Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

EOKA was pushing an open door in 1955, but I would like to bring in a personal experience here regarding EOKA. Back in 1958 I think or perhaps 1957, in Famagusta, EOKA murdered two 18 year old British girls while they were taking an afternoon stroll. I was a 7 year old child then and as usual we all turned the radios on to hear the uncensored news from Greece. The killings were portrayed as another glorious chapter in EOKA's history. Immediately after the killings, the British soldiers stopped all buses taking workers back to their villages around Famagusta and asked the workers to form a line. The soldiers then started hitting them with the back of their guns. My father was one of them and since then, I remember, he had kidney problems till the day of his death. Despite being very young, I started associating EOKA with terrorism ever since. The murder of young girls did not make any sense to me. My father also viewed EOKA in a similar manner, despite being on the receiving end that day. I remember him telling me that what they did to me is nothing next to what they did to the two poor girls.

[erolz]

I already answered to Erol regarding this matter in the past. Foreign investment is already limited. Nobody can come here and invest on whatever he likes. There are rules. For example nobody can come here and build a nuclear power plant, nobody can come here and build a factory that will turn the sky from blue to black.In fact in the past the Mazda car manufacturer requested a licence to build a factory here making cars and they refused to them.

The examples you give are not limits on foreign investment they are limits on what is environmentaly acceptable. If the limit applies only to froeginers then it can be considered a limit on foreign investment, but you imply in the above that if a GC wanted to build a nuclear power plant or a factory that will turn the sky from blue to black they would be free to do so without limit for a foreigner would not.
As I continually stress this example of limits to foreign investment is just ONE example that I can pre guess and that I coinsider within the realms of possibility, of 'Cypriot' legisaltion that would materialy affect the two communites in very different ways and detrmientaly to the TC community vs the GC community, yet the 'pre defined list' appraoch to vetos areas of the two communites (or two component states) would provide no protection for TC. I therefore have concerns for all the other areas and especially those that I can not 'pre guess' today and this is why I have problems with a pre defined list of areas the TC community would have veto rights in.

The problem is Erol, that for many TCs, it is not so.In fact it is to legitimise what is not theirs and to profit on the expense of GCs.Do you deny this fact?

I deny it is a FACT that for MANY TC their motivation is to profit from that which is not thiers. Certainly some do, but now we are adown to arguing about what % of TC community makes 'many'. I do not think that TC as a community / people have more people that want to profit from that which is not thiers at the exepense of others than any other group of people.

There are no embargos.Giving licence to do whatever you like with stolen properties (which is what you call embargo) will not limit the problem it will multiply it.

But these embargoes also stop us from doing what we like with property that was always TC, so even if I accepted your thesis above (which I do not) they are still embargoes. Everyone calls them such (except perhaps yourself and some other GC). The people imposing them call them embargoes.

Exchange of properties is a myth. There are no equal to equal properties to exchange. There are 3 times as many GC properties area-wise and 20 times as much valuewise. Exchange of equal to equal valuewise will still leave an unbalance of 1 Vs 19 against the GCs !!

Agreed and equilatbale exchange of properties is a myth - but then who talks of such? Exchange of properties per se is not a myth it's a reality. Certainly call it it an enforced an inequitable exchange of properties if you like, but to say it is a myth is imo misleading and incorrect.

I think you are the ridiculous one. The fact is that within 4 years the British were forced out. You have no facts to prove they would move out in 10,20,30 or 100 years. All you have is a lot of hypotheses.

Come on MicAtCyp - do you REALLY beleieve that without EOKA Cyprus would still be under British rule today?

Makarios was playing on double boards. You cannot take anything he said for granted. Otherwise you will lead yourself to wrong conclussions. The safest way to draw safe conclussions is to look at facts, not speaches.

So when main event says that Makrios was against ENOSIS after independance, I should ignore what Makrios himslef said (and did) after independance and just agree that main source is right? What Makrios said AND what he did make it totaly and absoultely clear (tom em at least) that main sources statement is either a gross misconception on his part or a gross attempt at propaganda.

As a current example, Papadopoulos today stresses he wants BBF. However look at facts. Is he really working towards BBF?What politicians usually say is NOT in line with what they actually do.

Would you prefer a list of things Makrios DID to continue to promote the cause of ENOSIS after indpendance (and saying he still supported ENOSIS is something he DID - for just by saying it it has effects on the whole of Cyprus ) to refute main sources ridiculous claim. If so I can and will provide such a list. however it would be a lot simpler and easier to just recognise that main sources statement was just rubbish and not supported by any facts - just a totaly one sided propaganda based view of events.

[MicAtCyp]

And who defines what a "true federation" is?

Constitution experts have defined the concepts of Federation, in relation to Confederation, or cooperation between 2 separate states.Do some reading. An example of true federation is the German Federation, and the US Federation.

Yet in 67 the GC house of representatives _unanimoulsy_ passed the following resoloution

"Interpreting the age-long aspirations of the Greeks of Cyprus, the House declares that despite any adverse circumstances it will not suspend the struggle conducted with the support of all Greeks, until this struggle succeeds in uniting the whole and undivided Cyprus with the Motherland, without any intermediate stages."

As far as I know the house of representatives issues laws, not resolutions.Any resolution by the house of representatives even a unanimous one (by those who were present AND ONLY THOSE) is as meaningless as anything can be. Secondly you should have known that until 1976 (?) the only Political parties we had with the exception of Akel were those of the Ministers of Makarios! The above statement is as representative of the will of the people much as Makarios’s on and offs statements about Enosis. I will ask you a simple question: do you honestly beleive that if the GCs really wanted Enosis it was so difficult for them to declare it during the 60s? In my opinion it was a piece of cake!

The right to self determination is a human right. The right to political represntation is a human right. They are in the charters of human rights.

Nobody said it is not. What I said it is not a BASIC human right like for example the right for life.Besides the right for self determination presupposes a certain group can be classified as people. After that the ways that right could be excercised depend on many additional factors as well. The right for that group to have it's own political representation also depends on many additional factors as well and it may range from zero to full Political representation. So your assumption that ANY group within ANOTHER group can decide by ITSELF the kind of self determination it will have, and the kind of political representation will have, IS WRONG.

er sorry to be so dumb but what is BBF?

Bizonal Bicommunal Federation.

Says the charters on human rights. These list what rights indivduals have and what rights peoples have and no where does it list a right to kill or use violence.

Obviously you are MIXING up the concept of human rights with other RIGHTS. You cannot say you have no RIGHT to kill for self defense and use that generalisation arbitrarily and absolutely like you did so far. All you can say is that this is not included in the UN charter of HUMAN RIGHTS. I have every RIGHT to get a divorce if I want to, and you cannot tell me I have no such right because it is not in the list of UN human rights..... I hope you understand the difference.

So let me get this straight. GC had a RIGHT to use violence and murder to secure purely GC objectives for Cyprus, but TC did not have such a right according to you? Why? My view is a lot simpler - neither had such a right.

My view is simple too.The GCs had a right to fight for their liberation, and the TCs had a right to fight against their oppression. Our disagreement is that for Eoka there was no other option other than the armed struggle whereas for the TCs there were many other options other than Invading and throwing out of their homes and lands 200,000 GCs and occupying 37% of Cyprus and, and, and....

I do not really understand this. How big is an area? All of Cyprus? A region? A city? A town? A village? A part of a village? A single house? I also fail to understand how such right to 'local' autonaomy would provide us any protection on national issues that were against our will and interestes (like enosis).

The area of the regions of a multiregional Federation extends from a village to a region of your own choice. It's upto you to define it and ask for it. The only thing you have to prove is that you are a clear majority (=more than 67%= 2/3 rds) in that area or many separate areas!

[MicAtCyp]

Heres a letter than one of the "brutal terrorists and murderers" of Eoka wrote a few weeks prior to be hunged by Her Majesty. The letter never reached it's destination and was found recently at the records of the Nicosia prisons.

In the file there is also letter, dd15/6/1956, sent by Zakos to Andreas Karaolis, while he was kept in detention at the kokkinotrimithia prisons

The letter reports the following:

"Dear Andrea,

if you receive this letter you may wonder how I took the initiative to write you, even if we are personally unknown to each other. The guys from your areas that are here in the detention cells with me, talked to me about you. I am the brother of Michalakis Karaolis,and we also have another 3 sisters. I had correspondence with my brother, but they deprived it to me. I neither receive, nor send letters anymore. So if you agree to write to you please answer me back.. I will be very pleased. And together with my letters, I will be sending my regards to my brother who is kept a few cells away from yours through you.

If you allow me I will call you brother from now on, as well as Charilaos because I love you both like my brothers. Please greet Charilaos on my behalf. Also please tell him that if he likes we can corespond together too.

Our life here is "tolerable". We heard about you all, from MichalaKis and we admire your courage through your sufferings.May God help you in your new court trial, get acquitted and return to your homes, with your beloved persons and parents. May God be with you and comfort you in these difficult moments of your life. And you never forget Him. Pray also to Virgin Mary who is a quick comforter and hope bringer to the despaired. Get dressed the armor of God and do not allow any of it's elements be removed. The belt of truth, the armor of devotion, the helmet of hope, the shield of faith and the Greek soul are reciprocal and you should possess them. I know you do, I just remind you of that.

Therefore Andrea, yia sou and may God be your assistant. Greetings from Angelos and Nisiforos. Please confirm receipt of this letter.

[MicAtCyp]

Is it a sin to be kicked out by the stalinist leadership of a party like AKEL? Papapetrou, one of the very few sincere politicians in Cyprus, mentioned publically on tv, something that all people of his generation went through, and nobody came forward to dispute his allegations. Papadopoulos himself, in a letter to the UN in 1964, warned the international community that if the turkish fleet enters Cyprus waters, we would "clean up" the TC's in 18 hours. To deny that a plan existed in which the very existence of the TC's was put in jeopardy is only for thick headed skulls with fascist mentality, so MikAtCyp, keep your bright ideas for youself and make sure you do not take the blinkers off; you will be blinded by the light.

Here comes the chicky Bananidiot once again leaving open doors to escape in case he is accused of calling me thick headed skull with fascist mentality who wears blinkers

Who said it was a sin to be kicked out of Akel?Are you playing crazy that you did not understand what I said? I said it was IMPOSSIBLE for a hard core leftist to be drafted and be trained to apply the Akritas Plan. Papapetrou simply lies when he says he was drafted to do that. And all his allegations that GC teenagers were drafted in 1964 to do that are simply lies. We live here, those who in 1964 were teenagers are today around 55. You cannot spread whatever lies you hear as if nobody lives to verify them just lies.

The statement that the TCs would be killed in case the Turkish army would invade had so much to do with the truth as to what really happened in 1974. The total number of TC massacred is not more than 180. And even that number was due to that very hot air statement, i.e some idiots thought the lies they heard in the past about vanishing innocent people were actully true. Both you and them don't differ in turning lies into dogmas.

I was a 7 year old child in 1958

So you are exactly the same age like Papapetrou. Now tell me how come Papapetrou was drafted to apply the Akritas Plan and you weren’t?

[MicAtCyp]

Slavery and dejuicing?

Canned is it a fact or is it not that the British were drafting all males villagers during the Winter to build roads WITHOUT PAY and against their will to work? If that is not slavery then tell me what it is.
Is it a fact or is it not that they practically stole all the mineral wealth of Cyprus especially all copper? Is it or is it not a fact that they damaged the place beyond repair-go to Skouriotissa to see the polution by yourself even upto date. Is it or is it not a fact that the Standard of Living in Cyprus multiplied by 5 times within 10 years after the British left? If that was not a clear indication that the British were holding back our development then tell me what it was.

On the other hand may I suggest you take your nausea pills before reading something that refers to your country’s dejuicing of their collonies. As for the Ottoman era yes that was worse, does that however give you credit in your opinion?

As for your terrorism definitions perhaps you should go along and find the definition of State terrorism and the definition of Liberation Struggles to enlighten yourself. Secondly pay special attention to the word "unlawful" in your own definitions. The ones who were ulawfully here on the first place were your own Nation. The real Terrorists were the British. And before them the barbarians i.e the Ottomans. I hope you do notice the honourable difference....

Yes, this is merely a hypothesis, but it's one based solidly in the whole sweep of modern history, which I think are pretty firm foundations.

Of course it's hypothesis. What you think does not matter. Look at FACTS. I can always claim the British would NEVER let Cyprus free because Cyprus is an exceptional case for them.Even today their bases seem more important for spying all over the world than anything else.

By the way tell me how you label the attitute of the British today to forbit the villagers to plow their fields, because they are supposely used by them (without compensation of course) as a range field? Depriving of property, State Terrorism, slavery or what? What do you call their insistance to operate their huge transmitting antenas consuming 500 KWH i.e transforming 500 KWH from electric to electromagnetive energy wave drilling every childs brain and blood at an area of at least 5 Km at Ladys mile, injecting them with pure cancer every day?Compare that to the power a mobile phone transimits to the brain of a human which is only a fraction of a Watt. Modern use of the slaves as guinea pigs perhaps?

Have a nice nausea.

[MicAtCyp]

The examples you give are not limits on foreign investment they are limits on what is environmentaly acceptable.

Erol you are right the examples I gave just happened to have environmental implications. My point though is that foreign investment is already limited for many reasons, be it environmental, be it for sucking of resources, or for other reasons.

I therefore have concerns for all the other areas and especially those that I can not 'pre guess' today and this is why I have problems with a pre defined list of areas the TC community would have veto rights in.

In that case you should also accept a Veto coming from the GCs for exactly the same reasons. In other words matters that will benefit you as a community but effect us negatively as a community. If you agree then no problem with me.

I deny it is a FACT that for MANY TC their motivation is to profit from that which is not thiers. Certainly some do, but now we are adown to arguing about what % of TC community makes 'many'. I do not think that TC as a community / people have more people that want to profit from that which is not thiers at the exepense of others than any other group of people.

The party of Eroglu is full of such people.Ex-militants, property suckers etc. Would the percentage of that party be an indication to you?And how exactly is any GC going to profit from something that is not his, when on the average each GC refugee left a property which valuewise was 20 times more than what the TCs left behind? Please don't try to equalise unequal things.

But these embargoes also stop us from doing what we like with property that was always TC, so even if I accepted your thesis above (which I do not) they are still embargoes. Everyone calls them such (except perhaps yourself and some other GC). The people imposing them call them embargoes.

What are you talking about? The first one who used this fancy word is Denktash and later on all the TCs started saying "embargos and embargos". It seems to me you don't know what an embargo is and how it is applied. All their is is NO LICENCE to use or exploit our stolen properties.On the other hand you cannot claim that these restrictions are absolutely effective, you do exports, you do imports, you do get tourists in our hotels, you do exploit our proprties. This out balances the income you lose from the "always TC properties" by many many times already.

Agreed and equilatbale exchange of properties is a myth - but then who talks of such? Exchange of properties per se is not a myth it's a reality. Certainly call it it an enforced an inequitable exchange of properties if you like, but to say it is a myth is imo misleading and incorrect.

What do you mean here? Are you talking for the results of the Turkish Invasion? If yes then I am not talking for that I am talking for what an agreed solution will contain. And in the meantime for the compensations Turkey will have to pay through the ECHR

Come on MicAtCyp - do you REALLY beleieve that without EOKA Cyprus would still be under British rule today?

What I beleive or what you beleive does not count. What counts is FACTS. And for your information there are and were many Cypriots who would love to be under her Majesty rule up until today, for their own interests.Who knows who would prevail in the end?

So when main event says that Makrios was against ENOSIS after independance

The fact that Eoka B (one and only goal for them was Enosis) organised more than 7 assisination attempts against him.The fact that he crushed with the Greek Junta many times. (OK here you may say he did not abandon the Enosis idea but just postponed it).However it is a fact that he also started liking his throne so much that he would never step out and be degraded to just a Bishop. In one of his letters to Greece he said "I am an elected leader of an independent and sovereign country-not an assigned governor of one of your provinces".

I would welcome your list of the things Makarios DID in promoting Enosis after 1967. I am not sure to which arguments of MainSource you are referring to though.Please quote me the relevant parts.

[erolz]

As far as I know the house of representatives issues laws, not resolutions.Any resolution by the house of representatives even a unanimous one (by those who were present AND ONLY THOSE) is as meaningless as anything can be.

Resolutions are meaningless? That's a strange concept.

Secondly you should have known that until 1976 (?) the only Political parties we had with the exception of Akel were those of the Ministers of Makarios! The above statement is as representative of the will of the people much as Makarios’s on and offs statements about Enosis.

The original argument was with main sources assertion that Makraios gave up the idea of ENOSIS in 1960. This is clearly rubbish as far as I am concerned as evidenced by his words AND his acts, or do you disagree and maintain as main source did that Makarios abandoned ENOSIS in 1960? An extension of that argument was the argument that there was no significant support amongst the GC people for ENOSIS after 1960. Even if this was the case ( and I personaly do not believe it) and I accept that it was only a small minority that supported ENOSIS, then this small minority happend to contain all GC ministers from presdient on down. I am sorry but this continued attempt to convince me that neither Makarios, the GC administration o the GC people had any desire for ENOSIS after 1960, apart from a tiny insignificant minority, is just not born out by the copious evidence as far as I am concerned.

I will ask you a simple question: do you honestly beleive that if the GCs really wanted Enosis it was so difficult for them to declare it during the 60s? In my opinion it was a piece of cake!

I piece of cake that everyone understood had a very high chance (if not certainty) of Turkish action as a result. Hence the need to try and abbrogate the treaties of Guarantees, the invitation of UN troops to Cyprus and other ACTS of Makraios, his administration and by extension the GC people. Again I am sorry but I find the idea that GC did not unilateraly declare ENOSIS in the 1960's as proof that they did not want or continue to seek ENOSIS nothing short of absurd.

The right to self determination is a human right. The right to political represntation is a human right. They are in the charters of human rights.

Nobody said it is not. What I said it is not a BASIC human right like for example the right for life.

Both the rights I mention above are basic human rights, both in the UN charters of human rights. The charters on human rights makes no 'hieracrchy' of rights. All the ones listed are human rights and they all have equal relevance.

Besides the right for self determination presupposes a certain group can be classified as people. After that the ways that right could be excercised depend on many additional factors as well. The right for that group to have it's own political representation also depends on many additional factors as well and it may range from zero to full Political representation. So your assumption that ANY group within ANOTHER group can decide by ITSELF the kind of self determination it will have, and the kind of political representation will have, IS WRONG.

I never asserted that ANY group (within another or not) can decide by itself that it is a people. That determination is complex and unclear but it does have precedents in international law. I have given links to expert opinion on 'what consitutes a people' too many times in the past to bother doing so once more. In my opinion the TC community is a people.

Obviously you are MIXING up the concept of human rights with other RIGHTS. You cannot say you have no RIGHT to kill for self defense and use that generalisation arbitrarily and absolutely like you did so far.

Actually I do say that. You have a right to self defense. You do not have a right to kill in self defense. If you did then if someone came up and slapped you you could pull our a gun and shoot them in the head. You have no such right. You have a right to defend yourself, not to kill someone who attacks you. Killing an attaker can be deemed as justifed and necessary in terms of your right to self defense (just as it can be deemed unjustifed and unessary) but it is never your RIGHT to kill an attacker.

All you can say is that this is not included in the UN charter of HUMAN RIGHTS.

No I say it is not a human right to kill (as was argued originaly - GC had a right to kill based on their _human rights_ to self determination) and I also say you have no other legal right to kill sepearte from basic human rights and I still stand by that.

I have every RIGHT to get a divorce if I want to, and you cannot tell me I have no such right because it is not in the list of UN human rights..... I hope you understand the difference.

Look I understand the difference between the basic human rights as laid out in the UN charters on human rights and other legal rights you may have. I just do not agree you have a RIGHT to kill, either as a human right or as a legal right.

My view is simple too.The GCs had a right to fight for their liberation, and the TCs had a right to fight against their oppression. Our disagreement is that for Eoka there was no other option other than the armed struggle whereas for the TCs there were many other options other than Invading and throwing out of their homes and lands 200,000 GCs and occupying 37% of Cyprus and, and, and....

LOL. GC had no other choice but to fight for their liberation? Sorry but I find this assertion ridiculous. If the GC had wanted indpendance from Britiain this could imo have easily been secured in due course without any resort to violence. However if the desire was ENOSIS there was no way this was achievable without violence (and in the end it prooved unacheivable even with violence). What options did the TC have for ending their oppression and securing their rights from 63 to 74? Did we not constantly try and negeotiate the end of our oppression and return of our rights - right up to the point at which GC and Greeks executed a coup and statred killing each other over a cause you claim had no support amongst the GC people.

The area of the regions of a multiregional Federation extends from a village to a region of your own choice. It's upto you to define it and ask for it. The only thing you have to prove is that you are a clear majority (=more than 67%= 2/3 rds) in that area or many separate areas!

I am sorry but I still have no idea how this could work. Let's say we have a region of four villages 3 GC and one TC. The GC in thsi region claim to be a 'federal area' based on being the majority in this area. Similarly the single TC village claims to be a federal area based on the fact the village is TC. Who gets to make decision affecting this village? Seems to me this idea is fundamentaly propblematic but maybe I have still msunderstood it?

[erolz]

Erol you are right the examples I gave just happened to have environmental implications. My point though is that foreign investment is already limited for many reasons, be it environmental, be it for sucking of resources, or for other reasons.

And my point is that if the areas that either the TC community or the TC component state is based on a limited pre defined list of areas (like religion culter and education only) then there remains a very real (imo) potential for a GC majority to enact legislation, against the will of the TC community (or TC component state) that affects the TC community materialy differnetly (and worse) than it affects the GC community. That is still a concern for me.

In that case you should also accept a Veto coming from the GCs for exactly the same reasons. In other words matters that will benefit you as a community but effect us negatively as a community. If you agree then no problem with me.

Of course I would accept the same for the GC community or GC component state - I believe in the concept of equality of the two communites.

The party of Eroglu is full of such people.Ex-militants, property suckers etc.

As are other parties here, in the south and around the world.

Would the percentage of that party be an indication to you?

No because the % of that party is the %^ of that party and not the % of TC that want to exploit what is not theirs at the expense of GC.

And how exactly is any GC going to profit from something that is not his, when on the average each GC refugee left a property which valuewise was 20 times more than what the TCs left behind? Please don't try to equalise unequal things.

I accpet that TC, because of the senario, have more opportuinty to exploit what is not theirs and seek to continue that exploitaation for as long as possible than GC do. What I do not accept is that TC have more desire in general that GC have to explit what is not theirs or that the reason there is no solution today is based on the fact that TC simply want to keep what is not theirs. This is one factor for some TC but there are many many other factors and for many TC like myself it is not a factor at all.

What are you talking about? The first one who used this fancy word is Denktash and later on all the TCs started saying "embargos and embargos". It seems to me you don't know what an embargo is and how it is applied.

From dictionary.com

A prohibition by a government on certain or all trade with a foreign nation.

The EU has placed a prohibition on exports from the TRNC to the EU. This is clearly an embargo from where I am sitting.

All their is is NO LICENCE to use or exploit our stolen properties.

What there is is a band on exports from the TRNC to the EU. The ban makes no disitionction between products from former GC land or any other type of land prior to 74. It prohibts all exports.

On the other hand you cannot claim that these restrictions are absolutely effective, you do exports,

Have I ever made such a claim? No embargoes or economic sanctions are ver totaly effective. Futher I would happily agree that the extent of the emabragoes aginst the TRNC are no where are harsh as those against countries like say Iraq after the first gulf war (just as the whilst GC displaced from their homes in 74 can be descibed as refugees they are no where near the same as say the regugess from areas like darfur today).

you do imports,

The EU emabragoes against the TRNC are specfically for exports from the TRNC to the EU. There has never been a prohibition on selling stuff from the Eu to TYRNC - just on buying stuff from the TRNC from the EU.

you do get tourists in our hotels, you do exploit our proprties. This out balances the income you lose from the "always TC properties" by many many times already.

Mybe they do and maybe they do not. My personal belief is that TC are just as capable as creating wealth as GC are. The fact that we have not created as much wealth in the north as you have in the south since 74 is related to the emarbgoes, lack of recognition and the lack of foreign aid (other than from Turkey) in amounts comparable to that which the south recieved after 74. Presumably you believe it is because we are less competent as TC than you are as GC as you do not believe that there are embargoes and that any loss from embargoes is more than made for by what we have gained at GC expense?

What do you mean here? Are you talking for the results of the Turkish Invasion? If yes then I am not talking for that I am talking for what an agreed solution will contain. And in the meantime for the compensations Turkey will have to pay through the ECHR

The idea of an exchange of properties in an agreed solution is a myth? So you do not want us to give back any land / properites and you do not want toreturn any to us?

What I beleive or what you beleive does not count.

It counts to me!

What counts is FACTS. And for your information there are and were many Cypriots who would love to be under her Majesty rule up until today, for their own interests.Who knows who would prevail in the end?

To me the idea that without EOKA there is ANY chance that Cyprus would today still be ruled by the UK is just ridiculous. Sorry.

The fact that Eoka B (one and only goal for them was Enosis) organised more than 7 assisination attempts against him.The fact that he crushed with the Greek Junta many times. (OK here you may say he did not abandon the Enosis idea but just postponed it).

I have no doubt that those that wanted ENOSIS immidieatly decided and increasingly so over time from 1960 that Makarios was part of the problem and not solution and acted accordingly. This however is no proof that Makarios abandoned ENOSIS.

However it is a fact that he also started liking his throne so much that he would never step out and be degraded to just a Bishop. In one of his letters to Greece he said "I am an elected leader of an independent and sovereign country-not an assigned governor of one of your provinces".

Are we not to ignore everything Makarios said according to you, or are we to ignore only that which he said that supports my arguments and accpet that which supports yours?

I would welcome your list of the things Makarios DID in promoting Enosis after 1967. I am not sure to which arguments of MainSource you are referring to though.Please quote me the relevant parts.

Where did 1967 come from? This discussion and my list of statements of Makarios came from main sources statement

Makarios was against Enosis after Cyprus' independance,

I refute this claim totaly. It is not supported by Makarios' word or his acts from 1960 (not 1967) and clearly so. That mani source can make this claim and then add

We have said this a million times...but you pettyness of always wanting a GC leader to be a bad guy wont allow you to take it in.

implying that we refuse to beleive it simply beacuse we wish to villify any GC leader, rather than refute based on the massive and clear evidence to the contrary just add insult to injury and indicates that actually despite his claims it is main source that is unable to accept reality when then clashes with his preconceived propaganda based notions, an not me / TC 9in this case at least).[/quote]

[MicAtCyp]

Erol I will try to make my replies short.

1)Resolutions are meaningless if made by a body whose job is not to issue resolutions.
2)I said that the Enosis idea was NOT the goal for the majority of the population.I said after 1960 it started fainting even among those to whom it was a primary goal.And after 1967 Makarios abandoned it. Obviously I don't agree with Mainsource that the abandoning of the Enosis idea-from those who had it as primary target- just happened overnight in 1960.
3)Regarding declaration of Enosis in the 60s you missed my big IF . And yes IF all the GCs wanted it they would even risk a war.
4)The UN may not make a hierachy among the human rights (for obvious reasons) but if you tell me the human right for life is equal to the human right for education then I tell you a dead person cannot read books, so you are missing the obvious hierachy.
5)How about your human right for life in case someone holds a gun and is ready to shoot you? Can you still insist you have no right to kill before he kills you?
6)The options TCs had from 1963 onwards were to stick to their positions in the Government, disolve the TMT and go to the UN to get a resolution- just to name a few. Did they ever do any of these?
7)The multiregional Federation assumes that any area that is not claimed to be TC Fed is GC Fed area. The end result will be many areas that will form the TC Multi regional Fed. The example you gave of 3 to 1 villages is an exceptional case but still can be dealt with in the same manner.
So we agree on the matter of Vetos for decisions that can affect each community negatively.This of course must apply in case the solution is Federal.The GCCS can veto the decisions of the TCCS through the common state.
9)There is no party in the world as big as that of Eroglu concentrating such proportions of ex-militants and property suckers.If you know one name it. I told you before don't try to equalise what happens at the pseudo with overgeneral statements and vague percentages.
10)The same reply regarding the matter of exploiting properties by TCs/Gcs that don't belong to them.
11)You forget that embargo means restriction on legal trade.The trade you are asking for is not legal on the first place, it's trade of stolen goods.So there is no embargo.There is restriction to trade stolen goods, as there will always be all over the world.
12)The idea of exchanging equal to equal properties and after that have a balance or near balance is a myth! We will not have a balance! All we will settle is 1/20th of the value of properties.
13)And for me the idea that without Eoka there was NO chance that until today we would be governed by the British is equally ridiculous.Sorry.
14)It is still my opinion that after 1967 Makarios started abandoning the idea for Enosis. According to Insan he was forced to abandon it after 1967. If my information was not convincing to you then please refer to Insan.The fact is that nothing happened in PRACTICE after 1967 to subtantiate the argument that Makarios was working for Enosis.If you insist give me your list of events.
15)In the next 2 paragraphs you included statements that are not even mine, what am I supposed to reply?Please next time write the name of the one to whom you are replying. (In case your reply is addressed to more than one person of course)