section_heading: Neuspjela negacija časopisa Living Marxism
paragraph_text: Ed Vulliamy, jedan od prvih novinara koji su objavili vijest o Trnopolju, navodi da je to bila stara bodljikava žica no da je svjedeno bila postavljena nova oko logora. Izjavio je: "''Ako je potrebno, istina se katkad mora uspostaviti i zakonom...Bilo je obeshrabrujuće morati izvještavati da je u prvoj godini u kojoj je proglašena nova, ujedinjena, demokratska Europa, su još postojala takva mjesta kao što su Trnopolje i Omarska. Još je bilo gore vratiti se u London i pronaći obskurnu skupinu pseudo-intelektualaca koji se toliko trude pokušati uvjeriti javnost da su ti logori bili laž i da sam sve to izmišljao''."<ref>"At the time I paid little attention to what would become Living Marxism's myopic obsessions: such as which side of which pole the old barbed wire or fresh barbed wire was fixed. There were more important matters, such as the emaciated Fikret Alic's (accurate and vindicated) recollections of the night he had been assigned to load the bodies of 250 men killed in one night at yet another camp. If it is still of any remote interest, I will say this: I now know the compound in which these terrified men were held captive to have been surrounded on one side by recently reinforced barbed wire, on two sides by a chain-link fence patrolled by menacing armed thugs and on a fourth side by a wall. But so what? This was a camp - I would say a concentration camp - and they were its inmates. What does it take to convince people? The war ground on, the British foreign office and Living Marxism in perfect synergy over their appeasement of the Serbs while other, worse camps were revealed. The bench in The Hague issued its judgment on Trnopolje in 1997: a verdict that described the camp as infinitely worse than anything we reported - an infernal place of rape, murder and torture. Witness after witness confirmed this. The Financial Times enthusiastically re-iterated Living Marxism's claims of a fabrication, but published a hasty and grovelling retraction when it looked at LM's non-evidence." <ref>