December 27th 2010 12:11:37 AM
I’m not sure why The American Thinker decided to defecate on Serbs for Christmas, but that’s what it did. As if Serbs had had a chance to catch their breaths from the last pile dumped on them. I guess not everyone takes Christmas off, and this lawyer — a “deputy political advisor to the commanding general, Multinational Division (North)” in Bosnia — certainly wasn’t about to.
For Christmas Day the site ran, of all things, a piece titled “A Srebrenica Christmas,” by Richard L. Kent.
It was brought to my attention by Doris Wise Montrose, president of the L.A. chapter of the Children of Jewish Holocaust Survivors, who asked for my assessment because she didn’t trust the content and was confused as to what it was doing on one of her favorite sites.
Below is the letter I wrote to her after suffering through the pabulum, followed by her response. It bears pointing out that this Christmas gift to Serbs comes even as the long-suppressed story is finally breaking that, yes, Serbs probably were chopped up for their parts in Kosovo, with our help and blessing. To hope that this might finally stir some pause in the fair-minded that maybe, just maybe, as in Kosovo, we didn’t get the straight story in Bosnia either…well, that’s too much to hope for in this life. The narrative just keeps chugging along on auto-pilot.
Perhaps I’ll email the editor, Thomas, though I’m hesitant to start another round of the “OH look, famous pro-Serb propagandist Julia Gorin wants you to believe…” bit. [By the writer, not the editor, who has been open-minded on this subject in the past.]
OK, as quick as I can be about it: The writer, Richard Kent, is biasedly mistaken on a few counts. First, he calls the language that the children speak “Bosnian.” There is no ‘Bosnian’ language. There is only Serbo-Croatian, which is actually Serbian. (The Croats simply changed the Cyrillic lettering to Latin and called it “Croatian,” changing also a few words and expressions here and there.)
Second: The trauma he names for the Muslim child naturally happened at the hands of Serbs—and the trauma he names for the Serbian sisters was — guess what — also caused by a Serb (their vicious Serbian father, who killed their mother). So even the Serbian children he names weren’t at the orphanage because of anything that a Muslim or Croat did to their families. And yet I’m personally acquainted by now with Serbs whose families were slaughtered by Croats in Croatia, and with a young man whose mother and sister were held in one of the nightmarish Muslim-run concentration camps. (The camps you don’t hear about but which a Bosnian-Croat NGO is suing the Bosnian government for.) I’m not doubting the children’s stories that the writer imparts, just noting the conspicuously familiar and repetitive theme of Serb-as-villain that he seems to be wedded to, like most everyone else.
This is a typical recycle job, still propagating that Srebrenica was demilitarized. EVERYONE by now admits — Western officials, diplomats, generals and the journalists who had distorted, omitted and concocted information to secure Western intervention — that Srebrenica was armed and carrying out gruesome raids on nearby Serbian villages. Unlike the Serbian soldiers, they did not spare women and children. The Dutch battalion members, if not the Dutch government, have defended their inaction, asking why they should have picked one side over the other and started shooting that side’s ethnic rivals. Which is what the Muslim side had hoped would happen. But don’t ask any of the happily indoctrinated who are still indoctrinating the rest of us to be interested in de-programming themselves by tuning in to even a day’s transcripts from the Hague, where the above-mentioned personages have been reluctantly debunking their own mythology in the witness chair for a decade now, to the reluctant ears of the Court. And don’t ask why the memoir of former chief prosecutor Carla Del Ponte — who started out as anti-Serb as any respectable person — hasn’t been translated into English and is being banned in several countries. While essentially still purveying the official Balkans narrative, the book nonetheless has enough uncomfortable facts to make it “problematic.”
Then this writer tries to have the reader think that the “orphans’” fathers are all dead. Not just dead but executed. Which the Hague forensics people have been unable to show — and therefore the Hague simply proclaimed it so. (The disputed number who were provably ‘executed’ ranges from several hundred to just over a thousand — not the famed “8,000.”) But in 2005 the ICTY at the Hague redefined the term “Genocide” to make the crime fit the demanded punishments — so that it could throw the book at every Serbian general for the crime of being a Serbian general. Then the International Court of Justice simply grafted the judgment as its own without conducting an independent investigation. So that now the propagandized can shout: “BOTH the HAGUE and the ICJ ‘found’ it was GENOCIDE!” In fact, 5,000 men who broke out of Srebrenica and made it through Serb lines were re-deployed to other combat zones, as was reported in news dispatches at the time. These 5,000 are counted among the touted 8,000.
Meanwhile, here is an example of a Bosniak baby girl who was “orphaned” and adopted by a Serb couple, only to meet her Muslim father this year (he had been “elsewhere” when her village was overtaken, i.e. he was fighting).
This writer is thoroughly propagandized, and as I found, aggressively defends still swallowing the original and stale Balkans story which better on-the-ground people than he have long eschewed. I know this because I looked this government dhimmi up and found the kinds of online fights he’s had. (Just do a “find word” for “Kent” on this cache’d page.)
One impression that Mr. Kent’s article does convey accurately is that ethnicity is not a fixation for the Muslim, Croat and Serbian children of Bosnia, whose families have managed to interact comfortably with one another for the most part, and who in Srebrenica today continue to bring food over each other’s houses on Ramadan and Orthodox Christmas. Unfortunately, when the West stepped in to exploit the ethnic tensions that did exist, by backing the Islamic supremacy and separatism of then-president Alija Izetbegovic, we set something in motion that has been changing the dynamics of the Balkans to increasingly resemble what Sarajevo has become today with our help: almost completely Islamicized, a place where the local government institutes segregation and where Muslim children do not want to learn with non-Muslim children.
And Doris’s reply:
I suspected the article was BS and that’s why I asked you about it. I found it at AT b/c it’s one of the sites I visit very often. I don’t know if you are considering responding to this article but why not write an entire article and submit it to Thomas Lifson? That’s what I would like to see. This is fraudulent narrative passing as fact b/c this narrative gets so much more attention. A lot like the other BS narrative called the Palestinian narrative.
So what if they call you the “famous pr0-Serb propagandist.” I want to be part of the “famous pro-Israel, anti-palestinian-BS propagandist” club myself. If your work can get others to join you in debunking this, there may actually be a chance to debunk the pro-palestinian narrative.
When I asked Thomas Lifson if he could post my response, he urged me to leave a comment. When I said I was thinking more of something like the “Disputing Julia Gorin” section he allows whenever I write something on the Balkans and people want to attack me for it, he became a wise-ass and wrote, “If you want to write Christmas in Serbia next year, we’ll consider it.” OK, Thomas, it’s your publication so you can make it as indistinguishable from the rest as you like. So I’ll just urge my readers to email you at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Especially since there were virtually no intelligent comments posted under the piece, and the last one was posted on Sunday, it’s doubtful the author or previous commenters will be checking that section again. So again, I suggest anyone taking as much offense as I did to this article and the editorial decision that allowed it, make your sentiments known by emailing Thomas Lifson at email@example.com.