The USA does not recognize “a Macedonian language or subnational group�

[Istor]

It is a political move to usurp the votes of Greeks of USA. Very smart indeed !!

But dear Greeks of USA, do the right thing! Don't forgive those who have brutally and shamefully stolen your votes at Nov of 2004 !!!!!

[Amarantos]

It is a political move to usurp the votes of Greeks of USA. Very smart indeed !!

Bravo Istor!Excellent observation!
Πως μας διεφυγε ρε γμτ!

[Istor]

Diadwste to stous Ellines se olo ton kosmo kai thn Ellada, paidia!!

Mavro stous pseftes !!!

[Amarantos]

The explanation of the latest announcement.

Web Exclusive
By Marcus Mabry
Newsweek
Updated: 10:52 a.m. ET Oct. 21, 2006
Oct. 21, 2006 - If the elections for Congress were held today, according to the new NEWSWEEK poll, 60 percent of white Evangelicals would support the Republican candidate in their district, compared to just 31 percent who would back the Democrat. To the uninitiated, that may sound like heartening news for Republicans in the autumn of their discontent. But if you’re a pundit, a pol, or a preacher, you know better. White Evangelicals are a cornerstone of the GOP’s base; in 2004, exit polls found Republicans carried white Evangelicals 3 to 1 over Democrats, winning 74 percent of their votes. In turn, Evangelicals carried the GOP to victory. But with a little more than two weeks before the crucial midterms, the Republican base may be cracking.If something doesn’t give—and quick—Republicans will view 2004 as the good ol’ days. Fifty-five percent of likely voters in the new NEWSWEEK poll say they would vote for the Democrat in their district if the election were held today, versus 37 percent who say they would vote for the Republican. That’s not surprising; the Democrats have been leading in the opinion polls for months. But the new poll suggests—from the leanings of bellwether voting blocs to voters’ priorities—that a possible Republican loss could turn into a rout.
Take white Catholics, swing voters who went for President George W. Bush in the 2004 election. This time 44 percent of them plan to vote Democrat versus 42 percent who plan to vote Republican. Among independents, 44 percent support the Democrat in their district, while 34 percent support the Republican. And voters have more faith in the Democrats to handle almost every major issue presented in the poll, which was conducted on Thursday and Friday nights through phone interviews with 1,000 adults: from Iraq (46 to 34), to the economy (50 to 35), to federal spending (52 to 29), to health care (57 to 24).
But Democrats shouldn’t start measuring for the drapes in the Speaker’s Office just yet. Compared to the NEWSWEEK poll two weeks ago, taken in the aftermath of the Mark Foley Congressional page scandal, the Republicans seem to be closing the issues gap—at least on the issues where they have traditionally enjoyed greater voter trust than the Democrats. The Oct. 5 and 6 poll gave Democrats a lead on moral values (42 to 36), a stunning reversal of every previous poll. While Republicans have not retaken their lead on the issue, they have stopped their slide. In the new poll, 41 percent of Americans say they trust the Democrats more on values and 37 percent said they trusted the GOP more.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15357623/site/newsweek/

[preston]

Originally Posted by Istor

It is a political move to usurp the votes of Greeks of USA. Very smart indeed !!

But dear Greeks of USA, do the right thing! Don't forgive those who have brutally and shamefully stolen your votes at Nov of 2004 !!!!!

I rcon you are right on the money once more Istor!!!

[Vergian Pride]

It only took time, for the truth to come slapping on the Propagandists' faces.

[Amarantos]

QUESTION: On FYROM. They are laughing of course. It's a matter of laughing-- yes. Anyway, FYROM.


MR. MCCORMACK: FYROM. Oh, yes. FYROM, yes.


QUESTION: We will listen carefully what you're going to say. The Defense Minister of FYROM Lazar Elenovski after his meeting yesterday with the DOD, DOS, and White House officials stated that the U.S. Government in no levels supports the integration of his country with NATO without, however, solving the main dispute with Greece. He said specifically, "I expect no obstruction from Greece to the accession to NATO." Could you please, Mr. McCormack, comment since he's placing the U.S. Government on the spot after those meetings?


MR. MCCORMACK: How is he placing us on the spot?


QUESTION: Because -- okay. In order to facilitate your answer. Okay, what is the U.S. position vis-ΰ-vis to the dispute between the Greece and FYROM on the name?


MR. MCCORMACK: They have to come to common agreement on it. We have made our decision known on how we are going to refer to Macedonia. But Greece and Macedonia need to come to some sort of accommodation or understanding as to what Greece will refer to Macedonia as.


QUESTION: But otherwise if FYROM is going to submit an application to become a member of the European Union or NATO regardless of solving the problems between Greece, are you going as the U.S. Government to support this application using the name FYROM?


MR. MCCORMACK: I think that you can proceed concomitantly on both of those -- on those tracks, resolving -- trying to resolve the name issue between Macedonia and Greece and considering applications to those various bodies. In the case of the EU, we don't have a say in that.


QUESTION: No, I'm saying --


MR. MCCORMACK: We're not a member. But in the case of NATO, then we will talk to Macedonia about their aspirations. We have made it very clear that NATO should have a door open to consideration in expanding its membership. And we're going to continue to talk to Macedonia about what their aspirations are.


QUESTION: Otherwise you're going to support Skopje submitting the application to become a member of NATO using the name FYROM. Correct?


MR. MCCORMACK: That's not what I said. I said that we are going to continue to talk to Macedonia about their aspirations for joining NATO. That is not a process that has played out completely and that we are only one part of that conversation. They have to have that conversation with others. I understand in the case of Greece, that they need to come to some accommodation on this, for those two parties, difficult issue. We understand that it's difficult for them. It's an emotional issue. But they should try to work through the issue. They after all live next door to one another. Neither of them are going to be able to move. So they should work to resolve the issue.


QUESTION: One --


MR. MCCORMACK: We've got to --


QUESTION: One last --


MR. MCCORMACK: We've got to move --


QUESTION: Mr. McCormack --


MR. MCCORMACK: Lambros, Lambros, we're going to move on. Okay? Dave.


Daily Press Briefing -- February 1


The cards are on the table.

[Amarantos]

Αβαντάρουν και Σκόπια οι ΗΠΑ με διπλή ονομασία


ΟΥΑΣΙΓΚΤΟΝ
Του Δ. Π. ΔΗΜΑ


Η αμερικανική κυβέρνηση μετακινήθηκε, χθες, σαφώς, υπέρ των Σκοπίων, συνταχθείσα κατ' ουσίαν με την πρόταση διπλής ονομασίας, επί της οποίας επιμένει αδιάλλακτα η προς βορράν γειτονική χώρα.


Â«Η Ελλάδα και η Μακεδονία χρειάζεται να καταλήξουν σε κάποιου είδους διευκόλυνση ή κατανόηση για το πώς η Ελλάδα θα αναφέρεται (αποκαλεί) τη Μακεδονία», είπε ο εκπρόσωπος του Στέιτ Ντιπάρτμεντ, εξ αφορμής ερώτησης για τις διεργασίες εισόδου της FYROM στο ΝΑΤΟ, το προσεχές έτος.

Η σχετική διατύπωση είναι επακριβώς αντλημένη από την ούτως ή άλλως αμερικανικής έμπνευσης επιχειρηματολογία της γείτονος που, προβάλλοντας τη διπλή ονομασία, υποδεικνύε τη «Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας» για τη διεθνή κοινότητα και μια δεύτερη ονομασία «με την οποία -και οιονδήποτε τρόπο το επιθυμεί- θα την αποκαλεί η Ελλάδα».

Κατά το σκεπτικό της FYROM, οι διαπραγματεύσεις εντοπίζονται μόνο για την ικανοποίηση της Αθήνας στις διμερείς της σχέσεις με τα Σκόπια.

Η νέα αυτή Â«απαράδεκτη παρέμβαση» της Ουάσιγκτον είναι προφανές ότι καθιστά περαιτέρω αδιάλλακτη τη FYROM, της οποίας ο υπουργός Αμυνας έλαβε νεότερες διαβεβαιώσεις, τις μέρες αυτές, στην Ουάσιγκτον, για είσοδο της χώρας του στο ΝΑΤΟ, την άνοιξη του 2008.

Καθιστά, δε, απόλυτα σαφές ότι οι Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες είναι ένας «αναξιόπιστος και απρόβλεπτος εταίρος», που κλονίζει τη σχέση Αθήνας και Ουάσιγκτον, γεγονός που προοιονίζεται «δύσκολες μέρες» τη διανυόμενη χρονιά.

Ο Â«φόβος» είναι πως, κατόπιν οδηγιών της Ουάσιγκτον, θα «κινηθεί» μέχρι την άνοιξη ο μεσολαβητής του ΟΗΕ Μάθιου Νίμιτς, με νέα πρόταση που θ' αντανακλά τη χθεσινή διατύπωση Μακόρμακ, που σημειωτέον ήταν προετοιμασμένη και δεν αποτελούσε αντικείμενο διαλογικής συζήτησης ή πίεσης των ερωτούντων.

Εως πρόσφατα, η Ουάσιγκτον διατύπωνε τις διαπραγματεύσεις Αθηνών και Σκοπίων στο πλαίσιο του ΟΗΕ, ως μια «προσπάθεια ανεύρεσης μιας κοινά αποδεκτής ονομασίας», αλλά με τη δεύτερη αμερικανικής εμπνεύσεως πρόταση Νίμιτς, του περασμένου Μαΐου, που ταυτίστηκε με τα Σκόπια, ήταν προφανές για το πού οδεύουν τα πράγματα.

Εξάλλου, για το ζήτημα του ΝΑΤΟ και όσο παραμένει ανοικτή αυτή η διαμάχη, ο κ. Μακόρμακ παρατήρησε πως τα δύο αυτά ζητήματα «μπορούν να προχωρήσουν συνακόλουθα... προσπαθώντας να επιλυθεί το ζήτημα μεταξύ Μακεδονίας και Ελλάδας και εξετάζοντας τις αιτήσεις για τα διάφορα σήματα» στο ΝΑΤΟ και στην Ε.Ε.

«Στην περίπτωση του ΝΑΤΟ θα μιλήσουμε στη Μακεδονία για τις φιλοδοξίες της (και) έχουμε κάνει ξεκάθαρο ότι το ΝΑΤΟ θα πρέπει να 'χει ανοιχτή πόρτα στη διεύρυνση των μελών του», πρόσθεσε ο εκπρόσωπος.

Σε παρατήρηση κατά πόσο εννοούσε ότι θα υποστηρίξουν την αίτηση των Σκοπίων με την ονομασία FYROM, ο κ. Μακόρμακ είπε ότι:

«Δεν είπα αυτό... είπα ότι πρόκειται να συνεχίσουμε να μιλάμε στη Μακεδονία για τις φιλοδοξίες τους να γίνουν μέλος του ΝΑΤΟ, αυτή είναι μια συνεχιζόμενη διαδικασία, χρειάζεται να 'χουν συνομιλίες και με άλλους».





dpdimas@hotmail.com



ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΟΤΥΠΙΑ - 02/02/2007

Åëåõèåñïôõðßá - Ã�ðïãåõìáôéÃ*Þ Ã�äÃ�óìåõôç Åöçìåñßäá

[Amarantos]

Ο Ν. Μπερνς εξέφρασε την ελπίδα Αθήνα και Σκόπια να καταλήξουν σε λύση
ΑΠΕ 21:09

Â«Η θέση των ΗΠΑ δεν έχει αλλάξει» σε ό,τι αφορά τις διαπραγματεύσεις Ελλάδας και ΠΓΔΜ για το θέμα του ονόματος, δήλωσε ο Αμερικανός Υφυπουργός Εξωτερικών Νίκολας Μπερνς απαντώντας σε σχετική ερώτηση μετά από συνάντηση της Ομάδας για την Αϊτή.

«Ελπίζουμε πολύ», υπογράμμισε ο τρίτος στην ιεραρχία της αμερικανικής διπλωματίας, «ότι υπό την αιγίδα του πρέσβη Νίμιτς μπορεί να γίνει δυνατό για τις δυο κυβερνήσεις να καταλήξουν σε μια κατάλληλη λύση σε αυτό το πρόβλημα».
ethnos.gr - Ã� Ã�. ÌðåñÃ*ò åîÃ�öñáóå ôçÃ* åëðßäá Ã�èÞÃ*á êáé Óêüðéá Ã*á êáôáëÞîïõÃ* óå ëýóç - áðå


Τ' είχες Γιάννη μ', τ' είχα πάντα.

[Amarantos]

QUESTION: Yes. Mr. McCormack, on FYROM. Last Thursday, in answer to a question of mine regarding the land dispute between Greece and FYROM, inter alia, you stated, "Greece and Macedonia need to come to sort of accommodation or understanding as to what Greece will refer to Macedonia as." What do you mean with this since that reflects exactly the position of FYROM?


MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you asked a question about membership in NATO. That's how this whole question came about. Macedonia is part of the Membership Action Plan, MAP, so there is some interaction ongoing between NATO as an organization, its individual member-states and Macedonia. We ourselves have made a decision with respect to the name of Macedonia.


Now, eventually, as we have said, that NATO has an open door and we clearly have -- are engaged in discussions with other non-member states right now about the potential for membership down the road, one of those issues between Macedonia and Greece would have to be the name issue. And in -- if you were ever to -- if you were ever to get to membership for Macedonia in NATO, you would have to get all member NATO states agreeing that Macedonia should enter. So it was a reference to the fact that if you ever do get to that point, it's an issue that would need to be resolved between Macedonia and Greece since NATO is a consensus organization.


QUESTION: What is the U.S. position exactly, whatever you told us, that if she is going to apply as Macedonia or FYROM, would you support such an application?


MR. MCCORMACK: We're not there, Lambros. With respect to the name, we have made our decision with respect to the name. Now, the UN is involved in this issue as well and there have to be discussions as to what Macedonia would be referred to in the UN as well. Again, those need to be worked out. These are issues that are not a -- it's not a bilateral issue at this point between the U.S. and Macedonia. As an organization and as a member-state, this issue is not an issue for us, but clearly it is for the Greek Government. It would need to be resolved if Macedonia were ever to proceed further down the pathway to NATO membership.


Now, that is not the only issue. There are a number of other issues that are part of the Membership Action Plan that Macedonia would have to resolve before it could even get close to membership. So it's one among a number of different issues that NATO countries, as a whole, have with Macedonia.

Daily Press Briefing -- February 5