Hans Lothar Schteppan - Where the truth lays...(Greek LIES)
Krater Makedonski
Forum Plus, Number 123, 01.02.2008
If for the Greeks the "name" issue represents "Support for the State Philosophy" which is overly excessive, then for the Macedonians it represents a risk of "losing their country and ethnic existense".
Macedonians have been using this name for at least 1,500 years or since many tribes settled the Balkans and mixed with the indigenous people. Greeks on the other hand have gained Macedonian territory, specifically their northern province which for the longest time they called "Northern Greece" only 95 years ago when they took possession of 51% of Macedonia in 1913. Only in 1989 did Greece change the name of its northern province to "Macedonia" under the motto "Attack is the best defense".
It is absurd that Macedonians are even talking to the Greeks knowing that they have little chance of making progress in these unfair negotiations. Thanks to Greece's threat of veto and its irresponsible use of it as well as its position in NATO and the EU it has all the help it needs from the European Community to hold Macedonia back as long as it wants.
Greece very cunningly and abruptly rejected Macedonia's name in 1992 in Lisbon before anyone had a chance to "examine the facts". This rejection also came with misinformation and confusion leading the unaware European ministers to come to the wrong conclusion. Greece lead the European Community into believing that the name "Macedonia" was of no importance to the Republic of Macedonia because allegedly this was a name created by Tito when Yugoslavia became a state of republics in 1944. Thus Greece's strong objection to the name was laid on a foundation of lies. The EU states, without consulting historical data and without examining the facts, were quick to take Athens's side. A similar scenario was repeated in 1993 when Macedonia applied for membership into the United Nations. It seems that justice is not important these days and the sacred Greek might is always placed ahead of Macedonia's right.
If we examine past approaches to the name issue taken by our American "mediator" of the UN, we will find that the whole process is biased in Greece's favour. Actions taken during briefings in Skopje in 1994 and 1995 at best can be described as "desperate".
With the exception of naming the Skopje Airport "Alexander the Great", every gesture Macedonia made in Greece's view should be positive but from what experience has shown Greece has been relentless and has, without thinking twice, used all ammunition delivered to its hands against Macedonia.
Macedonia on the other hand has a great heritage which modern Europe considers to be the cradle of western culture. Ironicaly even though it is well known that Alexander the Great was Macedonian, no one complained when Greece named its airport "Alexander the Great" in late 1989. What justification did the Greeks have? That Alexander the Great spread "Hellenism" to the world during his expeditions? If that were true, and no one can deny that modern Europe in its entirety has profited immensely from Hellenism, then why is there not a single European nation (besides Greece) Greek today? Why is there not a single nation outside of Europe, where Alexander ventured, Greek today?
When Slav tribes were settling the Balkans in the 6th and 7th centuries AD the ancient Greeks had already abandoned Greece and others settled in their place. For well known reasons the Greeks left Greece at the end of the 4th century but the descendents of the ancient Macedonians remained all while Macedonia was a Roman province. Thus the descendents of the ancient Macedonians lived in Macedonia as the descendents of the ancient Thracians lived in Thrace and as the descendents of the Ancient Epirians lived in Epirus. In time these people assimilated with the Slav tribes who in turn adopted those lands as their home and left their genetic markers in the modern populations. So today we have Slav and ancient Macedonian genetic markers in the blood of the modern Macedonians the same as we have Thracian genetic markers in the blood of the modern Bulgarians and modern Turks living in Eastern Thrace. The same can be said about the modern Greeks and Albanians
who carry in their blood the genetic markers from the ancient Epirians.
Even though it is well known that the Turko-Tatar Bulgars settled the Eastern Balkans 150 years after the Slav tribes and took the Slavic language from them, does not prevent the modern Bulgarians from asserting that today's Macedonians allegedly speak "Bulgarian".
omnibuster
Hans Lothar Schteppan is a former German Ambassador to FYROM and author
of the book "Macedonian Knot" never mentios the pro communist attitude
of the FYROM makos.I wonder why. :oÞ
Nikitas25
Greece will spare no effort in reaching a real and viable solution for
the
sake of peace and stability in the region. Alliances and partnerships,
however, can only be fostered among countries if there is mutual trust
and
goodwill.
--
Soon very soon SJR
ERIC
outright fantasies and fabrications, half truths and pathetic logic but of
average content for the FYROM side.
He prepares us for the tone of his farce editorial by the 2nd sentence when
he uses the name "Macedonian" and term "ethnic existence" in the same
breath. The reader, then, has total knowledge as to the content and type of
rubbish that he is about to spew out.
Geez, 1,500 uninterrupted years of slav speakers in parts of the FYROM
calling themselves "Macedonians"----what an unbelievable find the clown has
created.
Even the newly annointed patron saint of the FYROM, Gotse Delchev, declared
that he was Bulgarian........too bad old Gotse wasn't able to read this
Schteppan crap before he made such statements.
As well, let us not forget the statements of the FYROM's George Washington
( Kiro Gligorov the 1st president of the FYROM) who proclaimed--------
"We are Slavs who came to this area in the sixth century ... we are not
descendants of the ancient Macedonians."
(from the Foreign Information Service Daily Report, Eastern Europe, February
26, 1992, p. 35. )
"We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians. That's who we are! We have
no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia. The ancient
Macedonians no longer exist, they had disappeared from history long time
ago. Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century (A.D)."
(from the Toronto Star newspaper, March 15, 1992)
Now that it appears that the name issue won't be settled this year, perhaps
Greece should wait a while longer before offering up the 'republic of slav
macedonia'. The name including a slav identifier was found unsuitable owing
to the existence of the 1/3 or so portion of the FYROM that is ethnic
Albanian. When that population secedes from the FYROM, THEN the slav
identifier can be accurately accepted.
Regards
Eric Christou
Where do these types crawl out from under....
"omnibuster" <omnib...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mn.11b67d84e...@yahoo.com...
> FYROM makos.I wonder why. :oŞ
>
>
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Where the truth lays...
> Forum Plus, Number 123, 01.02.2008
>
> By Hans Lothar Schteppan
>
> The satire "Greek by name" from December 12, 2007, is characterized as successfully funny and even humourous, sadly however reality is seldom a "comedy".
> If for the Greeks the "name" issue represents "Support for the State Philosophy" which is overly excessive, then for the Macedonians it represents a risk of "losing their country and ethnic existense".
Both points of view are absurdly hyperbolic.
> Macedonians have been using this name for at least 1,500 years or since many tribes settled the Balkans and mixed with the indigenous people.
True, but the term "Macedonia" certainly predated the arrival of the
Slavs.
> Greeks on the other hand have gained Macedonian territory, specifically their northern province which for the longest time they called "Northern Greece" only 95 years ago when they took possession of 51% of Macedonia in 1913.
This is a very misleading statement. Who are the "Greeks", and who are
the "they" who "took possession" of 51% of "Macedonia" in 1913?
Metaphorical sleight of hand does not hide the fact that the good Mr
Schteppan is using two different yardsticks here: he seems to infer
that "the Greeks" are the people of the Hellenic Republic (or Kingdom)
and nothing else, while "Macedonia" is a piece of land.
If Mr Schteppan were to argue his point logically, the "Hellenes"
would be compared to the "Macedonians", while "Greece" would be
compared to "Macedonia". But he is comparing "Macedonia" with "the
Hellenes" which is an apples/oranges juxtaposition. It is hard to
imagine that someone of his obvious intelligence is not doing this
deliberately.
> Only in 1989 did Greece change the name of its northern province to "Macedonia" under the motto "Attack is the best defense".
Possibly.
> It is absurd that Macedonians are even talking to the Greeks knowing that they have little chance of making progress in these unfair negotiations. Thanks to Greece's threat of veto and its irresponsible use of it as well as its position in NATO and the EU it has all the help it needs from the European Community to hold Macedonia back as long as it wants.
This is absolutely correct.
> Greece very cunningly and abruptly rejected Macedonia's name in 1992 in Lisbon before anyone had a chance to "examine the facts". This rejection also came with misinformation and confusion leading the unaware European ministers to come to the wrong conclusion. Greece lead the European Community into believing that the name "Macedonia" was of no importance to the Republic of Macedonia because allegedly this was a name created by Tito when Yugoslavia became a state of republics in 1944.
Ridiculous. PResumably, none of the members of the "European
Community" had ever heard of the Kingdom of Alexander.
> Thus Greece's strong objection to the name was laid on a foundation of lies.
Your arguments rest on a similar foundation, Hans old man ...
> The EU states, without consulting historical data and without examining the facts, were quick to take Athens's side. A similar scenario was repeated in 1993 when Macedonia applied for membership into the United Nations. It seems that justice is not important these days and the sacred Greek might is always placed ahead of Macedonia's right.
There is some truth to this, but it seems to insinuate that Greece has
no right on its side at all. Macedonia, to be sure, has a case for its
position. Mr Schteppan seems to think that all Greece has on its side
is might. A little simplistic.
> If we examine past approaches to the name issue taken by our American "mediator" of the UN, we will find that the whole process is biased in Greece's favour. Actions taken during briefings in Skopje in 1994 and 1995 at best can be described as "desperate".
> With the exception of naming the Skopje Airport "Alexander the Great", every gesture Macedonia made in Greece's view should be positive but from what experience has shown Greece has been relentless and has, without thinking twice, used all ammunition delivered to its hands against Macedonia.
It looks as though he's right here. Greece has been pretty relentless
and willing to use blackmail.
> Macedonia on the other hand has a great heritage which modern Europe considers to be the cradle of western culture. Ironicaly even though it is well known that Alexander the Great was Macedonian,
Although he seems to think that the "European Union" hadn't heard of
Macedonia (see above)
> no one complained when Greece named its airport "Alexander the Great" in late 1989. What justification did the Greeks have? That Alexander the Great spread "Hellenism" to the world during his expeditions? If that were true, and no one can deny that modern Europe in its entirety has profited immensely from Hellenism, then why is there not a single European nation (besides Greece) Greek today? Why is there not a single nation outside of Europe, where Alexander ventured, Greek today?
What on earth is this is supposed to mean? It is of historical record
that Rome ruled Germania Inferior. So why isn't Mr Schteppen a Roman?
this line of argument is illogical beyond belief. Moreover, he accuses
the "European Union" of ignorance, but he seems unaware of the
archaeological, numismatic, linguistic, narrative and other evidence
that Alexander's armies conquered the Persian Empire.
And if he wants a simple answer to a stupid question, if he wants to
know why the areas conquered are not still Greek, he ought to ask the
Turks, Arabs, Persians and Afghans that question. He might also ask
the Pakistanis and Indians where their name "Sikendar" came from.
> When Slav tribes were settling the Balkans in the 6th and 7th centuries AD the ancient Greeks had already abandoned Greece and others settled in their place.
Oh dear. This is such a flasehood that I am inclined to think that
this passage was written (or edited) to slander Mr Schteppan. It is
hard to believe that anyone would say such a thing and not have at
least some kind of evidence to back up the claim.
> For well known reasons the Greeks left Greece at the end of the 4th century but the descendents of the ancient Macedonians remained all while Macedonia was a Roman province.
Again, this is so completely incorrect that I am led to smell a rat.
> Thus the descendents of the ancient Macedonians lived in Macedonia as the descendents of the ancient Thracians lived in Thrace and as the descendents of the Ancient Epirians lived in Epirus. In time these people assimilated with the Slav tribes who in turn adopted those lands as their home and left their genetic markers in the modern populations. So today we have Slav and ancient Macedonian genetic markers in the blood of the modern Macedonians the same as we have Thracian genetic markers in the blood of the modern Bulgarians and modern Turks living in Eastern Thrace. The same can be said about the modern Greeks and Albanians
> who carry in their blood the genetic markers from the ancient Epirians.
Actually, from a strictly genetic point of view, everyone is related
to everyone else in the region.
> Even though it is well known that the Turko-Tatar Bulgars settled the Eastern Balkans 150 years after the Slav tribes and took the Slavic language from them, does not prevent the modern Bulgarians from asserting that today's Macedonians allegedly speak "Bulgarian".
What this has to do with anything is beyond me.
>
> Further forward in time, during the 9th century according to George Shtatmiller author of the book "History of South-Easter Europe" the Greeks, drawn by the Slav settlements of Greece, returned to their former fatherland and assimilated the Slavs and Albanians settling that region. So how can the Greeks then claim to be related to the ancient Macedonians?
Another statement so completely ridiculous as to make me question its
authenticity. I wonder what Mr Schteppan would have to say if he were
asked to comment on what he has supposedly said here.
>
> Contrary to any Greek assertions, Greeks in reality never settled Macedonian territories, not in ancient nor any other time until the 20th century.
What does he mean by "Greeks"? or "Macedonians"?
> Macedonians on the other hand have conquered and have occupied Greek lands. The ancient Macedonians, through the League of Corinth, held hegemony over the Greeks for over 120 years during which time they also occupied Athens for a short period.
Correct.
>
> Thus prior to the 20th century Macedonia was never Greek, not during Roman times when both Macedonia and Greece were Roman colonies, not during the Middle Ages, not during Ottoman times and certainly not until after the 1912, 1913 Balkan Wars when Greece, for the first time, by virtue of conquest, was awarded Macedonian lands including Solun and parts of Thrace. And this Greece did not do alone but with help from its neighbours Serbia, Bulgaria and Montenegro and with the blessings of the Great Powers. Thanks to the Great Powers, Russia in particular, for their support of the four Balkan monarchies which united and declared war on the Ottomans without themselves being swallowed up by Austro-Hungary or Romania.
What all this has to do with 2008 is beyond me. It is, however, more
or less historically correct.
>
> Let us also remind the world that the Thracians and Epirians disappeared after 1913 only as a result of brutal hellenization at the hands of the Greek state, brutal Bulgarization at the hands of the Bulgarians and Islamization due to Ottoman influence.
The Thracians and Epirians? Is he saying that such people existed as
distinct peoples prior to 1913?
> The Macedonians occupied by Serbia to some extent survived Serbian attempts at assimilation and began to regain their Macedonian consciousness under the cover of Yugoslavia.
>
> It is sad to say that Macedonia's annexation in 1913 happened with the blessing of International right which now reminds it of the shame it committed. It is not fear of the Macedonian hammer that Greece is afraid but of the fear of facing its own shame in public.
How can Mr Schteppan know what someone else is afraid of? This all
smells rather fishy to me ...
>
> As protectors of the European heritage which has flourished for centuries, European Union parliamentarians should be ashamed of forcing Macedonia, a state which in the past has done so much for Europe, to accept a farcical name like "FYROM". This again proves that Europe values business and money far above justice, truth, etiquette and morality.
If it proves such a thing, why does FYROM want to join the EU?
>
> If this small country has learned anything, it has learned how unfair Europe can be. The 2001 Ohrid Agreement was forced upon it by Brussels bureaucrats without even examining the facts or consulting history. Europe has shown no care for the dangers under the sword of Demiclis it has created for this young state. With this kind of attitude how does Europe expect to hold a united existence?
Once again, if the EU is such a rotten body, why does FYROM want to
join so badly?
>
> The only option Macedonia is left with to protect its rights is to present its case to the international community.
>
> Hans Lothar Schteppan is a former German Ambassador to the Republic of Macedonia and author of the book "Macedonian Knot"
I think that this passage has been edited, doctored, and just plain
embellished. Extremists on both sides will gain from it if it becomes
the "truth", as extremist Greeks can use it to discredit Mr Schteppan
and/or honest historians who believe that FYROM has some legitimacy to
its claims.
"Macedonian" extremists gain if this becomes the accepted version of
events, their slandering of Mr Schteppan be darned.
andy...@gmail.com
> This Schteppan writes as a total idiot-------breathtaking stupidity,
> outright fantasies and fabrications, half truths and pathetic logic but of
> average content for the FYROM side.
Like I said, I think that Mr Schteppan's account has been altered if
not out-and-out falsified. There are so many glaring falsehoods that
either the German foreign service is appointing meddling no-nothings
as ambassadors or someone has cooked up the whole thing to muddy the
watters in the name debate.
With ultranationalists, objective truth does not exist and slander of
an opponent is fair ball.
DonFigo
No here is the truth you lying Skop commie
http://www.politik.de/forum/archive/index.php/t-129900.html
Comedy: Greek by Name
By Hans Lothar Schteppan
Translated and edited by Risto Stefov
rst...@hotmail.com
February 12, 2008
Look who edited the article mouhahahaha
Zhivko Apostolovski
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ad9cefdf-c001-41dd...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
Dear Mr Toole,
Me thinks it is you one of those "meddling know-nothings", posting from
"UTOPIA", with FALSE (uninformed/utopian) "objectivity". It seems to me that
you have much to learn about Macedonia and Greece before you even come close
to being objective.
And one more thing: there is NOTHING altered or falsified in Mr Shteppan's
account, but then, if you have read his "Macedonian Knot" you wouldn' have
made your SILLY accusations.
Pozdrav,
Krater
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
> <andyto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ad9cefdf-c001-41dd...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 2, 11:07 am, "ERIC" <fitz...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> >> This Schteppan writes as a total idiot-------breathtaking stupidity,
> >> outright fantasies and fabrications, half truths and pathetic logic but of
> >> average content for the FYROM side.
>
>> Like I said, I think that Mr Schteppan's account has been altered if
>> not out-and-out falsified. There are so many glaring falsehoods that
>> either the German foreign service is appointing meddling no-nothings
>> as ambassadors or someone has cooked up the whole thing to muddy the
>> watters in the name debate.
>>
>> With ultranationalists, objective truth does not exist and slander of
>> an opponent is fair ball.
>
> Dear Mr Toole,
>
> Me thinks it is you one of those "meddling know-nothings", posting from
> "UTOPIA", with FALSE (uninformed/utopian) "objectivity". It seems to me that
> you have much to learn about Macedonia and Greece before you even come close
> to being objective.
Well, it's good to know I've drawn fire from both sides. I must be
onto something ;-)
One sentence out of Mr Schteppan's alleged account will suffice to
explain why I smell a rat. Quote:
"When Slav tribes were settling the Balkans in the 6th and 7th
centuries AD the ancient Greeks had already abandoned Greece and
others settled in their place."
The ancient Greeks abandoned Greece? I have a bachelor's degree in
Classical Studies (with distinction) and have spent more than half of
my life studying the Greco-Roman world. And this is the first time I
have ever heard anything like what "Mr Schteppan" states as fact. If
the ancient Greeks abandoned Greece, where did they go? And who was it
who settled in their place and evolved into the people who call
themselves "Hellenes" today? I allow that the modern Greeks are only
vaguely related to the ancient Greeks, but that's a far cry from what
"Mr Schteppan" says.
I would like to hear from a reputable and scholarly reference for
the above statement. It astonishes me that I know so little about
something I have been passionate about for a quarter of a century ;-)
>
> And one more thing: there is NOTHING altered or falsified in Mr Shteppan's
> account, but then, if you have read his "Macedonian Knot" you wouldn' have
> made your SILLY accusations.
It wasn't my accusations that are silly; it was the author's
statements. there's plenty more falsehoods in what he says, and
ultranationalists make poor historians.
Zhivko Apostolovski
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2ac7985c-ae24-4018...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 2, 12:21 am, "Krater Makedonski" <jordan.ap...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> Where the truth lays...
> Forum Plus, Number 123, 01.02.2008
>
> By Hans Lothar Schteppan
>
> The satire "Greek by name" from December 12, 2007, is characterized as
> successfully funny and even humourous, sadly however reality is seldom a
> "comedy".
> If for the Greeks the "name" issue represents "Support for the State
> Philosophy" which is overly excessive, then for the Macedonians it
> represents a risk of "losing their country and ethnic existense".
Both points of view are absurdly hyperbolic.
> Macedonians have been using this name for at least 1,500 years or since
> many tribes settled the Balkans and mixed with the indigenous people.
True, but the term "Macedonia" certainly predated the arrival of the Slavs.
Most of the modern day scholars, especially those from the (european)
communist block, suffer from the Russian "Slav" doctrine ("history),
especially for the Balkans, where through their "slav" brotherhood they
envisioneged an easy control there.
> Greeks on the other hand have gained Macedonian territory, specifically
> their northern province which for the longest time they called "Northern
> Greece" only 95 years ago when they took possession of 51% of Macedonia in
> 1913.
This is a very misleading statement.
*It is a correct statement, if you knew your facts.
Who are the "Greeks",
*Those who lived in the "Kingdom of the Greeks" (Greece) officially
established (recognised) in 1830 as a sovereign state, headed by a king
"importe" :-) from Bavaria. As far as their ethnic makeup is concerned the
majority of "Greeks" are of afro-asiatic descent, plus the "Greeks" from
the various ethincities of european origin, the artificial (assymilated -
most of them by force) - Vlachs, Albanians, "Slavs". The boundaries of the
above "Greece" mirrored the boundaries of "ancient Greece", because at that
time, to paraphrase Victor Roudometof: "An indispensable component of the
thesis concerning unbroken historical continuity was the Hellenic character
of the ancient Macedonian kingdom. In the early years of the Kingdom of
Greece (1832-1844), the boundaries of modern Greece were conceived as
identical to those of ancient Greece; the ancient Macedonians were viewed as
conquerors of ancient Greece and not as part of it." (see "Nationalism and
Identity Politics in the Balkans: Greece and the Macedonian Question" which
was publishe in "Journal of Modern Greek Studies"
and who are
the "they" who "took possession" of 51% of "Macedonia" in 1913?
*The above. They not only took 51% of Macedonia, but subsequently,
epecially in the 20's they began their massive ethnic cleansing of the
native Macedonian population and in their place the settled "Greeks" from
the greek isles and mainland Greece (administration, police, etc) and about
3/4 of a miliion christians from Turkey, whom now they are portraying as
"greek Macedonians". In 1926 alone, in one of the greek newspapers is stated
that more than 1/2 million Macedonians are evicted to Bulgaria.
Metaphorical sleight of hand does not hide the fact that the good Mr
Schteppan is using two different yardsticks here: he seems to infer
that "the Greeks" are the people of the Hellenic Republic (or Kingdom)
and nothing else, while "Macedonia" is a piece of land.
*Macedonia at that time was under Turkish (Ottoman) occupation. It was not a
sovereign state like the "Kingdom"
If Mr Schteppan were to argue his point logically, the "Hellenes"
would be compared to the "Macedonians", while "Greece" would be
compared to "Macedonia". But he is comparing "Macedonia" with "the
Hellenes" which is an apples/oranges juxtaposition. It is hard to
imagine that someone of his obvious intelligence is not doing this
deliberately.
*Childish stupidity that bears no relevance to the sailent point.
> Only in 1989 did Greece change the name of its northern province to
> "Macedonia" under the motto "Attack is the best defense".
Possibly.
*TRUE. From the mid 1980's every "Tom, Dick, Harry" knew that Yugoslavia was
disintegrating, thus the "Greeks" began their preventative measures in
respect of (Republic of) Macedonia.
> It is absurd that Macedonians are even talking to the Greeks knowing that
> they have little chance of making progress in these unfair negotiations.
> Thanks to Greece's threat of veto and its irresponsible use of it as well
> as its position in NATO and the EU it has all the help it needs from the
> European Community to hold Macedonia back as long as it wants.
This is absolutely correct.
> Greece very cunningly and abruptly rejected Macedonia's name in 1992 in
> Lisbon before anyone had a chance to "examine the facts". This rejection
> also came with misinformation and confusion leading the unaware European
> ministers to come to the wrong conclusion. Greece lead the European
> Community into believing that the name "Macedonia" was of no importance to
> the Republic of Macedonia because allegedly this was a name created by
> Tito when Yugoslavia became a state of republics in 1944.
Ridiculous. PResumably, none of the members of the "European
Community" had ever heard of the Kingdom of Alexander.
*You have yet to learn about politics. What do you mean by "Kingdom of
Alexander"?
> Thus Greece's strong objection to the name was laid on a foundation of
> lies.
Your arguments rest on a similar foundation, Hans old man ...
Really?
> The EU states, without consulting historical data and without examining
> the facts, were quick to take Athens's side. A similar scenario was
> repeated in 1993 when Macedonia applied for membership into the United
> Nations. It seems that justice is not important these days and the sacred
> Greek might is always placed ahead of Macedonia's right.
There is some truth to this, but it seems to insinuate that Greece has
no right on its side at all. Macedonia, to be sure, has a case for its
position. Mr Schteppan seems to think that all Greece has on its side
is might. A little simplistic.
*But TRUE.
> If we examine past approaches to the name issue taken by our American
> "mediator" of the UN, we will find that the whole process is biased in
> Greece's favour. Actions taken during briefings in Skopje in 1994 and 1995
> at best can be described as "desperate".
> With the exception of naming the Skopje Airport "Alexander the Great",
> every gesture Macedonia made in Greece's view should be positive but from
> what experience has shown Greece has been relentless and has, without
> thinking twice, used all ammunition delivered to its hands against
> Macedonia.
It looks as though he's right here. Greece has been pretty relentless
and willing to use blackmail.
*Like I have said, it's hard to objective and correct for someone posting
from "utopia", with no historical knowledge on the matter.
> Macedonia on the other hand has a great heritage which modern Europe
> considers to be the cradle of western culture. Ironicaly even though it is
> well known that Alexander the Great was Macedonian,
*"Modern Europe", especially the "anglos" like yourself are steeped in their
perceived "hereditary greek democracy", not in Macedonian. That is why only
lately the scholars are beginning to write (revise) the history of the
ancient Macedonians and their contemporaries the ancient Greeks and to
portray them as the ancient chroniclers did: as two separate entities -
ethnically, culturally and linguistically (Waldemar Heckel).
Although he seems to think that the "European Union" hadn't heard of
Macedonia (see above).
*Who have more credibility - politicians or used car salesmen? :-(. I hope
you get my drift.
> no one complained when Greece named its airport "Alexander the Great" in
> late 1989. What justification did the Greeks have? That Alexander the
> Great spread "Hellenism" to the world during his expeditions? If that were
> true, and no one can deny that modern Europe in its entirety has profited
> immensely from Hellenism, then why is there not a single European nation
> (besides Greece) Greek today? Why is there not a single nation outside of
> Europe, where Alexander ventured, Greek today?
What on earth is this is supposed to mean?
*It means what it states. It means that Greece is falsely claiming
Macedonian as a (past) greek land - which is a FACT.
It is of historical record
that Rome ruled Germania Inferior. So why isn't Mr Schteppen a Roman?
this line of argument is illogical beyond belief. Moreover, he accuses
the "European Union" of ignorance, but he seems unaware of the
archaeological, numismatic, linguistic, narrative and other evidence
that Alexander's armies conquered the Persian Empire.
*You are inventing your own arguments here which have no correlation to the
statement of Mr Schteppan..
And if he wants a simple answer to a stupid question, if he wants to
know why the areas conquered are not still Greek, he ought to ask the
Turks, Arabs, Persians and Afghans that question. He might also ask
the Pakistanis and Indians where their name "Sikendar" came from.
> When Slav tribes were settling the Balkans in the 6th and 7th centuries AD
> the ancient Greeks had already abandoned Greece and others settled in
> their place.
Oh dear. This is such a flasehood that I am inclined to think that
this passage was written (or edited) to slander Mr Schteppan. It is
hard to believe that anyone would say such a thing and not have at
least some kind of evidence to back up the claim.
*The "history" of the phantom "Slavs" makes most historians look foolish,
let alone Mr Schteppan.
> For well known reasons the Greeks left Greece at the end of the 4th
> century but the descendents of the ancient Macedonians remained all while
> Macedonia was a Roman province.
Again, this is so completely incorrect that I am led to smell a rat.
Smelling a rat or no, are the modern day (afro-asiatic) Greeks descendants
of the ancient Greeks, since they are claiming an unbroken continuity to the
ancients? Take a look at Bakoyani and Vasilakis and tell us if they appear
to be related to Alexander, or to the present day president of Egypt,
Mubarak? :-)
> Thus the descendents of the ancient Macedonians lived in Macedonia as the
> descendents of the ancient Thracians lived in Thrace and as the
> descendents of the Ancient Epirians lived in Epirus. In time these people
> assimilated with the Slav tribes who in turn adopted those lands as their
> home and left their genetic markers in the modern populations. So today we
> have Slav and ancient Macedonian genetic markers in the blood of the
> modern Macedonians the same as we have Thracian genetic markers in the
> blood of the modern Bulgarians and modern Turks living in Eastern Thrace.
> The same can be said about the modern Greeks and Albanians
> who carry in their blood the genetic markers from the ancient Epirians.
Actually, from a strictly genetic point of view, everyone is related
to everyone else in the region.
And how did you come to this conclusion?
> Even though it is well known that the Turko-Tatar Bulgars settled the
> Eastern Balkans 150 years after the Slav tribes and took the Slavic
> language from them, does not prevent the modern Bulgarians from asserting
> that today's Macedonians allegedly speak "Bulgarian".
What this has to do with anything is beyond me.
*It is hard for someone to comprehend the above when that someone is in
"utopia", planets away from historical facts. A "bulgarian" language is of
the "turkic" family of languages, yet the modern day "Bulgarians", who are
not of the turko-mongol Bulgarian ethnogenetic stock, but of native Balkan
(european) stock, who speak a language derived from the Macedonians, deny
that the present day Macedonians speak a macedonian language, instead they
are calling it a "bulgarian dialect". The author is just pointing out
another STUPID absurdity on the part of Macedonia's predatory neighbours.
>
> Further forward in time, during the 9th century according to George
> Shtatmiller author of the book "History of South-Easter Europe" the
> Greeks, drawn by the Slav settlements of Greece, returned to their former
> fatherland and assimilated the Slavs and Albanians settling that region.
> So how can the Greeks then claim to be related to the ancient Macedonians?
Another statement so completely ridiculous as to make me question its
authenticity. I wonder what Mr Schteppan would have to say if he were
asked to comment on what he has supposedly said here.
*Why don't you write to Mr Schteppan and then let us know if the article has
been falsified.
> Contrary to any Greek assertions, Greeks in reality never settled
> Macedonian territories, not in ancient nor any other time until the 20th
> century.
What does he mean by "Greeks"? or "Macedonians"?
*What does the historiography mean by Greeks and Macedonians?
> Macedonians on the other hand have conquered and have occupied Greek
> lands. The ancient Macedonians, through the League of Corinth, held
> hegemony over the Greeks for over 120 years during which time they also
> occupied Athens for a short period.
Correct.
>
> Thus prior to the 20th century Macedonia was never Greek, not during Roman
> times when both Macedonia and Greece were Roman colonies, not during the
> Middle Ages, not during Ottoman times and certainly not until after the
> 1912, 1913 Balkan Wars when Greece, for the first time, by virtue of
> conquest, was awarded Macedonian lands including Solun and parts of
> Thrace. And this Greece did not do alone but with help from its neighbours
> Serbia, Bulgaria and Montenegro and with the blessings of the Great
> Powers. Thanks to the Great Powers, Russia in particular, for their
> support of the four Balkan monarchies which united and declared war on the
> Ottomans without themselves being swallowed up by Austro-Hungary or
> Romania.
What all this has to do with 2008 is beyond me. It is, however, more or less
historically correct.
*Are you for real?
> Let us also remind the world that the Thracians and Epirians disappeared
> after 1913 only as a result of brutal hellenization at the hands of the
> Greek state, brutal Bulgarization at the hands of the Bulgarians and
> Islamization due to Ottoman influence.
The Thracians and Epirians? Is he saying that such people existed as
distinct peoples prior to 1913?
*I don't know about the Epirotians, but today there exists a Thracian ethnic
identity in Bulgaria. I know this first hand.
> The Macedonians occupied by Serbia to some extent survived Serbian
> attempts at assimilation and began to regain their Macedonian
> consciousness under the cover of Yugoslavia.
>
> It is sad to say that Macedonia's annexation in 1913 happened with the
> blessing of International right which now reminds it of the shame it
> committed. It is not fear of the Macedonian hammer that Greece is afraid
> but of the fear of facing its own shame in public.
How can Mr Schteppan know what someone else is afraid of? This all smells
rather fishy to me ...
*Easy, if one knows the facts of the situation. The "cat" (Macedonia) which
in the past was tied in the bag, is now out and free for everyone to see and
poor ol' Grecia dos not know how to handle the situation.
> As protectors of the European heritage which has flourished for centuries,
> European Union parliamentarians should be ashamed of forcing Macedonia, a
> state which in the past has done so much for Europe, to accept a farcical
> name like "FYROM". This again proves that Europe values business and money
> far above justice, truth, etiquette and morality.
If it proves such a thing, why does FYROM want to join the EU?
*Utopians,Utopians... such blessed people :-) Unfortunately we mortals have
to deal with everyday realities like politics and its prostitute
politicians.
*Macedonia, not FYROM wants to join EU.
> If this small country has learned anything, it has learned how unfair
> Europe can be. The 2001 Ohrid Agreement was forced upon it by Brussels
> bureaucrats without even examining the facts or consulting history. Europe
> has shown no care for the dangers under the sword of Demiclis it has
> created for this young state. With this kind of attitude how does Europe
> expect to hold a united existence?
Once again, if the EU is such a rotten body, why does FYROM want to join so
badly?
*Because Macedonia sees a safe haven there - free from the constant
predatory attack from its neighbours. Comprendo? Actually it is the
politicians who want to join EU. Most of the population is against it as
things stand right now.
> The only option Macedonia is left with to protect its rights is to present
> its case to the international community.
>
> Hans Lothar Schteppan is a former German Ambassador to the Republic of
> Macedonia and author of the book "Macedonian Knot"
I think that this passage has been edited, doctored, and just plain
embellished. Extremists on both sides will gain from it if it becomes
the "truth", as extremist Greeks can use it to discredit Mr Schteppan
and/or honest historians who believe that FYROM has some legitimacy to
its claims.
"Macedonian" extremists gain if this becomes the accepted version of events,
their slandering of Mr Schteppan be darned.
*You are the one who is slandering, based on a premise. I was not aware that
in your "utopia" people a guilty until proven inncent. :-(
Pozdrav,
Krater Makedonski
ERIC
"Zhivko Apostolovski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47f4310b$0$22095$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
There, I had to wait almost, what, almost 15 lines for good old Zhivko to
begin to spout his incredible garbage---"As far as their ethnic makeup is
concerned the majority of "Greeks" are of afro-asiatic descent"
BRAVO Zhivko-----it's comforting to all of us that such shit still
circulates freely and fully in your unrepentant liar's mindset and
imagination
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
> *"Modern Europe", especially the "anglos" like yourself are steeped in their
> perceived "hereditary greek democracy", not in Macedonian.
And this is the kind of remark that puts an end to my interest in
debating you, Zhivko.
Adieu
DonFigo
It is about time you people realized that these Skops are not
interested in dialogue,the only language they understand is the
language of the vourdola.YOU are not dealing with
Europeans(Zhivko,Aryan 666,Macedon,Pavel) here.They are the offspring
of commie parents who having lost the Greek civil war,and subsequently
fleeing to Yugoslavia
have willed all their frustrations,prejudices and racist theories
against the Greek people to these Skopian in Australia and Canada.The
poster with the Greek flag says it all.Time to act.
Krater Makedonski
are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr Schteppan's
statement in question.
You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bcc112c1-facb-4e45...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Krater Makedonski
"ERIC" <fit...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:arWIj.151530$pM4.114518@pd7urf1no...
Why don't you tell Bakoyani and Vasilakis to buy themselves a mirror and
take good look of themselves before they open their lying mouths about
Macedonia (and point them towards Egypt if they wish to dig for their
ancestral roots), instead of you shooting the mesenger in this case.
DonFigo
Get out blockhead Skop idiot,Come back when you leaarn the European
ways
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Until you prove that the article is doctored (forged) then your accusations
> are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr Schteppan's
> statement in question.
>
> You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
>
Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
and I have read a lot.
gogu
news:9416325e-ec18-4099...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
>has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
>Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
>and I have read a lot.
Except of one *great*, totaly discredited idiot, Falmeryer!
Krater Makedonski
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9416325e-ec18-4099...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
*You are changing the goal posts here, my friend. My remarks were in
relation to your slander about a "forged document". Your issue with what Mr
Schteppan has written is shifting the goal posts on your part because it is
another matter which, frankly, does not interest me at this point in time.
In relation to the "Greeks", even in ancient times the Macedonians did NOT
consider many of the peoples whom modern day historigraphy calls Greeks, to
be of the greek race. A direct proof for this you will find in Polibius'
"Histories" (book 18) where the Macedonian king Filip V mentions several
peoples from "Greece" as NON Greeks. Livy also replicates the same quote in
his book The Rise of the Roman Empire.
To me personally (and to the Macedonians), what is of importance is that the
"Greeks" in 1912, under the guise of liberation from the Turks, illegally
occupied by force a non Greek land, namely the 51% of the ethnographic
region known as Macedonia, they committed ethnic cleansing/genocide and
other cultural and physical atrocities on a large scale and colonised it
with "Greeks" (christians) from Turkey and a smaller number of Greeks from
Greece/greek isles, whom today they are claiming as "Macedonians", heirs of
ancient Macedonia. If you want to "ridiculous things", then you will find
plenty in the greek propaganda on Macedonia.
Krater Makedonski
"gogu" <Rruminii...@Greci.com> wrote in message
news:A5adndLKAt0cm2ja...@giganews.com...
As I said previously - anyone who dabbles in the history of the phantom
"Slavs" and/especially the "slavic" language, unfortunately, can only make
fools of themselves.
andy...@gmail.com
> <andyto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9416325e-ec18-4099...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 3, 1:05 am, "Krater Makedonski" <jordan.ap...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > > Until you prove that the article is doctored (forged) then your
> > > accusations
> > > are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr Schteppan's
> > > statement in question.
>
> > You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
>
> > Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
> > has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
> > Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
> > and I have read a lot.
>
> *You are changing the goal posts here, my friend. My remarks were in
> relation to your slander about a "forged document".
I said they were either forged or Mr Schteppan doesn't know what he is
talking about.
> Your issue with what Mr
> Schteppan has written is shifting the goal posts on your part because it is
> another matter which, frankly, does not interest me at this point in time.
Well, perhaps we're at cross-purposes then. I assumed that you posted
it because you thought it was worthwhile for others to read it. Was I
wrong?
>
> In relation to the "Greeks", even in ancient times the Macedonians did NOT
> consider many of the peoples whom modern day historigraphy calls Greeks, to
> be of the greek race. A direct proof for this you will find in Polibius'
> "Histories" (book 18) where the Macedonian king Filip V mentions several
> peoples from "Greece" as NON Greeks. Livy also replicates the same quote in
> his book The Rise of the Roman Empire.
No argument from me here.
>
> To me personally (and to the Macedonians), what is of importance is that the
> "Greeks" in 1912, under the guise of liberation from the Turks, illegally
> occupied by force a non Greek land, namely the 51% of the ethnographic
> region known as Macedonia
I see a lot of that 51%, and I would like to know where it comes from.
Is it a map that is generally agreed-upon?
> , they committed ethnic cleansing/genocide and
> other cultural and physical atrocities on a large scale and colonised it
> with "Greeks" (christians) from Turkey and a smaller number of Greeks from
> Greece/greek isles, whom today they are claiming as "Macedonians", heirs of
> ancient Macedonia.
Well, I doubt that anyone implicated in the events you describe from
1912 is likely to be alive today. Who do we punish now? And be careful
about "inherited guilt", because it can recoil on those who use it
against others.
So if the Greek propaganda is so wrong, why not just laugh it off? If
I say 2+2=5, is that a reason for you to get angry with me? If the
Greeks are telling such obvious falsehoods, why should anyone care?
> If you want to "ridiculous things", then you will find
> plenty in the greek propaganda on Macedonia.
All propaganda is ridiculous.
Krater Makedonski
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46f16128-2ffe-4f38...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 3, 6:38 pm, "Krater Makedonski" <kra...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> <andyto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9416325e-ec18-4099...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 3, 1:05 am, "Krater Makedonski" <jordan.ap...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > > Until you prove that the article is doctored (forged) then your
> > > accusations
> > > are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr Schteppan's
> > > statement in question.
>
> > You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
>
> > Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
> > has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
> > Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
> > and I have read a lot.
>
> *You are changing the goal posts here, my friend. My remarks were in
> relation to your slander about a "forged document".
I said they were either forged or Mr Schteppan doesn't know what he is
talking about.
I suggest you read your original remarks. You slandered the Macedonians by
insinuating that the article was forged/doctored. Allow me to tell you this:
Mr Schteppan spent some years in Macedonia as a german ambassador, is very
well informed with the realtively recent political history of Macedonia and
(from what I have read in his book "The Macedonian Knott") is reasonably
savvy in its ancient history, as well. First of all, he is considered a
friend of the Macedonians and secondly, the Macedonians have nothing to
gain, but much to lose by doctoring his article(s), as that kind of thing
can easily be found out.
> Your issue with what Mr
> Schteppan has written is shifting the goal posts on your part because it
> is
> another matter which, frankly, does not interest me at this point in time.
Well, perhaps we're at cross-purposes then. I assumed that you posted
it because you thought it was worthwhile for others to read it. Was I
wrong?
No. I still think it is a very worthy article in many respects.
> In relation to the "Greeks", even in ancient times the Macedonians did NOT
> consider many of the peoples whom modern day historigraphy calls Greeks,
> to
> be of the greek race. A direct proof for this you will find in Polibius'
> "Histories" (book 18) where the Macedonian king Filip V mentions several
> peoples from "Greece" as NON Greeks. Livy also replicates the same quote
> in
> his book The Rise of the Roman Empire.
No argument from me here.
I thought it worthwhile to extrapolate a bit more on the "Greeks", since
they make the very absurd claim that Macedonia "is a 4000 years old greek
land". They have even published a (much ridiculed) "scholarly" book with a
smilar title.
> To me personally (and to the Macedonians), what is of importance is that
> the
> "Greeks" in 1912, under the guise of liberation from the Turks, illegally
> occupied by force a non Greek land, namely the 51% of the ethnographic
> region known as Macedonia
I see a lot of that 51%, and I would like to know where it comes from.
Is it a map that is generally agreed-upon?
Yes. Also 38% are covered by Republic of Macedonia, about 10% are in
Bulgaria and the rest are in Albania and Serbia.
> , they committed ethnic cleansing/genocide and
> other cultural and physical atrocities on a large scale and colonised it
> with "Greeks" (christians) from Turkey and a smaller number of Greeks from
> Greece/greek isles, whom today they are claiming as "Macedonians", heirs
> of
> ancient Macedonia.
Well, I doubt that anyone implicated in the events you describe from
1912 is likely to be alive today. Who do we punish now? And be careful
about "inherited guilt", because it can recoil on those who use it
against others.
This is not a matter of guilt. It's a matter of exposing the greek lies
which are propagated at the expense of the national identity of the
Macedonians. It is also a matter of compensation/reparation for the families
of those Macedonians who over the years have suffered (and still suffer) at
the the hands of the greek authorities and who lost their propertie simply
for being Macedonians, wherever they may be now. Most of them are not far
away. In Bulgaria alone, it is estimated that there are about 3-4 million (9
million total popualtion) "Bulgarians" of Macedonian descent. The larger
proportion of those are from greek occupied Macedonia. Then there are
Macedonian refugees in the former Soviet block countries, USA/Canada,
Australia, etc. This is what Greece fears most about the name and is
spending an enormous amount of state resources on its anti Macedonian
propaganda. Nothing else comes even close.
So if the Greek propaganda is so wrong, why not just laugh it off? If
I say 2+2=5, is that a reason for you to get angry with me? If the
Greeks are telling such obvious falsehoods, why should anyone care?
You can't laugh something off when national identity is at stake. A lie told
1000 times becomes a fact and the Greeks had a free reign over the past 90
years at telling their lies about Macedonia, while the Macedonians were
under the thumb of their colonisers. Now that a part of Macedonia has become
a sovereign state, some of the Macedonians can counter the greek lies (and
not only the greek, but the bulgarian, serbian, etc).
> If you want to "ridiculous things", then you will find
> plenty in the greek propaganda on Macedonia.
All propaganda is ridiculous.
Maybe, but unfortunately it is still very effective.
PS I think it was yesterday that I sent a "reply" with my apology to you
about my poor choice of words in respect of the "anglos", but I don't see it
in my list here. I am not sure if it has made it to the "board". I any case
you have my ureserved, humble apology, it was not my intention for it so
sound as it did I did not intend to include you. All I meant to say was that
they are part of your ethnic background. I don't have the time to read what
I have written and sometimes some of my messages may, unfortunately, contain
some unwanted warts (consequences) and plenty of "typos". :-(
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
(snip)
> > > > Until you prove that the article is doctored (forged) then your
> > > > accusations
> > > > are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr Schteppan's
> > > > statement in question.
>
> > > You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
>
> > > Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
> > > has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
> > > Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
> > > and I have read a lot.
>
> > *You are changing the goal posts here, my friend. My remarks were in
> > relation to your slander about a "forged document".
>
> I said they were either forged or Mr Schteppan doesn't know what he is
> talking about.
>
> I suggest you read your original remarks. You slandered the Macedonians by
> insinuating that the article was forged/doctored.
How on earth does impugning the honesty of a German diplomat slander
Macedonians? Or is this just another case of that easily-injured
"national pride" that all the people of the Balkans suffer from?
> Allow me to tell you this:
> Mr Schteppan spent some years in Macedonia as a german ambassador, is very
> well informed with the realtively recent political history of Macedonia and
> (from what I have read in his book "The Macedonian Knott") is reasonably
> savvy in its ancient history, as well. First of all, he is considered a
> friend of the Macedonians and secondly, the Macedonians have nothing to
> gain, but much to lose by doctoring his article(s), as that kind of thing
> can easily be found out.
And I did easily find it out. If the Greeks abandoned Greece, why did
they do it and where did they go? I rest my case.
> > Well, perhaps we're at cross-purposes then. I assumed that you posted
> > it because you thought it was worthwhile for others to read it. Was I
> > wrong?
>
> No. I still think it is a very worthy article in many respects.
It's full of so much foolishness I wonder that anyone would have
assumed people would take it seriously.
>
(snip)
>
> I thought it worthwhile to extrapolate a bit more on the "Greeks", since
> they make the very absurd claim that Macedonia "is a 4000 years old greek
> land". They have even published a (much ridiculed) "scholarly" book with a
> smilar title.
That doesn't surprise me. Both sides have their "scholars".
Predictably, the Greek scholars support tht Greek point of view, and
the Macedonian scholars support the Macedonian point of view. That
tells a disinterested 3rd party (me) that there is something more than
an honest search for historical truth here ....
>
(snip)
>
> > I see a lot of that 51%, and I would like to know where it comes from.
> > Is it a map that is generally agreed-upon?
>
> Yes. Also 38% are covered by Republic of Macedonia, about 10% are in
> Bulgaria and the rest are in Albania and Serbia.
Do the Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians and Serbs agree on that figure? I
think I know the answer to that one ;-)
>
(snip)
>
> > Well, I doubt that anyone implicated in the events you describe from
> > 1912 is likely to be alive today. Who do we punish now? And be careful
> > about "inherited guilt", because it can recoil on those who use it
> > against others.
>
> This is not a matter of guilt. It's a matter of exposing the greek lies
> which are propagated at the expense of the national identity of the
> Macedonians.
Why what the Greeks say so important anyway?
> It is also a matter of compensation/reparation for the families
> of those Macedonians who over the years have suffered (and still suffer) at
> the the hands of the greek authorities and who lost their propertie simply
> for being Macedonians, wherever they may be now.
If we opened that can of worms in the Balkans, every man, woman and
child would end up suing every government in the region, as everybody
has suffered at everybody's hands at some time or other. Should the
Greeks sue the Macedonians because of Tito's support for the
communists during thei rcivil war?
> > Most of them are not far
>away. In Bulgaria alone, it is estimated that there are about 3-4 million (9
> million total popualtion) "Bulgarians" of Macedonian descent. The larger
> proportion of those are from greek occupied Macedonia. Then there are
> Macedonian refugees in the former Soviet block countries, USA/Canada,
> Australia, etc.
Look at how many Greeks live abroad. Or Germans. Or Scots. Or
Italians. OR Poles. What does any of that prove?
> This is what Greece fears most about the name and is
> spending an enormous amount of state resources on its anti Macedonian
> propaganda. Nothing else comes even close.
I think both sides are guilty of the most absurd propaganda here.
>
> > So if the Greek propaganda is so wrong, why not just laugh it off? If
> > I say 2+2=5, is that a reason for you to get angry with me? If the
> > Greeks are telling such obvious falsehoods, why should anyone care?
>
> You can't laugh something off when national identity is at stake.
Yes we can. What's stopping us? Oh yes .... that ultranationalism
thing ....
> A lie told
> 1000 times becomes a fact and the Greeks had a free reign over the past 90
> years at telling their lies about Macedonia, while the Macedonians were
> under the thumb of their colonisers. Now that a part of Macedonia has become
> a sovereign state, some of the Macedonians can counter the greek lies (and
> not only the greek, but the bulgarian, serbian, etc).
But the problem is, the Greeks accuse the Macedonians of lying. And
not only yhr Greeks, but the Bulgarians, the Serbians, etc ... Now
what?
>
> > If you want to "ridiculous things", then you will find
> > plenty in the greek propaganda on Macedonia.
>
> All propaganda is ridiculous.
>
> Maybe, but unfortunately it is still very effective.
>
> PS I think it was yesterday that I sent a "reply" with my apology to you
> about my poor choice of words in respect of the "anglos", but I don't see it
> in my list here. I am not sure if it has made it to the "board". I any case
> you have my ureserved, humble apology, it was not my intention for it so
> sound as it did I did not intend to include you. All I meant to say was that
> they are part of your ethnic background. I don't have the time to read what
> I have written and sometimes some of my messages may, unfortunately, contain
> some unwanted warts (consequences) and plenty of "typos". :-(-
No offence taken, really. I just don't like discussions to get
personal.
Krater Makedonski
<andy...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:13baf79f-ef39-42b6...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> > > > Until you prove that the article is doctored (forged) then your
> > > > accusations
> > > > are silly and slanderous, irrelevant of the accuracy of Mr
> > > > Schteppan's
> > > > statement in question.
>
> > > You will always draw fire when you accuse and slander without proof.
>
> > > Let's see Mr Schteppan's proof for the ridiculous things he allegedly
> > > has said, shall we? This business of the ancient Greeks abandoning
> > > Greece is not supported by any historical reference I have ever read,
> > > and I have read a lot.
>
> > *You are changing the goal posts here, my friend. My remarks were in
> > relation to your slander about a "forged document".
>
> I said they were either forged or Mr Schteppan doesn't know what he is
> talking about.
>
> I suggest you read your original remarks. You slandered the Macedonians by
> insinuating that the article was forged/doctored.
How on earth does impugning the honesty of a German diplomat slander
Macedonians? Or is this just another case of that easily-injured
"national pride" that all the people of the Balkans suffer from?
You slandered the Macedonians by insinuating "ultrananationalists" may have
doctored the document/article and by "i smell a rat here". This has nothing
to do with "easily-injured national pride". Being arrogant in your defence
will not right the the wrong.
> Allow me to tell you this:
> Mr Schteppan spent some years in Macedonia as a german ambassador, is very
> well informed with the realtively recent political history of Macedonia
> and
> (from what I have read in his book "The Macedonian Knott") is reasonably
> savvy in its ancient history, as well. First of all, he is considered a
> friend of the Macedonians and secondly, the Macedonians have nothing to
> gain, but much to lose by doctoring his article(s), as that kind of thing
> can easily be found out.
And I did easily find it out. If the Greeks abandoned Greece, why did
they do it and where did they go? I rest my case.
What did you easily find"? That the article was doctored? Because what we
are discussing here is if the article was forged as you were insinuating, or
not. Nothing else.
> > Well, perhaps we're at cross-purposes then. I assumed that you posted
> > it because you thought it was worthwhile for others to read it. Was I
> > wrong?
>
> No. I still think it is a very worthy article in many respects.
It's full of so much foolishness I wonder that anyone would have
assumed people would take it seriously.
I guess the beuty is in the eys of the beholder.
>
(snip)
>
> I thought it worthwhile to extrapolate a bit more on the "Greeks", since
> they make the very absurd claim that Macedonia "is a 4000 years old greek
> land". They have even published a (much ridiculed) "scholarly" book with a
> smilar title.
That doesn't surprise me. Both sides have their "scholars".
Predictably, the Greek scholars support tht Greek point of view, and
the Macedonian scholars support the Macedonian point of view. That
tells a disinterested 3rd party (me) that there is something more than
an honest search for historical truth here ....
There are other - iternational, renowned scholars, as well.
>
(snip)
>
> > I see a lot of that 51%, and I would like to know where it comes from.
> > Is it a map that is generally agreed-upon?
>
> Yes. Also 38% are covered by Republic of Macedonia, about 10% are in
> Bulgaria and the rest are in Albania and Serbia.
Do the Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians and Serbs agree on that figure? I
think I know the answer to that one ;-)
It is a generally agreed "figure" as far as the ethnographic map of
Macedonia is concerned. It's simple mathematics. :-) As far as claims
towards various portions of Macedonia is concerned, that is another story,
UNFORTUNATELY.
>
(snip)
>
> > Well, I doubt that anyone implicated in the events you describe from
> > 1912 is likely to be alive today. Who do we punish now? And be careful
> > about "inherited guilt", because it can recoil on those who use it
> > against others.
>
> This is not a matter of guilt. It's a matter of exposing the greek lies
> which are propagated at the expense of the national identity of the
> Macedonians.
Why what the Greeks say so important anyway?
Are you blind? Or do you live on some far away planet? Haven't you heard of
ON, NATO, EU. Or in the past the Bucharest treaty, The Treaty of Berlin ,
Paris Peace conference. It is not that important what the Greeks say to us,
but what they say internationally which influences the behaviour of others.
Tell me one other SOVEREIGN country which has had another country as its
"godfather" for its name. "FYROM" is existent because of what the Greeks
say. And the greeks have done so with propaganda based on falsehoods - from
ancient times to the present. As I said previously they have a head start on
us of approximately 90 years, but their free has come to an end and they
don't like it, so now they are relying on their political advantages given
to them by EU/NATO/UN.
> It is also a matter of compensation/reparation for the families
> of those Macedonians who over the years have suffered (and still suffer)
> at
> the the hands of the greek authorities and who lost their propertie simply
> for being Macedonians, wherever they may be now.
If we opened that can of worms in the Balkans, every man, woman and
child would end up suing every government in the region, as everybody
has suffered at everybody's hands at some time or other. Should the
Greeks sue the Macedonians because of Tito's support for the
communists during thei rcivil war?
You are in a different universe with your counter argument. The Macedonians
fought on their land at the invitation and promise of a sovereign land by
the communist Greeks. They did not conquer and colonise a non Macedonian
land. You are talking about war reparations.
> > Most of them are not far
>away. In Bulgaria alone, it is estimated that there are about 3-4 million
>(9
> million total popualtion) "Bulgarians" of Macedonian descent. The larger
> proportion of those are from greek occupied Macedonia. Then there are
> Macedonian refugees in the former Soviet block countries, USA/Canada,
> Australia, etc.
Look at how many Greeks live abroad. Or Germans. Or Scots. Or
Italians. OR Poles. What does any of that prove?
If you wish to put it that way (superficially) it proves nothing, but if you
wish to scratch the surface a little bit, then you will find your proof.
> This is what Greece fears most about the name and is
> spending an enormous amount of state resources on its anti Macedonian
> propaganda. Nothing else comes even close.
I think both sides are guilty of the most absurd propaganda here.
Such as? I am all ears (eyes). I'll make it easy for you: you just write
about the Macedonian "absurd propaganda".
>
> > So if the Greek propaganda is so wrong, why not just laugh it off? If
> > I say 2+2=5, is that a reason for you to get angry with me? If the
> > Greeks are telling such obvious falsehoods, why should anyone care?
>
> You can't laugh something off when national identity is at stake.
Yes we can. What's stopping us? Oh yes .... that ultranationalism
thing ....
We can all feel smug when we are blissfully unaware of the implications.
Btw, what do you deem a ultranationalism/ultranationalists?
> A lie told
> 1000 times becomes a fact and the Greeks had a free reign over the past 90
> years at telling their lies about Macedonia, while the Macedonians were
> under the thumb of their colonisers. Now that a part of Macedonia has
> become
> a sovereign state, some of the Macedonians can counter the greek lies (and
> not only the greek, but the bulgarian, serbian, etc).
But the problem is, the Greeks accuse the Macedonians of lying. And
not only yhr Greeks, but the Bulgarians, the Serbians, etc ...
And all for the same reason: - as big as possible a piece of Macedonia (som
hav it, some want more/some of it)
Now what?
Why don't we involve the scholarly world? But who needs science when "might
is always right", or "the big fish will always eat the little fish". Have we
really progressed as humans? I don't think so. We are more cruel and
dangerous now than we have ever been. Thus my answer is "fight for our
national dignity and survival", as we have no other options.
S_N
news:47f317ba$0$12542$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Where the truth lays...
Forum Plus, Number 123, 01.02.2008
One of the numerous instances of nonsense:
[...]
Let us also remind the world that the Thracians and Epirians disappeared
after 1913 only as a result of brutal hellenization at the hands of the
Greek state, brutal Bulgarization at the hands of the Bulgarians and
Islamization due to Ottoman influence. The Macedonians occupied by Serbia to
some extent survived Serbian attempts at assimilation and began to regain
their Macedonian consciousness under the cover of Yugoslavia.
Here is a brlliant illustration how manipulation of history might have
political, economical and other effect on life of ordinary people.
It is now that finally Turkey as agreed to re-open the negotiations for
compensations of Thracian Refugees in Bulgaria amd you claim these
disapear.
The descendats of these people are very much alive and keep up their
organisations:
.
http://www.meridian27.com/trakia.htm - Bourgas
http://trakiya-kj.hit.bg/ - Kardzhali
http://trakiya.cult.bg/ - Stara Zagora
etc., etc.
As you might well see these people are bulgarians, they feel Bulgarians and
their parents and grandparents have escaped to Bulgaria from Turkey
precisely at the time when they had allegedly "disapeared". Never tired of
posting lies, Zhivko, right ....
andy...@gmail.com
wrote:
> <andyto...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:13baf79f-ef39-42b6...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 4, 3:17 am, "Krater Makedonski" <jordan.ap...@optusnet.com.au>
>
> > > I suggest you read your original remarks. You slandered the Macedonians by
> > > insinuating that the article was forged/doctored.
>
> > How on earth does impugning the honesty of a German diplomat slander
> > Macedonians? Or is this just another case of that easily-injured
> > "national pride" that all the people of the Balkans suffer from?
>
> You slandered the Macedonians by insinuating "ultrananationalists" may have
> doctored the document/article and by "i smell a rat here". This has nothing
> to do with "easily-injured national pride". Being arrogant in your defence
> will not right the the wrong.
Well, I guess I am just arrogant. But there are ultranationalist
sentiments at work here. And if I insulted anyone I apologize whole-
heartedly.
>
(snip)
>
> And I did easily find it out. If the Greeks abandoned Greece, why did
> they do it and where did they go? I rest my case.
>
> What did you easily find"? That the article was doctored? Because what we
> are discussing here is if the article was forged as you were insinuating, or
> not. Nothing else.
I am discussing the content of the article as well.
>
(snip)
>
> > > No. I still think it is a very worthy article in many respects.
>
> > It's full of so much foolishness I wonder that anyone would have
> > assumed people would take it seriously.
>
> I guess the beuty is in the eys of the beholder.
So it would seem.
>
>
>
(snip)
> > That doesn't surprise me. Both sides have their "scholars".
> > Predictably, the Greek scholars support tht Greek point of view, and
> > the Macedonian scholars support the Macedonian point of view. That
> > tells a disinterested 3rd party (me) that there is something more than
> > an honest search for historical truth here ....
>
> There are other - iternational, renowned scholars, as well.
Did you read what the Academy of Athens had to say? What do you think
of that?
(snip)
>
> > > Yes. Also 38% are covered by Republic of Macedonia, about 10% are in
> > > Bulgaria and the rest are in Albania and Serbia.
>
> > Do the Greeks, Albanians, Bulgarians and Serbs agree on that figure? I
> > think I know the answer to that one ;-)
>
> It is a generally agreed "figure" as far as the ethnographic map of
> Macedonia is concerned. It's simple mathematics. :-) As far as claims
> towards various portions of Macedonia is concerned, that is another story,
> UNFORTUNATELY.
Well, everyone has their own "true" maps, and they all look different.
>
(snip)
>
> > > This is not a matter of guilt. It's a matter of exposing the greek lies
> > > which are propagated at the expense of the national identity of the
> > > Macedonians.
>
> > Why what the Greeks say so important anyway?
>
> Are you blind? Or do you live on some far away planet? Haven't you heard of
> ON, NATO, EU. Or in the past the Bucharest treaty, The Treaty of Berlin ,
> Paris Peace conference. It is not that important what the Greeks say to us,
> but what they say internationally which influences the behaviour of others.
Yes, but that's not what I was saying. What they say in international
politics is not the same thing as what they say about history.
> Tell me one other SOVEREIGN country which has had another country as its
> "godfather" for its name.
> "FYROM" is existent because of what the Greeks
> say. And the greeks have done so with propaganda based on falsehoods - from
> ancient times to the present. As I said previously they have a head start on
> us of approximately 90 years, but their free has come to an end and they
> don't like it, so now they are relying on their political advantages given
> to them by EU/NATO/UN.
If they get too foolish about it, their support could dry up. People
already think that BOTH sides are acting a bit weird here, and
contrary to what many Greeks think, this was a very hollow "victory"
for them, at least in terms of how their image has fared.
>
(snip)
>
> > If we opened that can of worms in the Balkans, every man, woman and
> > child would end up suing every government in the region, as everybody
> > has suffered at everybody's hands at some time or other. Should the
> > Greeks sue the Macedonians because of Tito's support for the
> > communists during thei rcivil war?
>
> You are in a different universe with your counter argument. The Macedonians
> fought on their land at the invitation and promise of a sovereign land by
> the communist Greeks. They did not conquer and colonise a non Macedonian
> land. You are talking about war reparations.
I am talking about what happens when people start talking about
"reparations" in a region where everyone believes they have centuries
of legitimate grievances against everybody else.
>
(snip)
>
> > Look at how many Greeks live abroad. Or Germans. Or Scots. Or
> > Italians. OR Poles. What does any of that prove?
>
> If you wish to put it that way (superficially) it proves nothing, but if you
> wish to scratch the surface a little bit, then you will find your proof.
Well, there are plenty of people with "involuntary-emigrant"
ancestors. Refugees. There are more Irishmen in this world who are
descended from refugees than there are people in Ireland. Then there's
the Israelis, the African-Americans, the Roma etc etc ....
>
(snip)
>
> > I think both sides are guilty of the most absurd propaganda here.
>
> Such as? I am all ears (eyes). I'll make it easy for you: you just write
> about the Macedonian "absurd propaganda".
Those textbooks for one.
>
(snip)
>
> > Yes we can. What's stopping us? Oh yes .... that ultranationalism
> > thing ....
>
> We can all feel smug when we are blissfully unaware of the implications.
> Btw, what do you deem a ultranationalism/ultranationalists?
Someone who is willing to resort to coercion and/or violence to avenge
perceived attacks on his/her identity.
>
(snip)
>
> > But the problem is, the Greeks accuse the Macedonians of lying. And
> > not only yhr Greeks, but the Bulgarians, the Serbians, etc ...
>
> And all for the same reason: - as big as possible a piece of Macedonia (som
> hav it, some want more/some of it)
>
> > Now what?
>
> Why don't we involve the scholarly world? But who needs science when "might
> is always right", or "the big fish will always eat the little fish". Have we
> really progressed as humans? I don't think so. We are more cruel and
> dangerous now than we have ever been. Thus my answer is "fight for our
> national dignity and survival", as we have no other options.
You won't like this, but I think "national dignity and survival" are
dangerous, even deadly concepts. The world would be far better off
without them.