There appears to be synchronized campaign by Bosnian Genocide deniers to undermine Michael Dobbs.

I have noticed in comments posted on Dobbs' articles that people close to the so called "Srebrenica Historical Project" (this is Republika Srpska -financed genocide denial NGO) continue to spread the filth of denial whenever and where-ever they can.

The stench of denial can be felt even through a computer screen. Although I fully support the right of genocide deniers to express their personal opinions, I hope they understand that a pile of dirty toilet paper has more worth than their words.

The only synchronized campaign around is by Srebrenica genocide affirmers, and it has been going on, largely unchallenged, for the last 16 monotonous years. It is good that Mr. Toljaga [until now suspected to be hiding behind the pseudonym Spood] has finally come out into the open to face the audience. Mr. Baseball Bat would actually be a much more accurate rendition of Mr. Toljaga’s awkward BCS surname than Spood, but the choice is his.

It is kind of Mr. Baseball Bat to support our right to free expression, but that is already guaranteed by the law so his support is entirely superfluous.

As for toilet matters, that is where most of Mr. Toljaga’s comments properly belong, and be sure to flush. The 5,977 victims allegedly identified under independently unverifiable procedures conducted by the ICMP laboratory in Tuzla are of little relevance in establishing how many prisoners were unlawfully killed. For one thing, as Jean-Rene Ruez, prosecution chief investigator, admitted recently at the Karadzic trial, DNA matches are not an indication of the time or manner of death. [Transcript, 23,925] Secondly, it is a fact admitted by everyone, from survivors to prosecution military expert Richard Butler, and US intelligence officer in Sarajevo at the time, John Schindler, that the 28th Division column suffered enormous legitimate combat losses on its way from Srebrenica to Tuzla. So manner of death is a key issue in a properly conducted trial, but it is a riddle that DNA does not solve. It does not appear that the factually unsupported figures cited by Mr. Toljaga in his numbers game, be it 5,977 or 8,372 victims, make allowance for losses which are legitimate battle casualties and for which no one so far has been criminally charged.

Mr. Toljaga’s incapacity to face Srebrenica issues on a factual level most likely explains his posturing about the “stench” of statements that he obviously finds disagreeable, but is unable to refute. It is embarrassing when someone with a pretense to academic credentials must resorts to unsavory scatological references. In a debate, factual and rational discourse is the only thing that is called for.

Mr. Toljaga,

Let's stick to the evidence and not get into juvenile arguments about who's opinions amount to "a pile of dirty toilet paper". Let's try to talk about this like grown-ups. The readers can decide for themselves which side has the better evidence.

You seem to be making two claims here. First that 8,000 or more people were captured and then systematically executed by Serbian forces, and secondly that the motivation behind the killing was genocidal intent to destroy the Bosnian-Muslim ethnic group as such.

I would like to see you present some specific evidence to substantiate your claims. What evidence do you have that Serbian forces captured, let alone executed, that many people? Given that there was a war going on and that most of the victims were part of a military column that tried to cross the Serbian front line, how can you dismiss the possibility that some of them died in combat?

Secondly, given that approximately 90% of the victims were either soldiers or military aged men, how do you know that the motivation behind the executions that did happen was genocidal intent to destroy the Bosnian-Muslim ethnic group as such, and not an intent to destroy members and suspected members of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina, specifically members of Nasir Oric's 28th Infantry Division? What specific evidence do you have that the ethnic group itself was the target?

Could Misha's oblique reference above be to the distinguished Professor Whore? If so, Misha must be corrected, or rather supplemented in his modest appraisal. The professor is not just a "world renowned historian" [that is the least of it], but also a world renowned expert on genocide and international law, and on just about any other subject that he chooses to deal with. The factual background of Srebrenica seems to be the only weak area in the professor's encyclopaedic knowledge of almost everything.

"Praise be to Allah who relieved me of the filth and gave me relief." -- THE PROPHET. -- What does EffendiToljaga know about toilet paper?.

The Srebrenica genocide myth is a very lucrative business, and a business it most certainly is. A great many people are making money on maintaining this myth, from the Clintons and Albright right down to the locals in Bosnia who demand compensation, not to mention the annual fest that is the Srebrenica "memorial." Lots of money coming and going....no...no...they're not going to give up that myth anytime soon just because the facts aren't there.

The antagonists are listed: Prosecutor & Ratko Mladic.. The document is denoted as "Prosecution Pre-Trial Brief". Almost no argument (I could not find any) is made as to the alleged laws being violated & the reasons why the actions constitute violations of these laws. Thus, this document comprises a recitation of facts by the prosecution, with evidentiary support being provided in the form of footnotes. This is likely the way the Hague wants things, but it seems a bit odd. Most often there is only an indictment (or in California an information) & nothing else.

p 69, part B, "Mladic was a Key Member of a JCE to spread Terror among the Civilian Population of Sarajevo." The primacy of Mladic is not established IMHO. All one sees is the opinion, registered as such, by an international observer & a single order from Mladic forbidding the use of heavier arms than necessary. That does not satisfy my needs for an organizational chart with proof of who ran things.

7,000 deaths in the grand scheme of the universe of military crimes is not much to yell about, but the process fascinates; the logic of the arguments used by both sides will likely prove useful in many other cases.

Whose baby is this bit?

What's interesting about this is the fact that they've charged Mladic with genocide against Muslims and Croats outside of Srebrenica for crimes that essentially amount to ethnic cleansing.

In previous trials, the Tribunal has acknowledged the difference between the intent to displace an ethnic group and the intent to destroy an ethnic group.

The indictment against Mladic is an indication that the ICTY is biased against Serbs. There is a clear double standard.

The ICTY never charged the Croatian leadership with genocide for Operation Storm or Flash -- eventhough the intent and the result of those operations was the permanent removal of the Serbian population from Krajina.

Serbs were displaced from the B-H Federation to the same extent that Muslims and Croats were displaced from Republika Srpska. 90% of the Serbs who had lived in the territory that became the Federation weren't living there after the war was over. They had been expelled, as Muslims and Croats had been expelled from Republika Srpska. The ICTY never charged anybody from the Bosnian or Croatian leadership with genocide for that.

Serbs were expelled from Kosovo after the NATO attack on the FRY. Nobody from the leadership of NATO or the KLA was ever charged with genocide for that.

By trying Mladic last, the Tribunal has the luxry of trying him by a different set of rules than everybody else. Because his case is going to be one of the last, if not the last one, to be decided they can do anything they want to with him without having to worry that the precident is going to boomeraing back on them in a later trial.

And of course Mladic isn't well. He's had a few strokes and isn't right in the head anymore. He can't defend himself. It's hard to believe, when you see him and hear what he says, that he's the guy who outwitted an international man hunt for fifteen years. The cynic in me wonders if they didn't wait this long to arrest him on purpose.

I wonder if these people organize themselves or if they're hired to do so. Interesting look in how they make forums and comment sections pointless.

It really is sad, because the John McCain of 2000 really was what the country needed then and we would be better off, but just like he said in his speech, he let Washington change him and he chose Palin just to get votes, not because he felt she was best for the job. McCain is an intelligent man, he knows better than anyone else that she was not the best person for the job... so why did he choose her, simple... to try to win the election, not to best serve the country..

"Is rio orange war always comparateur forfait inevitable ?"
MaximB

There is no shame in being more mature than he is. People can read this and make their own judgments. If he's long on insults and name calling, but short on evidence botox people are going to see that and they'll judge him accordingly. You don't need to insult him.If you're telling the truth and he's lying, then you've got nothing to gain and everything to lose by letting the debate descend into a name-calling contest.