🚀 go-pugleaf

This Sunday's NY Times Magazine contained a portfolio of photos 
titled "The Dying City of Sarajevo." First, here's what it =should=
have included:

  1. A double-page spread of the demolished skyline or other long
     view of the city.

  2. Major ancient landmark buildings that have been destroyed.

But these scens were not there. What it actually included was:

  1. The interior of a nondescript church with fire-charred seats and 
     roof beams, but absolutely no smoke damage to the walls!

  2. A section of street about 100 feet long littered with a 
     too-even distribution of roof tiles.

  3. The facade of a stone building with some of the facing 
     blown away.

In other words, they used scenes that are about the size of the
average movie set, and look like they were set up to make a
movie, to represent the alleged destruction of a whole city.
This strengthens my position that the allegations are fiction. 
I'm even more willing now to bet money on my position if there
is anyone out there who will take the oppositie side.