Mitreski, care to address?

[quote=Buktop;35287]He had every right to state his disapproval of the actions of WMC in regards to the NJ community, just as you are stating your disapproval of UMD activities, this by no means makes it UMD policy.[/quote]

I didn't question his right to state his opinion, I merely pointed out that he has an opinion and posted what that opinion is/was.

[QUOTE=Vangelovski;35289]I didn't question his right to state his opinion, I merely pointed out that he has an opinion and posted what that opinion is/was.[/QUOTE]
understood

[QUOTE=Soldier of Macedon;35281]How has he been caught red handed? Are you also trying to imply that Pelister did not produce the same email to us, that was sent to him by Mitreski?[/QUOTE]I am implying that he has been known to take comments out of context whether intentionally or by mistake. And numerous people have pointed that out.

Do you believe that Pelister has supplied a manipulated version of Mitreski's email, rather than the genuine article? Or is it Mitreski who is trying to re-interpret his earlier comments? I am looking forward to Pelister's response and input on this.

[COLOR=#390002][FONT=Verdana]Taking into account Mitreski's previous comments, it seems that he has embroiled himself into Meto's "name-gate" scandal.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Soldier of Macedon;35302]Do you believe that Pelister has supplied a manipulated version of Mitreski's email, rather than the genuine article? Or is it Mitreski who is trying to re-interpret his earlier comments? I am looking forward to Pelister's response and input on this.[/QUOTE]

I am nearly 100% sure that Pelister is taking Mitreski's statements out of context. Is it not true that the criteria for entry into NATO and EU negotiation of the name? He never said we should, he said if we want to get into NATO or EU then negotiation is required. I am sure you realize this.

Once again, this whole argument is based on the quotes that are provided out of context.

And if you notice, Pelister seems to avoid responding to these questions.

[QUOTE=Buktop;35308]I am nearly 100% sure that Pelister is taking Mitreski's statements out of context.[/QUOTE]
Buktop, that isn't what I asked. I wanted to know if you are of the opinion that the email sent by Mitreski to Pelister has been manipulated. Namely, are you implying (as Mitreski seems to be) that Pelister played with the wording or changed parts of the email prior to putting it up for public display?

[quote=Buktop;35308]I am nearly 100% sure that Pelister is taking Mitreski's statements out of context. Is it not true that the criteria for entry into NATO and EU negotiation of the name? He never said we should, he said if we want to get into NATO or EU then negotiation is required. I am sure you realize this.

Once again, this whole argument is based on the quotes that are provided out of context.[/quote]

Buktop,

If you want some "context", then you should view the comments within the context of UMD's key objectives - and that's Macedonia's entry into NATO and the EU.

UMD has consistently argued that Macedonia should join these organisations. In fact, it has claimed devastating consequences if it doesn't. Meto's (and it appears now Mitreski's) answer on how Macedonia can "realistically" join these organisation is for it to change its name.

So, viewing their comment's within the context of UMD's key policy objectives of NATO and EU membership, its difficult to see how it could be r[COLOR=#390002][FONT=Verdana]easonably understood that [/FONT][/COLOR]these two (President and Vice President) do not support a name change.

[QUOTE=Soldier of Macedon;35310]Buktop, that isn't what I asked. I wanted to know if you are of the opinion that the email sent by Mitreski to Pelister has been manipulated. Namely, are you implying (as Mitreski seems to be) that Pelister played with the wording or changed parts of the email prior to putting it up for public display?[/QUOTE]

[quote="Pelister"]Recently the Vice-President of UMD (who by now probably hates me), said that He personally agreed with Nimetz, that TO INTEGRATE, WE MUST NEGOTIATE.[/quote] This is Pelister's initial statement. I assume you realize what he is implying.

[quote="AMitreski"]THIS IS A FULL BLOWN LIE AND YOU KNOW IT. I pointed out to you exactly what my statement was ( you ahve it in your inbox), but here you go again spread lies.

All I said was that Nimetz told me that Macedonia is not required to negotiate its name. And I said he is right! We do not have to.

STOP LYING AND TWISTING THINGS FOR YOUR OWN SICK BENEFIT.[/quote] This is Mitreski's response

I am not saying that the literal text was manipulated, I am saying its meaning was.

And this is not the first time Pelister has taken quotes out of context, whether it be deliberately or mistakenly.

[QUOTE=Vangelovski;35312]Buktop,

If you want some "context", then you should view the comments within the context of UMD's key objectives - and that's Macedonia's entry into NATO and the EU.

UMD has consistently argued that Macedonia should join these organisations. In fact, it has claimed devastating consequences if it doesn't. Meto's (and it appears now Mitreski's) answer on how Macedonia can "realistically" join these organisation is for it to change its name.

So, viewing their comment's within the context of UMD's key policy objectives of NATO and EU membership, its difficult to see how it could be r[COLOR=#390002][FONT=Verdana]easonably understood that [/FONT][/COLOR]these two (President and Vice President) do not support a name change.[/QUOTE]Do you happen to know UMD's other key policy objectives?

[quote=Buktop;35317]Do you happen to know UMD's other key policy objectives?[/quote]

Post what you have in mind.

[QUOTE=Risto the Great;35266]Prolet, some very wise advice. Well done.[/QUOTE]

Spolaj Ti Brat, thanks for the compliments :thumbup::thumbup:

[QUOTE="Buktop"][quote="Pelister"]Recently the Vice-President of UMD (who by now probably hates me), said that [B]He personally agreed with Nimetz, that TO INTEGRATE, WE MUST NEGOTIATE[/B].[/quote]
This is Pelister's initial statement. I assume you realize what he is implying.[/QUOTE]
I know exactly what he is implying. Here is the relevant excerpt from the original email that Mitreski sent to Pelister:

[url]http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=19723&highlight=mitreski#post19723[/url]
[QUOTE]I asked Nimitz what international law gives the right to Greece to dictate the name of a sovereign country. He said that there is no such law, but Macedonia, [B]if it wants to enter certain international organizations then it is bound to negotiate over the name. He is right. We can say fuck off and stop negotiations, but what would happen next nobody knows[/B]........[/QUOTE]
How does one interpret that? Why should we accept that it is a must to negotiate on our name if we want to enter certain international organisations? I don't share that opinion. If we are to enter any organisation, our name shouldn't be up for discussion, period. If it does get brought up as a condition of entry, then we should walk away. That is what the UMD should have been telling the government, rather than fearing the 'unknown' of what might happen were we to "[I]say fuck off and stop negotiations[/I]". At the end of his email, Mitreski also makes the following statement:
[QUOTE]We have talked in private to Macedonian officials that we need to end these negotiations. We will continue to do so.[/QUOTE]
But Mitreski says earlier in the email that "[I]what would happen next nobody knows[/I]". How are these two points reconciled? Why aren't they talking in public rather than in private? Does the UMD stand to lose something if it echoes the true voice of the Macedonian Diaspora in an overt manner?
[quote="AMitreski"]All I said was that Nimetz told me that Macedonia is not required to negotiate its name. And I said he is right! We do not have to.[/quote]
Now who is twisting words and making re-interpretations? Mitreski said "[I][B]he is right[/B][/I]" in reference to Macedonia being 'bound' to negotiate its name for the purpose of entering international organisations. He did not, as falsely indicated in the above quoted text, say "he is right" with regard to Macedonia not being required to negotiate its name.
[QUOTE="Buktop"]I am not saying that the literal text was manipulated, I am saying its meaning was.

And this is not the first time Pelister has taken quotes out of context, whether it be deliberately or mistakenly.[/QUOTE]
I don't agree with some of his other statements, but in this instance, neither the text nor Pelister's interpretation is manipulative or out of context. Buktop, your personal view of Pelister is clouding your objective judgement.

personally i want to thank pelister for his bravery and tenacity, i can see now exactlt how right he has been all this time on the umd and its many strange attitudes.

pelister come to the human rights dinner with friedman how can you miss it mate. you are close enough come on our table we need a few more.

BTW


What I am upset the most about is that UMD's policy is twistes up like a pretzel on these forums by few people who either belong to another Macedonian organization and try to weaken UMD, or just due to pure jealousy.

Ако бараш влакно ќе го најдеш и во јајцето.

Here is my article published in Dnevnik. As you can see I have asked some serious questions:

Не треба да се преговара за тоа што е наше

(Текст на Александар Митрески, потпретседател на Обединета македонска дијаспора, објавен на [url]www.umdiaspora.org[/url] , 24-ти април 2008)

Кога се преговара во некој спор, двете страни почнуваат со тврди ставови во своја корист кои се појдовна точка за да се дискутира за можен компромис. За жал, веќе 17 години Македонија наивно преговара. Ние во овие преговори треба јасно и гласно да кажеме дека нашето уставно име и идентитет не се можна тема за дискусија. Впрочем, ниедна личност, партија, установа нема право да преговара за уставното име.

Но наместо тоа, ние постојано гледаме како да најдеме некое си фер решение и со тоа постојано си ги поткопуваме нашите позици. Во исто време, пак, Македонија никогаш гласно не кажала дека и таа има проблем со својот јужен сосед кој треба итно да се реши, а тоа се правата на Македонците од Егејска Македонија.

Уставното име на нашата држава е Република Македонија и нема менување на тоа име за интерна и интернационална употреба. Доколку Грција има проблем со тоа име, тогаш билатерално да се реши тоа прашање. Ова требаше да биде исходот од преговорите за името во 1995-та година. А ние тогаш, а и сега, влегуваме во преговори веќе подготвени за отстапки и компромис. А другата страна во 1995-та г. излезе со тврд став дека во името на нашата држава не смее да стои зборот Македонија, за сега да изгледа како херој кој веќе направил компромис и може да прифати име како Северна Македонија.

Колку шлаканици треба да ни се удрат за ние да се освестиме дека не треба да продолжиме во овој самоубиствен процес за срамно преговарање за нешто што со векови е наше? Тажно е тоа што Бакојани се лути дека Нимиц давал промакедонски предлози. Секој предлог на Нимиц кој е различен од нашето уставно име е погубен предлог за нас и ние тоа треба гласно да го манифестираме. Во овие преговори само ние можеме да изгубиме нешто, а другата страна е победник со самото тоа што има преговори.

Дали на Република Македонија не и е грижа за стотиците илјади Македонци кои се обесправени во Егејска Македонија и уште толку Македонци кои не можат да одат да си ги видат своите родни огништа? Кога Р. Македонија ќе го покрене ова прашанје во овие преговори? До кога срамно ќе молчиме против нашиот јужен сосед додека тие си играат со нас како сакаат? Зарем е толку тешко да се свати дека проблемот не е името, туку со милионите што јужниот содед треба да ги плати за оштета кон Егејските Македонци?

[B]Македонија мора веднаш да ги прекине овие преговори, бидејќи повеќе не е обврзана да го прави тоа. [/B]Со ветото е прекршен Привремениот договор и со тоа Р. Македонија мора да поднесе барање за пререгистрација во Обединетите нации под своето уставно име. Впрочем, се виде дека тие селективно почитуваат договори. Ние го дадовме своето знаме за да не ни се дава вето. Кој ни гарантира дека доколку пак направиме отстапки тие нема повторно селективно да почитуваат договори кога треба да влеземе во ЕУ?

Македонија мора да почне агресивно да го поставува прашањето за Македонците од Егејска Македонија до Европскиот парламент и Судот во Стразбург. Македонија треба да поведе судска постапка поради прекршување на договорот и претрпените штети што не сме во НАТО. Се покажа дека, и покрај ветото, Р. Македонија има пријатели и има перспектива. НАТО нема да ги реши економските прашања, туку работа, почитување на закони, некорумпираност и гордост се нашата иднина.

[QUOTE=Vangelovski;35278]Mitreski, maybe UMD hasn't taken a stand against the WMC, but the "young" Meto certainly did in his post on Macedonian Media Monitor, dated 3 April 2003:

[FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#000000][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=#000000][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][FONT=Calibri]

[/FONT][/QUOTE]

Ok than, I guess we agree that UMD has never gone against WMC.

[QUOTE=Risto the Great;35267]No they won't. We already have confirmation the UMD chooses to ignore historical arguments. It is policy for them apparently.[/QUOTE]

Where did you hear that?

[QUOTE=Buktop;35249]...
The quote provided by Indigen does not indicate willing and unwavering support of the Framework Agreement....[/QUOTE]

I refuse to believe that you are so dense as to believe what you just said there. And I hope you take that as a compliment.

actually this discussion is going nowhere, and ultimately actions speak much louder than words.whats funny is how the umd heads and supporters profess adherence to democratic principles yet are so sensitive to criticsm.

A.Mitreski, Do you have the list of achievements from 2009?

You shouldnt be so upset, we give credit where its due you did a fantastic job organizing the screening of "A Name is a Name" keep it up the good work.

The Ilinden Upraising succeed, it only lasted 10 days and the Ottoman Turks took it back then what happened afterwords? We where split into 3 parts, Turkey had a modern army with Cannons and Machine Guns while we had the Creshevo Topche covering us. The Bulgarians,Greeks and Serbs took advantage of our weakness and they took over us, while even the British and Australian Troops struggled against the Turkish Forces as we all know what happened in Gallipolli they where sent to the slaughter house.

[QUOTE] we can not argue with people who spin and twist things around intentionally.[/QUOTE]

...then you're not fit to challenge the greeks.

mitreski are you able to give us a break down of where most of umds finacial support comes from.

A Mitreski, Have you ever heard of "Za Sekoj Komita Tri Kodoshi" ??

The test is now my friend, The Premier of South Australia just called us History Thieves and other names. Get your people on it to follow this case carefully, sooner or later you will have to get involved. Demonstrate that you can work together with the other groups and you will gain our trust.

[QUOTE=Buktop;35254]It is not about judging Aleksandrov, it is about the rights of the citizens to question the constitutionality of their adherence to the Interim and Framework agreements.

Have you volunteered your time to construct a case for the constitutional court in Macedonia? Have you, being such an important activist, offered to help support a case reaching the constitutional courts?

I do what I can, when I can, I am not the activist that you are, but yet I don't see you pushing for exploring the proper avenue's of questioning or overthrowing the Interim and Framework Agreements at the constitutional courts, (where this whole matter should have been decided 20 years ago) It is not difficult to discern that the government of Macedonia follows these two agreements and considers them valid and binding and within their constitutional authority, so wouldn't the obvious course of action be to question it through the high courts?

This is not a question of what have I done, what have you done, it is a question of why hasn't this been done?[/QUOTE]

My advocacy against the Framework Agreement is well documented in Macedonian and Australian media archives since before it was even ratified.

The Macedonian Australian Council of Sydney (including the Macedonian Orthodox Community of Sydney and the Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St. Petka) raised $386,237.70 in less than a month just in Sydney to support the defense against the racist terrorists who attacked Macedonia in 2001 i.e. to do the opposite of appeasing them with something like the Framework Agreement.

While most of the money from that fund was used to support the families of soldiers who were or would be killed or injured on the frontline - something that is essential for sustained resistance, the Macedonian Australian Council of Sydney is the only organization anywhere in the world to have funded a media campaign in the Republic of Macedonia against the ratification of that treacherous and suicidal Agreement (with ground-support from the World Macedonian Congress and MAAK). We also sponsored the blockade by displaced Macedonians of the border with Kosovo, which was designed as a protest against foreign pressure to appease the Albanian racist terrorists (also organized by the World Macedonian Congress). If more organizations and some political parties had the courage and will to join us, we might have actually succeeded. Since that time, we have consistently maintained a policy that the Framework Agreement is a treacherous, racially discriminatory and ruinous arrangement, which must be replaced with a model for the Rule of Law and multiculturalism that is based on a successful Western model (but not on the Swiss model, where there is no autochthonous Swiss ethnicity), where racism and terrorism are not rewarded, but punished. I would fill you in on some of the details if I thought it was worthwhile, but it seems that you are only questioning me as a way to divert attention from the fact that you and the organization you support have not only failed to clearly denounce or condemn the Framework Agreement, but have in fact praised it.

Regardless of what you and the UMD have said and done in the past, I would be happy to know that in future you will condemn and oppose it for what it is. Are you and the UMD willing to do that or not?

I have almost no faith in Macedonia's Constitutional Court. In fact, I have little faith in the Macedonian legal system in general, especially when it comes to protecting citizens' rights against the power of the state (especially the post-communist installations of SDSM and Co.) and its foreign puppet-masters. Even the current Government of Macedonia has no faith in the Constitutional Court. Hypothetically, if the Constitutional Court were to rule that the Framework Agreement or any part of it is unconstitutional, the political parties that are responsible for its ratification could easily change the Constitution to overcome any legal obstacles to their designs. So why would I waste my time launching a case before the Constitutional Court?

The only thing that can save Macedonia is the extermination of the popular slave mentality that lets the rule of fear and petty materialism take precedence over justice and the Rule of Law.

[QUOTE=aleksandrov;35422]I refuse to believe that you are so dense as to believe what you just said there. And I hope you take that as a compliment.[/QUOTE]Thanks for the compliment, what I see in the quote indigen posted is an advocacy against violence and hatred. I see an advocacy of temporary adherence in an effort "to continue towards the much-needed progress and reforms". I took it as a policy of buying time while working to find a better solution. I know you do not view it like this, and I can't make you see what I see, and I understand the point you are trying to argue, but as you said, between the politicians, the legal system and the separatist elements within the Albanian community, we have more problems than we can handle. The government has trapped us within the tangles of this treacherous agreement, and the key to overthrowing it is to tackle the legal problems that allow these sorts of issues to exist. I would like to see more action from UMD in relation to the legal shortcomings of the constitution.

[quote="Aleksandrov"]Regardless of what you and the UMD have said and done in the past, I would be happy to know that in future you will condemn and oppose it for what it is. Are you and the UMD willing to do that or not?[/quote]I have always condemned and opposed the Framework and Interim Agreements, I have always advocated overthrowing them, we differ on the avenues to achieving the ends.

[quote="Aleksandrov"]My advocacy against the Framework Agreement is well documented in Macedonian and Australian media archives since before it was even ratified.

The Macedonian Australian Council of Sydney (including the Macedonian Orthodox Community of Sydney and the Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St. Petka) raised $386,237.70 in less than a month just in Sydney to support the defense against the racist terrorists who attacked Macedonia in 2001 i.e. to do the opposite of appeasing them with something like the Framework Agreement.

While most of the money from that fund was used to support the families of soldiers who were or would be killed or injured on the frontline - something that is essential for sustained resistance, the Macedonian Australian Council of Sydney is the only organization anywhere in the world to have funded a media campaign in the Republic of Macedonia against the ratification of that treacherous and suicidal Agreement (with ground-support from the World Macedonian Congress and MAAK). We also sponsored the blockade by displaced Macedonians of the border with Kosovo, which was designed as a protest against foreign pressure to appease the Albanian racist terrorists (also organized by the World Macedonian Congress). If more organizations and some political parties had the courage and will to join us, we might have actually succeeded. Since that time, we have consistently maintained a policy that the Framework Agreement is a treacherous, racially discriminatory and ruinous arrangement, which must be replaced with a model for the Rule of Law and multiculturalism that is based on a successful Western model (but not on the Swiss model, where there is no autochthonous Swiss ethnicity), where racism and terrorism are not rewarded, but punished. I would fill you in on some of the details if I thought it was worthwhile, but it seems that you are only questioning me as a way to divert attention from the fact that you and the organization you support have not only failed to clearly denounce or condemn the Framework Agreement, but have in fact praised it.[/quote] I applaud your efforts, I am genuinely appreciative of the work you have done, I am not asking simply to detract from the issues or divert from criticism, I ask out of sincerity.



[quote="aleksandrov"]I have almost no faith in Macedonia's Constitutional Court. In fact, I have little faith in the Macedonian legal system in general, especially when it comes to protecting citizens' rights against the power of the state (especially the post-communist installations of SDSM and Co.) and its foreign puppet-masters. Even the current Government of Macedonia has no faith in the Constitutional Court. Hypothetically, if the Constitutional Court were to rule that the Framework Agreement or any part of it is unconstitutional, the political parties that are responsible for its ratification could easily change the Constitution to overcome any legal obstacles to their designs. So why would I waste my time launching a case before the Constitutional Court?[/quote]And here is where I agree with you, this is the discussion I wanted to promote previously to highlight the shortcomings of the Macedonian constitution that was drafted by the corrupt and power hungry remnants of a dictatorial system. I feel this is a much more important subject than quarreling over the he said she said nonsense. Unfortunately I was accused of diverting from the UMD discussion and the issue was ignored.

This is an honest question, would it be possible for the citizens to call on the government to redraft or remove the relevant articles of the constitution that give the government the power to amend it without the consent of the people?



[quote="Aleksandrov"]The only thing that can save Macedonia is the extermination of the popular slave mentality that lets the rule of fear and petty materialism take precedence over justice and the Rule of Law.[/quote] I think that the people should be given [B]real[/B] options to discourse and to ensure the actions of the government are in the interests of the citizens. This alone would eliminate the fearful mindset the people have towards their government.

Governments should fear their citizens, the citizens should not fear their governments.

[QUOTE=amitreski;35421]Let's move the discussion here [url]http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=35414[/url] . Please read my post that contains my article in Dnevnik.[/QUOTE]

I did read that post. It did not really touch on most of my concerns. Can you have another go?

Here it is again:
[QUOTE]
Hello amitreski, welcome to this forum.
I feel a little frustrated with the UMD and wonder out loud whether there has ever been situations where the UMD has done quite the opposite in relation to decisions of the Macedonian Government. Has the UMD ever castigated (any of) the Government's decisions or actions at any point? Some people may in fact view the UMD as a voice or tool of the Macedonian Government. Does the Macedonian Diaspora need to blindly support the Government in power?

I have touched upon this in the past and have wondered what the UMD will do when it comes to a crossroad in ideology. Will it be prepared to lose relationships with the Government in power to assert itself? It has never done this in the past as far as I am aware.

Thank you for admitting the error in Meto's youthful statements. We still really do not have closure on this matter until he personally deals with it. The protracted nature of this line of query has ensured the UMD is not seen to be transparent and merely raises more questions about the true intent of this organisation.

How do you feel about the MPO alliance with UMD? What are your thoughts in relation to this organisation?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=amitreski;35246]Given the widespread discussion in this mistake, I am sure Meto would not make that mistake again :wink:.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps there is a use for pesky internet forums after all. :wink:
Notwithstanding this, the issue here is not whether he will repeat that mistake again, it is more to do with whether he sincerely believes it and has not changed his mind. Then it comes to how much influence he has over the rest of the UMD executive committee.

[QUOTE=amitreski;35418]BTW


What I am upset the most about is that UMD's policy is twistes up like a pretzel on these forums by few people who either belong to another Macedonian organization and try to weaken UMD, or just due to pure jealousy.

Ако бараш влакно ќе го најдеш и во јајцето.

Here is my article published in Dnevnik. As you can see I have asked some serious questions:

Не треба да се преговара за тоа што е наше

(Текст на Александар Митрески, потпретседател на Обединета македонска дијаспора, објавен на [url]www.umdiaspora.org[/url] , 24-ти април 2008)

Кога се преговара во некој спор, двете страни почнуваат со тврди ставови во своја корист кои се појдовна точка за да се дискутира за можен компромис. За жал, веќе 17 години Македонија наивно преговара. Ние во овие преговори треба јасно и гласно да кажеме дека нашето уставно име и идентитет не се можна тема за дискусија. Впрочем, ниедна личност, партија, установа нема право да преговара за уставното име.

Но наместо тоа, ние постојано гледаме како да најдеме некое си фер решение и со тоа постојано си ги поткопуваме нашите позици. Во исто време, пак, Македонија никогаш гласно не кажала дека и таа има проблем со својот јужен сосед кој треба итно да се реши, а тоа се правата на Македонците од Егејска Македонија.

Уставното име на нашата држава е Република Македонија и нема менување на тоа име за интерна и интернационална употреба. Доколку Грција има проблем со тоа име, тогаш билатерално да се реши тоа прашање. Ова требаше да биде исходот од преговорите за името во 1995-та година. А ние тогаш, а и сега, влегуваме во преговори веќе подготвени за отстапки и компромис. А другата страна во 1995-та г. излезе со тврд став дека во името на нашата држава не смее да стои зборот Македонија, за сега да изгледа како херој кој веќе направил компромис и може да прифати име како Северна Македонија.

Колку шлаканици треба да ни се удрат за ние да се освестиме дека не треба да продолжиме во овој самоубиствен процес за срамно преговарање за нешто што со векови е наше? Тажно е тоа што Бакојани се лути дека Нимиц давал промакедонски предлози. Секој предлог на Нимиц кој е различен од нашето уставно име е погубен предлог за нас и ние тоа треба гласно да го манифестираме. Во овие преговори само ние можеме да изгубиме нешто, а другата страна е победник со самото тоа што има преговори.

Дали на Република Македонија не и е грижа за стотиците илјади Македонци кои се обесправени во Егејска Македонија и уште толку Македонци кои не можат да одат да си ги видат своите родни огништа? Кога Р. Македонија ќе го покрене ова прашанје во овие преговори? До кога срамно ќе молчиме против нашиот јужен сосед додека тие си играат со нас како сакаат? Зарем е толку тешко да се свати дека проблемот не е името, туку со милионите што јужниот содед треба да ги плати за оштета кон Егејските Македонци?

[B]Македонија мора веднаш да ги прекине овие преговори, бидејќи повеќе не е обврзана да го прави тоа. [/B]Со ветото е прекршен Привремениот договор и со тоа Р. Македонија мора да поднесе барање за пререгистрација во Обединетите нации под своето уставно име. Впрочем, се виде дека тие селективно почитуваат договори. Ние го дадовме своето знаме за да не ни се дава вето. Кој ни гарантира дека доколку пак направиме отстапки тие нема повторно селективно да почитуваат договори кога треба да влеземе во ЕУ?

Македонија мора да почне агресивно да го поставува прашањето за Македонците од Егејска Македонија до Европскиот парламент и Судот во Стразбург. Македонија треба да поведе судска постапка поради прекршување на договорот и претрпените штети што не сме во НАТО. Се покажа дека, и покрај ветото, Р. Македонија има пријатели и има перспектива. НАТО нема да ги реши економските прашања, туку работа, почитување на закони, некорумпираност и гордост се нашата иднина.[/QUOTE]

This is a reasonable letter in my opinion.
I welcome the different path it treads from that of Meto's "mistake".
Why would you not make such broadcasts in the English language in suitable publications?

As an aside, the AMHRC is funding Greek and Bulgarian based organisations that fight for the rights you speak of in your last paragraph. They have made monthly cash contributions over many years to these organisations in order to keep up the fight. You should talk to them to find out more about this.

Mitrevski, that's one of the problems with UMD - it tells people what they "want to hear" and then makes public statements to the contrary, such as speculating on "acceptable" names.

[quote=amitreski;35414]Tom

UMD is formulated based on the opinions we receive from our supporters and members. Few guys in Australia, Canada or USA sitting behind a PC on a public forum can not dictate UMD's policy.

UMD has done many town hall meetings across USA and Canada to hear the opinion of out members. Furthermore, UMD sends out a survey to our membership to hear their opinions on important topics. I know you may be disappointed, but when we asked our membership body if we should withdraw from the negotiations, the majority of respondents said that we should not.

So there you have it. People that donate and support UMD get to influence the direction of UMD.


Again, UMD is not the only Macedonian organization out there. Feel free to support another organization.[/quote]

Mitreski,

You didn't really answer any of my questions. You and UMD have made some positive statements, but they are few and far between.

Can you answer any of the questions surrounding the highly controversial statements made by UMD and its leadership that have been posted here?

Bucktop,

The one good thing about the Macedonian Constitution, which many Western constitutions don't offer, is the opportunity for a citizens-initiated referendum to change or supplement any legislative act, including the Constitution. But that's of little use when foreign powers like the US and some European countries, with the help of cheap local journalists and politicians, are successful in scaring and brainwashing a large section of the Macedonian public against protecting Macedonian rights and interests, as was the case with the last referendum organized by the World Macedonian Congress, against local government legislation that amounted to further ethnic segregation of the country, in accordance with the wishes of separatist terrorists. If the UMD wants to end this trend, it has to first stop deceiving itself and the Macedonian public into believing that the USA or any other power that tries to suppress the free will and citizens' rights of the Macedonian people is "Macedonia's best friend". I know that this is hard for Americans of Macedonian origin, who have conflicting allegiances between America and Macedonia, but perhaps they could avoid that conflict by putting justice and fairness above all?

[QUOTE=amitreski;35414]Tom

UMD is formulated based on the opinions we receive from our supporters and members. Few guys in Australia, Canada or USA sitting behind a PC on a public forum can not dictate UMD's policy. ...[/QUOTE]

Have you held a general meeting of your membership to articulate or endorse the contentious policies? How many of your members support your opinion that the Framework Agreement as a great achievement of the late Boris Trajkovski? What forum have they expressed their support in? Since you've decided to try and belittle and discredit the critics of some of your policies as "few guys in Australia, Canada or USA sitting behind a PC on a public forum", you should answer that question clearly and directly, unless you have no problem appearing hypocritical.

Do you want to lead or follow the opinion of your general membership? The fact that you still work with a self-appointed Board of Directors that has decided not to have its first general election until 2011 suggests that you want to lead your membership in a particular direction. I can understand that, but you can't have it both ways. You can't severely restrict the power of your members when it comes to holding elections or general meetings, yet credibly use the membership as a shield to protect yourselves against policy criticism.

[QUOTE=Risto the Great]No they won't. We already have confirmation the UMD chooses to ignore historical arguments. It is policy for them apparently.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=amitreski;35420]Where did you hear that?[/QUOTE]
I am sorry if I give the impression of misleading anybody. I can only work with public statements from relevant and interested parties. Then I have to try to make sense of various agendas and try to determine where the issue of credibility lies.

I believe you had private correspondence with Pelister where you stated the following:
[QUOTE]
Too much nationalism and the ancient rhetoric from Macedonia have damaged our reputation[/QUOTE]
If you deny making this statement, I will pursue this with Pelister.
If this is indeed correct and attributable to you, I ask you how that statement should be interpreted. I believe it should be interpreted in a way that suggests historical arguments are in fact damaging Macedonia's reputation. As a consequence of who you were representing in your correspondence, the UMD believes historical arguments are in fact damaging Macedonia's reputation and it must form part of their policy.

Correct me if I am wrong.

UMD Policy on the Ohrid Framework Agreement
 

Does the following public statement by the UMD organization amount to support for the Ohrid Framework Agreement or not?

"UMD Remembers President Trajkovski

Monday, 26 February 2007

Washington, D.C. – February 26 marks the 3-year anniversary of the tragic plane accident that caused the death of the former Macedonian President Boris Trajkovski and his entourage. The president and his associates were heading towards the regional economic forum in Mostar, Bosnia.

President Trajkovski stood behind his people through many trials and tribulations. His thoughts are prevalent even today. “The [Framework] Agreement is not perfect, but no agreement ever is…It is the best thing we have right now…The alternative is division at all levels: civil, inter-ethnic, political and generational…The alternative to peace is war, which will expose everyone to mass casualties, misery and a loss of perspective for many years to come,” said President Trajkovski in 2001.

Republic of Macedonia knocks on the door to NATO membership and is an EU member candidate. United Macedonian Diaspora encourages the Macedonian government, political opposition, and civil society not to forget the words of President Trajkovski and to continue towards the much-needed progress and reforms to ensure admission into all Euro-Atlantic institutions. There are urgent reforms that must be addressed in order for the Republic of Macedonia to join Euro-Atlantic structures, and our organization encourages the Macedonian government and its assembly to diligently work toward meeting these goals.

United Macedonian Diaspora is certain that differences between political parties will be overcome, reforms will be met, and that President Trajkovski’s vision “to create a society based on democracy, the rule of law and the free market economy, ultimately creating a civil society based on trust,” will prevail. The United Macedonian Diaspora salutes this courageous man that always put his people and country ahead of personal glorification.

To learn more about the life and legacy of President Trajkovski, please visit the Boris Trajkovski International Foundation website by clicking HERE."

[URL="http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/180/54/"]http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/180/54/[/URL]


I know the answer seems too obvious to warrant a poll, but there's at least one member of this forum who vehemently disagrees.

I am particularly interested in the answer of UMD members.

________________________________________________________________________

Added on 17 June 2010:

I am adding a clip posted by Homer Makedonski and Indigen further down on this thread, which refers to evidence of collusion by the US administration and its Macedonian vassal, Boris Trajkovski, with Albanian terrorists, in their attacks on the Macedonian Republic in 2001:

[URL="http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X86MWXAGQY&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X86MWXAGQY&feature=related[/URL]

In my view, the fact that UMD has quoted Trajkovski's arguement FOR the Framework Agreement and then called on us to continue those "reforms" is a clear statement of support. UMD could have chosen any number of Trajkovski quotes, however, they specifically opted for this particular one to send a message. UMD's message is, that the Framework Agreement should be supported and implemented in full so that Macedonia can enter the EU and NATO.

[quote] [B]United Macedonian Diaspora encourages the Macedonian government[/B], political opposition, and civil society not to forget the words of President Trajkovski [/quote]

If its made in the West, UMD is likely to back it.

Why would UMD support these exclusively Western institutions and Western structures, knowing full well how unjust and injurous they are to us?

Why would they back these anti-Macedonian institutions and structures?

Are they whores? Don't they have any back bone, or even the most basic principles to stand on? Or are they simply opportunists and careerists seeking their own personal gain at our misfortune?

[QUOTE=aleksandrov;35489]Bucktop,

The one good thing about the Macedonian Constitution, which many Western constitutions don't offer, is the opportunity for a citizens-initiated referendum to change or supplement any legislative act, including the Constitution. But that's of little use when foreign powers like the US and some European countries, with the help of cheap local journalists and politicians, are successful in scaring and brainwashing a large section of the Macedonian public against protecting Macedonian rights and interests, as was the case with the last referendum organized by the World Macedonian Congress, against local government legislation that amounted to further ethnic segregation of the country, in accordance with the wishes of separatist terrorists. If the UMD wants to end this trend, it has to first stop deceiving itself and the Macedonian public into believing that the USA or any other power that tries to suppress the free will and citizens' rights of the Macedonian people is "Macedonia's best friend". I know that this is hard for Americans of Macedonian origin, who have conflicting allegiances between America and Macedonia, but perhaps they could avoid that conflict by putting justice and fairness above all?[/QUOTE]
I know the referendum you speak of very well. Now how is it that SDSM's propaganda campaign was allowed to run unopposed? Did the opposition coalition not have enough funds to run their own media campaign?

can someboy direct me to meto article written for the melbourne age, i must have missed it.

[quote=osiris;35565]can someboy direct me to meto article written for the melbourne age, i must have missed it.[/quote]

That's a good question - where is that article?