Ed Herman's review of John Laughland's 'Travesty'

Laughland's devastating analysis of the Milosevic indictment and trial is a study in abuse of power in a politically-motivated show trial, incompetence, and faux-judiciary malpractice. The first indictment, issued in the midst of the NATO bombing war, on May 27, 1999, was put up in close coordination between the ICTY and U.S. and British officials, and its immediate political role was crystal clear-to eliminate the possibility of
a negotiated ... Full Story »

Posted by Ben Ross
Tags Help
Subjects: U.S.
Topics: Foreign Policy
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Ben Ross - Aug 23, 2007 - 4:59 PM PDT
Edit Lock: This story can be edited

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Kaizar Campwala
1.7
by Kaizar Campwala - Oct. 1, 2008

This review is overly fawning of the book and does not consider it critically. The content itself, based on my knowledge of the conflict, is dubious.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Polly Briley
1.0
by Polly Briley - Oct. 1, 2008

Wow, where to start ... has this person ever been to the Balkans? Has he walked around the suburbs of Sarajevo or through the village of Srebrenica? Based on this "review" I seriously doubt it. Poor little Milosevic, he was just trying to keep his country together. Commandeering the serb army forces and turning this on the populous was just his way of protecting them. It is not his fault. Rape is just another name for a military battle. Shooting eight year old boys is just a precaution in case they grow up. Holding siege on a major city for almost four years was just a matter of creating a tighter community. ANYONE who buys the tripe in this article must also then believe that the war crimes trials after WWII were also ... More »

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Ben Ross
4.0
by Ben Ross - Oct. 1, 2008

actually from April 2007! very strong review on strangely reported story.....Kosovo....I had no idea the duplicity. Media scam?

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.2

Poor
from 3 reviews (30% confidence)
Quality
2.2
Facts
1.0
Fairness
2.0
Information
2.7
Sourcing
1.5
Style
1.0
Balance
1.0
Context
2.3
Popularity
2.2
Recommendation
2.0
Credibility
2.3
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »

Topics

(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!