Talk:Georgios Grivas

Untitled
Ok, can you site a reliable source, or do you just expect people to just take your word for it.

Grivas's X organisation was not aimed at liberating Greece from Germans. Grivas and his X were German collaborators. I am surprised that I am the first to notice this horrific revision of history. As the war draw to it's end and the allies were preparing for the aftermath, the British regarded Grivas's men as an effective ally against the leftist National Popular Front (gr. EAM), the communist-run partisans.During the months after the country's liberation (October 1944) the X were fully pardoned and the former nazists became the mainstay of the new gendarmerie. On December the 3rd, 1944, the EAM organised a rally against it's exclusion from the government posts and against the reinroduction of former collaborators into the armed forces. Grivas's snipers opened fire, killing scores of people and leading to the December conflict: EAM partisans faught the newly formed police and thousands of British troops for control of the capital. Grivas's extreme nationalism and anti-communist were more than evident in his return to Cypus. Turkish-Cypriots and AKEL communists (who were rightly suspicious of a guerilla movement led by the notorious Grivas and favoured mass political action against the colonial rule instead) were dubbed as traitors and executed.

Cleaning
I removed an external link because it was broken. I also removed statements like "X was definetely a terrorist organisation" and "the coop(=coup?) lead to the turkish invasion", not because I disagree with them politically but because I think they don't really fit in a Wikipedia article. Instead I ve tried to include all points of view on X and since Grivas was dead when the coup happened there is no point in arguing whether the coup caused the invasion in this article. Mavros 12:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

More about Cyprus
I have added more material about Grivas and Cyprus. I have left the bits about Greece and the Nazi era substantially unaltered.

The coup of 1974 is definitely part of Grivas' legacy. As related in the article, EOKA B had been plotting against Makarios for years, and the fact that is was not used in the actual execution of the coup was more accidental than intentional. And relating the fact that the Turkish military invasion swiftly followed the coup is the least that can be said about the relationsip between the two events.

Disgrace!
Category:Fascists??? Kentucky Colonels??? "X" = German collaborators??? This article is a disgrace on wikipedia. NPOV has totally gone out the window and so has reality! Btw, the December events started when the EAM attacked X members, British troops and anyone else they could get a hold of.

My father served in the Cypriot National Guard 1n 1963-64. As soon as he entered the gate when reporting in for the first time, an officer checked his name and place of birth (village) and automatically placed a red star (communist) on his military papers. I remember my father saying to me that he was not the only one. All of the people with left ideologies were marked by officers for special treatment. My father had a brief meeting with Grivas. Him and three other left ideologists all friends were brought in front of Grivas because they belonged to AKEL and shared similar left-democratic ideologies. Grivas then, used a bayonet to produce a small scar on each side of the soldiers. My father has that scar, and it is at least 4-6 cm long.

What a complete and utter lie! You are really sick, aren't you!
 * Definitely not a lie misguided one.

Grivas was a monster. A number of books written by numerous authors all in Greek will provide evidence about his organisation X. During the resistance in Greece, his organization was collaborating with the Nazis against the resistance in which at the time was mainly ELAS. A sworn anti-communist, Grivas turn to the British for help to wipe out all the Greek communists of ELAS after the end of the WWII. I am tired to hear right-wing nationalists who brought nothing bad destruction to Cyprus trying to turn things around and portray Grivas as a hero. Everybody knows in Cyprus that left-wing Cypriots were not allowed to join EOKA because of their political beliefs. Grivas died before the Turkish Invasion but he was the main man for EOKA B. He was the one who wanted president Makarios dead. All right-wings should not forget that both both Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots voted 97% to unify with Greece. We also know how Great Britain used "Divide and Conquer" to rule Cyprus by forcing right-wing Turkish Cypriots to form TNT and fight the Greek Cypriots. We also know that nationalistic right wing Greek-Cypriots tried to kill as many Turkish Cypriots as possible. Both of my parents are refugees. They lost everything after the invasion. I personally use Wikipedia every day. I feel that Wikipedia has let me down. In the future I think it's prudent to report facts and not to manipulate people by trying to pass lies. And since this article is written in English and not in Greek, I think someone has to edit the whole article about Grivas.


 * In my opinion Grivas is on the top of the list of the Greek heroes of the 20th century. He fought bravely against the British conquerors and no communist traitor can accuse him because he didn't let communists join EOKA. You are an idiot if you believe that the 97% which voted for union included turko-cypriots. The Tc simply didn't voted. So Grivas was helping the British, right? You are completely biased my friend. About WWII, X bought weapons from the Germans, yes. But it wasn't collaborating with them, it just had a silent truce. X's goal was to fight ELAS, who massacred right-wing civilians and wanted to establish a communist dictatorship in Greece. Grivas was a sworn anti-communist, yes. According to you, this is a heavy sin. But if he was a communist a wanted his country to be turned into a puppet of the Soviet Union, and have the fate of Hungary and Romania, he would be hero!!!!!! What you wrote is just a piece of communist propaganda. In Greece, this kind of propaanda is on the school books. But one day this will change... Mitsos 15:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

This is not about communism or imperialism my friend. Grivas was a sworn anti-communist monster who supported the NAZIS. Do we agree on that? If you do not, then we need to stop here. In my opinion, anyone who supported the AXIS during WWII should not be treated as a hero or have monuments build to honor them. Grivas supporters claim that he forced the British out of Cyprus. Did he? Well, the British Bases in Cyprus provide you with all the evidence you need. The British granted us independence because they wanted to and they had to follow similar ideologies granting self determinations to most other ex-British colonies, not because they were forced to. Do you know how many British soldiers were killed during 1955-1959? Well, don't go far because the British Foreign Office has given these numbers that amount to less than 120. Do you know how many Cypriots from EOKA got killed? Well, if I am not mistaken, and try to prove me wrong those numbers are way more than 300 souls. Do you call that a success? In my opinion no. Grivas did cooperate with the British after the Germans left Greece. Do you honestly believe that British did not know where Grivas was hiding in Cyprus. I live in the US my friend and I can definitely tell you that countries such as the US, the British, Israel and Russia are well on top of things. I would first call it a shame, but now I would call it stupidity more than anything else to believe that the US, the British or the Soviets at the time would allow you to unify Cyprus with Greece. Do not forget my friend that we Greeks can never be slaves or change our religion, but that has nothing to do with what the US, Britain or USSR at the time thought of us. They already had an agenda decided, and Turkey was the favorite. I hope you read the conversation that Kissinger had with the British foreign minister at the time. They both knew about the invasion. Doesn't that say something to you. I guess not. Fanaticism seriously damages your judgment. And if you are Greek that you claim to be then you should try your best in the future and do not let your government sell Cyprus as they did in 1974, because we the Cypriots love Greece but we still have a bitter taste since 1974. Don't sell us again...


 * "This is not about communism or imperialism my friend. Grivas was a sworn anti-communist monster who supported the NAZIS." No, he simply didn't fought the Nazis, he didn't supported them. "In my opinion, anyone who supported the AXIS during WWII should not be treated as a hero or have monuments build to honor them." Why do you think that? If you were a German wouldn't you support your fatherland??? Would you become a traitor??? Many soldiers of the Axis fought and died heroicaly. Why shouldn't they have monuments build to honor them? The British Bases in Cyprus are the result of Makarios policy, not Grivas. Grivas was right to oppose Makarios. "Grivas did cooperate with the British after the Germans left Greece." This is blatantly not true. I don't know why exactly the British left Cyprus, but I know that Grivas fought against them, heroicaly, in an inequal battle. Many members of EOKA, like Euagoras Pallikaridis, gave their lives for the independence of Cyprus. You say that the rebellion of EOKA wasn't succesfull because 300 Greeks died and only 120 British. Do you know that more than 200.000 Greeks and only 100.000 Turks died during the War of Independence?? So in your opinion, it was a failure!!!!! You are right, the traitorous "Greek" government in 1974 (Karamanli) did sold Cyprus. "I hope you read the conversation that Kissinger had with the British foreign minister at the time. They both knew about the invasion. Doesn't that say something to you." Of course I know that. I never claimed that's not true. Makarios, Karamanlis and the political establishment of Greece, were the ones who sold Cyprus in 1974. Mitsos 12:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Mitsos read the Cyprus Conspiracy. It is a book.   Also go to a library and start reading. Open up your right wing mind and get more to the center.  Right wingers both Greeks and Turks screwed Cyprus. (UNFanatic 16:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC))

I read much more books than you. I can see it from your knowlege of history. I haven't read this book, but I 'm sure it's going to be a load of leftist crap, if it says that Grivas was a CIA agent! Read what I have written above slowly and carefully. Can you confront my arguments that Grivas was a hero? The "Greek"-Cypriots who were killed by EOKA were TRAITORS. Anyone who supports the independence of Cyprus is a traitor. CYPRUS IS GREECE. THE ONLY SOLUTION IS ENOSIS. Plus, I 'm not a right-winger. I 'm a Nationalist. I 've been called neo-Nazi. Mitsos 17:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Grivas is a disgrace for Cyprus.
Grivas was on the payroll of the CIA trained to get underprivileged Greek-Cypriot youths to fight in his EOKA-B group. HE KILLED GREEK-CYPRIOTS that were for the government of Cyprus. He supported the coup. What ever happened to the democratic process? Telling me that is not a traitor is like telling me there was no Armenian or Pontian genocide. Too bad he died right before the invasion. War criminal and traitor to the Republic of Cyprus. He is no hero.(UNFanatic 19:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC))

What a load of nonsense. You really have absolutely no clue what your are talking about do you?

And then you woke up. Too bad. ΕΟΚΑ Β ΞΑΝΑΧΤΥΠΑ! Mitsos 19:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality dispute
I am marking this article as being of disputed neutrality. The latest editors UNFanatic and Mitsos provide ample evidence of their own lack of neutrality, and of the nature and extent of their biases, on this talk page. The editing history also evidences the editing war they engaged in. EleftherosKyprios 16:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

If you believe that there are aspects of the article that need to be improved, then you should clearly and exactly explain which part of the article does not seem to have a NPOV and why and make some suggestions as to how one can improve the article. I am removing the neutrality dispute for the moment. You can put it back if you wish, but please follow the guidelines. Larisv 20:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

The article seems to be flip-flopping between unequivocal praise and unmitigated condemnation, depending on which editor has worked on it last. Those who fervently admire Grivas, as well as those who passionately despise him, cannot attempt to write an encyclopaedic article about him exclusively from their point of view without having their neutrality challenged. As it currently stands, the article is an unequivocal paean of praise for Grivas. It cites as its only sources Grivas' own memoirs and books, a book written by Spyros Papageorgiou, former public relations officer of EOKA B and member of the coupist government of 1974 (albeit the only one to ever offer a public apology), and one biography of Grivas, and contains both inaccuracies (for but one example, Grivas did not leave Greece after the failure of the counter-coup in 1967 but almost four years later, in 1971 - did it really take him that long to realise that was his only choice to evade house arrest? And where is the evidence that he was at all involved in the counter-coup?) and irrelevances (why is the advance of the Greek Army in 1922 to within 70km of Ankara more relevant to Grivas that the subsequent utter rout and defeat of the Greek Army by the Turks and the disastrous consequences thereof?). It also glosses over important events in which Grivas played a key role. The whole EOKA B era, for example, is dealt with by a single, and almost entirely content-free, sentence - likewise the Kokkina and Kofinou incidents - about the same space afforded the mention of the 1922 advance in which Grivas was but a junior officer in the field. The whole article has the tone of a propaganda piece ("he embarked upon a plan for the realisation his life’s dream, i.e. Enosis"). The neutrality dispute stays until I see an article attempting to treat Grivas as a historical personality rather than as a pure hero or an umitigated villain, containing more facts than unqualified opinion, and not a merely reflecting the editor's personal biases. EleftherosKyprios 14:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. If you claim that an article contains factual inaccuracies then you should point them out. In actual fact none of the factual statements made in the article are in dispute and the article is no more than a series of statements of fact. The only example you have given of an alleged inaccuracy does not actually relate to any statement made in the article. It is true that there is no evidence that Grivas was ever involved in the counter-coup attempt of December 1967 - he actually wasn't - and nowhere in the article is any such suggestion made. What the article does mention is Grivas' involvement in the anti-junta movement between the years 1968 - 1969 along with a relevant source. I can understand your concern about the way the Kokkina and Kofinou events are treated, though it's probably more to do with the fact that the article does not state that either of these events were initiated by Grivas. If it had, then the article would have been inaccurate - the decision to carry out both attack was made by the political leadership, not Grivas, and at least in the latter incident, Grivas had voiced his concerns. Including accusations which are unfounded only to refute them doesn't really make a good biographical article. I have removed a couple of phrases which indeed gave the article the tone of a propaganda piece including the one you mention above. However, I have kept the reference to the participation of Grivas in the advance of the Greek army past Sagarios river which I believe is of interest - though corrected the phraseology to indicate that it's merely a reference to Grivas participation in the particular campaign. I have added however a reference to the fact that Greek army was subsequently routed and defeated and had to completely abandon Asia Minor so as to avoid the previous reference being treated as one sided. Larisv 18:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't really understand the neutrality tag on this. The article lacks some information but seems NPOV. Constantinos7 09:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

disgrace 2! > please do something<
this article is indeed a disgrace for wikipedia, it is Historic fact (taught at school for god's sake!) that Grivas was a traitor who cooperated with the Germans during the occupation of Greece. He had full support from the nazis in exchange for the anti-resistance services his team provided. Not only team X fought against true Greek patriots, who were fighting for freedom, but they also committed criminal acts against unarmed civilians! They pretty much controlled drug dealing and forced many girls to prostitution all these under the coverage of the Germans.

since i discovered wikipedia, NEVER have i seen such an insult to the history of my country, it made me so ungry that i purposely created this wikipedia account so that i can eponymously say that:

this article must be rewritten from scratch! and if no one is willing to do so, i will do it my self as soon as i can!

Vflouris 02:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)vflouris

You are free to have as strong views as you wish on the matter and you have set them out exactly where they belong, in the talk page. The section on X may be very short but it is historically accurate. If one wants to expand then one has to include more information on the formation and activities of X which are clearly the activities of a resistance - albeit a minor one - organization. As for the Greek patriots fighting for freedom and your wish to set the record straight, maybe you can start by creating a page explaining the patriotic motives that necessitated the physical destruction of EKKA and regiment 5/42 and the brutal execution of its leader Colonel Dimitrios Psaros. Not least given that Organization X, having failed to obtain arms and supplies from the British which would have allowed them to carry out military operations against the Nazi's arranged for many of its men to join the guerilla organizations in the mounatain, including EDES and 5/42. Larisv 10:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * right now I am very busy, but starting from next week i will collect all the necessary sources to prove the inaccuracy of this article, at least for the X team part and I am sure that other people will do the same with the EOKA 2 part which contributed greatly to the tragic division of Cyprus.


 * As for your comments on ELAS, all I can say is that it is very sad to see that there are still people in the extreme right that until today don't recognize the true patriotism and the struggles for freedom and democracy of the left
 * Vflouris 11:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)vflouris

There you go, Vasili. Anyone who doesn't recognize that labeling one's political opponents (whether they be EDES, EKKA or "X") as Nazi collaborators - or pimps and drug barons for that matter - and then trying to physically exterminate them is an act of true patriotism that furthers the cause of freedom and democracy belongs to a goulag! Larisv 18:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * you are misinterpreting what i wrote and you are trying to change the subject too!
 * I didn't say anything about EDES and EKKA, all i said is that "X" was a group of traitors and war criminals! EDES is a good example of a right wing resistance group, but still I 'd like to avoid discussing about conflicts between resistance groups during the war (for now at least and until it is necessary) because that is irrelevant to my point which is that Grivas was collaborating with the nazis during the occupation instead of fighting them.
 * Vflouris 18:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)vflouris

Then you are just stating a lie. The same lie used by the Greek Communists and ELAS to justify their coordinated attack with Nazi troops against EDES, the same lie they used when they attacked and slaughtered the men or Regiment 5/42 and its commander Colonel Dimitrios Psaros, the same lie they used when they attacked and slaughtered the men of the resistance organization of Colonel Christos Karahalios in Peloponissos and scores of other smaller nationalist resistance groups. Yet what you fail to acknowledge is that EDES, 5/42 and Karahalios's company (the "right wing" resistance organizations as you call them) included in their ranks "X" members who had left Athens to join the nationalist (as opposed to the communist) resistance movement in the mountain, under instructions from General Grivas, in order to participate in the resistance struggle against the Nazis. In the same manner Grivas had arranged for over 100 of its "X" fighters to secretly leave Greece and join the Greek Army in Egypt in order to take part in the war along side the allied forces against the Axis. "X", Vasilis, was no more than an organizagion of career officers mainly of the 2nd Division of the Greek Army, of royalist leanings (just like most career officers at the time), who had distinguished themselves in the fight Against the axis in the mountains of Epirus and Northern Greece and who certainly did not suddenly turn into "collaborators" when the line fell. They were Greek patriots, albeit loyal to the King, not fascist stooges loyal to the Furer. Grivas had from the outset set the "X" organization at the disposal of the Greek Government in Exile in Cairo, made numerous contacts with the Allied Command in an attempt to obtain arms and coordinate with them the struggle against the Germans and participated in all the meetings held by the "nationalist" resistance movement alongside EDES and EKKA in an effort to coordinate the activities of the non-communist resistance organizations without ever his patriotism and loyalty to the allied cause be put into question. "X" did indeed prove to be one of the most militant and resilient of the "nationalist" resistance groups which managed to resist the ELAS attack both during and after the end of the Nazi Occupation but that is mostly a testament to the organizational skills of Grivas and his continuous efforts to set up a fight-worthy military resistance organization in anticipation of orders and reinforcments in the form of arms and amunitions from the Allies which would have allowed it to become and effective fighting force against the Nazis, assistance which to his dismay and utter frustration never came. But just like EDES, and unlike other "nationalist" resistance groups which had also fallen victims of the relentless and ruthless ELAS attacks, Grivas and "X" consistently refused to "collaborate" or accept assistance not only from the Nazis but also from Greek collaborationist administration. In fact, Grivas and his men had refused to obey drafting order which they had received along with all the other military officers to join the 'Tagmata Asfalias' (the collaborationist security units) and had to go into hiding and loose the allowance they had been receiving as members of the Greek army, just like Grivas had gone into hiding in 1943 when the Nazi's had issued an order for his arrest; and save from a small number of guns which "X" had managed with its very limited means to buy in the black market after the Italian collapse, all the arms which "X" used during the fight against ELAS at the end of the German occupation, it had received directly from British and the Greek government not from the Nazis or the collaborationist administration. The reference to "X" in the article may be brief but it accurately describes in an NPOV manner the actual nature of "X" as a minor resistance organization with limited influence during the Nazi occupation, better known for its participation in the struggle, on the side of the British, to prevent Athens from falling under the control of EAM/ELAS in December 1944. Whatever other strong views you may have against "X" belong here, not in the article.Larisv 21:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Good article
Indeed.Well done. Eagle of Pontus (talk) 11:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Year of birth
Ok, so is it 1898 or 1897? AstarothCY (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 15:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC) Year of Birth definitely 1897 and the date of birth 6.6.1897 (see copy of Birth Register in Leonidas Leonidou, Georgios Grivas Digenis, Viographia, vol.1, p.3.). In fact the birth was on the 5.6.1897 and registering took place the following day by Kallou Xadjumichael, his ante! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Filokypros300 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Well folks, if you think this is bad ...
... cast your eye over the claptrap written about the Organization of National Resistance of the Interior X (Chi). Apparently it was a resistance organisation! Didn't even Woodhouse (who was somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun) compare them to the Ku Klux Klan?

It really is time Wikipedia acknowledged the controversial nature of Greek history 1941-49, not to mention the pusillanimity of the English language versions, and made a serious effort to monitor the relevant articles, as they do with the Palestine issue. Bougatsa42 (talk) 06:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Clearly an attempt at an edit war
Dr.K. has reverted one of my edits, and reverted again. No explanation has been given. My passage was referenced, the original was not. S/he has also accused me via my talk page of waging an edit war. Bougatsa42 (talk) 02:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

X was nazi collaborators
Try the Greek version. It has books from historians and not the lies from a member of X Istoria1944 (talk) 22:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Many books in the Greek version happened to be biased towards EAM/ELAS. If pro-X books are lies from members of Organisation X, then pro-EAM/ELAS books are lies from members of EAM/ELAS which permeate Hellenic academia.- Hu753 (talk) 11:34, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 16:06, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

He said
--2A02:587:801D:1C4C:E45F:5D5A:83B:AD6B (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2022 (UTC)