Talk:Istrian–Dalmatian exodus

Extreme POV

PIO, stop adding the same information you have been trying to add to the Tito page. What you are stating is hardly NPOV, not to mention unfactual. I have yet to see any proof of what you have added, and will revert it until you get a valid source for the information.

Edit war?

We need to figure out some way of solving the edit war that is currently going on here. Apparently, one side is consistently trying to impose an Italian POV over a clear Yugoslav POV that had previously taken over. I appeal to both for joint cooperation so that we don't waste time on useless and endless reverts.E.Cogoy 05:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how it was a clear Yugoslav POV, as the person who created the initial article was Italian himself. This was followed by PIO's heavily pro-Italian POV changes which I tried to change to NPOV. Then there was another Italian edit that was very close to NPOV, but lacked proper citations for actions like "political cleansing" taking place, etc.--Zivan56 20:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Major editing

I apologize as I did a major editing, trying to write a few NPOV paragraphs, and forgot to log in. There is still a Reference section that should be added. FrancescoMazzucotelli 19:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

history

I consider simple history!--PIO 17:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, where to start with all your edits. First of all, its "Yugoslav" people, not "jugoslav" as you put it. These changes are considered racist, and perhaps even defamitory if they have any meaning in Italian. Furthemore, all identifiable ethnic groups are treated as proper names, and as such should be capitalised.

Second of all, Dalmatia was not an Italian province; check the article you linked to before making changes. Tito was not the leader of Yugoslavia during this time, Ivan Ribar was until 1953 the leader of the communist part of Yugoslavia.

I suggest you stop editing these pages, as you are clearly the one who is not familiar with them. If you have something to contribute that you know is true, I have no problems with it; but this is just "vandalism" as you call it. --Zivan56 02:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The exodus is also dalmatian because Zadar was an italian town with a high percentage of Italians (about 83%) actually there are not italian people here, we could suppose that 20.000 Italian were forced to exodus. --Ilario 09:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The capitalization could be an error. If you think that is a "racism", your opinion could be also racist. --Ilario 09:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The integrations of other contibutors are not "vandalism". I'm verifying them with integration and references. --Ilario 09:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you are confused as to who the comment was directed at. This is to PIO (aka Jxy) and not your edits. If you have proof, that is in English, feel free to post the info here. It is not an error, he does it all the time and its not proper english. He has been vandalising pages before and he is very close to being banned for that. --Zivan56 23:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Tito

I've verified. The persecutions among Istrians with Italian ethnicity was caused suddenly the Armistice (1943-1945) by local populations following revenge's desire caused by Fascism and its nationalist politic. A second phase (started in the 1945) was caused by Tito and Yugoslav Army who had the aim to acquire Trieste before other Allied Forces. In this last situation the aim was not an revenge, but a political aim. If Allied Forces had been persuaded that the Slav ethnic presence was a majority (or the entirety) in comparison with Italian presence, the Istria and Trieste would been assigned easily to Yugoslavia. The aim of Tito was political, but it was present. In fact in the following years Tito became aware that in some parts of Istria these aims were destroying the economic structure because a lot of Italians were traders or artisans, and he changed his politic. --Ilario 10:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Now i add in article some identical informations of foibe massacres: in fact is the same historic context!--PIO 11:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Ethnic Cleansing

It surprises me that some people have not even read this article fully before making changes to it ad-hoc. The London Memorandum of 1954 gave to the ethnic Italians either the choice of opting to leave (the so-called optants) or staying. These exiles were to be given compensation for their loss of property and other indemnity by the Italian state under the terms of the peace treaties. Get it now? Now, read the definition of Ethnic cleansing and tell me if it matches up. Nobody was forced to leave, and they were given compensation if they did leave. Also, with regards to the Tito, he was not the leader until 1954 (see List_of_leaders_of_communist_Yugoslavia). You, PIO/Jxy, see bent on accusing anything you can think of that is negative. --Zivan56 20:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

About command of Broz and ethnic cleansing you must apprehending above statements of Ilario and mine: Tito's command expression is in foibe massacres too and ethnic cleansing is in see also section of foibe too! Your interpretation about optants is wrong because you ignore Prominent Italian historians like..... This article is simple an other part of same historic event of foibe: both were ethnic cleansing for prominent Italian historians! Your changes are POV very much because you are an admirer of dictator Broz and you are negative obstructionist. Moreover in my next change i approve your some words added in article to verify your real intention of neutral collaboration! In Slovenia you can find this book: Tudi mi smo umrli za domovino.--PIO 16:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Prominent Italian historians - need I say more? Either way, it is very clear you have an inherent bias against Tito, no matter what "sources" you provide. Anybody can find any source with any POV easily, but finding more than a few is what will allow you to prove your argument (especially with non-peer reviewed sources) --Zivan56 19:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

You don't know history! You are alone troublesome admirer of dictator Broz in this discussion: an administrator needs block you! Moreover in my next change i use different words.--PIO 16:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

So, despite the fact that 5 people so far have reverted some of your edits, you still think you are right? Two of them were Italian, so you can't say they were "admirers." You are the one that clearly needs to be blocked, its just wikipedia bureaucracy that keeps them from doing it. Furthemore, I don't even want to start with your violations of the English language; I suggest taking an in depth course instead of doing ad-hoc translation from Italian. --Zivan56 06:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Kasichescu sedea,truiblinca leshen tu' olsiuh meteran Titu, en tu Istriia bhlesciu zardenkien op ilkjeje lomasdenhia tu italii kroatii on slevenshki? Nikita Orolov.

Che facciamo, comunichiamo in italiano? LEO

Zivan56, pay no attention to the irredentists, this is all rooted in the fact THAT ITALY LOST WW2 and that there is a LOT of bottled up frustration and irredentist sentiment nowadays towards Croatia and ex-Yugoslavia. In simple terms: they want Istra back and want to criminalise it's loss. It's that rudimentary. Well here's what I have to say about that: there will be no criminalisation of Yugoslavia, revanchism and irredentism while there is yet a key on my keyboard. You will either use reliable sources in expressing your oppinion or they will be considered untrue. What Zhivan56 is qoting is historic fact, what you are saying is the oppinion of biased Italian authors. I can find you dozens of historians in Croatia that say our border should be in Macedonia, but they are not automatically right! DIREKTOR 19:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

DIRETTORE stop your propaganda against Italians!!!! LEO 25 August 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.95.202 (talk) 17:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

Work on the compromise version, further refinement

If my Italian collegues would merely list their proposed changes, we could get to work on getting this version of theirs finallized. On the other hand, your uncompromising editing would lead to an edit war (I will never let you bully people into your version without a consensus). Let us therefore discuss the issues, Slavic communist barbarian to Italian fascist oppresors. Please? DIREKTOR 15:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I am PIO unlogged and in next edit I add integration. PIO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.90.185 (talk) 16:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

PIO!, my favourite fascist oppresor (a joke, of course, see my post above)! Here's the situation, PIO: I had my version, you had your version. I edited your version somewhat to produce a compromise version. This compromise version is here to be the article while we discuss changes. Are you willing/able to discuss changes? I repeat: the version I made will stay only until we can reach a civilized democratic consensus. You edited the compromise version so I reverted that edit, for now, only until we reach conenesus. Can you discuss in English? Will you discuss in English? DIREKTOR 10:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I am democratic anti-communist and you are communist lier. In next edit I restore my integration and put your POV statements in a section called -denial-. If you are accurate, understand that you started edit wars in many articles against 12 and more editors: they need ban you! If you remove again my integration, I will report you to an administrator for disruption! PIO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.93.231 (talk) 19:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

This is not gonna work, PIO. I'm not gonna let you push your fanatical POV. Get this: I am not "denying" anything! Nowhere did I write that the foibe massacres or the exodus did not occur. I am merely questioning (not denying!) the connection between the two. I also rewrote your Italian city names that were historically Slavic after World War 2 and I removed your obvious personal oppinions added to a text copy-pasted from a real source.

FYI:

• I am not a communist (or socialist). In my oppinion communism is a failed and deeply flawed ideology. I support Yugoslavia not because of its socialism, but because it brought together all southern Slavic nations in a truly equal and prosperous union.
• I am not a nationalist. I loathe the ideology. Seeing the nationalism-inspired killings of the Yugoslav wars can do that to you, believe me.
• Living in a democratic country does not make a person democratic. You are absolutely not democratic, obviously because you do not respect anyone's oppinion but your own.

I did not report you for your (frequent) previous personal attacks, but I believe I may now be forced to do so. I will never let you push your version without consensus, remember that. DIREKTOR 18:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR you have not consensus and make edit wars in many articles!!!! You are a communist supporter of criminal dictator Josip Broz!!!! You are anti-Italians and insult defining Italian soldiers of WW2 cowards!!!! You are fanatic denier of ethnic cleansing against innocent Italian people!!!! If you remove again my integration, I will restore again it and I will request for mediation. PIO, 9 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.94.37 (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

1) I have no consensus because you (and your buddies) categoricly refuse to discuss anything.
2) Tito is not a criminal dictator (officially, he was the most liberal Socialist leader of the eastern bloc), nor even a textbook dictator for that matter. I support his ideals because they kept the second Yugoslavia together.
3) I am an Italian (Venetian) by ancstry so it would be kind of STUPID if I was an "anti-Italian". I merely answered to Italian military boasting and utterly riddiculous war threats of several users (LOL) by stating several historic facts about Italian miltary exploits.
4) Look it up on the UN websites. The Istrian exodus was not ethnic cleansing, the people left VOLUNTARILY (hell! even the Croatian Operation Storm isn't ethnic cleansing).

5) And finally, before you bother another Admin, please remember that there is currently an Arbitration taking place on this and other articles, that you add historically incorrect data (example: "Fiume" was "Rijeka" after WW2, when the exodus took place etc...), and that you are about to be reported for your repeated, open, and unmistakable personal attacks against me and other editors. DIREKTOR 09:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I object to the use of ethnic Italians in this page

"Italians" and "Italianization" should be used only when referring to Mussolini's propaganda. It should not be used to describe the historical ethnicity of Istrians, and Venetians for that matter.

Just because Istrians spoke a romance-language for centuries, they were not speaking an "Italian" dialect. Even Venetian (that subplanted the autoctonous Istrian tongue) is not an "Italian" dialect. Romance languages (Spanish, Portuguese, French, Catalan, Venet, etc...) are not Italian dialects. They are all sister languages with closer ties than Slavic ones, but it does not make them a dialect of one another.

The Venet tongues spoken from Verona to Istria are very similar to one another, and belong to the same language, with a distinct literature dating back to the 9th century (that's right, the Verona's riddle was written in Venet). Dante Alighieri himself, in his De Vulgari Eloquentia highlighted the different language spoken in Verona, Vicenza, Venice and Istria.

I object to historically referring to Venetians as Italians. They were an indipendent country who fought fiercely against Italians, often enlisting Sclavones in their army. Istrians were part of the Venet Republic as far back as the 12th Century, much before Padua, Vicenza, and Verona joined. Culturally Venice looked to the East (the Greek world, Bisantium and the East) rather than Tuscany, Genoa and Rome. By the way, during the League of Cambrai, Venice had to fight against the Italians, the Germans, the French and the Spanish,...and won.

If Venetians are not Italians, I wonder why Venice used to be the publishing center of Italy? Two books that you may want to examine are the biography of Christopher Columbus, written in Castilian by his son Fernando, which was translated into Italian and published in Venice in 1571. "Historie del S. D. Fernando Colombo; nelle quali s'ha particolare, & vera relatione della vita, & de fatti dell'Ammiraglio D. Cristoforo Colombo, suo padre: Et dello scoprimento ch'egli fece dell'Indie Occidentali, dette Mondo Nuovo" is at: http://www.liberliber.it/biblioteca/c/colombo_fernando/ Another very famous book published in Venice is G.B. Ramusio's, "Navigazioni e Viaggi," which is at: http://www.liberliber.it/biblioteca/r/ramusio/ User:Italus 22 November 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 05:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

When Napoleon inveaded the Venet mainland, it was the Dalmatians and the Istrians who insisted to temporarily bring the Venet government across the Adriatic. Most of the military resistance to Napoleon in the Venet mainland was fought by Dalmatians. The Venet Republic was almost more theirs than anyone's. So much for the "occupied lands" theory. Even under the Austrian Empire, Venet, Istrian and Dalmatians fought together in the 1866 Battle of Lissa (Vis) against the Italians,...and won.

When Italy annexed Venetia (thanks to their alliance to Prussia against Austria) they made a referendum-farce, where people voting NO had to use a different ballot box. Less than a quarter of the population voted, and the result would have made any dictatorship blush (646thousand YES, 69 NO). And by the way, Istrians did not even vote in the referendum and remained under Austria until World War I. After millenia (because the Roman Regio X went from Mantua to Pola), Venets and Istrians were divided. 138.88.200.242 22:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not here to question the objective intent of Italian contributors to this page. But after a century of propaganda to Italianize the Venetian territories, by default it has become customary to refer to non-Slavs as Italians, even by the Istrians (and Dalmatians) themselves. If there are no objections I will correct the ethnic references. 138.88.200.242 19:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Firefighters = Axis forces???

I don't know wich is the pourpose to pass the strange idea that Firefighters are a combattant forces (never been nowere!!!) but anyone like you can easely enlarge the picture by your/his self and will see that there are naked bodies on the ground, 1 firefighter wearing a head (like a spelealogist!) light close to a civilian (on his left), two womans (on his right) an a bust of a man in an Anglo-american tunic with Boots (yes... for who are attempting to make some propaganda the Italians were dressing whool Jacket, shirt&tie and the infamous cardboard shoes during the war Russian front included!!!...) nevertheless is impossible that this picture was taken in 1943 just and simply because the first bodies exumations took place in the A zone of the Trieste Free Territoy since 1945 managed by English troops and firefighters! Nickel Chromo 17:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, understand this: nowhere did I say the Axis military found the bodies. I merely meant that Axis authorities found them (and they did if it was taken in 1943). It is irrelevant wether a firefighter or a police officer or a social worker found them. As for the 1945/1943 dilemma, I went by the original wording, I have no idea wether the photo was taken in 1943 or 1945. DIREKTOR 17:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It's Impossible that was taken on 1943 as explained above (The man wearing an anglo american tunic with anglo/american boots). On '43 there were just "rumors" aobut the killings and since sept. 8th the first exumations took place on the A Zone of the so called Free Territory of Trieste there are also some filmed documentaries about this showing English troops, firefighters with trucks full of coffins and civilians.

Point number 2. The Istrian exodus must be considered as Ethnic cleansing since sept. 43 till the and of the war, Forced migration (since the end of the war untill the signature of the Peace treaty (10 Feb. 1947) due to yougoslav killings deseappering policy adopted as revenge against civil italians, loyalist and anticommunist peoples living in the area; must be considered as Human migration since the signature of the treaty till the signature of London Memorandum. --Nickel Chromo 18:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

• Like I said, I do not know when the picture was taken. The original wording said 1943 so I took it for granted, I suppose. Since you proved it was an Allied recovery I suppose the Axis had nothing to do with it.
  
• The Istrian exodus must be considered ethnic cleansing? Perhaps you read a little too much of the local Italian fanatical version. I do not believe the United Nations recognise it as such. The reasons are obvious: even lavish (Italian) estimates place the number at around 5000 all together. Spread all over the Dalmatian coast and Istria, the Italian minority was around 300,000 strong. Also, the killings were obviously politically, not ethnicly motivated and included for the most part the anti-partisan elite, not the innocent majority population.
• Forced migration? Are you suggesting that the Yugoslav authorities held guns to the head of 200,000 people and ordered them to leave? In 1954, no less! All those people had a choice, in accordance with the treaty between SFR Yugoslavia and the Republic of Italy. DIREKTOR 09:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

• To the first point someone added the info about the Picture released on IT-PD coming from the Italian National Partisans Association.
• To the 2nd and 3rd point just to be cleaver I have never, nor will I ever, read books written by fanatic (nor from the right point of wiew neither from the left!) ...I don't know why are you saying and thinking this... The info I have found are coming from the final relation of the Italian-Slovenian History Commission, has reported from the Corriere della Sera (The top Italian newspaper - openly decleared to support the Center left coalition during the 2006 Italian political elections) as you are assering to ha have Italian ancestry may be some of your relatives shuold translate this final report that you can easely find on the ANPI, the Italian National Partisans Association - (Rome section) official web site here linked: [1]

I don't like the page Istrian exodus as it right now, but the block must be kept, infact it look clear that there is something strange on your point of view, are you sure that you are the whom who is not reading the fanatic former communist yugoslav sources as some one can easily think after have read your personal user page? and after have read your comment here? User talk:UstashkiDom#Take it easy where you stated:

We can always use support against radical Serb (četnik) and (especially) Italian theses in Wikipedia.

• I would like just remark that your POV is against the radical Serbs but also against especially (all) Italian theses on wikipedia So I'm afraid to say this but I don't trust in what everyone can easely see there because it look clear you are prejudiced against all Italians.
  

Do Viđenja, gospodine direktor. Nickel Chromo 10:18, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• I did not presume you read books on this, when I said "local Italian fanatical version", I meant the article.
• I do not read fanatical Yugoslav communist books.

• The foibe massacres are not ethnic cleansing (not recognised as such by the UN), as they were done by the criteria of ideological background, not ethnicity, i.e. the Partisans did not kill all Italians because they were Italian, they killed some Italians (probably aroun 5,000 out of 250,000) because they were (or were considered to be) fascist or right-wing.
• The Istrian exodus is not forced migration, because the Italians were givien a choice (options) by the international community and the Yugoslav government (Treaty of peace with Italy (1947)). In fact those who chose to leave were known as the "optants".

• I am not prejudiced against Italians at all, I love Italy and I lived in Milan and Riva del Garda for three months. The statement you are quoting is misunderstood, what I said was that I can use help against radical Italian nationalist theses, not all (that woud be stupid). Read the sentence more carefully. (BTW, its: "Doviđenja gospodine Direktore." Not bad though, its a difficult language, :D)
  

Arrivederci, signore Nickel Chromo... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Block

This block will not end the dispute, I'm afraid. While I realise I am an involved party here, it is nevertheless a certain objective fact that the other side in this conflict (namely, User:PIO, in his favourite IP "form") refused repeated requests for discussion on the article even when he faced a tiresome edit war if he refused. It is therefore highly unlikely that he is about to start cooperating now, when his version is temporarily enforced by the block. I also doubt that he is going to give up on this, since he has patiently waited for the longer semi-block to expire.
Once again, even though I realise I am an involved party, I feel I must reccomend the reinstatement of the old prudent semi-block as the only means to secure an end to this edit war. DIREKTOR 09:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I request to related administrators article's full protection until disputes have been resolved by mediation or arbitration because it's impossible imminent agreement for disruption of DIREKTOR who started edit warring against many other editors: you can read edit of Ilario -12:57, 19 July 2007- pp-dispute|expiry=14 August|reason=edit war, user DIREKTOR is rollbacking any contribution without justification, please see the history. PIO, 23:55 12 September 2007

My efforts to achieve consensus through discussion are clear at the History and the Discussion pages. The accusations brought forth by User:PIO are, of course, utterly riddiculous. My only intention was to engage in civil discussion at some time.
In case of further fanciful accusations, note that only User:PIO, myself an User:Nickel Chromo (in a much smaller cappacity) participated in the dispute about this version of the article. PIO would not hesitate to go back ten years to find someone who confronted me in some way, in order to create the illusion of me being the invading madman confronted by a whole pack of editors. He has even claimed there are a dozen editors confronting me (at User:Riana's talkpage), wich is an outright lie. DIREKTOR 09:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Related administrators I report list of editors trying to stop DIREKTOR's POV edits since 08:58, 12 July 2007, when he started:

• 1 LEO, unlogged
• 2 IP 4.231.203.5
• 3 IP 4.231.202.71
• 4 IP 209.215.160.114
• 5 Ilario
• 6 IP 151.33.91.64
• 7 Rjwilmsi
• 8 IP 74.169.117.194
• 9 IP 151.33.92.29
• 10 IP 84.52.165.115
• 11 IP 89.172.231.41
• 12 PIO, unlogged
• 13 IP 138.88.200.242
• 14 Nickel Chromo.

Dear administrators do you think are they few users???? PIO, 11:50 14 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.91.76 (talk) 11:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

, :D , at least three of those IPs are your sockpuppets.... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR we can collaborate like as for foibe massacres. PIO, 15:04 17 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.88.231 (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Work on the compromise version

Hmmm, this version that was blocked on is so POV towards one side that it requires a thourough makeover. Nickel Chromo does not like it either. I'm not saying "no", though.
Let's first clear a couple of things up:

• Sources must be non-Yugoslav and non-Italian, as these two often contradict and are biased.

• The city names must be written in their post-WW2 versions (by Wikipedia rules), since this is post-WW2, after all. The Italian names should go into brackets (), if you like (though even this is not demanded by Wikipedia policy).

• Do you consider the Istrian exodus a forced migration, if so do you have sources showing that Yugoslav troops forced Italians out of their homes (in 1954, when the exodus occured)?

• Do you consider the foibe massacres ethnic cleansing, if so, bear in mind that I can present (reliable) sources (UN, Britannica) showing they were done because of ideological, not ethnic reasons, even if ethnic considerations played some part. This is not ethnic cleansing by UN standards.
  

Example: an Italian peasant or ordinary citizen would not be killed by the Partisans (during the foibe massacres), nor forced to leave his home. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR I added in article section periods of exodus because these periods are important in connection with forced migration, ethnic cleansing and political cleansing. I added in article section denial of exodus because denialism of forced migration and ethnic cleansing is in your words and it's the same denialism of some Slav and Italian historians. Sources must be in English language: this is hard problem!!!! The city names must be written in version demanded by Wikipedia policy. Doviđenja gospodine Direktore. PIO, 17:24 17 September 2007

So you insist on irrational behaviour and unsourced edits? (I hope this will not destroy our work on the Foibe massacres article version.) You must understand that claims and accusations of ethnic cleansing and forced migration are very hot stuff that absolutely needs reliable proof and sources. Do not start another edit-ar! Discuss! DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 17:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR I not edit in articles: those IP are not mine!!!! PIO, 17:51 17 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.88.231 (talk) 17:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, for God's sake! I know, your IPs start with 151.33.**.***. Just respond to my previous post. Do you insist on ethnic cleansing and forced migration allegations without proper unbiased sources?
Italian sources are just as reliable as Yugoslav ones. The problem is they contradict, we need to move beyond that, we need things like encyclopedias and books by objective emotionally uninvloved (NON-ITALIAN, NON-YUGOSLAV) authors. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Giove's editing

Giove, discussion is currently taking place (between PIO and myself) on the more acceptable version for both sides, do not edit widly and without consultation as you may endanger the fragile "ceasefire" (or "ceaseedit", if you will). DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 16:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Just for the record Giove, your undiscussed and incorrect edits won't last. I'm backing down for the time being to discuss with PIO and maybe reach a consensus. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 15:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

DIREKTOR needs to reach a consensus between all involved users not between you and myself!!!! Points of ethnic cleansing and political cleansing against Italian people were discussed above and we can to wait opinions of other users. PIO, 16:26 25 September 2007

I know that PIO, it just seed to me that Giove did not respect our efforts and went on to edit as he pleased. All I'm saying is that he should do what we do. DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

What is it now?

Someone isn't happy even with this POV version. I thought this matter was finally closed! DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 20:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You are under warning by administrators: you can not edit in this article!!!! Leo

You really are "confused", as you say. I'm allowed to edit in all articles. Also I'm not "under warning by administrators", where do you get that from? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Look Leo, this version was worked hard on by both User:PIO and myself. It is POV even without your edits. I thought we finished this matter! Why are you reopening this? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 14:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Fairy tales and pseudohistorical claims by Petacco -part1

Here I have seen some sources that are disputable:

• Book Arrigo Petacco, L'esodo. La tragedia negata degli italiani d'Istria, Dalmazia e Venezia Giulia, Mondadori, Milano, 1999.

There is an English translation of the book that can be viewed ob Google Books here

That book is disaster as well and unreliable for several resons.It is full of errors and scandalous(at the moments fascistoid interpretations )

• All sources(bibliography for the book) are Italian. All cca 55 books!! It is obvious that author speaks no South slavic language.Moreover , I suspect that the author speaks any Slavic language, or any foreign language at all. So , the author, journalist from Liguria, from the opposite side of Apenin peninsula gives himself a right to write a book about this region. Not just about one historical period of Eastern Adriatic but morever, about the enire history of that region.That can be read as a fun book , or as a source about "prejudice towards to Slavic people", but certainly not as a valid historical book. at least in English language could have been found enough sources for that book. The book was translated into English by Konrad Eisenbichler, German speaker.

• At the begining of the book author claims :" first Rome , then Venice , have brought the civilization with themselves and that is undisputable fact " . Even if we accept the fact that there was no any indigenous/authohtonous civilization before Romans ,that can not be true . Greeks were the first colonizers who came there, at the period when the inhabitants of Lazio were illiterate barbarians. And ,second of all, Modern Italy does not the exclusive owner of Roman legacy.Claims that entire inheritage of Roman Empire belongs to Italy is one of the basis of Irredenta movement. If the Julius Cesar was an Italian , then Traian was Basque and Diocletian Croatian statesman.The author obviously believes that indigeneous inhabitants of Eastern Adriatic were some humanoid creatures like Yahoo creatures from Gulliver's Travels. I guess that the author classifies the Slavic people on that way , as well.

--Anto (talk) 20:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Fairy tales and pseudohistorical claims by Petacco -part2

• There are huge contradiction about the rule of Catholic clergy. On one place claims catholic clergy has been widespreading Slavic nationalism(???) in the villages and that in historical Diocese of Trieste 190 of 290 priests were Slavs , that filoaustrian Catholic church disliked laicized Italy. On the other , however, he claims that the Slavs were expelling from there two most important stubs of italianicity:teachers and Catholic priests.

• According to Petacco fascism was nothing but the response to the Slavic (Slovene and Croatian ) opression and antifascism is ,in fact, a solution and a hiding place for historical and frustrating Slavic nationalism. Following that logic, according to Petacco Gabriele d'Annunzio was poet-warrior and Vladimir Nazor was (believe or not) great chauvinist.

• Writting about fascist oppression and forced Fascist Italianization of the personal and place names in Istria Petacco speaks about Slavic language (???). He makes no difference between Croatian and Slovenian .He followss the logic of generally accepted name in Italy for all the people from the Eastern Adriatic , phrase «Slavo»,derogative term for amorpheus Slavic "the other one" (see again [Yahoo (literature)|Yahoos]]  !!) , illiterate Creature who distroyed great Italian culture. For information, Croats in the 9th were using three scripts:Latin alphabet, Cyrillic alphabet and Glagolitic alphabet

• It is tragicomical example of a basic lack of knowledge that the author can not name properly the nationalities which lived in ex-Yugolavia. This proclaimed expert claims that in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia were living 12 million of people. There were ethnic groups , who mutualy hated each other,  :Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians(??) , Macedonians, Montenegrins, Dalmatians(????) , Morlachs(????) and Kosovars (????) ass well as Italian, Hungarian and Austrian minorities.
• Diletant pseudo-historical description of the situation continues with the the description of Croats and Serbs as wild tribes whose only historical essence was to have war(s) against each other until extinction one of them. "Serbs and Croats have been always separated by original hate for which were spoiled literally rivers of blood" . The author is obviously not interested in fact that such a behaviour wasn't appearing before creation of Yugoslavia and after ww2 . It simply does not match with his " theory".

--Anto (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Fairy tales and pseudohistorical claims by Petacco -part3

• Another elementary notnsence is desciprtion of the murder of Stjepan Radić in Belgrade by Puniša Račić [2] he describes as revolver duel amoung them.

It would be comical if it was not tragical.  :( Brothers Radić as Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday vs. Puniša Račić as Billy the Kid

• According to this "historiographer" Ante Pavelić (leader of Ustaše) was medical doctor by profession and Ustaše were making ethnic cleansing of Muslims. Makes me laugh!

• After he has disqualified antifascism in Istria by couple descriptions of the murders he adds an extra dimension to the story : " another dark custom gave a mark to these massacres:after putting the victims into fojbe on the bunch of dead bodies they were throwing the the live black dog. Since there is no mentions of that legend in any country of ex-Yugoslavia, neither in Bulgaria, Albania , Romania or Greece, we can ask ourselves what were the sources for that story: Dylan Dog comic books ?? Japanese trash horror movies ??? According to the ancient Balkan legend, the dog , barkling non-stop, was not permitting the resting in peace for the souls of murdered people on the other world. Another controversy about that ritual is that partizans , described as apassionate atheists, would be so careful about their victims' destiny in the Other world.

• His description of chetniks is more than childish :they all had ,beside modern machine guns , laso long daggers/knifes that were using in death duels with their eternal enemies Ustaše. That stereotype is equal insult to Serbs and Croats . Does author know at all that all armies in the world have daggers in their standard equipment??? Or he believes that they use it for cutting the nails or cleaning the teeth after eating lambkin?
• Petacco writes:"in order to Croatize Istria, it was arranged the forced immigration of Bosnians and Macedonians". A new recipe: Macedonians and Bosnians make Istria more Croatian???
• Author describes with simpathy the murder of Robert De Winton , commander of Brittish troops in Pula. Murder was committes by Maria Pasquinelli, apassionate fascist after Western Allies decided to leave Pula in Yugoslavia
• Instead of conclusion we can just mention Petacco's claims that the existing of Goli otok and prisons on it was discovered couple years ago , thanks to Giaccomo Scotti. IF you want to write something about whi ch you know nothing, take a look at Petacco-He will be your idol!

--Anto (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Anto, you have to try to ignore 'writers' like Petacco. It's political propaganda for 4-year-olds. The problem (or joy) of Wiki is that it's a democratic forum where ideas should meld into a concensus, but legitimate sources and fascist idiots get equal weight if they've published a paper or two. On this page and others, it's up to the sensible ones among us to sort out what is accurate and what is nonsense. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Anto is total out of this talk: this page is for exodus not for that Petacco's book!!!! Your personal opinions against fascist idiots or communist idiots or anarchist idiots or socialist idiots are propaganda too!!!! LEO, 24 nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.86.203 (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to punctuate how reliable are Italian sources here. Petacco's book mentions Raoul Pupo's book as one of the source so I guess we can find the same mistakes there. Perhaps Giorgio Napolitano has found an inspitation for his speech in Petacco's book.

Also , there is no any non-italian book quoted here !!

--Anto (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Amico croato, ti rispondo in italiano perchè conosci questa lingua e il mio inglese non è buono: complimenti per la tua buona conoscenza di certe lingue! Il problema dell'attendibilità e neutralità delle fonti riguarda l'essenza di questo progetto ma se i libri sono di autori solo italiani è perchè gli storici italiani hanno studiato meglio di tutti le situazioni delle foibe quindi esodo! Se tu conosci libri di autori croati, sloveni, serbi, montenegrini e altri puoi inserire i collegamenti con tali libri: la citazione dei libri di autori non italiani è valida per la neutralità dell'articolo! Puoi citare autori e testi nella sezione historical debate. Io disprezzo Napolitano perchè è un vecchio sovietico e servitore fedele dei russi ma proprio per questo la sua dichiarazione ha importanza storica: il vecchio comunista Napolitano ha riconosciuto la pulizia etnica che i comunisti capeggiati dallo schifoso Palmiro Togliatti negavano. Condivido il tuo parere riguardo il comunismo the worst political movement in 20th century e il cambiamento della bandiera australiana quando ci sarà la Repubblica Australiana: forse un giorno mi trasferirò nella splendida isola australe. Puoi comunicare a DIREKTOR che il suo fanatismo è noto a tutti e la sua ostinazione sarà causa della sua messa al bando!!!! LEO, 25 nov 2007

For those who don't speak Italian, LEO starts by complimenting his "Croatian friend" on his good knowledge of languages. He goes on to say that he sees the essence here as the reliability and neutrality of the sources, but if there are only books by Italian authors then that's because Italian historians have studied better than everyone else the Foibe and therefore the exodus. If anyone knows of any Slavic authors, then you can cite the authors and texts in the section he calls 'historical debate'. Then, just in case you think that LEO loves all Italian authors then think again, because he goes on to condemn Napolitano ("old Soviet" and "faithful servant of the Russians") but "therefore his statement has historical importance: the old communist Napolitano recognised the ethnic cleansing that the communists led by disgusting Palmiro Togliatti denied". LEO describes communism as "the worst political movement in the 20th century". Optimistically for all of us, he then speculates that when there is a change in the Australian flag and an Australian republic then he might himself "transfer to the splendid southern island". Well, from your mouth to God's ears, Leo. Lastly he says you can tell DIREKTOR that his fanaticism is well-known to all and his obstinacy will be a cause of him being banned. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 11:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Layers upon layers of deep political biase, I don't know what to say, except that the threats are laughable considering who they come from... DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits

"Former times"? What does that mean specificly? Also, why did you remove the link and turn it into a reference? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the claim that "The main motives for the mass killings seems to have been a plan of ethnic cleansing and political cleansing, that is to say, elimination of potential enemies of the communist Yugoslav rule, including members of German and Italian fascist units, Italian officers and civil servants, parts of the Italian elite who opposed both communism and fascism and even Serb, Slovenian and Croatian anti-communists". It cites as its reference Carl Savić in his article on Yugoslavia and the Cold War (http://www.serbianna.com/columns/savich/085.shtml). If you take the trouble to read the article, Savić makes no such claim.

Firstly, there were undoubtedly reprisals after the Italian capitulation in 1943, but whether there were "mass killings" is highly questionable.
Secondly, there was no attempt at ethnic cleansing against the Italians or anyone else by the Partisans. Anyone with even the most basic understanding of Partisan strategy and the subsequent policy of Yugoslavia knows that they were the only ones ever to seriously attempt to stamp out ethnic divisions and suspicions in the region. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Another matter, in the recently added "Periods of the exodus" section I found the 1943 exodus period, is there actual confirmation of some kind mass Italian emmigration in 1943, I mean this was wartime!? DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 22:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Edits in November 28

I did several edits. They are mainly evident corrections of historical errors. They are self evident from the wikilinks. They do not affect the "political" POV of the article.--Giovanni Giove (talk) 13:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni approvo il tuo testo e integrerò: collaboriamo con l'amico sloveno che mi sembra in buona fede.
Slovenian friend AlasdairGreen27, this proposal by DIREKTOR or message number 4 is vandalism!!!! In next edit I add other links and fix link of Slovenian historian Darovec: your link is uncorrected then impossible to visualize! LEO, 28 nov 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 (talk) 14:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words about me, Leo. The link is http://www2.arnes.si/~mkralj/istra-history/naslovna.html
Feel free to correct it if it doesn't work for some reason. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 14:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Look out!

LEO is here, editing from 151-numbered IPs. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

What is your problem???? Why removed my version???? LEO, 28 nov 2007