For the Anniversary of March 25th, 1821

With the opportunity of the anniversary of our nation’s liberation through the declaration of the revolution of 1821, act which is the climax of a continuous effort by the Greeks, through the centuries of Turkish occupation, to reclaim a right which had violently been taken from them by Westerners (Veneti, Franks, etc) first and then by the Ottoman Turks, we will celebrate this testament of blood on a national level by detecting it on the personal level according to the example with the babushkas.

The Revolution of 1821 was not a sudden event but the successful attempt after at least two more (1611: the movement in Epirus by Dionysius, Eparch of Larissa who was named by the pro-Turkish and the kontzabasides [Greek origin supervisors approved by the Turks to oversee Greek areas] called him Skylosophos – dog philosopher , 1769: the revolutionary movement of Theodore Orlov , 1790-1792: the revolutionary movement of Lambros Katsonis and Androutsos) which were bathed in blood but from which the Greeks learned what not to do and what to do in order to be successful next time.

We must not forget that the war for the independence of the Hellenic Nation started off completely unsupported, not only by other states, but also by the very units of governance/ administration presenting themselves as Greek but, as we have demonstrated in past articles were not truly members of the Greek group. We are referring to the various officials (Phanariotes [Rich and prominent Greek origin families living in Phanar of Constantinople], Dragoumans [translators for the Sultan and ministers of foreign policy for the Turks], elders, prefects, kontzabasides, kapoi/armatoloi [policing officials of Greek origin appointed by the Turks]) who evidently put as first priority their personal economic gain and the acquisition of power and not the interests of the social group they were supposed to represent (simple examples to illustrate the truth: the fierce war since the end of the 18th century and up to 1821 that was waged by the Patriarchate, the Phanariotes, the kontzabasides and their representatives, trying to enforce menticide and stifle any form or expression of the Greek Enlightenment using slander, libel, abuse, threats, circulars, suppressive measures, terrorism, persecution of the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the Hellenic Nation even to the point of executing them and shutting down schools and universities).

Additionally, we must mention that the revolution sprung up from the Greek people, both inside and outside the borders, fact which can be ascertained by the first sources of its funding [it was funded by the Greeks of the communities abroad who had a great interest in the intellectual and cultural development of the villages/towns they originated from and who repeatedly sent money to build educational institutions there (The School of Karpenisi, the ‘Museum of Agrafa’ School, schools in Ioannina, in Zagora of mt. Pilio and elsewhere became small academies where the new liberal ideas circulated and disseminated, as well as the political speeches which had been delivered by the revolutionary France of 1789-1792) to pay the teachers, to build libraries and to send several books for the education of their fellow countrymen] and its armament.

Efforts to quench the Revolution of 1821 (Excommunication by the Patriarch, May 7th 1821: the razing to the ground of the villages of Pilio by the Pasha of Larissa Machmut Dramalis in retaliation of the declaration of the revolution in Pilio by Anthimos Gazis; June 7th 1821: the battle of Dragatsani and the decimation of the ‘Sacred Band’, a battalion founded by Alexandros Ypsilantes, massacres in Serres, Chalkidiki and elsewhere; April 20th 1821: the battle of the Alamana bridge of Sperchios River, near the pass of Thermopylae, where while wounded Athanasios Diakos fought and was captured and was transported covered in blood to Lamia to be tortured) were made once more but the organization through the experience of trial and error did not allow the revolution to be quenched but instead each betrayal and atrocity gave more reasons for its strengthening.


When, therefore, it became obvious that the Revolution was not possible to be quenched and not only that, but that the Nation that gave rise to it had began immediately and effectively to create and staff on the basis of meritocracy administrative state positions (summoning of the Parliament of Thettalomagnisia, surrender of Tripole and its monetary and other treasures, etc) setting the bases for a state truly from the people by the people, the established governing class moved on to plan B: pandering (May 26th 1821: ‘Act of Kaltetzon’, September 4th 1821: ‘convention of Western Greek Peninsula’ and ‘convention of Eastern Greek Peninsula’, January 1st 1822: lecture on the subject of the independence of the Greek Nation by the First National Council in Piada, next to the Ancient Epidavros, and voting of the ‘Consolidating Law’, March 1823: Second National Council in Astros)

This class which serves, caters to and is only after the money and power of rule regardless of colour, ideology, origin, nationality, etc, began making steps of support towards the cause, giving (always insufficient) sources of funding, armament, connections and army directing.

But in the same time it undermined the cause by giving to the people ‘benefits’ incompatible with the Nation and its people as well as the people’s way of thinking, undercutting in this manner a fight for independence which had been wreathed in laurels when it didn’t have ‘help’ from agents of abroad who a little while ago supported and had excellent socioeconomic relationships with the enemy the Greeks were facing and subjugating from the moment of its birth with loans and dependencies (‘Deed of Sold Greece’ : the report to the English government signed by the prefects and marshals with which the British protection, as well as the dispensation of loans from England to embattled Greece within the framework of George Canning for the creation of British protectorates in the Mediterranean) which were not used but squandered by themselves for their own personal establishment in the new schema which Greeks had enforced by their blood in the first years of the revolution.

How can we transfer this inhumane and undermining attack and combating which happened and is happening on an international and national level at the personal level of the citizen’s everyday life (not just the Greek citizen but any conscientious citizen who truly represents his/her Nation and state as we have described before)?

As we have said in the example with the babushkas, exactly the same forces and powers of interpersonal relationships but also manipulation permeate all the levels of human existence from the personal to the international. Let us therefore see the complete example of an existing person commemorated in history the identity of whom we will reveal in the end of this article so that we will be given the opportunity to realize that several aspects of his life are common with all of Greek citizens who truly represent the group they officially belong to.





Born in the early 20th century within social upheavals which tore his family apart and forced him to migrate so that he would be able to survive, this man was raised under very strenuous circumstances in terms of family environment: irrevocably hurt by the violent circumstances which led to his being uprooted but also to the death of his wife, the living father of this man did try to offer this man family support and stability in the new land. However, he broke down because all his efforts were thwarted and undermined by the theoretically support forces of the state but also his social circle from the closer to the wider (meaning, neighbours, relatives, benefit agents of the state to immigrants). Very soon this man, after he had grown up in underprivileged conditions, decided that if he truly wanted to go forward and improve he would have to rely on his own self and not allow any other person to determine what his position in society would be, which position was at the time just like the one of the Greeks at the eve of the Revolution of 1821: financially dire circumstances, outrageous demands to his person by people who claimed to be family but were deeply undermining, and an active combating of this man in all his efforts to gain an education and escape poverty.

This man, after he decided to rely on himself he declared himself head of his family, took upon himself its financial and administrative reins and plotted down a strategic plan for the improvement of his situation but also of all those willing to follow him and especially of those who were weak, namely children.

In the course of his life this man was accosted ideologically by many forces which, seeing his impetus and the potential he had in setting the proper example to his environment about what is feasible in society, considered him a dangerous element requiring integration and manipulation, exactly in the same manner Greeks demonstrated with the Revolution of 1821 and before it what was feasible despite the flaunting of power by those who seek to enforce social, personal and historical subjugation.

Through the process of trial and error this man saw through the attempt for manipulation and control both in the case of war as well as in the case of peace.

Especially in the case of peace he saw how much he was combated with weapons such as bureaucracy, minister’s decrees, jobbery, socially destructive ‘reforms’ which despite his efforts from the central positions he held (as civil servant in the Greek IRS where he had studied all stipulations in order to use them to protect the citizen personally as well as the social group in general) everything he built was torn down with a despotic and completely unsolicited signing by ‘authorities’ which were staffed by exactly the same people and families serving the enemy and themselves before 1821.

Having realized as much this man decided to abandon the usual ideological ways and follow the most dangerous and least used way of peace and freedom which of course leads to the liberation of Free Bondsmen in a personal but also later social revolution of the same scope as the one of 1821.

Using the scientific method he cultivated this way but just as the Hellenic Nation, he trusted that his so-called familial circle would support and cover for him and he didn’t check with the way we have described in previous articles whether the apparent family group was also actual. Therefore he didn’t calculate correctly and he trusted wrongly and consequently all his work and struggle was undermined exactly as the independence of the Nation was undermined and is being undermined even now.

This prolonged undermining led to him being murdered and his murder be covered up in such a way that the circumstances of his death remain a mystery with continual to this date threadbare ‘official’ explanations by the state which imply the level and scope of those who benefited from his death and the arresting of his activities, just like it is obvious who benefit from the mismanagement and the social but also often actual execution of entire peoples, but only if we ask the correct questions we listed in previous articles and then have the stamina to answer them objectively.

To this profile of a positive person and fighter in the covert war being waged on the individual during peace fits everyone who wishes for freedom of the body, the mind and the spirit without the hypocrisy, waylaying and oppressive compromise/subjugation which characterizes Free Bondsmen.


This existing person is named George Alexiou Geritsidis, worked as an IRS servant in the public sector protecting from financial bankruptcy several citizens and limiting the illicit activity of other agents, was decorated during a war he hated (and called his medal which was thrown in the deepest part of the occasional closet or drawer ‘tin’) and supported from the background and through ideological teaching the movement for Peace which was represented brilliantly by Gregory Lambrakis and was murdered while serving as an IRS inspector in the division for chemical – related companies on November 17th 1973. To this day his murder is mentioned annually among the victims of the Polytechnic (the 1973 Rise against the Junta) and with regard to his work as a civil servant he is commemorated as ‘fallen in the line of duty and because of it.’



The reason this man was selected (among the several unsung Greeks who could just as easily be commemorated) as a representative example for our anniversary of the declaration of independence of the Hellenic Nation is because we will use him again as actual model for the declaration for which we are beginning today, on March 25th 2008, preparing with the correct knowledge of what has taken place but also correct knowledge of ourselves and our environment so that we become able to support and guard for it:

When George Geritsidis received his first paycheck for the first time (as an employee in the salt pans of Xanthi) and returned home, his father who was alive (who as we mention was broken down and had proven that he could not face the responsibilities and tasks of the role of head of family) was standing at the door and asked reaching out with his hand with an authoritarian move that he hand over his salary. George Geritsidis gave him an amount for pocket money and told him that the time had come for him to step down and relinquish his position as head of family to George, including of course management of the financial income which George himself was procuring- a role he served and responsibilities he met brilliantly during the course of his life, pushing upwards in the social ladder all the members of both his nuclear as well as extended family so they led a decent and respectable life.
Following therefore his example, on a national scale (and for sure on a global one), the time has come for the oppressed Hellenic People (and all other Peoples no matter their name) to declare its coming of age, fact which means that the People don’t need guardians and managers of their resources which they are procuring (all the more so since from 1821 to 2008 it has been proven with p<0.001>statistical significance that the guardians and managers of this level and to that scope are completely incompetent, useless and abusive and therefore obsolete and downrated in the roles and positions they claim and possess, as they are responsible for the conscious and sought for interception of the ‘coming of age’ of the dependent peoples, the heritage, fortune and toil they manage, pander and squander) and for the Greek citizen him/herself to take over (just like the citizen of all Nations around the globe) the reconstruction and tiding up of his/her house which he/she is obligated to claim, demarcate, develop and actualize so that he/she ensures to him/herself as well as the future generations, the future beneficiaries of this house, the life he/she is truly entitled to provide for him/herself as a human being and the future generations are entitled as human beings to have.

A Look in the Mirror (Part 1)

The mirror is one of the most threatening and in the same time necessary elements within every house. Every day everyone of us goes close to the mirror, but instead of using it as we should, that is as a means for our own pleasure and functioning, we use it as a means of subjugation and masking of our own personality, most of the times.

How does that happen?

It is very rarely that we walk up to the mirror to please ourselves with what we will see. On the contrary, we go near it with stress, ready to locate even by a magnifying glass the ‘bad’, ‘incorrigible’, ‘unacceptable’ characteristics on us which take away our right to feel okay, to walk in the street with happiness and self confidence. They certainly also do not allow us to assign any value to all the very good characteristics and traits which we have. In this way, the mirror becomes a means of control and restraint of human distinctiveness and inimitability and fully facilitates the creation of Free Bondsmen.

But shouldn’t we try to be nice and proper?

By all means we should strive every day to improve ourselves so we can feel stronger, more in control and more eager for life (aside the clichéd activities projected through the mass media such as a continual exhausting march from shopping mall to shopping mall , night club to night club and romantic/sexual relationship to romantic/sexual relationship) and its activities than before. If we don’t feel that but on the contrary as rule and in general we sense stress, doubt for ourselves and our capacities, disappointment in ourselves, embarrassment for our very existence and our traits/characteristics, at a disadvantage and underperforming then we are not achieving progress with the method we are following but conversely we cause a depression of our personality and our capacities and instead of truly living we carry on in a state of sedation.

And how does the mirror cause us that?

As we have already said, we go near the mirror not to look with pleasure upon what it will show us, so that we will draw energy in order to develop what we see even more, but with fear and aversion or anxiety and compulsion in order to camouflage, hide, ‘distract from’ parts of ourselves which are objectively necessary and functional and which are rejectable not by any natural process but by a completely fabricated and constructed social order to which in theory, like any Free Bondsman, we have a choice whether to conform but in essence we are bullied and blackmailed into doing so.

In this manner, the mirror makes us feel that we are constantly under scrutiny or judgment and usually with criteria which have nothing to do with nature or health or the good standing of our body and psyche and prevents us from calming down in order to experience and get to know ourselves without fearing whether this self will be ‘fitting’ or ‘matching’, as if the individuals of a society are obliged to be carbon copies of each other in order for that society to be functional or in order for the individuals to prove they belong to it.

But doesn’t society need fitting and matching people in order to function?

In order to answer correctly to this question, just like any question anyone can ask us, we must first have fully and clearly defined what we mean by ‘fitting’ and ‘matching’ and to what we must be ‘fitting’ and ‘matching’ and with what sort of goal in mind.

If we define as the function of society its healthy development so that it becomes less and less infringing and abusive on nature, more and more supportive to its members (that is in terms of benefits and support to the individual and his/her needs personally and directly, not in general) and less and less demanding from its members (in terms of procedures and support of the governmental structure such as taxes, contributions, etc) then the ‘fitting’ and ‘matching’ person is the one who does not care whether society will accept and validate his/her existence based on the camouflage uniform he/she is wearing and which codes for subjugation to specific social groups within society.

This matching and fitting person is the person who worries and sees to the solution of problems. This person gains pleasure from solving problems so that his/her environment consists of happy people who feel free to speak openly and candidly, think freely, express their thoughts, desires and ambitions freely without fearing that they will be met with hostility, reservation or even ridicule. This person is interested in bringing forth results and in order to do it is not afraid to work with anything, regardless of social status, and is not afraid to defend the logical and ethical trajectories which exist exactly in order to ensure the correct, certain and swift development of society to levels that often the mass media tag utopian.

If, however, we define as the function of society the perpetuation and maintenance of a diseased situation within which bounteously resources of all kinds (environmental, human, intelligence, ingenuity, toil, time and money) are lost, stolen or squandered so that the parasitic survival of a small number of families across the globe in ensured at the expense of innumerable others and which innumerable other families are the ones responsible for the survival we have achieved up to now as human species, then for sure the ‘matching’ and ‘fitting’ man changes. The person we described above is highly incompatible with this here society. For this here society, ‘matching’ and ‘fitting’ is the concentration camp inmate: he/she must look alike with his fellow inmates at all costs, wear a specific uniform under pain of punishment, say or do specific words and actions prepared and predesigned for him/her by third parties, and of course be so scared that he/she does not actively think saying phrases such as ‘I won’t get into that mindset’, ‘I wont go down that road’, ‘I won’t open that can of worms’, ‘we won’t be the ones to discuss/decide/evaluate/judge this’ etc.

For sure, the society we just described which is parasitic and fights just like cancer the very organism sustaining it, is not viable at all and has an expiry date in contrast to the first one which is both viable and supportive towards its environment so that its survival is ensured.

If we go near our mirror with happiness in order to look upon who we are and with a motive to elevate and not hide our personality and inimitability as individuals attuned to nature, logic and as a result to healthy ethics that is derived from it, then we are individuals who belong and fit to that first society which is viable and will survive to go on.

If we go near our mirror with stress and fear and aversion ready to list what we don’t like but without much motivation or faith that what we do not like can change and look over ourselves under a state in which cadets find themselves before standing in line for inspection in the army, then we are individuals belonging and matching to the other society which is diseased and which has an expiry date and which does enforce on us an expiry date as well which comes far earlier than our death date.

And how do we now apply this look in the mirror to an international level with nations in the place of individuals?

As we have mentioned before in the analogy with the babushkas in a previous article, that which happens on a personal level is exactly what happens in every other level, with the difference being only in scope and measure. The society of nations is of course no exception. Let’s continue, therefore, in order to illustrate as much our example from last time and let’s see how as a nation the Greeks (and not just the Greeks but every nation which is real and not a fabrication) are members of the first type of functioning of the viable society and are being assaulted with all kinds of manipulations (as we demonstrated in the last article) in order to be transformed into the second kind of functioning belonging to the diseased society type and which leads to disaster.

In order to be able to demonstrate this, the first which we must do is to define (or answer) who the true Hellene/Greek is and how we can tell him/her from the others. (The same goes for any other nationality and not just the Greeks which we are using as an example)

The first logical level of the definition is that Greek is the one who belongs to and represents the Greek Nation.

But what do we mean by ‘belongs to and represents’?

The one who belongs to a group protects it, cultivates it, elevates it and promotes it with the love with which someone presents a work which has been given to him/her with trust and which he/she has taken up and continued so that the next generations belonging to this group are strong, happy and proud.

The one who represents a group is one who belongs to it already and who, with his/her behavior, thoughts, work, actions, leisure and decisions upholds and protects the ideological, moral and everyday principles through which this group is defined.

ONE DOES NOT BELONG TO A GROUP WHEN HE/SHE DIVIDES IT, SUBVERTS IT, ACCUSES IT, DOWNRATES IT, DAMAGES IT, WEAKENS IT OR WEARS IT DOWN AT ANY LEVEL OR WITH ANY EXCUSE, MEANS OR END.

ONE DOES NOT REPRESENT A GROUP WHEN HE/SHE EMBARRASSES IT, DOES NOT DEFEND IT, HAS THE INTERESTS OF OTHER GROUPS AS PRIORITY OVER THOSE OF THE GROUP, GIVES LEVERAGE TO OTHER GROUPS TO ATTACK, SLANDERS THE GROUP OR ALLOWS OTHERS TO SLANDER IT, ALLOW FOR LIBEL AND MUD SLINGING.

Therefore, a Hellene/Greek is the one who protects, cultivates, elevates, promotes with love the Hellenic/Greek identity as it has been forged without breaking the Hellenic/Greek moral and behavioral rules and upkeeps and protects the Hellenic/Greek ideology and moral values. The Greek goes up to the ethnic mirror and is happy, gazing upon the virtues, achievements and triumphs in history and everyday and with enthusiasm and happiness seeks his/her improvement and and not his/her alteration so that he/she will ‘fit’ or be ‘matching’ with a group which has already proven that it is not viable or functional.

ONE IS NOT A GREEK who embarrasses Greece inside and outside its borders through subversive policies which project a fabricated weakness and servility to the Greek National group (and any other National group which is true and not constructed since one of the basic forces which creates a group is the sensation of pride and ability of existence which its members have when they declare themselves as members). One is not a Greek who does not defend the Greek group outside but also in terms of its internal needs, the one who gives priority to the claims or needs of another group above the Greek one (from an ethnic to a financial level), and certainly he/she is not Greek and certainly one is not Greek who defames the Greeks, their actions and their vested rights on all levels (from vested grounds to vested milestones of a socioeconomic welfare and security) and allows others to defame, slander and calumniate the abilities, capacities, identity, way of life, philosophy, achievements and pursuits of the Greeks.

Could we have some examples?

There are innumerable contemporary examples from which we will present some in the following two weeks.

The principles presented do not pertain only the National group by the name of Hellene/Greek but for every one which has been created spontaneously and not been constructed by third parties/forces. If you belong to one of the spontaneously created Nations I would be happy to hear from you.

A Current Events Example

Having laid down the basic principles according to which people and groups, from the smallest (family) to the largest (state conglomerations), operate in order to create Free Bondsmen and their masters-free bondmen which direct them, the time has come to illustrate with a tangible example where the attempt to manipulate and subjugate via the strategies we have examined is obvious.

I could easily have chosen a case of familial manipulation or workplace manipulation from the several I have encountered and helped people overcome and beat but something like that would not allow me to get across the severity of what we are now going to see in the action, if I allowed anyone the ability to say ‘this isn’t happening to me/ this can’t happen to me’. For this reason, therefore, I chose an example which is yet unraveling and which all of us in Greece experience daily through the mass media: addressing myself to the group named ‘the Greek/ Hellenes’ or ‘the Greek/ Hellenic Nation’ I will use as an example of great manipulation and psychological blackmail the issue of the naming of the state of Skopje (current F.Y.R.O.M.).

Why is this issue relevant to our discussion concerning Free Bondsmen and efforts of imposition of one side upon the other?

It is very relevant because here we are presented with a classic case of blackmail in order for us to accept and endorse an unfounded position which is flimsy in scientific, political and logical terms, while denouncing our critical thinking, our rights and our free will as well as our very essence as Nation and personalities. That is exactly what a Free Bondsman is called to do.

How do we support this?

Let’s begin with the definition of the Free Bondsman as we had stated it in our first article:

“ the person who theoretically is free to act at will and evaluate, judge and think of matters without pressures, blackmail or compulsions about what he/she wants to be and how he/she wants to behave. This person truly believes that he/she is truly free and acting or behaving at will, without compulsions, but “within logical limits”

We are theoretically told that as Greeks we are free to think without pressure or blackmail what we want considering the naming of Skopje and that additionally we are free to do what we like and express ourselves as we like on this matter.

The Free Bondsman is often inhibited by admonitions and blackmail of the type:

However, with great effort and pressure almost to the point of hysteria we are told to:

“This is not logical/rational/wise this does not make sense”

reason ourselves regarding our ‘extreme’ demands not to be offended ethnically and in terms of our state through the creation of a name which beyond doubt implies that we are oppressors of a phantom people who strains under Greek rule, regardless of course, of History and historic documentation proving irrevocably that within Greek borders there are Greeks, with Greek area names which were drenched in Greek blood bred on those very areas so that there will now be the capacity for hospitality to other groups which have not found tolerance such as the Greek one elsewhere.


“This is simply not done”

repeatedly it is being stated without any justification that it is impossible to have a name without negative implications to a small state which is an artificial creation consisting of ethnic groups of questionable coexistence ability. The only answer given by the mass media is silence along with laughter which may work towards the gagging of a people but do not constitute an argument.

“What will the people say?”

we are threatened that if we speak up, our fellows / global common opinion will characterize us as ‘savage’, ‘racist’, ‘nationalists’, ‘fanatics’, ‘lowly’, etc. Of course something like that is not said at all about actions of people in Skopje nor of course is it mentioned that in cases of a dispute, silence or abstinence of an answer constitutes acceptance and corroboration of the claims of the opponent and NOT A DEMONSTRATION OF SUPERIORITY.

“What will _________ say?”
“You only think about yourself/ you are so selfish”
“you are cruel/thick skinned”
we are continually told that there exist one or two generations of the opponents who have grown up on the lies which everyone presses us to accept as true. We are told that we must do this because this is the reality of these people and it is inhuman to defend the truth and hurt their feelings. Of course if we do not do this, we are ‘hard-hearted’, ‘the bullies of the Balkans’, ‘terrorists’, ‘fascists’, ‘self-centered’, ‘conceited’, ‘haughty’, etc.
But until this moment this type of behavior is observable in the opponent and some of our fellows.

“You won’t be the one to say what is right”

we are told that we are unable to show that what is being said and claimed by the opponent is unfounded, false and underhanded with secondary goals because we cannot (for unknown reasons) indicate with historical, anthropological, linguistic and socioeconomic proof the truth of the matter just because we are Greeks and if we do it we will be hard, we will be thinking only of ourselves and our evidence will be considered by default as false or fraudulent. We are also threatened that our word will not be at all considered except as an act of hostility and belligerence.

“You can’t decide for yourself”

we are denied every expression coming directly from the people from a demonstration to a referendum to even a concert or any other kind of events which through the entirely peaceful and clearcut imprint of the Greek, just as it had been illustrated in the terrible anniversary of the 25th of March of 1941 when the German soldiers during the Occupation of WWII succumbed to the spontaneous, peaceful and unarmed parade and march of the Greeks, after of course drenching it in blood. We are being told that suitable for this are only the politicians, that is the elected administrative employees and mandataries of the people.

“Nobody will pay attention to you/ heed you even if you do speak out your opinion”

repeatedly we are told that our positions cannot be heard and that on top of this we become a point of great irritation if we dare draw the attention from the pretense and the propaganda to the essence and the substantiated proof.

It is, of course, odd that everyone with bated breath beg with our Nation and its true members not to raise their voices of even deny what they are being accused of and without right asked of them if it indeed had been true that we would pass so unnoticed.

The fact is also downplayed that every time we did decide to speak up for our rights despite everyone who was trying to keep us from it, not only were we listened to and paid attention to but we managed to make them comply and respect these rights actively, and of course rush to claim through propaganda that the initiative did not belong to the Greeks but to third parties.

“That’s what everyone does/ this is the way it is/ this can’t change”

with intimidation in their eyes, reporters, politicians and other people appearing often on the television forum each day on the news regurgitate and repeat exactly and down to the very same wording the irrelevant emotional blackmail of ‘many countries have gone along with that name and if we don’t follow we will be left alone’ leaving implied in the air a phrase reminiscent of hysterical old women: ‘…and what shall become of us!’

But they do not clearly say what the threat is exactly, burke our right to stand by views that are objective and true, allow for suspicion and ‘what if’ to remain silently threatening the people who has had the courage to stand alone against an army before which much larger countries bowed, without any guarantee of victory or survival. They are trying to convince us just like in the case of Cyprus in 1974 and Imia in 1996 that we have no power, army and courage to stand up to the demands, and that we are weak.

When this finally stops working because on the final analysis the Greek true to his/her identity will in the end not accept the above, the attack changes and focuses exactly on our very identity, trying to convince us that we are not members of the Hellenic Nation but instead ‘Grecians’ that is caricatures of another race who just happen to inhabit the lands owned by this race and who act completely differently than the ones that raised them.

All these things are starkly obvious in their wrongfulness and their intent when a third party, one we consider stranger speak them and there would be no chance that we wouldn’t be able to objectively realize that the only thing that is being attempted here is to make us feel weak when in reality we are extremely strong, fact which is easily and widely provable.

These underhanded and grossly false things torture us and plant doubts in us rendering us temporarily idle because those saying these things is not considered a third party, foreign and hostile but an equal member of the Hellenic Nation who cares and worries about the same interests that we care and worry. When, therefore, someone you consider yours and with status tells you all these things it is not easy at all to immediately see them as they truly are.

How is it proven that we are in essence the exact opposite of the weak profile projected to us?

How can I tell the real Greek/Hellene from the superficial one but also the one who only features elements of fanaticism and menticide?

We will examine this next week, with evidence and tangible proof.