From: pt8684@meibm5.cen.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis)
Subject: Re: MIRacles No. 13
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:05:18 GMT

cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear) writes:

>From article <BvpznF.K6L@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, by ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ):
>> 
>>  I heard such things before.  The area of the so called "Republic
>>  of Macedonia" was given the name Macedonia after WWII.  This is
>>  a creation of Communist Tito.  Before WWII this area was called
>>  south Serbia, or banovina (=province) of Vardar.

>A few days away but things alas don't change much.
>... it will call it Macedonia. Not surprising really as that's its name.

    Not surprising that your information is incorrect.  The above are things
that have been proven.  Period.


>Perhaps the puzzle stems from the fact that Greek propagandists tend to
>imply that the Republic of Macedonia does try to establish a claim to
>ancient Macedon.

    Perhaps I'm so stupid that when people from this republic are telling me
that they are the descendants of ancient Macedonians, I arrive at the
wrong conclusion that they are trying to establish a claim to
ancient macedonia.  

    Or perhaps, when I see maps (circulating in many states), which show
a great Macedonia with northern Greece included in it, I'm also soooo stupid
that I arrive again to the wrong conclusion that there are territorial
claims against Greece.

> As for the use of the 'star' on the Macedonia flag.
>Since the modern Greeks in Macedonia have a highly tenuous connection,
>to say the least, to ancient Macedon and use the symbol too, I think it's a case of what's
>sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. As both groups live in the
>area and neither has a direct link to the ancient Macedonians the symbol, if such it
>is, belongs to both of them.

  You want an answer?  I guess the British logic of stealing the ancient
treasures of ancient Greece and denying their return to Greece directly
follows Mr. Fears logic.

  I have something to tell you Mr. Fear. And I will tell it as much politely
as I can: Fuck you !!

  I'm not going to allow you to tell me which part of the Greek history
 belongs to the Greeks or not.  Got it?

> I have still to see any
>proof that this 'star' was a symbol of the Macedonian state or the
>Argead dynasty

  This is because you don't want to see it.  I'm not going to prove
what's already proven.

>I think I've suggested as a compromise on this issue that if
>the Macedonians were to drop the emblem, the Greeks could drop their
>insistance on the 'Slavic' tag for the Republic of Macedonia. This still
>seems a good idea to me.

 Why is that?  These people are Slavs (to be exact they are Bulgarians).
There should be something to differenciate them from the Macedonian tradition
which is Greek.  The 'Slavic' tag is what makes them different from the
Greeks.  You want this tag to be droped, in order them to be free to make their
claims.  This is outrageous.


>>>By its very existence, the Greeks believe, 
>>>the Republic of Macedonia resurrects the intention to wrest 
                                            ^^^^^^^^^
>>>control of Greek Macedonia and its valuable port of Thessaloniki 
>>>from their rightful owners. 
>> 
>>  So, are they admiting that the creation of this republic by Tito was
>>  made in order to annex the northern part of Greece, which rightyfully
>>  bears the name macedonia for 2,000 yeras?

>Of course the first posting says no such thing, it reports not a fact
>but a Greek belief
>which was probably false in the first place.

  It says that it "resurrects the intension".  You are saying that there was
not such intension in the past.  This is wrong.  There were attempts, not
just intensions.

> Moreover to project Tito's
>plans whatever they were unthinkingly on the present day governemnt of the Republic of
>Macedonia which has altered its constitution explicitly to deny territorial
>claims is a non sequitur any way. Interesting that Macedonia seems to
>have lost 2,000 years of Greekness since earlier postings - in fact
>2,000 years would exclude Philip II and Alexander III. 2,000 years ago
>Macedonia was a Roman province which was huge compared to the Greek
>Macedonia or Republic of Macedonia of today.

 Refresh your memory. The 50 year period is not that large.  Today's politicians
were involved in the desicions of the post war era.

Secondly, stop the bullshit about the constitution.  The Greek goverment
is refering to the part which says that 2/3 parliamentary majority is
adequate to change the borders of this republic.  They are refusing to
change this.  Do you know of any democratic state that has something like that
in its constitution?

The 2,000 years refer roughly to a period.  Macedonia never lost its Greekness.

>Now let's see who are the provocateurs. A small nation with tiny armed
>forces which has a constitution explicitly stating it has no territorial
>ambitions or a much larger nation which tells it to change its name,
>continually insults its people by telling them they don't exist and are
>all stupid enough to have been brainwashed. Res ipsa loquitur
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 You are omitting the Albanians.  The 40% (or even larger) of the population
does not agree with your statements.

 You are so disgusting, that you hide the voice of the 40% of the population.

 Not to mention that you are twisting the facts.  Nobady can prove that there
exists a Macedonian nation.  For, very simply, it doesn't.  These are facts.
Everyone who claims that it exists, is simply ridiculous.

>Andy
 
 Panos Tamamidis
 A Macedonian from Macedonia
 Macedonia is Greek. Period.

 P.S.: This is the first and the last time I'm responding to Mr. Fear.
-- 
---> Panos Tamamidis
     University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek