Friday, April 17, 2009
WIKIPEDIA - HOW IT CENSORS IN GOVERNMENT'S CAUSE
wrote previously of how Wikipedia had censored any pro-Serb views, any mention of the primary Srebrenica genocide, any evidence that the official genocide is a pack of lies & had drawn its article on the Croatian Nazi leader Franjo Tudjman verbatim from a Croatian government hagiography.
Here is some stuff from Nigel Caulder detailing some censorship on the warming debate (though reading any of their articles on the subject shows it anyway).
In theory Wikipedia is a “people’s encyclopedia” written and edited by the people who read it — anyone with an Internet connection. So on controversial topics, one might expect to see a broad range of opinion. On global warming we get consensus, Gore-style: a consensus forged by censorship, intimidation, and deceit.
Naomi Oreskes, author of the now-infamous paper, published in the prestigious journal Science, claiming to have exhaustively reviewed the scientific literature and found not one single article dissenting from the alarmist version of global warming.
Naturally I was surprised to read on Wikipedia that Oreskes’s work had been vindicated and that, for instance, one of her most thorough critics, British scientist and publisher Bennie Peiser, not only had been discredited but had grudgingly conceded Oreskes was right.
I checked with Peiser, who said he had done no such thing. I then corrected the Wikipedia entry, and advised Peiser that I had done so.
Peiser wrote back saying he couldn’t see my corrections on the Wikipedia page. I made the changes again, and this time confirmed that the changes had been saved. But then, in a twinkle, they were gone again. I made other changes. And others. They all disappeared shortly after they were made.
Turns out that on Wikipedia some folks are more equal than others. Kim Dabelstein Petersen is a Wikipedia “editor” who seems to devote a large part of his life to editing reams and reams of Wikipedia pages to pump the assertions of global-warming alarmists and deprecate or make disappear the arguments of skeptics.
I soon found others who had the same experience: They would try to squeeze in any dissent, or even correct an obvious slander against a dissenter, and Petersen or some other censor would immediately snuff them out.
I have found Wikipedia of considerable use on many subjects. It is useful for finding the particular names & details which will allow you a deep search.
Nonetheless one datum is only one datum but 2 allows you to extrapolate a trend. Yugoslavia & global warming are 2 very different subjects - the only connection between them being the deep & damaging involvement of western government & its propaganda. There is no crossover, at least on the surface level, between Wiki contributors. However we certainly have a trend here of Wikipedia deliberately lying in the cause of whatever government has decreed. Their claim about Peiser saying Oreskes was right is not merely bias it is clearly an outright & deliberate lie.
Clearly Wikipedia can't be used as a primary source though it is useful in getting basic material & getting a viewpoint though not all of them.
In the book 1984 much of the story revolves around a massive bureaucracy, the Ministry of Truth, whose job is to rewrite news to say whatever the government wants. Nowadays such things can be done "in a twinkle" without the massive bureaucracy.
PS Calder also mentions how in discussing an article in 2000 in which he said he did not expect warming to continue & that in due course the Warming supporters (now "Climate Change" supporters) would start worrying about cooling that ""After his prediction was proven wrong, Calder participated in the polemic documentary film The Great Global Warming Swindle."
Here is some stuff from Nigel Caulder detailing some censorship on the warming debate (though reading any of their articles on the subject shows it anyway).
Just because I'm a sceptic, Wikipedia elects to focus on the 10% of my writing that happens to deal with the climate. In my accounts of general relativity, astrophysics, particle physics and solid-Earth geophysics (for example) I show my readers what real physics looks like. It's all very different from the computer games of the climate modellers.The report in question says
But we know about the Wiki Witch of the West, don't we, Benny? "Peisers [sic] crap shouldn't be in here," said William Connelley, as Lawrence Solomon reported last year.
In theory Wikipedia is a “people’s encyclopedia” written and edited by the people who read it — anyone with an Internet connection. So on controversial topics, one might expect to see a broad range of opinion. On global warming we get consensus, Gore-style: a consensus forged by censorship, intimidation, and deceit.
Naomi Oreskes, author of the now-infamous paper, published in the prestigious journal Science, claiming to have exhaustively reviewed the scientific literature and found not one single article dissenting from the alarmist version of global warming.
Naturally I was surprised to read on Wikipedia that Oreskes’s work had been vindicated and that, for instance, one of her most thorough critics, British scientist and publisher Bennie Peiser, not only had been discredited but had grudgingly conceded Oreskes was right.
I checked with Peiser, who said he had done no such thing. I then corrected the Wikipedia entry, and advised Peiser that I had done so.
Peiser wrote back saying he couldn’t see my corrections on the Wikipedia page. I made the changes again, and this time confirmed that the changes had been saved. But then, in a twinkle, they were gone again. I made other changes. And others. They all disappeared shortly after they were made.
Turns out that on Wikipedia some folks are more equal than others. Kim Dabelstein Petersen is a Wikipedia “editor” who seems to devote a large part of his life to editing reams and reams of Wikipedia pages to pump the assertions of global-warming alarmists and deprecate or make disappear the arguments of skeptics.
I soon found others who had the same experience: They would try to squeeze in any dissent, or even correct an obvious slander against a dissenter, and Petersen or some other censor would immediately snuff them out.
I have found Wikipedia of considerable use on many subjects. It is useful for finding the particular names & details which will allow you a deep search.
Nonetheless one datum is only one datum but 2 allows you to extrapolate a trend. Yugoslavia & global warming are 2 very different subjects - the only connection between them being the deep & damaging involvement of western government & its propaganda. There is no crossover, at least on the surface level, between Wiki contributors. However we certainly have a trend here of Wikipedia deliberately lying in the cause of whatever government has decreed. Their claim about Peiser saying Oreskes was right is not merely bias it is clearly an outright & deliberate lie.
Clearly Wikipedia can't be used as a primary source though it is useful in getting basic material & getting a viewpoint though not all of them.
In the book 1984 much of the story revolves around a massive bureaucracy, the Ministry of Truth, whose job is to rewrite news to say whatever the government wants. Nowadays such things can be done "in a twinkle" without the massive bureaucracy.
PS Calder also mentions how in discussing an article in 2000 in which he said he did not expect warming to continue & that in due course the Warming supporters (now "Climate Change" supporters) would start worrying about cooling that ""After his prediction was proven wrong, Calder participated in the polemic documentary film The Great Global Warming Swindle."
Comments:
<< Home
1. Wikipedia only allows respectable opinions, which means being published in mainstream paper, TV show or in a government report. Essentially, wikipedia takes the conventional wisdom, spells it out and gives it footnotes.
2. A majority of wiki editors are probably young enough that they just got out of school. As such they probably still have the biases they acquired from their education.
3. A user can out n article on their watchlist, so that if any changes are made they will immediately show up as a banner at the top of the page that he is using. A user wanting to censor a page just has to wait for you to edit it. The page on Texas electrical deregulation hasn't changed in three years despite being on a topic that affects 20 million people. Lat time I checked that article still had the example of a store owner selling sandwiches in a free market. The article on "charter schools" also hadn't changed.
2. A majority of wiki editors are probably young enough that they just got out of school. As such they probably still have the biases they acquired from their education.
3. A user can out n article on their watchlist, so that if any changes are made they will immediately show up as a banner at the top of the page that he is using. A user wanting to censor a page just has to wait for you to edit it. The page on Texas electrical deregulation hasn't changed in three years despite being on a topic that affects 20 million people. Lat time I checked that article still had the example of a store owner selling sandwiches in a free market. The article on "charter schools" also hadn't changed.
# posted by 
: April 17, 2009
: April 17, 2009
Wikipedia censores in the leftist establishment's cause while US politicians on Capitol Hill censor in the cause of their party just as British and European politicians do.
I was doing a search on Google concerning an alleged massacre supposedly committed by Serbs in a place called 'Suva Reka' in Kosovo.
A post by Norman Fraser came up at this link:
http://ruaraidhdobson.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/aberdeenshire-and-the-executive-committee/
I laughed out loud when I read Fraser's pseudo-legal critique of Milosevic's cross-examination style; including Fraser's description of what constitutes "evidence" of a "mass grave" in Kosovo: an Albanian KLA supporter saying so. LMAO!
(LMAO: Laughing My Ass OFF) :)
Now I can see why you were expelled from Fraser's party: not only because of your opposition to anti-Serbian terrorist KLA and British/European/NATO policy of protecting them but also because you consistently make fools and idiots out of Messrs Fraser and Ashdown! LMAO again! :)I read here that you clearly exposed his former party leader (Paddy Ashdown) as a perjurer at the ICTY in the Hague but I am not sure whether you did this before or after you were expelled?
Please fill me in... :)
The Washington and European Union controlled client government in Belgrade, Serbia has just 'convicted' several Serbs of this alleged massacre in Suva Reka. All of those accused and subsequently 'convicted' have denied the charges.
Interestingly,I found this highly detailed entry on your blog on this very subject of "Suva Reka" and "mass graves" dating from January of 2008:
HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION IN GENOCIDE
http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2008/01/her-majestys-government-participation.html
It turns out that the UN's spokeswoman, Monique Feinberg, stated in July of 2001 that "Suva Reka" was the mass gave site of some 900 people and it turns out that these people were NOT identified as Albanians killed by Serbs but something rather different altogether....mostly Serbs killed by Albanians!!
I quote from your blog:
"However, once they [UNMIK/KFOR] realized that the bodies were actually those of executed Serbs, they abruptly ended their investigation and ordered the reburial of the corpses at the new cemetery in Suva Reka."
UNMIK suspects 900 Serbs were buried in Suva Reka mass grave
July 20, 2001 [Beta news report]
Belgrade, July 19, 2001 (Beta) -"UNMIK suspects that 900 Serbs and non-Albanians, killed after the deployment of KFOR troops in Kosovo, were buried in a mass grave in Suva Reka near Prizren", head of the Bureau for Missing and Detained Persons in the office of HRCA, Monique Fienberg, said on Thursday.
"The bodies have not been identified which means that members of any ethnic community could have been buried in Suva Reka.However, we suspect those are the bodies of Serbs and members of minority communities", Fienberg told B92 radio.
Fienberg was not able to give exact information when the exhumation of the bodies buried in Suva Reka would commence, saying that the process would most probably be carried out next year.
http://www.mail-archive.com/antinato@topica.com/msg00227.html
Note that soon after this report was publicized, B92 & Reuters reported that UNMIK's Susan Manuel said this was NOT a single mass grave site "but of several scattered sites around Suva Reka in which a total of between 850 and 900 corpses found throughout the province by international institutions had been buried."
[Similar to the description by UNMIK/NATO of Dragodan as 210 separate graves in the very same location as a "cemetery",thus not constituting a "mass grave"], B92/Reuters reported that:
"...the report of the mass grave had been dismissed by the head of the missing persons unit at Kosovo's UN police force, Guido Van Rillaer.
"It's a cemetery, very clear and simple," he said. "It's a storage place...a cemetery kept for unidentified bodies."
He added that around 230 people had been buried in Suva Reka, Reuters reports.
However, in the taped interview in question, Fienberg had said: "Now Suva Reka is a much bigger gravesite... It has around about 850-900 remains buried there and those remains also are unidentified which means by definition we don't know who is buried there.
"We suspect they are from all communities and so we do suspect that there may be some Kosovo Serbs and some of the minorities buried there as well."
Now if we are searching for an answer to this mystery of why - according to UNMIK/NATO - hundreds of corpses buried in a single location constitutes a "cemetery" or "storage place" instead of a "mass grave", perhaps we may find the answer in the following article from March 16, 2001, entitled:
Mass grave of Serbs found in Suva Reka
Here is an excerpt:
"...a significant number of kidnapped Serbs are buried at the new cemetery near Suva Reka. They were most probably killed in June, July or August of 1999 by Albanian terrorists at the time of KFOR's arrival.
"Bodies of hundreds of dead found in various parts of the province were first buried by KFOR troops in a common grave in the Pristina settlement of Dragodan.
"After the arrival of a group of experts from the Hague tribunal, the bodies were exhumed so their identity could be determined.
"The Hague investigators, Boskovic understood, expressly exhumed these graves in search of evidence of war crimes by Serb forces in Kosovo.
"However, once they realized that the bodies were actually those of executed Serbs, they abruptly ended their investigation and ordered the reburial of the corpses at the new cemetery in Suva Reka."
http://www.solidaire.org/scripts/article.phtml?section=A3ABBBAC&obid=8482
Now you know why - according to UNMIK/NATO-KFOR - Dragodan and Suva Reka is a "cemetery" or "storage place" instead of a "mass grave" and why UNMIK/NATO-KFOR categorically refused to allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies for 2 years!!
See also
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
# posted by prn : January 27, 2008
Thanks Peter I had misunderstood the FCO's reference to a cemetery & had thought that it meant the cemetery might be a proper cemetery & thus a 2nd site at Dragodan. Obviously you are right that it is merely a euphemism for mass grave, since a mass grave is ipso facto legal proof of genocide.
I didn't see support for your statement that NATO had refused permission for Serbian forensic experts to investigate the mass graves. I don't doubt that the Serbs would wish to make such an examination & a refusal seems impossible to justify on any grounds except deliberately trying to cover up genocide which happened under NATO authority.
One, presumably understood, effect of reburying the bodies is likey to be that it makes it more difficult to be sure when they were buried. However I have seen those FBI forensic programmes where they can tell what month a body was buried by the dead insepct & plant life in the body.
Certainly in cases of genocide of Serbs in mass graves away from the border where the Yugoslav government writ ran untill occupation, it is beyond reasonable doubt that such extensive killing could not have gone on without Yugoslav government interference. It could only be under a supportive government that such mass killings would be possible which again shows NATO to be responsible.
# posted by neil craig : January 28, 2008
Thanks Neil,
Regarding the deliberate refusal by NATO/UNMIK to allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies for well over 2 years.
If you recall, from British & US press reports, there were hundreds of teams of forensic pathologists from many NATO countries -including specialists from the US F.B.I. forensic squad- that examined the areas in question with a fine tooth comb from June 1999 right through until August 2000. Since at this time Milosevic was still in power, Serbian forensic specialists were not allowed to be involved as this was a NATO operation,(obviously NATO didn't want Milosevic or the Serbs to gain valuable PR points by proving that hundreds of Serbs were slaughtered in June & July 1999 by the NATO-sponsored KLA immediately after NATO took over), and as you know the Hague ICTY belongs to NATO as even NATO officials themselves have admitted to the media.
See http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/freezer1.htm
It is inconceivable that NATO, who were looking for evidence of Serbian atrocities up until June 11,1999 after which NATO/UNMIK took control of the province, would order the 900 bodies they discovered to be re-buried at Suva Reka and the 210 to 360 bodies re-buried at Dragodan if they had any evidence or even suspicion that the bodies were those of Albanian civilians killed by Serbs and that they were buried prior to June 11,1999 (after which NATO/UNMIK took control of Kosovo).
It is inconceivable that NATO/UNMIK would then wait for over two years until July of 2001 to make their announcement that they found all these 900 corpses in Suva Reka and then only allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies in Dragodan in April 2002 and - according to Susan Manuel of UNMIK - in Suva Reka in August of 2002.
"However, it remains unclear whether Serbian forensic experts participated in the investigation of bodies which are located at the official UNMIK/ICTY cemetery in Suva Reka and whether existing documentation was shared with the Serbian pathologists. Based on the statements of the Coordinating Center, one does not get the impression this is the case; however, Susan Manuel claims that Prof. Dobricanin is presently [August 30,2002] participating in the autopsy of a body from the cemetery (or mass grave site) in Suva Reka."
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
If you need confirmation that Serbian forensic pathologists were not allowed by NATO to take part in the exhumation & autopsies for well over 2 years, the following will be of assistance.
Excerpt from the article,
Mass grave of Serbs found in Suva Reka:
"However, two years later, someone from KFOR apparently became conscience-stricken: when it was determined that the mass grave near Suva Reka contains the human remains of at least 150 Serbs, most probably those who had been kidnapped. KFOR and UNMIK have balatedly announced the continuation of the identification process and, at last, the inclusion of Serbian pathologists."
http://www.solidaire.org/scripts/article.phtml?section=A3ABBBAC&obid=8482
Excerpt from the article,
SECRETS OF MASS GRAVES IN KOSOVO AND METOHIJA
"...the next day UNMIK issued a formal communiqué that Mr. Cady was referring to the official UNMIK/ICTY cemetery [in Suva Reka] containing a number of exhumed unidentified bodies previously autopsied by ICTY forensic experts during the year 2000.
Whether there are really two cemeteries remains unclear to this day but what it certain is that Serbian forensic experts were not permitted to participate in the exhumations and autopsies conducted by UNMIK and Hague tribunal teams during the course of 1999 and 2000.
"In addition to the fact that there have been many omissions and lack of coordination during the process of identifying the unidentified bodies, it also remains unclear whether after the war UNMIK police conducted investigations at all upon finding bodies of people, largely non-Albanians, who had been murdered.
"The lack of a timely response of international officials is best demonstrated by the case of Father Chariton (Lukic) of Holy Archangels Monastery near Prizren, who was kidnapped by persons wearing KLA uniforms in June 1999.
"Despite numerous appeals to UNMIK to conduct an investigation, it was not until the spring of 2001 that police investigators opened one, more than six months after Hague forensic experts located the decapitated body of 37 year-old Father Chariton near Prizren and identified him. However, the investigation soon ground to a halt for lack of evidence. The German photo reporter working for the magazine "Focus" who had filmed the abduction finally told investigators in Germany that the photographs had "turned out badly" and that the film was destroyed while he had "already completely forgotten" the entire incident.
It is completely justified to ask whether such inexcusable behavior on the part of the international mission with respect to numerous crimes was understood as a "green light" by the Albanian extremists to carry out their bloodbath."
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
See also the article,
Suva Reka mass grave exists, Committee for Kosovo confirmshttp://www.arhiva.serbia.sr.gov.yu/news/2001-07/21/24659.html
(the original "serbia-info.com" links posted no longer work so I have included the above as substitutes which I found on Google)
I was doing a search on Google concerning an alleged massacre supposedly committed by Serbs in a place called 'Suva Reka' in Kosovo.
A post by Norman Fraser came up at this link:
http://ruaraidhdobson.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/aberdeenshire-and-the-executive-committee/
I laughed out loud when I read Fraser's pseudo-legal critique of Milosevic's cross-examination style; including Fraser's description of what constitutes "evidence" of a "mass grave" in Kosovo: an Albanian KLA supporter saying so. LMAO!
(LMAO: Laughing My Ass OFF) :)
Now I can see why you were expelled from Fraser's party: not only because of your opposition to anti-Serbian terrorist KLA and British/European/NATO policy of protecting them but also because you consistently make fools and idiots out of Messrs Fraser and Ashdown! LMAO again! :)I read here that you clearly exposed his former party leader (Paddy Ashdown) as a perjurer at the ICTY in the Hague but I am not sure whether you did this before or after you were expelled?
Please fill me in... :)
The Washington and European Union controlled client government in Belgrade, Serbia has just 'convicted' several Serbs of this alleged massacre in Suva Reka. All of those accused and subsequently 'convicted' have denied the charges.
Interestingly,I found this highly detailed entry on your blog on this very subject of "Suva Reka" and "mass graves" dating from January of 2008:
HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION IN GENOCIDE
http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2008/01/her-majestys-government-participation.html
It turns out that the UN's spokeswoman, Monique Feinberg, stated in July of 2001 that "Suva Reka" was the mass gave site of some 900 people and it turns out that these people were NOT identified as Albanians killed by Serbs but something rather different altogether....mostly Serbs killed by Albanians!!
I quote from your blog:
"However, once they [UNMIK/KFOR] realized that the bodies were actually those of executed Serbs, they abruptly ended their investigation and ordered the reburial of the corpses at the new cemetery in Suva Reka."
UNMIK suspects 900 Serbs were buried in Suva Reka mass grave
July 20, 2001 [Beta news report]
Belgrade, July 19, 2001 (Beta) -"UNMIK suspects that 900 Serbs and non-Albanians, killed after the deployment of KFOR troops in Kosovo, were buried in a mass grave in Suva Reka near Prizren", head of the Bureau for Missing and Detained Persons in the office of HRCA, Monique Fienberg, said on Thursday.
"The bodies have not been identified which means that members of any ethnic community could have been buried in Suva Reka.However, we suspect those are the bodies of Serbs and members of minority communities", Fienberg told B92 radio.
Fienberg was not able to give exact information when the exhumation of the bodies buried in Suva Reka would commence, saying that the process would most probably be carried out next year.
http://www.mail-archive.com/antinato@topica.com/msg00227.html
Note that soon after this report was publicized, B92 & Reuters reported that UNMIK's Susan Manuel said this was NOT a single mass grave site "but of several scattered sites around Suva Reka in which a total of between 850 and 900 corpses found throughout the province by international institutions had been buried."
[Similar to the description by UNMIK/NATO of Dragodan as 210 separate graves in the very same location as a "cemetery",thus not constituting a "mass grave"], B92/Reuters reported that:
"...the report of the mass grave had been dismissed by the head of the missing persons unit at Kosovo's UN police force, Guido Van Rillaer.
"It's a cemetery, very clear and simple," he said. "It's a storage place...a cemetery kept for unidentified bodies."
He added that around 230 people had been buried in Suva Reka, Reuters reports.
However, in the taped interview in question, Fienberg had said: "Now Suva Reka is a much bigger gravesite... It has around about 850-900 remains buried there and those remains also are unidentified which means by definition we don't know who is buried there.
"We suspect they are from all communities and so we do suspect that there may be some Kosovo Serbs and some of the minorities buried there as well."
Now if we are searching for an answer to this mystery of why - according to UNMIK/NATO - hundreds of corpses buried in a single location constitutes a "cemetery" or "storage place" instead of a "mass grave", perhaps we may find the answer in the following article from March 16, 2001, entitled:
Mass grave of Serbs found in Suva Reka
Here is an excerpt:
"...a significant number of kidnapped Serbs are buried at the new cemetery near Suva Reka. They were most probably killed in June, July or August of 1999 by Albanian terrorists at the time of KFOR's arrival.
"Bodies of hundreds of dead found in various parts of the province were first buried by KFOR troops in a common grave in the Pristina settlement of Dragodan.
"After the arrival of a group of experts from the Hague tribunal, the bodies were exhumed so their identity could be determined.
"The Hague investigators, Boskovic understood, expressly exhumed these graves in search of evidence of war crimes by Serb forces in Kosovo.
"However, once they realized that the bodies were actually those of executed Serbs, they abruptly ended their investigation and ordered the reburial of the corpses at the new cemetery in Suva Reka."
http://www.solidaire.org/scripts/article.phtml?section=A3ABBBAC&obid=8482
Now you know why - according to UNMIK/NATO-KFOR - Dragodan and Suva Reka is a "cemetery" or "storage place" instead of a "mass grave" and why UNMIK/NATO-KFOR categorically refused to allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies for 2 years!!
See also
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
# posted by prn : January 27, 2008
Thanks Peter I had misunderstood the FCO's reference to a cemetery & had thought that it meant the cemetery might be a proper cemetery & thus a 2nd site at Dragodan. Obviously you are right that it is merely a euphemism for mass grave, since a mass grave is ipso facto legal proof of genocide.
I didn't see support for your statement that NATO had refused permission for Serbian forensic experts to investigate the mass graves. I don't doubt that the Serbs would wish to make such an examination & a refusal seems impossible to justify on any grounds except deliberately trying to cover up genocide which happened under NATO authority.
One, presumably understood, effect of reburying the bodies is likey to be that it makes it more difficult to be sure when they were buried. However I have seen those FBI forensic programmes where they can tell what month a body was buried by the dead insepct & plant life in the body.
Certainly in cases of genocide of Serbs in mass graves away from the border where the Yugoslav government writ ran untill occupation, it is beyond reasonable doubt that such extensive killing could not have gone on without Yugoslav government interference. It could only be under a supportive government that such mass killings would be possible which again shows NATO to be responsible.
# posted by neil craig : January 28, 2008
Thanks Neil,
Regarding the deliberate refusal by NATO/UNMIK to allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies for well over 2 years.
If you recall, from British & US press reports, there were hundreds of teams of forensic pathologists from many NATO countries -including specialists from the US F.B.I. forensic squad- that examined the areas in question with a fine tooth comb from June 1999 right through until August 2000. Since at this time Milosevic was still in power, Serbian forensic specialists were not allowed to be involved as this was a NATO operation,(obviously NATO didn't want Milosevic or the Serbs to gain valuable PR points by proving that hundreds of Serbs were slaughtered in June & July 1999 by the NATO-sponsored KLA immediately after NATO took over), and as you know the Hague ICTY belongs to NATO as even NATO officials themselves have admitted to the media.
See http://www.hirhome.com/yugo/freezer1.htm
It is inconceivable that NATO, who were looking for evidence of Serbian atrocities up until June 11,1999 after which NATO/UNMIK took control of the province, would order the 900 bodies they discovered to be re-buried at Suva Reka and the 210 to 360 bodies re-buried at Dragodan if they had any evidence or even suspicion that the bodies were those of Albanian civilians killed by Serbs and that they were buried prior to June 11,1999 (after which NATO/UNMIK took control of Kosovo).
It is inconceivable that NATO/UNMIK would then wait for over two years until July of 2001 to make their announcement that they found all these 900 corpses in Suva Reka and then only allow Serbian forensic pathologists to examine the bodies in Dragodan in April 2002 and - according to Susan Manuel of UNMIK - in Suva Reka in August of 2002.
"However, it remains unclear whether Serbian forensic experts participated in the investigation of bodies which are located at the official UNMIK/ICTY cemetery in Suva Reka and whether existing documentation was shared with the Serbian pathologists. Based on the statements of the Coordinating Center, one does not get the impression this is the case; however, Susan Manuel claims that Prof. Dobricanin is presently [August 30,2002] participating in the autopsy of a body from the cemetery (or mass grave site) in Suva Reka."
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
If you need confirmation that Serbian forensic pathologists were not allowed by NATO to take part in the exhumation & autopsies for well over 2 years, the following will be of assistance.
Excerpt from the article,
Mass grave of Serbs found in Suva Reka:
"However, two years later, someone from KFOR apparently became conscience-stricken: when it was determined that the mass grave near Suva Reka contains the human remains of at least 150 Serbs, most probably those who had been kidnapped. KFOR and UNMIK have balatedly announced the continuation of the identification process and, at last, the inclusion of Serbian pathologists."
http://www.solidaire.org/scripts/article.phtml?section=A3ABBBAC&obid=8482
Excerpt from the article,
SECRETS OF MASS GRAVES IN KOSOVO AND METOHIJA
"...the next day UNMIK issued a formal communiqué that Mr. Cady was referring to the official UNMIK/ICTY cemetery [in Suva Reka] containing a number of exhumed unidentified bodies previously autopsied by ICTY forensic experts during the year 2000.
Whether there are really two cemeteries remains unclear to this day but what it certain is that Serbian forensic experts were not permitted to participate in the exhumations and autopsies conducted by UNMIK and Hague tribunal teams during the course of 1999 and 2000.
"In addition to the fact that there have been many omissions and lack of coordination during the process of identifying the unidentified bodies, it also remains unclear whether after the war UNMIK police conducted investigations at all upon finding bodies of people, largely non-Albanians, who had been murdered.
"The lack of a timely response of international officials is best demonstrated by the case of Father Chariton (Lukic) of Holy Archangels Monastery near Prizren, who was kidnapped by persons wearing KLA uniforms in June 1999.
"Despite numerous appeals to UNMIK to conduct an investigation, it was not until the spring of 2001 that police investigators opened one, more than six months after Hague forensic experts located the decapitated body of 37 year-old Father Chariton near Prizren and identified him. However, the investigation soon ground to a halt for lack of evidence. The German photo reporter working for the magazine "Focus" who had filmed the abduction finally told investigators in Germany that the photographs had "turned out badly" and that the film was destroyed while he had "already completely forgotten" the entire incident.
It is completely justified to ask whether such inexcusable behavior on the part of the international mission with respect to numerous crimes was understood as a "green light" by the Albanian extremists to carry out their bloodbath."
http://www.kosovo.net/massgraves.html
See also the article,
Suva Reka mass grave exists, Committee for Kosovo confirmshttp://www.arhiva.serbia.sr.gov.yu/news/2001-07/21/24659.html
(the original "serbia-info.com" links posted no longer work so I have included the above as substitutes which I found on Google)
# posted by : April 24, 2009
: April 24, 2009
Thanks. The article you found is relatively new, indeed I have referred to it before http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2009/04/lib-dems-retroactively-alter-discussion.html
I have a great advantage in debate with these people - I make sure that I am on the same side as the facts. I should admit that on one point Norman found I had been wrong on something & I acknowledged it & explained why it was of limited importance. By comparison these people cannot acknowledge being wrong in any way which can be frustrating but after the ground has been cut from under them they can only fall.
If you have sincerity & the facts & full & equal chance to speak you can win any argument. It is only because the latter is so thoroughly controlled by the MSM that that the criminals go unpunished.
Post a Comment
I have a great advantage in debate with these people - I make sure that I am on the same side as the facts. I should admit that on one point Norman found I had been wrong on something & I acknowledged it & explained why it was of limited importance. By comparison these people cannot acknowledge being wrong in any way which can be frustrating but after the ground has been cut from under them they can only fall.
If you have sincerity & the facts & full & equal chance to speak you can win any argument. It is only because the latter is so thoroughly controlled by the MSM that that the criminals go unpunished.
<< Home
