Oh, yes, sure...

Saturday 13 November 1999 OPINION
Vancouver Sun

---

For NATO, truth was the first casualty in Kosovo

Lawrence Martin Southam News
OTTAWA - Numbers don't matter.

That was the response of Art Eggleton, the Canadian defence minister who
seemingly doubles as a Pentagon spokesman, to the news this week that
the NATO numbers on casualties caused by the Serbs in the Kosovo war
were more inflated than a Hindenburg airship.

United Nations search teams found 2,100 bodies, not all Albanians.
There are more searches to come but the numbers fall far short of the
NATO estimates that ranged from 10,000 to 100,000 and were swallowed
whole by most of the western media.

Some months ago, when the war was beginning, the numbers, in the words
of Mr. Eggleton and others, did of course matter. Now, since they are
not helpful to NATO credibility, they border on the irrelevant.

Mr. Eggleton was remarkably smooth before the cameras. It was as if he
were on automatic B.S.pilot. In his business you have to be smooth. The
stories tend to change.

Before the war began, the Kosovo Liberation Army was classified by the
Central Intelligence Agency as a terrorist organization, replete with
Marxists. During the war, the KLA was given a new shining identity by
NATO. Its members were "freedom fighters." After the war, NATO tells
yet another story: They're the enemy again.

Whatever the real reason for the massive NATO bombing campaign in
Kosovo, there is one aspect that cannot be overlooked. It is the idea
that in war the politicians can think their publics are so gullible,
ignorant and stupid that they can trot out any line and get away with
it.

In this war, it appears more and more like NATO won over public opinion
by putting out one extraordinary falsehood after another while relying
on a media, particularly the U.S. one, so compliant it began to look
like the state-run enterprise I saw in the Soviet Union before Mikhail
Gorbachev went to work.

Two of the Canadians closest to the Yugoslav story were Maj.-Gen. Lewis
Mackenzie, who commanded United Nations forces in the Bosnian war of
1992, and James Bissett, the last Canadian ambassador to serve in
Belgrade. While holding no truck for Slobodan Milosevic, both men were
courageous enough to challenge Ottawa's and NATO's assertions on this
war most every step of the way. They might well feel a bit of
vindication now, not just at this week's numbers, but at how the whole
picture is emerging.

The war was triggered by Mr. Milosevic's failure to accept the
Rambouillet accord which was likened by NATO leaders to a reasonable
deal. The consensus now among Henry Kissinger and many of his ilk is
that it was so unreasonable that no Serb leader with a grain of a brain
could have accepted it. It stipulated, for one, an independence
referendum in Kosovo in three years. Since Kosovo is 90-per-cent
Albanian, Rambouillet was tantamount to the Serbs handing over their
historic heartland to the enemy. Yet NATO said sign it or it's war.

To justify the actual bombing attacks, which made mockery of
international law, NATO leaders like Prime Minister Jean Chretien
alleged the Serbs were on a murderous and ethnic-cleansing rampage. In
fact, the most reliable estimates put the deportations before the
bombing attacks began at more like a trickle.

As for killings, the International Crisis Group this week put the
average number before the NATO intervention at 30 a week, for both
sides. More accurate were the NATO claims about large displacements of
people within Kosovo itself before the bombings. But how surprising
or catastrophic was this given that an ethnic civil war had been going
on for years and that in many cases the Albanians were giving as good
as they got.

It would be nice to say the pattern of apparent disinformation was
limited to the Yugoslav war, a campaign that served a vital purpose for
President Bill Clinton in that it vanquished Monica Lewinsky from the
front pages forever. But it was only a year ago when, on the very eve of
his impeachment hearings, Mr. Clinton started bombing the hell out of
Iraq, pretending that Saddam Hussein was such a grave threat to
humanity that if he didn't get him that week, the world would be
covered in poison gas by the following Tuesday. Before that, again with
the Lewinsky crisis in full throttle, Mr. Clinton bombed a
pharmaceuticals factory in Khartoum claiming, laughably as it turned
out, that it was a toolshed for terrorists.

There might be a bit of a pattern here. Believing in a lot of this
stuff is like believing in the tooth fairy. Art Eggleton likes tooth
fairies.

Nalini wrote: (my response follows)

>> A small word from me you seem to enjoy the way you treat Emina. Well i can only say this please come with relavent pieces and analysis, instead of backstabbing someone you have no ties with.

>> It just doesn't look very good as you also claim to be a university boy/man you should know better. Then to lower yourself like this. I just find it unbelievable how you can accuse someone you claim to have no ties with of HATING Serbian people, and doubt on someones medical abillities.

>> If i would be Emina i would not answer these questions you pose either. Besides why would someone claim to have had proper medical scholing, if that wouldn't be the case?

>> I don't expect any answers on this as you can't give any, because you don't know the person involved here. Nor do i know the person involved, but i rather stick to myself meaning no accusations from my side.

=====================================

Hmmmmm. You sound suspiciously like Emina - same writing style, e.g., run-on sentences, disjointed syntax, improper word usage, dangling phrases, and an overall incomprehensibility. You also seem fond of giving advice, just like Emina. Here are some examples from her posts:

///// "My advice learn to read before you answer."

///// "Just a friendly advice."

///// "If you have any questions ill be happy to try and give you some advice."

///// "Another advice don't ever underestamate that bastard Milosevic."

///// "Let me give you one peace of advice about Maja."

///// "Advice from the funnyfarm :-))"

This last one rings of truth.

I suggest you follow your own advice and "come with relavent pieces and analysis". If you read the archives, as you claimed when you first entered this forum, you would know that there is ample evidence of relevancy in my posts. Perhaps what you object to is the content, analysis, or ideas. If that is the case, then an honest critique would be the appropriate response, unless (again, much like Emina) you prefer sniping and attacking to open debate.

What I wrote to Emina was not backstabbing. It was up front, open, and direct. It was not written lightly, nor in a fit of pique. It was written only after my patience with her ran out. Furthermore, it was based on a very careful reading and analysis of her posts and her interactions with other people in this forum.

I am tired of her lies, hypocrisy, accusations, and attacks. I did my research. I copied the entire archives, put them into a format that can be sorted, indexed, and cross-referenced. Then I extracted each persons posts and recreated complete conversations that were otherwise disconnected and scattered across many files. From that information the patterns are obvious. What I wrote was based on clearly identifiable patterns of language, behavior, and attitude. Up to this point, no one has accused her of being anti-Serb, yet throughout the archives she exhibits a need to continually deny it, and remind everyone how she hates Milosevic. Why? Her constant references to Serb friends resembles the anti-semite who feels the need to continually remind others that - "some of my best friends are Jews" - while talking about Jewish conspiracies, or the racist who needs to preface his sentences with "I have nothing against black people, but . . . ." Do you see the picture?

Consistent with Emina's style, you have distorted and misinterpreted what I wrote regarding her many PhDs. I didn't "doubt her medical abilities", I asked her where she received her PhDs, in what discipline, and what the topics of her dissertations were. If one is going to make such claims, then they ought to be prepared to provide the proof if they expect to be taken seriously. For the same reason I have asked her sister, who claims to be a journalist, where she is published. Continual reference to these "phantom" PhDs is another pattern throughout her posts. Personally, I think they are both fakes. Regarding Dr. Ducik's medical abilities and Ms. Kwak's role in their business endeavors, I recommend you visit her web site at http://www.suncecyberdoc.com/ and make your own judgement.

suitboy

Phil,

Your taking issue with my critique of the HRW report sounds like that CW song,

. . . "That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it". :O)

T'gunns

To Suitboy:
I found your peice on Human Rights Watch to be exceedingly clever. I do not know if you are sincere in your critique of HRW or not. In the end, it really does not matter. Yes, the report certainly sounds amateurish. The Albanians, unlike us, are not all saints and virgins. But are you going anywhere with this? Are you suggesting that the Albanians deserved what they got. You are probably correct-the Albanians were not "good". But if you feel that this is significant, or that the incompetence or greed of some bunch of do-gooders is significant, relative to what happened in Kosovo-you are part of the problem. Next time-instead of spending agonizing hours over a report, work at a 7-11 for 4 hours and give the money to some poor person who has lost his/her home or loved ones to ethnic violence.