[MGSA-L] Fw: Statement of Protest (and the facts)

akis at sfr.be akis at sfr.be
Sat Aug 12 01:20:14 PDT 2017

Ι for one do think more information is needed, and I feel free to provide them.

The stalinist past of Kotzias is indeed well known, as it is irrelevant and useless to insist on (precisely for this reason).

What would be more interesting to talk about today is his rightwing nationalist present, which informs and defines his policy as a foreign affairs minister, e.g. as regards the relations with Macedonia and Cyprus. But I suspect that many of his "antistalinist" critics would agree with him on this issues.

---- Message d'origine ----
De : Nikolaos Zahariadis <zahariadisn at gmail.com>
À : akis at sfr.be
Objet : Re: [MGSA-L] Fw: Statement of Protest (and the facts)
Date : 11/08/2017 15:55:41 CEST
Copie à : smoschon at yahoo.co.uk;
   rolandmo at pacbell.net <rolandmo at pacbell.net>;
   MGSA List <mgsa-l at uci.edu>

I must admit I know very little about the case, but I do know that letters may be circulated as long as they are reasonable. People can make what they wish out of them and if one wants more information, please feel free to ask for it. And more importantly one is free to express his/her opposition and not sign anything if there is disagreement. 

I found the letter written in reasonable language. And more importantly and to the substance of the case, I want to see a reasonable public dialogue in Greece and not fear and intimidation. I agree, a letter to the editor would have been sufficient rather than a civil lawsuit, which makes me wonder why this seems to be the favorite tactic of politicians. Perhaps one (but certainly not the only) reason for the shallowness of public dialogue in Greece is the fear of lawsuits, which makes dialogue either bland and uninformative or extremely partisan in orientation. Both undermine democracy and transparency.

For this reason, I hope people take a closer look at the letter and draw their own conclusions. 


On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:32 AM, <akis at sfr.be> wrote:

"not a Stasi agent, but a collaborator of a Stasi agent"?

Not Yannis, Yannakis, as people say in Greek.
It is true that nobody asked anybody to sign the letter, but then nobody provided any other reason for posting this letter on the list either.
Every day, tens of letters are published. Why send to the list this particular letter, with its aggressive coldwar rhetoric, without any explanation, as an attachment to a void message? What are we supposed to make of it? It is certainly not for informative purposes, since it states that "the facts are well known". As it appears from this exchange, not all people see "the facts" in the same way.

---- Message d'origine ----
De : Spiros Moschonas <smoschon at yahoo.co.uk>
À : akis at sfr.be <akis at sfr.be>;
   rolandmo at pacbell.net <rolandmo at pacbell.net>;
   MGSA List <mgsa-l at uci.edu>
Objet : Re: [MGSA-L] Fw: Statement of Protest (and the facts)
Date : 10/08/2017 21:01:11 CEST

concerning the "facts": 

first, I think nobody asked anybody to sign the letter of protest; it is signed as it is

second, it was not claimed that Kotzias studied "with Honecker's money"; it was claimed that Kotzias studied with the party's money in Honecker's Germany; and no insinuation was made that Kotzias was a Stasi agent; it was claimed instead that he participated in a book edited by Manfred Buhr, "επικεφαλής του Ιδεολογικού Αγώνα του Κομμουνιστικού Κόμματος της Ανατολικής Γερμανίας (και πράκτορα της Στάζι με το ψευδώνυμο Ελαφοπόδαρος"; all in support of the major claim that he was a stalinist, which Kotzias has not rejected

and, last but not least, keep in mind that most of these were claims in a letter to the editor of the ARB, not in an "ARB story"; an answer to the letter would have been sufficient


From: "akis at sfr.be" <akis at sfr.be>
To: rolandmo at pacbell.net; MGSA List <mgsa-l at uci.edu> 
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 8:56 PM
Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Fw: Statement of Protest

The facts of the case against the ARB may be "well known", but not all of them are mentioned in this letter of protest. So in order for anybody wishing to sign to be able to ponder all the pros and cons, I think it would be useful to mention some additional facts.
The object of the trial was not the cold war, nor the content of the convictions held by Kotzias -or anybody else- 30 years ago, or now. 

It was the statements of facts, contained in the ARB story, that Kotzias was a "Gauleiter" [term designing a Nazi official] and that he had studied in East Germany "with Honecker's money". Insinuations were also made that he was a Stasi agent.

These claims were found inaccurate and libelling by the Greek court. 

This may or may not be sufficient justification for the decision. But I don't think it is useful to politicize the issue in such an explicit manner. Political views can be credited or discredited according to history's ups and downs. The persons who hold them, or held them in the past, must have the right to a fair trial, and to object any non true statements made against them.

---- Message d'origine ----
De : Roland Moore <rolandmo at pacbell.net>
À : MGSA List <mgsa-l at uci.edu>
Objet : [MGSA-L] Fw: Statement of Protest
Date : 09/08/2017 20:46:40 CEST

On Wednesday, August 9, 2017 10:55 AM, John O. Iatrides <joiatrides at earthlink.net> wrote:

 I would appreciate it very much if you could post the attached statement on the MGSA List.


List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillists.uci.edu/pipermail/mgsa-l/attachments/20170812/8c32c9bb/attachment.html>

More information about the MGSA-L mailing list