[QUOTE=Risto the Great;176383]The "Elite" probably means they can afford the second cheapest VW Golf. I wouldn't read too much into the "elite" people of Macedonia. Not that money is a measure of any person anyway. The average Macedonian will be to blame for all of this either from apathy or active anti-Macedonian attitude.[/QUOTE]

There's no fuckin' elite in Macedonia...certainly nothing from a positive perspective...

[QUOTE=Tomche Makedonche;176382]That’s because according to the New York Times article I posted in another thread, apparently the US has taken the view to treat this referendum in the form of a “Disinformation” war against Russia, with Congress apparently approving $8 million specifically to fight it.

This referendum has become a fake news information battleground between the US and “Russia” (apparently all groups advocating a boycott are fake Implants from Russia, you know like how in the Cold War Russians were hiding everywhere in Americans boxes of cereal ready to jump out, cause apparently, no free thinking person could object to such a wonderful deal). If only Russia knew it was supposed to be participating.[/QUOTE]

Surely if the Russians could deny Crooked Hillary the keys to the White House, then Zaev should be negated with ease...:alien::alien::alien: :death:

Macedonian boomers (and even one of the elite) supporting the name change and then attacking australian macedonians.

Its is no wonder macedonia is a shit hole, the older generation that where middle class and higher in yugoslavia are the most horrible and self loathing people in europe

[url]https://youtu.be/n80zsL1VOBU[/url]

I don`t pretend to be an expert in these matters, but can the boycott movement genuinely stop this deal from going through if majority of people who want to vote no don`t turn out? I`d assume it wouldn`t make a difference anyway with Zaev and co and this would still go through somehow.
I know that the World Macedonian Congress is supporting this stance of boycotting but I`m not sure about other organisations.

LMAO. That is too funny, and yet totally true. My parents would always joke that back in the day in the village, if you owned live stock you were "Bogat". That guy has 100 sheep, he is very wealthy. That is the the reference point we are starting from. Mind you, my mother is 53, so this was in the 70's, not the 18th century. Also this was in a village 5 minutes from Ohrid, I can't even imagine what it was like up in the hills, or in eastern Macedonia.

[QUOTE=Risto the Great;176383]The "Elite" probably means they can afford the second cheapest VW Golf.[/QUOTE]

As a side note to that point, there is something you guys should know about who these people are and are not. Sadly the people who are anti referendum, are by all accounts the least educated, the least affluent, and the ones who live the most difficult lives to begin with. I guess the old saying that good people work for a living still holds. From all the people I talk to, its always the poor village farmers that are against this. The very people that have been left behind the most in the world are the only ones putting their principles before themselves, go figure. Virtually all college educated youths are for the name change. Its hard to explain but its blatantly obvious.

It can't succeed unless for some reason there is a shockingly low turnout on the other side of the vote, which is both logically unlikely and by all accounts not going to happen. As I've said a million times already, its debatable weather the NO vote even outnumbers the YES vote anyway. Add to that the fact that the referendum is consultative (non binding). What is the point of playing their game?

The only chance a boycott has at causing low enough turnout is if you convinced every single last NO voter to not vote. Show me a circumstance in any field where you can convince 100% of any group to act in perfect unity? Let alone in a country where 10 people have 100 different opinions on any matter.

In the end who cares if you push turnout to below 50%, when the government sends it to parliament for a vote anyway. Then you can take your turnout numbers and shove them up your ass.

One way or another, on October 1st the boycott leaders will be left dumbfounded and saying only "But but, this isn't fair". Amateurs.

As far as I can tell, every group is on the boycott bandwagon, except LOMA. And we keep getting shit from everyone for it.

[QUOTE=Momce Makedonce;176393]I don`t pretend to be an expert in these matters, but can the boycott movement genuinely stop this deal from going through if majority of people who want to vote no don`t turn out? I`d assume it wouldn`t make a difference anyway with Zaev and co and this would still go through somehow.
I know that the World Macedonian Congress is supporting this stance of boycotting but I`m not sure about other organisations.[/QUOTE]

This from Kotzias in a recent interview he did and that has been posted on the World Macedonian Congress, forgive me but I’m using my phone so I don’t know how to attach links. Basically he has admitted that if the doors were opened for ascension for Macedonia into NATO/ EU again without this agreement and Greece used their veto again and Macedonia took Greece again to the International Court what would finally happen is Macedonia would be admitted into the UN under its constitutional name. Read the paragraph below especially the last third.

KOTZIAS: And many more, but they will be brought into the debate on the agreement, in October or November. The plain name ‘Macedonia’ produces the name and citizenship ‘Macedonians’. They shouldn’t scream or act scandalized. Let’s go to the ‘Macedonia and Macedonians’ issue. This was the main issue they wanted to negotiate. In other words, they wanted to keep their self-determination, and not giving it to them is the key and most difficult part of negotiations. Because if you don’t give it to them, you are denying the highest right recognized by the UN and international law: the right to self-determination. In other words, the right to be called what they want to be called. Would we do this? We did it. There wouldn’t have been an agreement. What would they do then? They would ask to join NATO, as they had asked. What would we have done? Used our veto, because we have to know what we are deciding. We would have vetoed their membership. Where would they then take us? To the International Court in The Hague. What is our problem? That we already have a ruling against us. A ruling on the veto that was never used but that we wanted to sell for appearance’s sake. What would the Court say to us? This time they wouldn’t tell us what the Interim Accord and international law say. They would tell us what their own ruling says. In other words, they would consider us to have broken the law. And with this offence found by the International Court in The Hague, our friendly country would go to the UN. And what do you think would happen at the UN if they raised the issue that we deny them self-determination; article such and such of international conventions and the UN Charter? They would get the name they have today. Anyone who doesn’t think beyond their own views has a problem.”

There you have it, the Greek Foreign Minister basically admitting that Greece does not/ did not have a leg to stand on and yet those traitorous maggots and grubs went through and initiated this so called agreement. What a bunch of total fuckwits and the less said about Dimitrov’s favourite spin calling himself a “visionary patriot” the better.

In another part of the interview he also states that Greece did recognize the Macedonian language over a hundred years ago when asked about the Macedonian language. Mind you he put it into the context that Macedonian was recognized as a language by Greece in order to negate Bulgarian territorial ambitions

[QUOTE=Spirit;176399]In another part of the interview he also states that Greece did recognize the Macedonian language over a hundred years ago when asked about the Macedonian language. Mind you he put it into the context that Macedonian was recognized as a language by Greece in order to negate Bulgarian territorial ambitions[/QUOTE]

But where were all the "Greek Macedonians" back then to protest Greece's recognition of a Macedonian language? Weren't they upset that Greece sold their name to the Slavs? :)

[QUOTE=Spirit;176398]
KOTZIAS: And many more, but they will be brought into the debate on the agreement, in October or November. The plain name ‘Macedonia’ produces the name and citizenship ‘Macedonians’. They shouldn’t scream or act scandalized. Let’s go to the ‘Macedonia and Macedonians’ issue. This was the main issue they wanted to negotiate. In other words, they wanted to keep their self-determination, and not giving it to them is the key and most difficult part of negotiations. Because if you don’t give it to them, you are denying the highest right recognized by the UN and international law: the right to self-determination. In other words, the right to be called what they want to be called. Would we do this? We did it. There wouldn’t have been an agreement. What would they do then? They would ask to join NATO, as they had asked. What would we have done? Used our veto, because we have to know what we are deciding. We would have vetoed their membership. Where would they then take us? To the International Court in The Hague. What is our problem? That we already have a ruling against us. A ruling on the veto that was never used but that we wanted to sell for appearance’s sake. What would the Court say to us? This time they wouldn’t tell us what the Interim Accord and international law say. They would tell us what their own ruling says. In other words, they would consider us to have broken the law. And with this offence found by the International Court in The Hague, our friendly country would go to the UN. And what do you think would happen at the UN if they raised the issue that we deny them self-determination; article such and such of international conventions and the UN Charter? They would get the name they have today. Anyone who doesn’t think beyond their own views has a problem.”

There you have it, the Greek Foreign Minister basically admitting that Greece does not/ did not have a leg to stand on and yet those traitorous maggots and grubs went through and initiated this so called agreement. What a bunch of total fuckwits and the less said about Dimitrov’s favourite spin calling himself a “visionary patriot” the better.[/QUOTE]

Uh, this isn't so. The Interim Accord had a 7-years duration and Greece could harden its' position by simply withdrawing. Basically, both sides could harden their position which would have unpredictable results, yet neither did. UN and the international community want a settlement and they want to see both sides following the settlement path and avoiding new troubles. USA also changed position and supported Greece in the NATO front, probably because the owed us one.

[QUOTE=Spirit;176399]In another part of the interview he also states that Greece did recognize the Macedonian language over a hundred years ago when asked about the Macedonian language. Mind you he put it into the context that Macedonian was recognized as a language by Greece in order to negate Bulgarian territorial ambitions[/QUOTE]

This isn't so either. The Abecedar agreement (there are many threads about it) used terms as "Slavophone Greeks" and "Macedonian dialect". I remind you that the abecedars were burnt by both pro-Greeks who wanted Greek schools and Greek language and pro-Bulgarians who wanted standard Bulgarian (not to mention Serbia was also infuriated).