Cyprus-Forum.com

[CopperLine]

Nikitas,
You are right to say that expulsion, population transfer etc are contrary to international law, human rights conventions, etc. Unfortunately, perhaps, these laws and conventions did not exist until towards the middle of the twentieth century onwards. In fact the basis of modern international order, including the basis of states today, is based I would argue on those massive population transfers - massive human brutalities. Some of these brutalities were 'legal' in the sense that state leaders and negotiators agreed with each other that XY & Z would be transferred/exchanged for AB & C and that this should be done through a formal agreement. Many transfers/exchanges were also done 'legally' when carried out 'domestically' for example, under the Nazi Third Reich across the Europe under its rule. And of course many were done without a care for 'legality'.

To be honest I don't understand your argument regarding 'signing away' or non-forthcoming signature'. It seems to me that once a law has been instituted internationally and so long as that law is in place there is no possibility that rights can be signed away. After all if a right is established as inalienable then, by definition, no one can alienate it either for themselves or on behalf of someone else.

[Kifeas]

First of all, these ridiculous persons (Al-Khasawneh and R. Hatano) make the allegation that “45,000 Turkish Cypriots cleansed from Greek Cyprus, 21 160,000 Greek Cypriots cleansed from Turkish Cyprus,” as if there were two pre-exiting countries in Cyprus, the Turkish Cyprus and the Greek Cyprus, out of which the existing non-ethnic (minority) populations were transferred (exchanged) between themselves! It is a hilarious, unhistorical, ridiculous and dissemble "assumption!"

They do even claim that the 45,000 TCs from the south were ethnically cleansed, when in fact they had voluntarily moved into the north, not 1974 that Turkey invaded, but in 1975!

Rubbish!

[CopperLine]

Piratis,
'Some crap' from Al-Khasawneh whom, you say, 'not even his mother knows' is in fact the assessment of one of the UN Rapporteurs in 1992-93. Not only would his mother have known this but you too, had you been bothered to read half a dozen more words.

Where Piratis did I say anything about "Since for GCs ethnic cleansing is unacceptable, while for the TCs it is acceptable" ? Where in my post did you contrive to interpret those words ? I neither said nor implied anything of the sort.

[GeorgeV97qaue]

Does it really matter what some bloke said all them years ago. Bottom line gents is what are we going to solve the problem.

[CopperLine]

Kifeas,
Read the bloody article will you !

Al-Khasawneh and R. Hatano do NOT make this claim. They are the UN Rapporteurs who are quoted - just one sentence - at the beginning of the article. The article is written by Jennifer Priest - again as I explained in my first post.

What is wrong with you guys ? Why don't you read the words in front of you ?

The ironic thing is that Priest quotes figures from de Zayas whose figures you guys had no problem with earlier in the year when he was being used in a discussion about ECHR cases.

[Kifeas]

Okay Copper, now that you have "proven" to us that it already happened in the past, and there is a precedent that "ethnic cleansing (sorry, population transfer /exchange) has contributed or constituted the formulation of nation-states, we “intent” to “consider” granting recognition and independence to the "Turkishcypriotland" of our Turkish Cypriot "neighbors!" Is there anything else you would like us to consider?

[CopperLine]

as if there were two pre-exiting countries in Cyprus, the Turkish Cyprus and the Greek Cyprus, out of which the existing non-ethnic (minority) populations were transferred (exchanged) between themselves! It is a hilarious, unhistorical, ridiculous and dissemble "assumption!"

They do even claim that the 45,000 TCs from the south were ethnically cleansed, when in fact they had voluntarily moved into the north, not 1974 that Turkey invaded, but in 1975!

Kifeas, with the sole exception of the number 45,000, not a single word of what you've written here can be found in the article I posted and which you are supposedly referring to.

[Kifeas]

The ironic thing is that Preece quotes figures from de Zayas whose figures you guys had no problem with earlier in the year when he was being used in a discussion about ECHR cases.

[Kifeas]

Copper, why don't you instead provide the link so that we can read the original, where presumably original fonts and formatting are retained, so that we can understand who is saying what, where the headlines appear and where the quote numbers are!

[Nikitas]

Copperline,

Re signing away.

I may have an inalienable right to ancestral land in northern Cyprus. If my government enters into a deal to give it away, and that deal is given approval in a plebiscite and subsequent international agreement my right will become very "alienable" even if there is no consent from myself. I will not be able to do a thing about it. Perhaps this is what Mr Talat thought of when he said that the law (EU law) favors the Greek side and that the Turkish Cypriots have to go above the law. Politics is, in some ways, a means to circumvent the legal order via agreements.