ISSN 2330-717X

Macedonian Group Demands Resignation Of Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis – OpEd

By

By Macedonian Human Rights Movement International (MHRMI)

Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis spewed out more anti-Macedonian hate speech, caught on video, at a lecture titled “Insight to Hellenism” at the University of Toronto on March 5, 2011. While praising the lecture, which glorified Greece’s policy of denying the existence and persecution of its large Macedonian minority and which defended Greece’s bombing of Macedonian civilians during Greece’s Civil War, Karygiannis once again referred to Macedonians as “Skopjans”. This is a term used by Greece to negate the ethnic identity of Macedonians and evokes Greece’s horrific campaigns, past and present, at ethnically cleansing or forcibly assimilating its large Macedonian minority.

Karygiannis encouraged one of the guest speakers, Christos Karatzios, to send a letter to Canadian MPs and to “… come and enlighten the rest of my colleagues on what is Greece…” . He accused Prime Minister Harper of “selling out” Greek-Canadians because of the Conservative Party’s recognition of Macedonia.

But will the Liberal Party reprimand him?

Karygiannis referred to Macedonians as “Skopjans” in an interview for the Globe and Mail on September 21, 2007, following Canada’s recognition of the Republic of Macedonia. Canadian-Macedonians were outraged and flooded the Liberal Party with demands that Karygiannis be reprimanded. The Liberal Party ignored the issue and instead chose to attack the Conservative Party’s recognition of Macedonia, pandering to the Greek-Canadian community.

Ironically, the Liberal Party and their apologists consistently accuse the Conservative Party of the underhanded tactics that Liberals employ. The federal and provincial Conservatives have come under recent attack for targeting ethnic voters and for ties to banned separatist groups. However, pandering to ethnic communities is a Liberal specialty and it is Jim Karygiannis who has notorious ties to the Tamil Tigers, classified by the Canadian government as a terrorist organization. Paradoxically, Karygiannis is an Associate Member of the House of Commons’ Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Macedonian Human Rights Movement International (MHRMI) calls on Canadian politicians, regardless of party affiliation, to demand Jim Karygiannis’ immediate resignation. We ask that concerned Canadians do the same via the contact information below. Jim Karygiannis’ continued presence in Parliament is an affront to traditional Canadian values.

10 thoughts on “Macedonian Group Demands Resignation Of Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis – OpEd

  • Avatar
    April 22, 2011 at 1:22 pm
    Permalink

    More “demands” from Bill Nicholov self-proclaimed “human rights” activist… whom in my opinion is just an extreme nationalist tjat adds the words “human rights” to his organization name.

    What Bill Nicholov means by “human rights” is he should be allowed to spew whatever hate \he wishes against anyone that questions his historical narrative as an ancient Macedonian (whom everyone knows were Slavic)

    Reply
    • Avatar
      April 22, 2011 at 11:42 pm
      Permalink

      Your President Gligorof explained in simple language you are Slaves.Your name can be FYROM,bardar,skopjans,or anything but macedonians.Thanks

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 22, 2011 at 1:29 pm
    Permalink

    “Bulgarian and Macedonian officials commemorated Yane Sandanski, a revolutionary of importance for both countries, on the occasion of the 96-th anniversary of his death.”
    http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=127542

    Fascinating. Why would FYROM nationalists be both celebrating a Bulgarian hero? Are you hiding something Bill? Why don’t you ever report “slight” details of history like this about your “Macedonian” heritage?

    “The history of the construction of a Macedonian national identity does not begin with Alexander the Great in the fourth century B.C. or with Saints Cyril and Methodius in the ninth century A.D. as Macedonian nationalist historians often claim.”[…] Finally, Krste Misirkov, who had clearly developed a strong sense of his own personal national identity as a Macedonian and who outspokenly and unambiguously called for Macedonian linguistic and national separatism, acknowledged that a Macedonian national identity was a relatively recent historical development.[…]The political and military leaders of the Slavs of Macedonia at the turn of the century seem not to have heard Misirkov’s call for a separate Macedonian national identity; they continued to identify themselves in a national sense as Bulgarians rather than Macedonians. – US Anthropologist Loring Danforth, “The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World”, Princeton Univ Press, (December 1995), p.64

    “The Macedonian nationalists quite simply stole all of Bulgarian historical argument concerning Macedonia, substituting Macedonian for Bulgarian ethnic tags in the story. Thus Kuber formed a Macedonian tribal alliance in the late seventh century; Kliment and Naum were Macedonians and not Bulgarians; the medieval archbishop-patriarchate of Ohrid, which Kliment led, was a Macedonian, not a Bulgarian independent church, as shown by the persistence of Glagolitic letters in the region in the face of the Cyrillic that were spawned in Bulgaria; and the renowned Samuil led a great Macedonian, rather than a western Bulgarian, state against Byzantium (giving Slav Macedonia its apex in the historical sun). – Dennis P. Hupchick, “Conflict and Chaos in Eastern Europe”, Palgrave Macmillan, 1995.

    Reply
    • Avatar
      May 11, 2011 at 12:26 am
      Permalink

      Jane Sandanski was murdered by bulgarians – doesnt make much sense if he was bulgarian

      Reply
    • Avatar
      May 11, 2011 at 12:40 am
      Permalink

      “My readings have established to my satisfaction the weakness of the Greek historical argument. It is also clear to me that national aspirations were alive and well in Macedonia long before Tito arrived on the scene
      …it should be noted that the greek claims are a new political development. Just a few years ago the greeks preferred not to use the name Macedonia at all.”
      John Shea
      Macedonia and Greece: The struggle to Define a New Balkan Nation Page 8

      Funnily enough, norther Greece for many years called just that, “Northern Greece”… and the name Macedonia was considered somehow suspect…. But three years ago that all changed. Now the name, Macedonia, is at the heart of a dispute that has paralysed the foreigh policy of the European Community and brought thousands of people on to the streets of Melburne, Sydney, Canberra and Brussels
      Prof Peter Hill

      Reply
  • Avatar
    April 30, 2011 at 9:40 am
    Permalink

    Call me a Skop to my face malaka and you will see a nice golly

    Reply
    • Avatar
      May 4, 2011 at 7:09 pm
      Permalink

      A FYROM nationalist extremist threatening violence? Here I thought you claimed to be persecuted?

      I would note long time FYROM support Loring Danforth is listed on MHRMI website as an expert. Even he says the people that lived in what is today FYROM used to freely self-identify as ethnic Bulgarians (quotes that MHRMI carefully omits from their website)

      Why are you former self-identifying ethnic Bulgarians oneedlessly causing these problems when you know for a fact most of your ancestors were ethnic Bulgarians? Are you ashamed of your ethnic Bulgarian heritage?

      Reply
    • Avatar
      July 29, 2011 at 4:37 am
      Permalink

      Before any country is considered a NATO member, it has to fulfill certain political criteria over and above those that NATO requires; the political preparation of the candidate country has to abide by NATO Enlargement Study and Accession Process, Ch. 5, para. 72, which expects the prospective members to have met OSCE requirements before NATO even considers preconditions and criteria for membership.

      NATO enlargement Study of 28 September 1995, which is the basis for subsequent enlargements, can be found in NATO Handbook in the NATO website [2]. Since the enlargement process is highly regulated one could divide the process into five stages. The first two stages are only preparatory. Stage 3 is the key to membership. If a country passes stage 3, it means that the country has met the preconditions, but not necessarily the criteria.

      Stage 1 is the expression of desire of a country to cooperate militarily with NATO having as a goal to eventually join NATO. “The expression of a military cooperation is realized by the participation of the applicant to join the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. The Partnership for Peace (PfP) is a programme of practical bilateral cooperation between individual Partner countries and NATO. It allows Partner countries to build up an individual relationship with NATO, choosing their own priorities for cooperation” [3].

      Stage 2 is just one step up the ladder for the country as a preparatory step to membership.

      Stage 3 is the hardest step of all. It is the Judgment step and NATO´s explicit call. It is a verdict based on negotiations, deliberations, and consultations in consensual decision. A country either has what it takes to be member of NATO or it doesn´t. The country has to meet the preconditions for membership. Skopje is in Stage 3 at this point.

      Stage 4 is the stage of scrutiny on the criteria listed in NATO´s 1995 enlargement study. Pros and cons of the country´s potential accession are discussed along with shortcomings in meeting membership pre-conditions.

      Stage 5 is the final step starting with consensus of country members that recognizes that the aspiring country has met NATO´s preconditions and is minimally prepared to function within NATO. This determination is strictly political and depends on the member point of political view. This is the stage of intra-alliance bargaining regarding the invitation date to join [4].

      The Freedom House report of 2010, an independent watchdog organization that supports the expansion of freedom around the world, considering NATO countries´ score somewhere between 1 and 1.3 (except Turkey 4.5) for political and civil rights, the FYROM scores Political Rights: 3 and Civil Liberties: 3. Overall the political status of the FYROM is classified

      Partly Free, which means that there is NO democracy in the FYROM.

      Reply
  • Avatar
    July 29, 2011 at 4:38 am
    Permalink

    so u dont belong in the eu, and especially with a name that is not yours lol!!!!

    Reply
  • Avatar
    July 29, 2011 at 5:02 am
    Permalink

    sorry moderator hope, this reply modified is ok, since miss macedonia is allowed to swear and call peoples m_ _ _ _ _ _, i hope this comment with no swearingis fairly accepted.

    Hi “SKOPJEAN”!! miss fake macedonia, miss vardar bonavina, miss yugoslavia, miss anything except macedonia, go learn some history you gypsies of the balkans, every yugoslav nation laugh’s at you and your deluded nation, your a joke and your government and u know it!!! you will loose your eu battle and u know that to and with 35% albanian population and the way muslims have kids you will be a minority in years to come hahaha, who’s the m_ _ _ _ _ now!!!!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.