Mass Grave Found in Bosnia
Researchers have found a mass grave in Bosnia, near the village of Kamenica, Srebrenica. The Moslem enclave Srebrenica was invaded by (Orthodox Christian) Serbian forces in 1995, after which approximately 8,000 innocent Moslem men were murdered.
At this moment, 247 bodies have been found. Researchers believe that another 100 individuals were buried in the grave.
Shortly after the Serbian forces invaded, they started ethnically cleansing the lands. It was all part of a genocide effort that would enable the Serbs to create a greater Serbia, with few or no others living in it.
8,000 innocent men and boys were led away and executed. Their bodies were buried in large mass graves, like seldom seen before.
After areal photos revealed the existence of these mass graves to the world, the Serbs tried to get rid of the evidence. Bulldozers were sent in and the bodies were reburied in other, smaller graves. Western researchers have been able to find many of these smaller graves nonetheless.
10 such smaller graves have been found near the village of Kamenic alone.
What on earth is the significance of the following insertion in your article, "was invaded by (Orthodox Christian) Serbian forces in 1995" ??? This is ridiculous, divisive journalism designed to stir up controversy more than relate the facts. So what some of the men were probably Orthodox Christians, there were likely atheists and secularists among them too! The battle-lines of the Middle Ages don’t need to be artificially superimposed on today’s world map… I am ashamed to have read this bigoted article which clearly has no regard for discussing the total picture of the Serbian / Kosovo tragedy.
Absolutely shameful!
Iona. Those words were included because of the following: the men killed were Moslems. The reason they were killed was their religion. This is pointed out in every single article, appearing at every single newspaper about the tragedy. If one notes the religion of one group - as one has to in this situation in order to properly identify them - one should also note the religion of the other. Not doing so, is silly and biased.
Secondly, those with at least some knowledge of the reason know that religion has always played a key role in the region, the Balkans. Pretending this not to be so - because some peoples’ feelings may be hurt - does not change reality. Religion, and the clash between different religions, has tormented the region for decades, one could argue centuries. Not explaining this to readers is irresponsible.
Lastly, although you imply that such an approach - pointing out religions, etc. and religious wars themselves - ‘belong to the Middle Ages,’ this is quite simply incorrect. Religion plays a role today, and played a role yesterday. It will also, sadly, play a significant role tomorrow. Especially when we talk about this particular region.
It is interesting to note, by the way, that readers such as yourself seldom comment when an aggressor is identified as ‘Moslem,’ yet respond angrily when the same is done for aggressors who are Christian.
And yes, the cases are perfectly similar.
Dear Editor-in-Chief,
The actions perpetrated against these individuals was done so, not soley because of their religion, but also because of the "cultural cleansing" perpetrated by Islamists in regions such as Kosovo, cultural cleansing that involved the demolition of Christian Churches, the rapes of Christian women and the general intimidation (and sometimes murder) of Christians in general in a region that was deemed "Islamic." These facts are well known but underestimated by journalism covering the Serbian conflict. I do not mean in any way to justify the tragic ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Serbian forces, but I still say that the comparison of Orthodox Christian and Moslem is, in this case, disingenuous for the following reasons:
1. The actions of the Serbs were the actions of a state military, not individuals acting on the basis of their faith. Additionally, Serbia is not an "Orthodox Christian" state, but a secular state.
2. The actions of the Islamists who destroyed Churches and perpetrated countless other wrongs against Serbian Orthodox civilians were, by contrast, the actions of individual Muslims who sought to rid their region of non-Islamic influences.
3. While the Serbian military is likely composed primarily of individuals referring to themselves as "Orthodox Christians," there were certainly individuals involved who were not Orthodox Christians. Furthermore, there can be no doubt that ANY Orthodox Christian who would perpetrate such violent crimes against any other human being is acting AGAINST his Orthodox Christian faith.
For the reasons mentioned above, I do not have a serious concern with referring to the Islam of those tragically killed in Srebrenica. I stand firm, however, in the position that mentioning the Orthodox Christianity of the perpetrators is extraneous.
By the way, I do not deny the role religion plays in conflicts such as the one in Serbia. I reacted against attempting to fit this atrocity into the "Orthodoxy vs. Islam" template when it simply doesn’t fit. Your response to my comments seem to me to demonstrate your general bias and presumptiveness in the "sheep’s clothing" of objective journalism with comments such as these:
"those with at least some knowledge of the reason " <—this clearly presumes I have no knowledge of the region. How do you know this?
"that readers such as yourself " <—what kind of reader am I? You are obviously terribly insightful to be able to characterize my "reader type" on the basis of my 101 word comment. Here you go trying to apply your templates again…
"religion of one group - as one has to in this situation in order to properly identify them - one should also note the religion of the other. Not doing so, is silly and biased." <—Really?? Is this the case in the attack on the World Trade Center in NY? How about the Georgian/Russian conflict in S. Ossetia? Bali? USS Cole? I’m sorry but this is not accurate. If one party in a conflict is secular, it doesn’t make sense at all to attempt to extrapolate the religion of the individuals to the government ordering the attack. This would be like saying the 9/11 attacks were perpetrated by Islamic extremists on Protestant Christians because, in all probability, the majority of those killed in the WTC attacks were Protestant Christians.You made the following remark in closing:
"It is interesting to note, by the way, that readers such as yourself seldom comment when an aggressor is identified as ‘Moslem,’ yet respond angrily when the same is done for aggressors who are Christian. "
This statement is totally presumptuous! You cannot presume to know how I would react to a story where the aggressor is identified as Moslem. To be honest, what jumped out at me in your story is the very fact that you yourself obviously viewed the mentioned of the Serbs Orthodox Christianity as superfluous or, at the very least, awkward as indicated by parenthesizing it:
"The Moslem enclave Srebrenica was invaded by (Orthodox Christian) Serbian forces… "
Clearly, the "Serbian forces" were NOT Orthodox Christian…they were secular Serbian-state military personnel (hence the war crimes tribunals prosecuting Generals in the military and not Patriarch Pavle himself…) Sorry, but I continue to disagree.
rubbish, utter rubbish.
Thank you for not forgeting Srebrenica!
One of the most professional articles I have read up to now! As for Iona, she is very biased. Firstly, 99.99 % of Orthodox Christians did participate in the genocide in Srebrenice and in many other places in Bosnia and it cannot be substituted by “some Orthodox Christians”. Secondly, she uses the expression “Islamists”, when she makes up “cultural cleansing” on Serbs – a total lie, to define all the Muslims in Bosnia, but when Orthodox Serbs are at issue, she says “there were likely atheists and secularists among them too! Thousands Muslim women and little girls were raped; however, she mentions “the rapes of Christian women” which is utterly nonsense. She well perceives that “the actions of the Serbs were the actions of a state military, not individuals acting on the basis of their faith”, and that’s true and everybody knows it but the International Court of Justice. Despite the thousand of the mosques, some several centuries old, destroyed by Serbs, it is well known that the Bosnian Muslims were the most secular Muslims in the world. But, while pretending to mourn those “individuals” killed in Srebrenica, she is ready to blame Islam and Bosnian Muslims for some for World Trade Center and others acts committed by Al-Qaida (and I doubt some acts are proved with certainty). She presents in her comments so many nonsense, uncorroborated facts and untruths. She is embittered that a professional journalist did his job professionally. As long as she and many others cannot confront the truth and reality, both present and the past, they are not capable of rememberance, and therefore reasoning. Didn’t Serbs cried that they were defending Europe against Islam?
I’d have to agree with Iona, though perhaps with a more nuanced critique. After reading the article, the reader is left with the impression that this was primarily a religious conflict and that the Orthodox Church was somehow complicit in it in some way. Both of these ideas, however, are simply not true. This conflict was primarily ethnic, and only insomuch as religion was part of their ethnicity, is it legitimate to bring up religion. In any case, to highlight religion as is done is in the article is simply not fair.