January 30, 2010

MONTENEGRO: Appeal

MONTENEGRO: Appeal, Time, Monday, Sep. 22, 1924

M. Luigi Criscuolo, head of the Manhattan Branch of the Committee for Montenegrin Independence, sent a memorandum to the League of Nations at Geneva requesting justice from that body for Montenegro, forcibly annexed by Yugo-Slavia in 1921.

Points from the memorandum:

Nearly six years have elapsed since the question of the independence of Montenegro was first brought to the attention of the nations of the world.

There is no abatement in the practice of the Serbs in imprisoning, torturing and murdering Montenegrin men, in mistreating and even violating women, in persecuting old men merely because they have refused to swear allegiance to the new Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and persist in maintaining that they are Montenegrins and that the sovereign rights of their country shall not be violated.

The ostensible object of the League of Nations is to prevent wars. For years, those who sympathized with the aspirations of the

Montenegrin people have been pointing out to the world that the inhuman policy of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes towards its minorities would only lead to another struggle in the Balkans. The attitude of the Croatian separatists under M. Stefan Radich, of the Macedonian insurgents under Alexandrov, of the Montenegrin insurgents under the late Savo Raspopovich gives proof that the spark exists that can kindle another war, if it be not extinguished. The League of Nations is hereby petitioned to appoint a Commission to investigate the condition of the minorities in the Balkans— in Montenegro in particular—in order to ascertain the truth of the assertions which we have made, and with a view of conducting an impartial plebiscite in Montenegro at the earliest possible moment. If it is possible for small nations to be forcibly annexed by large ones and no objection is forthcoming from an international tribunal such as is the League of Nations, then this is proof that civilization is declining rather than advancing. There is no one question that would inspire more faith in the League of Nations and gain for it many thousands of adherents and supporters than an immediate solution of the question of Montenegrin independence. This is particularly so in the United States, where the question has been brought to the attention of the American public and has received srong support— by the press of the country which, while realizing the almost hopelessness of the fight, has, nevertheless, in many instances maintained that the forcible annexation of Montenegro by Serbia was a crime against humanity as well as against International Law.

—An overstatement. While various sections of the U. S. press have from time to time published letters and articles on the plight of Montenegro, it is untrue to say that any paper has given "strong support."

Source Time

January 29, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 20

BIG Greek Lie 20 - Macedonia was liberated in 1912, 1913

(Some Greeks believe Macedonia was liberated from the Turks in 1912, 1913 and awarded to Greece)

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

"If the Greek State truly valued the thinking and methods of Socrates they would question themselves and their actions" Dedo Kire

Close to a century ago in 1912 under the guise of liberation, Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria invaded Macedonia and with the help of the Macedonian people, evicted the Turks. But instead of helping the Macedonian people create their own independent State, Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria occupied Macedonian territories and fought one another each to gain more land for themselves. Then in 1913 they partitioned Macedonia into three pieces under the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest. After placing artificial borders where such borders never existed before, each State treated its newly acquired territory as its own and began to colonize it. Those inhabitants who refused to recognize their new overlords were exterminated or evicted; those who remained passive were assimilated. This process was halted due to World War I but was resumed after the 1919 Treaty of Versailles when the Great Powers with minor changes sanctioned the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest making the partition permanent.

These are historic facts that cannot be denied. One only needs to examine events during the signing of the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest to understand the conditions under which Macedonia was partitioned.

Some Greeks today, ignoring historical evidence, insist that the 1912, 1913 Balkan conflict was about liberating ancient territories that belonged to Greece some 2, 400 years ago.

If that were true then;

1. Why did Greece agreed to sign the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest allowing Serbia to gain some 38% of Macedonia's territory and Bulgaria 11%? Why did Greece NOT demand, at least for the record, historical rights while signing the Treaty?

2. On what basis are these claims made? By now it should be well known to every Greek that there was no "Ancient Greece" or "Ancient Hellas". If you don't believe me then try and find an ancient source that speaks of "Greece" or "Hellas". How can Macedonian territories belong to "Ancient Greece" when such a name never existed?

3. If the word "Greece" or "Hellas" did not exist 2,400 years ago, how then can modern Greeks claim that "Macedonia was Greek"?

Was it not the Macedonians, Philip II and his son Alexander III who conquered the City States during the Battle of Chaeronea in 336 BC? Or do some Greeks still believe Philip II and Alexander III united the Ancient City States?

Here is a quote to refresh their memories:

"On his return trip home from a battle with the Scythians Philip's convoy was attacked and his booty was lost to Thracian Triballians. During the skirmish, Philip suffered a severe leg injury, which left him lame for life. After returning home he spent several months recovering.

While Philip was recovering, the City States to the south were making alliances and amassing a great army to invade Macedonia. On hearing this, Philip decided it was time to meet this aggression head on and end the treachery once and for all. On August 2nd, 338 BC, in the shallow Cephisus River valley near the village of Chaeronea on the road to Thebes, the two opposing armies met face to face. On the north side stood Philip's Macedonians with 30,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest Macedonian army ever assembled. Among Philip's commanding generals was his 18 year-old son, Alexander, in charge of the cavalry. On the south side, stood the allied Athenians, Thebans and Achaeans who assembled 35,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest army ever assembled since the Persian invasion.

Closely matched, the armies clashed and while the battle ensued the Macedonian right flank fell back and began to retreat. Seeing the Macedonians weakening, the allied City State general gave orders to push on and drive the Macedonians back to Macedonia. As the Macedonians retreated, the allied flanks broke rank and began the pursuit. Not realizing it was a trick, the allies found themselves surrounded and slaughtered by Alexander's cavalry. When it was over, the majority of the allied army, including the elite Theban Sacred Band lay dead in the fields of Chaeronea. Philip erected a statue of a lion to commemorate the sacrifice of the Theban Sacred Band who upheld their tradition and fought to the last man.

Ancient City State and Roman historians consider the battle of Chaeronea as the end of City State liberty, history and civilization." (1)

After reading the above, do you still believe Philip and Alexander united the Ancient City States? Would it not be more correct to say "the Macedonians by way of war conquered and enslaved the Ancient City States thus making them the property of Macedonia"?

The question still remains; if not by historical rights then by what right does 51% of the present Macedonian territory belong to Greece?

I can understand if a successor of the Roman Empire such as Italy, which held Macedonia for two centuries makes claims that Macedonia is Italian based on the fact that Macedonia once belonged to the Roman Empire or that Macedonia is Turkish based on the fact that Macedonia for five centuries belonged to the Ottoman Empire, but as God is my witness, I cannot fathom this Greek logic on how Macedonia could possibly be Greek?

"One can fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time"

I am not the only one looking at this "Greek Logic" as a bit unusual:

In Plutarch "The Age of Alexander" on page 212 we read: "While Demosthenes was still in exile, Alexander died in Babylon, and the Greek states combined yet again to form a league against Macedon. Demosthenes attached himself to the Athenian convoys, and threw all his energies into helping them incite the various states to attack the Macedonians and drive them out of Greece.". Why didn't Plutarch include Macedonia as part of Greece if Macedonia was Greek?

In M. Cary's book "The Geographic background of Greek and Roman History" (ISBN 0-313-23187-7) we find the following constituent parts of Greece: Epirus, Acarnania, The Ionian Isles, Aetolia, Thessaly, The Spercheu Valley, Locris, Phocis, Boeotia, Euboea, Attica, Aegina, Corinth, Achaea, Elis, Arcadia, Argolis, Laconia, Messenia, The Greek Archipelago, Crete, The Outer Isles, The Northern Aegean, The East Aegean, Rhodes. It makes one wonder why M. Cary omitted Macedonia from the general description of Greece? Perhaps for the same reason the German classical scholar Bursian failed to include Macedonia in his otherwise comprehensive geographical survey of Greece "Geographie von Griechenland". (2)

On page 91 in "Hellenistic World" by F.W.Walbank we find: "It is necessary, in any assessment of the role of Macedonia in the Hellenistic world to bear in mind that although our sources naturally, being Greek or based on Greek writers, lay their emphasis on Macedonian policy towards Greece, Macedonia was in fact equally a Balkan power for which the northern, western and north-eastern frontiers were always vital and for which strong defenses and periodic punitive expeditions over the border were fundamental policy." (2)

In N.G.L.Hammond's book "The Macedonian State" on page 141 we read: "Philip and Alexander attracted many able foreigners, especially Greeks, to their service, and many of these were made Companions." (2) If Macedonians were Greeks why did Hammond call them foreigners?

In Eugene Borza's "Makedonika" on page 164 we read: "Alexander seems to have imported troupes of performers from Greece." (2) How does one import Greeks from Greece into Greece?

In Plutarch's "The Age of Alexander" on page 264 we find: "Thebans countered by demanding the surrender of Philotas and Antipater and appealing to all who wished to liberate Greece to range themselves on their side, and at this Alexander ordered his troops to prepare for battle." (2) Were they also going to liberate Macedonia, i.e. Alexander's homeland, because according to modern Greek logic "Macedonia is Greek"?

In Quintus Rufus's "The History of Alexander" on page 50-1 Alexander, in a letter, responds to Darius: "His Majesty Alexander to Darius: Greetings. The Darius whose name you have assumed wrought utter destruction upon the Greek inhabitants of the Hellespontine coast and upon the Greek colonies of Ionia, and then crossed the sea with a mighty army, bringing the war to Macedonia and Greece." (2) Shouldn't Alexander have said "Greece and Greece"?

In Arrian's "The Campaigns of Alexander" on page 292 Alexander speaking to his officers: "...But let me remind you: Through your courage and endurance you have gained possession of Ionia, the Hellespont, both Phrygias, Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lydia, Caria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Phoenicia and Egypt; the Greek part of Libya is now yours, together with much of Arabia, lowland Syria, Mesopotamia, Babylon, and Susia;..." Point of interest: "The Greek part of Libya is now yours?" How can the Greek part of Libya become Greek again, if it already was in Greek hands to begin with? (2)

["Only in Thessaly and Boetia, and outside Greece, in Macedonia, was there cavalry worthy of the name."

"The Peloponnesian War was a fratricidal war among the Greeks, a fact that was not altered by the intervention of foreign powers, Macedonia, for instance and later the Persian Empire."] (Excerpts taken from The Greeks and Persians, from the sixth to the fourth centuries; edited by Hermann Bengston; published by Delacorte Press, New York.) (2)

In Agnes Savil's book "Alexander the Great and his Time" on page 180 we find: "For a time Hellenism revived when Demetrius of Bactria, half Macedonian, half Greek, tried in 187 B.C. to reclaim the Indian empire of Alexander." Should we assume that there is such a person who is half Greek and half Greek? (2)

In Quintus Rufus's "The History of Alexander" on page 188 we find: "Accordingly, one festive day, Alexander had a sumptuous banquet organized so that he could invite not only his principle friends among the Macedonians and Greeks but also the enemy nobility." "Macedonians and Greeks"? Not Greeks and Greeks? (2)

In Arrian's "The Campaigns of Alexander" on page 294 we read: "Gentlemen of Macedon, and you my friends and allies [Greeks], this must not be. Stand firm; for well you know that hardship and danger are the price of glory, and that sweet is the savor of a life of courage and of deathless renown beyond the grave." (2)

In Quintus Curtius Rufus's "The History of Alexander" on page 195 regarding the trial of Hermolaus we find: "As for you Callisthenes, the only person to think you a man (because you are an assassin), I know why you want him brought forward. It is so that the insult which sometimes uttered against me and sometimes heard from him can be repeated by his lips before this gathering. Were he a Macedonian I would have introduced him here along with you - a teacher truly worth of his pupil. As it is, he is an Olynthian [Greek] and does not enjoy the same rights." (2)

In Robert A. Hudley's paper "Diodoros 18.60.1-3: "A Case of Remodeled Source Materials" dissects "Eumenes": "We then come upon Eumenes' second observation that, being a foreigner, he has no right to exercise command over Macedonians. At no point, however, in Diodoros' prior narrative does Eumenes' Greek origin excite animosity among the Macedonians. More important, Eumenes does not see his foreign origin as an impediment to accepting the dynasty' offer of a supreme command in 18.58.4 and he proceeds to exercise that authority in 19.13.7 and 15.5 without any qualms on his part that he is not a Macedonian. Eumenes' foreign origin does become an issue at one point among the commanders of the Silver Shields." (2)

If the Ancient Macedonians themselves did not consider themselves to be kin to the people of the Ancient City States why should we?

Again the question still remains; if not by historical rights then by what right does 51% of the present Macedonian territory belongs to Greece?

Allow me to summarize:

1. The name "Greece" or "Hellas" did not exist in ancient times 2. The Ancient Macedonians did not consider themselves in any way, shape or form to be akin to the people from the Ancient City States 3. The Ancient City States were conquered and enslaved by the Macedonians; not united 4. The Ancient City States belonged to the Macedonians for nearly two centuries and not the other way around 5. No "Greek" or "Hellenic" State ever existed before 1829

So, how can Macedonian territories in 1912, 1913 be liberated by Greece when those lands NEVER belonged to Greece?

THE TRUTH:

The truth is Macedonia NEVER belonged to Greece. The 1912, 1913 conflict was simply a land grab perpetrated by Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria and sanctioned by the Great Powers to feed the imperial appetites of those three States. The so called "historical" claims were an afterthought designed to keep the innocent and uninformed tangled in a web of BIG Greek Lies.

NO! Macedonia is NOT and NEVER was Greek. Macedonia BELONGS to the Macedonians! In the words of William Gladstone "MACEDONIA FOR THE MACEDONIANS"!

The End

This is the last BIG Greek Lie. Look for the "Little Book of BIG Greek Lies" to be published in 2007.

References:

1. Stefou, Chris. History of the Macedonian People from Ancient times to the Present. Toronto: Risto Stefov Publications, 2005, P 67.

2. Quotes provided by Dedo Kire.

NOTE: I just want to mention here that the unknown author mentioned in Greek Lie # 19 is our own Soldier of Macedon (SoM) from the Maknews.com forum. Thank you SoM for your contribution.

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 28, 2010

BULGARIA: Usual Crisis

BULGARIA: Usual Crisis, Time, Monday, Sep. 17, 1928

The Cabinet of Prime Minister Andrei Liapchev fell, last week, for the usual reason: trouble with the belligerent Macedonian Minority.

A few days later His Majesty Tsar Boris called upon M. Liapchev to form another cabinet, for the usual reason: after other statesmen have had their try at assembling a Government, they are usually willing to compromise again on Liapchev. M. Liapchev duly formed another cabinet, but it, too, fell.

Source Time

January 27, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 19

BIG Greek Lie 19 - 4,000 years of Greek Civilization

(Some modern Greeks believe in a 4,000 year existence of a so called "Greek Civilization")

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

4,000 year "Greek Civilization"? Very impressive! But, what is a "Greek Civilization"?

According to Oxford a civilization is "an advanced stage of social development" and civilized is "being brought out of barbarism, being made into a fully organized State, enlightened and refined". According to Webster a civilization is "a social organization of high order, marked by the development and use of a written language and by advances in the arts and science, government etc., the total culture of a particular people, nation, period, etc." and civilized is "to bring or come out of primitive or savage conditions and into a state of civilization, to improve in habits or manners."

So "4,000 years of Greek Civilization" must mean "an advanced stage of Greek social development marked by the development and use of a written language and by advances in the arts and sciences, government, etc., the total Greek culture and Greek nation spanning for 4,000 years".

4,000 years of "Greek" civilization? Indeed!

I have been accused (by Greeks of course) of "fabricating information", "not including sources", "telling lies", "speculating", "providing no conclusions", "not making footnotes", etc., etc., so for this article I will do my best not to fabricate information, include sources and refrain from doing all those things. In fact, in this article I will go one step further and provide you with direct quotes from Western authors.

"Although the Greek-speakers of Constantinople may have been beneficiaries of a rich cultural tradition associated with the Byzantine Empire, a position retained also through the church during Ottoman times, years before the concept of a Greek state (which was a product of Great power politics and a concerted effort to de-stabilize the Ottomans) ever existed, 'the Greeks did not know who they were'". (P. 26, "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers", by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The ethnic mix of the Greek-speakers of the Ottoman empire (Greek was often learned as a second language by wealthier non-Greek people) was as diverse as any in the Ottoman Empire, possibly more. 'The islands and the seafarers from the coastal regions were distinguished by their peculiar ethnicity, many were of mixed Albanian-Greek origin'. (P. 23 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The Koundouriotes, for example, the most powerful maritime family on the island of Hydra, who led a substantial faction during the war (of independence), were of Albanian origin'. (P. 25 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"Although modern day Greek nationalists like to boast about how they never forgot their rich heritage and cultural icons, this next piece contradicts their theories. The 'Klephts' were the Greek equivalent of the Komiti or Hajduci, the warriors who championed the notion of a free nation. 'The 18th century Greek scholar, Koumas, tells of a visit to one of the most influential Klephts, Nikotsaras (possibly of part Slavic descent, Niko-'tsar'-as). In order to show respect, Koumas addressed the Klepht leader as Achilles. Nikotsaras retorted angrily: 'What rubbish are you talking about? Who is this Achilles? Handy with a musket was he?'." (P. 31 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"The philhellenes of America, Britain and Western Europe had called for a free Greek state in a romantic passionate attempt to bring to life the Hellenic culture of the past. Little did any of them know of what extreme changes had taken place in the region of what was once the Greek City States. 'Naturally, many travelers and philhellenes were shocked at the Greeks' lack of sophistication, and the ABSENCE OF A PHYSICAL RESEMBLANCE TO THE HELLENES of their classical imagination. All came expecting to find the Peloponnesus filled with Plutarch's men, and all returned thinking the inhabitants of Newgate more moral'." (P. 33 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) (1)

"It was not only the resemblance, or lack of it but also the fact that 'politically speaking the Greeks were Asiatics, and all their oriental ideas, whether social or political, required to be corrected or eradicated, before they could be expected to form a civilized people upon civilized European principals'. (P. 32 "The Balkans, Nationalism, War and the Great Powers" by Misha Glenny) So much for the cradle of European civilization". (1)

"As it is clearly obvious the Greek nation had many divisions and diversities within that had to be addressed before they could start telling the world that they are the descendents of the ancient Hellenes. Unfortunate though it may be, the modern-day Greek has more in common genetically with the Albanians, the Latin speaking Vlachs and the Turks than with 'Plutarch's men'". (1)

"The inherent instability of the Balkan Peninsula-located as it is at the crossroads of invading Turks, migrating Slavs, and colonizing powers from western or central Europe (Venetians, Austro-Hungarians)-has bequeathed a bewildering amount of cultural confusion to Greece." (Britannica)

"One of the most vexing questions concerning the history of medieval Greece has been that of the extent to which the indigenous "Hellenic" population survived and brings with it the question whether this term can properly be used of anything other than a cultural (as opposed to ethnic or racial) identity. The archaeological data, certainly, can offer answers only in terms of cultural similarities and differences, so that the question, as it has been traditionally expressed, of a Hellenic ethnic survival, cannot be answered. The issue must be explored in the context of the influx of large numbers of Slavs during the later 6th-8th centuries as well as the migration across Greece of nomadic or semi-nomadic pastoral groups such as the Vlachs from the 10th or 11th century and the Albanians from the 13th century. Although the evidence of place-names suggests some lasting Slavic influence in parts of Greece, the evidence is qualified by the fact that the process of re-Hellenization that occurred from the later 8th century seems to have eradicated many traces of Slavic presence. Evidence of tribal names found in both the Peloponnesus and northern Greece suggests that there were probably extensive Slavic-speaking populations in many districts; and from the 10th century to the 15th century Slavic occupants of various parts of the Peloponnesus appear in the sources as brigands or as fiercely independent warriors. Whereas the Slavs of the south appear to have adopted Greek, those of Macedonia and Thessaly retained their original dialects, becoming only partially Hellenophone in certain districts." (Britannica) (1)

"For Christians of the early and middle Byzantine worlds, the terms Hellene and Hellenic generally (although not exclusively, since in certain literary contexts a classicizing style permitted a somewhat different usage) had a pejorative connotation, signifying pagan and non-Christian rather than 'Greek'" (Britannica)

"Canning (a British politician, 1812-1862) had planned to head off Russia's advance, not by direct opposition, but by associating her with England and France in a policy of emancipation, aimed at erecting national States out of the component parts of the Turkish Empire. Such States could be relied upon to withstand Russian encroachment on their independence, if once they were set free from the Turk.. The creation of the Kingdom of Greece was the immediate outcome of Canning's policy". (P. 372, Trevelyan, British History in the 19th Century). (1)

"To me, philhellenism is a love affair with a dream which envisions 'Greece' and the 'Greeks' not as an actual place or as real people but as symbols of some imagined perfection". (P. 12, Greece without Columns) (1)

"Further back still beyond the War of Independence, when the modern nation-state of Greece came into being for the first time, the whole concept of Greece as a geographical entity that begins to blur before our eyes, so many and various were its shapes and meanings. But if geography can offer us no stable idea of Greece, what can? Not race, certainly; for whatever the Greeks may once have been, ...., they can hardly have had much blood-relationship with the Greeks of the peninsula of today, Serbs and Bulgars, Romans, Franks and Venetians, Turks, Albanians,...,in one invasion after another have made the modern Greeks a decidedly mongrel race. Not politics either; for in spite of that tenacious western legend about Greece as the birthplace and natural home of democracy, the political record of the Greeks is one of a singular instability and confusion in which, throughout history, the poles of anarchy modulated freedom has very rarely appeared. Not religion; for while Byzantium was Christian, ancient Hellas was pagan." (P. 23 Greece without Columns). (1)

"The Greek nation-state was a product of western political intervention-'the fatal idea' as Arnold Toynbee once called it, of exclusive western nationalism impinging upon the multi-national traditions of the eastern world. By extension, therefore, at any rate in theory, it was a child of the Renaissance and of western rationalism..." (P. 28 Greece without Columns) (1)

"Its international use to describe the sovereign state that currently occupies that territory is merely a reflection of the fact that 'Greece' in this modern sense is literally a western invention" (P. 29 Greece without Columns) (1)

"Greek natural identity was not a 'natural development' or the extension of a 'high culture' over the region of Macedonia, although now it is frequently portrayed as so. The ideology of Hellenism imposed a homogeneity on the Macedonian region and its inhabitants". (P. 94, Fields of Wheat, Hills of Blood) (1)

"Modern Greek identity is based on an unshakable conviction that the Greek State is ethnically homogenous. This belief ... has entailed repeated and official denial of the existence of minorities which are not of 'pure' Hellenic origin. The obsession with Greek racial identity involves the distortion of the history of the thousands of years when there was no such thing as a Greek nation state." (Simon McIllwaine) (1)

"A sharp and brutal revolution altered the whole character of Hellas... It also involved a steep decline of civilized life and an almost total rejection of former values... The most striking change affected the ethnic composition of the people and resulted from the mass migration of Slavs into the Balkans which began in the sixth Century." (N. Cheetham) (1)

"What is the word for this obsessive Greek pseudo-relationship with their country's past (they even have a magazine, Ellenismos, devoted to the subject)? It is not quite pretentiousness. There is too much passion for that. No, the Greeks, the ancient ones, had a word for the modern Greek condition: paranoia. We must accept that Mr. Andreas Papandreou (Greek prime minister) and the current EC presidency are the sole legitimate heirs of Pericles, Demosthenes and Aristide the Just. The world must nod dumbly at the proposition that in the veins of the modern Greek ... there courses the blood of Achilles. And their paranoid nationalism is heightened by the tenuousness of that claim." (The Sunday Telegraph, London, March 27,1994) (1)

"The most usual ideological abuse of history is based on anachronism rather than lies. Greek nationalism refused Macedonia even the right to its name on the grounds that all Macedonia is essentially Greek and part of a Greek nation-State, presumably ever since the father of Alexander the Great, king of Macedonia, became ruler of the Greek lands on the Balkan peninsula ... it takes a lot of courage for a Greek intellectual to say that, historically speaking, it is nonsense. There was no Greek nation-State or any other single political entity for the Greeks in the fourth century B.C.; the Macedonian empire was nothing like the Greek or any other modern nation-state, and in any case it is highly probable that the ancient Greeks regarded the Macedonian rulers, as they did their later Roman rulers, as barbarians and not as Greeks, though they were doubtless too polite or cautious to say so". (Eric Hobsbawn) (1)

"It is a striking fact that the leading defenders of Greek liberty at this time were largely Non-Greek. Koundouriotis was descended from the Albanian invaders of Greece in the 14th century, and spoke Greek only with difficulty. His principal colleague was John Kolettis, a Vlach who had been Ali Pasha's court doctor at Ioannina. One of the few leaders who maintained resistance far to the north of the Gulf of Corinth was the Souliote ,Marko Botsaris, whose followers were largely Albanian. By a strange chance, it happened that two of the Turkish commanders-in-chief during the war, Khurshid Pasha and Muhammad Rehid Pasha (known to the Greeks as Kiutahi), were by birth Orthodox Christians, who had been converted to Islam for the sake of career in the Sultans service." (C.M. Woodhouse) (1)

"Greece included considerably fewer than half of those who regarded themselves as Greeks by virtue of their language, their religion, and (less plausibly) their race. It was easy to stir up agitation in favour of enlarging Greece's frontiers by a progressive extension of 'enosis' (union)". (1)

"Greek demographic continuity was brutally interrupted in the late sixth to eighth centuries A.D. by massive influxes of Avar, Slav and later, Albanian immigrants......modern Greeks could hardly count as being of ancient Greek descent, even if this could never be ruled out." (Anthony Smith) (1)

"Basically, the current historical 'narrative' of modern Greece, removes all diversity from its pages. The young modern Greek State legitimized its existence, at least to the Great-Powers that supported it in the day, by claiming it represented ancient Greece, at a time when there weren't any 'Greeks' to be found anywhere, and the 'Greek' language between the Church and anything vaguely resembling it on the ground was unintelligible.

Any opportunity to influence public opinion in modern Greece and abroad, about the Greeks being 'pure' and 'homogenous'...etc is enthusiastically seized upon by the Greek State. It is not hard to work out that this kind of 'lie' would not really be well received if it could be shown that Greece had a lot of diverse ethnic groups still living there. The removal of Latin from the Vlach and Slavic from the Macedonian, among other things, is part in parcel of this censorship. The modern Greek State censors and abuses all its 'minorities'. The Greek historical 'narrative'' prospers only by hijacking different ethnic groups, removing their language, denying the 'differences', and literally inventing a complete new history for them. It's just plain crazy". (1)

"The Editor of The Sunday Telegraph argues that Greece has been ruthless in erasing traces of ethnic diversity, and suggests that the desperation of its actions, including the Greek claim to a monopoly of the classical past (in which all peoples of European origins have a share) can be explained by the fact that the Greeks today are a mixture of Slavs, Turks, Greeks, Bulgars, Albanians, Vlachs, Jews and Gypsies". (1)

"I watched the Koutsovlachi disappear in Thessaly over a period of twenty years. I remember the first time I went up there in 1957, I was stunned, it was another world--it was Rumania. Blond, blue-eyed women wearing incredibly beautiful costumes: white, with about twelve to fifteen inches of thick fringes at the bottom, in saffron, black, and ocher. And everywhere I went, there were ducks and geese, which I didn't see anywhere else in Greece. Ducks and geese and pigs--standard East and Central European farm culture. But I saw all of that disappear.

It's a pity because Greece has lost the Sarakatsani, it's lost the Vlachi, the Koutsovlachi, the Karagounidhes -- it's lost all these fascinating minority groups, and now people are getting up and trying to stop it, but they're about twenty years too late." (A Point of Contact: An Interview with Nikos Stavroulakis, by Peter Pappas in The Greek American (January 9, 1988)) (1)

"According to anthropologist Roger Just, most of the nineteenth-century "Greeks, 'who had so recently won their independence from the Turks, not only did not call themselves Hellenes (they learned this label later from the intellectual nationalists); they did not even speak Greek by preference, but rather Albanian, Slavonic, or Vlach dialects.'" (1)

"The obsession with Greek racial identity involves the distortion of the history of the thousands of years when there was no such thing as a Greek nation state. The early Slav invasions which reached far into the Peloponnesus and left Slav-speaking settlements well into the fifteenth century are conveniently ignored. So too is the fact that in the early nineteenth century the population of Athens was 24 per cent Albanian, 32 per cent Turkish and only 44 per cent Greek." (Simon Mcllwaine, The Strange Case of the Invisible Minorities, Institutional Racism in the Greek State, International Society for Human Rights, British Section, Dec 1993.) (1)

"No wonder the kodjabashis, the Peloponnesian notables, were disparagingly referred to as 'Christian Turks'. One hero of the war of independence, Photakos Kyrysanthopoulis, said that the only difference was one of names: instead of being called Hasan the Kodijabashi, he would be called Yanni: instead of praying in a mosque he would go to church." (P. 42, "A concise history Of Greece", Richard Clogg) (1)

"The Academy was built with bequest from Simon Sinas, the hugely wealthy son of Georgios Sinas, a Hellenized Vlach whose family came from Moschopolis in Southern Albania, who made his fortune in the Habsburg Empire and was himself the donor of Theophilos Hansen's observatory (1843-6). (P. 79, "A concise history Of Greece", Richard Clogg) (1)

And finally, some haunting final words for the Greeks:

In the 1830's an Austrian classicist called JJ Fallmereyer made a study of the South Slav migrations and concluded that "not only are the modern Greeks Slavs, but not a drop of pure Greek blood was to be found in the modern Greek State". In Athens needless to say, his name is not much. "Consequently the medieval and modern Greeks are not the descendants of the Greeks of Antiquity, and their Hellenism is artificial". (Robert Browning , Greece Old and New , edited by Tom Winnifrith and Penelope Murray, the Macmillan Press , London 1963.) (1)

"Slavic blood, Albanian heroes, Pontian Orthodox Turks, Latin speaking Vlach politicians, assimilated Macedonians and Albanians not to mention the dozen other ethnicities? Is any one truly Greek today?" (1)

In the presence of company it is not how one sees himself or herself it is how others see them that counts. So, I dedicate this article to those Greeks who love to ridicule Macedonians feeling very smug, secure and confident in their place and proud of their 4,000 years of Greek Civilization. What they really don't know is that they are standing on a rotten foundation ALL built on Greek lies.

You can believe the myths and fairytales your propagandists and government feed you or you can look at the evidence and start thinking for yourselves. You may be standing on what appear to be a solid foundation on the surface, but in reality you are standing on thin ice which with the slightest shock will crack and crumble before you.

Ask yourselves, why do so many people dispute your past? Are they all propagandists paid by rich Skopjans who have nothing better to do with their money but cause you trouble? Or are they in pursuit of finding the truth and telling you something that you should know? You can't say ALL these people are Skopjan propagandists or accuse me of "fabricating information". All the quotes given in this piece are written by western authors and I expect you will find them fair and impartial.

So, do you believe modern Greece is a unique nation that belongs to a 4,000 year old "Greek Civilization" like no other or do you believe your Government and benefactors have been feeding you a load of anachronisms (the representation of something as existing or occurring at other than it's proper time. Webster)?

THE TRUTH: (My conclusion)

The truth is Greece is a modern state created for the first time in 1929. Modern Greece just happens to be located where once upon a time a so called civilization existed for a brief period. The only reason we know about it is because the people preserved their thoughts by writing them on rocks. It would be naïve to think that it was the only civilization in existence or that it miraculously survived for over 4,000 years.

Modern Greece was created for a specific purpose, to act as a barrier to Russia and fulfill the political desires and agendas of the 19th century Western Great Powers. To believe anything different is foolish and to infer that there exists a 4,000 year old Greek Civilization is simply a BIG Greek Lie.

References:

(1) Many thanks to Paul for his research for this piece. I also want to thank the "unknown author" for some of the commentary in this article.

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 26, 2010

Harvard Encyclopedia - Macedonia

Harvard Encyclopedia on the Macedonian Language, 1980!

“Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups” by Stephan Thernstrom, Ann Orlov and Oscar Handlin, 1980, page 690.

Click on the image to see it in full size!

Харвардска енциклопедија на американски етнички групи, 1980, стр 690

Кликнете на сликата за да ја видете во целосен размер!

January 25, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 18

BIG Greek Lie 18 - Philip II United the Greeks

(Some modern Greeks believe that King Philip II of Ancient Macedonia united the so called "Greek" City States)

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

In spite of what we know today about the ancient Macedonians and the ancient City States, some Greeks still argue that King Philip II of ancient Macedonia did not subjugate the ancient City States but unified them instead. Some have even written to me declaring that Macedonia was another "Greek City State".

It has become painfully obvious that some Greeks will cling onto what they believe and ignore all evidence to the contrary. Some have admitted that arguments can even be developed to prove night is day and day is night. I say good for them, if that is what it takes to keep Greece Greek so be it, but for all those who need evidence to prove the obvious here it is;

During one of their campaigns south of Olympus, Macedonians took prisoners and Alexander asked one of the women who she was to which she replied: "I am the sister of Theogenes who commanded our army against your father Philip, and fell at Chaeronea fighting for the liberty of Greece."

If Philip and later Alexander were "unifying" the Greek City States then why were the so called "Greeks" fighting for the liberty of Greece? Were not Thebans and Athenians and their allies fighting together for the holy soil of Hellas on August 2nd, 338BC at the sleepy village of Chaeronea? Fellow Hellenes, the Athenians and Thebans, fought against the Macedonians, the barbarians from the north.

If the Macedonians were "Greeks" then this would have been a civil war. If Macedonians were "Greeks" why did they not fight to safeguard "the holy soil of Hellas"?

When another Macedonian king, Archelaus (413 to 399 BC) attacked Larissa in Thessaly, Thrasymachus wrote what was to later become a "model oration" on behalf of the Larissans. Only one sentence has survived which reads as follows: "Shall we be slaves to Archelaus, we, being Greeks, to a barbarian?" If the ancient Macedonians were "Greek" then why did Thasymachus refer to them not only as barbarians but very much distinguished them from "the rest of the Greeks"?

What about Demosthenes and what he had to say about the Macedonians, particularly about Philip II? Modern day Greeks would like to dispatch off Demosthenes castigations of Philip II as political rhetoric, and yet Demosthenes was twice appointed to lead the war effort of Athens against Macedonia. He, Demosthenes, said of Philip that Philip was not Greek, nor related to Greeks but comes from Macedonia where a person could not even buy a decent slave.

Soon after his death the people of Athens paid him fitting honours by erecting his statue made of bronze. On the base of his statue the following famous inscription was carved: "If only your strength had been equal, Demosthenes, to your wisdom, never would Greece have been ruled by a Macedonian Ares". The actions of his contemporaries, the ancient "Greeks" speak much louder about Demosthenes' character than the words of any modern Greek. Demosthenes, in modern terms, was a patriot, not a crackpot politician as some modern Greeks would have us believe!

When news of Philip's death reached Athens, Demosthenes appeared in public dressed in magnificent attire and wore a garland on his head. The following is what was subsequently written about that moment in history: "For my part I cannot say that the Athenians did themselves any credit in putting on garlands and offering sacrifices to celebrate the death of a king who, when he was the conqueror and they the conquered had treated them with such tolerance and humanity. Far apart from provoking the anger of the gods, it was a contemptible action to make Philip a citizen of Athens and pay him honours while he was alive, and then, as soon as he has fallen by another's hand, to be besides themselves with joy, trample on his body, and sing paeans of victory, as though they themselves have accomplished some great feat of arms." [p.207] (Plutarch "The Age of Alexander").

If the Macedonians were "Greek" why did so many "Greeks" join the ranks of the Persians to fight against them? Weren't the Persians the worst enemies of the "Greeks"? If Alexander indeed fought the Persians to avenge the "Greeks" shouldn't the "Greeks" have willingly and voluntarily joined him?

"Darius' Greeks fought to thrust the Macedonians back into the water and save the day for their left wing, already in retreat, while the Macedonians, in their turn, with Alexander's triumph plain before their eyes, were determined to equal his success and not forfeit the proud title of invincible, hitherto universally bestowed upon them. The fight was further embittered by the old racial rivalry of Greek and Macedonian." [p.119] (Arrian Book II - Battle of Issus, "The Campaigns of Alexander").

For those who think Philip II "unified" the Ancient City States or the "Greeks" as some modern Greeks would like to call it, please read carefully the next quote. "Alexander meanwhile dealt swiftly with the unrest in Greece - not only did the Athenians rejoice at Philip's death, but the Aetolians, the Thebans, as well as the Spartans and the Peloponnesians, were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. (Diod. 17.3.3-5) (Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander"). If you read the quote carefully you would have noticed the word "yoke". The Aetolians, Thebans, Spartans, and Peloponnesians were ready to throw off the Macedonian yoke. Allow me to emphasize that when one "unifies" there is no "yoke" to be thrown off!

"Alexander also referred to his father Philip as conqueror of Athenians, and recalled to their minds the recent conquest of Boeotia and the annihilation of its best known city." [p.41] (Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander"). Allow me to also emphasize that when one "unifies" there is no "conquest"!

Need I say more?

Apparently with some there is "need" so here are some more quotes (By Quintus Rufus "The History of Alexander"): "Men! If you consider the scale of our achievements, your longing for peace and your weariness of brilliant campaigns are not at all surprising. Let me pass over the Illyrians, the Triballians, Boeotia, Thrace, Sparta, the Aecheans, the Peloponnesians - all of them subdued under my direct leadership or by campaigns conducted under my orders of instructions". When one "unites", one does not "subdue" or "force submission" or "conquer" people.

"Starting with Macedonia, I now have power over Greece; I have brought Thrace and the Illyrians under my control; rule the Triballi and the Maedi. I have Asia in my possession from the Hellespont to the Red Sea." [p.277]

According to Arrian in "The Campaigns of Alexander", Alexander continues to speak to his Macedonians and allies: "Come, then; add the rest of Asia to what you already possess - a small addition to the great sum of your conquests. What great or noble work could we ourselves have achieved had we thought it enough living at ease in Macedon, merely to guard our homes, excepting no burden beyond checking the encroachment of the Thracians on our borders, or the Illyrians and Triballians, or perhaps such Greeks as might prove a menace to our comfort." [p.294].

After reading the above, an unbiased reader or a reader who has no political agenda, would come to the conclusion that there is some doubt in the modern Greek belief that the ancient Macedonians were "Greek" and that King Philip II of Macedonia "unified" the "Greeks". It should become obvious that Philip II fought the "Greeks" in battle and with his victory conquered and subjugated them and added them and their territories to his own growing empire. If indeed Philip and Alexander unified the so called "Greeks" in that manner and by those tactics according to modern Greek logic, then they must also have unified the Illyrians with the Thracians, the Triballians, Maedians and every other tribe in Asia as far east as India.

It is time these modern Greek unbelievers either put their biased beliefs aside and face reality or admit that the only reason they insist the ancient Macedonians were "Greek" is to justify their occupation of 51% of Macedonian territories. Ancient Macedonians were as akin to the so called ancient "Greeks" as modern Macedonians are akin to modern Greeks. The rest is "Greek logic" which should be classified as "Greek lies" and filed under the "ancient mythology" section called "Big Greek Lies".

You can believe what you like and you can argue about it until you turn blue. Your interpretation of history does not reflect the evidence left behind by the ancient authors. Your interpretation is clearly designed by your modern Greek and Philhellene historians and by the Greek State for the sole purpose of laying claim to Macedonian territories and the Macedonian heritage which rightfully belongs to the Macedonian people.

References:

Gandeto, Josef S. G. Ancient Macedonians, Differences Between The Ancient Macedonians and The Ancient Greeks. New York: Writer's Showcase, 2002.

Some of the ancient quotes and ideas for this article were provided by Dedo Kire.

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 24, 2010

Bulgaria wiping out its Macedonians

Bulgaria wiping out its Macedonians, The London Times, 4th December 1975


January 22, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 17

BIG Greek Lie 17 - The Ancient Macedonians were Greek

(Some modern Greeks believe the Ancient Macedonian were Greek)

by Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

Why is it so important to modern Greeks today to believe that the ancient Macedonians were Greek? Why is it so important for them to believe that the modern Macedonians are not at all related to the ancient Macedonians yet the modern Greeks are "direct descendants" of the ancient "Greeks"?

Before looking at the arguments and evidence presented we will examine the politics behind these claims.

Modern Greece today is holding 51% of Macedonian territories for which it has absolutely no justifiable reason. In 1912, 1913 Greece along with its partners Serbia and Bulgaria, under the pretence of liberation, invaded, occupied and brutally partitioned Macedonia into three pieces. Ever since this invasion Greece has systematically and tyrannically oppressed the Macedonian people to a point of extinction. There is no justifiable reason or logical explanation for Greece's behaviour but in the last century or so it has committed genocidal crimes against the Macedonian people including mass murders (1) , mass expulsions, mass confiscation of properties, mass denationalization, oppression, discrimination and all sorts of other abuses. Greece attacked the Macedonian people with the intent of eradicating them by any means possible. These are crimes that cannot be taken lightly or forgotten.

How has Greece justified all this and gotten away with it unpunished for almost a century?

Since its inception in 1829, Greece has systematically lied to the world about its own and later about Macedonia's past claiming Macedonia was and still is "Greek". Greece has also made claims that only "Greeks" live in Greece and has literally waged war against people who continued to claim to be non-"Greeks" and against those who refute its official position. .

Since Greece has no legitimate claim on Macedonian territories it had to invent far fetched ideas such as the ancient Macedonians being "Greek" in an effort to legitimize its claim. Greece looked back in history 2,400 years to justify its hold on Macedonian territories while ignoring not only Macedonia's but its own present reality. In the last century or so, Greece has behaved as if no one else but "Greece" had rights of ownership not only to Macedonian lands but also to the Macedonian heritage and history. When Greece forcefully imposed itself on Macedonia, it saw it as a vacant place ripe for colonization, treating its true inhabitants, the Macedonian people as vermin to be exterminated.

In the eyes of the world, the Macedonian people were seen as "Slav speakers" presumed to have come to this region during the 6th century AD. Slav speakers during the 19th century were considered the enemy and were looked upon unfavourably by the western world. So, in the last couple of centuries the world looked the other way while Greece waged war on the Macedonians in an attempt to exterminate them.

Since the 19th century, Greece has used the term "Slav" to refer to Macedonians in order to emphatically show to the world that the Macedonians of today are not at all related to the Macedonians of two thousand years ago. It also uses the word "Slav" to denigrate Macedonians making them feel like foreigners on their native lands.

Why has Greece chosen to lay claim to the ancient Macedonians before the Roman conquests and not to the Macedonians of a later period?

When Greece became a nation for the first time in 1829, its future was set not by its own people but by the politically motivated Great Powers, foreigners who artificially chose the character of this nation to suit their own political agendas. Modern Greece was created to be a continuation of the so-called "ancient Greece" of two thousand four hundred years ago. Two thousand four hundred years is a big historic gap for a new nation to fill especially one that has forgotten its past. Yes, there is a 2,400 year old historic gap between today's Greece and the phantom almost mythical "Greece" of yesteryears. Greece's course was set and its artificial history written by foreigners before its own conscience was developed. The people living in modern Greece were literally told who they are. They were told to forget their present reality, language, culture, customs, and embrace a new politically and artificially created reality. Once this transition was successfully completed in Greece proper it was easy for the "new" Greece to make claims on Macedonian territories. History clearly shows that Macedonia was not considered part of Greece in Greece's early days. This consideration was made only after Macedonia became ripe for conquest. So, when the right time came, it was natural for Greece to look at its own artificial construct and envision the ancient Macedonians as part of it. Then, when the Germans and others developed the idea that the Slavs came to the Balkans during the 6th century AD, Greece was quick to take advantage of this situation and label the Macedonians "Slavs" thus making them look like "new comers" in comparison to its own past. Slavs were naturally seen as undesirables and the world saw nothing wrong with legitimizing their abuse. Labeling the Macedonians "Slavs" gave Greece a way not only to show that these were "different" people, not related to the ancient Macedonians, but also that they did not belong on those territories even though they were there for 1,500 years. And because they were "Slavs" it was okay to treat them as vermin.

What evidence has Greece used to show that the ancient Macedonians were "Greek" and what evidence has it ignored that shows the opposite?

Even today some Greeks will argue to a point of exhaustion trying to prove that the ancient Macedonians were "Greek". They will tell their own version of history and stick with it while making remarks that it is universally understood and supported by the most important historians, therefore it must be true.

Here are some of the arguments they use to prove their point;

1. The Ancient Macedonians spoke a dialect of the Greek language.

From the various inscriptions found in archeological digs it has been established that one of the languages employed in ancient Macedonia was the Koine language commonly known as the language of trade and commerce. This was an international language which was used in the Macedonian court and by the Macedonian administration.

The Greek argument here is that "if Macedonians spoke Greek they must have been Greek". It is the same as saying "if the Macedonians speak English they must be English". While making statements such as these, most Greeks ignore evidence that proves that the ancient Macedonians, Alexander the Great included, spoke another language, a language indigenous to Macedonia, which makes them bilingual thus placing great doubts on the validity of this Greek argument.

Instead of trying to prove that the ancient Macedonians were "Greek", these Greeks who like to argue about their Greekness should look at their own relationship to the ancient "Greeks". They may be surprised to find that the modern Greeks have nothing to do with the ancients. In fact, if they dig deep enough they will find that the so called "Greek language" they speak today is as foreign to them as "ancient Greek" was foreign to the ancient Macedonians. Modern Greeks today speak an imposed language that was forced upon their great grandparents. A great majority (98%) of modern Greeks during the early 19th century did not speak Greek. They had to learn to speak Greek in school and some under the cruelest conditions. No common Macedonian spoke Greek before the Greek state made its presence in Macedonia. Then, almost overnight Greek occupied Macedonia became "Greek speaking". I wonder how that happened?

2. The ancient Macedonians prayed to the same "Greek gods" as the ancient "Greeks".

Again, according to inscriptions found in archeological digs the ancient Macedonians did share beliefs in some gods with the other people in the region including those living in the ancient city states. Sharing a common religion and believing in the same deity unfortunately is not a valid indicator of sharing a common ethnicity. Two people can speak the same language, share a religion and believe in the same God without being of the same ethnic origin. Take Christianity for example. Today we have hundreds of ethnicities living in Toronto, Canada who speak English, are Christians and believe in Jesus Christ. It would not only be wrong but outright ridiculous to even think that all these people have a common ethnicity or somehow are ethnically connected because they share a religion.

The so called "Greek gods" lived on Olympus (which by the way is in Macedonia) and were worshipped by many people. They were regional gods who belonged to the entire Balkans; not just to the "Greeks". It is 19th century politics and Greek propaganda which turned the mythical gods of the Balkans into "Greek gods".

3. The ancient Macedonians united the ancient "Greek" city states and spread the "Hellenic" language and culture to the known world.

This is a case of "Greeks" believing their own lies for so long that they forgot the truth. According to historic accounts;

"On August 2nd, 338 BC, in the shallow Cephisus River valley near the village of Chaeronea on the road to Thebes, the two opposing armies met face to face. On the north side stood Philip's Macedonians with 30,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest Macedonian army ever assembled. Among Philip's commanding generals was his 18 year-old son, Alexander, in charge of the cavalry. On the south side, stood the allied Athenians, Thebans and Achaeans who assembled 35,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry, the largest army ever assembled since the Persian invasion.

Closely matched, the armies clashed and while the battle ensued the Macedonian right flank fell back and began to retreat. Seeing the Macedonians weakening, the "Greek" allied general gave orders to push on and drive the Macedonians back to Macedonia. As the Macedonians retreated, the allied flanks broke rank and began the pursuit. Not realizing it was a trick, the allies found themselves surrounded and slaughtered by Alexander's cavalry. When it was over, the majority of the allied army, including the elite Theban Sacred Band lay dead in the fields of Chaeronea." (2)

Macedonia fought and defeated the so called "Greeks" in battle and subjugated them from 338 BC until 206 BC when they were briefly liberated and again subjugated by the Romans. So, according to "Greek" logic, the Macedonians united the so-called "Greek" city states by subjugating and subordinating them under Macedonian control. By the same "Greek" logic we can conclude that Hitler too, in WWII, united the Europeans by subjugating them and placing them under German control.

As for spreading the so called "Hellenic" language and culture, there is no evidence that the Macedonians exclusively did this for the sole purpose of honouring the "Greeks". The Macedonians gave the world what the Macedonians had and considered to be of value. The Macedonians also took what they considered valuable and adopted it as their own. Unlike the so-called ancient "Greeks" who were xenophobic and loathed everything foreign, the ancient Macedonians loved everything foreign and if it was of any value to them they did not hesitate to adopt it as their own.

It is difficult for modern Greeks to accept that everything has its time and that the so-called ancient "Greeks" ceased to exist a long, long time ago. It is difficult for them to accept the fact that; like the modern Macedonians, they are the product of evolution, of mixing and matching. It is difficult for them to accept that they are the children, at least in part, of the conquerors, invaders, settlers and plunderers that roamed the Balkans for the last two and a half millennium. It is difficult for them to accept the fact that they may not be the direct descendents of those "glorious Greeks" but mongrels of every race that visited the Balkans. It is easier for them to believe lies and fairy tales than face the fact that their grandparents and great grandparents may have been Albanian, Vlach, Turkish or Macedonian, yes Macedonian, the very same people they negate and insist don't exist.

THE TRUTH:

Modern Greece is a modern creation, a Great Power concoction. Britain and France in the early 19th century desperately needed an ally in the Balkans to protect their precious interests from Russia. Greece was created to prevent Russia from accessing Mediterranean waters, from spoiling Britain's back yard. Macedonia's partition and Greece's gain have nothing to do with "historical rights" but plenty to do with loyalty to an ally. Greece did its job well in serving as a "guard dog" for Britain so it was rewarded with Macedonian lands. The rest are lies to keep the innocent and unaware tangled in arguments from which there is no escape.

If you don't believe me ask yourself these questions;

1. How could the ancient Macedonians die off to the last one making them extinct and the so-called ancient "Greeks" survive?

2. How can all the modern Macedonians be "Slavs" that came to the Balkans during the 6th century AD and all the modern Greeks be "Hellenes" direct descendants from the ancient "Greeks"? Didn't Greece in 1912, 1913 invade and occupy a fully populated Macedonia? What happened to those Macedonians? Did they turn into "Greeks" overnight? (Yes they did! In 1928 Greece declared to the world that it had a 98% "pure Greek" homogenous population).

3. How has Greece maintained all its territories "pure Greek" with a 2, 300 year old open border?

4. How is it possible in this day and age for Greece, a "newly created" state to be allowed to have 2,400 year old inheritance rights (without a shred of evidence to prove it) and evict Macedonians from their lands on which they lived for more than 1,500 years?

Even by Greek accounts, Macedonians have lived in Macedonia since the 6th century AD, yet Greece is still evicting them. Greece is punishing Macedonians for being Macedonian! What do you think the name dispute is all about?

Like I said before, modern Greece is a newly created state modeled after the ancient city states with a 2,400 year old historical gap. Greece has usurped the ancient Macedonian heritage and Macedonian lands and will do anything to hang on to them including fabricating history and spreading BIG Greek lies. Macedonians are an obstacle to Greece's survival. The existence of Macedonians proves that Greece has lied all along and is now afraid that one day the crimes it has committed against the Macedonian people will be exposed. If Greece admits Macedonians exist, it will also have to admit that it has lied to the world and to its own people.

References:

1. George F. Kennan. "The Other Balkan Wars" A 1913 Carnegie Endowment Inquiry in Retrospect with a New Introduction and Reflections on the Present Conflict. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, 1993.

2 Stefou, Chris. History of the Macedonian People from Ancient times to the Present. Toronto: Risto Stefov publications, 2005

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 21, 2010

Macedonians in Evening Post

Macedonians mentioned in Evening Post.
































BIG Greek Lie 16

BIG Greek Lie 16 - The Macedonian Language Does Not Exist

(Modern Greeks believe the Macedonian language doesn't exist)

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

"If you peel away all that Greece has taken from others, you will find an empty carcass of a people shocked to find that they have been living a lie-a lie that they invented and a lie that will ultimately destroy them." Steve S.

There are some western academics and authors today who believe that the suppression of the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia has arisen out of Greek efforts at nation-building. After Macedonia's occupation and partition in 1912, 1913, a great effort was made to turn its inhabitants into the citizens of the Greek nation-state. In order to make sure its citizens were loyal to the Greek state, politicians and intellectuals rewrote history, creating a myth that ALL Greek residents were "ethnic Greeks". "Ethnicity" was purposely confused with "nationality" which led directly to the denial of the existence of the Macedonians. Denying the existence of the ethnic Macedonians quickly led to the denial of everything that was Macedonian and for those who insisted otherwise, denigration and human rights abuses followed.

After denying the ethnic existence of an entire nation, it was not difficult for Greece to deny the existence of the Macedonian language. Unfortunately for Greece, it was not as easy to hide a language as it was to hide an entire ethnicity. Ever since Macedonia's occupation and partition in 1912, 1913, Macedonians living inside Greece or should I say inside Greek occupied Macedonia, continued to speak their language even at the risk of being persecuted. After numerous efforts on the Greek part, to ban this language and make it illegal, Macedonians continued to speak it. Having to explain themselves why there are so called "Greeks" speaking a non-Greek language inside Greece, Greek authorities resorted to calling the language "Slav", "Bulgarian", "Serbian" and even an "idiom" but never Macedonian. This idiom, according to some Greek explanations, was some sort of lost Slavic dialect probably a remnant of the "Bulgarian schools" from the Exarchate days when Macedonia was still under Ottoman rule.

"...I asked him what language they spoke, and my Greek interpreter carelessly rendered the answer Bulgare. The man himself had said Makedonski. I drew attention to this word and the witness explained that he did not consider the rural dialect used in Macedonia the same as Bulgarian, and refused to call it by that name. It was Macedonian, a word to which he gave the Slav form of Makedonski, but which I was to hear farther north in the Greek form of Makedonike". Allen Upward, The East End of Europe. London, 1908, pp. 204-205.

The Greeks may have been able to fool their own people and outsiders with no interest in Greek or Macedonian affairs, but they could not fool those people who actually had interest in learning the truth and those who spoke Macedonian and whose mother tongue has been Macedonian for dozens of generations. In fact some believe that Macedonians spoke Macedonian and lived on Macedonian lands before the so called "Ancient Greeks" were civilized. One thing is certain, Macedonians spoke Macedonian before the Bulgars descended from the Volga.

"The Greeks will not admit the Slav language in Churches or schools; the inhabitants of Macedonia are in the great majority Slavs; they call themselves now Macedonians, and what they desire and what we ardently desire for them is an autonomy under European control. -In whatever way Macedonia might be divided, the people would always be discontented, and would fight again as soon as possible. The only hope I can foresee is in a strong autonomy, which neither Greeks nor Bulgars nor Serbs would dare attack; then the Macedonians, who are really intelligent and docile when they are well treated, would peacefully develop this beautiful fertile country, and might learn to be civilized. -Surely Europe will not leave Macedonia under people whom the Macedonians hate, and whom they will continually fight. As the little Balkan states can never agree, but always fight for Macedonia, let none of them have it. -We might then have peace, the Catholics would again have heart, and all the years of hard work among them would not have been wasted." Catholic Sister of Charity, Augustine Bewicke, January 4th 1919. Letter to Ian Malcolm, a British diplomat. Sister Augustine lived in Macedonia for 33 years.

The Macedonian language is at least three thousand years old and fifteen-hundred years ago formed the basis of what we now call Church Slavonic, the language of Kiril and Metodi from Solun and the language of all Slavonic Churches. There are also people who believe that the Slavic family of languages began in Macedonia and was spread throughout Eastern Europe by Macedonians.

Here is what Christian Voss has to say. "The case of the Slavic-speaking minority, which until today is officially denied in its very existence, in a comparative perspective is very strange, especially in view of their large number. The Slavic dialects in Aegean Macedonia - a territory of about 35.000 square kilometers - have approximately 200,000 potential speakers. Since only one third of them makes active use of the vernacular, which since 30-40 years is not the primary code any more, the term "Slavic-speaker" presents a more or less ethnic category which is supported on the sociological level (cf. Voss 2003: 116-117).

The demographic development in the region is determined by several waves of ethnic cleansing in form of population exchange between Greece and Bulgaria (Neuilly 1919) and Greece and Turkey (Lausanne 1923) as well as in form of expulsion (during the Balkan Wars 1912-1913 and at the end of the Greek Civil War 1948-1949). As a result, the indigenous Slavic-speaking population, which until 1912 constituted the majority in Aegean Macedonia (with 30-40%), became minorised - except the western part, i.e. the prefecture of Florina, where they are still the majority and where many villages had no settlement of Asia Minor and Pontos refugees (Voss 2003a: 62-64).

My survey of 270 villages in Northern Greece, where until today Slavic dialects are spoken, results from fieldwork conducted in the area between 1999 and 2003 (Voss 2003d): 112 of them are in Western Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Kastoria, Florina, and the northern part of Kozani), 121 of them belong to Central Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Pella, Kilkis, Thessaloniki and the northern part of Imathia), 38 of them in Eastern Macedonia (i.e. the prefectures Serres and Drama)."

So, without going into details, it is not a case where a Macedonian language never existed or a case where a Macedonian language did exist and became extinct and is no longer in use. It is a case where a Macedonian language existed, exists and is spoken by Macedonians today.

So, the big question here is why is Greece insisting that there is no such thing as a Macedonian language? And why do they insist that the Macedonians in Greek occupied Macedonia are "Slavic Speaking Greeks"?

Yes, the Macedonian language is a "Slavic language" but so is Russian, Ukrainian, Polish, Serbian, Croatian, Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak, etc. The Greeks have no problems with the Russians calling their language Russian or with the Poles calling theirs Polish. So why do they have a problem with Macedonians calling their language Macedonian?

THE TRUTH

It is well known that the Macedonian people living in Macedonia spoke a dialect of the Slavic branch of languages since the days of Kiril and Metodi. If I am not mistaken, by the turn of the 20th century there were at least fifty Macedonian dialects spoken in the territories of Macedonia. The Macedonian language, especially the dialects spoken in Greek occupied Macedonia, is an old and widely used language which took its time to develop and mature into the many dialects of this day. It is an oral and a mother language to all Macedonians and has been for as far back as the collective memory of Macedonians can recall.

Also, there are more than four-hundred million people in Europe that speak variants of this language so how can Greece say it doesn't exist?

Unlike "Greek" which is an imposed language, Macedonian is a natural language that has been orally passed on from generation to generation and has survived and flourished in the hearts and minds of the Macedonian people. I would say it is a precious language facing extinction that must be protected and preserved under all circumstances. Unfortunately Greece is totally ignorant of what a precious jewel it has and instead of cherishing it, it is bent on destroying it, choking the life out of it.

The Macedonian language exists not only in Macedonia but also in Canada, the USA, Australia and the world over. Only the Greek state and some Greeks deny its existence and that makes them conspirators in another BIG Greek lie. And now I leave you with this:

"Being shocked and increasingly concerned, I struck the village mayor when I heard him speak Bulgarian, which he wishes to call Macedonian, and I recommended that in the future he should always and everywhere speak only Greek, and that he should recommend that his villagers do the same." Greek Infantry Lieutenant Dim. Kamburas, Armensko, January 25, 1925.

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 20, 2010

Macedonians in Cape Vincent Eagle

Macedonians mentioned in the US Newspaper Cape Vincent Eagle 1902 and 1939

January 19, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 15

BIG Greek Lie 15 - Greeks are Hellenes

(Modern Greeks believe they are Hellenes)

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, Hellenism is "the culture, ideals, and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times. It usually means primarily the culture of ATHENS and the related cities in the Age of Pericles [495-429 BC]. The term is also applied to the ideals of later writers and thinkers who draw their inspiration from ancient Greece. Frequently it is contrasted with Hebraism - Hellenism then meaning pagan joy, freedom, and love of life as contrasted with the austere morality and monotheism of the Old Testament. The Hellenic period came to an end with the conquest of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC. It was succeeded by the Hellenistic civilization." Page 930, Columbia Encyclopedia, Third Edition 1963, New York and London.

If you ask a Modern Greek today to identify his or her "nationality" they will say they are "Greek". If you ask them what is that in "Greek"? They will say "Ellinas" or "Ellinida". There is no word for "Greek" in the Greek vocabulary. If there is (Graekos) it is rarely used and unknown to most Greeks.

According to most modern Greeks today, "Greek" and "Ellines" are synonymous. In other words a "Hellene is a native of either ancient or modern Greece; a Greek".

If I am to understand this correctly "a Hellene is a person who shares the culture, ideals, and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times" and "who is a native of either ancient or modern Greece". In other words, again if I understand this correctly, any person of any ethnicity who is native of either ancient or modern Greece and who shares the culture, ideals and pattern of life of ancient Greece in classical times qualifies to be a Hellene.

Can a person be a Hellene and something else at the same time? According to Modern Greek standards, NO! One cannot be a Hellene and a Turk at the same time; according to some Greeks, why would they want to? "A Hellene is a superior being!" Also, according to some Greeks, "to be a Hellene one must be a descendant of the ancient Hellenes".

Obviously there are people today who call themselves "Hellenes" or more accurately, "Ellines". My question here is "who are these people and how did they become the Hellenes?"

Modern Greeks today consider themselves to be the inheritors of the ancient Greek and Byzantine civilizations and cultures. Historically, the self-perception of the Greeks and the definition of Greekness have varied, but with the emergence and consolidation of the nation-state, from the late 18th century, Greekness was redefined along the lines of what some people call romantic nationalism.

Romantic nationalism is the form of nationalism in which the state derives its political legitimacy as an organic consequence of the unity of those it governs. This includes, depending on the particular manner of practice, the language, race, culture, religion and customs of the "nation" in its primal sense of those who were "born" within its culture. This form of nationalism arose in reaction to dynastic or imperial hegemony, which assessed the legitimacy of the state from the "top down", emanating from a monarch or other authority, which justified its existence. Such downward-radiating power might ultimately derive from God.

Greece accepts all those who agree with this principle and rejects those who disagree.

So what exactly is this principle and what are the criteria for belonging to it? Or, what is this club called "Hellas" and how does one sign up to join it?

Is it ethnicity? Obviously not! Modern Greece is made up of Slav Speakers, Albanians, Vlachs, Turks, Christian Turks, Roma, etc.

Is it the Christian Orthodox Religion? Obviously not, even though most conservative Greeks like it to be! The so-called ancient Hellenes were Pagan.

So what exactly is a "Hellene" then in modern terms?

A Modern Hellene is a person who has rejected his or her real ethnicity, forsaken his or her real culture for the sake of belonging to a "CLUB".

A Modern Hellene or Modern Greek, since Hellene and Greek are synonymous, has abandoned reality and the truth for the sake of living an Idea.

When Greece was coming together as a country for the first time in the early 1800's, ethnically it could not hold itself together because of the various ethnicities living together and pulling in different directions. It is well known and every Greek should know that the majority of their national heroes of the "Greek uprising" against the Turks were not Greeks. They were Albanians (Arvanites), Vlachs and Slav Speakers (mostly Macedonians).

Even though there were many roads Greece could have taken during its national awakening it chose the road to "Hellenism". Unfortunately, appealing as it might have been to the Greek State it was destructive and devastating to the indigenous people of the region who are reeling from it to this day.

Greece wiped out half a dozen natural cultures and vibrant languages for the sake of resurrecting something that had died two thousand five hundred years ago so that it could re-live the old glory days and satisfy the imperial ambitions of the Great Powers of the day.

THE TRUTH

The truth is "there are no Hellenes living today", and as per the Columbia Encyclopedia definition, they died, came to an end with the conquest of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC.

You Greeks can all pretend to be "Hellenes" but the only ones you're fooling are yourselves, which is fine by me. Unfortunately when you claim that the Macedonians, a real, vibrant living people don't exist, I take offense to that.

When you adamantly insist that Macedonia belongs to Greece, a group of people who fabricated their own identity, and not to the real Macedonians, I take offence to that.

When Macedonians are murdered, sent to prison, exiled from their homes and lands, forbidden to speak their mother tongue, not being recognized as people in their native lands, for the sake of propagating a Greek lie, I take offence to that.

When Macedonian names and toponyms are erased, Macedonian Bibles and tombstones eradicated, and peoples' identities stripped from them for the sake of creating "Hellenes" an identity that died many eons ago, I take offense to that too.

So please take a good look at your creation and tell me that "Hellenism" is not another BIG Greek lie!

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com

January 18, 2010

Mas in Macedonia

Mas in Macedonia - World Today, Wednesday, Januay 19/23, 2005

January 17, 2010

Macedonians in USA

Macedonians in USA 100 years ago. Here are three of the many documents from the american archives from Ellis Island immigrants in USA. It is clearly written "Nationality" and "Race" - "Macedonian".



January 16, 2010

The 31 Places to Go - Macedonia

The 31 Places to Go in 2010 - New York Times

...

21. Macedonia

One of the deepest lakes on the planet, with a dazzling Unesco World Heritage site of ancient dwellings rising high above its shores, Lake Ohrid in Macedonia is a local vacation star poised for greater international acclaim.

In the tiered, terra-cotta-roofed city of Ohrid, 18 miles from the Albanian border, a lakefront settlement dating back to Neolithic times, Macedonians boast that on their side of the lake is a church, monastery or mosque for every day of the year, each full of resplendent frescoes, mosaics and icons. Notable attractions include the recently renovated church of St. Clement and St. Panteleimon at Plaosnik, an epic Byzantine masterpiece, and the 13th-century St. John of Kaneo, a limestone and brick monastery that juts out over transparent blue waters.

An estimated $50 million renovation of the Ohrid Airport is planned for 2010, with more international flights expected by summer, and up to six new luxury hotels are in the works, including a $33 million property with construction scheduled to begin in March. Tourist attractions on Ohrid’s beaches were upgraded last year with swank bars and dining spots complimented by bamboo and leather couchettes, with the hot spot Cuba Libre (www.cubalibreohrid.com) leading the way.

Meanwhile, new government-financed archaeological digs around the lake regularly unearth treasures, like the 17 fifth-century tombs discovered last July. The find follows the 2008 opening of the Museum on Water, a re-created Bronze Age village built on stilts incorporating Ohrid artifacts. — Dinah Spritzer

...

Source New York Times

January 15, 2010

BIG Greek Lie 14

BIG Greek Lie 14 - Macedonians are Slavs

(Many Greeks believe Macedonians are Slavs)

By Risto Stefov

[NOTE: Our apologies to the Greek people if they find these articles offensive. Our objective here is NOT to create tension between the Macedonian and Greek people but rather to highlight the problem that exists within the Greek State and its institutions. As long as the Greek State denies our existence as Macedonians with rights and privileges, we will continue to publish these types of articles.]

Even before a typical Greek opens his or her mouth, I can tell you exactly what they are going to say when it comes to the Macedonians. To this day, I have received thousands of e-mails from Greeks and they all basically say the same things. "Macedonians don't exist", "Macedonians are Greek", "Tito created the Macedonian identity", "Macedonians are cultural and historical thieves", and of course the subject of this BIG Greek lie, "Macedonians are Slavs who came to the Balkans during the 6th century AD".

To prove my point I have included quotes from a number of these e-mails I received. Last names were removed to protect the authors;

George G. wrote: "If you cannot accept simple historical fact and evidence that Ancient Macedonia was Greek then I suggest you visit a mental institution. Linguistics, artifacts, historical sources (like Herodotus etc.) all prove the Hellenic identity of the Ancient Macedonians. It is accepted common historical knowledge that you Slavs came into the Balkan area along with the Bulgarians 6-10th century AD."

Pauk K. wrote: "I am Macedonian; therefore I can not accept you being Macedonian unless you have the same culture, religion and even anthropology as I do. I do see you as a Slav left over after the Russians failed to gain a warm water port. Stalin's words at the time of your creation (by the comintern, 1945), says all you ever need to know read it and face the facts."

Nenad D. wrote: "Macedonia is South Serbia!!!! This was Macedonia's former name and the only reason it is called Macedonia today is because Tito a Croat communist, brainwashed your people (and you) into thinking they weren't Slavs but that they were descendants of the Hellenic peoples that lived in the Balkan Peninsula about 4000 years ago."

Hessemo@aol.com wrote: "Keep writing retard your rubber room is waiting for you??? Hey you learn to speak Albanian yet???? Your knees sore yet from bowing before them??? monon lave etan e epitas

skopje born poor, cowardly void of history and culture, remains poor, cowardly void of history and culture and will die poor, cowardly void of history and culture never Macedonian !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

DNT73@aol.com wrote: "Macedonians combined with their fellow Greeks long ago and were mixed up and spread all over the Roman and Byzantine empires. They are part of the Greek cultural legacy. The Slavs and Albanians who live in that small piece of geographic Macedonia have nothing to do with it. Real Macedonians already absorbed into the broader Greek world long before the Slavs arrived in the 600's. There was no separate Macedonian identity by then, just a geographic designation.

Get your facts straight and stop spreading idiotic propaganda for a half Albanian, half-Bulgarian state. Also show some respect for the country that keeps your economy alive."

Nick V. wrote: "Because you now leave in an area that is called Macedonia you think you are Macedonians and descendants of the Hellenic Makedonians? No, you are Slavs, Bulgarians and God knows what else that came well after the era of Macedonia and Alexander and resided in the north part of Macedonia. I mean what language to do talk? Greek? No, you talk some Slavic dialect with a mix of Bulgarian, Serbian and Russian and in the south of your country with some Greek in there too. You wouldn't even know how to write and read if it wasn't for those two Saints that liberated you from the dark ages. In one of your sites someone says that you saved us from the Ottomans, are you serious?? You are only handful. I feel sorry for you guys coz obviously you had your identity brainwashed into you to believe that you are someone that you are not. I feel sorry that you had to steal another nation's history to feel that you belong somewhere You are Slavs or maybe Bulgarians with probably some villages that still speak a mix of Slavic and some Greek too, you are a mix of everything, Albanians, Bulgarians and with some Greek in there too, left behind from the communist wars. Wake up my friend and seek your true identity You can't use the name Macedonia as Macedonia is Greek and will always belong to Greece. You are saying that you have no intentions for claiming the south Makedonia, are you serious?? You are brainwashing your kids to believe otherwise, doesn't that create hate between us? You sites do as the same. We have never taught our kids that the north Makedonia belongs to Greece, it once did like many other places but not today, we don't want it, its all yours and you can leave peacefully with your fellow Slavs and the Albanian (one day they will take all your country if your not careful) but you can't and never will use the name of Makedonia, you put shame on the name! We are talking about 1000s of years of history and you come along from the north, barbarian tribes and now you think you can take our history from us? Not so."

Nick V. wrote: "I wish to know where you get all your fantasies/facts from? You should be ashamed for brainwashing your people with all these lies! Yes you are Slavs and you came from the north. The Macedonians are were and will be Greeks. People you need to wake up and stop stealing other people's history. You were brainwashed in to being so called Macedonians by Tito and communism. Wake up!"

George K. wrote: "Get back in you hole and take up another hobby - hear are the facts; Macedonia has been Greek for 3,000 years. In ancient times Macedonians spoke Greek, worshipped Greek gods, expressed their creativity through Greek art and maintained a refined Greek culture ... all archaeological discoveries continue to unearth more information attesting to the indisputable Greekness of Macedonia. Out of the blue, in 1944, the Yugoslav communist leader, Tito, wishing to weaken Serbia on the one hand, and set the footing for future territorial claims against Greece on the other, schemingly gave South Serbia the Greek name 'Macedonia' and re-wrote the 'history' books to declare that ancient Macedonia was Slavic and that these people were descendants of Alexander the Great. The existence of a 'Slav' Macedonia could never be, and indeed, has never been supported either by historical data, or by ethnographic maps, or by statistics, or by some census, or by archaeological finds, or by even an obscure mention of such a nation from antiquity till today. Macedonia has been the name of Northern Greece for more than 3000 years. The Greek region ... has one of the most homogeneous populations in the world (98.5% Greek). Its population speaks Greek, feels Greek, is Greek. An independent 'Macedonia would monopolize the name at the expense of the real Macedonians who are twice the number of the Slavs. The use and abuse of the name would cause widespread confusion as is already apparent. Macedonia is an indispensable part of Greece's historical heritage it cannot identify, in an ethnic sense another nation. The Skopje 'language' is undeniably Slavic."

Helen V. wrote: "I am a Greek Macedonian, who heard about the article you wrote in your so called "Macedonian" weekly. Firstly I must stress how offended I was by the lies that you wrote in order to brainwash your people! Macedonia has and will ALWAYS be known as Hellenic Lands, incase you don't know what Hellenism means, it is Greek Land! Macedonia is an ancient kingdom of Ancient Greece, which existed well before your people of Slavonic race even existed. We are one of the oldest and most respected countries and have such a RICH history, which your people could only wish they had one hundredth of the richness our civilization has. Incase you didn't know in order to visit Alexander the Greats Kingdom you need to go to Pella, and King Phillips grave and kingdom is in Vergina. Both of these kingdoms are located in Greece (Macedonia not far from Thessaloniki), in order to visit these you would paid either a drahma (with the old currency) or Euro (today) and most importantly all of the inscriptions on the ancient ruins are in Ancient GREEK writing not Bulgarian (which is what your language is an offspring of). I pity your people as they are lost and confused and have no history or culture of their own, and for this reason have had to adapt our beautiful and rich ways in order to have some "history". I noticed that the map you put with your article, has included other parts of Greece that you claim were Slavonic Macedonian. Since when was the island of Thassos of Slavonic heritage? In fact since when was any part of our beautiful lands of Slavonic Heritage? You are an extremely SAD race, who has no real existence! Any well educated person knows that there is only ONE Macedonia and that is "GREEK MACEDONIA" which carries the names so proudly because of what it represents. Your people were quite happy to be known as Yugoslavia for a long time and then in the 90's were all the states were forced to separate you were forced to find a name for yourselves, and seeing as you don't have a real country, or flag or heritage, you poor, pathetic souls chose to try and take our name and history in order to brainwash your future generations with.

My final comments to you are, "Read any encyclopedia or history book and you will see the truth that Macedonia is Greek, you will never get the name "Macedonia" as it's not yours to have, and Greece will NEVER approve it." You should be grateful that the Greeks gave you an alphabet, as your uneducated people wouldn't even be able to write if it wasn't for the GREEKS!!!!"

Panagiotis Z. wrote: "Your deep-rooted complex is understandable, since your identity crisis as a Slav (from "slave") stems from the historical void further enhanced by the existence of the Greek nation and its overshadowing cultural and linguistic ramifications, which are now further ascertained by DNA studies that reveal a homogeneous continuity in the Greek region, not to mention southern Italy and a large chunk of Turkish speaking Asia Minor since pre-classical times. It is facile to hold that Greece is mongrelized by recurrent invasions. The fact is, though, that the Greek speaking core was always so overwhelming in Hellas that it absorbed any invaders pretty much the same way a healthy organism absorbs viruses only to become stronger in the long run. The Turks, by the way who settled in Greece were for the most part jannisaries whose lineage was of Greek parenthood, converted by force in the early days of the Ottoman empire, my ignoramus friend.

The only myth you have to wrestle with is your lack of any significant background in your Slavic predicament. What an irony that history keeps repeating itself. In antiquity your region depended on Greek culture and now it depends on Greek finances. What a wretched state to be in! My sympathies"

Athanasios F. wrote: "I am not going to unfold any detailed historical facts about Greek/Macedonia and it's glorious past, but I will remind you your Slavic past in the northern greater area of Macedonia, around 800 A.D.I do remind you the General Tito's propaganda in order to issue an identity to your citizens. History is there for you and those who are trying (hopelessly) to propagate "facts" which have nothing to do with HISTORICAL facts. You can NEVER build an identity with stolen materials, no matter if unhistorical characters (International politicians) demand this. Facts are facts and NO one can change that. For Greeks you will always be Slavs and there is nothing wrong with that, by ALL means."

I think Athanasios said it; the Greeks will always call the Macedonians "Slavs" no matter what! The question is why?

From the e-mails above one gets the impression that Greece has done a wonderful job in indoctrinating its people with powerful anti-Macedonian propaganda. One also gets the impression that these Greeks are clueless about the reality of the Macedonian situation.

Greeks, at least the ones who wrote these e-mails, seem to talk in black and white clear cut terms about what happened 1,500 years ago, forgetting that from then until 1913 there were no borders between present day Greece and Macedonia. Whoever invaded Macedonia surely did not spare Greece. So if we are to believe mainstream history then it should be well known to these Greeks that the Slavs who invaded Macedonia also invaded Greece down to its deepest southern fringes. So if the modern Macedonians are Slavs, then so are the modern Greeks.

History also tells us that the present Greek-Macedonian border was erected after the Balkan Wars as a result of the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest. This is simply an artificial border that never existed before 1913. So how can modern Greeks claim that what is south of this border is "Pure Greek" and what's north of it is "Slav"? If we are to accept this "Greek claim" then we must also accept the idea that "pure Greeks" and "Slavs" co-existed in a borderless region for 1,500 years side by side without any contact between them. We must also ignore history and the fact that Greece became a nation state for the first time in 1829 and on its territory lived Slavs, Albanians, Vlachs, Turks and a variety of other ethnicities.

Our internet warrior Greeks seem to have forgotten that modern Greece annexed 51% of Macedonia fully intact and loaded with "Slav" speaking Macedonians as recently as 1913 and those Macedonians whom they call Greeks today were certainly not Greeks then.

From the e-mails above one gets the impression that some Greeks want the Macedonians to go away. There is no room for Macedonians in the Balkans. Greeks see their world in black and white, "pure Greeks" and "Slavs" even though it is clear both entities are made from the same raw materials which begs the question "how do Greeks distinguish between "pure Greeks" on one hand and "Slavs" on the other? What is the criterion that distinguishes these groups from one another? More importantly, why is one group the "pure Greeks" deserving of the full Macedonian heritage with full rights and privileges while the other group the "Slavs" are deserving of NONE and have no rights or privileges whatsoever. Are they not both indigenous people of the same land?

By their own testimonies the Greeks admit that the so called "Slavs" have been living in Macedonia since the 6th century AD, that's 1,500 years or equivalent of 75 generations. How long do a people have to live on a land before it can call itself indigenous? How long must a people live on a land to have rights? More importantly, why do Greeks believe Macedonian lands belong to them and not to the people that lived on them for 75 generations? Besides how can these Greeks justify that these lands belong to them? Do they have deeds or proof that they are the true inheritors? How do we know that they are not imposters and the "REAL" swindlers of the Macedonian lands and heritage? Have these Greeks never bothered to ask themselves (a) what gives them the right to these lands and (b) why are Macedonians excluded from these rights? Have they never bothered to ask (a) what makes them "pure Greeks" and their neighbours "Slavs" and (b) why they have full rights and privileges and the so called "Slavs" have none, not even the most basic human rights?

THE TRUTH:

The truth is Macedonians are not "Slavs", they are Macedonians. They speak the Macedonian language practice Macedonian traditions, have their own folklore and enjoy their own Macedonian music. Unlike the Greeks who have an imposed language, the Macedonian language is the mother tongue of the Macedonian people which has been with them for at least 75 generations. The Greek language, on the other hand, was imposed on the Greek people after Greece became a nation state for the first time in 1829.

The reason Greeks call Macedonians "Slav" is because in their minds "Slavs" are apparently an unworthy species of human that does not deserve to grace Macedonian lands or have any human rights. This goes back to the "Aryan" haydays when it was popular to abuse people for various reasons, reminiscent of what the Nazis did to the Jews. Even though this type of practice is no longer popular and most of its practitioners fell off the "Aryan" bandwagon a long time ago, it appears no one bothered to tell Greece. So to this day some Greeks continue to practice "Macedonian bashing" like it's still in style!

If you have been reading these types of articles (BIG Greek Lies) by now you would know that the so called "Greek nation" is nothing more than a politically manufactured entity. It is a real shame that the Macedonian people who belong to a unique, rich and ancient culture are being punished for being "real" and all this is done for the sake of propagating another BIG Greek lie.

And now I will leave you with this:

From :

Sent : April 12, 2006 12:07:04 PM

To : rstefov@hotmail.com

Subject : 'maks'

"You are a confused Bulgarian mixed with Serb and probably gypsy and Albanian as well. That's what the people of FYROM are. You are a made-up country. I hope the Albanians over-run you like the little cockroaches that you are."

You can contact the author at rstefov@hotmail.com