Reply to Julie Wornan
Reply to Julie Wornan
Julie Wornan wisely does not attempt to refute my â€œallegations.â€ Instead she works by an appeal to authority, and by an attack on what she reads as my â€œmethods.â€
On authority, she mentions the Red Cross, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. and she names six books plus the UN report on Srebrenica as presumably proving her case. She ignores the fact that none of these give any credible evidence that 8,000 â€œmen and boysâ€ were executed, nor is there any grave site or satellite evidence that gives credence to this claim. I offered fairly extensive evidence that suggests the claimâ€™s falsity, along with reasons for its persistence, that Wornan does not choose to confront. Her book selections are precisely those that say what she believes, several of them laughable in their bias (Rieff, Rohde and Malcolm); and she ignores all those that are more nuanced (e.g., Susan Woodward, David Chandler, Lenard Cohen, Robert Hayden) or that take a position closer to mine (e.g., Diana Johnstone, Michael Mandel, Philip Corwin, George Pumphrey, Ted Gale Carpenter, Kirsten Sellers).
She does venture to criticize my evidence that the Bosnian Muslims killed their own people for political reasonsâ€”she deems it â€œpreposterous,â€ and sneers at the idea that I â€œdemonstratedâ€ its truth. The one thing she doesnâ€™t do is mention, let alone evaluate, my sources, which include a detailed U.S. Senate Report, quotes from an on-the-scene U.S. army lieutenant colonel, references to articles by NYT reporter David Binder, and other materials. She also ignores my detailed analysis of Bosnian Muslim lying and deceptions designed to induce NATO interventionâ€”even admitted by Izetbegovic on his deathbedâ€”and the compelling evidence that Srebrenica was abandoned for political and PR reasons.
On my methods, according to Wornan, I say that a subject like the evidence for the 8,000 number is not discussed or debated, but ignoring that it isnâ€™t discussed because â€œit is not a major issue and not even a minor one.â€ That is the way a good propaganda system works: a convenient truth quickly becomes obvious and undiscussible, so that any attempt to make it an issue and demonstrate that it may be untrue can be dismissed out of handâ€”and contrary evidence can be ignored.
Wornan then says I use the tactic of claiming that every majority position must be suspect, and if regularly cited must therefore be untrue. This is sillyâ€”every majority position is not suspect, but some are and when they are challenged with evidence it is necessary to answer that evidence, not hide behind such a silly claim.
Wornan then descends farther: she knows that the Serbs are the aggressors, that the US, NATO and ICTY are pursuing Serb crimes based on the quest for justice, and that it is outrageous to suspect geopolitical motives for going after the Serbs. On this ideological foundation she can sneeringly work up another straw man: that someone has said that because of a US political interest the US and its agents have invented all Serb crimes. This is carrying a straw man argument awfully far, especially as nobody at all has denied Serb crimes. It is true, however, that because the Serbs are the designated target their crimes can be inflated and those of the US and its local allies can be ignored. Ignoring those crimes and pretending that there is only one villain and only Bosnian Muslim victims is now standard procedure, which Wornan follows. The Bosnian Serbs suffered thousands of deaths at the hands of the Bosnian Muslims, their mujahadin allies, and Croatians, and hundreds of thousands were made refugees in some very large and brutal ethnic cleansing operations. I think we will have to wait a long time before Julie Wornan calls for those Bosnian Muslim, Croatian and US criminals to be â€œbrought to justice.â€