito slip through their hands. The Serbs were in the middle. Croats and Muslims fought each other too. I don't know why that is hardly mentioned. And they are plenty accouts of atrocities from Croatian-Muslim fighting. So everyone fought everyone else. And how can you make the claim on Serbian nationalism and nothing else? That is ridiculous. What about Croatian nationalism? What about Muslim nationalism? Kosovo is in no way shaped or form similar to anything that happenned in Bosnian and Croatia, it was pretty bloodless. This whole subject started with the Srebrenica massacres and that's where I end it by saying the perpetrators should be brought to justice. Of what? Perpertrators of crimes? I agree. One such crime is deliberate slander in order to justify imperialist agression. And also, continuing to lie after the fact, to divert attention from the crimes conducted by the meddling of the imperialist powers. And your words "if individuals have committed crimes, take it up with the individuals" brings to what I said at the start, which also validates my original description of them as being "murdering thugs". Your statement could have been taken as generalisation and a very insulting one to Serbs at that. It is difficult when met with statements that are false, and when you know they are. But sadly these false statements continue to be propogated and repeated until turned into a perceived truth. I was born in Baku, where I lived until I was 9 years old. I can remember the shakeup in the aftermath of Sumgait. We were targeted first, in the ethnic cleansing operation of the Azeris. We were targetted way before "Operation Ring" was in full force. On other hand, the mainstream was making the claims on Serbs about ultra-nationalism, trying to create aa ethnically pure state, NAZIs, etc. Take all that and then take the end result and see that Croatia turned pure. In Bosnia, all the sections are pure, but Serbia 80,000 Albanians are living in Belgrade, next to bunches of Croats and Muslim Slavs. Smells like contradictions to me. And so it is an undeniable fact now over 100,000 Serbs have been "cleansed" from Kosovo. Oh well, they can join their compatriots in the tent cities that were spawned earlier. Hey, maybe Russia can send them some blankets? You would be surprised how much I know about Kosovo, specifically. I feel confident that if I present that information, I may be able shake your perception. My question is, are you game or are you willing to let your old perceptions that fall directly in line with the repetious cliches continue? Edited July 19, 2005 by skhara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z'areh Posted July 19, 2005 Report Share Posted July 19, 2005 (edited) Of what? Perpertrators of crimes? I agree. One such crime is deliberate slander in order to justify imperialist agression. And also, continuing to lie after the fact, to divert attention from the crimes conducted by the meddling of the imperialist powers. Your statement could have been taken as generalisation and a very insulting one to Serbs at that. It is difficult when met with statements that are false, and when you know they are. But sadly these false statements continue to be propogated and repeated until turned into a perceived truth. style_images/master/snapback.png I admire your passionate defense, I just wonder if the Armenian cause has the equivalent torch bearers among the Serbs in an equally passionate manner. Nevertheless, you approach this perhaps from a personal view of righting a wrong as far as the Serbs are concerned, which is commendable. I do not share the same affinity nor do I care to “study” the Serbs or the other ethnic components of the Balkans in a deeper fashion. I lost interest when I saw a photo of a Serb “soldier” kicking a dead woman’s head (in her 60s or 70s) around her lying dead were old men and babies in their pajamas. You can argue that the other side committed the same atrocities, and I would agree with you, thus my initial qualifier in my first post as one side being shittier than the other. However, as far as where this thread is going,,, we somehow went from the Srebrenica murders to a wider geopolitical discussions about the region, to the Serbs’ historical grievances, to the Ustashi butchery of the Serbs and their checkered flags to Nato designs etc…etc… skhara, as far as the West is concerned you don’t have to preach about their actions to the already converted. Clinton’s on again off again policies of “punishing” the Serbs is another discussion altogether. Did the Serbs suffer? Of course they did. But one looses credibility when one makes the Serbs the sole victims in this recent conflict, which is what concerns me personally, because I do not agree with that, and what bothers me the most is the way you end up distorting the time frame to make your argument. We, Armenians, have witnessed how similar distortions have been created to obfuscate the real issues. Now the Sumgait massacres have been pushed into a muddy territory where it is now considered as a mere tit-or-tat “event”, where in fact the whole crux of the Azeri-Armenian war is originated in us confronting this latest genocide. Let’s remember that in February1988 during the street protests in Stepanakert, the news in Baku of the alleged death of two, I repeat two, Azeri police was flamed which resulted in the Sumgait and Baku pogroms, now these pogroms are being justified by having been committed by the “poor displaced Azeri refugees from Armenia” allegedly as a result of their "expulsion", a migration in my opinion, some forced and some fled out of fear, but which is another six to eight months later from the Sumgait massacres in its chronological order. Skhara, it was 1998 that open conflict erupted between the KLA and the Serbs. In response villages were burnt by the Serbs a cruel crack down ensued and hundreds of thousands of Albanians either fled or were driven out. September 1998 Nato warned Milosevic to stop these activities and it was March 1999 Nato started the air strikes. Now one can argue about the effectiveness or even the need for air strikes but again that is another subject but there is no doubt, and I remember quite vividly, that countless warnings to stop the killings were issued but Milosevic dismissed them as a big bluff, so the people (Serbs) suffered because of Milosevic’s miscalculations. That’s the bottom line. Back to Srebrenica…and my “insulting” the Serbs. Unless one believes that all those 7000 Bosniacs that were killed was a case of mass suicide the minute the UN forces withdrew, the Serb forces and their leaders, Vlatko Mladic specifically, stand as accused. End of story! Edited July 19, 2005 by Z'areh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 Nevertheless, you approach this perhaps from a personal view of righting a wrong as far as the Serbs are concerned, My approach is a personal view as far as truth and manipulation is concerened. I lost interest when I saw a photo of a Serb “soldier” kicking a dead woman’s head (in her 60s or 70s) around her lying dead were old men and babies in their pajamas. I gained interest when I saw a very skinny man standing behind a barbed wire on whom the camera was zoomed in. It was said that the man is a victim of a Serbian "death camp". Skhara, it was 1998 that open conflict erupted between the KLA and the Serbs. And open conflict erupted because in 1998 the KLA were "unleashed" on Kosovo. There is ample evidence, showing arming, training, and the shady funding of the KLA by the CIA. In response villages were burnt by the Serbs a cruel crack down ensued and hundreds of thousands of Albanians either fled or were driven out. September 1998 Nato warned Milosevic to stop these activities and it was March 1999 Nato started the air strikes. And that's that huh? Will you take my invitation from above. I can make a thread, but I don't want to do it, if you have no interest. Or if you are going to "lose interest" over a photograph that is claimed is some evil NAZI Serb kicking a 60 year old woman in the head. Unless one believes that all those 7000 Bosniacs that were killed was a case of mass suicide the minute the UN forces withdrew, the Serb forces and their leaders, Vlatko Mladic specifically, stand as accused. End of story! 7000? I thought it was 8000? According to BBC its 8000. And I don't believe I ever painted the Serbs as sole victims, for in a balanced war, there are victims on both sides. I do paint them as victims of unjust slander. And the lies that are force-fed as truth today, will not be such tomorow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 (edited) (Italics represent quoted text.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is my completely in context reply to Dave's point in the original post. I did a brief search on the BBC news website. Take a look and check if you see what I see: Couple of articles about the Armenian Genocide in BBC (or what the BBC calls "alleged" and "what Armenians say is"): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4478919.stm Armenia is marking the 90th anniversary of the mass deportations and killings of hundreds of thousands of their people by the Ottoman empire Hmmm, I thought Armenians were commemorating the 90th aniversary of a genocide? My mistake BBC. Turkey's position I don't understand. Turkey is allowed to have a position? They can have a position without being called "the first NAZIs"? They are allowed to have a position without any mention of "not until WWII." You mean they can have a position, period? Another one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4477877.stm only a very few of them old enough to remember what Armenians call the first genocide the 20th Century But Turkey says the numbers of those killed are grossly inflated and that the Armenians were casualties of World War I, not genocide And another one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4497519.stm Armenia alleges..... Turkey says........... "genocide" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3383631.stm Armenians say.... But the Turkish Government says it was a civil war and a military reaction to Armenian insurrection as rebels sided with invading Russian troops. Now have we read the above articles? Lets read some bellow: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4652435.stm About 8,000 Muslim men and boys were massacred in the eastern Bosnian town, in what became the worst atrocity to hit Europe since World War II. Massacared? Worst atrocity? WWII? NAZIs! NAZIs! Genocidal Savages! NAZI Genocidal Savages! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4673941.stm Nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys were systematically slaughtered in the surrounding countryside when Bosnian Serb forces captured Srebrenica on 11 July 1995. A decade on and only 2,000 of the victims have so far been identified. Interesting admission? Slip of the tounge? A suggestion that Serbs mutilated and dismembered the corpses so much that 6,000 couldn't be identified? We mourn the thousands killed here. It was to the shame of the international community that this evil took place under our noses and we didn't do enough to stop it," said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, Serbia's parliament observed a minute silence for all victims of atrocities in and around Srebrenica, and also of last week's London bomb attacks. But it failed to make specific reference to the Srebrenica massacre, and was boycotted by the ultra-nationalist Serbian Radical Party. I wonder if there is really a party in Serbia, called "The Ultra Nationalist Serbian Radical party"? What would you guess the door charge is? Do you think that plumb brandy will be served? Anyway, the main point is: NAZIs, Savages, SREBRENICA MASSACRE 1: Bosnian Serb forces advance on Srebrenica. Thousands of Bosnian Muslims flee 2: More than 20,000 people flee to Potocari, seeking help from Dutch peacekeepers. But Serb forces enter the camp, killing the men and boys 3: Killing sites include a football field in Nova Kasaba 4: Thousands of males are killed trying to reach the Muslim-controlled city of Tuzla Hmm.. I would have expected more out of them. How come they didn't kill the women and children? What kind of of "new-Nazis" are these guys? The Real NAZIs never would have been such wimps. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I didn't dig through the 17 pages that came up dealing with Srebrenica. The several articles that I did read all pretty much say the same thing: "Bosnian Serbs killed 8,000 defensless Muslim men and boys." And it also quotes NATO war criminals, and their expressions of "horror" and "sympathy". Never once did I come across ""What Muslims claim"". ""But Serbs say."" ""Muslims allege"". ""Massacre."" ""So-called Massacre"". ""Republica Srpska Position."" Is there no Serbian position? Does it not exist? It surely does exist. And a very dangerous position for some it is: http://www.icdsmireland.org/resources/back...nica-report.htm Are our eyes closed? Or are we wide awake? Are our common-sensical and logical buttons being pressed, or are our emotional buttons being pressed? And no body make the mistake that I am purely concentrating on the Balkans here with my posts. The Balkans just happens to be a important geogstrategic region for various internationalist, neo-liberal forces. And other forces too: http://www.newamericancentury.org/ Edited July 21, 2005 by skhara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 shkara, I'm was trying to edit your last post regarding the quotes, forgive me I did not edit anything in the post, just maybe? fancions are not responding correctly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armat Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 This is perhaps off topic but one of my best friend is a Serb and he gave me a documenery to watch about the break up of the yoguslavia which Germany played a key role etc.I watched in great horror with all the crimes "muslims" commited including US former generals and CIA officials helping Croats whipe out the Serbs in Krajina. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z'areh Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 I didn't dig through the 17 pages that came up dealing with Srebrenica. The several articles that I did read all pretty much say the same thing: "Bosnian Serbs killed 8,000 defensless Muslim men and boys." And it also quotes NATO war criminals, and their expressions of "horror" and "sympathy". Never once did I come across ""What Muslims claim"". ""But Serbs say."" ""Muslims allege"". ""Massacre."" ""So-called Massacre"". ""Republica Srpska Position."" Is there no Serbian position? Does it not exist? It surely does exist. And a very dangerous position for some it is: http://www.icdsmireland.org/resources/back...nica-report.htm Are our eyes closed? Or are we wide awake? Are our common-sensical and logical buttons being pressed, or are our emotional buttons being pressed? And no body make the mistake that I am purely concentrating on the Balkans here with my posts. The Balkans just happens to be a important geogstrategic region for various internationalist, neo-liberal forces. And other forces too: http://www.newamericancentury.org/ style_images/master/snapback.png could it be that, just perhaps, the whole world witnessed what the Serbs did in Srebrenica, that's why there is no need to qualify the statements with "what the Serbs say" or "what the Muslims allege"??? And do we understand correctly your position as being Srebrenica affair did not happen? or that it did happen but the Serbs are getting an unfair treatment ? I just don't get what your point is in the above post. which is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vava Posted July 20, 2005 Report Share Posted July 20, 2005 shkara, I'm was trying to edit your last post regarding the quotes, forgive me I did not edit anything in the post, just maybe? fancions are not responding correctly style_images/master/snapback.png Edward don't worry, the multiple quotation function of the board software has a limit (I think it's 10 quotes maximum in a post). Once you surpass that, they all appear as tags. The only solution is the reduced the amound of quotes or to create two separate posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 shkara, I'm was trying to edit your last post regarding the quotes, forgive me I did not edit anything in the post, just maybe? fancions are not responding correctly style_images/master/snapback.png Edward don't worry, the multiple quotation function of the board software has a limit (I think it's 10 quotes maximum in a post). Once you surpass that, they all appear as tags. The only solution is the reduced the amound of quotes or to create two separate posts Thanks folks, I made the quotes into italics. I think its pretty obvious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 This is perhaps off topic but one of my best friend is a Serb and he gave me a documenery to watch about the break up of the yoguslavia which Germany played a key role etc.I watched in great horror with all the crimes "muslims" commited including US former generals and CIA officials helping Croats whipe out the Serbs in Krajina. style_images/master/snapback.png That's not off topic at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted July 21, 2005 Report Share Posted July 21, 2005 (edited) could it be that, just perhaps, the whole world witnessed what the Serbs did in Srebrenica, that's why there is no need to qualify the statements with "what the Serbs say" or "what the Muslims allege"??? could it be that the whole world wasn't there, therefore the whole world could not have witnessed it? What I know for a fact is that there were Dutch soldiers, Moslem soldiers, and Serbian soldiers. The above link, links to a report published by the Republica Srpska commission dubbed "The Forbidden Srebrenica Report". So there is a need because it throws the official report out the window. And do we understand correctly your position as being Srebrenica affair did not happen? I never claimed that the "affair" never happenned. In an earlier post, I said that I do not believe the official story. That is the myth 'repeated a million times to a billion people' by "officialdom" and their misreporter cohorts. or that it did happen but the Serbs are getting an unfair treatment ? That would be more accurate, but I would use harsher words such as "slanderous" and "unjust" instead of simply 'unfair' in this particular affair. I just don't get what your point is in the above post. The same "entities" that present "neutrality" over the Armenian Genocide, using such adjectives as "alleged" and such terms as "What Armenian's say, but Turkey claims", outright state that Serbs "executed" 8,000 Muslims. They state it as an unchallengable fact aside from the real fact that what the BBC claims is a "massacre" , has been already debunked. So year after year they repeat a lie. Like I said above, "a lie repeated a million times to a billion people, does not equal truth." I think these 2, are a couple of great articles to consider: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf...=74&ItemID=8244 I would highly recommend the article on Srebrenica here (there are other interesting non-related articles): http://www.swans.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Italics represent quoted text* Switching gears: I did a similar search on pravda that I did for BBC. The first one was on Armenian genocide. Let's see if we can spot the difference: http://english.pravda.ru/main/2001/09/05/14313.html The question is about genocide against Armenian nation that was committing by Ottoman Empire’s authorities in 1915-1923, as a result from 1 to 1,5 million people died in Armenian land Turkey itself still refuses to admit the fact of genocide Check out this one: http://english.pravda.ru/cis/2000/10/20/382.html At the request of President Clinton, the House of Representatives of the US Congress refused yesterday to adopt the resolution acknowledging the mass killing of Armenians by Turks which took place 85 years ago to be an act of genocide. In Mr. Clinton’s view, adopting of he resolution would jeopardaze American citizens and lead to more tension in the Middle East, BBC reports. It is noteworthy that the very including the item in the agenda angered Turkey. The latter categorically opposes the acknowledgement the above episode to be genocide arguing that at the time of the Ottoman empire’s decay, both Turks and Armenian suffered heavy losses. So, diplomatic efforts exerted by Turkey, which is ally of US and NATO member, have taken effect, while the interests of the Armenian people have been played down. Interestingly, recent killings allegedly made by Serb are unequivocally labelled “genocide”, while those perpetrated by Turks are being called into question. http://english.pravda.ru/cis/2001/04/24/4055.html Armenians who died in 1915 from genocide resolutions condemning genocide of Armenians I didn't find many in articles on "what the Serbs did here" Here is one I found: http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/07/19/32808.html Edited July 21, 2005 by skhara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhara Posted October 13, 2006 Report Share Posted October 13, 2006 Did I mention BBC in this thread? Suddenly I've been reminded of it when comming across this: French in Armenia 'genocide' row Hmm..... Is this the proper way to show the link? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6043730.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.