DENIALS OF NATO - A Debate
NATO's behavior in these cases has been consistent, and follows this basic sequence:
It would have been easy to depict those occurences as 'serb manipulations' and
insinuate the the Serbs themselves have bombed their own civilians. This is the pathetic
logic used by some in this very NG at each newly discovered massacre site in Kosovo. It
has not been Nato's stance, although Nato badly needs public support for its operations.
Your statement is incredibly ironic, given what actually did happen. NATO did EXACTLY
WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING--claiming that the Serbs had shelled their own people--with regard
to the bombing of downtown Pristina, the attack on the Albanian refugee column, the
destruction of the passenger train on the railway bridge, the cluster bombing of Albanians
in Korisa, etc, etc, etc. Did you really miss these performances, or are you so intent on
exonerating NATO that you've put them out of your mind?
Uhh, Alan--if they had, how would you know? I'd recommend that you read Alexander
Lykourezos's listing of NATO atrocities and see if you're really familiar with all of
Furthermore, there's a world of difference between merely mentioning a story in passing,
or giving it the kind of detail which makes the suffering real and human to the reader.
You can see illuminating examples of this division between "worthy" and
"unworthy" victims in Herman and Chomsky's _Manufacturing Consent_.
Just like they do not fail today to show the distress of Serb civilians fleeing Kosovo
or KLA militia behaving like......Serb paramilitaries.
The emphasis placed on these stories comes nowhere near the sensational coverage given
to allegations of ethnic cleansing and atrocities by the Serbs during the bombing.
Personally, I've seen very little coverage of the KLA's violence either now or before the
Due to the absence of free press coverage in Serbia during the bombing, we have in fact
been saturated with Serb controlled coverage from the ground.
Yes, you were told it was "Serb controlled", thereby making it seem as though
it had been heavily censored. On the other hand, "NATO controlled" reports were
passed on to us without any such labels.
The only uncensored images and reports we got were those showing the refugees pouring
into Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro. There has hardly been a day in that period where
some Serb official or another did not show on various networks to defend the Serbian
*Sigh*...you obviously watch different networks than I do. The mere momentary
appearance of a Yugoslav official does not constitute balanced coverage. And I don't know
what you were watching, but I remember just a handful of days where I actually DID see a
Yugoslav official. Here's yet another reference for you which makes this point with actual
numbers rather than vague recollections: http://www.fair.org/reports/kosovo-sources.html
wall of suspicion has (of course) been extended to the War Crimes Tribunal,
preemptively deriding any conclusion that UN sponsored organisation might come to.
The ICTY is derided based on its past performance, its constituency, and the history of
its creation. It is a subcommittee of the Security Council; it is NOT affiliated with the
World Court, as many seem to believe; and it is almost entirely funded by NATO. You
seriously think it's going to mete out impartial justice? I'll tell you what--if the ICTY
agrees to prosecute the cases brought
I choose to put my confidence in our democratic institutions, and remain as vigilant as
I can to prevent those institutions from being squatted by criminals, thieves and liars.
You and I can do very little to prevent it.
This is the logic that keeps WWII revisionnists ticking: "it is not because
millions of testimonies have been recorded and not because the winning side shows images
and records from extermination camps that such extermination has taken place"....
Will you personally be in the camp of the revisionnists after all this is over,
documented, prosecuted and judged ?
And will you bother checking when 50-90,000 alleged rapes result in just 119 documented
cases, as in Bosnia? Or, having digested the propaganda version of the story at the
outset, when it was plastered on the front pages, and having never heard the ACTUAL
figures because the media never emphasized them for you, will you continue to make your
judgements based on hysteria rather than fact?