Striking pictures, in particular the first and the last.

Did you see the news story this morning about the strangled nuns? My own bf saw it and say there’s no way a Greek would do that, it must have been Albanians. I was so disappointed!! What a thing to say, what makes Greeks so above human psychology there is no chance that their society, like any other society, can breed murderous thieves? Albanians are to Greece what the Young Black Male is to America. One size fits all.

Your posts are incredible. I am rarely in awe of anyone, but you do inspire me. I was awarded the Thinking Blog and have been searching who I could bestow it upon as well….and my search led me to you. But as it is…you already have received this gracious award. I hope to stop by here often and get to know you better.

Have the parents of the children above trespassed on public or private land?

If they have, the parents should be more responsible not to place their children in such a tangle in future.

Hey, great photos. A real sense of shared humanity.

[beginning quote]

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF SOCIAL RIGHTS
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DES DROITS SOCIAUX
DECISION ON THE MERITS
18 October 2006
European Roma Rights Centre
v. Bulgaria
Complaint No. 31/2005

http://www.coe.int/t/e/human_rights/esc/4_collective_complaints/list_of_collective_complaints/MeritsRC31_en.pdf

(…)

53. Furthermore, the Committee observes that a person or a group of persons, who cannot effectively benefit from the rights provided by the legislation, may be obliged to adopt reprehensible behaviour in order to satisfy their needs. However, this circumstance can neither be held to justify any sanction or measure towards these persons, nor be held to continue depriving them of benefiting from their rights.

(…)

CONCLUSION

For these reasons, the Committee holds:

– by 9 votes to 1 that the situation concerning the inadequate housing of
Roma families and the lack of proper amenities constitutes a violation
of Article 16 of the Revised Charter taken together with Article E;

– by 9 votes to 1 that the lack of legal security of tenure and the nonrespect
of the conditions accompanying eviction of Roma families from
dwellings unlawfully occupied by them constitute a violation of Article
16 of the Revised Charter taken together with Article E.

[end of quote]

So please stop invoking such “reprehensible” behavior of Roma when the society and the state you (and I) represent has put them in the outer margins of society.

Pdimitras
In your interview with the Skopjan newspaper Dnevnik, you insist on the existence of an ethnic Macedonian minority in northern Greece and you make reference to Aegean Macedonia.
Both of these are overtly political positions shared, as I’m sure you are aware, by Skopjan nationalists. Can you explain why GHM – which I thought was a human rights advocacy group – seems to have adopted the language and mentality of irredentist Slav extremists?
My concern that you have strayed (naively, inadvertently or maliciously – I don’t know) from human rights into political advocacy was amplified when I visited the site of Vinozito – the Slavophone political party in northern Greece, which you express support and sympathy for.
The site has literature that refers to the Greeks of Cyprus as ‘animals’ and argues for the recognition of the state set up by Turkish-occupation forces in Cyprus, i.e. the legitimisation of the Turkish invasion and the ethnic cleansing of 200,000 Greeks from northern Cyprus.
Why do you think Vinozito – which claims to be a human rights-based group for Slavophones in northern Greece – even has a position on Cyprus, and don’t you find it curious that the position it does have is in support of the ethnic cleansing of Greeks?

I also note that Vinozito refers to the ‘Turkish minority’ in Western Thrace. I don’t understand why a Slavophone advocacy group would take an interest in the Greek Muslims of Thrace – Turkophones, Pomaks and Roma. What is your opinion?
To me, it seems that Vinozito has quite a broad political agenda that goes beyond minority rights and reflects ugly and dangerous nationalist attitudes towards Greece and Greeks. Does GHM have any reservations about supporting the claims of what appears to me to be an extremist faction?

No doubt the Roma in Greece are victims of indifference from the Greek state and the Greek public, but my understanding is that they base their claims for better treatment on the fact that they are Greeks, Greek citizens – that Greece is their country – and they wish to be treated as Greeks. Do you think you are doing the Roma a disservice by associating their cause with the ‘cause’ of the Slavophones in northern Greece, who seem to resent being a part of Greece and have some unpalatable nationalist attitudes towards the country they live in and towards Greeks generally?

Finally, I notice that in your report on the CofE question on the Roma, you edited the quote from the Latvian, who asked ‘the Committee of Ministers to invite the Greek authorities to investigate the allegedly racist statements by the Deputy Supreme Court Prosecutor [in Patras]’.
I notice that GMH dropped the word ‘allegedly’ in its reporting of the exchange, i.e. you write: ‘Council of Europe calls on Greece to investigate racist statement of Supreme Court Deputy Prosecutor’. Can you explain why you did this? Can you also provide the original Greek for the term ‘gyp-town’ which you claim the Patras official used, so Greek speakers can decide if you have fairly translated what he said.

Panagiote (and Devious) will you please tell us?

The following is for those who care to know how the real situation with minorities in Greece is seen by the UN and Council of Europe bodies. Fanatic hypernationalists with racist overtones would not understand all that of course.

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), in the Third Report on Greece, adopted on 5 December 2003, made public on 8 June 2004, available at http://www.coe.int/T/E/human_rights/Ecri/1-ECRI/2-Country-by-country_approach/Greece/Greece_CBC_3.asp#TopOfPage summarized very well the situation of the minorities in Greece:

“Macedonians and other minority groups

80. In its second report, ECRI encouraged the authorities to ensure that all groups in Greece, Macedonians and Turks included, could exercise their rights to freedom of association and freedom of expression in accordance with international legal standards.

81. ECRI notes that the Greek authorities are more ready to recognise the existence of minority groups in Greece, such as the Pomaks or the Roma, including the fact that certain members of these groups have a native language other than Greek. However, other groups still encounter difficulties, the Macedonians and Turks for example. Even today, persons wishing to express their Macedonian, Turkish or other identity incur the hostility of the population. They are targets of prejudices and stereotypes, and sometimes face discrimination, especially in the labour market. In the Sidiropoulos and others v. Greece judgment of 10 July 1998, the European Court of Human Rights found that the refusal to register the association “Home of Macedonian Civilisation” constituted an interference with the freedom of association as guaranteed by Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. ECRI deplores the fact that, five years after the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, this association has still not been registered despite the repeated applications made by its members. ECRI notes that similar cases are currently before the Greek courts concerning registration of associations whose title includes the adjective “Turkish”.

82. ECRI stresses that the authorities took a first positive step on the path of reconciliation by opening their borders for a few days during the summer of 2003 to persons of Macedonian origin compelled to leave Greece in the civil war when most were only children. ECRI nevertheless deplores the fact that persons holding a passport in which the name of their birthplace in Greece was indicated in the Macedonian and not the Greek form were refused entry to Greek territory.

83. ECRI notes that representatives of the Macedonian community have asked the authorities to recognise their right to self-identification, as well as the existence of a Macedonian national minority in Greece. They have also called for the ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, considering that this step could improve their situation in Greece .

Recommendations:

84. ECRI encourages the Greek authorities to take further steps toward the recognition of the freedom of association and expression of members of the Macedonian and Turkish communities living in Greece. It welcomes the gesture of reconciliation made by the Greek authorities towards the ethnic Macedonian refugees from the civil war, and strongly encourages them to proceed further in this direction in a non-discriminatory way.

85. ECRI also recommends that the Greek authorities closely examine the allegations of discrimination and intolerant acts against Macedonians, Turks and others, and, if appropriate, take measures to punish such acts.

86. ECRI strongly recommends the Greek authorities to open a dialogue with the Macedonians’ representatives in order to find a solution to the tensions between this group and the authorities, as well as between it and the population at large, so that co-existence with mutual respect may be achieved in everyone’s interests.

- Muslim minority in Western Thrace

87. In its second report, ECRI recommended that the Greek authorities continue taking measures to improve the situation of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace, the majority of whom identify themselves as Turks, particularly regarding the management of private charitable foundations, the appointment of Muftis, and the educational system .

88. In the last few years, the situation of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace has improved, mainly particularly with respect to the religious freedom of members of this minority. There are numerous Turkish-language newspapers and other media, and significant measures have been taken by the government to raise the standard of education in Western Thrace, whether in ordinary schools or in minority schools. At the request of pupils’ parents, the Greek authorities have set up nursery schools to provide the possibility of learning Greek to the children who speak Turkish, Pomak or Romani, as their mother tongue. In primary schools, pupils may take backup lessons in Greek as a second language, and to this purpose teaching material has been developed, distributed and put already into use. The 0,5% quota, which was introduced for the Muslim minority in universities, is generally recognised as a successful measure.

89. However, much remains to be done if the situation of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace is to become wholly satisfactory. The issue of the elections of the managing committees. The issue of the appointment of Muftis remains pending, although debates are currently in progress taking place, particularly over the question whether the possible election of Muftis would be compatible with their present judicial functions. The region is suffering from an economic crisis, especially in the mountainous part, and this creates problems of access to employment. In this connection, ECRI welcomes the fact that the Greek authorities have plan to introduce a programme aimed at promoting equal opportunities in access to employment for members of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace. Other private initiatives focus on access to employment and to public life for the Muslim women of the region who are particularly disadvantaged in this respect chiefly because they lack sufficient command of the Greek language. Education is the main area where great strides have still to be made. In general, the educational standard of the minority schools is considered too low, and the teachers are not adequately trained to teach in either Greek or Turkish. Children from the Muslim minority of Western Thrace who attend those schools do not have the same chances of succeeding in the education system as children from the majority population, and this is a situation that has repercussions on subsequent employment opportunities. The authorities are aware of this problem and have established an equal opportunities programme for children from this minority.

Recommendations:

90. ECRI encourages the Greek authorities to continue carrying out measures to promote equal opportunities in education and employment for members of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace, paying special attention to the situation of Muslim women living in this region. Such equal opportunity measures should include Greek lessons for adults and children.

91. ECRI strongly urges the Greek authorities to hold a dialogue with the members of the Muslim minority in Western Thrace in order to find satisfactory solutions concerning issues such as the appointment of Muftis and the election of the managing committees of private charitable foundations.

92. ECRI recommends that the Greek authorities devote even more attention to remaining deficiencies in education in the Western Thrace region and that they remedy them as soon as possible.”

The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), in its Thirty-second session, 26 April – 14 May 2004, in the Concluding Observations of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Grecce (E/C.12/1/Add.97), 14 May 2004, available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/E.C.12.1.Add.97.En?Opendocument stated:

“D. Principal Subjects of Concern (…)

10. The Committee is concerned that there is only one officially recognized minority in Greece, whereas there are other ethnic groups seeking that status. (…)

28. The Committee is concerned that a high percentage of Roma and Turkish-speaking children are not enrolled in school, or drop out at a very early stage of their schooling. While it is possible to receive bilingual instruction in Turkish and Greek at the two Muslim minority secondary schools in Thrace, the Committee notes with concern that no such possibility exists at the primary level or outside the Thrace, and that members of other linguistic groups have no possibility to learn their mother tongue at school.

29. The Committee regrets the lack of information on the measures taken by the State party to preserve, protect and promote minority languages and cultures.

E. Suggestions and Recommendations (…)

31. The Committee urges the State party to reconsider its position with regard to the recognition of other ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities which may exist within its territory, in accordance with recognized international standards, and invites it to ratify the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1995). (…)

50. The Committee urges the State party to take effective measures to increase school attendance by Roma and Turkish-speaking children, including at the secondary level, to ensure, to the extent possible, that children belonging to minority linguistic groups have an opportunity to learn their mother tongue, including regional dialects, at school, and to ensure an adequate staffing with teachers specialized in multicultural education.

51. The State party is requested to include in its next report information on measures taken to preserve, protect and promote minority languages and cultures, which should not be limited to the Muslim minority in Thrace.”

The UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE
in its Eighty-third session, in its Concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee: GREECE, available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CCPR.CO.83.GRC.En?OpenDocument
stated

“20. The Committee notes the state party’s commitment that all citizens in Greece should enjoy equal rights, regardless of religion or ethnic origin. However, the Committee notes with concern the apparent unwillingness of the government to allow any private groups or associations to use associational names that include the appellation “Turk” or “Macedonian”, based upon the state party’s assertion that there are no ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities in Greece other than Muslims in Thrace. The Committee notes that individuals belonging to such minorities have a right under the Covenant to the enjoyment of their own culture, the profession and practice of their own religion, and the use of their own language in community with other members of their group. (article 27)

The State party should review its practice in light of Article 27 of the Covenant.

P|D
I’m disappointed by your response. You didn’t answer any of the questions I posed to you.
Is it me you mean when you mention ‘fanatic hypernationalists with racist overtones’? How did you come to such a conclusion? Someone who disagrees with you, who finds flaws with your arguments and approach, who does not regard you as the supreme arbiter on human rights, is not necessarily a fanatical, racist hypernationalist. This method of dealing with your detractors and doubters, if you don’t mind me saying, is extremely unhealthy and unworthy of someone who claims to be an advocate for democracy and free speech.
Just to be clear, the questions I posed to you were not on the human rights situation or otherwise of the Slavophones in northern Greece. Rather, I asked:
1. Why have you, as GHM, adopted the language – ‘ethnic Macedonians’, ‘Aegean Macedonia’ – of Skopjan hypernationalists? I thought you might have been misquoted. Do you regard the term ‘Aegean Macedonia’ as neutral/harmless/legitimate?
2. Why do you think Vinozito has a policy on Cyprus and Thrace? Vinozito’s agenda seems to me to have very little to do with human rights. They strike me as a nasty, irredentist, anti-Hellenic grouping and I was expressing surprise that you so enthusiastically supported them.
3. I contrasted Vinozito’s agenda with that of the Roma, who, as far as I know, do not have positions and policies on Cyprus and Thrace – why would they? – and asked whether you weren’t in danger of undermining the Roma’s pursuit of a brighter future within Greece and Greek society by associating their cause with that of Skopjan nationalists, who regard Thessaloniki as an occupied city and the 2.5m Greeks who live in Macedonia as illegitimate settlers.
4. Finally, I note you did not explain why you edited the CoE report in the way you did; nor did you provide the Greek translation of ‘gyp-town’.

DD
I had a look at the World of DD earlier and the entry, the BNP Ballerina, and noticed that you hosted comments from Patrick Harrington. I don’t know how this guy found you. Don’t you know who he is? Type his name into Google. He’s as low as it gets. A real fanatic and racist.

Dear DD

There is also a version of what you say. One cannot discuss with people who have an obvious disdain for human rights.

I posted the text above for the others. In it anyone with good will would understand that speaking about the Macedonian and Turkish minorities is adopting not “the language and mentality of irredentist Slav extremists” but the positions of the UN and the Council of Europe, ie the langauge of human and minority rights, which indeed hypernationalists in all countries loath.

And there is no goodwill when one accuses us for not including all words in a title that has to be short when the full text follows.

Or when s/he distorts our texts or the positions of a minority party to make arguments. Where does Vinozito speak of an occupied Macedonia and of the “refugees” established there after 1922 as illegitimate settlers? Or of Greek Cypriots as animals?

Vinozito went to the Council of Europe two weeks ago to support the following text tables by several European MPs:

http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc07/EDOC11249.htm

Doc. 11249
17 April 2007
Plight of the ethnic Macedonian national minority of northern Greece

Motion for a resolution
presented by Mr Jurgens and others

This motion has not been discussed in the Assembly and commits only the members who have signed it

1. The undersigned are deeply concerned about the high number of sustained human rights violations against the Macedonian ethnic and linguistic minority of northern Greece.

2. The Greek state refuses to recognise the existence of a Macedonian ethnic or linguistic minority within its borders. Government authorities have and continue to systematically exclude ethnic Macedonians from the political process, refusing even to acknowledge correspondence from the political representatives of the minority.

3. Despite the existence of a Macedonian speaking population in northern Greece the Macedonian language is not recognised by the Greek state and thus members the Macedonian speaking minority do not enjoy the right to learn the Macedonian language within the framework of the Greek education system.

4. In 1990, a group of citizens decided to form a non-profit-making association called the “Home of Macedonian Culture” in the town of Florina/Lerin. However Greek courts rejected the application. After exhausting all domestic remedies, the case was appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. In 1998, the court ruled on the matter and unanimously found that there was a violation of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (see Sidiropoulos and Others vs. Greece, ECtHR, 57/1997/841/8107). Deplorably however, almost ten years following this decision the “Home of Macedonian Culture” remains unregistered. Subsequent applications to register the association have been also been rejected by Greek courts.

5. During the Civil War in Greece (1946-1949) thousands of Greek citizens fled the country. Following the end of the war, all those who left Greece during this period were stripped of their Greek citizenship and property. In 1982 and 1985, the Greek government passed laws which restores citizenship and property rights to such individuals provided that they are “Greeks by genus”. Thus ethnic Macedonians and others were deliberately excluded. These laws are still in force today.

6. We suggest that the Legal Committee is required to make a Report of the cases of human rights violations against the Macedonian ethnic and linguistic minority of northern Greece during which the opportunity is provided for a number of representatives of this minority to bear witness in a hearing.

7. Greece has refused to ratify the Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Minority Languages. However the undersigned note the obligations of Greece are not only those in the various conventions of the Council of Europe to which it is a party, but also include various Conventions and Covenants of the United Nations and a number of legally binding texts of the OSCE.

Signed 1:
• JURGENS Erik, Netherlands, SOC
• ALMÁSSY Kornél, Hungary, EPP/CD
• BOUSAKLA Mimount, Belgium, SOC
• CILEVIČS Boriss, Latvia, SOC
• ÉKES József, Hungary, EPP/CD
• GROSS Andreas, Switzerland, SOC
• HAJIYEV Sabir, Azerbaijan, SOC
• KELEMEN András, Hungary, EPP/CD
• KOZMA József, Hungary, SOC
• LAMBERT, Geert, Belgium, SOC
• LINDBLAD, Göran, Sweden, EPP/CD
• Lord RUSSELL-JOHNSTON, United Kingdom, ALDE
• POPESCU, Ivan, Ukraine, SOC
• SZABÓ, Zoltán, Hungary, SOC
• Van den BRANDE Luc, Belgium, EPP/CD

1 SOC: Socialist Group
EPP/CD: Group of the European People’s Party
ALDE: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
EDG: European Democratic Group
UEL: Group of the Unified European Left
NR: not registered in a group

In the same session, another motion was tabled by Boris Cilevics, who also made the orla question on Roma mentioned by DD in the catching-up. For both COlevics a long time colleague and advisor of GHM had worked with GHM. The text:

Doc. 11261 revised
19 April 2007

Minority protection in Europe: best practices and deficiencies in implementation of common standards
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc07/EDOC11261.htm

Motion for a recommendation
presented by Mr Cilevičs and others

This motion has not been discussed in the Assembly and commits only the members who have signed it

1. Respect for cultural and linguistic diversity and protection of minorities in Europe has improved during the last decade. Due mainly to the adoption of the instruments of the Council of Europe, ie the legally binding Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, minority rights have been moved from the field of political rhetoric and manipulation to the area of practical policies and legally-based monitoring.

2. Unfortunately, the two instruments mentioned above have not yet become universally accepted standards throughout Europe, as some Council of Europe member states have not yet ratified them. This problem was addressed by the Assembly in its recent Recommendation 1766 (2006).

3. The Framework Convention is “a document of principles”, and practical methods of implementing these principles vary broadly from country to country. In the course of monitoring compliance of the state parties with the provisions of the Framework Convention, its Advisory Committee has accumulated an extensive array of relevant data.

4. Both effective solutions and failures are among these patterns, models and practices of implementation of the Framework Convention. Quite often the most successful solutions for some provisions, and serious problems in implementation of others can be observed in the same country.

5. Thus, in the Austrian province of Carintia, its governor has for several years effectively undermined implementation of the provision of national law stipulating bilingual road signs. Finally, after the Constitutional Court had unequivocally ruled that this practice was illegal, the minority language inscriptions were displayed, but with such small letters that it is virtually impossible to read them. This is a clear example of distorting the humanitarian spirit of the Framework Convention.

6. In Romania, remarkable progress has been visible and very high standards ensured in the field of minority protection in recent years. However, also here a controversy over displaying bilingual inscriptions in the multilingual Babes-Bolyai University, which led to the dismissal of two professors who produced and displayed such signs on their own initiative, has hurt the implementation of the Framework Convention.

7. Some state parties, including Denmark, the Netherlands and Latvia, have ratified the Framework Convention with declarations which substantially limit the scope of application of the Framework Convention and hence restrict its practical significance.

8. Non-recognition of certain minorities by some states remains a major problem. Paradoxically, despite having declared “unity of the nation” as a pretext for non-recognition, it is not rare for these states in the meantime to continue to differentiate between their citizens on the basis of ethnic origin. This is the case, in particular, in Greece, where former Article 19 of the Citizienship Law allowed for deprivation of citizenship on the basis of residence abroad of Greek nationals – but only those of non-Greek ethnic origin (this provision has been abolished, but the restoration of citizenship for those more than 45,000 nationals who were deprived of their Greek citizenship on the grounds of this provision is still pending). Similarly, the rights to restore citizenship and to reclaim property of those Greek citizens who fled during the Civil War, as established by law, also depend on their ethnic origin.

9. Therefore, the Assembly decides to study, in close co-operation with the Advisory Committee of the Framework Convention and the Committee of Experts of the Language Charter, concrete ways of implementing provisions of the Council of Europe instruments on minority protection, its successes and failures, with the view to disseminating best practices and making them available so as to offer guidance to all member states wishing to overcome difficulties and to further improve the protection of minorities and respect for diversity in their societies. This work should also cover practices in those states that have not ratified the Framework Convention and take into account related discussions e.g. in the framework of the Council of Europe’s inter-governmental committee of experts on national minorities (DH-MIN).

Signed 1:
CILEVIČS Boriss, Latvia, SOC
ALMÁSSY Kornél, Hungary, EPP/CD
BARNETT Doris, Germany, SOC
BEMELMANS-VIDEC Marie-Louise, Netherlands, EPP/CD
BERÉNYI József, Slovakia, EPP/CD
DAČIĆ Ivica, Serbia, SOC
DZEMBRITZKI Detlef, Germany, SOC
ÉKES József, Hungary, EPP/CD
FRUNDA György, Romania, EPP/CD
HAJIYEVA Gultakin, Azerbaijan, EPP/CD
JURGENS Erik, Netherlands, SOC
KELEMEN András, Hungary, EPP/CD
KOZMA József, Hungary, SOC
LAAKSO, Jaakko, Finland, UEL
MELČÁK, Miloš, Czech Republic, SOC
MOONEY, Paschal, Ireland, ALDE
OBRADOVIĆ, Žarko, Serbia, SOC
POPESCU, Ivan, Ukraine, SOC
SZABÓ, Zoltán, Hungary, SOC
VAREIKIS, Egidijus, Lithuania, EPP/CD
VĖSAITĖ, Birutė, Lithuania, SOC

1 SOC: Socialist Group
EPP/CD: Group of the European People’s Party
ALDE: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
EDG: European Democratic Group
UEL: Group of the Unified European Left
NR: not registered in a group

PD
I don’t think I’ve ever been called a fanatical, racist, hypernationalist who lacks goodwill with a disdain for human rights. How am I supposed to respond to this? Such attacks don’t really contribute to debate, do they? But then I don’t think you’re that interested in debate, criticism or accountability. I’m glad you represent a fringe pressure group and not some organisation with legitimate authority and power.
Just a couple of points:
1. I still don’t think you have addressed any of the issues I raised. I won’t bother to repeat them all, but I remain curious as to your use of the term ‘Aegean Macedonia’. Is this an official GHM description or were you misquoted? Surely, you are aware of how politically loaded the term ‘Aegean Macedonia’ is?
2. Vinozito has a website and you can go to it and read all the anti-Hellenic, lunatic and extremist ideas and groups this party associates with and endorses.
3. I saw a report on NET news a few days ago about a campaign by Roma (in Thessaly, I think) to get local authorities to provide them with loans to build homes and improve their living conditions. A perfectly reasonable campaign, which Greece – a prosperous and confident country – should have no problem accommodating. In interviews with Roma leaders, none of them referred, as part of their case, to issues relating to the Muslims in Thrace, the Turks in Cyprus or the Slavophones in Macedonia.
Conversely, Vinozito seems to see itself as part of a wider struggle against the Greek state and Greek society and even has policies on Cyprus. The Slavophones in Greece are, therefore, engaged in an altogether different campaign to the Roma. It is a deeply political campaign infused with bitter nationalism, which Greeks would do well to resist, regardless of what a dozen Eurocrats with no knowledge of Greece or the Balkans might think. Ultimately, I am shocked that GHM provides succour to Vinozito – clearly an unpalatable group – and I don’t think it does your credibility on other issues much good.