News agency Itar Tass reports
that Russian supply convoy has successfully arrived in airport Slatina
near Pristina.

REPORTERS SANS FRONTIERES

War in Yugoslavia: Nato's media blunders

Kosovo is being used as a pawn in a media war planned by strategists on
both sides. The workings of the propaganda machine hold no secrets for
the Serbs: the Belgrade government is fundamentally opposed to press
freedom and does not hesitate to "eliminate" dissenting voices. Serbian
Radio and Television (SRT), Serbian citizens' main source of news, has
for the past ten years been under the complete control of people close
to the government and is used as a weapon in the war. After passing a
particularly restrictive information law in October 1998, the Serbian
government took advantage of the start of the Nato air strikes to
silence independent media in the country and to keep foreign journalists

out of Kosovo (see the report "Yugoslavia: A State of Repression"
published by Reporters Sans Frontières in May 1999).
Nonetheless, the "communications strategy" used by the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation (Nato is made up of 19 democratic countries) since
the start of the conflict has also given rise to a number of questions
both from western correspondents and from independent Serbian
journalists. Veran Matic, editor of the radio station B92, which has
been banned by Belgrade since the start of the bombings, wrote on 2
April: "As a representative of the free media, I am only too aware of
the need for information, whatever side you are on in the conflict.
People inside the country should be kept up to date with international
debate as well as with what is happening at home. Those abroad ought to
be told the truth about what is going on here. But instead of detailed,
uncensored facts, all we hear is war propaganda, including western
rhetoric."

The reporting of rumours and exorbitant figures that are impossible to
check by certain western political and military officials, and their use

of aggressive vocabulary, have strengthened doubts about their goodwill.

"Nato should drop this information strategy", Pascal Boniface, director
of the Paris-based Institute of International and Strategic Relations,
said on 29 March. Other observers have been even more critical, putting
the blame squarely on both sides. "What the Serbs and their television
are currently doing is absolutely repulsive", said an analyst with the
Mass Media Research Centre at the University of Leicester, England, "but

the propaganda put out by Nato is scarcely better."

Many journalists who have attended the Nato press conferences in
Brussels are also very sceptical about the truth and accuracy of the
informations supplied by officials of the organisation. "What London and

Brussels offer to journalists as facts are usually only rumours", Kevin
McEderry of the French news agency AFP wrote on 22 April. On the same
day the French daily Libération summed up the situation as follows:
"Since the start of the air strikes, at press conference after press
conference, Nato officials have put out false reports and rumours."

What is the truth of the matter? Has Nato made blunders attributable to
confusion and haste, or have there been deliberate attempts at
disinformation? In a propaganda leaflet issued in Yugoslavia, showing a
B52 bomber dropping bombs from a high altitude and aimed at encouraging
Serbian soldiers to desert, Nato refers to: "Thousands of bombs... and
the determination, force and support of the whole world to continue to
drop them on your units." To make sure of this "support", which in
democratic societies depends on public opinion, might Nato officials
have taken a few liberties with the truth? Using some examples of these
"media blunders", Reporters Sans Frontières will try to get to the root
of the matter.

General Wilby's "very reliable source"

On 29 March 1999, a few days after the start of the military operation
against Yugoslavia, Nato announced in Brussels that the chief adviser to

Ibrahim Rugova, Fehmi Agani, and five other well-known Kosovo Albanians,

had been murdered by Serbian troops. They included Baton Haxhiu, the
young editor of the Albanian-language Pristina daily Koha Ditore.
Earlier that day, the managing editor of the daily, Veton Surroi, had
been included in the list, but his name was later withdrawn. The day
before, Nato had said that Rugova himself was in hiding and that his
house had been burned down.

Such reports caused widespread consternation and indignation among both
journalists and the public at large: Fehmi Agani, a professor of
sociology aged 66, is regarded as one of the most moderate and respected

Albanian officials in Kosovo. The report of the murders made the front
pages of the international, and particularly American, press (see the
International Herald Tribune, 30 March). British and Italian dailies
published praise-filled obituaries of the victims. Yet many high-ranking

European diplomats had expressed surprise about the report and refused
to confirm the murders. The French foreign ministry spokesman said he
was afraid they might have taken place, but could not be sure. British
general David Wilby, questioned at Nato headquarters about the
circumstances of the murders, said the report came from a "very reliable

source" in Kosovo, which his department had checked carefully. The
killings had apparently taken place after the five intellectuals
attended the funeral of an Albanian lawyer, Bajram Kelmendi, who was
murdered along with his two sons by Serbian soldiers (or paramilitaries)

during the first night of the air strikes, the general added.

AFP correspondents in Kosovo were unable to confirm the Nato
announcements. The independent Belgrade news agency Beta reported strong

denials by the Serbian authorities. A journalist posted to Belgrade told

Reporters Sans Frontières: "If they had any responsability in this
matter, Serbian officials would have blamed the murder on the KLA
[Kosovo Liberation Army] or kept quiet about it, as they usually do." On

the Albanian side, no-one was sure of the facts either. Journalists in
Tirana learned the news from the American news channel CNN, Kosovan
political leaders in Europe referred to the Nato report without giving
further details. When the report was checked, General Wilby's "very
reliable source" turned out to be the London-based Kosovo Information
Centre, which is run by Kosovan exiles. One of them, Hafiz Gagica, had
said the same day that Ibrahim Rugova had been wounded and his
whereabouts were not known.

Two days later Ibrahim Rugova spoke to foreign correspondents from his
Pristina home, saying he was in good health and his house had not been
damaged. SRT broadcast news of his "cordial" meeting with Slobodan
Milosevic in Belgrade. Thus, by exploiting the weaknesses in Nato's
communications policy, the Serbian president staged a media coup,
showing himself with the leading Kosovan advocate of a peaceful solution

to the conflict.

Renate Flottau, correspondent of the German weekly Spiegel, who spent a
week with Rugova in Pristina in early April, spoke about the pressure to

which the Kosovan leader had been subjected by the Serbian authorities:
he was being held hostage in Pristina and he was virtually kidnapped to
be taken to Belgrade. But nothing that Nato had said about him was true
either.

The report of the murder of the five Albanian intellectuals also turned
out to be incorrect. Baton Haxhiu learned of his death on the radio.
Passing through London on 7 April, and later in Paris, he told how he
had fled to Macedonia and said the other four people reported dead were
in good health. Fehmi Agani was in fact killed three weeks later by the
Serbian army, in circumstances that are still not clear, as he was
trying to flee from Kosovo with his family. The Serbian government
immediately blamed the killing on the KLA, while Nato officials never
mentioned the subject again. Nor did they ever deny the initial report.
Making a rumour official in this way, during the first week of bombing,
would appear to be less the result of a mistake than of a deliberate
decision: to tip the balance in favour of Nato air strikes on Yugoslavia

at a time when public opinion was still very sceptical about their
effectiveness.

Blunders by the military... and the media

The bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade on 8 May left western
leaders seriously embarrassed. The building was hit by three missiles
fired by Nato planes, leaving four people dead, including three Chinese
journalists, and several injured. On 10 May US president Bill Clinton
apologised to the Chinese government, describing the attack as a "tragic

accident". Meanwhile, the Nato spokesman tried to explain to reporters
that "a system, not an individual" was to blame. In Washington, defence
secretary William Cohen and the head of the CIA, George Tenet, said an
inaccurate piece of information had caused an error in the targeting of
the building. To put it more clearly, they were admitting that the CIA
had not bothered to record that the Chinese embassy had moved to a
different building several years earlier, even though the new address is

listed in the Belgrade telephone directory.

China rejected this explanation. An official said: "The western media
themselves wondered how the intelligence service of the world's leading
power had failed to recognise a huge diplomatic building, with a
courtyard, a nameplate on the door and a flag." On 11 May, Nato
secretary-general Javier Solana promised a "formal investigation", the
results of which would be annonced as soon as possible. So far they have

not been published.

The bombing of a convoy of journalists on 30 May provided a further
challenge to Nato's communication skills. Two vehicles carrying
journalists were targeted by Nato bombers on the road from Prizren to
Brezovica, in Kosovo. The correspondent of the British daily The Times,
Eve-Ann Prentice, a journalist with Portuguese national television, Elsa

Marujo, and a French author, Daniel Schiefer, were injured in the
attack, and one of their drivers was killed. Eve-Ann Prentice told her
newspaper how the raid had taken place. (Nato officials said on 31 May
that despite checks they had "no information" about it). Nato spokesman
Jamie Shea commented: "Of course, we cannot guarantee the safety of
journalists or individual vehicles in Kosovo."

The attack on a convoy of Albanian refugees on 14 April, the biggest
military blunder so far, highlighted the limits of Nato's attempts at
justification. Nato planes bombed two groups of refugees in the
Djakovica region of south-western Kosovo, killing 75 people, according
to Serbian sources. At first the German defence minister, Rudolf
Sharping, accused Serbian planes of the bombing. The next day, in a
press release issued by its Brussels headquarters, Nato acknowledged
that it had bombed a civilian vehicle by mistake: "Following a
preliminary investigation, Nato confirms that apparently one of its
planes dropped a bomb on a civilian vehicle travelling with a convoy
yesterday." Nato said the attack was made because military vehicles were

presumed to be in the area. "Serbian police or army vehicles might have
been in or near the convoy", the press release added.

On the same day the AFP correspondent in Kosovo, Aleksandar Mitic, the
correspondent of the daily Los Angeles Times, Paul Watson, and two Greek

television crews were able to go to the scene of the bombing. They found

scenes of disaster, with "bodies charred or blown to pieces, tractors
reduced to twisted wreckage and houses in ruins." According to Mitic's
report, two convoys, one to the north and one to the south of the town
of Djakovica, were the target of the bombings. He quoted one refugee as
saying the groups had been bombed three or four times, "the planes
circling overhead as if they were following us".

On 16 April, Nato spokesman Jamie Shea and military leader General
Giuseppe Marini insisted several times that "in one case and one only,
we have proof of civilian loss of life. Otherwise, we are sure that we
targeted military vehicles." The media were already talking about
"Nato's biggest blunder" and underlining the "confusion" in the Nato
press release. Public opinion, shocked by film of the bombings, was so
outraged that the London government was quick to stress that the bombs
used were not British. It was only on 19 April that Nato changed its
version of events, admitting that it had hit two convoys with the help
of about a dozen planes that dropped a total of nine bombs. It made
public a recording of one of the pilots responsible for bombing the
first convoy, who said the vehicles in question were "of a military
type". As for the second convoy, Nato claimed it had been targeted
because its "pace and formation were of a typically military nature". On

the same day the British Daily Express revealed that one of the American

pilots responsible for the bombings had been warned by a British pilot
that the convoy included civilians. Two days later, Nato officials
admitted that the recording made public on 19 April had no connection
with the bombing of the convoys. Belgrade rubbed salt in the wound by
broadcasting a supposed recording of a conversation between an American
pilot and an AWACS radar plane, encouraging the pilot to continue with
the bombing despite his suspicions that there were civilians in the
convoy. Nato immediately condemned the tape as a fake.

Where western communication went awry

Nato officials apologised for the bombing of the convoys near Djakovica
and said they regretted the death of civilians. They even apologised for

having given inaccurate information. On 16 April, for example, Rudolf
Sharping told the press that he had "at best, spoken too soon" about the

incident. He had at first accused the Yugoslav armed forces of being
behind the bombings on the basis of "the information available at the
time". In fact, the minister was repeating the words of General Wesley
Clark, who had referred to accounts by refugees claiming the convoys had

been attacked on the same day by Yugoslav bombers. "A monstrous lie",
the Yugoslav foreign ministry spokesman retorted.

But while acknowledging their "mistakes", western officials
systematically emphasised that the government of Slobodan Milosevic was
"entirely responsible" for the incidents. This gave them the opportunity

to make daily mention of violence committed by Serbian troops, the
Albanians' flight from Kosovo and the nature of the Milosevic
government. Roger Silverstone, a media specialist with the London School

of Economics, subsequently commented that Nato officials had "so far led

a good propaganda war, highlighting ethnic cleansing operations by the
Serbs to cut short their critics". In this respect too, the information
supplied by Nato seems not to have been carefully checked. "Villages
attacked by artillery", "towns razed to the ground", "human shields" and

"mass graves" were all reported without any evidence of their existence
being given. Naturally, the Serbian authorities were delighted to show
film proving that the Nato allegations were wrong, scoring valuable
points in the news war. When Nato was caught red-handed blundering - or
lying - it was quick to recall the lack of independence in the Serbian
media. On 18 April, shortly after the "media disaster" of the bombed
refugees, Nato spokesman Jamie Shea made a long statement condemning the

Milosevic government's stranglehold on the press. "Night and day, I am
under pressure from journalists to justify Nato's actions, but I am
struck that Slobodan Milosevic is not asked to justify anything", he
complained, adding: "Milosevic is unaware of the constraints connected
with the media."

Military officials also hit out at the Serbian media, accusing them of
conducting disinformation campaigns: on 19 April, as Nato admitted to
bombing the two convoys near Djakovica, the organisation's spokesman in
Skopje, Commander Eric Mongnot, denied reports of deaths among the Nato
forces put out by the Serbs, and accused them of "lying propaganda".

Others features of western communication are approximate figures,
debatable historic references and the use of vocabulary that has the aim

of making the adversary appear monstrous. For instance, Jamie Shea
described Slobodan Milosevic as "the organiser of the greatest human
catastrophe since 1945" and also as "the instigator of a flight similar
to the evacuation of Phnom Penh by the Khmers Rouges". Rudolf Sharping
said on 28 March that "genocide" was going on in Kosovo, while Jamie
Shea reported that 500,000 people had been driven out of Kosovo -
conveniently omitting to mention that this figure covered a full year of

clashes in the province and not the period of the Nato military
campaign. The term "genocide" has been used systematically by British
prime minister Tony Blair, and in Germany officials have compared the
Milosevic government to that of Hitler. These historical references have

led to protests from experts. Historian Wolfgang Benz, the director of
the Research Centre on Anti-Semitism, speaking in Bonn on 22 April,
warned against comparing the Belgrade regime with Nazi Germany. He
condemned the "indiscriminate and fateful use of the word Holocaust" and

accused western politicians of "dipping at random into a mixed bag of
historical terms". Shortly beforehand, British foreign secretary Robin
Cook had referred to a "final solution" being implemented in Kosovo by
Slobodan Milosevic.

>From 30 March onwards, the British government adopted an even tougher
tone in its "communication" to counter "the propaganda of the Yugoslav
army and its thugs", in the words of Robin Cook. Defence secretary
George Robertson described Slobodan Milosevic as a "butcher" during his
daily press briefings in London. Other British ministers depicted the
Yugoslav president as a "diabolical lout", aided by "corrupt and
sadistic henchmen". Serge Halimi of the French monthly supplement, Le
Monde diplomatique, said these expressions were deliberately thought up
to make the front pages of the British tabloids.

Kosovan leaders in exile were invited to London to explain the Nato air
strikes and call for them to continue. More discreetly, government
sources accused British journalists of giving too much weight to
"Serbian propaganda" and of "doubting too systematically the validity of

the Nato armed operation". The comment was directly aimed at the BBC's
correspondent in Belgrade, John Simpson. The daily The Times said on 16
April that he had been accused by British government officials of
"passing on Serbian propaganda indiscriminately in his coverage of the
Nato bombings." He was also accused of "over-simplification" and even
latent pro-Serbism, for claiming that the conflict had succeeded in
rallying the Serbian people behind their president. Unofficial
government sources have hinted that an official complaint could be filed

against the BBC. The corporation's deputy director, Richard Ayre,
defended the journalist, saying: "I pay tribute to the courage of John
Simpson and the objectivity of his reporting. (...) It is essential that

the public should be able to hear a true account of the atmosphere in
Belgrade and not simply what Nato governments would like people to
hear."

Conclusion: Has Nato lost this war?

Reporters Sans Frontières has collected many statements from journalists

who are indignant about Nato's communication strategy. Alexandra
Schwartzbrod, of the French daily Libération, believes that
communication about the bombing of the two convoys was "scandalous", and

has a general recollection of "confused", if not deliberately false,
information being put out by Nato. "They gave the impression that they
didn't really know what they were talking about", she said. Moreover,
since the end of April, her newspaper has not seen any point in keeping
a permanent correspondent at Nato headquarters in Brussels.

On 27 April Nato officials themselves admitted - although not in so many

words - that their communication strategy had failed. They said
communication policy should be "thoroughly reviewed (...) particularly
in the light of the disaster of the bombing of convoys of refugees".
London then sent some of its leading specialists in press relations to
Nato headquarters, including Tony Blair's chief adviser, Alastair
Campbell, who was one of the main architects of New Labour's election
victory in the May 1997 elections.

In an internal report to the organisation, revealed in the Spanish daily

El Mundo on 31 May, Nato recognised that "Nato headquarters does not
have the mechanisms, resources or experience necessary to conduct an
information campaign in wartime". The report said that public opinion
should be prepared for three possible scenarios: "a long period of air
raids; more intensive raids, not solely against military targets; and a
land invasion", and recommended the use of "all possible channels" to
improve communication, including non-government organisations and the
media. It is to be feared that the strengthening of Nato's communication

system is aimed at increasing manipulation of the media rather than
improving the quality of information.

In the third month of their military campaign, Nato officials have made
practically no mention of "collateral damage" - only of "legitimate
targets" such as television buildings and relay stations, post offices,
power stations and bridges - without provoking any major movements of
protest or indignation. But at what price? While remaining the defender
of a "just cause" in the eyes of western public opinion, Nato has not
shown goodwill in its relations with the media and has distorted the
truth on several occasions. The officialisation of the rumour about the
killing of Albanian intellectuals and more or less deliberate attempts
to confuse the media about the bombing of civilians have severely
damaged the organisation's credibility. The British government's
pressure on the BBC's Belgrade correspondent is a violation of the
freedom to inform. The bandying about of historical references and use
of aggressive expressions are unworthy of officials of democratic
countries.

It is obvious that in time of war, the information provided by one side
or the other may be liable to be used as a propaganda tool. Just as
inevitably, communication can also be used as a weapon, be it political
or commercial. But it could still be hoped that a coalition of
democracies, which claims to have right on its side, would behave with
more integrity than the dictatorship it is fighting against.

Alexandre Levy
Europe desk researcher
Reporters sans frontieres
5, rue Geoffroy Marie
75 009 Paris
tel : 33 1 44 83 84 84
fax : 33 1 45 23 11 51
email : europe@rsf.fr

"What London and

Brussels offer to journalists as facts are usually only rumours"

DANIELA.
my sister might not be on this board, but i can asure you she is not happy either.Nor am i for that matter.The thing that makes me sad is that the war still goes on.Right here on this board!
Hate consumes energy, and if i just speak for myself i am not planning on letting my energy be consumed by hate.

If you must know me and my sister Zoja are trying our best to help both sides of this ugly situation.
You might believe it or not, but me nor my sister hate Serbian people. We are just discusted with Milosevic and people that support them.I am also discusted with whatever terrorist actions.To be honest it's up to here!

And another thing just because i or my sister don't post much does not mean we are happy as i said quite the opposite actualy.

---

Then another thing i don't remember who said it, but a lot of innocent Serbians i know are on the internet in other discussiongroups like this and i can assure you this.They are not happy with milosevic either, but are realistic enough to ask themself Who has to take his place.Not willing to end up in the same shitty situation over and over again.
They even admit that damage A LOT of damage and wrong doing have been done by both sides and feel no hate for Albanians.Thats what i call courage.Some people on this board can learn a few things from that.

Emina

You are the ones ("zoja", "emina")cheering for the murderous and terrorising KLA - UCK so don't pretend to me that you are concerned about the fate of the "both" sides! There are more than two sides in this !

I don't remember Milosevic arming KLA and starting this war, and all the problems that the albanian
separatists subjected the serbs throughout this century...
He is very alive and well while you were supporting NATO bombardment even on your own albanian nationals, not just others.

Just come out in the open and admit that you want a 'greater albania' at all costs. Milosevic is not your problem - it's the serbs and other nationalities you're fighting to exterminate!
to steal the land from. Be it Greeks, Macedonians...

The ortodox monastery "Sveta Trojica" in the
Musutiste village near Prizren was burned to the
ground by the members of the KLA. The
monastery was mentioned for the first time in
1465. Most of the medieval orthodox monasteries
are located in Kosovo.

Daniela,
The KLA are not hurting anyone, just like you said the Serbs weren't hurting the Albanians a couple of weeks ago, and we KNOW you were right then. Those nice Serbian soldiers didn't hurt anyone. There was no ethnic cleansing or document stealing or home burning or cold blooded murders or rapes like that mean old NATO said there was. That is why the KLA isn't hurting the Serbians, because the Serbians were real good and fair to the Albanian people. Why would the Albanians hate the Serbians? The Serbs treated the Albanians so well.

boy this joint is rockin' now...


>>snippet from wednesday's BOSTON GLOBE; front page headline CHURCH TELLS MILOSEVIC TO GO...


"as streams of serb troops and civilians sped out of Kosovo, the Serbian Orthodox Church called yesterday for President Slobodan Milosevic to resign for the sake of the people..."


so, um, if the church felt they had that much sway w/milosevic, why did they wait until NOW to tell him to go? were they waiting to see if he could "win", and now they conclude he cant? WTF?!?


i tell ya nick ol' pal, you're sounding like some snarly, grimy bundist such as one might have seen in an early '40s b-movie...


so tell me, do you still beat your wife?

DANIELA.
I already went out in the open.Born in Sarajevo.Not Albania not Kosova,so im repeating myself.And oh one more thing i don't take responsability for Zoja's words.Is that clear?You need to learn to read our english is sooooooooooo different.
Who's pretending anyway?take a good look in the mirror.
A LIAR WON'T BELIEVE ANYONE ELSE DANIELA GET THE PICTURE?

Emina

Daniella,

Just so we are clear about where you stand,
do you agree with Nick
that there has been no mass killings
during the Serb reign of Kosovo?

NICK'S 6 PROOF OF YUGOSLAV VICTORY :

1. "Kosovo is still Yugoslavia territory".
For the moment maybe - but not SERBIAN !
Serbs have lost absolute control.
KOSOVARS RULE - with international protection.
This is proof .... of YUGO DEFEAT - not victory.

2. "Milosevic is still in power".
In power of Serbia - yes.
Let him stay in power there and spread his poison on Serbs.
Milosovic is in power over bankrupt shambles.
This is proof .... of YUGO DEFEAT.

3. "UN, not NATO is in control in Kosovo"
Milo wanted SERBS to be control of Kosovo.
Now UN / NATO / KLA are in control.
Milo LOST CONTROL.
Proof, yes, of YUGO DEFEAT.

4) "NATO must deal with Albanian liars, etc."
The ONE BIG LIAR HERE IS ....... Milosovic.
Everybody knows not to trust him.
His word has a long record of being WORTHLESS.
At least give Albanians a chance.
Now we listen to them - not to you Serbs.
Proof ... of YUGO DEFEAT.

5. "The Russians are in Kosovo "
Yes, soon to be under NATO command.
YOUR GREATEST ALLY now sport
'KFOR' (= NATO) on their tanks,
... begging to join the victors.
Proof ... of YUGO DEFEAT

6. "There is no autonomy for Kosovo .... etc".
De facto, Kosovo is now VERY autonomous.
Serbs have nothing - NOTHING to say there anymore.
Whatever the degree of autonomy,
SERBS ARE NOT IN CONTROL.
Hence, proof .... of YUGO DEFEAT.


NICK, if you still don't believe
THAT YOU ARE WRONG IN CALLING IT "SERB VICTORY"
then look around you everywhere
including the Russian and Serbian media :
HASTY WITHDRAWALS AFTER CAPITULATION !

SLOW LEARNERS NEED TIME,
BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO LEARN AT SOME POINT.

GUIDO,

I hope you are still around to
enjoy VICTORY - as predicted,
the only possible outcome.
Hope the COLLABORATORS here did not run you off the board
with thwarted facts and twisted truths.

Allow me to quote something you posted
(to the attention of Serb propagandists)
on APR.07.99

"I say all your arguments are irrelevant
because NATO is more powerful than Yugoslavia,
Yugoslavia will surrender
or be destroyed,
NATO will occupy Kosovo either way,
the refugees will return,
Kosovo will be autonomous or independant,
and Serbs will still be as*holes.
Albeit defeated as*holes.
THE TRUTH HURTS. HUH?"

RIGHT ON THE DOT.

I'm sorry everyone, please forgive me for this. I just have to say Afroditis, Daniella, Maja, and Nick were wrong about everything they believed in. But the really sad part is that their pride won't allow them to admit it. I'm suprised they would even show their faces around here. What a bunch of F*CKING IDIOTS!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

P.S. Please excuse my French, Pete Rose.

Who really wrote the so called letter from the Spanish pilot? What is his name and unit?
Has it been confirmed?
I read it on another site before it was posted here, and it looks like it was written by a Serb propagandist.