We need historical lectures basing on facts or in political motives?

I think is obvious. Bush give the name. For help in both wars he started and wasnt able to end.

He got 100 solders hahaha.

A lot of help. I wonder if those were also with GA.

Woooooo 100 big big help.

Toilets cleaners? Turkish toilets?

It doesn't really matter if you agree with the war or not. At the time Americans were pretty much all for it, as were the citizens of many other nations.

OK, so it appears that this support was based upon fraudulant evidence, but you shouldn't really blame one American ally when other American allies stood aside and simply watched on CNN.

Equally, the University of Athens and others around the world have the power to decide what and how they debate things. The University of Utah has the same rights.

If you're not happy with what they're talking about or doing, then don't go - the same way that you didn't participate in a war you beleived (rightly) to be unjust.

And if you think that 100 isn't much then I suggest a little history, i'd start with Rourke's Drift where a couple of hundred Welsh soldiers fought off around 4000 Zulu's. Or perhaps WWII where a vastly inferior Greek army gave the Germans a serious nose-bleed. That would be the vastly superior German army with a good few years battlefield experience.

http://unews.utah.edu/p/...

To FYRoM's Rogue Scholars and Pseudo Historians.

Say Something Silly....
Print Something Stupid.....
Misinterpret the True Meaning of Something....
Corrupt the True Meaning of Something.....
Distort the True Meaning of Something.....
Pervert the True Meaning of Something.....
Well....You will Go Down....Plain and Simple!

Say No More!

Quote: "We zealously preserve academic freedom, promote diversity and equal opportunity, and respect individual beliefs. We advance rigorous interdisciplinary inquiry, international involvement, and social responsibility."

Sounds like the university of Utah has an open minded approach. If the Greco-Macedonians of the world feel under-represented then why not attend the seminars and voice your opinions rather than take the easy option of posting vague accusations and empty threats here!

It is interesting for me that very few people here self define themselves as Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians. Why?

Informed Reader wrote:

Quote: "We zealously preserve academic freedom, promote diversity and equal opportunity, and respect individual beliefs. We advance rigorous interdisciplinary inquiry, international involvement, and social responsibility."
Sounds like the university of Utah has an open minded approach. If the Greco-Macedonians of the world feel under-represented then why not attend the seminars and voice your opinions rather than take the easy option of posting vague accusations and empty threats here!
It is interesting for me that very few people here self define themselves as Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians. Why?

As an answer to university's statement I may post Prof. Mary Lefkowich comment taken from the article above.

<<As Pr. Mary Lefkowich points out the teachers of course need to have freedom to experiment and to test new theories and interpretations. But academic freedom does not give us the right to rewrite history without reference to the known facts—even if by doing so we imagine that we can bring about social improvement. The scientists among us, for example, do not have license to falsify data to achieve desired results. If a scientist in the "hard" sciences does so, he or she is disciplined and even dismissed. It is often more difficult to distinguish between false and true in the writing of history, but it is still usually possible to establish at least the broad outlines, and to give a clear account of the available evidence. Historians do not have the right to invent their own narratives or to misuse evidence>>.

Regarding Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians.
These terms are of no use. The FYROM authoritites do not accept other identification apart from that of a "Macedonian" and of course those of us who live in the area cannot accept any other term than Macedonians. After all Macedonians were (and are) always Greek. Those who are not Greek cannot be Macedonians.

Informed Reader wrote:

Quote: "We zealously preserve academic freedom, promote diversity and equal opportunity, and respect individual beliefs. We advance rigorous interdisciplinary inquiry, international involvement, and social responsibility."
Sounds like the university of Utah has an open minded approach. If the Greco-Macedonians of the world feel under-represented then why not attend the seminars and voice your opinions rather than take the easy option of posting vague accusations and empty threats here!
It is interesting for me that very few people here self define themselves as Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians. Why?

To be honest you make a bit of sense and indeed the programme seems more or less within the bounds of what would be acceptable. However, the use of the name "Macedonia" (as opposed to Slav-Macedonian or FYROM or similar) in relation to the conference is something the university should have conditioned, because it is clearly not about Macedonia but about FYROM.

The UN also espouses freedom of speech and has opted to use the name FYROM. Why not the university of Utah?

Indirectly, by having a Macedonian, rather than a FYROMian, conference, the rights of Greeks are violated.

Informed Reader wrote:

Quote: "We zealously preserve academic freedom, promote diversity and equal opportunity, and respect individual beliefs. We advance rigorous interdisciplinary inquiry, international involvement, and social responsibility."
Sounds like the university of Utah has an open minded approach. If the Greco-Macedonians of the world feel under-represented then why not attend the seminars and voice your opinions rather than take the easy option of posting vague accusations and empty threats here!
It is interesting for me that very few people here self define themselves as Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians. Why?

Seeing you are so informed can you please tell me why Makedonija has NO ARMY in 1912?

Can you please tell us why the Macedonians were Christianised in 1st century AD by ST PAULOS in GREEK?

Why were the Makedonski's christianised 1000 years later bey Cyril and Methodius in Old Sluvonic?

Why do Makedonski's claim Tsar Samual as Makedonski King yet the world Historians claim TsarSamual was Bulgarian.

When Basil 2 blinded Tsar Samuals men he was refered to by historians as Basil the Bulgar Slayer!

Why was the Makedonski Alphabet created in 1945?

Were was the Makedonski ARMY in WW1 and WW2?

Why are all ancient Macedonian coins refering to ALEXANDROS and not Alexundar?

Why does the bible refrer to Thesaloniki and not Solun?

Show us one Makedonski school or Author or book that existed prior to 1912?

I can go on but seeing you are so informed please answer the above.

I will be too happy to answer any of your questions.

Maybe "Informed Reader" can explain why there are numerous GREEK Orthodox Churches & no MACEDONIAN Orthodox Churches in Alexandria, Egypt??

@ Serres Makethonia

Scupis in 1912 they were Serbians. Before 1912 what they were no one knows.

It is really pity that we bestow our maximum attention about OBAMA before we discuss dispassionately about BUSH regime.
By regime i mean mot despicable, detestable, detrimental and dastardly rule of a gang without any civility

United Macedonians wrote:

<quoted text>
To be honest you make a bit of sense and indeed the programme seems more or less within the bounds of what would be acceptable. However, the use of the name "Macedonia" (as opposed to Slav-Macedonian or FYROM or similar) in relation to the conference is something the university should have conditioned, because it is clearly not about Macedonia but about FYROM.
The UN also espouses freedom of speech and has opted to use the name FYROM. Why not the university of Utah?
Indirectly, by having a Macedonian, rather than a FYROMian, conference, the rights of Greeks are violated.

Rightly or wrongly depending on which side of the border you sit, the US decided to recognize RoM. The University of Utah is simply mirroring a national trend.

If it were a UN, EU, NATO, FIFA or Greek series of seminars then i'm sure they would have been entitled "FYROM Seminars" and everybody in RoM would be complaining about Greek interference.

Dimitri from Athens wrote:

<quoted text>
As an answer to university's statement I may post Prof. Mary Lefkowich comment taken from the article above.
<<As Pr. Mary Lefkowich points out the teachers of course need to have freedom to experiment and to test new theories and interpretations. But academic freedom does not give us the right to rewrite history without reference to the known facts—even if by doing so we imagine that we can bring about social improvement. The scientists among us, for example, do not have license to falsify data to achieve desired results. If a scientist in the "hard" sciences does so, he or she is disciplined and even dismissed. It is often more difficult to distinguish between false and true in the writing of history, but it is still usually possible to establish at least the broad outlines, and to give a clear account of the available evidence. Historians do not have the right to invent their own narratives or to misuse evidence>>.
Regarding Greco-Macedonians or Slavo-Macedonians.
These terms are of no use. The FYROM authoritites do not accept other identification apart from that of a "Macedonian" and of course those of us who live in the area cannot accept any other term than Macedonians. After all Macedonians were (and are) always Greek. Those who are not Greek cannot be Macedonians.

Sadly i will have to disagree with you that Macedonians are always Greek. Until the Slavs migrated south your statement would be true. In fact, until any Macedonian had a kid with anybody other than a Greek your statement would also be true. This though is simply not the case today. And given the huge number of migratory Slavs, the term Slavo-Macedonian should be used (in my opinion). Equally the term Greco-Macedonian should be used for those that are closer to the Greeks than the Slavs, to differentiate.

Skopidia wrote:

Maybe "Informed Reader" can explain why there are numerous GREEK Orthodox Churches & no MACEDONIAN Orthodox Churches in Alexandria, Egypt??

And perhaps you can explain how scientists recently found evidence of a small town in Alexandria that pre-dates Alexanders "founding" of the city?

To use other Greek claims, Greek and Macedonian Orthadox is the same thing because to be Macedonian IS to be Greek! Or can the argument only be used by Greeks?

Serres Makethonia wrote:

<quoted text>
Seeing you are so informed can you please tell me why Makedonija has NO ARMY in 1912?
Can you please tell us why the Macedonians were Christianised in 1st century AD by ST PAULOS in GREEK?
Why were the Makedonski's christianised 1000 years later bey Cyril and Methodius in Old Sluvonic?
Why do Makedonski's claim Tsar Samual as Makedonski King yet the world Historians claim TsarSamual was Bulgarian.
When Basil 2 blinded Tsar Samuals men he was refered to by historians as Basil the Bulgar Slayer!
Why was the Makedonski Alphabet created in 1945?
Were was the Makedonski ARMY in WW1 and WW2?
Why are all ancient Macedonian coins refering to ALEXANDROS and not Alexundar?
Why does the bible refrer to Thesaloniki and not Solun?
Show us one Makedonski school or Author or book that existed prior to 1912?
I can go on but seeing you are so informed please answer the above.
I will be too happy to answer any of your questions.

Phew, so many questions. Some of which I have no answer to, only parallels.

1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.

2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?

3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?

4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.

5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.

6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!

7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.

8, Greeks make better coins?

9, Who translated the bible?

10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?

Why are you picking on me! All i did was suggest that the university of Utah was within its rights to follow the example of its democratically elected government and refer to RoM/FYROM in the manner of its chosing.

Don't judge somebody based upon his location. In many cases the Greek argument relating to history is correct, but we live in the NOW, and many historic arguments are moot (which is a cool word) due to the changing nature of borders, populations and national identification.

Informed Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Phew, so many questions. Some of which I have no answer to, only parallels.
1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.
2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?
3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?
4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.
5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.
6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!
7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.
8, Greeks make better coins?
9, Who translated the bible?
10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?
Why are you picking on me! All i did was suggest that the university of Utah was within its rights to follow the example of its democratically elected government and refer to RoM/FYROM in the manner of its chosing.
Don't judge somebody based upon his location. In many cases the Greek argument relating to history is correct, but we live in the NOW, and many historic arguments are moot (which is a cool word) due to the changing nature of borders, populations and national identification.

I feel so sorry for you.... beeing so informed as you state in your nickname, all the fyromians have applied the below rules to your own history by default... I have taken this extract from a previous post...

Say Something Silly....
Print Something Stupid.....
Misinterpret the True Meaning of Something....
Corrupt the True Meaning of Something.....
Distort the True Meaning of Something.....
Pervert the True Meaning of Something.....

Informed Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Phew, so many questions. Some of which I have no answer to, only parallels.
1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.
2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?
3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?
4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.
5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.
6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!
7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.
8, Greeks make better coins?
9, Who translated the bible?
10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?
Why are you picking on me! All i did was suggest that the university of Utah was within its rights to follow the example of its democratically elected government and refer to RoM/FYROM in the manner of its chosing.
Don't judge somebody based upon his location. In many cases the Greek argument relating to history is correct, but we live in the NOW, and many historic arguments are moot (which is a cool word) due to the changing nature of borders, populations and national identification.

Thank you for the attemp toanswer my questions, but I was hopping you could add a more scientific response rather then you guesing.

In response to the changing of borders and due to the mix of ethnicities in the region due to the Turkic invasions I’m sure that people caught up on boarder alterations developed a different language from their forefathers.

Pozdrav Serres Makethonia not Makedonija

Informed Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Phew, so many questions. Some of which I have no answer to, only parallels.
1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.
2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?
3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?
4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.
5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.
6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!
7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.
8, Greeks make better coins?
9, Who translated the bible?
10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?
Why are you picking on me! All i did was suggest that the university of Utah was within its rights to follow the example of its democratically elected government and refer to RoM/FYROM in the manner of its chosing.
Don't judge somebody based upon his location. In many cases the Greek argument relating to history is correct, but we live in the NOW, and many historic arguments are moot (which is a cool word) due to the changing nature of borders, populations and national identification.

1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.
An independent republic NEVER existed apart from Alexander the 3rd time.

2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?
There is no evidence of any Slav speakers at that time.

3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?
Slavonic was not invented, The Slavs migrated into the region and the two Greek brothers wanted to Christianise the Slavs. Thus the Cyrilic Alphabet which is still used by the Bulgarians.

4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.

5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.
Im sorry you are WRONG! Tsar Sammual was king of the BULGARIANS. This is FACT.

6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!
Cyril & Mrthodius taught old Slavonic. The Makedonski Alphabet was invented 1945. Even Gotse Dulchev wrote in Bulgarian because Makedonski didn’t exist.

7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.
Where was your ARMY? The Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbs were under Turkish rule YET they formed their own armies. Wher was the Makedonski Army?

8, Greeks make better coins?
Come on Alexander ruled the known world don’t you think he could have made MAKEDONSKI coins?

9, Who translated the bible?
The bible says THESALONIKI full stop! No translation!

10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?
NO MY FRIEND they don’texist, because there was only Greek or Bulgarian Macedonians NO MAKEDONSKI’S.

Serres Makethonia wrote:

<quoted text>
1, because an independant Republic didn't exist as it had been previously partitioned by the great regional powers.
An independent republic NEVER existed apart from Alexander the 3rd time.
2, because St Paul had learned Greek but not Macedonian?
There is no evidence of any Slav speakers at that time.
3, because Slavonic had been invented and the two saints had invented it?
Slavonic was not invented, The Slavs migrated into the region and the two Greek brothers wanted to Christianise the Slavs. Thus the Cyrilic Alphabet which is still used by the Bulgarians.
4, The same way that many monarchs in Europe don't come from the country they rule over. King Otto of Greece is a good example, and Prince Philip is one that Greeks should relate to.
5, Basil the slayer of Bulgars or Basil the slayer from Bulgaria? The words of and from while very similar in modern languages may have had a more distinct meaning in the past.
Im sorry you are WRONG! Tsar Sammual was king of the BULGARIANS. This is FACT.
6, in 1945 you say, Cyril and Methodius must be a lot more recent than anybody thought!
Cyril & Mrthodius taught old Slavonic. The Makedonski Alphabet was invented 1945. Even Gotse Dulchev wrote in Bulgarian because Makedonski didn’t exist.
7, either fighting for or against the allies depending on which side the partitioning rulers decided.
Where was your ARMY? The Greeks, Bulgarians and Serbs were under Turkish rule YET they formed their own armies. Wher was the Makedonski Army?
8, Greeks make better coins?
Come on Alexander ruled the known world don’t you think he could have made MAKEDONSKI coins?
9, Who translated the bible?
The bible says THESALONIKI full stop! No translation!
10, I imagine that they exist, but given the hatred of all things Macedonian by the Greek, Bulgar and Serb, then they will be very rare indeed. Didn't the Greeks have a school book which included Macedonian words? Wasn't Macedonia mentioned seperately to Greece in many old maps and documents?
NO MY FRIEND they don’texist, because there was only Greek or Bulgarian Macedonians NO MAKEDONSKI’S.

All this historic FACT, and yet they exist across your northern border. Even the Greeks accept that there is a Republic of Macedonia. They quantify it with Former Yugoslav, but they admit it exists. This is the here and now, the present, today. However you word it you cannot deny it. Call them Slavo-Macedonians if you wish, call them whatever, but acknowledge that they are Macedonians as you have done since they declared independance.

Once you grudgingly admit that those ELECTED by you to speak on your behalf aceept a type of Macedonian that isn't Greek and then you cannot deny them equal claim to the history of Macedonia. You can deny sole claim, but not joint claim.

Otherwise you appear to the world both petulant and contradictory, something that the average modern Greek certainly isn't.

Informed Reader wrote:

<quoted text>
Sadly i will have to disagree with you that Macedonians are always Greek. Until the Slavs migrated south your statement would be true. In fact, until any Macedonian had a kid with anybody other than a Greek your statement would also be true. This though is simply not the case today. And given the huge number of migratory Slavs, the term Slavo-Macedonian should be used (in my opinion). Equally the term Greco-Macedonian should be used for those that are closer to the Greeks than the Slavs, to differentiate.

A disagreement without malice is an opportunity to bring an issue to new standards, so I don’t see why you should be sad to disagree with me
;)
Now, as I can understand you approach the term Macedonia geographically. My approach to the matter is historical. Had this been strictly geographically I would have agreed to this. May be I wouldn’t object for this country to be named so (keeping some reservations about the possible confusion after naming their country and our area with the same name).
However this is not the case at all.
This new state has claims on our northern territory and the name, along with the history distortion, are used to back them up.

It is a matter of dignity that I cannot accept this falsification of the History.
Ancient Macedonia was a Greek region and ancient Macedonians were Greeks.
I find it ridiculous to try to convince people (not always from their side – that’s quite impossible – but other people too) that Alexander the Great was not a Slav (no offend with regards to the term “Slav”).
Yet, they have gone too far, trying to show that they derive from ancient Macedonians and are the sole heirs of them,
Or to invent theories that ancient Macedonians and ancient Greeks were two separate nations (without one solid argument to support such a theory),
Or to make silly and miserable attempts to invent theories that Slavs lived in the area many thousands of years before the Greeks’ arrival or that the ancient Macedonians migrated to Siberia and several hundreds of years later they returned as … Slavs.
Or to try to decipher the Rosetta Stone and to desperately prove through this the existence of the ancient Macedonian language,(which was different to the ancient Greek language of course)
Only that this has been deciphered some 200 years earlier!
Everybody knows today that the texts depicted in this stone are written in Egyptian hieroglyphic, Egyptian demotic and ancient Greek.

What should I do then?
Accept the looting of my history?
Or may be – in the name of good neighbouring – should I accept to share my history with irrelevant people?
What is history actually? a sum of money to share, or a loaf to split?

What would you do if you were me?

PS Regarding your last sentence:“Equally the term Greco-Macedonian should be used for those that are closer to the Greeks than the Slavs, to differentiate”.
The term Greco-Macedonian is fairly inappropriate. The people who live in this area are not “closer to the Greeks”; they are as Greeks as I am too. This term could be used for them as an offend.
All the best.