Suggestion of the Roots of Macedonians into Antiquity is a Total Nonsense
pavel
Nonsense
Skopje, June 23rd, 2009, Utrinski daily
http://www.utrinski.com.mk/?ItemID=45ED08226B240E4E828380739DAB083F
The new history of Macedonian people, declared by the INI
and the chief archeologist Pasko Kuzman, that we can
hold the name of the country only if we can prove that we
are Macedonians from the Antiquity is widely propaganded.
The Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski is greatly influenced
by Pasko Kuzman. Now the government suggests a new
"truth" that we have to forget the Slavic roots (as claims the
historian Mitko Panov), and another historian - Aneta
Shukarova - insists the term "hellenism" to be replaced
by "alexandrism" or " macedonism".
"That is a complete lunatic asylum, a man cannot
understand if he is dreaming, or the events are in the
reality" - said Prof. Ljubomir Tsutsulovski. He has
reminded us for previous texts written by himself.
In them he has written that the theory for the
ethnogenesis is in principle problematic, because
if we follow its logic, from the antiquity we have
to go to the neolite, from the neolite to the paleolite,
etc, and in the end from the primates to the mammals,
etc, and to the amebas. So that we can conclude,
that we, all the humans are amebas, because our
roots are in those one-cell organisms.
The world-known Macedonian linguist Trajko
Stamatoski said that our language is a
Slavic one, and there are not any traces in it
from the Macedonians from the Antiqiuty. In
the Republic of Macedonia the toponimy is
predominantly Slavic - 90%, only 10% can be
associated with the "old layer" - the people
that have inhabited the country before the
Slavs to come into it. By him: "It is a total
nonsense and a shameful event to deny the
Slavic roots of the population." "The previous
year the XXIVth Slavic Congress has been hold
in our country with more than 700 scientists
from all over the world. But now I doubt what are
thinking all those men of science, when here
is suggested a new understanding of the
Macedonian national identity."
ADR
> Suggestion of the Roots of Macedonians into Antiquity is a Total
> Nonsense
Hey, Pavel, the more I hear from Gruevski, the more I like the guy.
Really, Greece could have never gotten anybody there as good as he
is. Eventually, he will make FYROM the laughing stock of the world.
In a more serious note, Gruevski is just the latest in the
"Macedonist" line. The Macedonists have long advocated that the
current population of FYROM are descendants of the ancient Macedonians
and that their language is not Slavic at all but the ancient language
of the Macedonians and the one in which Homer wrote the Iliad and
Odyssey in. Crazies like Josif Greslovski would write multipage
articles on this full of the most laughable distortions that you are
likely to encounter. But for these Macedonists, this is a core
principle. So, do not be so amazed (along with the linguists in
FYROM) about these assertions. These have been part and parcel of the
Macedonist propaganda for about a century now.
We know quite a lot of the Slavs who settled in and around Macedonia,
as their arrival was recorded by many historians. We know the names of
their tribes, their areas of settlement, their religion, and their
politics. Prior to them being assimilated into the Bulgarian kingdom,
they were courted by officials in Constantinople. The historical
accounts are there for all to be examined and read. The diversion
into a total fabrication cannot and will not stand for long. All that
this achieves is to prolong the dispute, unfortunately.
gogu
The point is that *TODAY* there are voices in Skopie that oppose the lunatic
theories of the Macedonists and Gruevski!
Until some years ago this was not possible in FYROM!
There was only one line, the line of the Macedonists!
I am glad to see that some FYROM-ians have all their minds;-)
? "ADR" <aret...@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????
news:d6bbdee6-145f-4dee...@w31g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
vjp...@at.biostrategist.dot.dot.com
friends than the Serbs and Bulgarians, which is why you want to find
this novel identity. Better to stop antagonising the Greeks.
- = -
Vasos Panagiotopoulos, Columbia'81+, Reagan, Mozart, Pindus, BioStrategist
http://www.facebook.com/vasjpan2
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---
[Homeland Security means private firearms not lazy obstructive guards]
[Urb sprawl confounds terror] [Remorse begets zeal] [Windows is for Bimbos]
akritas
> Suggestion of the Roots of Macedonians into Antiquity is a Total
> Nonsense
326 world scholars in an letter [http://macedonia-evidence.org/obama-
letter.html] asked from US President Obama "to help the FYROM
government in Skopje to understand that it cannot build a national
identity at the expense of historic truth. Our common international
society cannot survive when history is ignored, much less when history
is fabricated."
Let's following theirs advice. Slav Macedonians need to realize that
their newly conceived ethnogenetic dogma, extending to classical
antiquity, encroaches upon the Greek cultural heritage and the
identity of their Greek neighbours to the south. As such, it threatens
to ignite a clash of identities in the region as a whole.
ADR
> You are missing the point here Anastassios!
> The point is that *TODAY* there are voices in Skopie that oppose the lunatic
> theories of the Macedonists and Gruevski!
> Until some years ago this was not possible in FYROM!
> There was only one line, the line of the Macedonists!
> I am glad to see that some FYROM-ians have all their minds;-)
>
You have it wrong. In the past, following the formation of the
Yugoslav Republic and after its independence until the election of
Gruevski the line on the use of the term "Macedonia" was very much
what our friend Pavel advocated here. The then Skopje regime did not
dispute the essentially slavic nature of the inhabitants but it made
the case that they were the "natives" of Macedonia as they had
"intermarried" with some of the original inhabitants and occupied some
of the original territory of Macedonia. Thus, the statements by
Gligorov and others on this subject. None of the previous leaders
ever disputed the Slavic nature of "Macedonians".
Now, the Macedonist of the diaspora, as you well know, preach a very
different sermon, the one that our friend Wine Jar continuously
advocates here. There were never any Slavs and the people of FYROM
(obviously sans the Albanians) are the descendants of the ancient
Macedonians and their language is that of the ancient Macedonians as
well. There is quite a change here. And it is not really that
amazing that the more modest Macedonists would find this difficult to
swallow. But Slavic Macedonians in North America and Australia have
bought this hook, line and sinker and it is has now found adherents in
the highest offices in Skopje.
ADR
Good luck with that!!! What's the evidence that anything world
scholars may say would sway Gruevski??? He did not move an inch in
the recent discussions in Switzerland. Nor would he move at all. I
think that he expects that if he remains unbending, at the end the US
and certain NATO members would force Greece's hand. He may also
believe that a swing to the left in Greece may be advantageous to him
as it may have more of an affinity to compromise (I do not think so,
but he probably thinks this). In any case, there are many wackos
willing to believe the outlandish stupidities of the extreme
Macedonists. In fact, the more we react, the easier is for Gruevski
to paint us as the "aggressors".
We should see how Gruevski has framed the issue: Gruevski made it
clear time and time again that Greece "threatens the ethnic identity
of Macedonians" (in his own words). Of course, we need not discuss
here FYROM's own threads on the identity of the Macedonians in
Greece. In any case, more than 50% of the people of FYROM do accept
this notion and this renders any compromise impossible. Even if a
"compromise" is reached, Gruevski is going to submit it to a
referendum and dispose of it in this manner.
****We are not going anywhere any time soon!!**** If we want to blame
anybody, we should put the blame on the Simitis governments which did
not settle the problem when it could and would have been settled for a
fraction of today's effort.
gogu
>On Jun 23, 8:44 am, "gogu" <RruminiiSugPu...@Greci.com> wrote:
>> You are missing the point here Anastassios!
>> The point is that *TODAY* there are voices in Skopie that oppose the
>> lunatic
>> theories of the Macedonists and Gruevski!
>> Until some years ago this was not possible in FYROM!
>> There was only one line, the line of the Macedonists!
>> I am glad to see that some FYROM-ians have all their minds;-)
>Now, the Macedonist of the diaspora, as you well know, preach a very
>different sermon, the one that our friend Wine Jar continuously
>advocates here. There were never any Slavs and the people of FYROM
>(obviously sans the Albanians) are the descendants of the ancient
>Macedonians and their language is that of the ancient Macedonians as
>well.
That's right!
And professor Trajko Stamatoski says today that this is all BS and the
population is...slavic and has nothing in common with ".the people
that have inhabited the country before the Slavs to come into it."!!!
I say this is a major slap in Gruevski's face!
So where I have it wrong?!...
gogu
>Gruevski??? He did not move an inch in
>the recent discussions in Switzerland. Nor would he move at all. I
>think that he expects that if he remains unbending, at the end the US
>and certain NATO members would force Greece's hand. He may also
>believe that a swing to the left in Greece may be advantageous to him
>as it may have more of an affinity to compromise (I do not think so,
>but he probably thinks this).
Well, I have fresh news for you and all: Mr. Nimitz is coming again in the
Balcans in the next few days and it seems that Gruevski has put "water in
his wine" and is now ready to accept the name "Republic of North Macedonia".
Athens has put much pressure and US finally understood that no Greek PM
would ever grant the name to FYROM and that the only way to unblock the
situation would be US to put pressure on FYROM to accept a composite name.
Gruevski is now fighting to save the "ethnicity" and the "language/culture"
issues but Athens seems immovable in granting them to him ("ethnic
Macedonians" and "Macedonian Language/Culture").
ADR
> ? "ADR" <aretz...@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????news:4e010ddc-3d4c-4a23...@y33g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
George, you hope against hope. Which is OK, but pointless. You know
what the game is going to be here. Gruevski would sign the document,
put it for a referendum in FYROM and campaign against it. It would be
resoundingly defeated (there are always too many morons) and Gruevski
would claim that this formula is unacceptable to people. This would
bring the issue to a quick conclusion; Greece would be painted as a
bully (and many of the speeches during the referendum would be echoed
in the media around the world). Gruevski has calculated all of
these. Just look at what happened at Cyprus; although the people of
Cyprus voted down a very bad deal for them (an agreement that would
have deprived them of rights that the Turkish Cypriots would have
possessed), the international community condemned them for not been of
"compromising spirit" (as if they were the aggressors).
The only thing that would work well here is if Greece puts the
compromise up for a referendum as well. Then, the coverage would be
more balanced and Greece would be able to make its case much better.
But trust me, Greek politicians are not too savvy.
ADR
> ? "ADR" <aretz...@yahoo.com> ?????? ??? ??????news:4aca84f4-69bd-46ca...@u9g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
You have it wrong as to what the official position of Skopje was prior
to Gruevski. Gruevski has accepted (or he always did) the extreme
Macedonist position. In fact, he is not much better than our friend,
Wine Jar.
To a certain extent, he is right. FYROM would only manage to hang on
to "Macedonia" in the long run if it convinces the world opinion that
it represents the totality of the Macedonian experience. Of course,
you and I know that this would not fly anywhere where there is some
basic understanding of history, but you would be amazed how uneducated
the masses are. Extremely. As one US legislator put it: "you can
never underestimate the stupidity of the people". So far, Athens has
allowed FYROM a free hand.
Our governments finds billions to build a huge museum about the stupid
marbles of Acropolis (they are just fine in the British Museum) but so
far it has not invested substantially in any museum in the traditional
capital of Macedonia, Aigai (modern Vergina) nor has it managed to
find any funds to seriously campaign about the Macedonian issue in the
world press. It is high time that the Macedonian delegation in the
parliament started making some sounds and started making investments
where they count.
Krater Makedonski
"ADR" <aret...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4aca84f4-69bd-46ca...@u9g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 23, 8:44 am, "gogu" <RruminiiSugPu...@Greci.com> wrote:
> You are missing the point here Anastassios!
> The point is that *TODAY* there are voices in Skopie that oppose the
> lunatic
> theories of the Macedonists and Gruevski!
> Until some years ago this was not possible in FYROM!
> There was only one line, the line of the Macedonists!
> I am glad to see that some FYROM-ians have all their minds;-)
>
George,
You have it wrong. In the past, following the formation of the
Yugoslav Republic and after its independence until the election of
Gruevski the line on the use of the term "Macedonia" was very much
what our friend Pavel advocated here. The then Skopje regime did not
dispute the essentially slavic nature of the inhabitants but it made
the case that they were the "natives" of Macedonia as they had
"intermarried" with some of the original inhabitants and occupied some
of the original territory of Macedonia. Thus, the statements by
Gligorov and others on this subject. None of the previous leaders
ever disputed the Slavic nature of "Macedonians".
Originally, as we all know, the pan "slav" theory was cooked up by the
Russians for their own imperialistic needs of broadening their
influence/control of their "brothers/sisters" the "Slavs". For 50 years the
"(jugo)slav" communists forced down the throats of its citizens their mini
version, the pan "(jugo)slav" doctrine-theory. This theory was most intensly
propagated in Socialist Republic of Macedonia as it was still controlled by
(colony of) Belgrade (Serbia). This was to wipe out any Macedonian national
sentiment. Anyone that opposed this version of truncated Macedonian
"history" ("history" for the Macedonians began with "the arrival of the
"Slavs" - ancient history was totally avoided by the educational
institutions) was very qickly eliminated. Every generation in RoM since WWII
was "educted" (indoctrinated) that they are of "pure slav" origins and that
their language is also 100% "slavic". Anyone that opposed this view was very
quickly eliminated as "enemy of the state". Soon after WWII most of the
educated elite in RoM was decimated. More than 60,000 Macedonians were
either killed or imprisoned and afterwards constantly spied on and
persecuted. Thus the new Macedonian "educated" elite became "Slavs", using
the Macedonian identity only as a geographical descriptor or citizenship.
Even now, I think there are only 2 Macedonian academics with PhD in ancient
Macedonian history (Nade Proeva - got her doctorate in Paris and I can't
remember the other lady's name), as opposed to thousands of "Slavicists" of
every kind. In the late seventies there was an attempt by a group of
Macedonian academics to revive the studies in Macedonian history, but they
very quickly found themselves in hot water and their attempt was very
quickly quashed. I know only one of the "old-guard" Macedonian academics who
has publically apologised (on behalf of the Macedonian Academy) for
"creating (Macedonian) history without roots" ("history" beginning with the
"arrival of the Slavs"), to paraphrase him. That was the late Dr Ante
Popovski, saying that in his TV autobiographfy in 1995.
The Macedonian national identity/sentiment was being kept alive and advanced
by the Macedonians who escaped the clutches of the jugoslav regime. Thus OKM
(United Macedonian Committee), which later transformed to DOOM (Movement for
Liberation and Unification of Macedonia) became the most important
Macedonian organisation for the Macedonians outside of Macedonia and within
until the break up of "Jugoslavija", despite the fact that its general
secretary was murdered (in Munich) in 1974 by Jugoslavija's agents (of
Macedonian extraction) and that its president was illegally brought to
Jugoslavija from France in 1978 (the Serbians controlled Jugoslavija and
they have a very close political friendship with the French) imprisoning him
for 11 years. Eventually with the breakup of "Jugoslavija" and the new
multi-party political system replacing the old uni-party communist system,
VMRO-DPMNE (current governing party) was formed - a "marriage" of the
"diaspora" DPMNE (Democrtaic Party for Macedonian Natonal Unity - the old
DOOM) and VMRO (Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation) from RoM,
negotiated and agreed upon in Germany.
The above are the undeniable facts and, concisely, from above, it can be
said that the Macedonian national identity was being destroyed in RoM by the
jugoslav regime, but it was being kept alive and revived by the Macedonians
outside of "Jugoslavija". And it is primarily to the efforts of the
Macedonians outside of RoM that some of the Macedonians in RoM have
retained their Macedonian national/ethnic conscience. Now that the Serbian
(anti Macedonian) influence in RoM has gone, both the "Bulgarians" and the
"HellAsses" will find it ever more difficult to propagate their anti
Macedonian lies, because the world will be more and more informed about
them.
Now, the Macedonist of the diaspora, as you well know, preach a very
different sermon, the one that our friend Wine Jar continuously
advocates here. There were never any Slavs and the people of FYROM
(obviously sans the Albanians) are the descendants of the ancient
Macedonians and their language is that of the ancient Macedonians as
well. There is quite a change here. And it is not really that
amazing that the more modest Macedonists would find this difficult to
swallow. But Slavic Macedonians in North America and Australia have
bought this hook, line and sinker and it is has now found adherents in
the highest offices in Skopje.
The Macedonians, nitwit grkoman, do not advocate as you lie above. What we
ask for from anyone, is, to provide a proof (evidence) for the existence
(origins) of the phantom (non existent) "slav" language prior to the
"arrival of the Slavs" in the Balkans. As you very well know there is not an
iota of concrete evidence for this, because this is cooked up theory for
political (imperialistic-Russian) ideology. The only known origins of this
phantom "slav" language lie in Macedonia. Thus, grkoman, all "slavic"
languages are in fact MACEDONIC languages - spread thoughout Europe (and now
wider) by the Macedonian teachers-missionaries.
Spirit of Truth
"Krater Makedonski" <kra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a41869a$0$32004$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> The Macedonians, nitwit grkoman, do not advocate as you lie above. What we
> ask for from anyone, is, to provide a proof (evidence) for the existence
> (origins) of the phantom (non existent) "slav" language prior to the
> "arrival of the Slavs" in the Balkans. As you very well know there is not
> an iota of concrete evidence for this, because this is cooked up theory
> for political (imperialistic-Russian) ideology. The only known origins of
> this phantom "slav" language lie in Macedonia. Thus, grkoman, all "slavic"
> languages are in fact MACEDONIC languages - spread thoughout Europe (and
> now wider) by the Macedonian teachers-missionaries.
Silly. How do you think it got to Czechoslovakia and Poland. You post such
idiotic things, Bulgar.
Spirit of Truth
Spirit of Truth
.........................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................
I've listen to enough of this nonsense. Fyrom SHALL accept Vardar
Macedonia and the US will see to it. Fyrom wants into Nato and Europe and
THAT is the only way. So forget your naysaying. You have gone into effect of
the stupid revisonist posters and the epitome of doublespeak, Schneider..
Spirit of Truth
Agamemnon
"pavel" <pavelma...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d71bf675-3e97-421f...@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
> Suggestion of the Roots of Macedonians into Antiquity is a Total
> Nonsense
> Skopje, June 23rd, 2009, Utrinski daily
> http://www.utrinski.com.mk/?ItemID=45ED08226B240E4E828380739DAB083F
>
> The new history of Skopjian people, declared by the INI
> and the chief archeologist Pasko Kuzman, that we can
> hold the name of the country only if we can prove that we
> are Macedonians from the Antiquity is widely propaganded.
> The Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski is greatly influenced
> by Pasko Kuzman. Now the government suggests a new
> "truth" that we have to forget the Slavic roots (as claims the
> historian Mitko Panov), and another historian - Aneta
> Shukarova - insists the term "hellenism" to be replaced
> by "alexandrism" or " macedonism".
>
> "That is a complete lunatic asylum, a man cannot
> understand if he is dreaming, or the events are in the
> reality" - said Prof. Ljubomir Tsutsulovski. He has
> reminded us for previous texts written by himself.
> In them he has written that the theory for the
> ethnogenesis is in principle problematic, because
> if we follow its logic, from the antiquity we have
> to go to the neolite, from the neolite to the paleolite,
> etc, and in the end from the primates to the mammals,
> etc, and to the amebas. So that we can conclude,
> that we, all the humans are amebas, because our
> roots are in those one-cell organisms.
>
> The world-known Skopjian linguist Trajko
> Stamatoski said that our language is a
> Slavic one, and there are not any traces in it
> from the Skopjians from the Antiqiuty. In
> the Republic of Skopjia the toponimy is
> predominantly Slavic - 90%, only 10% can be
> associated with the "old layer" - the people
> that have inhabited the country before the
> Slavs to come into it. By him: "It is a total
> nonsense and a shameful event to deny the
> Slavic roots of the population." "The previous
> year the XXIVth Slavic Congress has been hold
> in our country with more than 700 scientists
> from all over the world. But now I doubt what are
> thinking all those men of science, when here
> is suggested a new understanding of the
> Skopjian national identity."
Mackman
> "ADR" <aretz...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Krater,my friend, you are an active crater of insanity, paranoia and
schisophrenia and, so, are the rest of your South Slavonian pseudo-
Macedonian comrades. I really wonder whether you live in a real world
or a lunatic world of your own together, of course, with your
similarly lunatic people that surround you and all this remind me of
people living in a mental institution that, supposedly, provides
comfort and protection from the real world of pain, suffering and
misery.
You seem that you live in a world of absurdity conveniently
constructed for you and your comrades who realize that the doom's day
is near and they are lookind for an escape when they realize that
there is not any escape from plagiarism, identity theft, frad and
forgery. I really believe that this time you and your people, I hope
not all of them, went too far trying to find something that does not
exist but you thought that you and your people had the means to create
it and that is, the imaginary and fictional connection between your
South Slavonian people and the ancient Macedonians who were always
Hellenic people and spoke a Hellenic language.
So, now you think that by eliminating the word SLAVS from your Slavic
history and your slavic language, you have been able , although in a
fictional and fraudulent way that the <Macedonian> languge, that is
the language of the Macedonian Greek people was the ancient
<Macedonian> language of the non-Slav Slavic people and that all the
Slavs, I do not know how many Slavic people would agree with that,are
miraculusly descendants of the ancient Macedonians.
In other words, you the Slavic people by just erasing or eliminating
the word Slav from your heritage become the <descentants> of the
ancient Macedonian people and you speak their Macedonian non- Greek
language while we the real and true Macedonian people seem to have
vanished from the historical and classic Macedonia and so did our
Macedonian Greek language with us. I believe that you are going to
have a dedly crush and there will be nobody there to help you and,I
realy believe, you are beyond any help. You are at the journey of your
final destruction and all the Makedomani will have a tragic end while
the real and true Macedonians will triumph once again and forever on
in to the ages of
ages.
Nick Hodges.
ADR
> The Macedonians, nitwit grkoman, do not advocate as you lie above. What we
> ask for from anyone, is, to provide a proof (evidence) for the existence
> (origins) of the phantom (non existent) "slav" language prior to the
> "arrival of the Slavs" in the Balkans. As you very well know there is not an
> iota of concrete evidence for this, because this is cooked up theory for
> political (imperialistic-Russian) ideology. The only known origins of this
> phantom "slav" language lie in Macedonia. Thus, grkoman, all "slavic"
> languages are in fact MACEDONIC languages - spread thoughout Europe (and now
> wider) by the Macedonian teachers-missionaries.
Wine Jar, I would not bother to reply to the rest of your ravings but
this, my man, is over the top even for you. The Macedonian teachers-
missionaries (I would think that you are referring to Constantine and
Methodius) did not change the language of slavic Europe!!! Are you
out of your mind??? They invented an alphabet for this language,
mostly based on the Greek alphabet. Their interest in that was to
translate the Bible and other documents, set up a clergy and mostly
making sure that the political influence of the Empire (as they were
imperial ambassadors) spread in the area. Constantine spend a
relatively short period there and went on to Rome. Methodius somewhat
longer but both were only in Moravia!!! It was St. Clement and the
group around Ohrid that were far more influential in the Balkans. In
any case, you are mistaking an alphabet for a language!!! Maybe you
want to provide us with some concrete ideas of how these two guys
managed to change the languages of Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Moravia,
Bohemia, Poland, Ukraine, Novgorod and Muscovy!!! Hey, this would be
awesome, man!!! Now, this would be the work of a lifetime. You would
be an idol among the Macedonists. The best fairy teller of them all.
ADR
> "ADR" <aretz...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> I've listen to enough of this nonsense. Fyrom SHALL accept Vardar
> Macedonia and the US will see to it. Fyrom wants into Nato and Europe and
> THAT is the only way. So forget your naysaying. You have gone into effect of
> the stupid revisonist posters and the epitome of doublespeak, Schneider..
>
> Spirit of Truth
Boy, talking about burying your head in the sand!!!!
Krater Makedonski
"Mackman" <nhod...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:69ec0bdc-ae6f-4f3d...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
The above from our dear friend Nick is perfect case of the the pot accusing
the kettle of being black. Calling someone else by a fictitious
ethnic/national identity is very easy. But to prove that fictitious identity
is real, as in the case of the "Slavs", is another matter altogether. But to
you idiots is of no significance whatsoever. To you the only thing that
matters is if you repeat the same lie 1000 times you hope that it somehow
will transform into truth. Well, I have news for you, clown. That's not
going to happen.
Anyhow, just to refresh your memory, Nicky boy, even though this was only
posted a day or so ago, here is some real news for you, straight from your
own horse's mouth:
From the book "Venizelos" by Herbert Adams Gibbons, 1920
Venizelos: "It may be useful to add that the present vice president of the
"HellAss" Ministerial Council, Mr Repoulis; the commander-in-chief of the
"HellAss" army, General Danglis; the commander-in-chief of the "HellAss"
naval forces nad Minister of Marine, Admiral Koundouriotis and the majority
of the crews of the "HellAss" navy, SPEAK ALBANIAN as their MOTHER TONGUE."
Venizelos: "One may be tempted to raise the objection (to claiming Albanians
as "HellAsses" - KM) that a SUBSTANTIAL PORTION of this "HellAss" population
USES ALBANIAN as its MOTHER TONGUE and IS, consequently, in all probability,
OF ALBANIAN ORIGIN..."
Author: " In my own personal experience I have had the ardent "HellAss"
national consciousness of inhabitants of Epir(us) and also of ATTICA, whose
LANGUAGE was AT HOME was ALBANIAN.
NOTE: Beside the SUBSTANTIAL ALBANIAN PORTION of the population of "HellAss"
there are SUBSTANTIAL MACEDONIAN, VLACH and "MUSLIM" PORTIONS as well. The
greastest heros in the founding of today's "HellAss" are NON "Greeks" of
Albanian, Vlach and Macedonian extraction.
Almost a century after this book was published the situation has not changed
much. The current president of "HellAss" (Karolos Papulias) is an Albanian,
whose family name Suleymani has been "hellassed". Since the founding of
"HellAss" there have been 27 ALBANIANS as political leaders of "HellAss".
gogu
>On Jun 23, 3:07 pm, "gogu" <RuminiiSugPu...@Greci.com> wrote:
>> That's right!
>> And professor Trajko Stamatoski says today that this is all BS and the
>> population is...slavic and has nothing in common with ".the people
>> that have inhabited the country before the Slavs to come into it."!!!
>> I say this is a major slap in Gruevski's face!
>> So where I have it wrong?!...
>You have it wrong as to what the official position of Skopje was prior
>to Gruevski. Gruevski has accepted (or he always did) the extreme
>Macedonist position.
Well Anastassios, this is not the relevant part of the message IMO, the
relevant part is that while until now no scientist in FYROM would debate the
origins of the current population from the ancient Macedonians, today it
seems there are some voices that oppose this official hard line!
And this is a progress IMHO. When the FYROM population will see the truth
that they are nothing but (Bulgarian) slavs, in no way connected to the
ancient Macedonians, in that moment they will become much more logical and
ready on a compromise on many open issues they have with Greece.
>Our governments finds billions to build a huge museum about the stupid
>marbles of Acropolis (they are just fine in the British Museum)
????
> but so
>far it has not invested substantially in any museum in the traditional
>capital of Macedonia, Aigai (modern Vergina)
This is simply not true!
Even from the 80's architect Sidiropoulos of Veria, me and a collective of
architects elaborated the plans of the Vergina Museum and AFAIK it is build
and functioning today!
gogu
>On Jun 23, 3:21 pm, "gogu" <RuminiiSugPu...@Greci.com> wrote:
>> Well, I have fresh news for you and all: Mr. Nimitz is coming again in
>> the
>> Balcans in the next few days and it seems that Gruevski has put "water in
>> his wine" and is now ready to accept the name "Republic of North
>> Macedonia".
>> Athens has put much pressure and US finally understood that no Greek PM
>> would ever grant the name to FYROM and that the only way to unblock the
>> situation would be US to put pressure on FYROM to accept a composite
>> name.
>> Gruevski is now fighting to save the "ethnicity" and the
>> "language/culture"
>> issues but Athens seems immovable in granting them to him ("ethnic
>> Macedonians" and "Macedonian Language/Culture").
>George, you hope against hope. Which is OK, but pointless. You know
>what the game is going to be here. Gruevski would sign the document,
>put it for a referendum in FYROM and campaign against it. It would be
>resoundingly defeated (there are always too many morons) and Gruevski
>would claim that this formula is unacceptable to people.
Hmmm...I am not sure at all people in FYROM will reject it!
It seems that this time Gruevski and his gang got the message that without a
settlement on the name there will be no progress in their aspiration in EU
and NATO.
I am sure that he can convince his people that this is the best solution for
them.
And here it comes the benefic effect of those scientists in Skopie that say
people in FYROM are slavs and not related to the ancient Macedonians!
More voices like them are heard in Skopie, much more easily will be for
their leadership to convince them and accept the compromise!
>This would
>bring the issue to a quick conclusion;
There is no other solution (quick or not) than a composite name which
Gruevski has already accepted AFAIK.
> Greece would be painted as a
>bully (and many of the speeches during the referendum would be echoed
>in the media around the world).
I fail to see how Greece will be condemned as the "bully" part!
FYROM rejects the compromise and Greece will be accused?!
Come on!
The scenario is this: Gruevski accepts the compromise on the name (North
Macedonia), he brings it in a referendum in Skopie, people vote and accept
or reject it.
>Gruevski has calculated all of
>these.
My information is completely different...
>Just look at what happened at Cyprus; although the people of
>Cyprus voted down a very bad deal for them (an agreement that would
>have deprived them of rights that the Turkish Cypriots would have
>possessed), the international community condemned them for not been of
>"compromising spirit" (as if they were the aggressors).
Exactly!
So if FYROM-ians will reject the compromise, who will be condemned?!
The Greeks or the FYROM-ians?!
>But trust me, Greek politicians are not too savvy.
Generally I would agree with you but right now they are doing the right
thing IMO.
Soon we will see the results.
gogu
news:Ajg0m.8512$aX1....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
It's not "nay saying" Spirit, it's reality, like it or not!
What I say is not what I think/want, it's what's happening right now in the
area!
Like it or not!
Mr. Nimitz comes with "Republic of North Macedonia" in his luggage and this
time Gruevski was pressed by Washington to accept this name, and he did!
I repeat, not a scenario but *REAL* information, no matter if we like it or
not!
Now if this is a "good" or a "bad" solution/compromise for Greece, this is
another discussion we can have.
Nashton
You're insane. If anything, there was a concerted effort to apply the
narrative/nationality of Macedonia to a subset of the Slav population.
And before you go on copying and pasting, some attributions would be in
order.
OTOH nobody would ever accuse yo of intellectual honesty.
Krater Makedonski
By twisting my words (arguments) and by resorting to childish name-calling
you are only exposing your inability to respond with adequate answers to my
argument/question. Provide proof for the existence of the phantom "slav"
language prior to the arrival of the "Slavs" in the Balkans (including
"Black Athena") and then we can discuss what the Macedonian missionaries did
or did not. Capiche, grkoman? But I know that there is no adequate answer to
my argument from anyone, let alone from a nitwit like yourself, because
there is not a shred of evidence for that "phantom" language, especially in
the land "behind the Carpathian mountains" - the "motherland" of the phantom
"Slavs", as the proponents/propagators of the "slav" theory-doctrine.
There was no need for you to respond to the rest of my post, grkoman, as it
was educational information for you grkomani and bugaromani because you have
been fed only LIES by your corresponding state propagandas.
Another question for you, grkoman: Why is the name Dimitar so common among
the modern-day Macedonians, to whom you FALSELY refer as "Slavs" and they
celebrate him as a very important saint in their calendar when, according to
the byzantian scribes he was the enemy of the "Slavs"?
"ADR" <aret...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e1da3ed2-f7cf-4af6...@12g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Nashton
> Nitwit grkoman,
>
> By twisting my words (arguments) and by resorting to childish
> name-calling
The irony meter just imploded with a loud thump.
ADR
> Nitwit grkoman,
>
> By twisting my words (arguments) and by resorting to childish name-calling
> you are only exposing your inability to respond with adequate answers to my
> argument/question.
You should not throw rocks if you live in glass house, Wine Jar. In
terms of name calling, you with "Black Athena" and HellAss should have
nothing to complaint about. I am just translating your name her
(Krater) to English.
> Provide proof for the existence of the phantom "slav"
> language prior to the arrival of the "Slavs" in the Balkans (including
> "Black Athena") and then we can discuss what the Macedonian missionaries did
> or did not. Capiche, grkoman?
Capiche, Wine Jar!!! In fact, we have as evidence the "Macedonian
Missionaries" that you have mentioned. These "Macedonian"
missionaries, who were, of course, Greek, the sons of the Drungarius
of the Theme of Thessaloniki, were highly placed imperial officials,
abbots and teachers at the University of Constantinople. They
undertook several embassies to the Abbassid Kaliphate (at Bagdad) and
to the Khazar kingdom. They knew Latin, Khazar, Hebrew and Arabic.
In 862 CE, they were send to Greater Moravia (approximately modern
Slovakia) following an invitation by the Mangrave there, Rastislav,
was was eager to become independent of the Frankish Empire. Over
there, they translated the Bible (in 863 CE) into Slavic having
invented the first alphabet for the Slavic language, the Glagolithic
(the Cyrillic is an elaboration of it) in order to do so. They also
translated a number of other ecclesiastical texts.. In 868 CE, they
went to Rome. So, dear Wine Jar, if you can tell me now how these
people managed to change the language of half of Europe in 5 years, I
would be grateful. Even if they wanted to, can you even calculate how
long such an undertaking may have taken????? So, I hope that this is
enough for you, although I doubt it.
> But I know that there is no adequate answer to
> my argument from anyone, let alone from a nitwit like yourself, because
> there is not a shred of evidence for that "phantom" language, especially in
> the land "behind the Carpathian mountains" - the "motherland" of the phantom
> "Slavs", as the proponents/propagators of the "slav" theory-doctrine.
Well, unless all the ecclesiastics and the numerous ambassadors (from
the Roman and Frankish Empire), historians such as Procopius and
Agathias and many others who visited the area cannot be trusted (and
the Papacy had a lot of influence in the area), then I guess you are
right!!! Just for your erudition, here is the description of the
Slavs by Procopius (book VII). This section was written in 551 CE,
prior to the southern movement of the Slavs. Just for your erudition,
"Ister" is the Greek name for Danube. Read what Procopius says about
their language (utterly barbarous). If they spoke "Macedonian",
Procopius would have been able to say so since Macedonia was an
imperial province (and was for 800 years). Is this proof enough for
you, Wine Jar?????
"...Procopius Histories (VII. 14. 22-30). For these nations, the
Sclaveni and the Antae, are not ruled by one man, but they have lived
from of old under a democracy, and consequently everything which
involves their welfare, whether for good or for ill, is referred to
the people. It is also true that in all other matters, practically
speaking, these two barbarian peoples have had from ancient times the
same institutions and customs. For they believe that one god, the
maker of lightning, is alone lord of all things, and they sacrifice to
him cattle and all other victims; but as for fate, they neither know
it nor do they in any wise admit that it has any power among men, but
whenever death stands close before them, either stricken with sickness
or beginning a war, they make a promise that, if they escape, they
will straightway make a sacrifice to the god in return for their life;
and if they escape, they sacrifice just what they have promised, and
consider that their safety has been bought with this same sacrifice.
They reverence, however, both rivers and nymphs and some other
spirits, and they sacrifice to all these also, and they make their
divinations in connection with these sacrifices. They live in pitiful
hovels which they set up far apart from one another, but, as a general
thing, every man is constantly changing his place of abode. When they
enter battle, the majority of them go against their enemy on foot
carrying little shields and javelins in their hands, but they never
wear corselets. Indeed, some of them do not wear even a shirt or a
cloak, but gathering their trews up as far as to their private parts
they enter into battle with their opponents. And both the two peoples
have also the same language, an utterly barbarous tongue. Nay further,
they do not differ at all from one another in appearance. For they are
all exceptionally tall and stalwart men, while their bodies and hair
are neither very fair or blonde, nor indeed do they incline entirely
to the dark type, but they are all slightly ruddy in color. And they
live a hard life, giving no heed to bodily comforts, just as the
Massagetae do, and like them, they are continually and at all times
covered with filth; however, they are in no respect base or evil-
doers, but they preserve the Hunnic character in all its simplicity.
In fact, the Sclaveni and the Antae actually had a single name in the
remote past; for they were both called Spori in olden times, because,
I suppose, living apart one man from another, they inhabit their
country in a sporadic fashion. And in consequence of this very fact
they hold a great amount of land; for they alone inhabit the greatest
part of the northern bank of the Ister. So much then may be said
regarding these peoples....."
> There was no need for you to respond to the rest of my post, grkoman, as it
> was educational information for you grkomani and bugaromani because you have
> been fed only LIES by your corresponding state propagandas.
I have asked you to provide evidence of this propaganda and you have
not done so far. Anyway, just digest the information that I have
given you and we can chat again.
> Another question for you, grkoman: Why is the name Dimitar so common among
> the modern-day Macedonians, to whom you FALSELY refer as "Slavs" and they
> celebrate him as a very important saint in their calendar when, according to
> the byzantian scribes he was the enemy of the "Slavs"?
St. Dimitrios as well as St. George are martial saints and have
nothing to do with the Slavs. In fact, St. Demetrius was martyred in
the beginning of the 4th century CE, when Slavs were not even in the
area. Their names are, of course Greek and you can easily check a
dictionary for their meaning. St. Demetrius was usually depicted
slaying a barbarian because of his supposed miraculous intervention
during the sieges of Thessaloniki by the Slavs (late 6th century CE).
His miraculous intervention as well as the sieges of Thessaloniki by
the Slavs (and their aftermath) are well documented by the
contemporary bishop of Thessaloniki, John of Thessaloniki, in the
"Miracula Sanctii Demetrii", This book, which contains the
contributions not only of John of Thessaloniki but a couple of
successor bishops, has been written during the time of the Slav
invasions and settlements of Macedonia. Now, I guess that you may
believe that this surviving contemporary book is total fiction, but
you would really be quite alone at that. If you remember, I posted
sections of the book here in the past that provided details of the
siege and the description of the Slavs by bishop John.
Spirit of Truth
"gogu" <Rruminii...@Greci.com> wrote in message
news:VLudnROMJsPHcdzX...@giganews.com...
>� "Spirit of Truth" <juneh...@prodigy.net> ������ ��� ������
Gogo, I was talking to Tasso.
Spirit
Spirit of Truth
Here, Bulgar, are you unable to read the written word?
CHAPTER III
Rumblings of the Approaching Storm
The Commission's task was to deal with the Greek refugees from Asia Minor, a
people totally unlike their conquerors, the nomadic Turks. These Greeks had
a brilliant heritage of their own as direct descendants of the Ionian Greeks
who settled the Aegean coast of Asia Minor. It was in their land that Homer,
perhaps the greatest poet of all ages, sang their early history. The scene
of the Iliad is the plains of Troy, on the Asia Minor coast, south of the
Dardanelles. In Homeric times not only the Ionian coast, but also the
southern shore of the Black Sea, were populated by Greeks, who engaged in
agriculture and carried on a lively commerce by sea.
Soon after Athens had reached the height of its glory under Pericles in the
Fifth Century, B. C., and had started on its decline, the rise of Macedon
under Philip carried Greek influence into new regions. The glory of Athens
had been based upon sea power, but the conquests of Macedon were the work of
land armies- Philip invented the invincible phalanx. Upon Philip's death his
son, Alexander the Great, set forth to conquer the whole of the then known
world, and as that world in his day lay to the east, his marches were in
that direction. In a few years he had overrun the fertile plains and opulent
cities of Asia Minor, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia, and had carried his
conquests to the gates of Delhi. In all the cities in the intervening
countries he left large garrisons of Greek soldiers. In many of these
countries he founded flourishing new cities. In every place his soldiers
were followed by large colonies of Greek civilians. The result was that the
whole of western Asia, and of what we call the Near East, including Asia
Minor Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Babylonia, Mesopotamia, Persia, and
northwestern India, was saturated with the Greek influence and with Greek
colonies.
The imagination of these conquered peoples was dazzled by the introduction
of Greek art, literature, philosophy, and public works. Though the
successors of Alexander were unable to maintain the political control of the
lands he conquered, and though successive waves of Roman, Arabian, and
Tartar conquests swept over these lands in succeeding centuries, none of the
later conquerors has been able wholly to eradicate the influence of Greek
culture, nor to exterminate that element of population which was of Greek
blood.
Thus it becomes clear that when, nearly seven hundred years ago, the night
of Turkish oppression began to settle down upon the Near East, the Greeks
who were caught beneath the Turkish darkness were not merely the inhabitants
of Greece itself, but were also those several million Greeks who had been
settled for more than a thousand years in Asia Minor. This fact has played a
decisive part in the recent history of both Turkey and Greece.
To understand the modern history of the Greeks, Western readers will have to
get one idea clearly in mind-an idea that will probably astonish most of
them. This is, that the modern Greek thinks no more about the Greece of the
Classical Age than we do. The modern Greek shares our veneration of that
golden epoch of the human intellect, but it is just as remote to him, and
just as unrelated to the immediate interests of his life, as it is to us.
Until six years ago no modern Greek ever dreamed, of reconstituting Athens
as the permanent capital of the Greek world. On the contrary, every Greek in
the world shared a passionate devotion to the ideal of re-erecting the
ancient Byzantine Empire in its prime of glory as of, let us say, the Ninth
Century, with Byzantium (Constantinople) as its capital. Not to the
Parthenon at Athens, but to the Santa Sofia at Constantinople, did his
mingled emotions of religion and political greatness yearn with a burning
zeal. If this animating principle be kept firmly in mind the whole course of
Greek political aspirations in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries
becomes clear.
The Greek War of Independence, which came to a successful conclusion in
1832, affected less than one half of the Greeks in the Turkish Empire. It
did not bring freedom to the Greeks of Macedonia and Thrace, of Crete and
the Aegean Islands, nor to the more than two million Greeks in Asia Minor
and Constantinople. For ninety-five years following the War of Independence,
down to the destruction of Smyrna in 1922, the consuming ambition of the
Kingdom of Greece, shared by the "unredeemed Greeks" of Asia Minor and the
islands, was the liberation of this majority of the Greek race. Along with
this ambition went the desire to control the territory over which all these
Greeks were scattered.
When I arrived in Constantinople as American Ambassador in 1913 the second
Balkan War had just come to a close. My two and one half years at the
Embassy there not only gave me an intimate knowledge of Turkey and the
Turks, but of the Greeks in Turkey as well. To my astonishment I then
learned that the Greeks comprised a considerable percentage of the
population of the Turkish Empire. In Constantinople alone there were between
three hundred and four hundred thousand permanent Greek residents. They were
one of the strongest elements of the population. I learned that, not only in
Constantinople, but also throughout Asia Minor, the Greeks largely
controlled the banking, the shipping, and the general mercantile business.
Some of the Greeks in Constantinople were among the most brilliant and
cultivated people I have ever met anywhere in the world. Highly educated,
fluent linguists, and very prosperous, they would have adorned any society.
Some of them were the only non-diplomatic residents of Constantinople who
were admitted into the diplomatic social circles.
I found that the Greeks, like various other non-Mohammedans, occupied a
peculiar legal status in Turkey, for which there is no parallel in any
European country. They constituted a separate legal community, and exercised
all community rights for themselves. They organized and supported their own
schools. This peculiar status arose from the theocratic nature of the
Turkish Government. To the Turkish mind, civil government and religious
government are inseparably intertwined, the civil government deriving its
sanctions and its authority from the Mohammedan religion. Consequently, the
Turk has always regarded the non-Mohammedan minorities as being simply other
religious communities. The Turkish Government has dealt with them as such.
Therefore, the Metropolitan, or chief bishop of the Orthodox Greek Church,
was officially recognized by the Turkish Government as the head of the Greek
community. He was held responsible for the orderly behavior of his
co-religionists, and for their obedience to Turkish laws.
When I came to Constantinople the revolutionary Committee of Union and
Progress-better known to the world as the Young Turks-was in control of the
government. They had deposed the former Sultan, Abdul Hamidj and had placed
upon his throne Abdul's brother, Mohammed. Utterly incompetent and
hopelessly weak, Mohammed was ruler merely in name. The real power was
exercised by the Young Turks, whose outstanding conspirators were Enver,
Talaat, and Djemal. Their men had set up the machinery of a sham
constitutional government, including a parliament of two houses, a senate,
and an assembly. The Greek community had representatives in this body. It
was of no advantage to them, however, as the parliament had no real
authority.
As a result of the two Balkan Wars the relations between the Turks and the
Greeks were considerably strained in 1913. The first Balkan War (in which an
alliance of Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria had decisively defeated Turkey) had
resulted in the lopping off from the Turkish Empire of Albania, Macedonia,
and Thrace, leaving Turkey only a few miles of European territory just north
of Constantinople. This disaster had followed close upon the almost equally
disastrous war between Italy and Turkey in 1911, wherein Italy wrested
Tripolitania from Turkey. I could readily understand the bitter feelings
harbored by the Turks. They were being pushed out of one after another of
their possessions, and were beginning to be fearful of being crowded to
complete extinction as a nation. The instinct of self-preservation was
aroused within them. They hated with a deadly hatred all Italians,
Bulgarians, "Serbs, and Greeks. They yearned for an opportunity to strike
back and take vengeance for their losses and humiliations.
The Greeks were the only one of these hated races within striking distance
of Turkish vengeance. The Greeks alone had a considerable body of their
population living within the Turkish borders. It was-deplorable, but by no
means unnatural, that they should speedily become objects of petty
persecution where-ever they happened to be living in Turkey.
They became also objects of official suspicion on the part of the Turkish
Government. That government was concerned with more than mere revenge. It
was fighting for the life of Turkey as an independent nation. Recently
deprived of many of its richest territories, Turkey was menaced with other
losses at the hands of ambitious neighbors. Its capital, Constantinople (now
within sight of enemy guns), had been coveted by Russia since the time of
Peter the Great, and by Greece for many centuries before that.
Thus, the Young Turk government had reason enough to be fearful of the
future. But the Young Turks had friends who took pains to increase their
fears. These friends were the German Ambassador at Constantinople and the
German army officers who had been brought in to organize and train the
Turkish Army. It developed later that the German Ambassador and the German
officers were already feverishly engaged in paving the way for the World War
that broke out in the following year. They were scheming for Turkish
cooperation in that conflict.
I have explained the German plan at length elsewhere. Briefly, it was to use
Turkey and Bulgaria during the impending war for the purpose of wholly
segregating Russia from her Western allies. After the war Bulgaria and
Turkey were to be made into tributary states, forming the opened corridor of
German expansion through to Mesopotamia and India. In working out the
details of this scheme Germany had foreseen that the presence of large
bodies of recalcitrant Greeks and Armenians within the Turkish Empire would
constitute a serious military difficulty. In the excitement and confusion of
war, these minorities would be strongly tempted to organize into hostile
armies threatening the German-Turkish lines of communication. Even if they
did not carry their hostilities so far as this, they would almost certainly
use their knowledge of the country to act as spies for the benefit of
Turkey's enemies. Especially could they be dangerous along the coasts of
Asia Minor, both to the north on the Black Sea, and to the west on the
Aegean, where the Germans had planned to establish submarine bases. The
majority of the inhabitants in the cities and towns on these coasts were
Greeks. For the foregoing reasons, the German agents in Constantinople did
everything in their power to heighten the fears of the Turkish Government
and to incite it to violence against the Greeks and Armenians.
Already in the early spring of 1914 the Young Turks were scheming and
preparing to go to war with Greece. They were not going to submit calmly to
the dissection of their nation. To defend themselves, they were determined
to take the offensive. It soon became evident that they had been advised
that, in anticipation of their entering the Great War, it was essential to
remove the Greeks from the seashores. Consequently, they began a systematic
petty persecution of the Greeks in the coast towns, with the purpose of so
frightening and discommoding them as to induce them to move out. The results
of their reign of terror were apparent, to those of us who lived in
Constantinople. Whenever we passed the Greek Consulate we could see a throng
of excited Greeks besieging its doors in an effort to get passports to leave
the country. Our friends among the wealthy Greeks told me they were removing
their valuables from the country; and they repeated to me endless stories of
the persecutions and hardships of their less fortunate brethren. The Greek
Metropolitan told us something of his difficulties. The poor man was in a
truly tragic position. Appeals to him, as the head of the Greek community,
poured in by the thousands from every part of Turkey. He had attempted to
obtain redress from the Turkish Government, but had been met with rebuffs
and insults. Only too plainly he perceived that the sufferings of his
followers were more than the result of sporadic outbursts of local
patriotism: they were the result of a systematic policy emanating from the
government at Constantinople itself.
Intolerable as the government was making it for the Greeks in the coast
towns, the Greeks were not leaving their homes fast enough to suit the
Turks. More strenuous measures were therefore adopted, and the atrocious
murder of fifty Greeks at Phocaea followed. The Phocaea incident brought the
designs of the Turks out into the open, and made it evident to all that a
war between Turkey and Greece was practically inevitable. The Young Turks
realized that in such a war they could not attack Greece by way of the
traditional route through Thrace and Macedonia. Both Bulgaria and Serbia
might join Greece to bar the way. To succeed, the attack would have to be
launched by sea. The Turkish Navy and the Greek Navy were so evenly matched
that the Turks had no assurance of victory on the water.
My office at the American Embassy now became the local scene of a strange
and subterranean battle for the control of the Aegean Sea. I have once
before told this incident in print, and I cannot do better than quote it
here from my Ambassador Morgenthau's Story:
... early in June, I received a most agitated visitor. This was Djemal
Pasha, the Turkish Minister of Marine and one of the three men who then
dominated the Turkish Empire. I have hardly ever seen a man who appeared
more utterly worried than was Djemal on this occasion. As he began talking
excitedly to my interpreter in French, his whiskers trembling with his
emotions and his hands wildly gesticulating, he seemed to be almost beside
himself. I knew enough French to understand what he was saying, and, the
news which he brought-this was the first I had heard of it- sufficiently
explained his agitation. The American Government, he said, was negotiating
with Greece for the sale of two battleships, the Idaho and the Mississippi.
He urged that I should immediately move to prevent any such sale. His
attitude was that of a suppliant; he begged, he implored that I should
intervene. All along, he said, the Turks regarded the United States as their
best friend; I had frequently expressed my desire to help them; well, here
was the chance to show our good feeling. The fact that Greece and Turkey
were practically on the verge of war, said Djemal, really made the sale of
the ships an un-neutral act. Still, if the transaction were purely a
commercial one, Turkey would like a chance to bid. "We will pay more than
Greece," he added. He ended with a powerful plea that I should at once cable
my government about the matter, and this I promised to do.
Evidently the clever Greeks had turned the tables on their enemy. Turkey had
rather too baldly advertised her intention of attacking Greece as soon as
she had received her dreadnaughts. Both the ships for which Greece was now
negotiating were immediately available for battle! The Idaho and Mississippi
were not indispensable ships for the American Navy; they could not take
their place in the first line of battle; they were powerful enough, however,
to drive the whole Turkish Navy from the Aegian. Evidently the Greeks did
not intend politely to postpone the impending war until the Turkish
dreadnaughts had been finished. Djemal's point, of course, had no legal
validity. However great the threat of war might be, Turkey and Greece were
still actually at peace. Clearly Greece had just as much right to purchase
warships in the United States as Turkey had to purchase them in Brazil or
England. . . .
To Djemal and the other Turkish officials who kept pressing me I suggested
that their ambassador in Washington should take up the matter directly with
the President. They acted on this advice, but the Greeks again got ahead of
them. At two o'clock, June 2ad, the Greek charge d'affaires at Washington
and Commander Tsouklas, of the Greek Navy, called upon the President and
arranged the sale. As they left the President's office, the Turkish
Ambassador entered- just fifteen minutes too late!
Djemal treated his failure in the negotiations for the American battleships
as a personal defeat and humiliation. His anger could not, of course, find
any outlet upon me. It could, however, be turned upon the Greeks who lived
in Turkey. Djemal was the most relentless of the group of desperate leaders
of the Young Turks. Realizing that the Turkish Navy was now outmatched, and
that Turkey would have to give up the idea of open war with the Greeks to
recover the Aegean Islands, Djemal's implacable hatred took a new direction.
At his insistence the Turkish Government began the deliberate effort to
remove all Greeks from, the seashores of Asia Minor;-that I have mentioned
above-and to molest them in other ways.
These Greeks were completely at the mercy of the Turks. The Greek Government
was impotent to help them. Whole settlements of Greeks in Asia Minor were
rounded up by the Turkish troops, were loaded like cattle on to ships and
deported from the country. On shipboard these Greeks were treated with the
greatest brutality. They were given neither food nor water-in some cases for
such long periods of time that their tongues clove to the roofs of their
mouths. En route to Greece the ships called at the Island of Prinkipo, in
the Sea of Marmora. Notwithstanding the terrible sufferings of the refugees
on board, the Greek residents of Prinkipo were not permitted to do anything
to help their brethren on these ships, which were anchored within sight and
sound of the shore.
I came into intimate contact with this whole problem through the Greek
Metropolitan at Constantinople. Powerless to be of any assistance to his
fellow countrymen, he appealed to me for help for them. I sent a boat to
Prinkipo with barrels of water and boxes of crackers, with instructions to
distribute them to the distressed refugees.
The Prinkipo incident was so flagrant and was so obviously approved by the
Turkish authorities that it dispelled any lingering doubts I might have had
that an organized effort was being made to frighten the Greeks out of
Turkey. This incident had the same effect upon the minds of the Greeks
themselves, and many of the leading Greek bankers and merchants of
Constantinople left Turkey with their families, many of them removing to
Athens and Paris.
The World War broke out shortly after the Prinkipo incident. The Greeks in
Turkey were now more alarmed than ever. The Greek Government was a
traditional friend of Great Britain's, and Great Britain was now at war with
Turkey's military advisers, the Germans. The Greek inhabitants of the
Turkish Empire were therefore more than ever under the suspicion of the
Turkish rulers. The stream of Greeks besieging the consulate with
applications for passports to leave the country now became a veritable
deluge.
The Greek inhabitants of Turkey were, of course, citizens of the empire,
and, as such, were liable to military duty. Not unnaturally, they were
regarded by the Turks as unreliable soldiers in the Turkish Army.
Consequently, they were not permitted to bear arms. Those who had the means
to do so were coerced into buying exemption from military service at the
rate of about forty English pounds per capita. The less affluent Greeks-who,
of course, comprised the great majority-being unable to purchase exemption,
were enrolled in so-called "labor battalions" and were put to work at menial
tasks under the direction of Turkish officers. They built military roads,
erected barracks, and performed other tasks of manual labor behind the
lines. They were subjected to iron discipline, as the Turks regarded every
Greek as a potential traitor, insurrectionist, and spy.
I would be the last person to condone the Turkish brutality toward the Greek
labor battalions-for the Turks, undoubtedly with deliberate intention, so
overworked and underfed these men as to cause the death of several hundred
thousand of them. Nevertheless, it is only fair to the Turks to say that
they were largely justified in their fears that the Greeks would have
availed themselves of any opportunity to hamper Turkish military efficiency.
After the World War had been in progress for two years Venizelos took Greece
into the war on the side of the Allies. From that moment onward the Turks no
longer treated their Greek citizens as merely potential traitors, but began
to treat them as avowed enemies, and to make their lives miserable in every
possible way. I was besought upon scores of occasions to use my influence
with the Turkish Government to help Greek individuals and Greek communities
out of critical difficulties with the Turks. Happily, I was able on a good
many occasions to be of real service to these distressed people.
The ending of the World War, with the incidental complete defeat of the
Turks, by no means ended the troubles of the Greeks. The Kingdom of Greece,
to be sure, would inevitably gain great advantages when the terms of the
peace settlement were finally written. The Greek inhabitants of Turkey,
however, were left in little better state than they had been before. Indeed,
as will appear shortly, the extraordinary success of Venizelos at the Paris
Peace Conference, in securing for Greece exceptional advantages in the peace
terms there, eventually operated indirectly to bring overwhelming disaster
upon the Greeks in Turkey.
The conference at Paris did not include the Turkish problem in the peace
settlement. The Allies, themselves, had too many conflicting interests
involved in the Near East to permit an immediate agreement. Consequently,
that whole subject was laid aside for separate treatment after the
Versailles Treaty should be out of the way.
Even during the peace conference, however, the Turkish problem could not be
kept submerged. The Italians were determined to gain special advantage from
the dismemberment of the Turkish Empire, and Greece was only little less
anxious to do so. Italy announced her claims and proceeded to overt acts.
Italian troops seized the port of Adalia, the key to southwestern Asia
Minor, which Italy coveted. The Greeks protested that this move was intended
solely to anticipate their "own claim in Asia Minor. President Wilson
attacked the Italian move so vigorously that Premier Orlando for a time
withdrew from the conference. President Wilson now announced his support of
the long-debated claim of Greece to the possession of Smyrna, Aidin, and the
Ionian coast. Partly to block further the Italian aggression, and partly to
protect the Greek inhabitants of Asia Minor from the fury of the vanquished
Turks, President Wilson now consented that the Greeks be invited to send an
army of occupation to police this region until the Powers could finally
agree on its ultimate disposition,
Apparently, President Wilson's theory in proposing this move was that the
nearest friendly troops were the Greek divisions in Macedonia, and that
prompt action was necessary to protect the Christians of the Smyrna
district. Winston Churchill has only recently asserted that the American
missionaries in Smyrna added their warnings against this move to the
warnings of the British Foreign Office and British General Staff, declaring
that it was fraught with the gravest dangers, not only to the Greek Army
itself, but to the Christian population of Ionia as well. In any event,
Lloyd George cordially approved President Wilson's proposal, Clemenceau
offered no objections, and the occupation was ordered and quickly
accomplished. Greek troops landed at Smyrna under the protecting fire of
Greek battleships, killed a number of Turkish soldiers retreating from the
city, and quickly occupied advanced positions in the hinterland.
Churchill has described vividly the bewilderment and alarm with which he
heard the news of this action. He had made a special study of the Turkish
problem in both its military and political aspects. He was convinced that
the Greek Army would eventually meet with disaster in the exceedingly
difficult mountainous interior of Asia Minor. But he was even more alarmed,
he declares, at the political complications that would be engendered. The
defeated Turks were growing restive. Constantinople was strongly held by the
Allies with their fleets in the Bosphorus, but the dwindling Allied armies
retained only a few precarious footholds in Asia Minor, where most of the
Turks lived. This half-savage warrior race was already angry enough at its
military defeat, but to have a part of its very homeland occupied by Greeks,
whom it regarded with age-long hatred and contempt, fanned resentment to
active fury.
The results that Churchill foresaw actually came to pass. The Turks felt
that their very existence was now threatened, and they resorted to desperate
measures. Mustapha Kemal, the ablest officer the Turks had had during the
war, now emerged as the political and military leader of an organized
movement to defy the whole world, if necessary, to preserve a Turkish nation
in Asia Minor. Withdrawing from Constantinople, and setting up headquarters
in the mountain fastnesses at Angora, a group of determined Turkish leaders
issued a manifesto to the world, in which they declared that Turkey would
fight to the death of her last man to preserve Turkish nationality.
This was the beginning of the Turkish Nationalist State, which has persisted
to the present day. Kemal rapidly organized an efficient army and proceeded
to recapture the ammunition "dumps" of arms laid down when Turkey had
capitulated the year before. The Greek Army in Ionia was soon confronted
with the menace of a well-equipped Turkish army waiting only for a favorable
opportunity to join battle.
Meanwhile, in 1920, the Allies gathered at the Conference of Sevres to
thresh out the peace settlement for Turkey.
Before discussing the Sevres Conference, however, I should go back a moment
to the decision at the Paris Conference to have the Greek Army occupy Ionia.
Quite independently of Churchill, I came to the same conclusion he had
reached, for I, too, was intimately familiar with the Turkish problem from
my residence in Constantinople in the first years of the war. I told Henry
White, one of the American peace commissioners, my views on the subject. I
once before described this incident and| quote what I then printed:
"When discussing with Henry White the Greek invasion of Smyrna, I told him
that the Greeks were making a mistake and that they would be drawn into a
tedious struggle with the Turks. They would have to draw-heavily on their
resources and on their people's patience, which would be severely strained
if, as I feared, the war lasted for years. White was deeply impressed.
"I want you to tell that to Venizelos," he said.
He knew everybody, and his bringing people together was not the least of his
services to our Commission. He invited the Greek Premier to his rooms in the
Crillon, and there I repeated my opinion.
"I told him in great detail the changes that had taken place in Turkey since
the beginning of the war, and described to him the characters of the men
that were now in power. I also explained to him the great importance they
put on retaining possession of the Port of Smyrna, now that they had lost
most of their other ports on the Mediterranean, I felt certain that they
would draw the Grecian Army back into their hinterland, and away from their
base of supplies, and then would continue to fight them by legitimate, or
even guerrilla, methods, until they exhausted them. I reminded him how the
Turks not only forbade their own people to employ Greeks, but even insisted
that the American firms could not use Grecian workmen to collect the
licorice root, or the Singer Manufacturing Company continue to have Greeks
in charge of their Turkish agencies. I also alluded to the difficulties of
governing Smyrna from Athens, as Constantinople would divide their country,
and the cost of administration would be beyond the present and prospective
resources of Greece, and, finally, I reminded him that they would antagonize
Italy and said: "You know better than I do what that means for Greece."
Venizelos listened patiently to my elaboration of this theme.
"Perhaps we have acted too hastily," he said, "and if all you say is true,
it may have been unwise for us to send an army into Smyrna, but now that the
army is there, it would be more unwise to withdraw it-to do so would admit
military and court political defeat. The Monarchists are plotting constantly
against me in Athens, and they are backed by the merchants and shipping men
who are over-ambitious and want new territory for their operations."
The conference at Sevres finally worked out a treaty of peace, which
everybody signed. It satisfied nobody. Turkey was to be dismembered and left
with no territory to call her own except the interior of Asia Minor and the
city of Constantinople. The independent Republic of Armenia was erected to
the east; Mesopotamia and Palestine were put under British mandate, Syria
and Cilicia under French mandate, and to Italy was assigned Adalia and its
hinterland. Smyrna and Ionia were held by the Greeks, pending further
discussion of their eventual disposition.
The relations between Turkey and Greece now moved rapidly toward a tragic
conclusion. The Turkish Nationalists announced they would never accept the
Treaty of Sevres, and bent all their energies toward getting their army into
condition to defend their country. They were also determined to seize the
first opportunity to drive the Greeks out of Ionia.
At this juncture, when Greece had the greatest need of the genius of
Venizelos, that far-sighted statesman was overwhelmingly defeated in the
Greek general election in the fall of 1920. His Royalist enemies in Greece
were almost as much astonished at the result of this election as Venizelos
himself. Immediately, however, they hastened to take vengeance on his
adherents. Their first act upon organizing their government was to repeal
the decree of exile against Constantine, and to recall him to Athens to
resume his throne.
Reinstated in power, Constantine pursued his advantage by removing from
command all the officers of the Greek Army who owed their positions to
Venizelos. It so happened that these officers were by far the most
experienced commanders amongst the Greeks. They were replaced by favorites
of Constantine. The most grotesque example of this favoritism was his
appointment of General Hadjanestes to the supreme command of the army of
occupation in Ionia. This was the most important command in the army at the
moment. The Greek troops in Ionia were operating in a most difficult country
in the presence of a skilful and implacable enemy. General Hadjanestes, upon
whom was placed the terrific responsibility of guiding this army in its
precarious situation, was notoriously a nervous wreck at the time
Constantine appointed him.
Early in 1921 representatives of the British, French, and Italian
governments met in London to reconsider and revise the impossible Treaty of
Sevres. The London Conference worked out a set of tentative proposals for a
revision of that treaty. These proposals were indignantly rejected by the
Greeks. Constantine now thought he saw an opportunity to eclipse the glory
that Venizelos had gained by his acquisition of Ionia. He thought he saw an
opportunity to drive the Turks out of Asia Minor and to assert Greek
sovereignty over the whole of that country. He accordingly committed the
supreme folly of ordering a general offensive against the Turkish
Nationalist position. The Greeks were defeated in this attack, and
Constantine left Athens and took personal command of the army in Asia Minor
on June nth. He left Greece hailed by the government-inspired press as
Emperor-Designate of Constantinople, thus vaingloriously appealing to the
traditional ambition of the Greek nation to reconstruct the Byzantine
Empire.
The Turkish military commanders in Asia Minor now followed the strategy that
I had foreseen in Paris three years before. The Turks retired before the
Greek advance, permitting the Greek Army to capture difficult mountain
passes with only feeble resistance. Thus the Turks lured the Greeks farther
and farther into the difficult mountains just west of Angora. The Greek line
of communications was thus extended until Greece's army was barely able to
maintain its supplies from the coast. Then, one day in August, the Turkish
Army, in accordance with its long-meditated plan of action, attacked the
Greek Army on the banks of the Sakkaria River. The Greek Army was compelled
to withdraw westward until it could reform its lines on a continuous front
about four days' march east of Smyrna.
Then followed a year of international negotiation. The conflicting ambitions
of the Allied Powers regarding the future of Asia Minor resulted in some of
the most disgusting intrigues in modern history. Of these, two were
especially disgraceful. The first was the so-called Franklin-Bouillon
Agreement, arrived at between France and the Turkish Nationalist Government.
This agreement was signed on October 20, 1921, at Angora, by Kemal for the
Turks and by Franklin-Bouillon for the French. It was dictated by the greed
of French capitalists seeking concessions from the Turks for railways and
commercial privileges. In exchange, the French shamefully deserted their
support of the Greeks, whom in 1919 they (along with Great Britain and the
United States) had invited to take over the military occupation of Asia
Minor. Not only did the French withdraw their moral support from the Greeks
and transfer their friendship to the Turks, but they "abandoned" great
quantities of French ammunition in Asia Minor-practically making a present
to the Turks of munitions of war with which to destroy their former allies,
the Greeks.
Italy, like France, deserted her Greek ally. During the Paris Conference the
Italians had entered the southern coast of Asia Minor at Adalia, and were
still in possession there whilst the Greeks were operating against the Turks
from Smyrna as a base. While this Greek campaign was in progress it soon
became notorious to military observers of all nations that the Turks were
being continually supplied with ammunition "bootlegged" to them from the
Italian base at Adalia. Italy's ambitions with regard to Asia Minor were
stronger than her sense of duty to an ally. Italy already occupied the
Dodecanese Islands off the coast of Asia Minor, and the peninsula itself has
long been an object of Italy's scheme of colonial expansion. To have
remained faithful to the Greek alliance would have been to help Greece
eventually to become the owner of Asia Minor. On the other hand, to have
helped Turkey to repel the Greeks was to weaken both of Italy's rivals. The
temptation was too strong for Italy to withstand it.
Greece was almost hopelessly weakened, not only by the active betrayal of
France and Italy, but as well by the inactivity and indifference of Great
Britain, her third ally. The United States likewise shared in this disgrace.
The request that Greece should occupy Smyrna and police the Ionian shore was
initiated by President Wilson. It implied the assistance of all four of the
Great Powers, including the United States. But in 1926, following the
victory of the Republican Party in our national election, the United States
rejected practically all the commitments of the Wilson Administration. They
gave not the slightest regard to the fulfillment of our arrangement with
Greece, which was part of the general scheme of ending the war. We
precipitately retired from the scene, and so far as we were concerned left
Greece to her fate.
This fate speedily descended upon the Greeks in the most terrible form.
Following the year of futile negotiations among the European Powers, the
Turks attacked the Greek Army in Asia Minor, defeated it decisively, and put
it to ignominious rout. Two weeks later, on September 9, 1922, the Turks
entered Smyrna. Then followed the orgy of looting, outrage, massacre, and
burning, which desolated the city. The Turks segregated all the able-bodied
Greek men of mature age and drove them into the interior of Asia Minor,
where practically every one of them died of starvation, forced labor, or
assassination. The old men, the women, and the children were herded upon any
kind of craft that was available and without more ado were shipped (to the
number of several hundred thousand) to the mainland of Greece and to the
Aegean Islands under Greek sovereignty. The sudden enforced exodus of this
vast number of people, all unexpectedly uprooted from their ties of home and
occupation, all of them completely impoverished, and all of them thrown
chaotically upon Greek soil without any regard to their future welfare,
marks the beginning of the refugee problem in its most acute stage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morgenthau: I was sent to Athens:
Spirit of Truth
gogu
>
> "gogu" <Rruminii...@Greci.com> wrote in message
> news:VLudnROMJsPHcdzX...@giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "ADR" <aret...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:bc828d03-a9b7-4218...@c18g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jun 23, 3:21 pm, "gogu" <RuminiiSugPu...@Greci.com> wrote:
>>> ...........................................................................................................
>>>
>>> I've listen to enough of this nonsense. Fyrom SHALL accept Vardar
>>> Macedonia and the US will see to it. Fyrom wants into Nato and Europe
>>> and
>>> THAT is the only way. So forget your naysaying. You have gone into
>>> effect of the stupid revisonist posters and the epitome of doublespeak,
>>> Schneider..
>> It's not "nay saying" Spirit, it's reality, like it or not!
>> What I say is not what I think/want, it's what's happening right now in
>> the area!
>> Like it or not!
>> Mr. Nimitz comes with "Republic of North Macedonia" in his luggage and
>> this time Gruevski was pressed by Washington to accept this name, and he
>> did!
>> I repeat, not a scenario but *REAL* information, no matter if we like it
>> or not!
>> Now if this is a "good" or a "bad" solution/compromise for Greece, this
>> is another discussion we can have.
> Gogo, I was talking to Tasso.
Well, I was cited second after ADR's name in the headers so I thought it was
also addressed to me;-)
ADR
> This is simply not true!
> Even from the 80's architect Sidiropoulos of Veria, me and a collective of
> architects elaborated the plans of the Vergina Museum and AFAIK it is build
> and functioning today!
The museum is just OK. I thought that the idea of cutting it in the
tumulus was not appropriate, one wants to preserve archaeological
sites. This is why the original Acropolis museum within a stone's
throw from the Parthenon was not a brilliand idea either. The Vergina
area needs substantial upgrading (but so do most archaeological sites
in Greece. The museum in Olympia, that carries some of the most
important ancient statues in Greece needs massive revamping. But, as
usual, we lavish money in Athens paid by the rest of the country.