By Felix Quigley
The key to understanding that Srebrenica was a totally manufactured Big Lie rests in understanding that it was created by US and EU Imperialism along with Islamofascism for a specific purpose and that it relied on the slavish promulgation of totally false information by the Media and by a layer of people around the British Media in particular.
There are two sides to this. There was the way that Islamofascists used the “safe” area set up by the UN in Srebrenica town, but at night in the outlying districts the Islamofascists led by Nasir Oric were able to attack defenceless Serb farmsteads. You see the UN had not disarmed the Islamist Army and could not! The Serbs were very much the small farmers of Bosnia and in their isolated homesteads were very vulnerable. For the actual murders of Nasir Oric you can visit our article on this site.
The extract from the article which we will now publish shows that the Serbs walked into an elaborately prepared trap. There is evidence to show that this trap was set up in meetings between Clinton and Izetbegovic. The best description of this trap is contained in the article produced on Emperors New Clothes and written by Carlos Martins Branco, who was a UN Military Observer in Bosnia at that very time. Thus the authenticity cannot be faulted:
start quote here
The attack on Srebrenica, with no help from Belgrade, was completely unnecessary and proved to be one of the most significant examples of the political failure of the Serbian leadership.
Meanwhile the western media exacerbated the situation by transforming the enclaves into a powerful mass-media icon; a situation which Izetbegovic was quick to exploit. CNN had daily broadcasts of the [supposed] images of “mass graves for thousands of corpses,” [supposedly] obtained from spy satellites. Despite the [supposed] microscopic precision in the localization of these “graves,” it is certain that no discovery to date has confirmed such suspicions. Since there are no longer restrictions on [NATO troops] movement [throughout Bosnia], we inevitably speculate on why they have still not been shown to the world.
[Note from EC: Mr. Branco is using irony to convey his belief that the supposed mass graves do not exist. However, given the effect of media repetition of the supposed massacre story, irony is easily missed; hence our repeated insert of “supposed.”]
If there had been a premeditated [Serbian] plan of genocide, instead of attacking in only one direction, from the south to the north – which left the possibility of escape to the north and west, the Serbs would have established a siege in order to ensure that no one escaped. The UN observation posts to the north of the enclave were never disturbed and remained in activity after the cessation of military operations. There are obviously mass graves in the outskirts of Srebrenica as in the rest of ex-Yugoslavia where combat has occurred, but there are no grounds for the campaign which was mounted, nor the numbers advanced by CNN. [Large graves are often dug after a battle in order to dispose of bodies as part of battlefield clean-up. – EC]
The mass graves are filled by a limited number of corpses from both sides, the consequence of heated battle and combat and not the result of a premeditated plan of genocide, as occurred against the Serbian populations in Krajina, [7] in the Summer of 1995, when the Croatian army implemented the mass murder of all Serbians found there. In this instance, [in the instance of the fall of Krajina] the media maintained an absolute silence, despite the fact that the genocide occurred over a three month period. The objective of Srebrenica was ethnic cleansing and not genocide, unlike what happened in Krajina, in which although there was no military resistance, the Croatian army decimated villages.
Despite knowledge of the fact that the enclaves were already a lost cause, Sarajevo insisted in drawing political dividends from the fact. The receptivity which had been created in the eyes of public opinion made it easier to sell the thesis of genocide.
But of even greater importance than the genocide thesis and the political isolation of the Serbs, was blackmailing of the UN: either the UN joined forces with the Sarajevo government in the conflict (which subsequently happened) or the UN would be completely discredited in the eyes of the public, leading in turn to support for Bosnia [i.e., Bosnian Muslim extremists]. Srebrenica was the last straw which led western governments to reach agreement on the need to cease their “neutrality” and commence [an open] military action against one side in the conflict [i.e., the Bosnian Serbs]. It was the last straw which united the West in their desire to break “Serbian bestiality”. Sarajevo [the Muslim extremist’s so-called ‘government’] was conscious of the fact that it lacked the military capacity to defeat the [Bosnian] Serbs. It was necessary to create conditions via which the international community [i.e. the West] could do this for them. Srebrenica played a vital role in this process.
Srebrenica represents one of a series of acts by the Serbian leaders intended to provoke the UN, in order to demonstrate their impotence. This was a serious strategic error which would cost them dear. The side which had everything to win by demonstrating the impotence of the UN was the Sarajevo leadership and not that of Pale [capital of Republika Srpska]. In 1995 it was clear that the change in the status quo required a powerful intervention which would overthrow the Serbian military power. Srebrenica was one of the pretexts, resulting from the short-sightedness of the Bosnian Serbian leaders.
The besieged [Muslim] forces could have easily defended the enclave, at least for much longer, if they had been well led. It proved convenient to let the enclave fall in this manner. Since the enclave was doomed to fall, it was preferable to let this happen in the most beneficial manner possible. But this would only have been viable if Sarajevo had political initiative and freedom of movement, which would never occur at the negotiating table. The deliberate fall of the enclave might appear to be an act of terrible Machiavellian orchestration, [obviously designed in the minds of the Bosnian Muslims’ US advisers – EC] but the truth is that the Sarajevo government had much to gain, as proved to be the case. Srebrenica was not a zero-sum game. The Serbians won a military victory but with highly negative political side-effects, which helped result in their definitive ostracization.
We might add a final curious note. As the UN observation posts were attacked, and proved impossible to maintain, the [UN] forces withdrew. The barricades set up by the Muslim army did not let the troops pass. These [UN] troops were not treated as soldiers fleeing from the front line, but rather with a sordid differentiation.
The Muslims not only refused to fight to defend themselves, they forced others [i.e., the Dutch/UN force] to fight on their behalf. In one instance, the commander of a Dutch vehicle decided after conversations with ABiH [Bosnian Muslim force] to pass [their] barrier. [Dutch positions were in front of the Muslim positions – i.e. between the Muslims forces and the attacking Serbs.] A Muslim soldier threw a hand grenade whose fragments mortally wounded him. The only UN soldier to die in the Srebrenica offensive was killed by the Muslims.
Carlos Martins Branco
European University Institute
Department of Social and Political Sciences
Badia Fiesolana
Italy
end quote here
http://emperors-clothes.com/sreb/branco-1.htm
The lessons from this are enormous. The report above refers continually to the Muslims, but the Muslims themselves, as in every such case, were divided and the Islamofascist Muslims of Izetbegovic had instituted a regime of terror against any Muslims who would oppose his Islamist programme.
Nevertheless what Branco spells out in very clear fashion is that in order to meet these kinds of threat there is need for a leadership of a very special type.
In fact it is necessary to go back and study the policies of the United Front, which Leon Trotsky fought for in the 30s in the fight against Fascism, because that is what the Serbs were continually faced with in those days.
This issue of leadership was expressed by Branco in the following. It is essentially the very same isue which is faced by the Jews of Israel as they face the Islamofascist and Imperialist onslught in Gaza and elsewhere.
I do believe that Srebrenica shows a pattern of behaviour of the warring factions in the conflict: on the one hand, the Bosnian Muslims provoking the Serbs and trying hard to convince the international community to intervene by force against the Serbs in order to solve the military question; on the other hand, the Serb leadership’s lack of intelligence giving Muslims the justifications and arguments they were looking for. I know that some of you won’t enjoy the contents of the article. For those, sorry.
4international 