Karadzic

The Independent refers to Karadzic as a "Monster." Think back to last year and consider: "How do they know what they know?" How have they attempted to justify their knowledge claims? Please be specific.

The Independent refers to Karadzic as a "monster." They justify their claims, through language (war speak), empircal sense, and emotion.

The language in the article brings out anger and sadness. The language used (war speak) causes readers to feel these emotions.War speak is the most prolific way in which the Independent successfully (at least, in my case) evokes anger and sadness, two primary emotions from the reader.
Words used in the article that promote the idea that Karadzic is a monster are words like "war criminal" "artillery, tanks" "nazi-style" (a major comparrison to other monsters), etc. These create the idea Karadzic is a monster.

Empirical Knowledge
The article is told from fist person point of view and states that it is about his visit. It implys that this story is true. We believe what he is saying becaues he has been there and witnessed this.

Through this readers, like myself, have been convinced that Karadzic is a monster.