Last week, we finally get explanations as to the selection of the Peter Handke , the nobel prize in literature. One of the most notable of the texts was: David Kärdes (DN, 18/10). Some of the well-admired for her response, I hear, on the other hand those who, in the text, see a huge lack of knowledge about the tenth anniversary of the parade, with an ‘ always have done, the generous” will be to let all the stories be heard. Which, obviously, form an explosive cocktail.
Kärdes arguments for, and defense of the recipient of the award is incomprehensible. For example, she writes that, because many of the members of the committee have a jewish background, they would ”probably not” to give the prize to Céline , or Ezra Pound . What are the consequences of it? That the nobel Committee will have to introduce quotas, in order to avoid a scandal? A identitetspolitiskt it seems to Kärde, linking a person’s judgment of her ethnicity, only jews can understand the anti-semitism, the only bosniakier the tenth anniversary of the only Armenian genocide in the Ottoman empire, and so on. The problem with her argument is that it will lead her on the ground. If it were so, then the bosniernas the criticism of Handke, the only relevant consideration.
it Was the tenth anniversary of the
second, The central argument of her article is, it could almost be?) to search beyond the confines of the society mittfåra,” and let all the stories be heard. It can be a bit. But then you have to have the knowledge of what is in there. The Kärdes naive and the world is on the margins of society, only the weak and the powerless, and their stories deserve to be heard. In the real world, there is also folkmordsförnekare, security, historierevisionister, the relations of the murderer, Milosevic war of independence with the ill-judged part of the left wing.
There is no more identity politics, we need to, nor do I think that either the society mittfåra, or on its margin, has a value in and of itself. However, it is my belief that if the nobel Committee had no knowledge of Srebrenica and the Balkans, they wouldn’t have given the prize to Handke. No matter the ethnicity. You are, quite simply, ignorant. And to prove it, I’m going to give Kärde, the most radical of the examples.
the article cites the she retired sociologidocenten
by Kjell Magnusson ” as a credible source and a link to his article (DN 18/10). Let’s look at the article, but only to a basic awareness of Kärde. Kjell Magnusson, denied that Srebrenica is a genocide. Or, as he prefers to call it ”questioning”. Had the Kärde I, she would find it here, here, here, and here. To, among other things.
as Magnusson’s arguments are different but the is. Sometimes, he says, that the bosnienserberna ”has not wished to root out” anyone, but only wanted to ”pass” (GP, 19/03 2003), (not the case, The court found that there is an intention to wipe out, to Krstic the case). Sometimes, he says, that The court’s ”classification is not based on generally accepted criteria (Gp, 5/11 2011) (even it is true, the text of the convention has been almost literally transferred to the Hague tribunal’s statute refer to the She (SVD, 21/11 2003).
to Deny the genocide
Sometimes he says that the ”number of kills” is not enough for it to be a genocide (GP, 19/03 2003) (Not true; see the He Brings , the answer, The … 17/11 2003), and, sometimes, that there has not been any systematic approach of the tenth anniversary of the (IP, 19/03 2003) (including the case of it, and by the way, is a very thoroughly demonstrated in a series of judgments of the Hague).
in the absence of other remains, he says, that ”the court of reason, is a badly-written” (GP, 28/1 in 2014), that is, if there had been only one conviction. In other words, Sweden has used almost all of the way in which the international organisation Genocide watch lists to describe how the denial of a genocide is: A. to Deny that it happened to fit in with the definition of the crime of genocide; (B) Reduce the number of deaths; (C) to Assert that there is no intent to exterminate, D, to Shift the blame to the victims, and so on.
The most tragic thing is that in England, once again, is doing the same thing in the article, Kärde, links to, but that neither she nor the daily News, understand it. So let us now, together. ”djupläsa” of the article.
the Type of Sweden is somewhere that Handke did not deny the ”Armenian genocide”? Read word for word. Does he use the word? Well, once, when he was referring to what the Handkes, critics say. The words he selects for yourself? ”Handke does not deny the massacre in Srebrenica”, is the quote in the title. Interesting, is it not?
It is true, also, of course, is neither Handke, or any other, as far as I know, denies the srebrenica massacre. It might be a little bit more difficult as there are around 8000 bodies. The question of whether the denial of the genocide at Srebrenica is all about, how they were killed, why they killed, and how it came to be. If they are dead or not. So, what exactly is Gary to guarantee ? No, more than that, Handke is not to deny that there are 8000 bodies. Don’t understand the Kärde the way he pulls her by the nose?
One of the survivors from Srebrenica, sitting in front of a portrait of some of the 8,000 muslim men and boys who were killed during the genocide. The image above is from 2007. Photo by: AMEL EMRIC / associated press , New Year
please Read on. Gary writes, ”Handkes the question is also legitimate,” and, creeping in, a little out of the blue, that ”No massacre of that magnitude would have happened in the past, and there was no real military reason.” Also, this is not true, of course, the reasons are explicitly printed out in the document, which outlines six ”Strategic objectives” (see pages 147-148, in the judgment of the New Year ), and the third is the establishment of a landskorridor to the republic of Serbia, along the Drinadalen, some sort of landlivlina to the ”motherland” of Serbia, that is, the court of justice in several judgments of the court. However, if it is that Magnusson’s claims were true: that there is no reason, it is illogical, unplanned, strange, – the question would then be ”legitimate” to ask, Kärde? Example of this: ”this Is indeed a planned and deliberate act of genocide”?
in the near future. ”We’ll go to the hague tribunal, we may note that, in the judgment of Radovan Karadzic in 2016, is just as unclear as in the sentencing of general Krstic in 2001, and who was giving the orders.” Sure, you get the impression that the tenth anniversary is a chaotic event, but the one who gives the orders, but the logic and structure? (not true, although it is already in the Krstic judgment, the participants discussed the planning and kommandokedjan).
So, let’s sum it up: what is Sweden’s happened in Srebrenica? The tenth anniversary of the seems, according to him, will be a spur of the moment — orderlöst kind of in a very illogical way, just happened to end up in a ”massacre”, without any kind of military logic. Some sort of weird campaign in which some of the soldiers seem to have gone berserk, and avenged themselves on all they could get. In other words, nothing is planned, organized, deliberate genocide.
as We all know these days.
in England, writes thus, in a paper in which he sneaks into all the lies of the folkmordsförnekare tend to argue in order to deny the Armenian genocide, and the Kärde cites in his article! He’s doing it in front of your eyes, and you don’t see it. So, a little bit of knowledge you have.
for the next debate, on the Handke. As soon as one begins to describe the Srebrenica massacre as a battle, a massacre, the armies fought, which avoids the word genocide, claiming that it was not the intent, organization, structure, that we have no evidence to stop. We’re talking about an event that has been studied for 24 years at The court of first instance, of the approximately 90 judges, the 4000 is a witness for the whole of the former federal republic of Yugoslavia, completed hundreds of trials of the DNA analysis, the millions of written pages, or documents, evidence. We all know these days.
In the Srebrenica massacre, there was hardly any sort, it was not revenge for the earlier atrocities in the world, not the chaotic campaign, which resulted in an unplanned massacre. The greatest number of victims are the most helpless people, the prisoners, who were brutally and systematically executed. It is important, therefore, to call it an act of genocide. It’s not a question of semantics, nor is it about sensitivity bosnians, it’s a matter of what we believe happened in Srebrenica in 1995.
Finally, I do not think that the Committee will need to take in some of the bosniakier, or for that matter any other nationality), in order to prevent the recurrence of this outrage.
It’s enough that you read on.
Jasenko Selimovic is a writer. He has previously served as the artistic director of the Gothenburg city theatre, as well as an Mep for the Liberal party.
READ MORE: , the Academy is required to answer the questions on the Handke. READ MORE: , the Academy can’t ignore the Handkes the policy. READ MORE: of the Swedish Academy develops Handkes the word of A new scandal for the English royal Academy?
on The screen the player is shown below, the latest episode of the Culture to Express there Jasenko Selimovic, and Taken the Victor Malm debates in Peter Handkes the nobel Prize in literature.
Jasenko Selimovic, and the Victor of the Ore in the debate, by Peter Handke.
