DOCSLIB.ORG

Ideological Activism – Macedonians Under Greece

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ideological Activism – Macedonians Under Greece Ideological Activism – Macedonians Under Greece By Stoian Kochov (Translated from Macedonian to English and edited by Risto Stefov) Ideological Activism – Macedonians Under Greece Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2015 by Stoian Kochov & Risto Stefov e-Book Format May 20, 2015 2 REMEMBERING: IDEOLOGICAL ACTIVISM - MACEDONIANS UNDER GREECE (1945-1949) Digging into the past has allowed me to better understand the truth about the genocide committed against the Macedonian people living in Greek occupied Macedonia in the years 1945 to 1949, precisely during the period when the Communist International was active in Greece. Historical studies and research conducted after the genocide inspired me to write about the very activities (attitudes, views, crucial decisions) which were detrimental to our future. These “ideological” activities were ordered “from above” by the Communist Party of Greece (CPG) and by the Communist Party of Yugoslavia/Communist Party of Macedonia (CPY/CPM) and were blindly followed and implemented by the National Liberation Front (NOF) and Anti-Fascists Front for Women (AFZH), to the detriment of the Macedonian people. It later became obvious that we the Macedonians, as soldiers of the Democratic Army of Greece (DAG), did not have any control of the Macedonian political movement. We were novices and all the knowledge we had was planted into our minds; all the effort and compassion we put into this service was already pre-planned by the ideologues of war - strangers to our kind. After conducting my own investigation, I was able to confirm that: Our organizations NOF and AFZH were always under the watchful eye of “big brother” who ruthlessly had the organizations under his control. Everything was under his control; perception, attitude, view of the world, importance of action, engagement in achieving certain social and especially political problems, etc. By digging deeper and analyzing details of NOF’s and AFZH’s activities, I was able to provide evidence that Yugoslavia and its ideological movement was in favour of Greece and the Western powers. Yugoslavia was in favour of the division of the spheres of influence, a decision that was made in Yalta and in Crimea from February 4 to 11, 1945, regarding the new post-war settlement of the planet earth. My research and my results documented in this book aim to answer the following questions: 3 1. How and why was the “Macedonian syndrome” activated, through ideological activism, in Greek occupied Macedonia after World War II and during the Greek Civil War (1945-1949)? 2. With what kind of strategic objective did we organize NOF and who actually pushed us to take a military option and fight in a war? Was that our strategic goal or was it organized by strangers through ideological activism (Operatives of strategic tasks) with the awareness that, for half a century, we were forced to follow a “comfortable” policy with Greece? 3. Were the Macedonian people living in Greek occupied Macedonia, intellectually, military and political capable, through such a strategic option, of preserving the territorial integrity of Greek occupied Macedonia and the compactness of the Macedonian population after World War II when international state borders, particularly after the international border between Greece and Yugoslavia became a militarized frontier between the Western and Eastern camp? 4. Why did we discard the alternative of not getting involved in the war? Was it because it would have been less glorious not to have fought? Had we chosen that option there was a good chance that today we would still be at home in our own iconic Macedonian space; on our grandfather’s piece of land! 5. The Greek Civil War (1945-1949) spilled a lot of our blood and left our villages and homes burned to the ground. Worse than that, it permanently drove the Macedonian people out from their native lands and left them stranded to roam the world. It ruined our lives as Macedonians. The Author Skopje, 1995 4 FOREWORD The political manipulation of the Macedonian people living in Greek occupied Macedonia, by Communist International and the Communist parties (CPG; CPB (Communist Party of Bulgaria) and CPY) during the war years (1940-1950); The half a century of wandering and silence after the 1953 Balkan Pact; are only a couple of factors that have led to severe consequences for the Macedonian people. These were people who were recruited (most by violent mobilization) and pushed into becoming ideological soldiers (“useful idiots”), victims who became unwilling servants of other people’s interests. And as a result they not only lost their political identity, but were thrown into total political discrimination and social marginalization (they were thrown into the ideological waste basket), with aims at turning them into ideological and political believers. Today all this is reflected in the overall national interests of the Macedonian people. For them, the Macedonian Question, or a representation of it, from a political or even ethnic point of view, was a huge plot and that is why there was no reality to the slogan “United Macedonia” after the Second World War. And that is why we, the Macedonian people from Greek occupied Macedonia, found ourselves outside of our homes and exiled forever. To attempt to examine if we had a strategy of our own during the Greek Civil War is beyond reason, but we do have to admit that it was our blood that the strangers used to write their own great stories. The topic “(Self) sacrifice of the Macedonians under Greece”, in a range of dilemmas, about which I have touched upon in my book, is of vital interest to the Macedonian nation and can be summarized by answering a few important questions: Are we defending a revolution in the “History of Greek occupied Macedonia”, or are we covering up a fraud for all those (self) sacrifices we experienced?! Was there any point to our entry into a new war (Greek Civil War) after World War II was over and after most problems created by it were already globally resolved, including the international border running right through historic and ethnic Macedonia? Why did we enter this war without any clear idea as to where we were headed? Why did we follow the absurd suicidal strategy to bring socialism to Greece and 5 allow the “communists” to use us in a fictional strategy concocted by strangers to “Soviet-ize the Balkans” and whatever else they were doing? Surely we must also have known how the Greek government with an Army of 250,000 trained soldiers equipped with the most modern weapons, leaning towards the far right, would have reacted to this, especially since they referred to us as “Bandits” and called this war, not a Macedonian revolution, not a Greek Civil War, but a “Bandit war”. Objectively speaking, most of the historiography about this war has been referred to as a “Partisan War with 90% of the fighters being forcibly mobilized peasants under the leadership of the CPG”. But, as a matter of fact, we the Macedonians contributed about 50-60% of the total resources available to DAG from the villages where NOF and AFZH had influence and pushed us into the war. The problem seemed complicated but apparently the truth was simple, but only if we were honest and impartial about how we regarded our historical objectivity. We Macedonians living in Greek occupied Macedonia were always under close watch or under the watchful eyes of the anti-Macedonians. But the fact is that we never paid much attention to ourselves, our vital interests, but rather we hoped that our national problem would be solved by our ideologically affiliated “Big Brothers”. Today’s findings are telling us that many powers did whatever they could to force the indigenous Macedonian people out of Greek occupied Macedonia and silence them permanently. These “interventions” were most apparent after the Second World War. But then the question is: What did we do in this “stormy chaos” after the world was divided into spheres of influence between the two camps? What did we do after they had dropped the “iron curtain” between us? Also surprising is the fact that, even after the creation of the Macedonian state and even when two sovereign states, Greece and Yugoslavia, stood between us, we were still obsessed with the idea of unifying all of historic and ethnic Macedonia and all the Macedonian people, including those living in Greek occupied Macedonia by “starting a revolution” which “fit with our historical needs” and was based on “ancient traditions.” But, from what had happened and the stage we were in, after World War II ended, and after the world was divided into rigid spheres of influence, when it 6 should have been very clear to us why such a political option was not viable at that point in time, we, it seems, were still too blind to see the truth. It seems that the “architects” who were planning our demise were sure that we would be “blinded” by our ancient desires to create a United Macedonia and that we would dismiss the truth even though it was staring us in the face. And sure enough they were right and that is why, at the end of April 23, 1945, they created the Macedonian organizations NOF, AFZH and NOMS (People’s Liberation Youth Organization) in Skopje and through them urgently called on the Macedonian people in Greek occupied Macedonia to stand up and fight: “Now or never!” It was done in the period when we were under the spell of the ideological force of strangers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 15-Year-Old Greek Students Consider the Removal of Children in the Greek Civil War’
    Kosmas, V. (2019) ‘Student responses to differing accounts of a controversial historical issue: 15-year-old Greek students consider the removal of children in the Greek Civil War’. History Education Research Journal, 16 (2): 209–28. DOI https://doi.org/10.18546/HERJ.16.2.05 Student responses to differing accounts of a controversial historical issue: 15-year-old Greek students consider the removal of children in the Greek Civil War Vasileios Kosmas* – Democritus University of Thrace, Greece Abstract In recent decades, controversial issues have come to the forefront of history teaching. So far, they have been utilized in three ways: (1) to manage tensions in divided societies; (2) to instil humanitarian values into students; and (3) to enhance the teaching of second-order historical concepts. This study is based on the findings of other relevant research, and underpins the use of controversial accounts in order to foster procedural concepts of history. It was conducted in three middle schools of the Xanthi Prefecture, northern Greece, in 2017 and 2018. The subjects were 94 15-year-old students, and the design was experimental. After being taught two versions of the Greek Civil War, a traditional and an experimental one, students expressed their opinions about three pairs of different historical accounts of a controversial issue: the removal of children during the war. A pilot study consisted of role-playing activities involving historical competences. After qualitative and quantitative analysis, a variety of ideas emerged about the differences in the accounts, the reasons for their differentiation, and the epistemological status of history. The findings show that: (1) students’ comprehension depended on the level of difficulty of the accounts; and (2) the experimental groups modified their ideas about the different accounts and history to some degree.
    [Show full text]
  • The Attitude of the Communist Party of Greece and the Protection of the Greek-Yugoslav Border
    Spyridon Sfetas Autonomist Movements of the Slavophones in 1944: The Attitude of the Communist Party of Greece and the Protection of the Greek-Yugoslav Border The founding of the Slavo-Macedonian Popular Liberation Front (SNOF) in Kastoria in October 1943 and in Florina the following November was a result of two factors: the general negotiations between Tito's envoy in Yugoslav and Greek Macedonia, Svetozar Vukmanovic-Tempo, the military leaders of the Greek Popular Liberation Army (ELAS), and the political leaders of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) in July and August 1943 to co-ordinate the resistance movements; and the more specific discussions between Leonidas Stringos and the political delegate of the GHQ of Yugoslav Macedonia, Cvetko Uzunovski in late August or early September 1943 near Yannitsa. The Yugoslavs’ immediate purpose in founding SNOF was to inculcate a Slavo- Macedonian national consciousness in the Slavophones of Greek Macedonia and to enlist the Slavophones of Greek Macedonia into the resistance movement in Yugoslav Macedonia; while their indirect aim was to promote Yugoslavia's views on the Macedonian Question. The KKE had recognised the Slavophones as a "SlavoMacedonian nation" since 1934, in accordance with the relevant decision by the Comintern, and since 1935 had been demanding full equality for the minorities within the Greek state; and it now acquiesced to the founding of SNOF in the belief that this would draw into the resistance those Slavophones who had been led astray by Bulgarian Fascist propaganda. However, the Central Committee of the Greek National Liberation Front (EAM) had not approved the founding of SNOF, believing that the new organisation would conduce more to the fragmentation than to the unity of the resistance forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Macedonians and the Greek Civil War
    Macedonians and the Greek Civil War By By Naum Peiov (Translated from Macedonian to English and edited by Risto Stefov) Macedonians and the Greek Civil War Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada Originally published in Macedonian in June 1968 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2015 by Naum Peiov & Risto Stefov e-book edition November 16, 2015 2 INDEX Foreword ............................................................................................4 PART ONE – The Greek Civil War 1945 – 1949 - Introduction ......8 CHAPTER ONE – Unilateral Civil War .........................................21 CHAPTER TWO - Restoration of the monarchy ............................52 CHAPTER THREE – ESTABLISHING A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT..............................................................................72 CHAPTER FOUR - Withdrawal of the Democratic Army .............81 PART TWO - Macedonians in the Greek Civil War .......................91 CHAPTER FIVE – Systematic persecution of the Macedonian people ...............................................................................................91 CHAPTER SIX - RESISTANCE TO NEW PRESSURE .............127 CHAPTER SEVEN - RELATIONS BETWEEN NOF AND THE CPG................................................................................................136
    [Show full text]
  • Spyridon Sfetas Autonomist Movements of the Slavophones in 1944
    Spyridon Sfetas Autonomist Movements of the Slavophones in 1944: The Attitude of the Communist Party of Greece and the Protection of the Greek-Yugoslav Border The founding of the Slavo-Macedonian Popular Liberation Front (SNOF) in Kastoria in October 1943 and in Florina the following November was a result of two factors: the general negotiations between Tito's envoy in Yugoslav and Greek Macedonia, Svetozar Vukmanovic-Tempo, the military leaders of the Greek Popular Liberation Army (ELAS), and the political leaders of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) in July and August 1943 to co-ordinate the resistance movements1; and the more specific discussions between Leonidas Stringos and the political delegate of the GHQ of Yugoslav Macedonia, Cvetko Uzunovski in late August or early September 1943 near Yannitsa2. The Yugoslavs’ immediate purpose in founding SNOF was to inculcate a Slavo-Macedonian national consciousness in the Slavophones of Greek Macedonia and to enlist the Slavophones of Greek Macedonia into the resistance movement in Yugoslav Macedonia; while their indirect aim was to promote Yugoslavia's views on the Macedonian Question3. The KKE had recognised the Slavophones as a “SlavoMacedonian nation” since 1934, in accordance with the relevant decision by the Comintern, and since 1935 had been demanding full equality for the minorities within the Greek state; and it now acquiesced to the founding of SNOF in the belief that this would draw into the resistance those Slavophones who had been led astray by Bulgarian Fascist propaganda4. However, 1. See T.-A. Papapanagiotou, L’ Effort pourla creation dugland quartiergendral balcanique et la cooperation balcanique, Juin-Septembre 1943 (unpublished postgraduate dissertation, Sorbonne, 1991); there is a copy in the library of the Institute for Balkan Studies, Thessaloniki.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Macedonian Question on Civil Conflict in Greece (1943 - 1949)
    THE IMPACT OF THE MACEDONIAN QUESTION ON CIVIL CONFLICT IN GREECE (1943 - 1949) Hardly one single issue had such diverse and long-standing repercussions on the inception, plan- ning, conduct and perceptions of the Greek Civil War as the Macedonian question. Imbued with the legacy of 19th century conflicting national visions and inter-war destabilizing revisionist schemes, it found itself in the wartime whirlpool of revolutionary change, activating forces — and passions — that were to affect developments in three Balkan states1. An examination of the impact of the Macedonian question on the Greek Civil War can hardly be restricted to the years 1946-1949. Its ramifications in internal Greek conflicts were discernible even in the early phases of the Occupation and throughout the Resistance, continued unabated to Decem- ber 1944 and, despite the Varkiza settlement, remained active during the interlude of 1945-19462. Perceptions and realities in Macedonian affairs rarely coincide. Contemporaries suffered much by lack of dependable information on the aims and policies of adversaries and allies alike. Pre-conceived notions frequently substituted for intelligent analyses. As a result, deep-rooted fears and suspicions persisted and created a permanent sense of insecurity, which was further fanned by psychological warfare operatives, tempering with a sensitive national issue for political ends. Meanwhile, dogmatic approaches to rapidly changing situations blurred the vision of leaders and disoriented public opi- nion. In the end, actors on the Macedonian stage found themselves performing in a theater of the absurd. During the occupation, civil strife in Greek Macedonia between resistance groups was not limited to a contest for post-war political predominance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of the Macedonian Question on Civil Conflict in Greece (1943 - 1949)
    THE IMPACT OF THE MACEDONIAN QUESTION ON CIVIL CONFLICT IN GREECE (1943 - 1949) Hardly one single issue had such diverse and long-standing repercussions on the inception, plan- ning, conduct and perceptions of the Greek Civil War as the Macedonian question. Imbued with the legacy of 19th century conflicting national visions and inter-war destabilizing revisionist schemes, it found itself in the wartime whirlpool of revolutionary change, activating forces — and passions — that were to affect developments in three Balkan states1. An examination of the impact of the Macedonian question on the Greek Civil War can hardly be restricted to the years 1946-1949. Its ramifications in internal Greek conflicts were discernible even in the early phases of the Occupation and throughout the Resistance, continued unabated to Decem- ber 1944 and, despite the Varkiza settlement, remained active during the interlude of 1945-19462. Perceptions and realities in Macedonian affairs rarely coincide. Contemporaries suffered much by lack of dependable information on the aims and policies of adversaries and allies alike. Pre-conceived notions frequently substituted for intelligent analyses. As a result, deep-rooted fears and suspicions persisted and created a permanent sense of insecurity, which was further fanned by psychological warfare operatives, tempering with a sensitive national issue for political ends. Meanwhile, dogmatic approaches to rapidly changing situations blurred the vision of leaders and disoriented public opi- nion. In the end, actors on the Macedonian stage found themselves performing in a theater of the absurd. During the occupation, civil strife in Greek Macedonia between resistance groups was not limited to a contest for post-war political predominance.
    [Show full text]
  • Uprootedness As an Ethnic Marker and the Introduction of Asia Minor As an Imaginary Topos in Greek Films
    Uprootedness as an Ethnic Marker and the Introduction of Asia Minor as an Imaginary Topos in Greek Films Yannis G. S. Papadopoulos The 'Asia Minor Catastrophe' followed by the influx of Anatolian refugees is a seminal moment in modern Greek history that reshaped to a great extent Greek national identity. In the analysis that follows I will try to trace how the Ottoman past, the 'uprooting experience' and the refugees' effort to integrate into Greek society are represented in some Greek films of the 1960s and 1970s. These films bear testimony to the acculturation process that led to the development of an Asia Minor and Pontic ethnic identity. Moreover, they reflect the construction of divergent collective memories, which accommodated the refugee experience in the framework of twentieth-century Greek history. As various scholars have pointed out, ethnic identity is the result of a group's interaction with the taxonomies imposed on it by state agents and broader society and the fluctuation of the accepted boundaries of difference in a modern national state. Besides, Fredrik Barth noted that 'the nature of continuity of ethnic units depends on the maintenance of a boundary whose cultural features may change and yet the continuing dichotomization between members and outsiders allows us to specify the nature of continuity, and investigate the changing cultural form and content'.1 The Greek Orthodox inhabitants of Anatolia did not form a culturally homogeneous group although they participated in the common Ottoman culture.2 Even among Greek-speaking Christians, customs and dialect varied considerably from place to place and Turkish-speaking Christians often had more in common with their Muslim co-villagers than with the Christians from another village or region.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Care for Refugee Children During the Greek Civil War (1946-1949)
    Izvorni znanstveni ~lanak Acta med-hist Adriat 2014; 12(1);135-152 Original scientific paper UDK: 341.39:361.93’’20’’(495) HEALTH CARE FOR REFUGEE CHILDREN DURING THE GREEK CIVIL WAR (1946-1949) ZDRAVSTVENA SKRB O DJECI TIJEKOM GRAĐANSKOG RATA U GRČKOJ (1946.-1949.) Leonidas Rempelakos1, Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou1, Dimitrios Ploumpidis2 Summary This paper focuses on physical and psychological traumas of children during and after the Greek Civil War (1946-1949). There were two evacuation programmes: one organised by the Greek Communist Party to seven countries of Eastern Europe and the other by the Greek government and Queen Frederica to children’s homes (paidopoleis) in the country. The pa- per also argues that Greek refugee children experienced war terror and violence, voluntary or forced separation from their families, and institutionalisation for a shorter or longer time, and that both sides sought to provide shelter, food, medical treatment, and psychological support to the victims. Key words: Children’s evacuation; Greek Civil War (1946-1949); Paediatric care; Psychological traumas 1 History of Medicine, Athens University Medical School, Athens, Greece. 2 First Psychiatric Department, Aiginiteion Hospital, Athens University Medical School, Athens, Greece. Corresponding author: Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou, Assistant Professor of the History of Medicine. Athens University Medical School, Athens. 51, Themidos Street, Athens 15124, Greece. E-mail: [email protected] 135 Introduction Although the military conflict was over 64 years ago, the Greek Civil War persists in the national history, sociology, art, and literature. After almost forty years of silence following its end, its impact still continues to polarize the nation, judging by the recently published memoires and studies of either the winning or the defeated party.
    [Show full text]
  • Macedonians in Greece Risto Stefov
    Macedonians in Greece 1939 – 1949 By Risto Stefov Macedonians in Greece 1939 - 1949 Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2009 by Risto Stefov e-book edition 2 PREFACE Very little has been written about the Macedonians in Greece and their involvement in World War II and in the Greek Civil War. Macedonians who live in Greece to this day are afraid to speak of their terrible ordeals for fear of repercussions from the Greek authorities or because it is simply too painful for them to remember. To this day it is taboo in Greece to speak of the Greek Civil War. The Macedonians in Greece it seems have been ignored by all sides. Yugoslavia has ignored them because it did not want to ruin its good relations with Greece. Greece on the other hand, to this day claims that Macedonians simply do not exist and wants no part of them. Bulgaria, even though it has a large Macedonian immigrant population from Greece, has yet to recognize the Macedonian people as a distinct ethnic group. So in reality no one really cares about the Macedonians in Greece and as a result very little to nothing has been written about them. “Indeed, the Macedonians in Greece are hardly ever mentioned in scholarly literature and have been virtually forgotten as a people and as a national minority.” (Andrew Rossos) This is most unfortunate not only because the Macedonian contribution to the struggle against Fascism and Nazism has been completely omitted, but because the Macedonian people themselves living in Greece despite their contributions, have been completely ignored as if they didn’t exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Chapter
    RETROGRESSION OF THE TURKISH-GREEK RELATIONSHIP THE ISSUE OF CYPRUS AND RELATED DEVELOPMENTS (1950-1960) Assist. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Murat Çay Gaziantep Üniversity Introduction The political scene after WWII was an indicator that the struggle between the world’s political blocks would not cease. This struggle was then referred to as “The Cold War”. The two main opponents of this struggle were the Soviet Union and the Western block. Turkey and Greece aligned with the latter, albeit due to differing reasons relating to their own particular circumstances. Turkey depended on external resources to develop its economy post-war, hence it needed to improve its relationship with the West. Internal and external reasons are open to discussion but an important external reason for Turkey’s rapid alignment with the Western block was a looming Soviet threat. For Greece, the situation was considerably worse because there had been a three-year civil war in the country between 1946 and 1949. An interesting development at the time was that, in a period when there was a Soviet threat in the Middle East and a civil war in Greece instigated by supporters of communist Markos Vafeiadis, supporters of communism in Cyprus increased their activities aimed at making Cyprus a part of Greece. The fundamental reason for this was to take back Cyprus, which is very strategically located in the Eastern Mediterranean, from the hands of the United Kingdom, and to therefore weaken the Western position there and consequently to turn the island into a communist stronghold (Armaoğlu, 1994: 529). The surging civil war in Greece could then be stopped with the help of the USA and the communist masses were able to be expelled from the country.
    [Show full text]
  • From Absence to Trauma: a Study on the Representation Of
    From Absence to Trauma: A Study on the Representation of the Occupation and the Civil War in Greek Films of the Period 1946-1989 by Dimos Dimoulas A dissertation submitted to the Department of Translation and Intercultural Studies, School of English, Faculty of Philosophy, In fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece June 2017 ii iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would have never been able to complete my dissertation without the guidance of my advisor, help from my friends, and support from my family. It is my great pleasure to acknowledge people who have given me guidance, help and encouragement. Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude to my advisor Professor Michalis Kokkonis for the continuous support of my Ph.D. study and related research, for his caring, personal attention, motivation, ample knowledge and for providing me an excellent atmosphere of doing research. His guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis. Professor Kokkonis also helped me to develop my background in film theory and history, opening new horizons for me. Each of the members of my Dissertation Committee has provided me extensive personal and professional guidance and taught me a great deal about both scientific research and life in general. I would especially like to thank Professor Yiorgos Kalogeras. Working with Professor Kalogeras has been a pleasure and a privilege; he patiently corrected my writing and his help has been invaluable and much appreciated. My sincere thanks goes to Assistant Professor Eleftheria Thanouli her insightful comments and encouragement, her advice and feedback but also for the hard question which incented me to widen my research from various perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Name Country D. Beardman United States Of
    Name Country D. Beardman United States of America Melinda McRostie Greece Dilana Paraskevi Greece Susan Vella Bardon Malta Karen Lee United States of America Ray Brown United Kingdom arhonto terzi Greece valerie osborne Greece Vagelis Greece zoe androutsopoulou Greece Becky P United Kingdom NO NAME Other maria tanti lombardo Malta Darren Malta NO NAME Other nik United Kingdom Mylonas Constantinos Greece Nancy Papathanasiou Greece Oscar Zerafa Gregory Malta fragitsa Greece Petros Evdokas Cyprus Joanne Australia NO NAME Other ΑντιγονηΔιβολη United Kingdom fiona laferla Malta Renee Meijer France Luana Caruana Malta Jacqueline Chircop Malta Kay Huby United Kingdom Claudia Borg Malta Kimon Fotiadis Belgium Jan Oldham Australia Maria Teresa Malta Olga Philaniotou Greece George Zarb Malta paravatos United Kingdom Alexandra Stajkoski Germany Michael Deguara Malta Michele Waterford Australia Charlene Malta Maria Koekenhoff United Kingdom Deborah Malta ben gabel United Kingdom Name Country Frans Bølling Denmark Kathleen Jasonides Greece Sherif El Gazzar Egypt Karolina Krist Greece Alessandra Villa Italy MARIA CHARITOU Greece Marina Chandoutis Greece Dr. Christos Orovas Greece Costas Gaganakis Greece Karin Schagerl Austria Yannis Manassis Greece Cortellessa Italy katina Vaselopulos United States of America mautzie Germany Pierre Portelli Malta chris chris Germany shaun grech Malta eri poulianaki Greece Eileen Pappas Greece Andrew Darby United Kingdom NO NAME Greece Baitzar Gazerian Greece Tommy Murtagh Ireland Diana Louis Greece Stavroula Stolaki
    [Show full text]