Talk:Organization X

Untitled

I have just edited and expanded this article. I believe that it now gives an accurate idea of how X is seen both by Greeks and international academics. I have kept someone's use of the word notorious as it seems fair - X was one of the best known of the far-right gangs operating in Athens. Xites have been analysed as fascist, and the British agent Chris Woodhouse, a virulent ant-communist, compared them to the Klu Klux Klan. Bougatsa42 (talk) 03:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I do not agree that material from, say, David Close (which if often not referenced itself) is acceptable but records from the Greek Communist Party which give names, dates and places are not. (I have only referenced Close as he is so popular with the far right, and being anti-ELAS I presume he must have very good reason for criticising their opponents. I draw the line at Woodhouse though ....) I have removed the reference to the shooting from hotels, as although one source involves X, other evidence refers only to the Battalions. Bougatsa42 (talk) 20:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, the KKE has a bone in the issue as a major involved party, and its views on the Dekemvriana and the Civil War are anything but unbiased. Of course its sources can be used, but their neutrality will always be suspect, not so much for the events themselves but on claims of "the campaign of provocation of Athenians orchestrated by the British" or the size of the quarter-million demonstration and who actually fired the shots and why, where accounts differ. In general, it is best to avoid such sources, there's no lack of more neutral bibliography on the issue. Constantine ✍ 07:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, take the situation post December, when bodies were dug up out of Athens, mutilated, and paraded before Citrine as ELAS atrocities. Marion Sarafis and Heinz Richter have personally spoken to people who saw their relatives buried intact only to have them dug up and paraded, but no names given. On the other hand, KKE presented a report in 1945 detailing dozens of names, date and mode of death, place of burial, relative involved, etc etc. There was plenty of opportunity to discredit these findings, if they were false. Nobody has done so. I'm not very impressed with the view that such detailed and objective reporting has to be ignored because it's from the KKE, whereas any unsubstantiated opinion from, say, a British academic is acceptable and 'encyclopedic'. Likewise I do not accept the KKE's unsubstantiated opinions.

The KKE reports on provocation post-liberation likewise give details that could have have been checked any time. I don't accept that the Greek or British right can redefine 'provocation' so that it does not include arming collaborators and setting them in the centre of Athens, or British soldiers attempting to disarm ELAS members or trampling on Greek flags. (Sarafis gives details of some such incidents, which he says are countless. Generally they do not overlap with those of the KKE, along with the file no. of the letters of complaint, but I suppose he doesn't count either.)

Note that on the Aris Velouchiotis page, Woodhouse, the anti-communist special agent who went on to help bring down Iran's only democratically elected government ever, is quoted in all seriousness as saying that Aris fought more Greeks than Germans ...

It is quite incredible that anyone is questioning who fired the shots on 3 December '44 in this day and age (no, valid accounts do not differ), but this is not the appropriate place to discuss the Dekemvriana.

I am neither Greek nor left-wing (and am probably the only neutral person contributing to these pages). I would be happy to believe that ELAS was made up of monsters and only fought Greeks, the Chites were wonderful people and a major resistance movement, and that the EDES and EKKA were not essentially mercenaries doing the British bidding. All I need is the evidence. Bougatsa42 (talk) 08:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Erm, sorry to say so, but you do seem very biased to me. And I am saying this as both a Greek and as someone with strong Leftist family tradition. You cannot seriously portray one side entirely in white and the other in black, or ignore the social and political complexities of WW2-era Greece in favour of a clear-cut but unrealistic narrative of EAM victims and rightist murderers. The Chites were thugs, yes, and the British role was disgraceful, but EAM also was no Salvation Army, and it was not exclusively and selflessly dedicated to fighting the Germans without ulterior motives or without having shed innocent blood itself. If this were a forum, I could tell you several dozen stories of loyal EAM members who were turned upon by their comrades for various reasons of internal politics or in the name of "party discipline", stories of people intent on remaining uncommitted who were forcibly recruited or forced by reprisals or threats into one camp or the other, etc. But it isn't a forum here, and the simple fact is: KKE was a major participant in one of the most controversial conflicts in Greek history, and using its own sources to the exclusion of others manifestly does not serve to provide a balanced or nuanced version of events. This much should be self-evident. I also remind you that it is not Wikipedia's role to pass judgement on events, people or groups, but to report what happened and what scholars think were the reasons for it.

Constantine ✍ 09:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

So I am using KKE sources to the exclusion of all others? Funny, I thought I had used a range of sources for my contribution ... BTW, the article is not about EAM-ELAS but about X. Bougatsa42 (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nazi Collaborators

Many scholars deem Khi or its members as Nazi collaborators. Certainly we can not be sure if Grivas (hence/or X) was a nazi collaborator. But many authors have added a question mark that needs to be presented in the article (and lede) Τζερόνυμο (talk) 06:28, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

• Daniel Ganser (2004) p 213

"The turn around of the British came as a shock to ELAS and its difficulties increased when former Nazi collaborators and right-wing special units, such as the fascist X Bands of Cypriot soldier George Grivas, with British support started to hunt and kill ELAS resistance fighters. Churchill, who observed the battle from a distance, noticed however that the X Bands, for complete lack of popular support, never numbered more than 600 Greeks and hence ELAS remained the strongest guerrilla on the territory"

• Britain and the Revolt in Cyprus, 1954-1959 - Robert Holland p29

"It was during, and particularly after, the Second World War that Grivas' career became murky. He first became a national figure towards the end of the short-lived resistance to the German invasion of Greece in the spring of 1941. Instead of lying low in Athens, like some other senior military figures, he took to the hills. Whether while 'on the run' he undertook any hostile actions against German forces or installations remains problematical. There were allegations that he took money from the occupying authorities (if so, he was hardly alone); it was also alleged that his chief role throughout enemy occupation was that of an extreme right-wing activist dedicated to the return of the monarchy. Certainly during the civil war which got under way in Greece after September 1944, Grivas formed a para-royalist body, Khi, which hunted down Communists in the most brutal fashion."

• David French Fighting EOKA: The British Counter-Insurgency Campaign on Cyprus, 1955-1959 p.47

During the Axis occupation he worked with other extreme right-wing activists for the return of the monarchy, and formed an underground militia, Khi, sometimes also known as the ‘X’ organization. Grivas was a fanatical anti-communist. His organization directed its operations against the Greek communists rather than the occupying powers, and earned a justified reputation for the brutality of its...

• Andrew Novo (2010) On all fronts: EOKA and the Cyprus insurgency, 1955-1959 p=66

"Because of Grivas’s central role in the creation of EOKA, its political credentials and organisation were a legacy of the Greek Civil War and the ideals of Xhi. After the disintegration of the Greek army in 1941, Grivas formed Xhi as a resistance organisation to combat the Nazi occupation. Almost as soon as it was formed, however, Xhi engaged in violence against the rival communist underground.118 Once Germany withdrew its forces from Greece, Xhi played a small role in the civil war, where its anti-communist role was front and centre. As one historian writes: ‘Upon Liberation it [Xhi] suddenly blossomed out as an aggressive, anti-Communist body.’119 Xhi’s rather dull performance during the occupation and its invigorated activity after the liberation meant that a number ‘of its [Xhi’s] associates were tainted with the stigma of collaboration; and its weapons, on the Colonel’s [Grivas’s] own admission, were obtained from the enemy [Germany]. For this reason, the British refused X[hi]’s offer to help fight the Communists in 1944’"

Thanks, Τζερόνυμο (talk) 06:28, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Daniel Ganser is a known conspiracy theorist and thus is an unreliable source. The other books did not state as a fact that Organisation X had collaborated with the Axis Powers, they only made allegations thereof. - Hu753 (talk) 08:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

NPOV

Whoever wrote much of the article obviously had a strong right-wing bias in favor of organization X and its actions.

There are numerous sections where EAM is accused of collaboration or of being "anti-Greek" with no evidence. Despite there being significant evidence that organization X in fact collaborated with the Axis.

Large parts of this article need to be significantly edited or rewritten entirely. The Boleshevik Walrus (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

If you look at the history of the page the POV content was inserted by user:Mourtzas two days ago. I restored the article to its previous state and removed the Battle of Thiseio section since its entire unreferenced.--Catlemur (talk) 18:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The Organisation X article is a mix of leftist propaganda and Questionable References and statistics. This article needs to be erased and written from scratch. At The same time EAM attacked Athens they also attacked EDES in norther Epirus in their attempt to consolidate their power in Greece and overthrow the GOverment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mourtzas (talk • contribs) 09:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

This article is far from the reality

Half of the information here are false and it is a mix of memoirs from junta sympathizers and extreme monarchists. After the article is completed in greek , i will try to fix this one. Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 14:20, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ιπποκράτης2020: How is the current article version (22/9/20) even remotely right wing?--Catlemur (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

half of information here is used in books of Chi ex-members . i dont care whether the contributors of the article are right wing or left wing or centrists or phalangists or stalinists. i really dont care.

The article is POV friendly to Organisation X. look the greek article for example and see the vast difference there. (in the greek article i have used only the works of historians and i only mentioned the opinion of historians). I will try to contribute to this one as well. If you want to help me achieve NPOV, it would be great. Thank you Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ιπποκράτης2020: Can you enlighten me as to who are the Chi ex-members among the authors of the books cited in the article? Preferably with proof of your claim.--Catlemur (talk) 18:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Catlemur:give me one hour and i will give you the sources that you need. ( i correct myself)i dont mean that books of chi members are used in the article. i mean that claims like 200.000 members , which indicate a massive popular following are simply not true, even the british military intelligence claims that in 1946 maximum number of "chites" was 50.000 Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 18:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Ιπποκράτης2020: So all of a sudden you shift your narrative from "This article is almost exclusively citing sources written by nazis." to "I disagree with 1 claim in the article." while failing to provide a single source to back up what you are saying. The 200.000 number comes from Kousouris, Dimitris (2015). Δίκες τών Δοσίλογων 1944-1949 [Trials of Collaborationists 1944-1949]. This is a book I got at a Greek public library. As explained in another part of the article X served as a tool for collaborationists to whitewash their past and pose as former resistance fighters. If you consider this as nazi propaganda then I don't really know what to tell you.--Catlemur (talk) 19:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

extreme monarchists are not nazis.

firstly the resistance activites of X are considered by menelaos haralampides to be totally marginal so the 'resistance part' imo needs to be removed and write it simply as militant organisation in the beggining Source page 348 Χαραλαμπίδης, Μενέλαος (2011). Η εμπειρία της κατοχής και της αντίστασης στην Αθήνα. Το εαμικό αντιστασιακό κίνημα στις ανατολικές συνοικίες της Αθήνας: Καισαριανή, Βύρωνας, Παγκράτι, Γούβα, Υμηττός (Διδακτορική διατριβή). Αθήνα: Εθνικό και Καποδιστριακό Πανεπιστήμιο Αθηνών.

Secondly the organisation as stated by ex chi member omiros papadopoulos, between 1942-1945 had only 712 members (spiros papageorgiou grivas and x pages 684-715) and although kousouris is a very reliable source, he might be exaggerating on X's members

Thirdly according to Cypriot Historian Alexios Alecou, the organisation from 1944 began to showcase fascist characteristics page 80 Alecou, Alexios (2016). Communism and Nationalism in Postwar Cyprus, 1945-1955: Politics and Ideologies Under British Rule , which is not mentioned in the article

I apologize if i sounded offensive, i just thought that these are key points that need to be mentioned Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Two things before I disengage from this conversation. You are hugely misinterpreting the content of the article and you are trying to right great wrongs which is not helpful at all.--Catlemur (talk) 19:33, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

You walked away from this conversation but you never disproved the points raised by the previous poster. You just chose to disregard everything because of semantics. This doesn't make those references wrong, it just shows that you had no answer or it was more that you expected to get. The point they initially raised still stands; the article needs improvement. Also, signing off, you are not worth an answer from me. I am disengaging. Artorias Sanchez (talk) 04:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Organization X are not Axis collaborators

There is no irrefutable proof that Organization X had ever collaborated with the Axis Powers or their collaborationist organisations. If Georgios Grivas was truly an Axis collaborator, he would have obediently joined the so-called Security Battalions when asked to do so. - Hu753 (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

The following sources will be quite edifying.

1. "Grivas and X". The Lost Archive, Spyros Papageorgiou, "Nea Thesis" Publications

2. "Organization X", Three Years, Three Centuries", Homeros Papadopoulos. "Nea Thesis" Publications

3. "The Epic of the Makrygiannis Gendarmerie Regiment", N. Samuel, "Free Thought" Publications--Hu753 (talk) 11:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

As already duscussed in el.WP, these are not RS. Authors are not experts, historians or reliable.Cinadon36 18:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Looked up Nea Thesis on Google and it seems like they published a book about the supposed traces of Ancient Greek Civilization on Easter Islands and books by Konstantinos Plevris. Seems to be suspect to say the least.--Catlemur (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

In that case, I formally withdraw my claims and apologise for offering up publications from a publishing house which prints out conspiracy theories as a source.--Hu753 (talk) 06:31, 22 June 2022 (UTC)