Comments on: Dancing On A Mass Grave

By: john andrews

john andrews — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:05:13 +0000

I’ve been reading The Times (sort of) for the best part of twenty years – but I can’t think that I’ve ever read anything by Mr Kamm, or even noticed his name before.

Who cares what this non-event thinks?

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:02:50 +0000

An e-mail to the Times from Jonathan Cook (whose articles appear on this site).

Jonathan Cook responds to latest alert with email to The Times
Posted by The Editors on November 25, 2009, 11:15 pm

Dear Ms Baker,

I have followed with interest the long-running correspondence between Oliver Kamm and Media Lens, available on many websites, including the Times’. I have never worked for the Times, but I have worked for many years as a journalist on the Telegraph, Guardian and Observer. In that time I have become more than familiar with British newspapers’ claims to truth-seeking and editorial professionalism. The Times will be judged harshly for allowing Mr Kamm to publish his abuse against Media Lens on its site. But The Times and you will be judged far more harshly for your feeble attempt to defend his original libellous statement. If you are not prepared to retract the article and wish to maintain your current defence (as published on Media Lens’ site), it is incumbent on you and the paper you represent to show unequivocally both that

a) Mr Kamm was referring to Kosovo rather than, as appears plain from his words, Srebrenica

b) Media Lens has denied that mass graves existed in Kosovo

Otherwise, readers like myself will be forced to conclude that the professionalism the Times claims is a sham.

Yours sincerely,

Jonathan Cook

By: greybeard616

greybeard616 — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:54:00 +0000

Seeking the truth in the midst of massive mis-information dispersal is not “denial”–it is good research. Zionists have effectively “lumped” questioners with-for lack of a better word-quacks. Almost nobody “denies” the Jewish Holocaust. Many responsible thinkers doubt, question or deny key aspects of the Holocaust “legend”. Such questioners are pilloried because the political benefit of the libel is great indeed. The more the pity. For in so silencing questioning the American public continues following the “information” being ladled out for us.

By: kalidas

kalidas — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:34:26 +0000

Yeah, good ole humanitarian intervention.
It hurts so good.
Now it’s New and Improved, with the gift that just keeps on giving.
DU.

By: Mary

Mary — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:15:38 +0000

Instead of a direct comment from Kamm, there has been a response from the Times via their Feedback? editor. The Medialens Editors reply.
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1259170411.html

PS Kamm’s recent proselytizing for Bliar’s candidacy for EU President is disgusting especially in the light of the revelations coming out from the Chilcot Inquiry. An Iraqi man was holding a placard yesterday (the opening of the Inquiry) saying

7 million Iraqis killed, injured, homeless since 2003

It is being said that Bliar’s desire for the ‘job’ was to give him immunity from arrest and trial at the Hague.

By: b99

b99 — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 18:13:19 +0000

I think US intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo was a good thing – and I felt so at the time. That was genocide – and it had to be stopped.

By: bozh

bozh — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:56:55 +0000

One can certainly get lost in an argument how many muslim men from srebrenica were slain by serbs soldiers. Or how many iraqis have been by now slaughtered.
But one can not ever get lost [and forever to boot], in an argument or statement that an aggression is by far the greatest crime than any waves and rippples of crimes that an aggression later causes.

And the Left failed to condemn serb aggressions. Even the Right was solidly supporting serbs until at least ’94 in US and mid-95 in canada.
One of the causes for srebrenica [from srebro=silver] was allowing serbs to get too strong and not supplying or allowing croats and bosniaks to obtain enough arms to prevent at least one of the three yugoslav aggressions.

Regarding socalled Krajina and serb socalled lands, there is no such geographic region.
These areas were called “vojna krajinas”. These were continuoulsy changing croatian frontiers set up to stave ottoman advances. Serbs were settled in these areas by austrian empire in the 17th century in order to help the war against ottomans.
In fact, if it hadn’t been for poles, ukrainians, czechs, slovaks, hungarians, austrians, wallach, croats, germans, and rumanians, serbia might have still been under turkish yoke. But nations know no gratitude nor reason!
tnx

By: bozh

bozh — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:28:30 +0000

Having joined End the Arms Race, a vancouver ‘peace’ org, in ’93 in order to find out what the left in canada or vancouver thought of the three serb or yugoslav aggressions against slovenia, croatia, and bosnia i can attest that the Left in vancouver had no word to say ab. serb ethnic thinnings or the aggressions.

In fact, left even now thinks that serbs were partisans and croats Ustashe.
Actually serbs were partisans and chetniks. Chetniks were royalists and eventually joined germans and italians and with them fought partisans.
Croats were Ustashe and partisans.
According to partisan history, Ustashe barely controled zagreb and its eniviron.
Croatian partisans came mostly from littoral croatia and the areas controled by fascist italy. Even today there is much hatred btwn littoral croatia and some other parts of croatia or bosnia. tnx