Usaonline365

Usaonline365 Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Usaonline365, News & Media Website, .

Erik Ten Hag– Galatasaray hadn’t won a game on English soil in 117 years of existing, until Erik Ten Hag.– Manchester Un...
05/10/2023

Erik Ten Hag

– Galatasaray hadn’t won a game on English soil in 117 years of existing, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United had never lost the opening 2 CL group games, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United had never conceded 7 goals in the opening 2 CL group games, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United had never conceded 3+ goals in back to back CL games, until Erik Ten Hag

– Galatasaray hadn’t scored in or won an away goal in the CL since 2015, 3 in one game as soon as they meet Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United hadn’t lost 4 of the opening 7 games in PL history, until Erik Ten Hag

– Manchester United haven’t had as few as 9 points from the opening 7 games since 1989, until Erik Ten Hag

– Manchester United hadn’t conceded 4 goals in a CL group game in 28 years, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United hadn’t conceded 3+ goals in 3 consecutive games since 1978, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United had never lost at the Tottenham Hotspur stadium, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United hadn’t lost the opening two away games since 1973-74, until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United hadn’t conceded more than one goal in 4 consecutive league games since 1979, Until Erik Ten Hag.

– Manchester United had never conceded 2 goals in the opening 4 minutes of a PL game at Old Trafford, Until Erik Ten Hag

– Manchester United had never conceded 23 shots in one game at Old Trafford in PL history, Until Erik Ten Hag

– Brighton had never won twice in a row at Old Trafford, until Erik Ten Hag

Hope this helps

The troubling relationship of Minister Bruno Le Maire
27/05/2023

The troubling relationship of Minister Bruno Le Maire

  While France is on fire following the pension reform, the friendly relations between the Minister of Economy and Christian Schmidt de La Brélie,...

⚡️🇮🇷🇷🇺🇺🇦 On the Possible Shipment of Iranian Ballistic Missiles to Russia⚡️Colleagues from the War Whistleblower channel...
01/11/2022

⚡️🇮🇷🇷🇺🇺🇦 On the Possible Shipment of Iranian Ballistic Missiles to Russia⚡️

Colleagues from the War Whistleblower channel have pointed out an article by the US news agency CNN, the authors of which write about a shipment of Iranian strike UAVs and ballistic missiles to Russia.

If the purchase of drones is not surprising, in the second case the question may arise: why does the Russian Armed Forces need missiles from the Islamic Republic at all?

What exactly can Iran provide?

According to public sources, Tehran was considering supplying two types of systems - Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar.

▪️ The Fateh-110 is an operational tactical missile system on a three-axle vehicle chassis. A launcher without a container is mounted on the body of the vehicle.

The MLRS uses solid-propellant ballistic missiles, which are equipped with controls and guidance systems based on inertial and satellite navigation. The latest versions also have infrared homing heads (IR).

The Zolfaghar is an improved version of the Fateh-110, with a 1.5-meter longer hull, improved solid propellant engine and lighter hull made of carbon fiber.

The launcher is mounted on a dual-guided vehicle. The missile's warhead is fitted with an infra-red seeker, which improves guidance accuracy. It is activated in the last leg of the flight and improves targeting accuracy.

🔻 So why does the Russian Armed Forces need Iranian missiles?

▪️ The Fateh-110 is a cheaper counterpart to the Russian Iskander SAM. It is inferior in range and types of munitions used, but is superior to Iskander in terms of cheapness and weight of the warhead.

The Fateh family also has a modification, Ormuz, with an anti-radar surface-to-air missile system for countering radars and SAMs, which is quite relevant in the context of the unsuppressed Ukrainian air defenses.

▪️ The Zolfaghar missiles are capable of destroying targets at ranges of up to 700 km. This makes it possible to hit targets at long distances with high accuracy and destructive power thanks to its powerful warhead.

🩸 In terms of increased operational and combat capabilities, the Iranian missiles will expand the range of weapons in addition to the more expensive Russian Iskander.

This will also make it possible to replenish Russian tactical weaponry and continue massive strikes against targets in AFU-controlled territory.

The GPS-guided precision-guided complexes could make a significant contribution to the military operation, which the US Himars have essentially done previously. The cheaper rockets from the MLRS did more damage than the expensive Iskanders.

High mobility and manoeuvrability, combined with a conventional wheelbase, will allow for the quickest and most effective strike at the target coordinates and escape from the launch area, avoiding detection.

Statistics from the Japanese Ministry of Finance show a sharp increase in trade with Russia. Even the record year 2021, ...
27/10/2022

Statistics from the Japanese Ministry of Finance show a sharp increase in trade with Russia. Even the record year 2021, in which there was a strong upswing, will be surpassed.

Japan’s trade with Russia rose 31 percent in August from the same period last year, the TASS news agency reports, citing trade statistics released by Japan’s Ministry of Finance on Thursday. The growth in trade primarily relates to purchases of Russian gas and oil. TASS reports:

“Japan’s imports of Russian liquefied natural gas increased by 211 percent in August 2022 compared to August 2021 and by 386 percent in monetary terms. In August, Japan resumed imports of Russian oil, which had resumed in July after being suspended in June However, the volume of imports fell by 20.3 percent from a year ago. In monetary terms, oil imports grew by 54 percent, amid rising global prices.”

According to TASS, the sharp increase in trade between Russia and Japan is related to the increase in world fuel prices – which in turn has led to an increase in imports of Russian energy sources.

Seafox is an anti-mine marine drone. It is a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) manufactured by German company Atlas Elektr...
19/10/2022

Seafox is an anti-mine marine drone. It is a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) manufactured by German company Atlas Elektronik to positively identify mines with a camera linked to the surface via a fibre-optic cable and destroy them with an integral shaped charge.
This fibre-optic guided, one shot mine disposal vehicle is used for semi-autonomous disposal of naval mines and other ordnance found at sea. It is able to automatically relocate previously acquired positions of underwater objects within minutes with the integrated homing sonar. After relocating, these objects can be identified using the onboard CCTV camera and destroyed by the use of a built-in, large calibre shaped charge. The one-way concept significantly reduces the disposal time and extends the operational envelope.
The system has been fully qualified for military purposes and has been introduced in large numbers into various navies. It is deployable from a wide range of carrier platforms, including dedicated MCM vessels, surface combatants, craft of opportunity, rubber boats and helicopters.
The SeaFox system is a mine disposal system based on the most advanced concept using the Expendable Mine Disposal Vehicle principle (EMDV).

Small, unmanned underwater drones are used for direct disposal of historical and most modern mine types; identical, reusable vehicles (without charge) are used for inspection, identification and training purposes.
The system is effective against long and short tethered mines, proud ground mines and floating mines.
The SeaFox system mainly comprises a console, a launcher and the SeaFox vehicles. The system can be delivered as a stand-alone or a fully integrated version.
In case of stand-alone, the console contains all electronics, software, displays and operating elements to guide the vehicle automatically or manually towards the target and to relocate, identify and destroy it. In the fully integrated version, a Multi-Function Console or any existing console can be used.
The two different vehicles ensure quick disposal of mines during operation with the combat vehicle (SeaFox C) which has a 1.4 kg warhead, as well as cost-saving identification with the reusable identification version (SeaFox I).
Currently, the U.S., UK, Finland, Germany, N-the Netherlands and Belgium use different variants SeaFox UUV for training or combat purposes. SeaFox was used in real operations. In 2001 the Royal Navy leased some Seafox drones for use on HMS Bangor and HMS Blyth off Iraq as part of Operation Telic. The Bangor also deployed them off Libya in 2011. The SeaFox was also employed by the Common Unmanned Surface Vehicle (CUSV) during the U.S. Navy’s Trident Warrior 12 Exercise and was also deployed to the Persian Gulf in the summer of 2012.

Russia NEVER had black slaves nor did Russia create a market to trade black people (1600-1800).Russia NEVER participated...
23/03/2022

Russia NEVER had black slaves nor did Russia create a market to trade black people (1600-1800).

Russia NEVER participated in the Berlin conference to share Africa like some piece of goat meat (1884).

Russia NEVER colonised, underdeveloped and looted Africa's resources (1914-1960).

Russia NEVER enabled a safety net for African leaders to hide stolen funds, use these stolen funds to develop itself and then grant the same funds back to Africa as loans.

Russia never invaded and destabilized any African country (Libya, Somalia, Congo, Burkina Faso, Egypt, South Africa, et cetera).

Russia NEVER killed any of African Freedom Fighter but UK and USA have killed hundreds of of our Saviours and thousands you of our African Freedom Fighters are still languishing in different prisons and dungeons all over America.
Who killed Marcus Garvey of Black Panther USA.
Who killed Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso.
Who killed Patrice Lumumba of Congo.
Who killed Malcolm X. Of Black Panther.
Who killed Mu'ammar Al' Gaddafi of Libya.
Who killed Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. Of African American.
Who Killed Tupac Sharkur.
Who Killed Fela Kuti.
Who Killed Stephen Biko of Bantu in South Africa.
Who Killed Solomon Mahlangu.
Who killed 5 million BIAFRANS...et cetera.

Those who did the aforementioned are the ones pushing the narrative that "Russia" has become the Boogeyman... Those who colonized and for about 100 years refused to share their technology with Africa want Africa to like those they like and hate those they hate.
Nah! Never again!

If Russia is the Boogeyman, then the west the devil himself 😎
The West and Russia should find solutions to their problem. Enough of the killing of innocent Ukrainians. No to war.

IOC: The obscure Games of Thomas Bach and John Coates.How the President of the International Olympic Committee is plotti...
05/03/2021

IOC: The obscure Games of Thomas Bach and John Coates.

How the President of the International Olympic Committee is plotting behind the scenes with his Australian Vice President to make Brisbane the sole favourite to host the 2032 Olympic Games. An Inquiry.

While the air of the time is rather one of transparency in the geopolitics of sport, the IOC seems to be returning to the Stone Age and their legendary tricks. Judge for yourself: on Wednesday 24 February, Thomas Bach and the IOC Executive Board unanimously decided to enter into an exclusive "focused dialogue" with the Australian city of Brisbane and the province of Queensland with a view to awarding the 2032 Olympic Games. From now on, the Committee of Future Hosts examines the files and makes recommendations to the Executive Board, which validates the choice and submits it to the session for simple ratification.

A process that was opaque to say the least, as Norwegian Kristin Kloster Aasen did not even publicly reveal the names of the other candidate cities! An obscure but not so strange way of designation when we know that this new designation procedure has been proposed by the Australian...John Coates during the IOC session in June 2019. John Coates, a big name in the world of sport, IOC Vice-President, he is also president of the Supervisory Board CIAS of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). With his little glasses, his pinched lips and his red hair, the sexagenarian looks like a Presbyterian priest to whom one would give the good Lord without confession. Distrustful, John Coates is a real little devil.

Looking back: John Coates was a key figure in Australia's bid for the 2000 Olympic Games. He and his team influenced IOC members by offering favours, including five-figure payments and jobs for family members. The best and most eloquent summary of the affair was given by the spokesperson for the IOC sponsors, David D'Alessandro, who, in the New York Times on February 14, 1999, wrote in a blunt way: "On January 22, John Coates, president of the Australian Olympic Committee, admitted that he had pledged $35,000 each to two IOC members from Kenya and Uganda for their national sports federations - hours before the crucial choice of venue for the 2000 Summer Olympics. Although there was later evidence of similar efforts by other bidders, the Sydney case is particularly clear. There was an obvious attempt to influence the outcome of the selection process: Coates explained that he decided to do this "so that I wouldn't have to spend the rest of my life wondering why we didn't win.“

If Coates has been cleared of any corruption charges by the IOC, he is dragging this dirty story like a millstone around the neck. Incorrigible, he suggested, in private, that he could apply similar methods in the race for 2032. John Coates is the man who whispers in Thomas Bach's ear.

It's as simple as that within the IOC. Who talks to whom and when, on what basis what is discussed, who proposes which concepts - you can hardly check anything anymore. It was already difficult in the old system, but back then it was still possible to make a rudimentary comparison of the Olympic bids. This has now become completely impossible for the public. The rules for doing so were changed in the June 2019 session. Bach, of course, sells the new system as a "revolution", a vocabulary he still used on Wednesday, February 24. Elements of language skillfully distilled by Coates to hide the triumphant return of the dark ages.

24/01/2021
20/01/2021

Here's a fantastic new factual documentary that we've produced, investigating claims that global elites have orchestrated the pandemic and what their motives might be. Described as "a brilliant compil

13/01/2021

The CIA clowns who spread deliberate disinformation across the ‘net are doing an outstanding job of pushing noise and confusion. As a result, my sources are have now fractured into split realities, where in one reality Trump has given up and surrendered while in another reality Trump is about to achieve a decisive victory and astonish the world.

Most importantly, whether the troop expansion in DC is actually part of an unconventional warfare strategy being carried out by President Trump and Chris Miller, the Secretary of Defense. If Biden isn’t inaugurated on the 20th, the radical Left will stage an attempted color revolution siege of Washington D.C., but thanks to these maneuvers by Trump and Miller, there are 15,000 troops in place with the support of the Democrats and the media. Perhaps they are being played and don’t yet realize it.

10/01/2021
https://24.321-news.com/2020/11/28/ghanem-nuseibeh-on-crusade-against-qatar/
28/11/2020

https://24.321-news.com/2020/11/28/ghanem-nuseibeh-on-crusade-against-qatar/

Home Business Ghanem Nuseibeh on crusade against Qatar BusinessFinancePoliticsStrategy Ghanem Nuseibeh on crusade against Qatar November 28, 2020 Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest WhatsApp This mysterious businessman works behind the scenes to sully Qatar’s reputation at all costs using strategie...

09/08/2020

SUNDAY 9 AUGUST, 2020

Dr Elie Hatem and Manuel Ochsenreiter.
The project of world chaos
Dr Elie Hatem, Lebanese-French Lawyer and political adviser, speaks about the change in political patterns after the collapse of Soviet Union. And he offers a unique insight into current global affairs in an interview with Manuel Ochsenreiter.

Published: September 26, 2018, 12:38 pm

Dr. Hatem, how can we sum up the recent international political situation?

It is chaotic, which is the result of political projects and games. Of course, some powers are taking advantage of this chaos, especially those who created it or participated in its creation. There are huge amounts of money used for this purpose. We also saw an economic and financial crisis and, consequently, an intellectual and cultural one. Thus, public opinion became easily manipulated as far as people have less knowledge and no time to analyse the political situation. This is how political projects are easily implemented, especially through the instrumentalisation of religion or the creation of fear in populations.

Who takes advantage of this situation and how?

Principally, the United States of America which became the super-power or the “global police”, after the collapse of ex-Soviet Union. Through their intelligence services and under the control of lobbies, the USA are using both hard and soft power to achieve their plans. In fact, Washington leads the Anglo-Saxon world which house the financial centers. As Amschel Rothschild said: “Let me issue and control nations’ money and I care not who makes the laws.”

Since the collapse of Soviet Union, we saw many military interferences and invasions, justified by fake reasons and advanced through mainstream media. We also saw revolutions created by those actors. Take for example the invasion of Iraq where the goal was to destabilise the whole Middle East. This situation facilitated what the media called the “Arab spring” that has increased religious fanaticism, the collapse of states and installation of chaos. This is what happened in Tunisia, in Libya, in Yemen, in Egypt and in Syria. Who is behind this situation? Who took advantage of it? The United States, their allies and the lobbies who are controlling the US foreign policy. In Egypt, in Tunisia, in Ukraine and eastern European countries, also in the south of the Mediterranean, George Soros foundations (one of the levers of US soft power) obviously played a role in provoking this situation.

But don’t we witness today how the US as a global power is being challenged by other emerging powers such as Russia and China?

Indeed, since the end of the war in ex-Yugoslavia, the US imposed themselves as the “global police”, putting an end to the bi-polarity that used to rule international society before the collapse of Communism.

In fact, after WW2, the international community was divided into two blocks: the Eastern block, headed by the Soviet Union, called “totalitarian world” on one side, and Western block, headed by the US, called the “free world”, on the other side. In the totalitarian world people were deprived from freedom of speech, of movement, of private initiative. People were afraid to talk freely even within their own homes, to criticise the system or to express their own will. Entities were deprived from freedom and self-determination. This was the opposite of the situation in the “free world” to which I had belonged and which I had always defended: I was member of the WACL (World Anti-Communist League) and I never thought that one day I would visit Moscow which used to be the capital city of the “totalitarian world”.

Today, we are in an opposite scheme. In the ex-free world, we are totally under control and lacking freedom of movement and speech. All business and financial transactions are also scrupulously controlled and tracked. People are afraid to express themselves, even on the phones and on social networks. They are even afraid to show that they are thinking in a different way to what has been imposed on them by the system. People are feeling that they are under a dictatorship without a visible dictator. Isn’t it like the previous “totalitarian world”? On the other hand, we have in today’s Russia the opposite development of more freedom, and fighting international terrorism instead of funding it.

Does this justify the sanctions against Russia in the eyes of the West?

Of course, yes. Russia and its allies are an obstacle to Western policy. Washington and Brussels would like to implement chaos all over the world. Russia’s involvement in Syria and its success in putting an end to the destabilisation, including the annihilation of ISIS which was threatening Europe too, is seen by the West as sabotaging their plans. The Syrian war allowed Russia a “come back” on the international scene, gathering new allies, especially China and Iran.

Speaking about Iran, how do you view the new American sanctions against Tehran?

Iran joined the “New Free World” by refusing anarchic globalisation, defending the sovereignty of nations and their independence, respecting national and natural values of societies and entities. Since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, Iran progressed and reconciled the State – the rule of law – and the deep authentic Persian nation, the “real country”. It also recovered its traditional position of guardian of the Shiite world as it used to be during the 17th century when Shiism became the State religion of Persia.

This is similar to Russia which also recovered its leadership of the Orthodox world after the collapse of Communism. By the way, both countries respect the rights of the other religious communities existing within their borders.

The sanctions against Iran are illegal. In fact, only in case of committing international unlawful acts, sanctions can be implemented. But what international unlawful act Iran has committed? This country fought terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria, tried to protect the sovereignty on the request of the legal governments in Baghdad and Damascus. Iran also protected Christian communities in Syria who were threatened by the slaughters of ISIS.

You are criticising the American government without making a distinction between the previous policy of the US and today’s Trump administration…

President Donald Trump broke with his predecessor’s internal policies. But he is unfortunately pursuing the same foreign policy of his predecessors. In fact, the American foreign policy is guided by lobbies – especially the Israel lobby – and by intelligence services. During his presidential campaign, Donald Trump thought that it would have been easy for him to beat the establishment [in Washington]. He even stated in 2015 that he would not be under the control of the Israel lobby. But, very quickly after this declaration which was considered “anti-Semitic” and after being attacked by the media, he stooped to AIPAC and showed his sincere loyalty and subservience to them. This explains his position of moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and his stubbornness against Iran.

How does one get out of this situation?

We are facing a worldwide crisis – a clash between the populations and their governments who seem to be puppet ones. Political power is exercised by shadow actors, using the globalisation system. This is what late UN general secretary Boutros Boutros Ghali was demonstrating when criticising the failure of the United Nations. In the beginning of the 20th century, we were watching the destruction of state-empires through the emergence and the encouragement of nationalism. We are now seeing the destruction of nations-states in order to create a general regression of people and civilisations in a chaotic climate. We all have to defend our historical civilisations, our cultures, our values, our specificities, our freedom and independence. We have to fight against globalisation and to focus on defending our sovereignty.

Dr Elie Hatem with former Front National leader, Jean-Marie Le Pen. FWM

Dr Elie Hatem is Barrister-at-law both at the Paris Bar Association and the International Criminal Court of Justice (The Hague). PhD in International Public Law and Constitutionnal Law, he was teaching International Relations and International Law in universities. Closed to Late Boutros Boutros-Ghali, former Secretary General of the United Nations, he advised many Presidents of Republic and Head of States, including the current President of Lebanon, Michel Aoun. He is also the political advisor of Mr Jean–Marie Le Pen, the founder of the French political party, Le Front National.

All rights reserved. You have permission to quote freely from the articles provided that the source (www.freewestmedia.com) is given. Photos may not be used without our consent.

MANUEL OCHSENREITER

[email protected]

29/07/2020

The Language of Cultural Genocide

By Victor Bivell

A printable version is Here

While most people understand what genocide is, cultural genocide is rarely discussed in public so it can be a much less familiar concept. Acts of genocide are relatively easy to identify as they require targeted deaths and sometimes leave large numbers of dead bodies. While acts of cultural genocide can be overt, such as cultural destruction, they can also be covert such as cultural suppression, cultural appropriation, language manipulation, and lack of recognition and respect. So cultural genocide is sometimes subtle and hard to see. A disturbingly full range of the techniques of cultural genocide can be identified in the way Greek governments have treated ethnic Macedonians for well over a hundred years. Let’s look at these techniques.

They begin with the breaking of the very first right of every individual and every society; a right that is also the very first article of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That right is self-determination. The UN Covenant says:

“PART I,
Article 1,
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

So peoples and the individuals who comprise them determine for themselves who they are and what their own culture is. If a people, let’s say the Macedonian people, call themselves Macedonians, they have the right to call themselves Macedonians. If they have a Macedonian culture, they have the right to have a Macedonian culture. If they have a Macedonian language, they have the right to have a Macedonian language. If they have a Macedonian religion, they have the right to have a Macedonian religion. If they have a Macedonian identity, they have the right to have a Macedonian identity. And so on.

For most people, this is not a problem. But for other people, life is not that simple. Why would one group of people want to eradicate or appropriate the culture of another group of people? It may be revenge or hatred, but in many cases it is greed. The oppressed group has something that the oppressor wants.

We can see this clearly in the case of Greece and the Macedonians.

Well before 1912 when the border of modern day Greece stopped at Thessaly, Greek prime minister Harilaos Trikoupis was credited as saying “When the great war comes, Macedonia will become Greek or Bulgarian, according to who wins. If it is taken by the Bulgarians, they will make the population Slavs. If we take it, we will make all of them Greeks.”

Trikoupis was prime minister seven times between 1875 and 1895 and he was very clear - Greece wanted the land. And as part of taking the land it would turn the native population into Greeks. This was the motive - to win up to around 67,000 square kilometres of prime land in then Ottoman Macedonia.

But note also that Trikoupis does not refer to the people of Macedonia as Macedonians, nor as the native population or native inhabitants. Greece had had its covetous eyes on Macedonia for a long time before Trikoupis, and it knew that to say that it was going to take Macedonia from the Macedonians was to admit theft. So to hide the reality of its intentions it renamed the people with the generic label “population”. This label is itself an act of cultural genocide as it denies the identity and identities of the people of Macedonia. The implication is that it is acceptable to invade Macedonia as there are no Macedonians. Note also the double standard as the statement preserves the identity of the “Bulgarians” and the “Greeks”.

This sly use of language is an early example of the crucial role of language in the Greek techniques of cultural genocide. But the approaching “great war” and break up of Ottoman Macedonia were not the start of Greek acts of cultural genocide in Macedonia. Macedonians had already suffered many years and many acts of overt and covert cultural oppression.

Two of these were book burning, and in 1767 the closure of the Ohrid Archbishopric. The Ohrid Archbishopric had began in the 10th century as the autocephalous Ohrid Archdiocese, and its successor is the modern day Macedonian Orthodox Church.

The closure of the Ohrid Archbishopric was done by the Turkish Sultan at the urging of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Nick Anastasovski in his book The Contest for Macedonian Identity 1870-1912 writes “Following the abolition of the Archbishopric of Ohrid, the Macedonian church was annexed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which took ecclesiastical control of Macedonia and, in place of native Bishops of one interest with the people, Greeks were sent from Constantinople. Greek bishops and metropolitans reinforced Greek religious domination in Macedonia by attempting to wipe out traces of the Macedonian character of the Archbishopric of Ohrid. They set upon destroying centuries-old books, records and religious texts and often replaced Macedonian church inscriptions with Greek. In monasteries on the Holy Mountain of Sveta Gora, ‘the Greek clergy acted drastically’, throwing old Macedonian parchments into the sea or burning them in furnaces, and at the Monastery of Saint Naum on Lake Ohrid, the Greek prior Dionysius burned the manuscripts. In Prilep there was a burning of the religious books, whilst the books stored at Veles were destroyed in a bonfire in the marketplace under the orders of the Greek bishop. As much as 300 kilograms of parchments and religious books belonging to the Ohrid Archbishopric were lost forever.”

Nor was that the start. A Russian academic says there is evidence that all old Macedonian religious books before the end of the twelfth century have been destroyed. In a 2008 interview with Balkananalysis.com, the world leading Balkan linguist, professor Victor Friedman, said “John Fine in his book The Early Medieval Balkans (p. 220) cites Vladimir Moshin, who published an article in1963 in a Russian academic journal in which he made the argument that the reason there are no Slavic language manuscripts from this region prior to 1180 is owing to their deliberate destruction by the Greeks/Byzantines. Up until his article, people had been saying it was the Turks who destroyed everything. But there are Greek-language manuscripts from this period that survived in this region, whereas Slavic ones did not. And it is not as if the latter were not being composed in an organized way; the Ohrid literary school which began in the late 9th century is just one place where manuscripts were being written in large numbers. Which means that Greeks have been trying to destroy Slavic culture and literacy for a very long time.”

The major acts of genocide itself were committed in the “great war” foreseen by Trikoupis. When it came, there were two wars, which we know as the First Balkan War of 1912 and the Second Balkan War of 1913.

The Balkan Wars were not just a series of battles between the invading armies of Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro against the defending army of Turkey; they were also a systematic war by the attacking armies against the civilian people of Macedonia. Many hundreds of villages were destroyed or burned, including Macedonian, Turkish, Bulgarian and Greek villages. In his book Death & Exile: The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims, 1821-1922, Justin McCarthy says the Balkan Wars of 1912-13 saw 632,408 people killed and 812,771 people were made refugees. Richard C. Hall in the International Encyclopedia of the First World War puts total military deaths at 238,500. So it is likely that the majority of the slain were civilians, on these numbers about 400,000.

The Carnegie Report into the Balkan Wars makes it clear that along with the Bulgarian and Serbian armies, the Greek army was committing acts of genocide on the civilian population. One example: “... the object of these armed conflicts, overt or covert, clearly conceived or vaguely felt, but always and everywhere the same, was the complete extermination of an alien population. In some cases this object expressed itself in the form of an implacable and categorical “order” to kill the whole male population of the occupied regions. We are in possession of some letters from Greek soldiers, of unimpeachable authenticity. These documents, though written in our own day, throw back to the time of the Assyrian conquest. “We have taken a small number of prisoners and them we have killed, such being the orders received * * * in order that the dirty Bulgarian race may not spring up again” * * * “We are” – such is the order, – “to burn the villages, massacre the young, and spare none but the old people, children and minors.” Here the intention is clearly to spare none but those no longer capable of carrying on the race and those still young enough to lose their nationality by receiving a Greek education.”

Note also that the Greek army personnel are told that the civilians are “Bulgarians”, not Macedonians, and this associates them with the rival Bulgarian army and Bulgarian church, making it more acceptable for the Greek soldiers to commit acts of genocide upon them.

Perhaps the name Balkan Wars is itself a misnomer and an attempt to hide the real war. The great majority of the war occurred in Macedonia, and several hundred thousand civilians were deliberately killed. Perhaps the Balkan Wars should be more widely known as the Macedonian Genocide, as many Macedonians call it. As Macedonia had always been a multicultural land, the Macedonian Genocide included ethnic Macedonians, ethnic Turks and converted Muslims as well as Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs and other groups who were in the path of the wrong army.

After the Macedonian Genocide/ Balkan Wars, and along with about 34,600 square kilometres of newly acquired Macedonian land, Greece gained over a million new people of different ethnicities. As most were not Greek, it now more earnestly than ever set about as Trikoupis had foreshadowed to “make all of them Greeks”.

It implemented policies of cultural oppression and assimilation, and used a wide variety of techniques across every aspect of life. These included the widespread use of renaming – giving ‘problematic’ people, places and everything else new names that deny or hide the original cultural name and its history and associations.

The Macedonians among the newly acquired peoples were not called Macedonians; they were called Bulgarians, Slavs, Slavic Speakers, Slavophones, Macedonian Slavs and other names. Over the coming years the Greek government changed people’s Macedonian names to Greek names; it changed the Macedonian names of the towns, villages and geographic features to Greek names; it forbade the use of the Macedonian language; and what little education it gave to villagers and village children it gave only in the Greek language. It forbade Macedonian cultural expression through song and dance and other artistic means.

Cultural appropriation can also be done by adding a linguistic descriptor or prefix. So after the Balkan Wars, the southern half of Macedonia became “Greek Macedonia”. This is the same technique as Orthodox Easter being renamed “Greek Easter”, Turkish coffee being renamed “Greek coffee”, Mediterranean salad being renamed “Greek salad”, Balkan yoghurt being renamed “Greek yoghurt” and so on. The modern day Greeks do a lot of renaming.

The acts of cultural destruction and people-appropriation included gravestones. In many villages in what became in 1912 Greek Macedonia it is impossible to find gravestones of people buried before 1912. This is because they were written in the Cyrillic or other alphabet. These gravestones were evidence that the people were not Greek and contradicted the Greek propaganda that “Macedonia’s population was Greek” and that “Macedonia has always been Greek”.

This form of cultural oppression continues to exist. The gravestones written after 1912 are all in Greek. Local Macedonians have long reported that Greek is the only language in which they are allowed to have gravestones. In the same oppressive way, babies must be given a name that is Greek rather than a name that belongs to another ethnic group such as Macedonian. For many older people who were born before 1912 or soon after, it resulted in the cruel irony that they lived their lives never having spoken or read Greek yet for ever they must have a Greek tombstone.

There was also ethnic cleansing through persecution, lack of economic development and economic opportunities, and a refusal of the right to return to their homeland in Greece for many thousands of Macedonians who were seen as politically suspect or dangerous.

Large scale colonization was also used. Following the Greek invasion of western Turkey between 1919 to 1922 – a war which Greece lost – there was a massive population exchange between Greece and Turkey and over a million Christian Turks were settled in Greece, with over 600,000 of them settled in the newly acquired territory of “Greek Macedonia”. This made the indigenous inhabitants a minority in their own land and their lives and the natural expression of the culture became much harder.

It also adds understanding to why Greece refuses to call the indigenous people Macedonians and insists on calling them by a range of other names such as Slavic speakers, Slavophones, or Slavic Macedonians. The intent is to take the Macedonian identity from these people and give it to the colonizing Christian Turks, who it now freely calls both Greeks and Macedonians. Note again the double standard. Macedonians who have lived in Macedonia for centuries and some for millennia (as shown by genetic testing) are not recognized as Macedonians yet people who have lived in Turkey for centuries and millennia and have never previously lived in Macedonia are recognized by the Greek government as Macedonians.

These numerous examples show that the role of language has always been crucial, and is still crucial, in the Greek techniques of cultural genocide. Language and much more are destroyed when books and gravestones are destroyed. Language can be used to hide people's origins and ethnicity when their personal names are changed. Language can be used to hide history when place names are changed. Language can be used to hide and change identities, as when self-determined identities are forbidden and unwanted identities are forced upon the oppressed. Language can be used to perform theft when stolen identities are given to people who previously had other identities. And language is a tool of oppression and cultural genocide when the learning and use of a language is deliberately suppressed.

With much of Greece's destruction and appropriation of Macedonian culture done through the manipulation of language, over the past 150 or so years Greece has developed a substantial vocabulary of alternative names for people and things Macedonian that it sees as problematic. They are problematic as they contradict its narrative, its propaganda, about Macedonia and its right to the land and people.

The table accompanying this article is a list of that Greek vocabulary. It is not exhaustive, but many of the terms will be familiar to those who follow international politics. The Greek vocabulary is placed alongside the Macedonian words that were freely developed and inherited by Macedonians exercising their self-determination.

To illustrate the way in which the Greek words operate to deny culture and commit cultural genocide, I have included two other lists. One applies the language of cultural genocide to Greece and Greek culture - how another country or authority could do to Greece and the Greeks what Greece does to the Macedonians. The other list applies the same language of cultural genocide to England and Britain and to the English and British people to show how their culture could also be denied.

For example, the Greek technique of renaming the Republic of Macedonia as Skopje takes away its Macedonian character; in the same way that renaming Greece to say Athens or Pseudo Greece dilutes its Greek character; and renaming Britain to New Germany or Germanic Britain dilutes its British or English character.

Similarly, the way many British and some other Western academics refer to the ancient Macedonian Empire as the “Hellenistic Period”, literally “the Greekish Period”, takes away from its Macedonian character. One can ask whether there is another conquering power in history that is refered to by the name of another power, let alone one that it conquered? To put the oppressive boot on the other foot and de-emphasize the Greekness of the ancient Greeks we could refer to the ancient Greek empire and Greece’s dominant period in history as say the Egypto-Cretan-Assyrian-Phoenician-Judeo-Persian-Macedo-Roman Period or the Greco-Hybrid Period for short. Likewise, renaming the British Empire as the Germanistic Period achieves the same effect and takes away its British character. A key difference, of course is that modern Greeks and modern Britains are here to defend their honor and history; ancient Macedonians are not.

By using the techniques of the Greek vocabulary for cultural genocide, it is possible to rewrite Greek history and British history into narratives that Greeks and Britons would find hard to recognize.

Let’s start with an example for Greeks.

“The History of the Christian Greeks

“Under King Philip, Macedonia became the first centrally organized state in Europe, while the neighbouring land sometimes known as Greece did not become a country until over 2,100 years later in 1821. By then the widespread view was that the Greeks of antiquity had died out and there was great speculation about the identity of the people of the Former Ottoman Orthodox Christian Rum Millet or FOOCRM for short. The population was seen as a great mixture of Albanians, Turks, Macedonians, Vlachs, Bulgarians, Slavs and others. So a variety of names and identities for this new nation of people were possible. An all encompassing one was “Albano-Turko-Macedo-Vlacho-Bulgaro-Slavo-Greeks”. But while accurate, this was too long. As the leaders of the people wanted to be associated in some way with the real Greeks, as some of the people even had notions and pretensions of being descended from the real Greeks, and as some even pretended to be descended from the real Greeks, the terms Pretend-Greeks or Pseudo-Greeks were also suitable. The name Pseudo-Greeks also had the advantages of using a word (pseudo) from the real Greeks, it was thought accurate enough, and it was much shorter. Another advantage was that the country could then also be called the Pseudo-Hellenic Republic or Pseudo Greece for short. But there were issues in including the word Greek. While some Pseudo-Greeks claimed they could legitimately use the name Greek as they were continuing the cultural traditions of the real Greeks, this position was much disputed and not credible. For example, the Greeks believed in Zeus and the other Greek gods while the modern people of FOOCRM were mostly Christians. As the real Greeks were not Christian, it was not possible to be both Greek and Christian. So another compromise identity for the people of this new nation could have been Christian-worshipers, simply Christians, Greko-Christians or Christian-Greeks...”

This narrative diminishes the Greekness of modern day Greece and the modern day Greeks. It does it in the same way and using the same linguistic techniques that the modern Greek narrative and Greek vocabulary about Macedonians is calculated to diminish their Macedonianness. Greece has been doing this to the Macedonians for well over a hundred years and continues to do it today.

And here is an example for the English and British people.

“The Germanistic Period from King Henry VII to Queen Elizabeth II

“The Germanistic Period in history, also known as the Germanistic Empire, spanned almost 500 years from King Henry VII to Queen Elizabeth 11. During that time, what began as a search for an Atlantic route to Asia resulted in the creation of the largest empire in history. At its peak, the Germanistic Empire accounted for 24 per cent of the Earth’s land mass and 23 per cent of its population. A key feature of this empire was its many German characteristics – hence its name “Germanistic”. First there were the conquering people – who were of Germanic origin and were Germanic speakers. And just as Germanic tribes had invaded and conquered ancient Rome, the Germanic speakers of New Germany were invaders and conquerors. They were also imperialists and colonizers and gave Germanistic names to their many conquests. So it seems appropriate that the people who gave the world such names as New England, New Britain, New Hampshire, New South Wales, New Hebrides, New York, New London, and many hundreds of similar name should themselves come from New Germany. Another German feature of the Germanistic Period was the language. As it is part of the Germanic group of languages, for a time it was known as English (Germanic). However, many linguists argue that other names are more accurate. One school of thought argues that the predominant use of this language around the world is due to its useage in the United States and the pre-eminent role that the United States has played in world affairs. Perhaps more importantly, they rightly point out that the United States and other countries have been driving the growth and development of the language for well over a hundred years and the role of the Germanic speakers of New Germany is simply to keep up. So they say the name of the language should be American. Another school of thought argues that the original vocabulary of the language comprises only a very small percentage of the total vocabulary. The great majority of the words have been copied from numerous other languages or were created by people who are not from New Germany. These experts argue that a more appropriate and accurate name is New Esperanto...”

This example diminishes the Britishness of the British Empire, the Englishness of the English language and the Englishness and Britishness of the people. Yet it is what many British academics and some British media have been doing to the ancient Macedonians and to the modern Macedonians for a very long time.

Modern day Greeks and Britons would find such narratives offensive if they were practiced on a world wide scale, over a long period of time, and against their will. Yet they continue to do this to the ancient and modern Macedonians as if oblivious or uncaring to the disrespect they show and the suffering they create.

These examples illustrate that the Greek language of cultural genocide is hate speech. It is discriminatory and deeply hurtful to the Macedonians. Any acceptance of hate speech can see it become normalized and its usage spread more widely to the media, public figures and the general public. This of course is what the instigators and the oppressors want. But it is absolutely wrong, and good people need to be alert to its use.

My hope is that illustrating how this language and these linguistic techniques can be applied to the Greek people will make good Greeks more sensitive to the damage they do when they use the language of cultural genocide against the Macedonian people.

As English is a global language, my hope is that in illustrating how this language and these techniques can be applied to the British it will alert many more people around the world to its dangerous use. As many British and other academics are notorious for their use of the Greek language of cultural genocide when discussing Macedonia and Macedonians, I also hope to alert good academics to the damage they do when they use the language of cultural genocide in regard to the Macedonian people.

Meanwhile, the solution to cultural genocide is respect – respect for individuals and peoples, respect for the universal right to self-determination and self-identification, and respect for all cultural activities and creations. This is best done by and within multicultural societies. There needs to be an end to assimilation. Assimilation needs to be replaced with respect by everyone for everyone.

The Greek Vocabulary of Cultural Genocide
Macedonian Word

Country

Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia



People

Macedonians

Macedonian

Language

Macedonian

Modern History

The Macedonian Genocide

The Macedonian Freedom War in Aegean Macedonia

Ancient Macedonia

Macedonia

Ancient Macedonia

The Macedonian Empire

The Macedonian Period
Greek Cultural Genocide Word

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

FYROM

Skopje

Republic of Skopje

Vardarska

Vardar Macedonia

Upper Macedonia

New Macedonia

Slav Macedonia

Slavic Macedonia

Macedonia-Skopje

North Macedonia

Slavs

Slav Macedonians

Slavic speakers

Slavophones

Slavophone Greeks

Skopjans

Skopjan-Gypsies

Macedo-Slavs

Bulgarians

North Macedonians

Associates of Slav-Macedonians

FYROMians

Macedonian (Slavonic)

Slav

Slavonic

The Idiom

The Balkan Wars

The Greek Civil War

The Greek Kingdom of Macedonia

The Hellenistic Period
If Same Cultural Genocide Applied to Greece

Former Ottoman Province of Greece

FOPOG

Former Ottoman Orthodox Christian Rum Millet

FOOCRM

Achaea

Pseudo Hellenic Republic

Pseudo Greece

Hellass

Christians

Christian Greeks

Christian-worshipers

Indo-Euro-phones

Turkic-Christians

Athenians

New Greeks

Albano-Turko-Macedo-Vlacho-Bulgaro-Slavo-Greeks

ATMVBS-Greeks

Pseudo-Greeks

Achaeans

Romans/ Rhomaioi

We Don’t Worship Zeus Greeks

WDWZians

Greko-Christians

Modern Greek (Indo European)

Indo European

Indo-Euro-Greek

The Pseudo-Greek War of Independence

The Greek Invasion of Turkey 1919-22

The Egypto-Cretan-Assyrian-Phoenician-Judeo-Persian-Macedo-Roman Period

ECAPJPMR Period

The Greco-Hybrid Period If Same Cultural Genocide Applied to Britain

Former Roman Province of Britannia

FRPOB

London

Anglo-Saxionia

New Germany

United Kingdom of New Germany and Northern Ireland

UKNGNI

Germanic Britain

Teutonic Britain

Germanics

Germano-Britons

Germanic speakers

Germanophones

Anglo-Saxonians

Londoners

New Germans

Celtic-Roman- Anglo-Saxon- Viking-Norman- Caribbean-African-Asian-Britons

CRASVNCAAians

English (Germanic)

American

New Esperanto

The Battle of New Germany 1940

The Battle of UKNGNI 1940

The Germanistic Period

The Germanistic Period from King Henry VII to Queen Elizabeth II

#

There are more articles by Victor Bivell here.

Pollitecon Publications
PO Box 3411
Wareemba NSW 2046
Sydney Australia
Ph +61 2 9705 0578
Email vbivell @ pollitecon.com
Web http://www.pollitecon.com

Sign up to receive Pollitecon Updates



Books by Pollitecon

Lerin in Mourning

Pirey

Picture Mantelpiece

The Contest

Girl From Neret

The Big Water

From War

Bird Goddess

Black Seed

Macedonian Agenda

The Rising Sun in the Balkans

What Europe Has Forgotten

Free Book

Freedom Fighters



This email was sent by Victor Bivell, Pollitecon Publications, PO Box 3411, Wareemba NSW 2046, Australia to [email protected]

Unsubscribe

Address


Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Usaonline365 posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to Usaonline365:

Shortcuts

  • Address
  • Alerts
  • Contact The Business
  • Claim ownership or report listing
  • Want your business to be the top-listed Media Company?

Share