MilitaryForums.co.uk

You made a claim that there are no mass graves in Bosnia. When someone pointed out that a variety of sources including the CIA have detailed the mass graves, you took off after the CIA. Your rebuttal was a dodge. There are too many sources reporting mass graves in Bosnia for their existence to be denied.

Snyder and Redhand, perhaps we all ought to maintain this discourse on a dispassionate level. Personal invectives tend to obscure the argument.

Redhand, you have your own opinion and I am not about to attempt to sway you from it. You stated that the UN had made no reports on mass graves in Bosnia and I duly posted a link to the contrary. The added links to the CIA and ICC purely were for additional reading. Feel free to dismiss them as you wish.

Is anything that takes a second look labelled 'revisionist'?

Pasha, you know as well as i do, that when you start throwing around the word 'revisionist', it has certain PC implications.

No, taking a second look is not, to my mind at least, revisionist. Revisionism as I would understand it, would describe propagandists who wish to reexamine history in light of their own ideological position, and, generally, rewrite past events so as to further the causes they support. I'm not sure that such a definition has 'PC implications', perhaps you might care to expand on that point?

I deliberately used the term revisionist to describe the literature that deliberately denies and/or negates the very events that I witnessed and photographically documented. I have an extensive archive of photographic work from the Bosnian War housed with the Associated Press in their New York Office, of butchered Bosnian Muslims, Croats and Serbs. Inhumanity is just a word in your mouth until you've seen a young child nailed to a door. No one had clean hands in that conflict, and that the Bosnian Muslims fared worse probably spoke more to their relatively diminuative arsenal.

Im friends with Canadian Infantrymen who served in the balkans, and from their viewpoint, it was mostly albanian aggresiveness. There was even a book written on the subject by one who was their first hand...books called 'Inat'. I forget the authors name off hand but i'll find it for ya.

The Albanians weren't involved in the Bosnian War so I'm hazarding a guess that your friend is probably refering to the Kosovan conflict. Most people that were there (including myself) will wholeheartedly concur that many Kosovar Albanians in general, and the UCK (KLA) in particular, turned viciously on the Serbs once the shoe was on the other foot. The difference being of course that the force in charge this time, NATO, acted as a check on their lethal intentions. That is the first time that I have heard the accusation regarding British Paras standing idely while violence was visited by one section of a community on another and I will try to see what I can't dig up on it. Do you have any further details regarding this?

While I didn't spend anytime with 1 Para, I was with both 1 RGR during the initial invasion and the RGJ soon after. It was my personal experience that individual Serbs received round the clock protection if they needed it, much to the consternation of certain elements among the Kosovar Albanians who had been under the impression that NATO was soley for their protection.

As for mass graves in Kosovo, my colleagues and fellow photographers James Natchway and Sedat Aral both witnessed and photographed the exhumation and examination of the mass grave at Racak. While I wasn't there myself, I am inclined to believe that they did not lie about what they saw nor forge their photographs. Thank you for offer of researching that book, I'll try to see if I can't get a hold of it over here.
Regards

Pasha

Pasha wrote:Snyder and Redhand, perhaps we all ought to maintain this discourse on a dispassionate level. Personal invectives tend to obscure the argument.

You're right, Pasha, and in that spirit I went back and edited my posting. Your firsthand accounting of what you saw is infinitely more valuable than anything I can say.

Well put pasha.

And yes my mistake, i was referring to the conflict in Kosovo.

A book you may want to look at is 'To Kill a Nation, The Attack on Yugoslavia' by Michael Parenti. He in no way goes easy on any sides, but he does point out the media bias towards the serbs and the complete absurdity of theRambouillet agreement.

I don't think i've seen anything so unfair in my life as that 'agreement'.

I just get angry thinking about it, and im bewildered as to what has gone wrong in Britain that they would go along with such a thing, considering their past of a spirit of fair play. I'll get you the name of the author for that other book asap...its lying around here somewhere.

Ok this thread has been hijacked waaay off course by alot of people including myself.

Snyder,

Back to my apparent 'bumpersticker logic' that your intellectual mind cannot stand. Ill put my points as simply and legibly as possible:

Is it not true that Bush is accused of conspiring with the Bin Laden Family for his own personal and family gain?

Is it not true that the Bush administration and the combined intelligence agencies are actively hunting down Osama Bin Laden and the perpetrators of 9/11?

Is it not true that the Bush administration in its entirety is accused of favoritism towards Israel and its actions?

Is it not true that George Dubya Bush flew a jet fighter aircraft for the US National Guard during the Vietnam War era?

Is it not true that Bush is accused of being a blatant idiot (by the left and europeans) and in your own words a 'functional retard'?

Is it not true that George W. Bush went to a prestigous American University and received top grades?

Now here is the flip side to those questions that i left unanswered in my 'bumpersticker logic' that you apparently in your intellectual grandeur could not see.

How is it possible that Bush both caters and actively sympathizes with the Bin Laden family and yet fully supports Israel. Do you not see the discrepancy??

How is it possible that a 'functional retard' can fly a jet fighter and graduate from a top notch US university? I don't care what you or anyone else says...it doesn't happen.

Explain all of this and how it all rolls into one man. If you can successfully do it...i'll personally congratulate you.

Redhand, I'm not like one of those rabid "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" or their predecessors. I don't think my opponent is the spawn of Satan, nor do I believe every single negative thing said about him. I'm sure those things they say about George W. having strangled boxes full of little puppies when he was a child are terrible lies. I don't sign onto every single conspiracy theory. So, with that introduction, on to the topics at hand:

• The relationships between the Bushes and the Bin Ladens are murky. Until and unless I read something from several credible sources, I view those dark hints about the cooperation to be just that -- unproven mutterings from the tinfoil hat crowd. But it is sort of interesting that they can't find him. Or maybe they found him a long time ago and froze the body, with the intention of thawing it out in October and leaving it on a dusty trail in Afghanistan to be miraculously "found." Hard to say. Maybe Bin Laden checked into a luxury suite in Dubai under the name Wilt Chamberlain, and no one has figured it out yet.
• Bush is obviously displaying favoritism toward Israel, just as most other administrations have. Bush is just more blatant about it. My theory is that he had listened to tapes (remember, I don't think the man can read) of some Texas preacher going off about the Book of Revelations, and figures now's the time to prepare for the final battle. Little does George W. know that the in the time when the Book of Revelations was written, all words had numerical values and "666" referred to Emporer Nero. You know, the one who fiddled while Rome burned? That Nero, not George W.'s favorite horse on his ranch. That, and other details, are among the reasons people should learn how to read. Especially presidents.
• A side observation: Our British friends might or might not be aware of it, but observers of American politics marvel at the sudden disappearance of antisemitism from the evangelical Christian right wing. It is Armageddon theology, or are the Republicans simply trolling for campaign money? My Jewish friends are completely convinced of the latter. I know lots of Jews, including some who are quite Republican, and not a single one of 'em thinks any of this "Judeo-Christian heritage" stuff has a shred of sincerity behind it. Ya gotta understand: German Jews were just as assimilated then as American Jews are now. This is not lost on American Jews.
• Bush went to Yale undergrad and Harvard Business School, but he received "top grades" in neither place. He got what they call "gentleman's Cs," meaning that he showed up for class, if that. He was admitted through family connections. Everything George W. has ever "achieved" came through family connections. In fact, to get him into his prep school before Yale, they had to put him into some pre-finishing school in Houston and then beg Andover to take him. A couple weeks ago, George W. called on colleges to stop admitting "legacies," i.e., members of the lucky sperm club who happen to be born to rich alumni. The news readers on TV could barely keep a straight face. What's next, Arnold Schwarzenegger leading a crackdown on the sale of anabolic steroids in bodybuilding gyms?
• I can't explain how a man as blindingly stupid as George W. Bush learned to fly a fighter jet. In fact, I sort of wonder if that's even true. But if it is, then all I can do is quote the nun who taught religion in second grade: Snyder, it's a mystery, and I don't want to hear any more questions about it.
• How could Bush be friends with the Bin Laden family and the Israelis? Dare I say it -- money. I've heard it makes the world go 'round, but that could be another bit of leftist propaganda. Damn Marxists, they're everywhere.

Flying ain't hard Snyder, officers do it. Good grief.

This little tirade should also be put in it's rightful place.
Wholley.

And so should that apostrophe.

snyder wrote:And so should that apostrophe.

Oh my! So you're quite the grammarian as well!

Or not.

Snyder wrote: It was the beginning of tidal wave of propaganda

Don't you think it should read "It was the beginning of the tidal wave of propaganda"?

But of course it should. Stop being a nitpicking dumbass until you get better at it.