Click to get your own widget

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

TRNOPOLJE & OMARSKA - 2 EXAMPLES OF THE CONCENTRATION CAMP LIE

There has been a certain amount of comment on my previous item REPORTING ON PALESTINIAN DEATHS as to whether the fact that all our media have claimed the existence of concentration camps in Bosnia as in itself proof that it is true & that those who dispute the our media such as" The articles published in The Emperors Clothes...which deny this... 'are mendacious trash" (to quote an Anonymous who declines to deny being Mr Norman Fraser*)

TRNOPOLJE
This is the photo used by the Guardian, ITN etc etc to prove that the Trnopolje camp was a concentration camp. Penny Marshall & other journalists gave evidence in the ITN-LM libel case in connection with LM Magazines' article showing it was faked. As a result the judge said that LM's claims were "essentially true" but advised the jury to find against them because they had not put sufficient emphasis to the possibility that ITN had done this faking "accidentally".

The manner in which this faking was done was firstly by filming not OF people within barbed wire but FROM within a barbed wire enclosure & secondly by concentrating the filming on Fikret Alic with out mentioning that his starved look was not in any way because of starvation but because he was suffering from TB.

Whether or not this was accidental I couldn't say however if it was this produces greater problems for ITN. This film turned out to be the most important story ever broken by ITN. ITN sold it round the world & never noticed it was being used to "prove" the existence of a concentration camp.For many years up until the present it has been presented by ITN as true, even the court's finding of accidental fakery, was accidentally not noticed by them. Penny Marshall's ITN career, still at ITN, has not been harmed by this accident. The difference between accident & intentional act is that you can never, by definition, say it won't happen again. This means that, since 1992, ITN have never been honestly been able to claim that any news item has not been faked accidentally. When they claim Bliar "honestly" believed the WMD lie they may accidentally lying. When the news ends with the funny animal story about an amorous hamster we do not know whether ITN staff have accidentally been using a vibrator on it.

However it is not merely that these liars have faked these pictures to create one concentration camp.

OMARSKA This, on the other hand is a photo of the Omarska concentration camp, an entirely different place, if you believe in the integrity of the Guardian, ITN & the western media generally.

Finally, while it is undoubtedly the case that the claims that these photos represent separate places & were not faked concentration camps, is an example of the very highest pinnacle of honesty of which these "news" institutions are capable, then or now The claims by Emperor's Clothes that no concentration camps existed (that these were refugee camps - an entirely different thing) is of an entirely different order of accuracy.

Also, accidentally, censored by our media. This article by Counterpunch which goes into some detail about the real & undenied but censored Srebrenica Massacre of thousands of Serb civilians also mentions what The Moslem Nazi leader said about the concentration camp story.
On his death bed, he readily admitted as much to his ardent admirer Bernard Kouchner, in the presence of U.S. diplomat Richard Holbrooke. Kouchner reminded Izetbegovic of a conversation he had had with French President Mitterrand in which he "spoke of the existence of 'extermination camps' in Bosnia."

You repeated that in front of the journalists. That provoked considerable emotion throughout the world. [...] They were horrible places, but people were not systematically exterminated. Did you know that?

Yes. I thought that my revelations could precipitate bombings. I saw the reaction of the French and the others-I was mistaken. [...] Yes, I tried, but the assertion was false. There were no extermination camps whatever the horror of those places. (2)
..........
2. Bernard Kouchner, "Les Guerriers de la Paix", Grasset, Paris, 2004, pp. 372-375.

Bernard Kouchner whose history as a pro-Nazi apparatchik closely parallels that of Paddy Ashdown & is thus not going to be lying against the Nazi cause.

So there it is - yet again the very highest standard of honesty of our media is proven to be noting but racist genocidal, allegedly accidental Nazi lies.

PS *Norman Fraser, longtime readers will know, is the guy who produced a lying document about how I had written letters to newspapers, using the party's, name to put forward "illiberal" policies like wealth creation, freedom & opposing genocide which lead to my expulsion from the party. He is still actively undermining liberalism in the name of liberalism

PPS The BBC have given no reply to my reply to their request that I be more specific in my accusation that they bbc-wont-deny-being-genocidal-nazi-liars I replied citing the Dragodan Massacre, carried out under UK government authority, of at least 210 civilians. Just to remind them that I am srill here.

Comments:
Neil,

Well done on the Omarska/Trnopolje ITN/Guardian FAKERY article post!!

Congratulations also on exposing these British media Nazis' brazen lies and despicable cover-up of the REAL Srebrenica genocide of thousands of innocent Serbian civilians (mostly elderly, women and children) perpetrated by the late Islamist Nazi, Alija Izetbegovic, and his warlord, the Islamo-Fascist terrorist, Mr. Naser Oric, from 1992 to 1995.

(Most of the killing being done by axes,iron bars,knives,sledghammers and explosives: with Mr. Oric bragging about it and laughing as he watched his 'snuff' videos of his killings - with the following boastful words of some Serbian families in Srebrenica done in with explosives: "We launched those guys to the moon!!". This bragging on the part of Mr. Oric being done in front of reporters from the Washington Post and Toronto Star).


Neil, by revealing this, you truly and indisputably have proven to be a CLASSIC LIBERAL: dedicated to freedom/liberty, prosperity - and last, but certainly not least - the TRUTH.


May all your future days for the rest of your life be productive, fruitful, prosperous and HAPPY days. Never give up fighting for the values and cause of genuine Liberalism!


KEEP UP THE SUPERB WORK, NEIL!!!


Cheers!


Pete.
 
Neil,

by the way I almost forgot. Trnopolje is spelt with TWO of the letter 'o' not one. You might want to change this in your article title as well as the body of the article itself in order to better assist researchers all over the world doing a search for "Trnopolje" on Google, for example.

Cheers,


Pete.
 
Neil,

Mr. Norman Fraser can't get his facts straight about the Israelis or the Serbs fighting Islamist Nazis and not "moderate secular democrats committed to a multi-ethnic society"[Guardian/ITN/BBC quote] since both can't seem to accept the abundant evidence that the late Izetbegovic's SDA party is still composed of radical Islamist fundamentalists - who glorify the foul deeds of the WW2 Bosnian Islamist Nazi SS divisions against Serbs,Roma and Jews - and who deliberately bombed their own people (as well as Serbian civilians) in ALL of the so-called "market place massacres"in order to lay the blame at the Serbs so they could get US/NATO military might to fight for them.

In 1992, Izetbegovic even had the brazen audacity to name his newly formed personal praetorian body-guards, the "Handzar", after the notorious WW2 Bosnian muslim Nazi SS division guilty of genocide against the Serbs, Jews and Roma peoples in Bosnia.

For proof, see the MAINSTREAM Bosnian muslim Sarajevo magazine "Svijet", glorifying this despicable Nazi SS division in an article in 1997 - well after the Bosnian war ended - with full color photographs accompanying the text praising this Islamist Nazi SS division!

http://www.tenc.net/bosnia/svijet.htm


Similar praise to the Handzar SS division was given in 1991 almost a full year BEFORE the outbreak of war in Bosnia in the Bosnian muslim magazine "Vox" - where we see a color drawing of the SS Handzar troops stepping on the decapitated heads of Serbs with the text caption reading: "Handjar Division is Ready!! (oh these Bosnian Islamists are just so "committed" to a "tolerant multi-ethnic Western style democracy"!).
See

"Srebrenica: The Untold Story" at

http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/051.shtml

Mr. Norman Fraser also can't accept the fact that the Arab leadership in the Middle East couldn't give a hoot about the lives of ordinary Arab civilians (whether or not they were killed by the IDF or the Islamist terrorists themselves)just like Izetbegovic couldn't give a hoot about the lives of ordinary Bosnian muslim and Serbian civilians in Sarajevo (as numerously documented by several UN commanding officers on the scene at the time - see previous comment post).

But then what else would you expect from the radical Islamists in the Balkans and Israel - people whose ideology/political philosophy stem from brazen, unashamed WW2 Nazis like Yasser Arafat's political mentor in the PLO/Fatah movement,the former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem: Haj Amin Al-Husseini,a personal friend of Adolf Hitler and the chief organizer behind Heinrich Himmler's creation of the infamous Bosnian muslim Nazi SS divisions: "Handzar" and "Kama" (who along with the Croatian Ustasha murdererd 750,000 to 1.2 million Serbs, Jews and Roma peoples from 1941 to 1945).

See
http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/amin_en.html


Cheers,

Peter.
 
Neil,

Some further links of interest regarding WW2 Nazi SS collaborator and major recruiter for the 13th Waffen SS Bosnian muslim "Handzar" divsion, the late Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, and his Islamist Nazi warlord, Mr. Naser Oric, and their horrific genocide perpetrated against the Serbs in and around villages of Srebrenica from 1992 to 1995:

http://emperors-clothes.com/sreb/mem.htm

http://www.srebrenica-report.com/docs/UN-1993-1.pdf

The UN document A/47/813, S/24991 on rape by Bosnian Muslim & Croat forces in Bosnia in 1992 can be read at:

http://www.srpska-mreza.com/Bosnia/rapes/raped-serbs.html.


http://www.balkanpeace.org/cib/bos/boss/boss13.shtml

http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg-sreb101604.htm

http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/documents/srebrenica.pdf

http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/oric.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/fulltext.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija1.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija2.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija3.htm

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/tribunal_watch/first_ind/mediakit.html


http://www.jasenovac.info

http://www.jasenovac.org


http://www.vaticanbankclaims.com

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/kosta/licnosti/tudjman.html


http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2006/02/tudjman-irving-2-holocaust-deniers-but.html


http://www.macedoniansincanada.com/Grecory%20R.%20Copley.htm


Suppressed UN documents detailing crimes against Serbs in and around Srebrenica, 1992-1993

http://emperors-clothes.com/sreb/mem.htm#doc

The SDA Islamist Nazi fundamentalist muslims under the command of the late Alija Izetbegovic and Naser Oric MURDER at the very least 3,870 Serbian CIVILIANS [elderly men, women ,and children]with SLEDGEHAMMERS,KNIVES,AXES,IRON BARS,FLAMETHROWERS & EXPLOSIVES in and around Srebrenica for THREE YEARS running from 1992 to 1995, then BOAST about it to Western media reporters (from the Washington Post & Toronto Star), while the UN looks apathetically on and it's NOT called "GENOCIDE" by the corporate controlled news media.

As they say in some parts of the US: "Please pinch me momma, I must be DREAMING!"

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Oct0703.htm

http://www.srebrenica-report.com

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep1703.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep1903.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Oct1503.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Oct0903.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Oct1603.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Oct20%2003.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Jun1503.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep0803.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Aug3193.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Genocide.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Dec3192-2.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Rome.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/freezer1.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/guide-yugo.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ranta.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/kosovo.htm

http://www.serbianna.com/features/srebrenica/
 
The One Big Lie: The Denial Of Ethnic Cleansing

The really big lie is to try to pass these Serbian camps off as ‘refugee camps’. There is far too much evidence for that.

The camps we are discussing were in the Opstina (district) of Prijedor, a strategically important area in north-western Bosnia, forming a corridor between Serb-held lands in Croatia and Serbia itself. From late April to mid-July 1992 this area was ‘ethnically cleansed’, a Serb term, of its non-Serb population. The towns and villages of the region were systematically swept by the Yugoslav Army (JNA) and Serb paramilitaries. Non-Serb houses and villages were destroyed. Some inhabitants were killed on the spot but most were forced to flee. The camps of Trnopolje, Omarska and Keraterm were set up to house the refugees.

Conditions in all the camps were poor but the camps had different and complementary functions. The camp at Trnopolje was primarily a detention camp for women, children and old men. Most of its inmates would simply be expelled from the area. However, when the ITN crew visited it in August 1992 it had just been sent a consignment of detainees from Keraterm, including Fikret Alic whose condition spoke of a starvation diet and a series of beatings, not childhood illness. Beatings, killings and rapes took place in Trnopolje but it was in Keraterm and Omarska that a really brutal regime prevailed. It appears that ‘eliticide’ was practiced at Omarska where non-Serbs prominent in political, business or intellectual circles were imprisoned and systematically degraded, beaten and murdered. Omarska has the most complete records and it has been estimated that from 4,000 to 5,000 prisoners were killed there. The camps acted as a mechanism to eliminate some and terrorise the remainder into leaving the region. In that they were successful. The non-Serb population of the Prijedor district went from 50,000 in 1992 to 3,000 in 1995.

The strategy and practice of ethnic cleansing is examined in Ch 5 of James Gow, The Serbian Project and Its Adversaries, London, 2003. For witness evidence of ethnic cleansing see Roy Gutman, A Witness to Genocide, London and Brisbane, 1993, especially pages 90 to 101 for Omarska. Finally, for net references on ethnic cleansing and the operation of the camps see the ICTY summary of the judgement on Dr Momir Stakic at

http://www.un.org/icty/stakic/trialc/judgement/sta-sum030731e.htm

and for more detail and references, the judgement at

http://www.un.org/icty/stakic/trialc/judgement/index.htm .
 
Once again assertion but no actual evidence. Even the assertions are self-contradictory.

That refugees were created on both sides is not denied & while people who have seen friends murdered by Moslems undoubtedly mistreated Moslems this is not the same as an organised "ethnic cleansing" (an English language term). In fact Miloseveic found & produced in court a document carelessly presented by the Izetbegovic's Nazi regime written before the start of the war declaring their determination to explel non-Moslems thus it was not the Serbs, not even non-governemnt Serbs who started this but your Bosnian nazi friends. Obviously had the authorities desired to permanently remove Moslems they would not have set up refugee camps nearby but encouraged them to leave either for Nazi territory or indeed for Serbia proper, the controller of ethnic cleansing in your warped view, as nearly 100,000 did.

While accepting that your claim that to call these camps "refugee camps" is a "Lie" represents your normal standard of honesty Norman the fact that you also say they were "were set up to house the refugees" shows not only that you are a liar but a stupid liar.

To describe Fikret's condition as a "childhood disease" is rubbish. TB is not always a childhood disease & obviously not in his case.

You then say that his emaciated condition is due to "a series of beatings". In this particular case you have amply demonstrated the capacity for bureaucratic obedience in the face of facts which has earned you a minor place in the SLD & would berhaps have earned you a slightly higher one in Orwell's 1984 or Nazi Germany. One of the characteristics of ""serial beating is bruising, Since Fikret is not wearing a shirt it is obvious he isn't bruised. That you can write this while looking at 2 pictures (admitedly only one of which is officialy the other being, in your Orwellian universe of somebody completely different at another camp) shows how deep your authoritarian racism goes.

Finally relying on Gutman as a winess to anything is unwise. Journalist Joan Philips (LM May 1993) has proven that Gutman had not been to the camps when he wrote those lurid & emotive tales. He deliberately fabricated the story & for this naturaly got a Pullitzer. Perhaps you could apply for one also.
 
Re Fikret Alic. He was hit and kicked in the mouth thus:

COUNT:

30.3. a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, torture, recognised by Article 5(f) of the Statute.

31. Between 14 June and 5 August 1992, Zoran ZIGIC took out Fikret ALIC and several other detainees. ZIGIC then beat Fikret ALIC by hitting him with a pistol and by kicking him in the mouth, knocking out four of his teeth. Zoran ZIGIC thereby committed:

at http://www.un.org/icty/indictment/english/sik-ii950721e.htm
 
You may be aware that in the case of the very first person, Dusan Tadic, "tried" for murder by the ICTY the alleged victim walked into court to testify for the defence. It turned out the witness who alleged Tadic had murdered his father had been coached by the Bosnian Nazi government. For his innocence he was sentenced to 20 years.

This proves that the "court" is irredemably corrupt & willingly accepts evidence from sources known to be engaged in fabrication.

If you have some actual "evidence" from some impartial source of the "severe beatings" you maintain are so invisibly obvious then present it. If not either apolgise or you are clearly a Nazi liar whose preseence brings the Scot Lib Dems into disrepute.

PS I note that you have neither disputed that the document Milosevic presented proves it was your Molslem Nazi allies who started the ethnic cleansing nor suggested that there was anything wrong with them doing so. After all to racists like you Serbs are merely Untermensch.
 
Ahhh, Mr. Fraser! (aka Mr. "Anonymous")

Changed your mind have we, about cutting and running like you did in the "20th Anniversary of Chernobyl Update" as well as the "Three Cheers for the Scottish Daily Mail" thread on this blog?!
Got tired of making up stories about Mr. Neil Craig and being exposed for the liar that you are on this blog and felt compelled to answer?
********************************************************************************************************************************************
Anonymous said...

As usual Mr North, much bluster and few facts. 'Moderation' permitting I continue this dialogue of the deaf under the 21 June posting on Trnopolje and Omarska
********************************************************************************************************************************************
On the contrary, Mr. Fraser - in your case its a hell of a lot of bluster and HOT AIR (nice way of saying LIES) with ZERO facts from your end (e.g., still waiting for you to provide even one SHRED of evidence to PROVE that Emperor's Clothes has LIED even ONCE - unlike your Guardian pro-Islamist Nazi employment agency friends who have repeatedly lied in Goebbels fashion tens of thousands of times over the last 16 years).

I think the only person whom has repeatedly proven himself totally STONE DEAF and DUMB to the evidence and facts(when I write "DUMB",I don't mean mute, by the way) is clearly YOU, Mr. Fraser.

You have repeatedly proven yourself STONE DEAF to easily proven FACTS and very,very DUMB as far as logic and providing ANY kind or real evidence to prove your case is concerned.

Cheers! (And have a nice day ,Mr. Norman Fraser!)


Peter Robert North.
 
Well, you are a pair of charmers indeed. So, one at a time…

Mr Craig Apart from having a very restricted understanding of what counts as ‘fact and ‘evidence’ (you seem to rule out anything you don’t like), you would appear to have censored much of my last post which in part read thus:

’Plenty of evidence Mr Craig, properly referenced, as understood by any properly trained scholar. I suspect you have not read the Gow book, rather a tall order overnight at 322 pages. As to a refutation of Gutman, you clearly have not read him either because 'A Witness to Genocide' is a series of interviews with refugees. At no point does he say he has been to the camps…

So we are back with your failure to read the material raised, never mind evaluate the argument. But, of course, this is your stock in trade: blather, faith and denial’.


Now why did you censor that I wonder? Was it because it makes it clear that you are not a master of your own material? You are surely not worried about a little ad hominem argument since you are so keen on them yourself?

Anyway, back to Tagic. You really should give a reference to your quotes because that allows me to check your sources. I’ve made mine clear to you but maybe you’re a wee bit worried about yours. A little rooting around produces the press release of the Tajic judgement which makes it clear at

http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/p190-e.htm

that Tajic was originally found guilty on only 9 out of 31 counts and, at paragraph 3, that the statement of one witness was withdrawn and the charges he made were consequently dropped. Was this your man? It seems to demonstrate the fairness of the trial if it is.

I find this evidence so much more compelling than yours because it has gone through a judicial process which permits cross-examination and produces an official record which can be checked and evaluated. So many of your assertions are not referenced and so cannot be checked easily. Then I’ve got to scour around to find your original source that usually permits me to prove that the information is propaganda or quoted out of context (like virtually every bit of ‘evidence’ in the Emperor’s Clothes articles).

As to your reference above, ‘ 2. Bernard Kouchner, "Les Guerriers de la Paix", Grasset, Paris, 2004, pp. 372-375.’, you haven’t read this book. The higher standard of typing clearly indicates that you have lifted the quote from a website. I would like to know which one without having to Google search it please.

Incidentally, the weight of evidence heard at the Tajic trial gives considerable authority to the overview of ethnic cleansing in the judgement at:

http://www.un.org/icty/tadic/trialc2/judgement/index.htm

and gives a good account of the camps in the Prijedor district at paragraphs 154 to 179.

Mr North One again I cross swords with the Father Jack of genocide denial...

I did not follow up previous threads for two reasons. Firstly, because I wanted to do some research and it took me longer than expected. Secondly, once I had done that research, I was reluctant to spend the considerable time I thought was required to write it up. My reluctance stems from the fact that both you boys will not believe anything that does not come off a pro-Serbian website and secondly because of Mr Craig’s habit of editing or completely censoring my posts. I thought I was wasting my time.

Indeed I still do…

Anyway, Mr C, we will see if this post appears.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Norman you ar a liar.

1) The paragraph you say I censored was not in your original post. This is a direct & deliberate lie. Another piece of Orwellian rewriting, on a par with the photographs you still support.

2) the fact that the "judicial process" summarised itself by describing a witness claiming Tadic had murdered his father, the "judge" informing the defence counsel they should not investigate, the defence council nonetheless visiting the locus, finding tha allegedly murdered father, bringing him into court to testify as to his being alive, the prosecution witness admitting to having lied because the Bosnian Nazi secret police had threatened him, the "judge" refusing to investigate this allegation, reprimanding the defence counsel for doing their job & then sentencing Tadic to the 20 years the prosecution had originaly asked for anyway as "a witness withdrew his testimony" indicates your idea of judicial impartiality.

In any honest court threatening a witness would have been investigated & any future witness living under the control of theBosnian Nazis would treated as completely unreliable & someone on whose evidence alone it would be improper to convict.

3) Gutman first wrote for publications such as Newsday in which he stated that he had seen atrocities in these camps. The book only came later after he had been proved a liar.

4) I note that despite your claims you belatedly hadn't run away you didn't follow up your lie that I had never written anything favourable about Moslems by apologising for it.

Norman you are a disgusting racist totally dishonest Nazi & despite calling us boys, which I appreciate at my age, I claim an abject apology from you.
 
Mr. Norman Fraser,


according to your "logic" and "evidence", Mr. Fikret Alic is now the only person whom the Serbs apparently were NOT feeding in a "concentration/death camp" - to the point of emaciation - whom was beaten and kicked in the mouth - with INVISIBLE injuries - in a "death camp", which according to your own statement, now supposedly doubled as a refugee collection center(?!), and whom while being incarcerated in this "death camp" SMILES and LAUGHS for the camera [this, AFTER being supposedly pistol whipped and having four of his teeth knocked out according to your source] whilst his fellow "inmate" next to him, a muslim by the name of "Mekhmet" keeps repeating to the arrogant Ms. Penny Marshall:

"It's a refugee camp, NOT a prison!"

And in answer to Ms. Marshall's loaded question: "They treat you badly?" replies:

"No,no,no. I think very,very kind"


Further, you write that:

============================================================================================================================================
"From late April to mid-July 1992 this area was ‘ethnically cleansed’, a Serb term, of its non-Serb population."
============================================================================================================================================
"Ethnic cleansing" is now a "Serb term", is it, Mr. Fraser?

The Ustasha Croatians and Bosnian Muslim Nazis in WW2 perpetrate a horrific genocide against Serbs,Jews,Roma peoples in Croatia and Bosnia from 1941 to 1945 by murdering at least 750,000 to 1.2 million people - a genocide so horrific it even shocked the Germans in the SS - and yet according to your logic, "ethnic cleansing" is a term supposedly originated by the Serbs.

Are you trying to be funny as well as incredibly dumb, Mr.Fraser?

Quoting Mr. Roy Gutman and his book as "witness evidence to ethnic cleansing"? Islamist Nazis in the Bosnian muslim SDA party who glorify the WW2 SS Nazi Handzar division - and ipso facto, the foul deeds of mass murder perpetrated by them -even to the extent of naming, in 1992, Izetbegovic's personal praetorian body guards the "Handzar" division and writing up glowing articles of praise about said Nazi SS division in the mainstream Sarajevo magazine, "Svijet" - feed Mr. Roy Gutman his "witness testimony" on alleged "Serb ethnic cleansing" which Mr. Gutman has himself admitted supplied him his bogus "witness testimony" and which Mr. Gutman even admitted he never bothered to check the authenticity of.

You also DENY the abundant evidence - supplied by PUBLIC statements and writings PRIOR to and during the conflict - by the Izetbegovic Islamist Nazis and Croatian Ustasha Nazis themselves -Messrs. Izetbegovic and Tudjman -and NOT some "pro-Serbian website" as you ridiculously claim - that they themselves confessed by these public statements and writings that they were indisputably brazen, unashamed Nazis dedicated to the total GENOCIDE of all Serbs and Jews in all of Yugoslavia.


The fact that you DENY the abundant evidence provided by senior UN commanders & officials as well as official United Nations documents (not the NATO owned Hague ICTY prosecution which you love to quote as supposedly infallible, "honest" sources) concerning the horrific massacres of Serbian elderly men, women and children in and around Srebrenica by Izetbegovic's Islamist Nazis as well as Krajina by Tudjman's Ustasha Nazis speaks volumes and conclusively proves yet again that the REAL "Father Jack" of genocide denial here is clearly YOU, and you alone, Mr. Fraser.



Mr. Norman Fraser,as Neil Craig has conclusively pointed out, not only are you a proven liar, but you are also indisputably, an incredibly STUPID one as well.
 
Mr. Fraser,

you also DENY the abundant evidence - supplied by PUBLIC statements and writings PRIOR to and during the conflict - by the Izetbegovic Islamist Nazis and Croatian Ustasha Nazis themselves -Messrs. Izetbegovic and Tudjman -and NOT some "pro-Serbian website" as you ridiculously claim - that they themselves confessed by these public statements and writings that they were indisputably brazen, unashamed Nazis dedicated to the total GENOCIDE of all Serbs and Jews in all of Yugoslavia.


The fact that you DENY the abundant evidence provided by senior UN commanders & officials as well as official United Nations documents(not the NATO owned Hague ICTY prosecution which you love to quote as supposedly an infallible, "honest" source) concerning the horrific massacres of Serbian elderly men, women and children in and around Srebrenica by Izetbegovic's Islamist Nazis as well as Croatia/Krajina by Tudjman's Ustasha Nazis speaks volumes about your "integrity" and where your sympathies truly lie.

It also conclusively proves yet again that the REAL "Father Jack" of TRUE genocide denial here in the case of Srebrenica and Krajina/Croatia is clearly YOU, and you alone, Mr. Fraser.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the NON-Nazis who may be reading this thread (i.e., excluding pro-Nazis like Mr. Fraser above), please see the Western government & media suppressed official United Nations documents: A/48/177, S/25835 and A/47/813, S/24991 describing the
hideous murders and rapes of Serbian civilians in and around Srebrenica and other Bosnian towns - available at:

http://www.srebrenica-report.com/docs/UN-1993-1.pdf

http://emperors-clothes.com/sreb/mem.htm

The UN document A/47/813, S/24991 on rape by Bosnian Muslim & Croat forces in Bosnia in 1992 can be read at:

http://www.srpska-mreza.com/Bosnia/rapes/raped-serbs.html

Rigorously documented information on REAL Nazi concentration camps run by the Bosnian SDA Izetbegovic Islamist Nazis can be found at:

http://www.balkanpeace.org/cib/bos/boss/boss13.shtml

More information on Paddy "Nazi Pants Down" Ashdown's attempt to cover up the REAL Srebrenica report issued by the Republic of Srpska (Bosnian Serbian republic) in 2002 and his FORCED "confession of guilt" in mid-2004, supposedly by "the Bosnian Serbs" for the Izetbegovic Islamist Nazi SDA/Guardian/ITN/BBC racist version of the July 1995 events - all done by Ashdown FABRICATING another bogus report,and FORCING the Serbs to accept it or face being FIRED - can be found at:

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep1903.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep0803.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Sep1703.htm

http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/news/smorg-sreb101604.htm

http://www.slobodan-milosevic.org/documents/srebrenica.pdf



More information on the Islamist Nazi warlord, Mr. Naser Oric, and his BOASTING to reporters from the "Washington Post" and "Toronto Star" of the mass murder of thousands of Serbian civilians in and around Srebrenica from April 1992 to July 1995, can be found at:

The muslims under the command of Alija Izetbegovic and
Naser Oric MURDER at least 3,800 Serbian CIVILIANS [elderly
men, women ,and children]with HAMMERS,KNIVES,and AXES
in and around Srebrenica for THREE YEARS and BOAST about it to Western reporters (Washington Post & Toronto Star), while the UN looks apathetically on and it's NOT called "GENOCIDE" by the corporate controlled news media.

As they say in some parts of the US: "Please pinch me momma, I must be DREAMING!"

http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/oric.htm
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/fulltext.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija1.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija2.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija3.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/freezer1.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/guide-yugo.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ranta.htm
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/kosovo.htm
http://www.serbianna.com/features/srebrenica/



Here we have a link to the mainstream Bosnian Muslim magazine "Svijet" where they published an article in 1997 glorifying the WW2 Bosnian Muslim Nazi SS division known as "Handzar", who along with the Croatian Ustasha (Croatian National Socialist SS) and Albanian "Skanderbeg" Nazi SS division in Kosovo, were responsible for the murders of 750,000 to 1.2 million Serbs, Jews & Roma peoples in death camps in Yugoslavia from 1941 to 1945.

http://emperors-clothes.com/bosnia/svijet.htm


To conclusively PROVE that Izetbegovic was a racist, Nazi Islamist fundamentalist terrorist, dedicated to seeing ALL Serbs and Jews permanently REMOVED from Bosnia-Herzegovina, by FORCE if necessary,by referring to Izetbegovic's very OWN writings and PUBLIC statements, please visit:

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija1.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija2.htm

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija3.htm

The above helps explain why Mr. Norman Fraser and his friends at the Guardian/ITN make no mention of the heinous crimes of the Bosnian Islamist Nazi warlord, Mr. Naser Oric, from April 1992 to August 1995 in and around villages adjoining Srebrenica & Gorazde.

Mr. Oric received his specific instructions for these slaughters from Alija Izetbegovic - according to testimony under oath, by French UN general, Phillipe Morillon, at the ICTY Hague "war crimes tribunal".

Mr. Oric's barbaric murders of Serbian women & children were rigorously documented in several UN reports cited above and even PHOTGRAPHED & VIDEOTAPED by himself and shown to US & Canadian reporters while he LAUGHED as he watched his videos!! (see below links ).

This monster cold bloodedly murdered - using the most hideously brutal methods over 3,870 innocent elderly Serbian men, women and even babies and children under 5 years of age, mostly by cutting throats and beheading, often preceded by the most horrific tortures including cutting off of limbs, lips, noses, ears, breasts, genitalia, burning of skin and gang rape.

Yet Mr. Norman Fraser and his friends, the Guardian/ITN/BBC racist Nazi liars, have consistently FAILED to mention any of it in over 14 years of reporting. Why?

Similar crimes were perpetrated by the Croatian Ustasha Nazis against Serbs in Croatia from late 1990 onwards - soon after Mr. Franjo Tudjman came to power - and in the Serbian Krajina province which was cleansed of 275,000 to 350,000 Serbs by Messrs Franjo Tudjman, Ante Gotovina & Agim Ceku from August to November 1995 in the Clinton administration-backed massive ethnic cleansing operation known as "Operation Storm": the total number of Serbs cleansed from Croatia & the Krajina province being close to 600,000 from late 1990 to November 1995 with total Serbian CIVILIANS murdered estimated at 14,000 to 20,000 by independent Western observers.

See:

http://emperors-clothes.com/croatia/tears.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Genocide.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Dec3192-2.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Jan3193.htm

http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2005/12/croatian-holocaust-it-would-have-been.html

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/kosta/licnosti/tudjman.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MOS20050803&articleId=795


Dr. Francisco Gil-White, of the world renowned US-based Historical & Investigative Research Foundation (http://www.hirhome.com), wrote recently about the Israelis & Serbs thus:

*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The reason I compare the Israelis with the Serbs is the following:

1) The Israelis are falsely accused of oppressing Arabs in the West Bank
and Gaza.

2) The Serbs were falsely accused of murdering Kosovo Albanians, Bosnian
Muslims, and Croats (what really happened was the reverse, just as the
reverse is also true in Israel -- it is the Arabs who have a policy of
murdering innocent Israelis)

3) The enemies of the Jews and Serbs today are the same people.

4) The enemies of the Jews and Serbs in WWII were also the same people,
when the Serbs demonstrated the greatest moral courage of any people on
earth by dying valiantly in defense of their Jewish compatriots --
something that no other population in Europe did.
http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ball.htm#_ftn19a

Unfortunately, most Jews are unaware of this chapter in their history,
as they are also unaware of most of their history, something that I am
trying to fix in my massive history of the Jewish people, which you may
examine here:
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/cruxcontents.htm

What you have heard about the Serbs is propaganda, pushed by the same
people who lie about the Israelis.

If you liked the piece on Deir Yassin, you will probably like my pieces
on Yugoslavia as well. If anything strikes you as outrageous, I suggest
you go ahead and check it to satisfy your skepticism. Every claim has a
footnote with the source documentation. My website does not ask anybody
to believe anything. When I know something is true but I cannot give the
source, I don't make the claim. I only make claims that you can check
independently, so that individual readers can individually reach a
conclusion as to whether I am honest, impartial, and accurate. You will
make your own determination.

The following two pieces will probably be a big eye-opener.

1) http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/freezer1.htm

This piece demonstrates that NATO was unable to document even *one*
Albanian civilian murdered by Milosevic's forces (by contrast, it is no
problem documenting the murders of Albanian civiians by NATO, and by
NATO's ally, the KLA, as this piece also shows).

2) http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/ihralija1.htm

This piece documents that what you heard about Bosnia was likewise
false. The Serbs did not attack anybody. On the contrary, they were
defending their homes from the terrorist attacks of Alija Izetbegovic,
an Islamist fundamentalist whom NATO backed, and who used imported
mujahideen (international Islamist terrorists first used in Afghanistan,
created by the US). Izetbegovic had been a Nazi in WWII and in the 1990s
he recreated the SS Handzar Division, which in WWII had been created by
Hajj Amin al Husseini out of thousands of Bosnian Muslim volunteers who
went around Yugoslavia murdering Serbs, Jews, and Roma (Gypsies). Hajj
Amin was also the former Mufti of Jerusalem before the war, from which
position he organized one terrorist riot after another against innocent
Jews with the help and encouragement of the British Mandate authorities.

For those who know history (an exceedingly small number of people), the
above is not surprising. In WWII, the Bosnian Muslims, the Croats, the
Slovenians, and the Albanians allied *en masse* with the invading German
Nazis and participated enthusiastically in the extermination of Serbs,
Jews, and Roma (Gypsies).
********************************************************************************************************************************************
 
Mr. Fraser,

Please don't insult our intelligence on the alleged "neutrality" and "impartiality" of your sources by calling what happens at the Hague ICTY a "judicial process" by attempting to quote the so-called "indictments" of ICTY Hague chief prosecutor Carla Del Ponte, or her former underling, Geoffrey Nice, or her predecessor Louise Arbour as "neutral", "impartial" sources, since NATO itself has PUBLICLY admitted that it OWNS & FUNDS this political kangaroo court/show trial "as a "very valuable tool" (Mr. Richard Holbrooke's own words) which Mr. Holbrooke of the US Clinton adminstration also brazenly admitted: "we used it to justify everything that followed.”


Mr. Fraser, you also write:
============================================================================================================================================
"...your original source that usually permits me to prove that the information is propaganda or quoted out of context (like virtually every bit of ‘evidence’ in the Emperor’s Clothes articles)".
============================================================================================================================================

Mr. Fraser, I am STILL waiting - after several months - for you to PROVE - with actual evidence this time, rather than your own arrogant assertions and bluster - that Emperor's Clothes has LIED even ONCE about ANYTHING concerning Omarska and Trnopolje - or for that matter, the Balkans conflicts in general.Please don't give me the excuse that you:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"...wanted to to do some research and it took me longer than expected. Secondly, once I had done that research, I was reluctant to spend the considerable time I thought was required to write it up"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

or Mr. Fraser, the other pathetic excuse given by you that Mr. Neil Craig supposedly refuses to publish your comments or edits them.

********************************************************************************************************************************************
PS: For the NON-Nazis reading this,who may need proof that NATO controls the Hague ICTY "war crimes tribunal" and that the NATO-owned Hague ICTY APPROVED OF TORTURE by ALLOWING FALSE TESTIMONY extracted from a PROSECUTION witness(!) through such torture,please see the following:

http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/rade.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/blewit.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/milo/bbc-rade.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/h-list.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/tribdocs.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/ian/day.htm

http://www.srebrenica-report.com/defense.htm
 
Neil,

In one of my previous comments above, the correct link referring to Srebrenica should be:

http://www.balkanpeace.org/cib/bos/boss/boss13.shtml

The subsequent links below refers to camps run by the SDA Bosnian Islamist Nazis and/or Croatian Ustasha Nazis:

http://www.balkan-archive.org.yu/politics/tribunal_watch/first_ind/mediakit.html

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:O2TXhBmRUkQJ:www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/047.html+carl+savich+celebici&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=2


http://www.srebrenica-report.com/politics.htm
 
I’m glad I’ve kept your attention. Several points come to mind:

Mr Craig Your points in order:

1) I posted twice on 29 June: only one post appeared. I’m no more a liar than you’re a young George Washington.

2) Sounds bad for my case but also sounds like Andy Wilcoxon, in which case it’s pish. No reference given usually equals pish on your blog.

3) Nothing in the secondary sources supports this assertion about Gutman, so I think you’re flannelling. Show me the reference!

4) Hmm.. Let me think now. You once said something nice about Fikret Abdic. He’s rather a special case isn’t he? I don’t think that merits an apology.

Mr North

My goodness, aren’t you angry. So angry that you’re trying your cyber bully act of dumping your favourites list onto the net and asserting that the result constitutes an argument. I have of course sampled some of these tasty morsels of Serbophilia and they appear to be simple propaganda. Thank you, however, for introducing me more extensively to the works of Dr. Francisco Gil-White. He’s really nuts but funny too. I laughed out loud several times. He can be Yosemite Sam to your Father Jack.

Regarding the Emperor’s Clothes, I would have thought that proving that the camps were places where people were brutalised and murdered might have demonstrated the essential absurdity of Jared Israel’ articles. However, you are clearly not a man easily trapped into clarity of thought, so see my next post...
 
The Emperor’s Clothes: Fur Coat and Nae Knickers

The Emperor’s Clothes articles quoted above are based on three main sources: an article by Thomas Deichmann in Living Marxism, the film Judgement and statements with concerning the Living Marxism libel trial. The specific allegations are that:

1) ITN represented Trnopolje camp as a concentration camp when in fact the camp was for refugees who were free to come and go as they pleased.

2) That the inmates were well treated.

3) Living Marxism lost their libel case on a legal technicality and that their allegations were in fact true.

The following source summarises the counter arguments: David Campbell, Atrocity, memory, photography: imaging the concentration camps of Bosnia – the case of ITN versus Living Marxism, Part 1 in Journal Of Human Rights, Vol. 1, No. 1 (March 2002), 1–33.

Which is available on the web here:

http://www.virtual-security.net/attrocity/atroindex.htm

Not only can the text also be downloaded as a pdf but, by using the appropriate plug-in, one can view the original ITN broadcasts.

1 Was Trnopolje a Prison Camp

Campbell notes that In Deichmann’s original article, it was argued that Alic´ and others were not imprisoned behind barbed wire, there was no barbed-wire fence surrounding the camp, and the barbed wire that was evident in the ITN reports surrounded the journalists rather than Alic´ and his compatriots. Deichmann contended that, although it appeared Alic´ was penned in, it was actually the journalists who were fenced in; in a compound or enclosure, the wire of which they filmed through to get the images of Alic´.65 “It was not a prison, and certainly not a ‘concentration camp’, but a collection centre for refugees, many of whom went there seeking safety and could leave again if they wished.41”

Campbell then notes that, surprisingly, by the time it came to the trial Living Marxism was not disputing that Trnopolje was a prison camp. Thus:

When asked by the barrister for ITN whether it was his contention that Alic and the other detainees could leave Trnopolje on 5 August 1992, Hume [the editor of LM] answered: ‘No, it is not my case. He is in a field surrounded on two sides by low wire fencing, outside of which there are armed guards (Figure 10), the north side of which abuts the community building and the south side of which abuts a barbed wire compound within which the ITN crews were filming and within which there are other armed guards. I think that’s abundantly obvious.’90 Hume also testified that conditions at Trnopolje were harsh, while Deichmann described Trnopolje as ‘an awful place’.91

The terrible conditions at Trnopolje were established in the libel trial by the evidence of Dr MerdzÏanic´, a Bosnian medic who was detained at Trnopolje and acted as one of the camp doctors. MerdzÏanic´ was interviewed by ITN in 1992, and it was he who secretly supplied the photos of badly beaten inmates to Penny Marshall, which were used in the original broadcast (Figures 11, 12, 13). In his testimony, MerdzÏanic´ made it plain that he was taken against his will from his home in Prijedor to the camp at Trnopolje and that he was not free to leave the camp. Moreover, he testified that he heard the screams of inmates being beaten by the guards, that he treated those inmates after they were abused (some of whom he secretly photographed), and that he also treated women who were raped by the guards.92


It is, of course, the testimony of Dr Merdzlanic which Jared Israel mocks in The Emperor’s Clothes.

Campbell continues:

None of MerdzÏanic´’s testimony was challenged in court by the LM legal team. Hume maintained that the fact they did not cross-examine MerdzÏanic´ was because ‘there has never been any question in my opinion or in the article that I published that this camp was anything other than a grim place at which there were beatings, there were killings and there were rapes. There has never been any question of that. We have never argued contrary to that.’93

Deichmann argued … it was not his case that Alic´ and the others pictured in the ITN reports were in fact free to go:‘I do not say that they at the time were able to leave and there – you know, there were fences, there were guards, which we have seen here, armed guards.’94

Most important of all is the fact that, during the libel trial, Deichmann and Hume conceded that the central point of their case against ITN – the nature of the fence at Trnopolje – had nothing to do with the issue of whether Alic´ and others were imprisoned in a camp.


Campbell also discusses the famous fence at length and concludes:

Even in their own terms – in which the material specifics of a particular fence at one camp are the focus of attention – the claims of Deichmann and LM are erroneous and their arguments flawed. The major reason for this is the partial, selective and partisan manner in which they developed and presented their case. The journalists they criticized were not interviewed, and the inmates who survived the camps in the Prijedor region were ignored. Positive interpretations were given to isolated statements by prisoners, while the overwhelming number of countervailing views that emphasized the negative were overlooked. The statements of those Deichmann did rely upon were selectively quoted, the map of the camp showing the fence that Deichmann constructed was misleadingly presented, and the summaries of supporting evidence (such as the LM account of the Tadic´ trial) were reported in a partial manner.

So, in short, Fikret Alic and his companions were prisoners and the camp at Trnopolje was a brutal place. The film that ITN took of the camp did not misrepresent what went on there.

2 Were The Inmates of Trnopolje Well Treated?

It is the contention of the film Judgement that no-one at Trnopolje was a prisoner, that the ‘refugees’ were well treated and that ITN faked their evidence by ignoring what they saw and editing their footage to fit their own agenda. Judgement is a production of The Emperor’s Clothes and in associated web articles Jared Israel gives a commentary of the film which seeks to prove the ITN footage faked by pointing out incidents such as Fikret Alic is smiling and his companion Mehmet says Trnopolje is a refugee camp and he is well treated.

Campbell’s rebuttal to this comes at note 35 on page 29 of the pdf.

35. As Fikret Alic´ has observed: ‘I would like to say that behind the cameramen there were Serb soldiers and they shouted to write everybody’s names who said something in front of the camera’. See ‘Bosnian Prisoner Praises ITN Crew’. Ian Williams noted the severe restrictions on their capacity to report freely – including the fact the ‘guards stood over everybody we spoke to’ – in a live interview following the broadcast of his report. See Ian Williams: Live 2-Way (interview with Dermot Murnaghan), 6 August 1992, videocassette (London: ITN Archive, reference: t06089201.htm). In addition, there was also a Bosnian Serb military film crew taping the ITN crew at work. This is apparent from the RTS video at Trnopolje, where the RTS crew captures a uniformed cameraman filming the ITN journalists. See Judgment at 25:20. The existence of two Serbian crews – one from RTS and one from the military – was noted in the libel trial. See Discussion re Video, ITN and Informinc Ltd, Day 3 PM, 73. These circumstances need to be taken into account when evaluating the central premise of Judgment, which involves an exchange with one of the prisoners at the wire fence. This exchange was also highlighted by Deichmann (1997a). Penny Marshall is shown asking questions of the prisoners, when Mehmet steps forward to say that Trnopolje is a refugee camp not a prison and that conditions are fine. ITN did not use any of this particular exchange in their broadcast report, which the makers of Judgment insist proves the charge of fabrication. However, in addition to the intimidating circumstances in which these exchanges took place, such a conclusion overlooks the way Mehmet, even in the exchange highlighted by RTS, confirms that he was taken from his home involuntarily, and that he cannot now leave the camp (at 22:20). Moreover, Marshall’s report (at 3:32) does include a statement from Mehmet – which is absent from the RTS video – in which he says he is afraid. Furthermore, the RTS film fails to include any other prisoner interviews, whereas ITN’s diverse range of sources demonstrates the widespread fear. This tactic of extracting one allegedly positive assessment of the camp of Trnopolje – regardless of the context in which the statements are made – and ignoring all other negative assessments, was a consistent theme in the campaign against ITN.

It should be noted that much of the ITN footage quoted above can be viewed on the site.

3 Did Living Marxism Lose their Case on a Legal Technicality?

Campbell notes at page 7

Despite their legal loss, LM magazine and like-minded supporters throughout the world have not let the issue rest. Hume denounced the court verdict in an unapologetic statement that restated his faith in Deichmann’s claims, the key element of which he maintained was never seriously challenged in court.17 Nick Higham, the BBC’s media correspondent, who had told various journalists after the publication of Deichmann’s article he believed ITN’s pictures were misleading, reported the trial’s outcome for the Six O’Clock News on BBC1.18 In his report, Higham noted that ‘the judge, Mr Justice Morland, told the jury LM’s facts might have been right, but he asked, did that matter?’. This summary was subsequently deemed by the Broadcasting Standards Commission to be misleading and thus unfair to ITN and its journalists.19

and Campbell’s notes 17 and 19 clarify the situation further thus:

17 Hume’s reaction to the verdict in the trial should be contrasted with LM’s legal documents made publicly available on their website. (This site had to close in the wake of the libel trial, but all documents quoted here were downloaded prior to the trial and are in my possession.) In the judge’s summing up at the trial, he posed the question: ‘have the defendants established that Penny Marshall and Ian Willliams had compiled television footage which deliberately misrepresented an emaciated Bosnian Muslim, Fikret Alic´, as being caged behind a barbed-wire fence at the Serbian-run Trnopolje camp on 5 August 1992 by the selective use of videotapes of him?’, and repeatedly emphasized the word ‘deliberately’. Quoting this, Hume protested that ‘we were being asked to prove what was going on inside the journalists’ heads eight years ago. The jury was only likely to come to one verdict’. In Hume’s view, ‘we could not win because the law demanded that we prove the unprovable’. Yet all the judge was doing was reciting LM’s own legal defence as a question for the jury. It was Deichmann’s article, and LM’s legal defence, that charged ITN with ‘deliberate misrepresentation’ and required the question of past intention to be addressed.

And

19 Not surprisingly, Higham’s statement was embraced by LM after the verdict; see Hume (2000). ITN, Marshall and Williams lodged a formal complaint with the Broadcasting Standards Commission (BSC) about Higham’s report. In upholding the ITN complaint, the BSC concluded that ‘the BBC’s paraphrase of the judge’s summing up could have left viewers with the false impression that ITN had got its facts wrong and won its case on a technicality’. See BSC, ‘Complaint about unjust or unfair treatment by ITN on its own behalf and on behalf of MS Penny Marshall and Mr Ian Williams submitted on 25 April 2000 about the Six O’Clock News on BBC1, broadcast on 14 March 2000’, 3 October 2000. The adjudication is summarized in BSC, Bulletin, No. 36 (26 October 2000), 1.


Conclusion

In total, all the allegations of Living Marxism, Judgement and the Emperor’s Clothes are incorrect thus:

1) Whilst it started life as a transit camp, at the time of the ITN visit Trnopolje housed prisoners who were subject to a brutal regime. Condition at Omarska were far worse and, even though ITN were unable to film freely there (as The Emperor’s Clothes asserted they were), it is clear from the footage taken that the Omarska prisoners were poorly treated and in a state of fear.

2) The inmates of Trnopolje and Omarska were not well treated. The Judgement video and the associated Emperor’s clothes articles are highly misleading in that respect and are designed to be so.

3) LM did not lose their case on a legal technicality. ITN proved that Trnopolje held prisoners subject to a brutal regime and LM could not prove that the ITN footage was filmed in a way which overstated that fact.

The video footage available on the site also shows a number of things that text cannot convey. At Omarska the ITN crew was only allowed to film the canteen but even here the emaciated condition of the prisoners and their evident state of fear shows that there is something very wrong going on. At Trnopolje the prisoners are still afraid to speak openly. The small proportion of screen time given to Fikret Alic is also notable, as is the number of other emaciated men who appear in the footage. Alic and others are wearing trousers several sizes too large, indicating a significant weight loss in captivity and corroborating later testimony of a starvation diet. The still photographs of beaten prisoners are shocking.

All this amply substantiates my opinion that the Emperor’s Clothes articles are mendacious trash.
 
So you are still refusing to withdraw your lies you obscenity.

1) You have been proven a liar repeatedly both here & in your "evidence" to the Lib Dem Executive. You have now changed your story, again, but it is clear that the piece which you now claim to have sent as a separate email makes no sense as a separate email. Liar.

2) And the same to you. You can't dispute facts so you are just rude about them.

3) You show complete ignorance of your case not even knowing that Gutman had published articles in newspapers during the Bosnian war. That is the whole point. That is what Ms Philips proved he had lied about his being there. We had discussed the fact that he had received a pullitzer for these articlesm, thus proving that he had reached the height of US journalism while remaining a faker, which should have given you a clue. Pullitzers are for newspaper stories. <"I SAW 10 young men lying in a trench" To Kill a Nation, Michael Parenti, p86 indictes he was claiming to have seen it.>

4) Lying again. You know that I also pointed out said "something nice" about the entire 1300 year history of Islam. So if the only "non-special case" is saying something nice about Islamic terrorists please prove where & when you have said "something nice" about those fine upstanding al Quaeda folk & how they so nicely helped us commit genocide. If you can't then you are, by your somewhat quiant definition, an anti-Moslem racist.

Now s regards your long copying abot the LM trial. Before taking the rest of your case apart lets be absolutly clear about what we are discussing. The claim that these people were prisoners held behind barbed wire, maintained at least on air, by ITN for 14 years, undeniably represents the absolute pinnacle of hinesty of which ITN & any of their employees is capable.

Despite this the court did find that it was untrue, ITN refuse to discuss it & the apologist article, despite acres of flannel doesn't actually say it is true either.

Thus are you & you pretty much alone, Norman, claiming that the barbed wire claims are true.

Answer yes or no.
 
I think you have completely lost the place Neil. Bye.
 
I'll take that as "Yes I wll still claim that (both?) ITN's photos aren't faked even though I know it is quite obvious this is a total lie cos that is the sort of person I am" then Norman. That OK?
 
Well, well, well....


Mr. Norman Fraser: the Joseph Goebbels of the SLD (i.e., "A lie repeated FREQUENTLY becomes the truth").

Thanks for the telepathic mind reading feat of my emotional state combined with amateur psycho-analysis from 25,000 Kilometres distance.

Once again, more of the same from the REAL "Father Jack" of Croatian Ustasha Nazi (Tudjman/Ceku/Gotovoina/Mercep/Paraga at al) and Islamist Nazi (Izetbegovic/Oric/Delic/Halilovic et al) genocide DENIAL: Mr. Norman Fraser - the repeatedly proven LIAR of the SLD, whom by his REPEATED lies - exposed here on this blog on numerous occasions - is repeatedly "bringing the party into DISREPUTE".

More of the same arrogant assertions and 'ad hominem' character assassination style attacks, more of the tired old "are you STILL beating your wife?" type comments from Mr. Fraser - in other words, 'BEGGING THE QUESTION': i.e., Mr. Fraser is yet again attempting to ASSUME the truthfulness of an argument or proposition to be proved WITHOUT actually ARGUING IT with any EVIDENCE whatsoever.

The fact that the Islamist terrorist employment agency - otherwise known as the Guardian - and their partners in crime, the giant multi-billion pound corporation, ITN, have repeatedly been caught red-handed in outright LIES (using the same FAKED ITN photo of 'Trnopolje' for both bogus "death camps" of 'Omarska' & 'Trnopolje' for nearly TWO YEARS on the Guardian's website, before being FORCED by Emperor's Clothes devastating expose at (http://emperors-clothes.com/villainy.htm) to re-label the FAKED "death camp" photo of 'Omarska' as the already PROVEN "death camp" FAKE,'Trnopolje', speaks volumes about the so-called "credibility" of your sources, Mr. Fraser).

Like I explained in the "Reporting of Palestinian Deaths" thread on this blog (http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2006/06/reporting-of-palestinian-deaths.html), there is a principle which I like to call "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" principle.


How does this rule work? Suppose that you know this person, whom we will call Mr. Norman Fraser of the SLD, and suppose that Mr. Norman Fraser, in the past has lied to you repeatedly, dramatically, and shamelessly about topic A on Mr. Neil Craig's blog as well as about Mr. Neil Craig within the SLD party itself.

The next time that Mr. Norman Fraser makes an ASSERTION about topic A with the same SLANT
as assertions on topic A that have repeatedly been exposed as HUGE LIES on Mr. Neil Craig's blog, you have to make one of two choices:

1) Make the provisional assumption that Mr. Norman Fraser is lying again (until proven
otherwise); or

2) Make the provisional assumption that Mr. Norman Fraser is, for the first time, telling the truth (until proven otherwise).

If you choose the second option you demonstrate that you are a cretinous imbecile who cannot reason (sort of like Mr. Norman Fraser of the SLD above).

This is what this guy Mr. "anonymous" (a.k.a. Mr. Norman Fraser) would have us do.


I am sure most readers reading this thread - just like most of the readers reading the "Three Cheers for the Scottish Daily Mail" thread ( http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2006/03/three-cheers-for-scottish-daily-mail.html) AND the "20th Anniversary of Chernobyl Prediction Update" comments thread (http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2006/04/20th-anniversary-of-chernobyl.html)
have also NOT failed to notice how each and EVERY time either Mr. Neil Craig or I have caught you, Mr. Fraser, in an an outright, brazen LIE, you have simply changed the subject - i.e., you have cut and run - without answering your LIE.

Either you cut and run or you simply REPEAT the same arrogant ASSERTIONS combined with an 'ad hominem' labelling/character assassination attack and nothing more (e.g. the "mendacious trash" comment concerning Emperor's Clothes as well as the comment: "He’s really nuts but funny too. I laughed out loud several times" concerning Dr. Francisco Gil-White of Historical & Investigative Research http://www.hirhome.com.)

Funny how in BOTH cases, Mr. Fraser, you have utterly FAILED to provide even one SHRED of EVIDENCE to prove even ONE SPECIFIC example where either Emperor's Clothes or Dr. Gil-White have outright LIED concerning the Balkans conflicts.

Yet it is quite easy to prove that both the Guardian and ITN have BRAZENLY LIED tens of thousands of times over the last 16 years concerning the Serbs, Serbia and Slobodan Milosevic - as well as LYING about the true nature of the Islamist Bosnian Nazis in the SDA party - including the late Mr. Alija Izetbegovic- AND the Croatian Ustasha Nazis of the HDZ party - including the late Mr. Franjo Tudjman.

For the NON-Nazis reading this thread (which excludes pro-Nazis like Mr. Norman Fraser), see

http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/guide-yugo.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/yugo.htm

http://128.121.186.47/ISSA/reports/Balkan/Balkanindex.htm


It is also exceedingly easy to prove that the ITN/Guardian team have consistently COVERED UP the countless atrocities and war crimes against innocent Serbian, Roma and Jewish civilians perpetrated by the Izetbegovic Islamist Bosnian SDA Nazis in Bosnia-Herzegovina AND the Tudjman Ustasha Croatian HDZ Nazis in Croatia/Krajina (and Bosnia Herzegovina) AND the Ceku/Thaci/Haradinaj KLA under-age child sex-slavery & drug-trafficking Nazis in Kosovo.

Horrendous crimes of Nazi genocide - complete with WW2 replica Nazi uniforms and slogans -perpetrated against innocent Serbian ,Roma and Jewish civilians WHICH YOU, Mr. Fraser, and the Guardian/ITN team DENY outright or fail to acknowledge by not reporting on any of it.

Here is an expose of the "honesty" of your so-called "neutral" and "impartial" Bosnian muslim medic, Mr. Merdzianic, which you describe as "mocking by Jared Israel".

Since you have extensively quoted from the assertions made by ITN/Guardian side, I'll let the readers of this thread judge whether or not Mr. Jared Israel of Emperor's Clothes is the one merely doing the "mocking" or whether he is actually telling the truth about the perjury committed by your so-called "neutral" and "impartial" doctor, from the Izetbegovic SDA Bosnian Islamist side and their version of events:
********************************************************************************************************************************************

In 2000, LM, the once-heroic exposer of slanders against the Bosnian Serbs, capitulated, offering a lesson in what not to do
Disastrous Strategy in the Picture-that-fooled-the-world Libel Trial


by Jared Israel
[Posted 13 May 2000 - Updated 12 June 2005]

[Note,14 June 2005: About a year ago, I wrote a critique of a London Guardian article by Ed Vulliamy, one of the reporters responsible for the 'picture-that-fooled-the-world.' See, "The Return of Villainy," at
http://emperors-clothes.com/villainy.htm ]

www.tenc.net * Emperor's Clothes

13 May 2000 - As you probably know, two months ago, ITN, the giant British news station, won its libel suit against the little British magazine, LM. LM was ordered to pay ITN and reporters Penny Marshall and Ian Williams 375,000 pounds damages and 300,000 pounds for court costs. That is 675,000 pounds total or over a million USD. It bankrupted LM.

But it wasn't only LM that took a beating. LM refused to challenge ITN's use of the trial as a forum in its continuing campaign to slander the Bosnian Serbs. Because of this LM strategy, which was endorsed by LM's chief witness, Thomas Deichmann, the truth about the Serbian people took a beating as well.

Punished for exposing a lie

LM's original sin was that in 1997 they printed an article by Deichmann called "The Picture that Fooled the World." In it Deichmann argued that photos of a supposed Bosnian death camp were a hoax. Those photos were taken from footage shot at a refugee Center in the Bosnian town of Trnopolje (turn-OP-ul-yay) by an ITN crew led by Penny Marshall, an ambitious young reporter. The ITN crew had visited this refugee center and also a detention center in Omarska with permission of the Bosnian Serb authorities. After the visits, the crew left Yugoslavia and ITN released still shots of the refugee center which were broadcast worldwide as evidence that the Bosnian Serbs (Orthodox Christians) were running death camps for Bosnian Muslims (mostly people of Serbian descent whose ancestors had converted to Islam.)

In his article, Deichmann pointed out that a crucial piece of visual evidence, a barbed wire fence, which in the ITN photos seems to enclose a group of refugees, actually enclosed the ITN crew. By filming through this fence, ITN got raw footage which, after being doctored, conveyed the impression of harsh imprisonment. This is all proven, using footage shot by a Serbian film crew that accompanied ITN, in the Emperor's Clothes movie, Judgment!'

The ITN photos fueled an anti-Serb hysteria, worldwide. For example, immediately after the photos were shown on US Television, President George Bush, Sr. announced draconian measures against Serbia and soon thereafter, Presidential candidate William Clinton demanded that Pres. Bush bomb the Bosnian Serbs.

'Judgment!' proves Deichmann was right. The pictures were fake. But if the pictures were fake, how come LM lost the libel case?

Blame it on Rio; blame it on the stars

Recently Thomas Deichmann asked a friend if she knew someone who might translate an article about the trial into English. His friend contacted me. Along with Max Sinclair, who has co-authored some Emperor's Clothes articles, I agreed to do it. The English translation is posted below, following these comments.

Until I read Deichmann's article, "Libel for False Television Pictures," I believed that Deichmann and LM publisher Mick Hume had fought the good fight at the libel trial. But after reading the article, I changed my mind.

In his article, Deichmann takes a fatalistic view of the causes of his and LM's defeat:

"The verdict did not come as a surprise to the LM team. Publisher Mick Hume commented: 'We had to prove the unprovable.'"
-- Thomas Deichmann in "Libel for False Television Pictures," posted below.
According to Deichmann, the key moment in the trial was at the end, when Judge Morland gave his summation. Here is Deichmann's report of what the judge said. (Keep in mind that Deichmann translated Judge Morland's remarks into German and we translated them back to English, so this isn't exact, word for word. But I have read other accounts of the summation, and as far as I can tell Deichmann accurately reports what the judge said.)

'"The decision is yours [said the judge]. But isn't it clear, after examining the unedited pictures and the bundle of photographs from Mr. Deichmann, that before the [Bosnian] Civil War the area surrounding the garage…and the electrical transformer was fenced in? This fence was made up of tall metal posts on the top of which was fastened barbed wire and below ordinary wire mesh. It had a gate to the east bound street. Ian Williams, Penny Marshall, and her camera crew openly contradict themselves if they say they did not realize they were surrounded by the old barbed wire fence....' Judge Morland then said: 'But does this matter at all to the case?' He reminded the members of the jury what this Libel case was about. The central question which the jury had to decide on was: In the eyes of the court did LM lie when it said that the ITN reporters deliberately published a misleading photo?"
-- From "Libel for False Television Pictures," by Thomas Deichmann
Deichmann argues that by telling the jurors that, based on the unusual British libel law, they should decide for ITN unless they were convinced that ITN had deliberately misled the public, the judge set an impossibly high standard for LM. How, Deichmann argues, can anyone prove intent to mislead? That, says Deichmann, is why ITN won.

Up until now, all of LM's supporters, including me, have bought this explanation. We blamed British libel laws and an unfair Judge. This has been a comfort because it puts the blame on external forces. It portrays Deichmann and the LM people as abused heroes.

The problem is, it isn't true.

Flaws in the ointment

Yes, the British libel laws put an unreasonable burden on the defendant. And yes, as I wrote in my article, "Tears of the Mighty," the LM verdict was "a grim miscarriage of justice."

But the Judge's remarks came at the end of a jury trial. Mustn't jury members have formed opinions before the summation?

Moreover, the Judge's remarks could be construed as anti-ITN. As Deichmann's article points out, the judge said:

"Ian Williams, Penny Marshall, and her camera crew openly contradict themselves if they say they did not realize they were surrounded by the old barbed wire fence."
Wasn't the judge telling jurors that the ITN people had lied about the photos; indeed, that they had continued lying during the trial? If at the end of the trial, jury members had no strong feelings, couldn't the Judge's summation have swung them against ITN, despite his instructions about the libel law? And if ITN had lost the case, mightn't its defenders have argued that the Judge's summation caused their defeat?

Juries are won over by arguments. How could this summation, which effectively accused the ITN people of perjuring themselves, have helped ITN?

Was there something wrong with the way LM had presented its arguments? Or was there something wrong with LM's strategy?

The trial was emotionally charged because of the issues involved. The British government had been involved in a war against Serbia, a former ally, for more than a year, counting the NATO-UN occupation of Kosovo, which was in fact a continuation of the 1999 bombing campaign by other means. The British mass media had been slandering the Serbs for ten years. The trial involved strong issues: supposed death camps, atrocities, media lies.

Deichmann accepts ITN's arguments

I think that in this climate, the Judge's summation had a hidden subtext, which had nothing to do with libel laws.

The Judge was seemingly talking about the charges against LM. But LM was not the real focus of the trial.

That is clear from Deichmann's own account:

"ITN lawyer Tom Shields stressed, during the trial, that the miserable condition of Trnopolje was noteworthy. The plaintiffs brought also as a witness, a Muslim Physician whom the guards forced to care for the camp's inhabitants in the Summer of 1992. At the time he was also interviewed by Penny Marshall and secretly gave her a camera with poorly lighted photographs on a undeveloped film. The photos showed spotlighted Bosnian Muslims who had been beaten and mishandled by the Serb guards. The Physician described on the witness stand the rape and assault of defenseless civilians. I never disputed these facts. His testimony was without question the most moving of the entire trial. Despite this, my impression was that this only influenced the Jury enough to score a few moral points for ITN. LM attorney Millar declined a cross examination and later asked me if I wished to speak with [i.e., cross-examine - JI] the Physician. I answered no." [My emphasis. -- JI]
-- Thomas Deichmann in "Libel for False Television Pictures." This article following my comments - JI.
In the above, remarkable statement, Deichmann accepts every accusation the physician made against the Bosnian Serbs as gospel truth. Who is this physician? Deichmann doesn't tell us. Does he know? Did anyone from the LM side challenge the physician's credentials as an objective observer motivated only by desire to tell the truth? No they did not. Indeed, they waived their right to cross-examine.

Why does Deichmann accept the accusation that there were "miserable conditions at Trnopolje"? Deichmann knows no more about what happened in Trnopolje than I do - we have both looked at the same video footage. Aside from the miserable fact of being refugees during a war, the footage suggests decent treatment. As shown in 'Judgment!', one of the refugees, Mehmet spoke to ITN reporter Penny Marshall calmly, cheerfully, rationally, trying to knock some sense into her head. Marshall kept trying to get Mehmet to say the Serbs were abusive. "No," Mehmet replied. "I think, very kind. But too hot." (It was August.)

Why does Deichmann accept that "the photos [supposedly passed secretly to Penny Marshall] showed Bosnian Muslims who had been beaten and mishandled." How could he know when and where the "poorly lighted photographs" shown at the trial by ITN had really been taken? How could he know the photos were not phonies? Couldn't the people in those photos have been actors? Or mightn't they have been Muslims or even Orthodox Christian Serbs who had been photographed elsewhere? Who knows? Didn't this trial take place precisely because LM challenged the authenticity of the "pictures that fooled the world"? Wasn't ITN suing because Deichmann had written that the ITN pictures were "fakes"? If ITN pedaled fake pictures before, why on earth did Deichmann say, without hesitation, that they were peddling real pictures now?

Deichmann writes, "The physician described on the witness stand the rape and assault of defenseless civilians." Note he does not even use the term, "alleged." To be accused of rape and assault by this doctor was to be convicted. Why? Can't one imagine a few possible reasons for the good doctor to have lied? Such as: a) he was promised some reward if he lied or b) he was afraid of what would happen to him and/or his family back in Bosnia if he did not lie. Deichmann says the man's testimony was "the most moving." Why?

Why in heaven's name did the LM people refuse to cross-examine the physician?

I think they did not challenge the doctor's testimony because, having been caught up in great events, they had first taken a brave stand and then, seeing that the enemy had raised the stakes (by attacking LM all-out) they surrendered. Whether or not there was ever an explicit discussion between some representative of Deichmann and/or LM and the ITN people, in effect LM-Deichmann and ITN cut a deal. I will explain the nature of this deal later. First, let us consider what was at stake in the trial.

"To awaken a specific impression..."

Deichmann writes that the purpose of the doctor's testimony was:

"...to awaken a specific impression. This impression was that I wished for Serbs, who were guilty of such evil acts, to be somehow left unpunished."
Deichmann thinks that attacking him was the goal of ITN; I beg to differ. ITN was not mainly interested in proving something about Deichmann, they were interested in showing that they were right when they accused the Serbs of being "guilty of such evil acts..." They wanted to prove that the Serbs are (supposedly) indefensible. In other words, they were trying to win a moral argument.

Deichmann insists that he "supported none of the parties in the Bosnian Civil War."

To call what happened in Bosnia a Civil War is misleading, because one party - the Muslim extremist SDA, led by Alija Izetbegovic - was financed and coached by the West, particularly the US. NATO bombed Serbian positions in support of the SDA. And the Western media operated as the SDA's super public relations firm, reaching millions with lies demonizing the Serbs and falsely describing the SDA as moderate and as the legitimate government of Bosnia.

In August 1992, ITN published pictures that were edited and presented in such a way that they created the impression that the Serbs were the 'new Nazis.' In challenging the authenticity of those pictures, Deichmann and LM were supporting a very important 'party,' namely the public's right to know the truth about the attempted demonization of a people. They were supporting honest journalism. The first task of honest journalism - journalism in the tradition of Emile Zola and Freda Kirchwey - is to insist on scrupulous regard for facts when the Establishment is trying to libel a people. If ever there was an Establishment, ITN is part of it, and if ever there was a people the Establishment was trying to libel, it is the Serbs. That is why Deichmann's earlier stand, challenging the "pictures that fooled the world," inspired millions, myself included. But when Deichmann, according to his article posted below, refused to challenge the physician's claim that at the Trnopolje refugee center, the Serbs "were guilty of such evil acts," he was no longer supporting the party of honest journalism. He was supporting the use of unsupported slanders to demonize the Serbian people.

What was ITN's main objective at the LM trial? In his article, Deichmann suggests that ITN wanted to attack LM and Deichmann in order to frighten journalists who might otherwise challenge media giants in the future. To which I say, sure, they wanted to do that, but it wasn't their main objective.

ITN's guiding strategy at the trial was not merely to personally attack LM and Deichmann and it was not merely to prove that they had told the truth about the "pictures that fooled the world" and it was not merely to intimidate journalists. Their central strategy was to prove that the media in NATO countries were morally right to attack the Serbs. LM and Deichmann answered this big strategy with a feeble counter-strategy, to a) argue that they had told the truth about the 1992 ITN photos and to b) leave unchallenged ITN's continuing attacks on the Serbs.

Deichmann and LM made a narrow argument and refused to answer ITN's big moral argument. ITN said: regardless of whether Deichmann told the truth in "The pictures that fooled the world," we told the more important truth: that the Serbs are monsters. That was ITN's theme at the trial, expressed most sharply in the physician's testimony, which was the trial's centerpiece..

As demonstrated in this trial and indeed throughout human history, all things being equal, when one side makes big moral claims and the other side concedes those claims, the first side will win. Always. Even if, as in the case of ITN's attacks on the Serbs, the big moral claims are lies.

This is most obviously true when the side making the big moral claims is the Establishment. Indeed, the lesson of history is that, when the little guy takes on the Establishment, his only hope of winning lies in exposing the injustice and dishonesty - that is, the immorality - of the Establishment. So if the little guy deserts this approach, if he allows the Establishment to have the moral victory, and only contends over secondary issues, then he faces an opponent that has both immense power and an unchallenged claim to justice. When - as is inevitable - he loses, he will tell himself they were just too powerful...

Do you want to know the power of a moral idea, fearlessly defended by the little guy? Just go to www.google.com and type these words - Zola Dreyfus. That's all - Zola Dreyfus. By publicly challenging the attempt by the French army and the Catholic Church to railroad a Jewish officer named Alfred Dreyfus on espionage charges, and thus foment antisemitism, the novelist Emile Zola transformed French politics. He had such a huge effect that now, over a hundred years later, there are 45,000 references to what he did on google.

Deichmann and LM had a similar though certainly smaller affect when they blasted the lies which had been used to demonize the Bosnian Serbs in August 1992, near the beginning of the fighting in Bosnia. It is most unfortunate that they caved in during the trial.

But, one might ask, if Deichmann had done as I am suggesting, what would have happened at the trial?

Let us consider that question.

The jury, and the 'jury of public opinion'

Mr. Deichmann either does not understand the judge's summation, or he doesn't want to understand it.

When the Judge noted that the ITN people had contradicted themselves - in other words, that they were lying about the "photos that fooled the world" - and then added, "But what does it matter, really?" he seemed, as Deichmann claims, to be talking about legal technicalities. (The British libel law states that to accuse a journalist of lying is libelous unless you can prove he intended to lie.) But this was only the appearance of what the judge was saying, because the underlying issue in this trial was not the British libel law. After all, if that were the real issue, then why did ITN bring the physician to testify?

In his article, Deichmann writes:

"His [i.e., the physician's] testimony was without question the most moving of the entire trial. Despite this, my impression was that this only influenced the Jury enough to score a few moral points for ITN."
-- Thomas Deichmann in "Libel for False Television Pictures." This article following my comments - JI.

What an amazing juxtaposition: 'The most moving testimony' and 'only a few moral points'!

Juries are not made up of legal scholars, Mr. Deichmann. They are made up of ordinary people and, by and large, they want to do what is morally right, as they understand it. Therefore "a few moral points" makes a whopping big difference to a jury.

How jury members conceive what is morally right is determined by a) their values, factual knowledge and opinions formed throughout their lives, i.e., before they arrive in court, and b) the evidence and arguments, as presented by both sides.

The jurors in this case had been reading British newspapers and watching British TV, so they had formed opinions about Bosnia. Assuming they were like most people in the West, they had concluded that the Serbs were very bad - the new Nazis, in fact - and that the West had been too soft on them. Emperor's Clothes has presented a good deal of evidence to demonstrate that this is dead wrong, indeed the opposite of the truth, but the jurors had probably not read Emperor's Clothes.

Faced with a trial in which the real issue is whether to support or oppose someone (ITN) who has attacked 'the new Nazis' what will jurors want to do? Side with ITN? Or side with someone who tried to bring ITN down?

It's a no-brainer. In any argument, the onlookers will root for the side that they feel is morally just against the side they feel is morally unjust, even if the unjust side is technically a better debater. And a trial is merely an argument with big stakes.

So going into the trial, those jurors wanted to find in favor of ITN. In his summation, the judge gave the jurors a technical excuse to use if they wished to make a moral statement in favor of ITN, meaning against the Bosnian Serbs. He told them, you should accept the truth of LM's case, that it was the ITN film crew, not the Muslims pictured in the ITN photos, who were behind barbed wire. But, he added, this does not mean that legally you are required to find for LM.

The subtext of the Judge's remarks was: 'If you believe that the Serbs were committing Nazi-like crimes at Trnopolje, then you needn't be concerned that ITN may have lied. If Trnopolje was a house of horrors, then the photos were telling the underlying truth about the Serb brutes, regardless of who was or was not behind some barbed wire.'

That was all the jurors needed. Why? Because what happened in the trial had confirmed the jurors' original feeling: that ITN was the morally just side.

A winning strategy

How could LM-Deichmann have used a moral approach in this trial, in which the moral understanding of the jurors started out against them?
They should have told the whole truth. Here are a few ideas - not the only ones, to be sure. But they indicate a direction. A lawyer, skilled in cross-examination, could, I believe, think up many tactical ways to implement the strategy that follows.

At the outset, LM-Deichmann could have said that it is a principle of justice that one cannot have a fair trial if the jury is biased against the defendant. They could have said, 'We believe you don't think you are biased against LM. But is LM the real defendant here?'

They could have said, 'We will prove in this trial that ITN lied about the "pictures that fooled the world." But we will prove more. The real defendant in this trial is not LM and Deichmann, it is the Serbian people. LM is under attack because we dared to challenge one particular and grotesque lie, typical of many grotesque lies, spread by the entire Western media, to demonize the Serbs. The issue with these pictures is not whether we can prove that ITN lied deliberately; the issue is whether this was part of a pattern of lying by ITN and other immensely powerful media corporations, and whether it is justifiable to defend a small people, lied about in the big media.'

They could have said to those jurors, 'Today you, and we too - all of us - are at the mercy of huge information corporations controlled by the same Establishment that has declared war on the Serbian people. Because no powerful force opposes these information monopolists, they have been able to get away with telling you countless lies about the Serbs. The important thing about the ITN pictures is that in fact they are typical of the lying media coverage of Bosnia.'

Just as ITN tried to play the moral card by bringing the physician (to 'prove' that the Serbs were supposedly monsters) LM-Deichmann should have played their moral card by a) taking the intelligence of the jurors seriously and b) accusing ITN of using the trial to further the Establishment strategy of lying to demonize the Serbs. (Which was indeed the purpose of the trial.)

Having integrated the communication of these points into their statements, examinations and cross-examinations, LM-Deichmann could have brought in witnesses to testify about other lies ITN has told about the Bosnian Serbs, thus demonstrating a pattern of lying against the Serbs.

LM-Deichmann could have explained to the judge (and of course, to the jurors) why they were doing this: because the easiest way to prove ITN deliberately misled the public in the instance in question is by showing that ITN has exhibited a pattern of lying to demonize the Serbs

If the judge allowed this approach, if he allowed witnesses to answer questions about other cases in which ITN lied about the Bosnian Serbs, all well and good. If the judge, unreasonably, ruled such questions out of order, LM would nevertheless have communicated to the jurors, and perhaps to the public, the seriousness and importance of their charge: that ITN used its position, used the public trust, to help demonize a people and destroy Yugoslavia.

Even if the jurors were not convinced that LM was right, they would have seen that LM was making a big moral argument, and ITN would have been placed on the defensive, where it belonged, instead of being able, ludicrously, to pose as the underdog, morally wronged by great, big LM, which is what the unfortunate strategy adopted by LM and Mr. Deichmann permitted ITN to do.

Having raised such points, whether witnesses were permitted to answer questions about a pattern of lying or not, LM would then have been positioned to take the offensive, ruthlessly cross-examining ITN's ace-in-the-hole, the Muslim doctor, with the goal of branding him a liar.

Deichmann says the physician's testimony about alleged Serbian abuse of Muslims in Trnopolje "...was without question the most moving of the entire trial." LM and Deichmann declined to cross-examine. By so declining, they refused to challenge the living evidence (the physician's testimony) against the real defendant (the Bosnian Serbs) and so, at that point, ITN won.

It is difficult to attack a prosecution witness who has dishonestly but successfully appealed to juror's emotions. Indeed, it is difficult to do many things, but in life and especially in politics, the most difficult tasks are often the most important, and when approached intelligently, may reap the biggest rewards.

If, throughout the trial, LM and Deichmann had adopted the strategy of exposing ITN's pattern of lying about the Serbs, then they would have had the moral stature to turn the physician's testimony against ITN by exposing the physician as a cynical liar.

For example, they might have said to that doctor, 'You have made some horrific charges. But some things about your story are puzzling. You say you had to hand Penny Marshall your camera in secret, because, you claim, the Serbs were watching and you had much to fear. Could you elaborate?'

After the doctor waxed poetic about how he was under scrutiny with an ever-present threat of deadly reprisals, the defense could have asked, 'Why did you believe the Serbs wouldn't want you to give Ms. Marshall your film?' The doctor would explain that of course they were afraid of the truth getting to the public. The defense could have responded, 'There was quite a public hue and cry about supposed Serb concentration camps at that time wasn't there? And the Serbs denied it, didn't they?' Then the defense could ask, 'If you are telling the truth about supposed monstrous abuses at Trnopolje, and if the Serbs therefore wanted desperately not to let the truth get out, then why did the Serb leaders invite ITN to film and interview people in Trnopolje? Why was Ms. Marshall allowed to speak to you in the first place?"

Deichmann writes that the court permitted LM to use the uncut film that ITN shot at Trnopolje. This film is almost identical to footage shot by the RTS (Serbian TV) crew that filmed alongside ITN. The RTS footage was used to make the Emperor's Clothes movie, 'Judgment!' As anyone who has seen 'Judgment!' will testify, the Bosnian Muslim refugees at Trnopolje wandered about freely. They gave casually disdainful answers when asked if they were being mistreated - as if the idea were ridiculous. Beaten men, men who are threatened with violent reprisals (even death!), may out of fear deny they are being harmed, but they begrudge such lies. They are sullen, not relaxed and casual, like the refugees in 'Judgment!' and, therefore, also in the uncut ITN footage. The defense could have played the footage in which one of the Muslim refugees, Mehmet, chats amiably with Penny Marshall, while a large group of refugees looks on, with everyone except Penny Marshall appearing relaxed, reasonably cheerful, and with no evidence of fear. They could have asked the doctor, 'Do you see any guards here?' And, 'If your stories were true, wouldn't these be the men who were being beaten and killed; wouldn't it be their wives and girlfriends and mothers who were being raped. How do you explain that they joke with Penny Marshall? Why does the refugee, Mehmet, reject Penny Marshall's persistent attempts to get him to say the Serbs are mistreating the Muslims? Why does Mehmet say the Serbs are kind, "very kind"? And how do you explain the fact that there are no guards? Are you claiming that the Serbs placed you, a doctor, under close watch, but they did not even send a guard to tag along alongside Penny Marshall's film crew when she interviewed these men - the very ones you say were being beaten and killed? I submit, doctor, that your story about rapes and beatings is, based on the evidence of our own eyes, a fabrication.'

A cross-examination would not proceed as a block of questions, but one question at a time, drawing the doctor by degrees into a trap, powered by the contradictions between his testimony on the one hand, and common sense and visual evidence on the other. A cross-examination would have been enriched by mistakes the doctor surely would have made as he stumbled into self-contradiction, trying to hold together his fabricated story in the face of persistent questioning backed by filmed evidence. It is quite possible that the doctor would have broken down, admitting he was lying.

I am not a lawyer, and I do not have the benefit of the transcript of the Muslim doctor's testimony, just what I read in the newspapers and in Deichmann's article. But, based on Deichmann's description, I am convinced that, in the hands of a skilled attorney, the doctor's testimony would *not* have ended up being, as Deichmann put it, "without question the most moving of the entire trial." And it might well have ended up being the biggest disaster for ITN.

By taking the direction I have suggested, that is, by challenging the jurors to think, LM and Deichmann might have gotten a different verdict. Certainly, they couldn't have gotten a worse verdict. (They lost....) Whatever the outcome, if they had taken this approach, they would have won a victory against the media campaign to smear the Serbs.

In cross-examining one of the ITN reporters, LM-Deichmann could have said, "ITN, Penny Marshall, Ian Williams (or whomever), you produced fake pictures about Trnopolje in 1992. Now you produce a witness who supposedly gave you other pictures. Why should we believe these are real?"

Instead, Deichmann says: "I never disputed these facts [about the Serbs]."

Facts? Phooey! With opponents like Deichmann, ITN didn't need lawyers!

Note added following the publication of this article

After LM lost the libel case, Emperor's Clothes was contacted by an Australian opponent of the media campaign against the Serbs. This fellow offered to finance an appeal. At his request, I phoned Thomas Deichmann and LM publisher Mick Hume and offered to organize a support committee and hire a lawyer for said appeal. Deichmann was hostile. My article had just appeared and he accused me of libel. (Ironic, don't you think?) He didn't want even to discuss an appeal. Mick Hume was more pleasant. But he was uninterested in appealing the verdict. He said it was "time to move on," or words to that effect. Later I learned he had been given a job as a first tier columnist with the London Times, you see. The Times has been one of the worst culprits in the media war against the Serbs.

The struggle to combat media lies that are used to spread racist ideas is an unequal struggle. Never has there been a media as powerful as today's media empires, and the opposition is weak, and often it is a phony opposition. It is a sucker game, stacked by the liars.

However, the exposure of lies is the most powerful weapon there is. Nothing has more appeal than the brave exposure of lies used to justify injustice and racism. LM and Deichmann proved this when they stood up to ITN. Nothing I am saying is meant to - or could - diminish what they did.

ITN responded by raising the stakes. Ruthlessly attacking LM, including with the libel suit, the Establishment, through ITN, offered Deichmann and Hume the following 'deal': 'You may give token resistance during the trial, but you must desert the Serbs. That is what we're interested in. If you desert them, we will bankrupt LM, but we will leave you alone afterwards, and indeed, you may find that you prosper. If you do not desert the Serbs, you will find that you do not prosper.'

Were a few carrots dangled in front of the collective noses of LM and Deichmann? Mick Hume apparently started working as a columnist at the London Times just after the trial ended. Suggestive timing....

It is a shame, of course, but let us not waste time crying over spilt heroes. Let us glean what we can from the LM-Deichmann capitulation, and, as Mr. Hume suggests, let us move on.

The bad news is that the LM-Deichmann legal strategy hindered the jury - and therefore, the public - from changing their minds about the Bosnian Serbs. The good news is that juries vote for what they feel is morally just, and that, my friends, is why I believe, in the long run, the truth can prevail.

Below is Thomas Deichmann's apologia for the LM libel trial.

-- Jared Israel
Libel for False Television Pictures
© by Thomas Deichmann

Translated by Max Sinclair for www.emperors-clothes.com

On March 14th 2000 the "High Court" in London found the Chief editor of the British magazine LM (previously Living Marxism ) along with its publisher Helene Guldberg and her publishing house Informinc guilty after eleven days of court room proceedings in a stressful libel case. They were sentenced to pay fines of 75,000 pounds sterling to the British news channel Independent Television News (ITN) and 150,000 pounds to two of its reporters, Penny Marshall and Ian Williams. The defendants were also ordered to pay the plaintiffs' legal fees - an additional 300,000 pounds. The total fine is calculated as more than one million US dollars. After the reading of the verdict Mike Hume and [publisher] Helene Guldberg said they would have to declare bankruptcy.

Another immediately implemented part of the punishment had the effect of shutting down most of LA's Website ( www.informinc.co.uk ) the same day. A few hours after the conclusion of the legal battle LM received a letter from ITN asking when payment of the fine could be expected.

Censor for Rent

A tragic chapter in modern media history was brought to an end by this case. It may just usher in a new Era. London, the "Mecca of the Libel Suit", was used for the first time by a mighty media corporation as a type of censor to knock an unloved and weaker opponent out of the running. The arrogant behaviour of ITN, represented during the hearing by Chief Editor Richard Tait, Penny Marshall and Ian Williams, is a harsh blow to every journalist. It is also a warning to investigative reporters whose job it is to go against the mainstream and to help bring difficult truths to daylight.

The publication of my article "The Picture that fooled the World" in the February 1997 edition of LM was the catalyst which began the saga. This article had already been printed in highly regarded European publications and been copied many times over. In it I showed in great detail that the famous ITN-pictures of an emaciated Bosnian Muslim behind a barbed wire fence taken at the Bosnian Serb camp of Trnopolje in August 1992 was a fake.

ITN and its reporters received much-desired prizes for this story. Since 1992, they have been continually praised for the high quality of their work. The trip to the High Court was also an attempt to bolster ITN's reputation which had come under attack by a growing number of critics in the last few years. ITN also suffered from a shrinking audience.

ITN's victory left a foul aftertaste - so openly did the media giant attempt to manipulate the process. Immediately after the verdict, ITN set its PR-apparatus in motion in order to newly publicize the story. Statements by both reporters and the news channel tried to leave the uninformed viewer with the impression that the Judge found that the LM-Article of February 1997 was incorrect. The situation is actually reversed of what ITN tried to convey.

ITN Reporter behind barbed wire

In my 1997 article, I showed, in great detail, first that there was no barbed wire fence surrounding Trnopolje and the Muslims filmed there. Second, that the barbed wire on the (in)famous ITN pictures belonged to an old Train station beside the so-called camp grounds. Third, that the British reporters stood inside this property surrounded by barbed wire and from inside there filmed the (in)famous pictures. Third, that nowhere else in Trnopolje did any barbed wire exist. And fourth, that the conclusions made by politicians and the media worldwide, that Trnopolje was a concentration camp similar to Auschwitz or Bergen-Belsen was based on a hoax.

The first three aspects of the case were proved during the hearing on the libel suit. In particular, the original uncut ITN film was helpful. This was the same film I used in my analysis in Autumn 1996. The fourth point, that Trnopolje was not a concentration camp, was not contested in the hearing. None of the witnesses argued that Trnopolje was a concentration camp. Judge Morland gave his summary the day before the end of the case and stressed to the jury that the reporters were surrounded by a barbed wire fence in August 1992 :

".....The decision is yours. But isn't it clear, after examining thee unedited pictures and the bundle of photographs from Herr Deichmann, that before the Civil War the area surrounding the garage...and the electrical transformer was fenced in? This fence was made up of tall metal posts on the top of which was fastened barbed wire and below ordinary wire mesh. It had a gate to the east bound street. Ian Williams, Penny Marshall, and her camera crew openly contradict themselves if they say they did not realize they were surrounded by the old barbed wire fence........"
Unquestionable hindsight

Judge Morland then said: "But does this matter at all to the case ?" He reminded the members of the jury what this Libel case was about. The central question which the jury had to decide on was: In the eyes of the court did LM lie when it said that the ITN reporters deliberately published a misleading photo ?

The case therefore did not rest on whether the photos were misleading; instead it concerned whether the reporters publicized the photos with intent to deceive. At the beginning of his summation the Judge stated his agreement with my investigative reporting. However, he then defined the situation of the violation in an exceptional way:

"...Worthy Jurors, you may think that it is necessary in a democratic society that Journalists are fearless investigators of injustice. You will especially note how exceptionally important it is that Reporters are faithful to the truth and fairness. It is proper that a Journalist should say so when he discovers another Journalist has been sloppy, unfair, and irresponsible.

"But you should not think that the case which stands before you revolves around whether Penny Marshall or Ian Williams were sloppy, unfair, or irresponsible. The key question in this case is, did the defendants prove that Penny Marshall and Ian Williams deliberately - and I stress the word ‘deliberately' - create irresponsible television pictures..."

Nick Hyham, media director of the BBC, recapitulated the explanation of the Judge in a news commentary on the day of the verdict in the following manner:

".....The Judge said, LM described the events correctly, but that didn't matter in the issue...."

The verdict ignored the underhanded tricks ITN and both reporters availed themselves of in their libel suit against LM. It strengthened the repressive English libel laws that are considered so frightening inside media circles. It established the libelous connotation of my article, an accompanying leader by Mick Hume, and a LM press release circulated in January 1997. LM is said to have claimed that ITN and its reporters deliberately and with full knowledge lied to the world. Actually, I am of the opinion that the reporters must have known exactly what they were doing at the time. However, this was not the thrust of my article.

ITN put itself on center stage of the suit because the ITN lawyers, Biddle & Co., knew that in this manner they could not lose the libel suit. The fact that in English libel law the burden of proof lies with the accused (further indication of the absurdity of this law) meant that LM had to prove the bad intentions of the ITN reporters in order for the court to decide in LM's favour. The verdict did not come as a surprise to the LM team. Publisher Mick Hume commented:

"...We had to prove the unprovable....."

Missing Memories

Despite all this Gavin Millar, LM's attorney, worked to convince the jury of the correctness of my article. He also exerted himself to establish that the two ITN reporters must have know that at the time they took the (in)famous pictures that they were on the small property surrounded by barbed wire.

No one, with the exception of Penny Marshall's cameraman, could answer the question just how Ian Williams was able to go from the fenced-in property to the open field just to the west of it; even though it is plain to see on the ITN video tapes. Williams, as the first witness in the case, answered he simply ran around the corner. He also could not remember when confronted with the ITN pictures which clearly showed how impossible his written description was of the barbed wire fence and the length of the west side of the area. At the end of his testimony, on the fourth day of the court room proceedings he stated that it was a "lie" that the reporters were surrounded by barbed wire.

During the testimony of the next witness, only a few hours later, Judge Morland intervened and gave his opinion that after viewing the ITN tapes many times, he was convinced that the reporters were indeed surrounded by barbed wire. He advised the ITN lawyer not to waste any more time on the matter. On the next day, Ian William's sound man offered a new version of the story, that William's team had come through the fence somewhere further south of the open field, possibly through a hole in the fence, which somehow never showed up on the ITN tapes.

Penny Marshall also had memory lapses specifically regarding the fenced in property, even though it was uncontested that she entered through a hole in the fence from the south side. She could neither remember that she was surrounded by barbed wire nor could she remember how she exited the fenced in property.

Gavin Millar, LM's attorney, was prevented from posing the question to the ITN reporters whether it had ever crossed their minds at the time (August 1992) that the (in)famous pictures of the emaciated Muslim taken behind barbed wire could trigger comparisons with the Holocaust. He also was forbidden to ask if they realized that their images represented a major scoop given the widely disseminated speculative reports of possible "Concentration Camps" and "Death Camps" in the North. Millar succeeded numerous times entangling the ITN employees in misstatements - but he was unable to prove ITN's deliberate manipulation.

Disappearing Videotapes and Defense Witnesses

One of factor was that the most important video tape was lost by the ITN archives. This tape showed Penny Marshall surrounded by the barbed wire fence. Only a short sequence of this tape could be seen in the courtroom having been taken from a news program in August 1992. The complete uncut tape remains lost. It would surely be able to show how Penny Marshall moved around the fenced in property and how she commented on the situation. The first time the subject of the disappearing videotape came up an uproar ran through the courtroom audience.

The video tape of a Bosnian-Serbian cameraman in Military uniform, which was shot on the same day as Penny Marshall Trnopolje filmed could not make up for the loss of the ITN tape. However, it did show that Penny Marshall interviewed two other men before she waved her hand at the emaciated man with the exposed upper body and called out a friendly greeting. This directly contradicted her presentation in the ITN news show and in later interviews.

One of the men in blue overalls interviewed introduced himself as Mehmet. He repeatedly stressed when questioned by the British reporter, that the Trnopolje Camp was not a prison but a refugee center and he felt safe there.

At the beginning of the process the ITN lawyer was able to invoke the English censorship law, to the effect that all further witnesses for the defense were shut out of the case. The most prominent was John Simpson, BBC World Affairs Editor, one of the most highly regarded reporters in the world. Former War Crimes expert and publicist Philip Knightley, author of the book "The First Casualty," was also denied the opportunity to take the witness stand. In addition, the London Queen's Counsel Steven Kay was also shut out from testifying. For good measure, the scope of my own testimony was severely limited.

Smear Campaign

Just before it was published in the Spring of 1997, LM's publisher issued a press release announcing my article. As ITN's chief editor Richard Tait admitted on the witness stand, nobody at ITN had even read the article at that point. Nevertheless, they instituted legal action on the spot to get all copies of that issue of LM destroyed.

Then, in addition to the charge of libel, ITN tried sue LM for "malice." They used the malice suit as a vehicle for attacking my article, calling it insulting and false, saying it had been written for the sole purpose of spreading pro-Serbian propaganda. As proof, they provided a list of LM articles on the Balkan crisis. Included was an excerpt from my interview with Austrian novelist, Peter Handke in the Spring of 1996.

The malice suit allowed the spreading of vicious lies and gossip. For instance, I was a paid agent of the Serbs; I was married to one and so on. This despite oft-repeated protestations that I had no such connections to the Serbs and supported none of the parties in the Bosnian Civil War. Ed Vulliamy, the Guardian reporter who accompanied Penny Marshall's crew to the North Bosnian camp in August 1992, contributed by writing hysterical defamations.

The malice charge was thrown out by Judge Morland. ITN's lawyer Shields didn't object because it was obviously indefensible. It is clear this charge was only added to the libel suit in order to foster the smear campaign.

Historical Revisionism

ITN lawyer Tom Shields stressed, during the trial, that the miserable condition of Trnopolje was noteworthy. The plaintiffs brought also as a witness a Muslim Physician who the guards forced to care for the camp's inhabitants in the Summer of 1992. At the time he was also interviewed by Penney Marshall and secretly gave her a camera with poorly lighted photographs on a undeveloped film. The photos showed spotlighted Bosnian Muslims who had been beaten and mishandled by the Serb guards. The Physician described on the witness stand the rape and assault of defenseless civilians. I never disputed these facts. His testimony was without question the most moving of the entire trial. Despite this, my impression was that this only influenced the Jury enough to score a few moral points for ITN. LM attorney Millar declined a cross examination and later asked me if I wished to speak with the Physician. I answered no.

The witness testimony of the Physician and remarks and questions of Tom Shields all pointed in the same direction: to awaken a specific impression. This impression was that I wished for Serbs, who were guilty of such evil acts, to be somehow left unpunished."

In a similar manner this attitude was brought home to me in the past few years by Journalists with a mission to Save-The-World from Baddies. These journalists had left behind their professional discipline in every one of their Balkan articles which were filled with their eccentric moralizing. If not filled with their blend of moral fever, then the articles consisted of a demented world full of genocide and mass graves. LM publisher Mick Hume during his testimony that he welcomed the publication of my article in LM, because it questioned the misuse of the Holocaust for political ends. By equating the Bosnian Civil War with the Holocaust the history of the 20th century was finally rewritten.

Refugee Center or Prison

The ITN lawyer exerted himself to question my description of the Trnopolje camp as a refugee center in which many Muslims sought safety from the bloody Civil War going on around them. During my testimony it became clear that Tom Shield, despite his hectoring me with morally laden catch phrases, didn't have the slightest idea what had happened during the Bosnian Civil . Trnopolje was surely a frightening place, but it was also surely not a Prison and most surely not a concentration camp.

Some of those who were there at the time in August 1992 revise their own analysis of the events the further the Bosnian War recedes into the past without presenting any new interpretations or facts. For example, ITN at the time the film was made reported that the group of Bosnian Muslim men on the other side of the barbed wire were not free to leave the camp which was surrounded by heavily armed guards. I never verified this report. More importantly I was able to verify that these men had arrived from another camp, shortly before the British reporters arrived, and were waiting to register for a place to sleep. This explanation of the situation was confirmed through interviews with these men on the ITN tapes and the statements of independent observers.

In her Television report of August 6, 1992 Penny Marshal said herself that these men had come from another camp and had been brought to Trnopolje. That refugees could leave the camp at any time they so desired was stated in my article as well as confirmed from many other sources.

I also accurately described in my article that in the area of the Trnopolje camp there were other fences (low wire mesh fences that enclosed small properties, a low metal fence which surrounded the school building). These fences were also documented in a sketch which accompanied the LM article. A lonely barbed wire fence also stood next to the old Train Station with the old roadbed.

Sword of Damocles

The barbed wire parcel in the ITN film in which the reporters found themselves became the critical detail for people to have proof that concentration camps existed in Bosnia. The single positive outcome of the courtroom proceedings at the High Court in London was that it was finally proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that neither the camp nor the filmed Muslims were surrounded by barbed wire. Rather, it was the journalists who were surrounded by barbed wire as my article had shown. On the other hand, the verdict spells the end of LM and now hangs like a sword of Damocles over every English journalist. LM, a sassy, opinionated magazine with intelligent if contrary reporting was brought to ruin. One can hope that other media organizations and journalists will not follow the ITN example. Instead, we hope they follow the example of publications like LM and its creators. One can also hope that reaction to the case strengthens the reform of or perhaps even the abolition England's libel laws.

These laws will never stand the test of the European Human Rights Commission in the European Unification process. One time an American Court refused to support a English Court's libel judgment because it ran so contrary to the libertarian tenor of the American Constitution. Richard Tait, Penny Marshall, and Ian William should be ashamed of their manipulation and direction of the entire process. TD

Further reading...

The article by Deichmann , courageously published by LM, that led to the ITN libel suit, can be read at the URL www.emperors-clothes.com/images/bosnia/camp.htm

Would you like to know more about media lies concerning Yugoslavia? Check out how the facts concerning C.A.R.E. spying in Yugoslavia were suppressed. The URL is http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/humanita.htm

What does the coverage of the WTO demonstrations in Seattle have to do with the coverage of attacks on Serbs in Kosovo? Too much, I'm afraid. See "Misleading from the start" by Jared Israel at the URL
http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/misleadi.htm
 
Mr. Norman - "Dr. Joseph Goebbels of the SLD" - Fraser, writes that:
============================================================================================================================================

"Whilst it started life as a transit camp, at the time of the ITN visit Trnopolje housed prisoners who were subject to a brutal regime. Condition at Omarska were far worse and, even though ITN were unable to film freely there (as The Emperor’s Clothes asserted they were), it is clear from the footage taken that the Omarska prisoners were poorly treated and in a state of fear."
============================================================================================================================================
Right, Norman, which is why the ITN/Guardian team did not need to fly in via parachute behind enemy lines to get the "scoop of the century", but requested the Bosnian Serb authorities - in the middle of a war zone known as Bosnia-Herzgovina on August 5,1992 - to provide them with safe passage via a Bosnian Serb military escort which enabled the Guardian/ITN team to visit these "death camps" and then said Bosnian Serb authorities ALLOWED the Guardian/ITN team to film/photograph this Omarska "death camp" and "atrocities at Omarska" which said footage of "atrocities" was then subsequently ***NEVER USED EVEN ONCE*** in any broadcasts by ITN and which said photographs of Omarska were ***NEVER PUBLISHED EVEN ONCE*** by the Guardian in its so-called "reporting" on this supposed "death camp" known as Omarska.

Instead, we have the FAKED ITN footage of the supposed "death camp" Trnopolje - which according to your own admission, also "housed the refugees" - labelled by the Guardian as Omarska instead.

Norman, you really are not only a proven LAIR, but you have just proven yourself yet again to be an INCREDIBLY STUPID liar as well.

I suggest you cut and run as you have done many times in the past on this blog, before you bring the Scottish Liberal Democrats into further DISREPUTE with your silly, pathetic lies.
 
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
"Interestingly, ITN appears to have lost a crucial videotape of the uncut rushes from which the report was edited together -- an accident, of course".

http://lists.peacelink.it/balcani/msg00151.html

The above comment was made by Philip Hammond soon after the ITn vs LM libel trial verdict.


Mr. Philip Hammond of the UK, co-editor with US Professor Edward Herman, of the University of Pennsylvania,
analyzed media coverage of wartime events in Kosovo in ex-Yugoslavia in their book "Degraded Capability: the Media and the Kosovo Crisis"

See

http://www.srebrenica-report.com
 
Mr. Norman - "Dr. Joseph Goebbels of the Scottish Liberal Democrats" -Fraser, quotes a certain Dr. David Campbell of the University of Newcastle,UK, whom claims that:

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

"As Fikret Alic´ has observed: ‘I would like to say that behind the cameramen there were Serb soldiers and they shouted to write everybody’s names who said something in front of the camera’. See ‘Bosnian Prisoner Praises ITN Crew’. Ian Williams noted the severe restrictions on their capacity to report freely – including the fact the ‘guards stood over everybody we spoke to’ –in a live interview following the broadcast of his report. See Ian Williams: Live 2-Way (interview with Dermot Murnaghan), 6 August 1992, videocassette (London: ITN Archive, reference: t06089201.htm). In addition, there was also a Bosnian Serb military film crew taping the ITN crew at work. This is apparent from the RTS video at Trnopolje, where the RTS crew captures a uniformed cameraman filming the ITN journalists. See Judgment at 25:20."
============================================================================================================================================

THE ABOVE COMMENT by Mr. Norman Fraser of the SLD (quoting this dishonest individual, Dr. David Campbell) IS A BRAZEN, BLATANT,SHAMELESS,LIE!!!Need Proof? Keep reading!


I ask all of you decent,freedom loving people to PLEASE read the below articles and OBTAIN the Emperor's Clothes' film "Judgement" at:

http://emperors-clothes.com/news/film.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/Film/judgment.htm

http://www.emperors-clothes.com/film/judgment.htm

Unfortunately for Mr. Fraser I have the Emperor's Clothes' film "Judgement" in my possession:

There are NO Serbian "military film crews" present.A Serbian RTS ["Radio Television Serbia" TV] cameraman dressed in a khaki green camouflage shirt does not equal "a military film crew". This is a deliberate twisting of the facts by this pro-Islamist Dr.David Campbell character in order to support the racist anti-Serbian lying of ITN & its ally: the Islamist terrorist employment agency - otherwise known as the Guardian.

In the Emperor's Clothes film,"Judgement" Penny Marshall can clearly be seen wearing a bulky military flak jacket.

Hmmmm....I wonder why Ms. Marshall is wearing a military flak jacket?
Did Ms. Marshall join the British army without telling us?

Hold on a minute, it's August 5, 1992, in Bosnia Herzegovina, and a brutal inter-religious/ethnic war is raging all around between four ethnic/religious and political factions - with bullets and shells flying all over the place - maybe that has something to do with it.

Does that now make Penny Marshall a member of a "military film crew"? According to Dr. Campbell's "logic", it most certainly does.

There is NOBODY from the Bosnian Serb authorities - dressed in civilian or military clothing - intimidating or "standing over" ANYBODY in the film - whether they be Bosnian muslim refugees or ITN/Guardian journalists or camera-crew members - NOT at the 25:20 minute mark (as claimed by Mr. Fraser's source,Dr. David Campbell) or ANYWHERE ELSE in the entire film!!

There are no "armed guards" tagging along with Ms. Marshall and her ITN film crew or the Guardian's Ed Vulliamy.

NOWHERE does ANY Bosnian muslim refugee show visible signs of fear at the Trnopolje refugee collection center (now described by Mr. Fraser as a supposed 'death camp' that "...started life as a transit camp.." and which,according to Mr. Fraser's own words, also "...housed the refugees"(?!)

NOWHERE does even ONE Bosnian muslim refugee at Trnopolje show even the slightest visible hint of fear,anxiety or tension.

In fact, most of the refugees are smiling and laughing: even casually joking with Ms. Marshall.

The above is hardly su
 
Mr. Norman - "Dr. Joseph Goebbels of the Scottish Liberal Democrats" -Fraser, quotes a certain Dr. David Campbell of the University of Newcastle,UK, whom claims that:

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

"As Fikret Alic´ has observed: ‘I would like to say that behind the cameramen there were Serb soldiers and they shouted to write everybody’s names who said something in front of the camera’. See ‘Bosnian Prisoner Praises ITN Crew’. Ian Williams noted the severe restrictions on their capacity to report freely – including the fact the ‘guards stood over everybody we spoke to’ –in a live interview following the broadcast of his report. See Ian Williams: Live 2-Way (interview with Dermot Murnaghan), 6 August 1992, videocassette (London: ITN Archive, reference: t06089201.htm). In addition, there was also a Bosnian Serb military film crew taping the ITN crew at work. This is apparent from the RTS video at Trnopolje, where the RTS crew captures a uniformed cameraman filming the ITN journalists. See Judgment at 25:20."
============================================================================================================================================

THE ABOVE COMMENT by Mr. Norman Fraser of the SLD (quoting this dishonest individual, Dr. David Campbell) IS A BRAZEN, BLATANT,SHAMELESS,LIE!!!Need Proof? Keep reading!


I ask all of you decent,freedom loving people to PLEASE read the below articles and OBTAIN the Emperor's Clothes' film "Judgement" at:

http://emperors-clothes.com/news/film.htm

http://emperors-clothes.com/Film/judgment.htm

http://www.emperors-clothes.com/film/judgment.htm

Unfortunately for Mr. Fraser I have the Emperor's Clothes' film "Judgement" in my possession:

There are NO Serbian "military film crews" present.A Serbian RTS ["Radio Television Serbia" TV] cameraman dressed in a khaki green camouflage shirt does not equal "a military film crew". This is a deliberate twisting of the facts by this pro-Islamist Dr.David Campbell character in order to support the racist anti-Serbian lying of ITN & its ally: the Islamist terrorist employment agency - otherwise known as the Guardian.

In the Emperor's Clothes film,"Judgement" Penny Marshall can clearly be seen wearing a bulky military flak jacket.

Hmmmm....I wonder why Ms. Marshall is wearing a military flak jacket?
Did Ms. Marshall join the British army without telling us?

Hold on a minute, it's August 5, 1992, in Bosnia Herzegovina, and a brutal inter-religious/ethnic war is raging all around between four ethnic/religious and political factions - with bullets and shells flying all over the place - maybe that has something to do with it.

Does that now make Penny Marshall a member of a "military film crew"? According to Dr. Campbell's "logic", it most certainly does.

There is NOBODY from the Bosnian Serb authorities - dressed in civilian or military clothing - intimidating or "standing over" ANYBODY in the film - whether they be Bosnian muslim refugees or ITN/Guardian journalists or camera-crew members - NOT at the 25:20 minute mark (as claimed by Mr. Fraser's source,Dr. David Campbell) or ANYWHERE ELSE in the entire film!!

There are no "armed guards" tagging along with Ms. Marshall and her ITN film crew or the Guardian's Ed Vulliamy.

NOWHERE does ANY Bosnian muslim refugee show visible signs of fear at the Trnopolje refugee collection center (now described by Mr. Fraser as a supposed 'death camp' that "...started life as a transit camp.." and which,according to Mr. Fraser's own words, also "...housed the refugees"(?!)

NOWHERE does even ONE Bosnian muslim refugee at Trnopolje show even the slightest visible hint of fear,anxiety or tension.

In fact, most of the refugees are smiling and laughing: even casually joking with Ms. Marshall.

The above is hardly surprising, since the Bosnian Serbs themselves INVITED Ms. Marshall,ITN and the Guardian's Ed Vulliamy - providing all of them full protection via military escort in the middle of a war zone - to visit both the Trnopolje refugee center and the Omarska POW camp to show how ludicrous Roy Gutman's stories of "death camps" (stories based primarily on Izetbegovic's SDA party - the illegitimate Sarajevo- based "Bosnian government" - sources & their handsomely paid American P.R. firm, "Ruder Finn" - really were.

EVERYONE in the film is quite calm and relaxed (except the arrogant Ms.Penny Marshall, whom was agitating for a "death camp scoop" because of immense pressure brought to bear on her by ITN's management, due to Mr.Roy Gutman's previous phony "death camp" reports in New York's "Newsday" newspaper back in July, 1992).

ALL of the refugees appear quite calm - with many of them, as noted above,smiling,joking and laughing amongst themselves - including most notably, Fikret Alic himself (that's right, the real skinny looking one whom supposedly was "beaten", "pistol whipped" and had "four of his teeth knocked out" according to Mr. Fraser) - while other refugees were so calm that they almost appeared bored and nonchalant with the attention they were getting from Ms. Marshall, ITN's camera crew and the Guardian's Ed Vulliamy.

Mr. Norman Fraser's latest source, Dr. David Campbell, is so eager to defend the ITN/Guardian version of events that he displays the same capacity for dishonesty and Orwellian "doublethink" as Mr. Fraser does.

For example, Dr. Campbell informs us that the man in the overalls, a muslim refugee named "Mekhmet", whom - on camera - said to Ms. Penny Marshall regarding Trnopolje that "it's a refugee camp, NOT a prison!" (Mekhmet is to the right of Fikret Alic, and is the guy holding the <5 foot tall broken down CHICKEN WIRE fence enclosing Ms. Marshall and the ITN/Guardian team) was supposedly "imprisoned" by the Bosnian Serbs at Trnopolje, but that he came to Trnopolje "voluntarily".

So according to Dr. Campbell's "logic" - or rather the lack of it - in support of the ITN/Guardian racist version of events - Mekhmet is now a "voluntarily" imprisoned refugee! (since Mr. Fraser informs us that Trnopolje, whilst supposedly being a "death camp" where people are murdered and raped on a daily basis - also doubled as a refugee collection center - since Trnopolje, according to Mr. Fraser: "....ALSO HOUSED THE REFUGEES". The preceding are Mr. Fraser's exact words here on this blog, folks.


Also, we are informed by Dr. Campbell that the Bosnian muslim medic, a certain Dr. Merdzianic, whom was supposedly "forced" to look after the refugees' health at Trnopolje, was able to "Secretly" hand over a camera to Ms. Marshall containing film - supposedly of beaten and tortured Bosnian muslim "inmates".

How could this have been done in "secret" if there were Bosnian Serb "guards" watching the good muslim doctor's every move? Why would the Bosnian Serbs even ALLOW Ms. Marshall to go anywhere near Dr. Merdzianic, let alone interview him if they were indeed guilty of such horrendous atrocities as claimed by Dr. Merdzianic? Hardly surprisingly, Dr. Campbell doesn' tell us.

Dr. Campbell also doesn't explain to us why the Bosnian Serbs INVITED Ms. Marshall and her film crew to Trnopolje and Omarska, whilst as pointed out by the International Committee of the Red Cross at the time of Ms. Marshall's visit, both the Bosnian muslim Izetbegovic SDA authorities AND the Bosnian Croat HDZ authorities under Messrs. Mate Boban & Franjo Tudjman, outright REFUSED to allow Western journalists and Red Cross/UN personell access to THEIR prisoner of war camps where they were holding Bosnian Serbs as well as Bosnian muslims loyal to the legitimate muslim leader of Bosnia, Mr. Fikret Abdic.

Keep in mind that at the ITN vs LM libel trial, ITN claimed, incredibly, to have actually "LOST" (?!) the uncut raw film footage (i.e. its so-called "rushes") of the "pictures that SHOCKED THE WORLD"! As Deichmann recounts, this caused a great uproar and commotion in the courtroom at the time.

It is hardly surprising that ITN suddenly claimed to have "lost" the raw unedited footage, since it would have clearly shown how Ms. Marshall, her ITN film crew and the Guardian's Ed Vulliamy all ended up getting inside the chicken wire fence-enclosed barn and transformer station - from which Ms. Marshall and her crew filmed in order to make it look like the Trnopolje refugees were the ones enclosed by barbed wire, and thus give the image of a supposed "death camp".


Here is what Jared Israel had to say about the above trial:
============================================================================================================================================

If, throughout the trial, LM and Deichmann had adopted the strategy of exposing ITN's pattern of lying about the Serbs, then they would have had the moral stature to turn the physician's testimony against ITN by exposing the physician as a cynical liar.

For example, they might have said to that doctor, 'You have made some horrific charges. But some things about your story are puzzling. You say you had to hand Penny Marshall your camera in secret, because, you claim, the Serbs were watching and you had much to fear. Could you elaborate?'

After the doctor waxed poetic about how he was under scrutiny with an ever-present threat of deadly reprisals, the defense could have asked, 'Why did you believe the Serbs wouldn't want you to give Ms. Marshall your film?' The doctor would explain that of course they were afraid of the truth getting to the public. The defense could have responded, 'There was quite a public hue and cry about supposed Serb concentration camps at that time wasn't there? And the Serbs denied it, didn't they?' Then the defense could ask, 'If you are telling the truth about supposed monstrous abuses at Trnopolje, and if the Serbs therefore wanted desperately not to let the truth get out, then why did the Serb leaders invite ITN to film and interview people in Trnopolje? Why was Ms. Marshall allowed to speak to you in the first place?"

Deichmann writes that the court permitted LM to use the uncut film that ITN shot at Trnopolje. This film is almost identical to footage shot by the RTS (Serbian TV) crew that filmed alongside ITN. The RTS footage was used to make the Emperor's Clothes movie, 'Judgment!' As anyone who has seen 'Judgment!' will testify, the Bosnian Muslim refugees at Trnopolje wandered about freely. They gave casually disdainful answers when asked if they were being mistreated - as if the idea were ridiculous. Beaten men, men who are threatened with violent reprisals (even death!), may out of fear deny they are being harmed, but they begrudge such lies. They are sullen, not relaxed and casual, like the refugees in 'Judgment!' and, therefore, also in the uncut ITN footage. The defense could have played the footage in which one of the Muslim refugees, Mehmet, chats amiably with Penny Marshall, while a large group of refugees looks on, with everyone except Penny Marshall appearing relaxed, reasonably cheerful, and with no evidence of fear. They could have asked the doctor, 'Do you see any guards here?' And, 'If your stories were true, wouldn't these be the men who were being beaten and killed; wouldn't it be their wives and girlfriends and mothers who were being raped. How do you explain that they joke with Penny Marshall? Why does the refugee, Mehmet, reject Penny Marshall's persistent attempts to get him to say the Serbs are mistreating the Muslims? Why does Mehmet say the Serbs are kind, "very kind"? And how do you explain the fact that there are no guards? Are you claiming that the Serbs placed you, a doctor, under close watch, but they did not even send a guard to tag along alongside Penny Marshall's film crew when she interviewed these men - the very ones you say were being beaten and killed? I submit, doctor, that your story about rapes and beatings is, based on the evidence of our own eyes, a fabrication.'

Why does Deichmann accept that "the photos [supposedly passed secretly to Penny Marshall] showed Bosnian Muslims who had been beaten and mishandled." How could he know when and where the "poorly lighted photographs" shown at the trial by ITN had really been taken? How could he know the photos were not phonies? Couldn't the people in those photos have been actors? Or mightn't they have been Muslims or even Orthodox Christian Serbs who had been photographed elsewhere? Who knows? Didn't this trial take place precisely because LM challenged the authenticity of the "pictures that fooled the world"? Wasn't ITN suing because Deichmann had written that the ITN pictures were "fakes"? If ITN pedaled fake pictures before, why on earth did Deichmann say, without hesitation, that they were peddling real pictures now?

Deichmann writes, "The physician described on the witness stand the rape and assault of defenseless civilians." Note he does not even use the term, "alleged." To be accused of rape and assault by this doctor was to be convicted. Why? Can't one imagine a few possible reasons for the good doctor to have lied? Such as: a) he was promised some reward if he lied or b) he was afraid of what would happen to him and/or his family back in Bosnia if he did not lie. Deichmann says the man's testimony was "the most moving." Why?

Why in heaven's name did the LM people refuse to cross-examine the physician?

I think they did not challenge the doctor's testimony because, having been caught up in great events, they had first taken a brave stand and then, seeing that the enemy had raised the stakes (by attacking LM all-out) they surrendered. Whether or not there was ever an explicit discussion between some representative of Deichmann and/or LM and the ITN people, in effect LM-Deichmann and ITN cut a deal. I will explain the nature of this deal later.

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/missing.htm
============================================================================================================================================

I SPECIFICALLY CHALLENGE ANYONE who wishes to challenge Emperor's Clothes' account to PLEASE obtain the film "Judgement" to prove all of the above for themselves.


Best wishes to you and ALL FREEDOM and LIBERTY LOVING PEOPLE both in the UK and the world over!! (naturally, this excludes pro-Nazis like Mr. Norman Fraser)

Freedom and TRUTH belongs to us all!!

Cheers!!


Peter Robert North.
PS:To all the NON-Nazis reading this thread: I am Jewish on my mother's side - almost all of my mother's entire family were murdered by the Nazis & their collaborators in the Holocaust, so I know a thing or two about who the real Nazis are in ex-Yugoslavia as - unlike Mr. Norman Fraser - I have studied the subject intensively.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.