Friday, June 10, 2011
UNPUBLISHED LETTERS - ENTIRE MSM CENSORS SREBRENICA IN THE NAZI CAUSE
I know that to most people Yugoslavia is "a far away country of which we know little" and that putting the entire population of Serbia in Nazi concentration camps, as advocated by the US Vice President would no more impinge on our lives than Auschwitz did on German's. However the fact that this can be so totally censored that not a single news item or even letter, so far as I know, has been published in the Anglo-American press reporting the facts from Maldic's side is very important. If our media can manage 100% censorship and propagandism on this issue then, by definition, they can on ANY issue they choose. I grant it might be slightly more difficult things that took place in Britain in public (eg the Kelvingrove "riot") but not those in private (eg each cabinet meeting being opened with the ceremonial rape, disemboweling and sacrifice to Satan of 2 children taken from care homes)(I'm not guaranteeing that Cameron does this but I am guaranteeing that if he does it could be made to receive exactly the amount of coverage it now does). Being able to totally censor one important news item is like being a little bit pregnant.
If anybody does see a mainstream news item or even published letter anywhere in the US/UK which does report accurately I would be interested if you could send a link.
Joan McAlpine's article about Srbrenica today refers to the "massacre victims" being sent to Tuzla so she clearly knows something about the real situation. Tuzla is on the opposite side of the Moslem enclave from Srebrenica, as anybody looking at a map can see, and not where refugees would have naturally gone. What happened is the 7,000 soldiers of the Srebrenica garrison did indeed reach safety and were immediately dispatched to the relative obscurity of Tuzla so that the Bosnian Moslem leader Izetbegivic (according to the western media at the time a "moderate multiculturalist" but in fact an unrepentant Ex-Nazi, associated with the SS Handzar Division, & publicly committed to genocide) could claim they had been massacred
This is because, as he himself said "You know, I was offered by Clinton in April 1993 (after the fall of Cerska and Konjevic Polje) that the Chetnik forces enter Srebrenica, carry out a slaughter of 5,000 Muslims, and then there will be a military intervention."
There was a genocide at Srebrenica but it was of over 3,800 civilians, mainly women, children and old people, because they were there, murdered, in many cases beheaded, by Srebrenica's Moslem ex-Nazi garrison. This was possible only because NATO "peacekeepers" who, having agreed to disarm them, instead allowed them free movement and protection as they carried out their genocide. This other genocide is not disputed. Even NATO's general Morrillon and others have testified to it during the Milosevic "trial". It is simply that this real genocide has, for 16 years, been censored by the western media.
I do not think it can be honestly claimed that Milosevic, Karadzic, Mladic or almost every other Serb "convicted" by the NATO funded "court" is legally 1/1,000th as deserving of punishment as every single MP who voted for these criminal wars.
Ref Izetbegovic quote http://www.ex-yupress.com/dani/dani2.html
PS Of the 2 letters today I would prefer this one published since it is clearly a subject on which the degree of media lying and censorship far exceeds even that of the pro-nuclear cause
I have highlighted the bit about the reporter's reference to Tuzla because the line of retreat of Serb troops was to the Goradze pocket, and thence to Sarajevo. Tuzla, at the right hand end of the Moslem territory is nowhere near where they arrived and as out of the way a spot as the Bosnian Moslems had. The fact that the reporter knows this proves they know there is, at least, something fishy about the whole story. In this case, and I suspect most others, the journalist cannot plead total, ignorance
Scotsman,and this one to BBC, ITN, STV, C4 News, Ayr newspaper, "Independent", Sidney Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph, Dunfermline local, Express Scotland, Express UK, Scotland on Sunday, Glasgow local, Daily Record, Edinburgh Evening News, Economist, Morning Star, New Statesman, Sun, News of the World, Aberdeen P&J, Telegraph, Sunday Post, Sunday Times, the Australian, Irish Independent, Scottish Review, US Seattle times, Dundee Courier, Yorkshire Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Globe (US), Asia Times, Metro (Glasgow free), Scotsman, Chronicle (US), Baltimore Sun (US), Evening Times, Financial Times, Guardian, LA Times (US), Daily Mail, Newsweek (US), NY Times (US) Sunday Times, Herald, The Times, Time (US) Sunday Herald, Toronto Star, Star (US), NY Times (US), NY Post (US), Newsweek (US), San Francisco something (US), Seattle Times (US), SJ Mercury (US), & Sun-Times (US).. OK a few don't come out till Sunday but I will take bets.
May I commend the Scotsman on its sense of patriotism in printing letters on both sides of the issue about the Highland Clearances 2 centuries ago. This is clearly a much more topical subject than the ethnic cleansing, and other atrocities too obscene to be mentioned in a newspaper, of 350,000 Serbs, Gypsies & Jews from Kosovo by NATO and its "police" (formerly the openly genocidal KLA & before their recruitment, training and arming, a collection of drug lords, WW2 Nazis, sex slavers and organleggers); the similar treatment of half a million Serbs and Yugoslavs from Croatia, with our military support; and another half million in Bosnia by the Moslems under their ex-Nazi & openly genocidal leader Izetbegovic, again only possible because of our military assistance. On all of these atrocities the Scotsman steadfastly refuse to publish anything which might embarrass our political masters.
I am glad to see that the Scotsman's political line does not extend to making Scots Highlanders into "unpersons" as they do with the Serbian "Untermensch".
I note that, despite significant coverage of the Ratko Mladic "trial" your coverage has not only been one sided but that, even among reader's letters, which is supposed to be the ultimate hold-out where opinions without official approval can be aired, you have chosen to allow no letters questioning the claims of his guilt.
If this were a real "trial" this would not only be unconscionable but, if seen across all the mainstream media, as it is in this case, would be strong grounds for a mistrial.
Fortunately, from the point of view of this in power, the Mladic "trial" has little in common with real trials. There is virtually no evidence that the alleged Srebrenica massacre of 7,000/8,000/11,000 Moslem soldiers ever took place. There is no question that, before Izetbegovic, the openly genocidal (& ex-Nazi) Moslem leader announced the "massacre" Bill Clinton met with him and was asked to intervene. Clinton said that if there were 5000 casualties, he could intervene.
What is worse, even than promoting a false massacre, is the censorship of real genocide. It is accepted, even by NATO, that at least 3,870 unarmed Serb civilians, mainly women, children and old men, were murdered, often by beheading by "raiding" parties from Srebernica, who were allowed to pass safely through NATO "peacekeeper's" lines. Such civilian murders are far more clearly genocide than anything alleged against Mladic (or Karadzic & Milosevic before him) yet none of those against whom there is undoubtedly a case to answer, have been charged with this by the NATO funded "court"
So long as the vast bulk of the mainstream media censor in the cause of genocide there are no circumstances under which similar allegations whether made against Gaddafi or the Israelis can be treated as truthful or that the widely used term "lamestream media" can be considered as anything other than the greatest courtesy.
Ref - 1 of several instances of Izetbegovic boasting of Clinton's "fake a genocide" offer.http://www.israpundit.com/archives/34738
- NATO general testifying to the real massacre at the Milosevic "trial" http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg030904.htm
PS I authorise you, if you wish, to edit out the last paragraph because, while entirely factual, I recognise it would embarrass you. If any of you wish to say you will not print this because you have actually already allowed a single article or letter putting the facts given here I would accept that as evidence that there is 1 western newspaper which is not wholly divorced from journalistic ethics and eager to censor any fact in the cause of racism and fascism.
I except the British Morning Star and Hong Kong Asia Times from this stricture since they have already published truthful material about the alleged and undisputed Srebrenica massacres and thus demonstrated they posses more commitment to journalistic ethics than all the rest of these media outlets combined.
UPDATE Andrej has come up with 1 letter, giving the facts. What chance 2?http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/7/serbs-were-provoked-to-attack-srebrenica/
To a large extent the news media remain programmed. It saves them from thinking.
I struck lucky on 9 June with a letter to the Derby Telegraph which they printed as an article. Only a local paper, I know - but something. One editor of a Church newspaper has also said that he will use it.
Just a matter of persistence and knowing the approximate wordage limit of the paper. A long and usually fruitless business. KBO as CHurchill said.