View Single Post
Old 06-20-2015, 03:29 AM   #1254
George S.
Senior Member
 
George S.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 10,116
George S. is on a distinguished road
Default

Archive for the ‘Big Risto Stefov Lies’ Category


Older Entries



Big Greek Lie #11, ‘Saint Cyrill and Methodios are Greek’
March 14, 2007





All neutral sources mention that the two brothers had Greek names (we are keeping in mind Cyril was baptised as konstantinos), they were members of a noble family, their father Leon was a Greek military man and their mother of slavic background. Furthermore both brothers were born in Thessaloniki, were educated in Konstantinople where they took a highly Byzantine education and lived all their lives into Byzantine Empire apart from the fact they were send out on missions to bring christianity to various regions.We can find the following evidence from records of their Greek conscience on the Honorary Volume to Cyrillos and Methodios for the 1100 years, Thessaloniki-1968 by Henriette Ozanne. For example, the below for Cyrillos:In his dialog with the Muslims, he points out that “…every science stem from us…” implying the Greeks and the Greek culture .During the Hazars’ mission, the hagan of the Hazars asked him what present he wished to have offered to him and he said “…Give me all the Greek prisoners of war you have here. They are more valuable to me than any other present…” – Scientif Annals of the Theology Faculty of the Thessaloniki University (1968) Also many non-Greeks accept that the 2 brothers were Greeks:The Slav Pope John Paul II who in 31/12/1980 (in an official encyclical-Egregiae Virtutis-to the Catholic Church) and 14/2/1981(in the S.Clement church in Rome) said that Cyrillos and Methodios were “Greek brothers, born in Thessaloniki”the Serb historian V.Bogdanovich, says that “Kyrillos and Methodios were born in Thessaloniki and were Greeks in origin, not Slavs” (History of the ancient Serbian literature, Belgrade 1980, pg.119).To anyone that has no ties with blind nationalism, it seems to be no doubt that Cyrill and Methodius were Greek, not only by birth but most importantly culturally as it was analyzed above.As it is known both Cyrill and Methodius played probably one of the most important roles in spreading Orthodoxy among the Slavic population. Hence they were named “Apostles of the Slavs“, having the meaning simply that they brought the Christian faith to the Slavs.

I have to underline here of the false notion some have about the title “Apostle“. Fact is that having spread Christian faith among a certain population doesnt mean that they belong ethnically to any of the people they converted. If we followed this flawed logic Khazars would also claim them as Khazars since they went to covert them to Christianity even before they went to the Slavs or even Arabs since Konstantinos undertook a mission to the Arabs.

One of the many examples is the story of Saint Boniface. Saint Boniface – original name Winfrid or Wynfrith – was born at Crediton in Devon, England and was sent to propagate Christianity in the Frankish Empire during the 8th century. Rightfully Saint Boniface was named as “Apostle of the Germans” and another example is St.Thomas who is called “the Indian Apostle,” but we all know that he was not an Indian. Instead he simply brought Christianity to the Indians. Neither Germans nor Indians are upon the tiresome and flawed notion of claiming St Boniface and St Thomas ethnicities as the well-known propagandists do.
Professors Ivan Lazaroff, Plamen Pavloff, Ivan Tyutyundzijeff and Milko Palangurski of the Faculty of History of Sts. Cyril and Methodius University in Veliko Tŭrnovo, Bulgaria in their book, Kratka istoriya na bŭlgarskiya narod (Short History of the Bulgarian Nation, pp 36-38), state very explicitly that the two brothers were Hellenes (Greeks) from Thessaloniki.

The late Oscar Halecki, Professor of Eastern European History, in his book Borderlands of Western Civilization, A History of East Central Europe (chapter Moravian State and the Apostles of the Slavs) agrees with the authors of Kratka istoriya na bŭlgarskiya narod.

As you see the real scholars and not the fake admit the historical truth.

Also according Pope John Paul II in an official apostolic homily to the entire Catholic Church proclaimed that Methodius and Cyril “Greek brethren born in Thessaloniki” are consecrated as “heavenly protectors of Europe”. John Paul II’ repeated this statement in a speech delivered in the church of Saint Clements, in Rome.
References from books about the ethnicity of Cyril and Methodius.
1.




Then in the ninth century Cyril and Methodius, two Greek monks from Thessaloniki , developed the Cyrillic alphabet and spread both literacy and Christianity to the Slavs.



“The macedonian conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a transnational world” by Loring Danforth
2.




Two Greek brothers from Salonika, Constantine, who later later became a monk and took
the name Cyril, and Methodius came to Great Moravia in 863 at the invitation of the Moravian Prince Rostislav



“Comparative history of Slavic Literatures” by Dmitrij Cizevskij, page vi
3.




the Byzantine court entrusted it to two brothers with wide experience o missionary work: Constantine the Philosopher, better known by his monastic name, Cyril and Methodius. Cyril and Methodius were Greeks.


“Czechoslovakian Miniatures from Romanesque and Gothic Manuscripts” by Jan Kvet, p. 6


4.




In answer to this appeal the emperor sent the two brothers Cyril and Methodius, who were Greeks of Salonika and had considerable knowledge of Slavonic languages.



The Balkans: A history of Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece, Rumania, Turkey (1916)” by Forbes, Nevil, p. 21
5.




In order to convert the Slavs to Christianity, Greek missionaries Cyril and Methodius learned the language.



“Lonely Planet Croatia” by Jeanne Oliver, P.35
6.




two brothers, the Apostles of the Sclavonians or Slavs, born in Greece and educated in Constantinople.



“Book of the Saints 1921″ by Monks Benedictine, P. 74
7.




Cyril, St 827-69 and Methodius, St 826-85, known as the Apostles of the Slavs – Greek Christian missionaries– They were born in Thessalonica.



“The Riverside Dictionary of Biography” by the American Heritage Dictionaries, p. 208
8.




two greek brothers, Cyril and Methodius, were sent in response to this request. This development was of particular importance to the formation of eastern european culture.



“historical Theology” by McGrath, p.125
9.




the byzantine emperor sent two greek monks, Cyril and Methodius, to spread Christianity to the slavic people.



“Global History and Geography” by Phillip Lefton, p. 130
10.




As the Slav tribes feel under the influence of Byzantium a considerable number of them were baptised but they were first converted to Christianity in Mass by the Greek brothers, Cyril and Methodius



Black lamb and Grey Falcon: A journey through Yugoslave” by Rebecca West, P. 710
11.




“Cyrillus autem et Methodius fratres, Graeci, Thessalonicae nati…”



http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j&...rtutis_lt.html Pope John Paul II.
12.
R. L. Wilkens book “Judaism and the Early Christian Mind” (1971)
Quote:

Cyril and Methodius, Saints (muth..us) [key], d. 869 and 884, respectively, Greek missionaries, brothers, called Apostles to the Slavs and fathers of Slavonic literature. Their history and influence are obscured by conflicting legends. After working among the Khazars, they were sent (863) from Constantinople by Patriarch Photius to Moravia. This was at the invitation of Prince Rostislav, who sought missionaries able to preach in the Slavonic vernacular and thereby check German influence in Moravia. Their immediate success aroused the hostility of the German rulers and ecclesiastics. Candidates from among their converts were refused ordination, and their use of the vernacular in the liturgy was severely criticized. According to one source, when Photius was excommunicated by Rome the brothers were called there. Their orthodoxy was established, and the use of Slavonic in the liturgy was approved. Cyril died while in Rome, but Methodius, consecrated by the pope, returned to Moravia and was made archbishop of Sirmium. Despite the papal sanction the Germans contrived to have him imprisoned, and, though released two years later, his effectiveness appears to have been blocked. His last years were spent translating the Bible and ecclesiastical books into Slavonic. His influence in Moravia was wiped out after his death but was carried to Bulgaria, Serbia, and Russia, where the southern Slavonic of Cyril and Methodius is still the liturgical language of both Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches. The Cyrillic alphabet. used in those countries today, traditionally ascribed to St. Cyril, was probably the work of his followers. It was based probably by Cyril himself upon the glagolithic alphabet, which is still used by certain Croatian and Montenegrin Catholics. Feast: July 713.

The Significance of the Missions of Cyril and Methodius
Francis Dvornik
Slavic Review > Vol. 23, No. 2 (Jun., 1964) page: 196
Moravian Christianity even had species of ecclesiastical organization before the arrival of the Greek brothers

14.

Quote:

The Significance of the Missions of Cyril and Methodius
Francis Dvornik
Slavic Review > Vol. 23, No. 2 (Jun., 1964) page: 211
This short sketch of the cultural development of the Slavic nations in the Middle Ages seems necessary to show the real significance of the mission of the two Greek brothers. Its aim in Moravia was, above all, cultural.

15.

Quote:

Slavic Translations of the Scriptures
Matthew Spinka
The Journal of Religion > Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1933), pp. 415
When those ancient precursors of Bible translators, the Greek brothers Constantine and Methodius, translated certain parts of the Scriptures and the liturgical books into Slavic for the use of their Moravian converts

16.
Quote:

Slavic Translations of the Scriptures
Matthew Spinka
The Journal of Religion > Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1933), pp. 415
Thus in a sense the two Greek brothers and their disciples fought a fight in behalf of all the later Bible translators and liturgical vernacularists, the English among them.

17.

Quote:

Slavic Translations of the Scriptures
Matthew Spinka
The Journal of Religion > Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1933), pp. 416-17In co-operation with Patriarch Photius they selected the renowned teacher of philosophy at the court school of Magnaura, Constantine, and his elder brother, Methodius, Greeks from Thessalonica, who were well acquainted with the language of the Macedonian Slavs, as best-fitted missionaries for the Moravian field.

18.

Quote:

Slavic Translations of the Scriptures
Matthew Spinka
The Journal of Religion > Vol. 13, No. 4 (Oct., 1933), pp. 424
The Slavic liturgy was, beyond any doubt, a radical innovation which the Greek brothers could not have justified except as an essential element in insuring the success of their work.



By Ptolemy

Back



Posted in Big Risto Stefov Lies | Leave a Comment


BIG Greek Lie # 10, ‘Greeks are Turks, Albanians, Slavs and Vlachs’
March 14, 2007

These quotes is an answer to the article entitled “BIG Greek Lie # 10”
and showed in http://www.maknews.com/html/articles…/stefov88.html by Mr Risto Stefov.

Mr Stefov try to explain what is ethnicity and try to make a Historic reference by using un-historical facts as about the Greeks in Macedonia.

Every body knows that the main source of your writings is Hr. Antonovski, Bernal and Fellemayer.
But who is Antonovski (the other two are known) and what is his work a about the Greek homogeneity.

Antonovski used the 1951 cencus that estimated 2 mil people. Of these, only 47 .000 are Slavphones but in his writing mention 80.000(lie). Those who had a Slav conscience departed from Hellas either under the Treaty of Neuilly, 1919) or after the end of the civil war in 1949. Seeing that no serious claim could rest on a linguistic minority of this size in a country with so compact a Greek population, Antonovski decided to raise the number of Slavophones to 250.000. He distributes them by regions in the following proportions, as compared with the Hellenic -speaking population. Kastoria ~72%, Kalamaria -32 %, Edessa -54,8 %,Serrai -13 %, Thesaloniki -27,6%. But as even with this gross over-estimation the Hellenic majority in””Aegean Macedonia”” remains overwhelming, Antonovski excludes from the Greek population the large number of Greek refugees who arrived from Asia Minor and settled in Macedonia, in 1923 nder the Lausanne population exchange Treaty.
He claims that they are not Greeks, but Karamanlides, pure Turks (tsisti Turtsi) whom Turkey sent to Greece on the occasion of the exchange of populations because being Christian Orthodox they did not have a Turkish conscience.
Turkey, according to Antonovski, wanted to be rid of them for that reason and at the same time because they might furnish Greece a pretext to claim on their behalf the Turkish territories they inhabited. Even the Pontian refugees, who are exclusively Greek-speaking and universally known to be the true descendants of the ancient lonian settlers of the Black sea, he calls Lazoi.
He assigns them as well as the refugees from Caucasus, who were themselves Pontian settlers, Turkish nationality. A hundred thousand of these refugees who settled in Greek Macedonia he describes as Armenian. He even discovered some Kurds among them!

Any similarity with your article Mr Stefov ? A lot of course.

It is hard to choose between you ignorance of historical facts and you impudence. For never since the Turks established their rule in Asia Minor, and by means of cruel persecution and oppression converted to Islam the majority of its Christian Greek population, never once did it happen that a Turk decided to become a Christian; that he exchanged his position of religious~ economic and political power for subjection; that he chose to become a slave at a time when people born Christians gave up their religion for Islam because they were able no longer to suffer oppression and tyranny.

But assuming that notwithstanding all this a Turk decided to take this step, how could he ever survive since death was the certain penalty for rejection of the dominant religion?

Death was even meted out to those Christians whose conversion to Islam did not go beyond the surface if it were ever discovered that they practised Christianity stealthily (the well-known Crypto-Christians ).

It is a shame in the face of the verv science which they are trying for the first time to establish in their country that the Slavs of Skopje, though themselves Christians, have no scruples about distorting history – even creating a university in their capital for that purpose-and about reviling that section of Greek Christendom which amidst tortures and under the cruellest yoke known to history, in preserving their Greek conscience have also managed to preserve the religion of Christ for centuries, and finally breathe the air of national and religious liberty on free Greek soil.

Mr Risto Stefov must know that many of their own fellow countrymen were compelled by Turkish oppression to embrace Islam. There are in that country today, as there are also in Bulgaria, many hundred thousand Mohammedans Slavs. But can they point to a single Christian Slav who had been a Turk and was converted to Christianity during the Ottoman rule? They insist that the Moslems of their country are Slav converts to Islam; they moan over the alleged fact that the Turks of Greek Macedonia who went to Turkey in consequence of the exchange of populations.

It is impossible to read such arguments without amusement and wonder at the degree of objectivity shown by the scholars of Skopje. The terms in which they couch their arguments are also characteristic.

According to Antonovski some Vlachs fell (Propadnale) under Greek influence, others gained (Dobile) a Slavic conscience.. It is probable that the Vlachs are latinised Greeks. But let us suppose that they are not, and that they’ came from Dacia during the Byzantine era. The fact that they loved and admired, or even just showed respect for the culture and the civilisation of the people in whose midst they had come to live, is considered as a fall, as a decline! They want to call them selfs as a Greek Mr Risto Stefov

Macedonia is a vaguely defined geographical area in the southern Balkans. It includes the territory of the Republic of Macedonia (which prior to its declaration of independence in September, 1991 was the southernmost republic in the former Yugoslavia) as well as territory in southwestern Bulgaria and north-central Greece as Danforth said.

Also Danforth, Karakasidou, Poulton and many others mention that During the Ottoman period, which lasted in Macedonia from the fourteenth century until 1913, the population of Macedonia included an amazing number of different ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups, including Slavic and Greek speaking Christians, Turkish and Albanian speaking Moslems, Vlachs, Jews, and Gypsies. Toward the end of the nineteenth century the population of Macedonia was increasingly being defined from various external nationalist perspectives in terms of national categories such as Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs, Albanians, and Turks. Ottoman authorities, however, continued to divide the population of the empire into administrative units, or millets on the basis of religious identity rather than language, ethnicity, or nationality.

Mr Stefov here are some links that you can find and disquass who are the Vlachs, Arvanites e.t.c.
http://www.lyrionushi.gr/arbereshgr.htm
http://www.vlahoi.net/index.php
http://www.mani.org.gr/ithi/idioma/id.htm

As about the Slavophone Greek Macedonians you know them very well and they know you also.

Reference:
Karakasidou, Field of Wheat, Hills of Blood
Poulton, Who are the Macedonians
N. Adriotis, the Language of the Federative Republic of…….
Danforth, how can a woman give birth to one greek and one macedonian?

Posted in Big Risto Stefov Lies | Leave a Comment


BIG Greek Lie # 6 ,”Greeks Are a Superior Race”
March 14, 2007

This article is an answer to the article entitled BIG Greek Lie # 6 by Mr Risto Stefov

GEOMETRY
Greeks never claimed that Geometry discovered from them. Any student in the Greek schools , mathematician college (world wide) in the first day in the classrooms teached as about the history of the Geometry:

Egyptians (2000 – 500 B.C.)
Ancient Egyptians demonstrated a practical knowledge of geometry through surveying and construction projects. The Nile River overflowed its banks every year, and the river banks would have to be re-surveyed.

Babylonians (2 000 – 500 B.C. )
Ancient clay tablets reveal that the Babylonians knew the Pythagorean relationships.

Greeks (750-250 B.C. )
Ancient Greeks practiced centuries of experimental geometry like Egypt and Babylonia had, and they absorbed the experimental geometry of both of those cultures. Then they created the first formal mathematics of any kind by organizing geometry with rules of logic. Euclid’s (400BC) important geometry book The Elements formed the basis for most of the geometry studied in schools ever since.

As you see the Greeks just transform Geometry from experimental practice into formal mathematics. Greeks were the first who asked “why is that?” and attempted to answer “because this” speaking about geometrical or natural matters as first time expressed from the Euclides.
As already said all these thinks teached in the 1st grand of the Greek High School.

ALPHABET
Greek never claims that invented the alphabet even some scholars support this theory.

The major difreent between Phoenician and the Greek is that the first is Consonantal Alphabetic when the second is a C&V Alphabetic.

Phoenician alphabet has no vowels.
Both scripts belong in Proto- Sinaitic family tree.
From the shape of the letters, it is clear that the Greeks adopted the alphabet the Phoenician script, mostly like during the late 9th century BCE.
In fact, Greek historian Herotodus (5th century BCE) called the Greek letters “phoinikeia grammata” (foinikia grammata), which means Phoenician letters,
When the Greeks adopted the alphabet, they found letters representing sounds not found in Greek. Instead of throwing them away, they modified the extraneous letters to represent vowels. For example, the Phoenician letter ‘aleph (which stood for a glottal stop) became the Greek letter alpha (which stands for [a] sound).
There were many variants of the early Greek alphabet, each suited to a local dialect. Eventually the Ionian alphabet was adopted in all Greek-speaking states, but before that happened, the Euboeanvariant was carried to the Italic peninsula and adopted by Etruscan and eventually the Romans.

Early Greek was written right-to-left, just like Phoenician. However, eventually its direction changed to boustrophedon (which means “oxturning”), where the direction of writing changes every line. For instance, you start on the right of the tablet and writes leftward, and when you reach the leftmost end, you reverse your direction and starting writing toward the right. Even more confusing is that the orientation of the letter themselves is dependent on the direction of writing as well. In the above chart, the letters are drawn as if they were being written from left-to-right. If I were to write right-to-left, I would horizontally flip the letters (like in a mirror).
Boustrophedon was an intermediate stage, and by the 5th century BCE, left-to right was the de-facto direction of writing.

The Greek alphabet was also the basis for Glagolitic, Cyrillic, and Coptic scripts among others.
Strangely, the Greeks tried writing once before. Between 1500 and 1200 BCE, the Mycenaeans, an early tribe of Greeks, has adapted the Minoan syllabary as Linear B to write an early form of Greek.

However, the syllabary was not well suited to write Greek, and leaves many modern scholars scratching their heads trying to figure out the exact pronunciation of Mycenaean words. The alphabet, on the other hand, allowed more precise record of the sounds in the language
More information’s as about the scripts into:
http://www.ontopia.net/i18n/scripts.jsp

ANCIENT GREEK DEMOCRACY

In our everyday vocabulary we are borrowed from the ancient Greeks: monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny, oligarchy and – of course – democracy.
Sparta never has a democratic form rule. Monarchy was the main government form. As also and the Macedonians, Thebans e.t.c..

Mr Stefov you said What exactly do we mean by “democracy”.

I start with mine questions and of course by giving answers in yours.

What’s in a word?

We may live in a very different and much more complex world, but without the ancient Greeks we wouldn’t even have the words to talk about many of the things we care most about. Take politics for example: apart from the word itself (from polis, meaning city-state or community) many of the other basic political terms in our everyday vocabulary are borrowed from the ancient Greeks: monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny, oligarchy and – of course – democracy.
The ancient Greek word demokratia was ambiguous. It meant literally ‘people-power’.

But who were the people to whom the power belonged?
Was it all the people – all duly qualified citizens?
Or only some of the people – the ‘masses’?

The Greek word demos could mean either. There’s a theory that the word demokratia was coined by democracy’s enemies, members of the rich and aristocratic elite who did not like being outvoted by the common herd, their social and economic inferiors. If this theory is right, democracy must originally have meant something like ‘mob rule’ or ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’.
By the time of Aristotle (fourth century BCE) there were hundreds of Greek democracies. Greece in those times was not a single political entity but rather a collection of some 1500 separate poleis or ‘cities’ scattered round the Mediterranean and Black Sea shores ‘like frogs around a pond’, as Plato once charmingly put it. Those cities that were not democracies were either oligarchies – where power was in the hands of the few richest citizens – or monarchies, called ‘tyrannies’ in cases where the sole ruler had usurped power by force rather than inheritance. Of the democracies, the oldest, the most stable, the most long-lived, but also the most radical, was Athens

The origin of the Athenian democracy of the fifth and fourth centuries can be traced back to Solon, who flourished in the years around 600
BCE. Solon was a poet and a wise statesman but not – contrary to later myth – a democrat. He did not believe in people-power as such.
But it was Solon’s constitutional reform package that laid the basis on which democracy could be pioneered almost a hundred years later by a progressive aristocrat called Cleisthenes. Cleisthenes was the son of an Athenian, but the grandson and namesake of a foreign Greek tyrant, the ruler of Sicyon in the Peloponnese. For a time he was also the brother-in-law of the Athenian tyrant, Peisistratus, who seized power three times before finally establishing a stable and apparently benevolent dictatorship. It was against the increasingly harsh rule of Peisistratus’s eldest son that Cleisthenes championed a radical political reform movement which in 508/7 ushered in the Athenian democratic constitution

Greek democracy and modern democracy
The architects of the first democracies of the modern era, postrevolutionary France and the United States, claimed a line of descent from classical Greek demokratia – ‘government of the people by the people for the people’, as Abraham Lincoln put it. But at this point it is crucial that we keep in mind the differences between our and the Greeks’ systems of democracy – three key differences in particular:
ofscale, of participation and of eligibility.

First, scale. There were no proper population censuses in ancient Athens, but the most educated modern guess puts the total population of fifth-century Athens, including its home territory of Attica, at around 250,000 – men, women and children, free and unfree, enfranchised and disenfranchised. Of those 250,000 some 30,000 on average were fully paid-up citizens – the adult males of Athenian birth and full status. Of those 30,000 perhaps 5000 might regularly attend one or more meetings of the popular Assembly, of which there were at least 40 a year in Aristotle’s day. 6000 citizens were selected to fill the annual panel of potential jurymen who would staff the popular jury courts (a typical size of jury was 501), as for the trial of Socrates.

The second key difference is the level of participation. Our democracy is representative – we choose politicians to rule for us. Athenian democracy was direct and in-your-face. To make it as participatory as possible, most officials and all jurymen were selected by the lot. This was thought to be the democratic way, since election favoured the rich, famous and powerful over the ordinary citizen. From the mid fifth century, office holders, jurymen, members of the city’s main administrative Council of 500, and even Assembly attenders were paid a small sum from public funds to compensate them for time spent on political service away from field or workshop.

The third key difference is eligibility. Only adult male citizens need apply for the privileges and duties of democratic government, and a birth criterion of double descent – from an Athenian mother as well as father – was strictly insisted upon. Women, even Athenian women, were totally excluded: this was a men’s club. Foreigners – and especially unfree slave foreigners – were excluded formally and rigorously. The citizen body was a closed political elite

As you see Mr Stefov when compared the ancient Greek democracy and the moderns democracies must keep in your mind the three scales.

You said something about the Phoenicians As I know the form of rule wan not the democracy but the oligarchy and some claim the aristocracy. Non body is accurate as about the rule system.
How you are sure for this?
Aristotle in his Politics defined the democratic citizen as the man ‘who has a share in legal judgment and office’. Maybe is time everyone to read the Aristotle as the Great Alexander had took a lot of lessons as about the democracy

Reference:
The Democratic Experiment (Paul Cartledge)

So the claims of the Mr Stefov as about Geometry, Alphabete and Democracy are inaccurate and un-historical

By Akritas

Posted in Big Risto Stefov Lies | Leave a Comment


BIG Risto Stefov Lie # 8,”Tito created the Macedonian Nation”
March 14, 2007

This article is an answer to the article entitled BIG Greek Lie # 8 by Mr Risto Stefov

The truth is Tito did not create the Macedonian nation. Tito recognized and accepted the existence of a Macedonian ethnicity within his own country, Yugoslavia by adding Bulgarians and Serbians Macedonians.

I agree with the not creation. Your nation was before Tito. But not with your meaning that you want to show as via your un-historical articles.

Tito made his policy. And the policy was the creation of the Balkan League. To succeded this must broke up any connections with the monarchfasim (as called it). The two biggest enemy were the Serbs and the Greeks. He had Succeeded only the first.

On August 2, 1945 general Vukmanovic, (one for the leaders of the Balkan League and right hand of Tito) declared in a speech in front of a crowd in Skopje:
“Comrades, you know very well that there is a part of the Macedonia npeople which is still enslaved [sic]. We must openly state this case.
We are not the only ones to do this; there are tens of thousands of Macedonian men and women who suffer and mourn today under the yoke of the Greek monarcho-fascist bands.”[Bulletin(Skopje) Aug 10,1945]

Who was this General? Certainly not a Macedonian. Explain to your people who is that man.

Why in your country until 1992 the school books show the name People Republic of Macedonian when in the Serbian Republic in the related book the kids teached the Vardaska Banovina?

The Greeks communists thought that with the help of Commitern would be create a new state under the Marshal commanders. In your mentioned link you have a lot of documents by the Communist newspaper Rizospastes.

Why do you love these guys to much?

Why Markos Vafiadis(Genrerala Marcosa) with Tito in your country are
the only given foreign names in the streets e.t.c ?

The next foreigners will be the Mathew Nimitz as the other US UNenvoy

Of course Mr Risto Stefov never answered in my questions. Not only mine but and from others Greeks in the mak.forum

By Akritas

Posted in Big Risto Stefov Lies | Leave a Comment


The BIG Stefov Lies # 17: “Ancient Macedonians were not Greeks
March 14, 2007

This is a response to the new propagandistic article, recently posted in http://maknews.com/html/articles/stefov/stefov102.html , which as usual tries to misinform readers and falsificate history.



Quote:

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.

The author obviously is misinformed. The truth is that Greece is the birth-place of the Western Civilisation and the years of the European Enlightement have inspired a wave of sympathy , for the sufferings of Greeks under the Ottoman Empire’s boot . They have also created a new word for this. The word PHILELLENES , and PHILELLENISM . As the Ottoman Empire was slowly slipping into the state of the “Sick Man Of the East” , the need to free the land where Democracy was invented , became greater and greater .

The authors estimation that the free Greek state would function as any kind of an ally to the great powers France and England ( here the author simple forgets even to mention the Austrian-Hungarian Empire who was much more close than France and England to the Ottoman Empire and Greece , its not to his convinience ) , is simply a wishful thinking if not an object of laughing .

The Greek state that was freed was nothing much than a poor , unorganised
country. The proof lies in that it took Grece a 100 years to become worthy of fighting a war against Turkey and freeing Greek lands under Turkish oppression.



Quote:

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.

Macedonias partition was a scheme of the Great Powers of the time, who did not want a very strong Greek state and a compromise arise between them and the Russians who have helped greatly in creating Bulgaria .

So to Greece went 51% of the geographical area of Macedonia, due to respect of Greek History , 14% went to Bulgaria , because the population there were of Bulgarian origin ( Macedonia of Pirin ) and the rest went to Yugoslavia , because of the Slavic population there.

The author, is tragically poorly informed , or he forgets to mention that Greece and Serbia were on the victors side in WWI and Bulgaria , and Turkey , on the defeated side . So IF the British were to reward Greece for beeing victorious would have had done much better. But they didnt…..



Quote:

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?


The truth is miles away from the author’s estimations. Ancient Macedonians had fused with the rest of Hellenes, as even the vast majority of modern historians acknowledge, CENTURIES before the arrival of the slavs in Balkans. On the other hand, it is easily refuted as entirely absurb and an insult to…everybody’s intelligence, the claim of the author and the inhabitants of his ‘artificially invented’ country that ancient Macedonians didnt fuse with the southern Greeks, from the moment, since at least Alexander’s time both spoke and understood a common language (Greek), both worshipped the same gods and shared a ‘Hellenistic’ culture. Both became an integral part of the Roman and later Byzantine Empire, both became the defining culture of the Byzantine Empire. Both had embraced Christianity and determined the characteristics of the Orthodox faith and finally consider eachother as ‘kinsmen’.



Quote:

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”?

The explanation is quite simple but seems too difficult for the author. Hellenes speak and read the same language that their ansestors used . It has been also been proved by linguists. A modern greek can easily read an ancient Macedonian inscription such as Pella Katadesmos, for the simple reason…they both speak essentially the same language. On the contrary, the Slavic inhabitants of FYROM that are descendants of the Slavic tribes which arrived in the area around the 6th century, according to internationally acknowledged historians and linguists around the world, speak a slavic language, similar to Bulgarian and…they cant read an ancient macedonian insciption for the simple reason, they dont speak Greek!!



Quote:

2. 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?

The propagandists of FYROM simply ignore the fact that Nobody has invaded Macedonia in 1913 but instead during the first Balkan war, the Balkan coalition between Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece and Montenegro INVADED OTTOMAN EMPIRE, for the liberation of the Bulgarians, Greek and Serbs who lived there and unfortunately for the propagandists of FYROM, there was NEVER, back then, ANY ethnicity called Macedonians.

The movement for independent Macedonia, which started far earlier (at the end of the 19th century) had an UNDISPUTED BULGARIAN CHARACTER and this fact is described by any contemporary (of the time) observer, historian, diplomat, nomatter what the skopjan propagandists claim. There is no need to rewrite history – it’s well described in so many books. There are many examples of 1 nation living in 2 different states. Furthermore, the geographical region called Macedonia had a rather mixed population at that time because of which the idea for independent Macedonia was more attractive for the local population than the idea for union with Bulgaria. The fact that the uprising in 1903 was a Bulgarian one and the fact that IMRO was an organization founded by BULGARIANS are descibed in all books (from that time and even in all books pre-1945). But the majority of these people that inhabited Macedonia , had a Greek consiousness which made them GREEKS . So, they DID NOT TURN Greeks …THEY WERE GREEKS!



Quote:

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?

The author obviously is lacking any seriousness here. NO SHRED OF EVIDENCE??? What type of evidence does the author want ??
Isnt the language a strong evidence?? The author, is trying in vain. From one hand , is asking what are the evidences that Greeks have inheritance rights and on the other hand he refuted himself by reaching the “easy conclusion” that Macedonias are living in Macedonia 1500 years … of course someone would ask…which Macedonians ?? The Macedonians that spoke Greek, worshiped Greek Gods , participated in the Olympic games which were GREEK GAMES for GREEK??? Or any other Slav, Turk , Vlach ,Gypsy , who acquired the name ‘Macedonian’, and this is considered by the author
__________________
"Ido not want an uprising of people that would leave me at the first failure, I want revolution with citizens able to bear all the temptations to a prolonged struggle, what, because of the fierce political conditions, will be our guide or cattle to the slaughterhouse"
GOTSE DELCEV
George S. is offline   Reply With Quote