If the media reports were so obviously flawed in their efforts to justify NATO aggression against the Serbs (you cite the examples of Markale and Racak) - what makes you think that Srebrenica is any different?

Clearly implying at least the possibility of a conspiracy to fabricate a massacre.

Then a series of historical digressions, until we get to:

All of these acts are barbaric and condemnable. My point is that you can pick out any one of these, air it on the media again and again and again to demonize your political adversary. And that's exactly what we have Srebrenica.

In which Srebrenica is recognised as an atrocity on par with(?) the terror-bombing of Dresden, but raises the (much more reasonable, IMO) question of why Srebrenica in particular should become the icon of Yugoslav atrocities, considering that those wars in no way offered any shortage of atrocities.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.