Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Piratis if “international law” is your ally, which I admit it is, it doesn’ t help too much u know. Speaking of reality I cannot see how resolutions and all the same help you except offering some psychological compensation.

Of course international law helps. If it wasn't for international law what would stop UK, USA, Israel and some others of the friends of Turkey to recognize the "trnc"?
Surely international law didn't help in the way that it helped Kuwait after the invasion by Iraq, since the resolutions of 1974 were not enforced as those that have the power didn't have the interests to do so.
However international law is what will give us the right to liberate our country once the balance of power will change.

It is the same body which offered you lately the “diavolic” Annan plan. I am sure u did not find it in accord with your interpretation of international law…

That plan was just an offer, which is now null and void, and nothing more. Not even the UN claimed that their plan was according to international law. This is why we had every right to reject it.

I can easily tell you a reason why GCs should accept partition or the violations against their human and legal rights. Because they are weak. Add another one. They are not in position to do anything for the opposite. There are many values beside human rights and dignity.

But you didn't answer the question: What will we gain???

I mean if a huge strong man comes against you and starts beating you up, what would you do? Just make a cold calculation and come to the conclusion that you have no chances against him, and therefore bend, let him screw you, and tell him that he has the right to do with you whatever he feels like? The only word that could describe this is masochism.

Wouldn't it be better to fight for your rights? Even if you would be beaten up anyways, you would have at least kept your dignity, and you would have caused to him some scratches and bruises or if you are lucky some more serious injury.

Let me tell u about the latter. How the GC feel coming in the “occupied” areas. What degree of dignity they have? I know it hearts, does it not?

Those GCs that go to the occupied areas just for tourism have no dignity. They are not many, just the same people that go over and over, mostly unethical people of the underworld that go to the casinos.
I never went to the occupied areas.

Human rights. The fashion of 20th history. Liberals embrased the idea because it serves their purposes. OK. Everything comes again to interpretation. Sorry I don’ t believe in human rights. It is simply another theoretical weapon in the history of ideas much employed by politics, as always.

What does it mean you don't believe in human rights? If somebody violets your human rights you will not even complain or fight back??

Your country is not for sale. Ah this sounds heroic. Go to the Land Registrar of your region and you may change your mind.

In land registry they sell property, not the country. The property sold is always under the control and the laws of the state.

Democracy is a compromise by nature. Power of course can be shared fairly and proportionately like it is done in all other democratic countries GC side already accepted otherwise in the 77-78 agreements. There are systems and systems on what concerns governance. How u interpretate democracy and all the same is another issue.

We never accepted otherwise. I don't have my own interpretation of democracy. Democracy can have different shades, but there are some fundamental principles that a system without them can not be a democracy. (of course nobody stops some undemocratic country to claim that it is democratic. But in Cyprus I want a true democracy, not just the label)

Here is how the US (a federation) defines democracy:

All democracies are systems in which citizens freely make political decisions by majority rule. But rule by the majority is not necessarily democratic: No one, for example, would call a system fair or just that permitted 51 percent of the population to oppress the remaining 49 percent in the name of the majority. In a democratic society, majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn, serve to protect the rights of minorities--whether ethnic, religious, or political, or simply the losers in the debate over a piece of controversial legislation. The rights of minorities do not depend upon the goodwill of the majority and cannot be eliminated by majority vote. The rights of minorities are protected because democratic laws and institutions protect the rights of all citizens.

Diane Ravitch, scholar, author, and a former assistant U.S. secretary of education, wrote in a paper for an educational seminar in Poland: "When a representative democracy operates in accordance with a constitution that limits the powers of the government and guarantees fundamental rights to all citizens, this form of government is a constitutional democracy. In such a society, the majority rules, and the rights of minorities are protected by law and through the institutionalization of law."

These elements define the fundamental elements of all modern democracies, no matter how varied in history, culture, and economy. Despite their enormous differences as nations and societies, the essential elements of constitutional government--majority rule coupled with individual and minority rights, and the rule of law--can be found in Canada and Costa Rica, France and Botswana, Japan and India.

THE PILLARS OF DEMOCRACY

* Sovereignty of the people.
* Government based upon consent of the governed.
* Majority rule.
* Minority rights.
* Guarantee of basic human rights.
* Free and fair elections.
* Equality before the law.
* Due process of law.
* Constitutional limits on government.
* Social, economic, and political pluralism.
* Values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation, and compromise.

from http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/w ... hatdm2.htm

[ge0rg10]

mem mate I like the way you think and your posts are of the highest quality but

"The GCs actually invited the Turks to invade in order to liberate them from the Venetians, and when they arrived, they helped with the conquest and the ousting of Venetian settlers.”

I have to say I don’t agree with you on this one, it looks as though you have taken a page out of the infamous user ottoboy's book. Here is a part of the page on Cyprus from wikipedia:

Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked the peoples of Cyprus at will. The Greek population of Cyprus were given weapons by the Venetians and fought the attacking Ottomans.

In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpasia Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.
In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. A fleet commanded by Piyale Pasha carried about 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Kara Mustafa Pasha to the island and landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell (9 September 1570), 20,000 Nicosian Greeks were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

I would also like to tell piratis your post is brilllllllllllllllliant but I would like to say I’ve been to the occupied north for a day out, and it was nice, I didn’t spend a penny there but we went for a day out to see that castle that the Greeks defended against Richard the lion heart during the third crusade. Does this mean I have no dignity and that I am unethical?

[mem101]

George, thanks for the compliment. Regarding my comments on the Ottoman empire this line in particular is highly contradictory to what I have read:

"Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked the peoples of Cyprus at will. The Greek population of Cyprus were given weapons by the Venetians and fought the attacking Ottomans. "

The rest of what you have written I have read also since then, please see my post above. I am just beginning to do some reading of academic books to improve my knowledge of the Ottoman empire so until I feel I am well informed enough to make my own inferences, I will take on board everything that yourself and others on this thread have told me. I'm sure you are aware that absolutley anyone who visits Wikipedia can make ammendments to entries as they see fit which doesn't make it the most reliable source.

[T_C]

Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked the peoples of Cyprus at will. The Greek population of Cyprus were given weapons by the Venetians and fought the attacking Ottomans.

In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpasia Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.
In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. A fleet commanded by Piyale Pasha carried about 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Kara Mustafa Pasha to the island and landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell (9 September 1570), 20,000 Nicosian Greeks were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

Sorry but this "evidence" on the Ottomans is getting rather boring. Is there any other sources which support these claims? Because the same source being used over and over again is giving me doubts on it's accuracy.

[ge0rg10]

Throughout the period of Venetian rule, Ottoman Turks raided and attacked the peoples of Cyprus at will. The Greek population of Cyprus were given weapons by the Venetians and fought the attacking Ottomans.

In 1489, the first year of Venetian control, Turks attacked the Karpasia Peninsula, pillaging and taking captives to be sold into slavery. In 1539 the Turkish fleet attacked and destroyed Limassol. Fearing the ever-expanding Ottoman Empire, the Venetians had fortified Famagusta, Nicosia, and Kyrenia, but most other cities were easy prey.
In the summer of 1570, the Turks struck again, but this time with a full-scale invasion rather than a raid. A fleet commanded by Piyale Pasha carried about 60,000 troops, including cavalry and artillery, under the command of Lala Kara Mustafa Pasha to the island and landed unopposed near Limassol on July 2, 1570, and laid siege to Nicosia. In an orgy of victory on the day that the city fell (9 September 1570), 20,000 Nicosian Greeks were put to death, and every church, public building, and palace was looted. Word of the massacre spread, and a few days later Mustafa took Kyrenia without having to fire a shot. Famagusta, however, resisted and put up a heroic defense that lasted from September 1570 until August 1571.

Sorry but this "evidence" on the Ottomans is getting rather boring. Is there any other sources which support these claims? Because the same source being used over and over again is giving me doubts on it's accuracy.

mem yeah I know anyone can edit wikipedia but the Cyprus page is under quite a strict watch but yeah I don’t know much about the ottoman empire at all i just thought i should bring that passage to your attention.

turkish_cypriot, that quote is not evidence and this is no court! If it were evidence and this was court who would be the judge, you? I hope not because you seem like a bit of a joker to me!!

On a serious note I was just bringing something that I have read to the attention of someone who looks as though he might like to read it, I didn’t post it with you in mind and to be honest I don’t give a rat ass if you find it boring or not. If you’ve read the same passage before why read it again and then tell me off that you’ve read it before. Go on wikipedia and type in Cyprus and at the bottom of the page it will say where the information is from. Also people using the same source would surely give the impression that the source is well known and so must be somewhat creditable.

[T_C]

On a serious note I was just bringing something that I have read to the attention of someone who looks as though he might like to read it, I didn’t post it with you in mind and to be honest I don’t give a rat ass if you find it boring or not.

Well if you didn't notice Piratis posted the exact same quote in this very thread (and many others) so you were rather late in doing so. Therefore you have failed to bring anything to the attention of anyone. All you have done is re-cycled a re-cycled quote hence my reply to you, which may I add was not intended to offend you.

If you type the beginning of that quote in the "search" option of this forum you will see that that particular quote has been mentioned to death!

If it is so credible then surely there must be other articles which support these claims? Where are they?

If you’ve read the same passage before why read it again and then tell me off that you’ve read it before.

Because you posted it! DUH!

Go on wikipedia and type in Cyprus and at the bottom of the page it will say where the information is from. Also people using the same source would surely give the impression that the source is well known and so must be somewhat creditable.

No! Not if it's just the one source that is being used over and over and over again it isn't.

[lupusdiavoli]

OK Piratis,

Let me codify the diagreement; on one hand human rights, international law, values, ethics etc. On the other hand reality and balance of power.

You can wait until the balance shift. What then? A change of roles?

Nice example the one with the aggresive man. Well it seems to me that your side is bending over the last 80-90 years. From defeat to defeat. Minor Asia or Ionia as u call it is lost. East Thrace, hald of Cyprus... Don' t u get it. Or u just wait the balance to schift? Nothing changed the last decades on the balance of power rather it turns in favour of Turkey in a way. I do accept though that the Greek side has on advantage, that is the E.U membership. But Turkey has other options too u know. It is a matter of geography.

Anyway I don' t want to stay on this circle. Not the other one ragrding the Ottoman and the rest. OK for the West Ottomans were the barbarians etc. Eveybody needs a myth in order to prevail.

Do u know for example that for many years Turks served in the Byzantium army? Do u have in mind the genious diplomacy of Byzantium used by giving wifes to Turks/Ottomans officials? Do u know that most of the high ranking clerks during Ottoman period were Greeks? That there is a bloody history also it is inevitable. But any empire cannot hold unless a degree of tolerance exists, a taxations system who allows economic balance also. As any empire the Ottoman decomposited gradually.

Human rights? It is a well known debate in academic circles u know. Liberals employed the human rights theory for their purposes ie. it was a spearhead during cold war. The basic concept is that since u r human u have some rights. Well I don' t believe in this theory. I do not accept their existence. It is a theoretical attitude. But as u don' t have in mind the relevant debate I prefer to stop here.


I say again. U lost a war, u thinl that by setting forth the human rights issue is enough to change reality? Then hold the European convention of human rights, the magna charta also. any known bill of rights, the european treaties also and marsh against reality. Good luck.

[ge0rg10]

i am sorry turkish_cypriot joker, Piratis used the exact same quote yes, i skip past that part once i read it was from the us or something but then that shows that two websites have said the same thing and you know that two is twice as good as one. When you ripped my last post apart you didnt coment on the fact that i said

"Go on wikipedia and type in Cyprus and at the bottom of the page it will say where the information is from"

I havent checked but it should say where the information came from, at the bottom of the page. oh yeah and i am sorry if i offended you. post ya soon bye

p.s. (how do ya do smilies?)

[T_C]

i am sorry turkish_cypriot joker, Piratis used the exact same quote yes, i skip past that part once i read it was from the us or something but then that shows that two websites have said the same thing and you know that two is twice as good as one. When you ripped my last post apart you didnt coment on the fact that i said "Go on wikipedia and type in Cyprus and at the bottom of the page it will say where the information is from"

Why should I of commented on the wikipedia suggestion when it was irrelevant to the point I was trying to make? I asked for people to stop using the same quote and find another one..to that you suggested I go to wikipedia....?!?!?!?

Two is twice as good as one? Hmmmm...ok.....

I can be a joker at times but in this instance you have completely out done me. I take my hat off to you and I have the urge to bow down infront of my computer in your honour.

I havent checked but it should say where the information came from, at the bottom of the page. oh yeah and i am sorry if i offended you. post ya soon bye

You haven't offended me mate, quite the opposite actually

p.s.(how do ya do smilies?)

http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?t=10167

[seleucus Nicator]

seleucus Nicator,

For the record: I've seen this term "brainwashed" around the forum but seeing it used on me, I find it, quite frankly, offensive. I am my own person, I have my own mind and would never be subjective to "brainwashing" by any stretch of the imagination. Sorry but I just needed to get that off my chest.

With regards to the ottoman rule, I must admit that I have not done extensive reading on the subject and what I wrote there was based on a few articles I read. I intend to do some reading on the Ottoman Empire as whole in the very near future. Thanks for the info, can I ask for your sources? History is a sort of hobby of mine as well - to the extent that I enjoy reading the occasional unbiased (or as unbiased as possible) historical books.

Also, I think the point I was trying to make was that the TC and GC communities lived together in relative peace and that the GC had a sense of autonomy. I'm now aware of the tax situation but I thought the TCs had to pay taxes too and that there was a joint uprising against their taxers on at least one occasion. When referring to TCs I'm talking about turks who were forced to migrate to cyprus, and converted catholics. Again bear in mind I haven't done extensive reading on the subject.

What is brainwash for me
that Ottomans helped the culture, religion and language (of the Christian subjects)to survive within their 500 years of control.
Civilizations survives only if they have strong elements not because they are helped from somebody.The Balcan areas that where mostly under latin control they were also survive their culture elements(like Cyclades and Ionian islands).
if Ottomans really wanted to change the religion of them they could easily do it but after who is gonna pay taxes.
The main mistake (my personal opinion)of Ottomans was that they didn't adopt the Greco Roman heritage (Arabs adopted but later prevailed more conservative elements and follow the decline ) and they "allowed" Byzantine -Greek (i.e. Eastern Roman) scholars to fled west to Rome and Venice, bringing with them classical Roman and Greek texts as well as their knowledge of the classical civilizations, much of which had been lost in Western Europe for centuries.Actually western Europe became the carrier ,after the fallen of Byzantine empire and the decline of Arabs , of the Greco Roman tradition and the development of the logic as mean to explain everything.
If Ottomans had adopted the Greco Roman tradition ,history of the empire would be totally different.
My sources are many but the letter (of Archbishop) i copy it from History of the Hellenes tome 15 page 361 edition Domi (the writer of this chapter is Georgios Dionisiou).
The terms G/C and T/C are wrong didn't exist this period thats why i m not using them.