Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kifeas]

Bananiot,

You said that

“Papadopoullos was the vice president of the treacherous Akritas Plan that aimed at "cleaning" the TC community in one night.”

These were your exact words.

I agree with you that he was one of the three co-authors (not a vice president) of the Akritas Plan. The other two were Klerides and Georgadjis. However, was the Akritas plan, a plan that aimed at CLEANING the TC community in ONE NIGHT, as you said, or even in a longer time frame?

Please Read the entire text of the Akritas plan that I posted previously in this threat, (http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21506#21506) and see how you exaggerate and distort facts in order to create a completely negative impression about Papadopoullos.

Find for me and for others the paragraph or even the sentence that implies, according to your allegation, that the plan’s aim was to exterminate the TCs from Cyprus?

I know it is a long text and you may find it tiring to read it and single out the paragraph that proves your claim, I.e., that the plan's goal and aim was to exterminate (clean out) the TC community from Cyprus. Do not worry and do not rush. I will be waiting patiently until you manage to do it.

If you fail to do so, then you should stop complaining that people in this forum call you a liar and a distorter of the truth.


PS: I stated before and I repeat again that I do not agree with the approach taken by the authors of the Akritas plan, in order to promote changes to the constitution. I accept changes were necessary but could have been achieved with patience and consultations with the TC community and not unilaterally.

[insan]

(ii) that it is necessary to remove these provisions right away because tomorrow may be too late;
(iii) (Omitted)

(a) The amendment of the negative elements of the Agreements and the consequent de facto nullification of the Treaties of Guarantee and Alliance. This step is essential because the necessity of amending the negative aspects of any Agreement is generally acceptable internationally and is considered reasonable (passage omitted) whereas an external intervention to prevent the amendment of such negative provisions is held unjustified and inapplicable.

The first step, therefore, would be to get rid of intervention by proposing amendments in the first stage. Tactic to be followed: (Omitted)

(a) The declaration of ENOSIS before actions (a) to (c).
(b) Serious intercommunal unrest which may be shown as a massacre of Turks.
The first reason is removed as a result of the Plan drawn up for the first stage and consequently what remains, is the danger of intercommunal strife. We do not intend to engage, without provocation, in massacre or attack against the Turks. Therefore, (section omitted) the Turks can react strongly and incite incidents and strife, or falsely stage massacres, clashes or bomb explosions in order to create the impression that the Greeks attacked the Turks and that intervention is imperative for their protection. Tactic to be employed: Our actions for amending the Constitution will not be secret; we would always appear to be ready for peaceful talks and our actions would not take any provocative and violent form. Any incidents that may take place will be met, at the beginning, in a legal fashion by the legal Security Forces, according to a plan. Our actions will have a legal form.
3. (Omitted)

http://www.pubinfo.gov.nc.tr/Orek.htm

[Kifeas]

Insan,

The way you present your quotes from the website you specified, cannot be followed by anyone who wants to make comparisons with the other links of the Akritas Plan.

I suggest you correct it by stating the section and the paragraph in which each one of your quotations is located.

I thing it is more fair for those who want to make comparisons in order to find out if it is really an omission that has not been declared in the other version, i.e. the one in the Cyprus-conflict website, or it is a purposeful omission of the author of your website in order to create an impression, but which in fact (actually) does exists in the other website (Cyprus-conflict)

Otherwise it will be rightfully interpreted as an attempt on your behalf to confuse the readers in order to create the impression that you are accurate in your allegations.

[insan]

Kifeas, It's easy to compare the two versions of Akritas plan. Just click on the link I've given and wait until the page completely loaded. Then click on edit(on upper left of internet explorer) and choose "find on this page". A search window will pop up. Write "omit" into the search bar and then click ok. It will point you the first omitted section or passage. Repeat this to find all other omitted passages and sections in Akritas Plan.

[Kifeas]

Insan, Let me help you.

This is your first quote from your previous posting.

(ii) that it is necessary to remove these provisions right away because tomorrow may be too late;
(iii) (Omitted)

The Above quotation that you posted from the http://www.pubinfo.gov.nc.tr/Orek.htm website, clearly refers to section (A.) External tactics (international). , Paragraph d, point iii, which according to the Cyprus-conflict website's version, which I posted in this threat (http://www.cyprus-forum.com/viewtopic.php?p=21506#21506,) reads as follows:

Code: Select all

(ii) The removal of these oppressive provisions must take place now because tomorrow it will be too late;
(iii) The removal of these provisions, despite the fact that this is reasonable and necessary, because of the unreasonable attitude of the Turks is not possible bv agreement, and therefore unilateral action is justified;

the corresponding version on the “TRNC” link, reads as follows.

Code: Select all

(ii) The removal of these factors of the administration must take place today because tomorrow will be too late.

(iii) The removal of these provisions of the administration, although it is reasonable and necessary, is not possible because of the unreasonable attitude of the Turks and therefore, since it is not possible by agreement with the Turks, unilateral action is justified;

Conclusion.
All these are artificial and purposeful omissions and not the result of any kind of censorship. The reasons are obvious. To create to the reader the impression that the Akritas plan had some brutal provisions against the TC community, which have been purposefully censored before it was linked in the press.
The Cyprus conflict website's version of the Akritas Plan and even the "TRNC" website's version state the full text, without any ommissions.

[MicAtCyp]

Kifeas,

Very well said about the Akritas Plan. I really wonder how many of the people participating in here cared to read it.

What really gets me tired in this forum is that whatever effort and time someone consumes, is ALL thrown into the dustbin simply because people NEVER care to read or study.They simply repeat groundless personal opinions.

Do you bet that after a weak or so Bananiot will come back repeating his very same arguments about the Akritas Plan? Do you bet that Insan and all other TCs will do the same?

I sometimes wonder what’s the use of participating to these forums. It's like talking to walls.
And whats worse, what everybody tends to remember is just ONLY sentimental bitter feelings built during the discussions.....

[MicAtCyp]

The aim of the plan is to degrade TCs to a minority status

Yeah right. The 18% is equal with the 82% so the aim of the plan was to degrade you from your equal status to that of a minority status.Too many poems they taught you.Boys and girls let me hear the poem once again:

The Gcs want to degrade the 18% minority into a minority status!!

Come on! Once more:

The Gcs want to degrade the 18% minority into a minority status!!

Very good.No go home and write an essay tittled "How to equalise the 18% with the 82%". Anyone who claims the 18% is not equal with the 82% gets an F.

[Viewpoint]

MicAtCyp

It's like talking to walls.

you could be talking about yourself, you have this arrogant condesending leaning on rude approach where you do not register our concerns and just belittle the people you say you wish to unite with.

Yeah right. The 18% is equal with the 82% so the aim of the plan was to degrade you from your equal status to that of a minority status.Too many poems they taught you.Boys and girls let me hear the poem once again:
The Gcs want to degrade the 18% minority into a minority status!!
The Gcs want to degrade the 18% minority into a minority status!!
The Gcs want to degrade the 18% minority into a minority status!!

And you feel this attitude reveals that you want to share a united Cyprus with us, quite the opposite and a perfect example of why I say we will never see eye to eye or agree on anything as long as you see us as a minority we will only move more and more towards partition. We may be a minority in numbers but you have to come to terms with us being equal partners and treat ıs according, if you want to build trust between our communities otherwise thank you MicAtCyp so kindly for fueling the desire for partition and the current status quo which your ex eoka ledder is currently persuing. Well done MicAtCyp

[cannedmoose]

I'm loath to support this, but I think a lot of the problems with the 82%-18% argument is that people misunderstand where people like MicAtCyp and Piratis are going with this (indeed I may understand where they're going with it also). When they talk about TCs as a minority, which they are in terms of the overall island population, some people equate being a minority with inequality and not having an equal status. You can be a minority, with state legislation in place to defend your rights as well as the rights of the majority population. Minorities in the UK are protected under equal rights legislation, which on the whole functions extremely well, they are also protected by universal rights afforded to citizens of the country. They also have political equality, with their votes counting for the same as every other voter in the country.

It's easy to get hung up on the majority-minority issue in Cyprus, but the fact is that in population terms, the TC population is and will always be a minority on the island, albeit a large one. How to deal with it in a rational manner is the major issue. I'm not sure that quotas work, they encourage 'positive discrimination' and go against the ideal of meritocracy. I also find it hard to conceptualise how the voice of 18% of the population can be of equal weight to the 82% majority, of course they have the right to a significant input, but to claim that parity of representation is fair is a slightly difficult idea to deal with.

The only way to deal with this that I can see is to have a federal solution, with two states each largely running their own affairs, but having an equal and joint voice in a limited number of areas such as defence, foreign affairs, some areas of tax etc. As these states develop and gradually intertwine, hopefully it will engender a process of 'Cypriotisation' and people will feel more at home as Cypriots than as Greeks or Turks. Then the issue of majority-minority will be less salient. It may sound like a continuation of the status quo, and in terms of ethnic relations it would remain an effective apartheid system, sadly I can't see a way beyond that at the moment. Whatever happens, the process of breaking down barriers in Cyprus will likely be a long one.

[garbitsch]

read the next message