Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

What happened to the Greeks of Istanbul is a very tragic chapter in the recent history of Turkey. The Greeks of Istanbul were indeed the finest people-true law abiders- whealty bu also very well educated people-skilled merchants and craftsmen. I would rate them higher than mainland greeks well above the GCs.. I , for sure, miss them very much..

Cem ... it is easy to mourn the loss of something once you have eliminated it and it no longer competes with you or puts you to shame.

Hence your sly put-down of GCs now whilst they are struggling for their existence, whilst they present opposition to your Expansionist plans.

If Turkey manages to eliminate the GCs ... then you might say the same about them as a parting shot ... following the maxim to not speak ill of the dead ...

Save your Eulogies ...


"The Turk is the only master in his country. Those who are not pure Turks have one right in this country: The right to be servants, the right to be slaves" Turkish Minister of Justice, 1930



The 1955 (6-7th September) pogrom was provoked by the demands of the majority Greek population of Cyprus for political union with mainland Greece. Towards this aim, in April 1955, the Greek-Cypriot National Organisation of Cypriot Fighters (EOKA) began an armed struggle against British forces.
The Cyprus issue provided a convenient basis to intensify the latent hostility against Istanbul’s Greek minority. Since 1954, a number of nationalist student and irredentist organisations, such as the National Federation of Turkish Students, the National Union of Turkish Students, and the editor of Hurriyet Hikmet Bil’s Cyprus is Turkish Party, had been protesting against the Greek minority and the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
During 1955, a state-supported propaganda campaign, which involved the Turkish press, galvanised public opinion against the Greek minority. The political purpose of the pogrom was to demonstrate unequivocally the seriousness of the Turkish claims over Cyprus.Indeed, in the weeks running up towards 6–7 September, Turkish leaders made a number of inflammatory anti-Greek speeches. On 28 August, barely two weeks before the Istanbul pogrom, Turkish Prime Minister Adnan Menderes publicly claimed that the Greek-Cypriots were planning a massacre of Turkish-Cypriots. However, the Turkish conspiracy to detonate an explosive on 5–6 September at the Turkish consulate (and birthplace of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk) in Greece’s second city, Salonica, was the propaganda spark that lit the fire on the day of the pogrom. At the Yassiada Trial in 1960–61, which convicted former prime minister Menderes and former foreign minister Fatin Zorlu to death by hanging for violating the constitution, it emerged that the consulate bomb fuse was sent from Turkey to Salonica on 3 September, three days before the pogrom.

In addition to the Cyprus issue, the chronic economic situation seems also to have motivated the Turkish political leadership into orchestrating the pogrom. Although a minority, the Greek population played a prominent role in the city’s business life, making it a convenient scapegoat during economic crises.

[zan]

What happened to the Greeks of Istanbul is a very tragic chapter in the recent history of Turkey. The Greeks of Istanbul were indeed the finest people-true law abiders- whealty bu also very well educated people-skilled merchants and craftsmen. I would rate them higher than mainland greeks well above the GCs.. I , for sure, miss them very much..

Cem ... it is easy to mourn the loss of something once you have eliminated it and it no longer competes with you or puts you to shame.

Hence your sly put-down of GCs now whilst they are struggling for their existence, whilst they present opposition to your Expansionist plans.

If Turkey manages to eliminate the GCs ... then you might say the same about them as a parting shot ... following the maxim to not speak ill of the dead ...

Save your Eulogies ...


"The Turk is the only master in his country. Those who are not pure Turks have one right in this country: The right to be servants, the right to be slaves" Turkish Minister of Justice, 1930



The 1955 (6-7th September) pogrom was provoked by the demands of the majority Greek population of Cyprus for political union with mainland Greece. Towards this aim, in April 1955, the Greek-Cypriot National Organisation of Cypriot Fighters (EOKA) began an armed struggle against British forces.
The Cyprus issue provided a convenient basis to intensify the latent hostility against Istanbul’s Greek minority. Since 1954, a number of nationalist student and irredentist organisations, such as the National Federation of Turkish Students, the National Union of Turkish Students, and the editor of Hurriyet Hikmet Bil’s Cyprus is Turkish Party, had been protesting against the Greek minority and the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
During 1955, a state-supported propaganda campaign, which involved the Turkish press, galvanised public opinion against the Greek minority. The political purpose of the pogrom was to demonstrate unequivocally the seriousness of the Turkish claims over Cyprus.Indeed, in the weeks running up towards 6–7 September, Turkish leaders made a number of inflammatory anti-Greek speeches. On 28 August, barely two weeks before the Istanbul pogrom, Turkish Prime Minister Adnan Menderes publicly claimed that the Greek-Cypriots were planning a massacre of Turkish-Cypriots. However, the Turkish conspiracy to detonate an explosive on 5–6 September at the Turkish consulate (and birthplace of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk) in Greece’s second city, Salonica, was the propaganda spark that lit the fire on the day of the pogrom. At the Yassiada Trial in 1960–61, which convicted former prime minister Menderes and former foreign minister Fatin Zorlu to death by hanging for violating the constitution, it emerged that the consulate bomb fuse was sent from Turkey to Salonica on 3 September, three days before the pogrom.

In addition to the Cyprus issue, the chronic economic situation seems also to have motivated the Turkish political leadership into orchestrating the pogrom. Although a minority, the Greek population played a prominent role in the city’s business life, making it a convenient scapegoat during economic crises.

You have been watching too much TV dear Stella.....

[Tim Drayton]

I think I have finally fathomed what makes Oracle tick. As she has rightly pointed out, in the natural sciences hypotheses may be tested experimentally. This is not possible in the social sciences and humanities. She therefore assumes that all scientific principles can be thrown out of the window in situations where it is impossible to test hypotheses. This is her fatal error. There exist accepted scientific principles in the humanities as well, such as intellectual rigour, striving towards objectivity, careful assessment of evidence and logical argument. You cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater just because there are no testable hypotheses. As one who is trained in the social sciences/humanities I have watched in puzzlement at the way she throws up all kinds of unsustained allegations and engages in ridiculous exercises such as posting articles that are supposed to prove these allegations when a sober reading reveals that they do not. How sad.

Tim I gave up on that twisted, bitter Turk hater a long time ago, you should do as well its just not worth it. If you do not value their opinion then it has not impact you should try it I guarantee it works, for she feeds off your responses and will continue to punch the air.

Do you know what really scares me? Clearly, in every community you will come across deranged fanatic racists. However, I so often see that the views expressed by this individual, far from attracting any kind of criticism from other members of her own community, seem to meet with a kind of semi-tacit consent. I have seen posts in which her logic leads inescapably to a call for genocide of the Turkish Cypriots, then somebody from Australia who according to his screen name is a "humanist" chimes in with an inane comment along the lines of, "Good on ya, Oracles." This makes me wonder if the kind of views you express need to be taken more seriously.

Thats a great analysis because it backs up the belief of many TCs that 70 to 80% of GC people think just like Oracle but conceal their true emotions until a point where they have the upper hand and can enforce what they percieve as being right for GCs only and sod the rest if they dont agree with what we demand then they must be wrong mentlity is what drives TCs to demand safeguards that guarantee that GCs stick to the rules and know exactly the consequencies if they should decide to feel they can renege or manipulate any future agreements.

By the way, I am guilty of overgeneralisation. The names of two Greek Cypriot forumers who do challenge these odious views spring to mind.

[Piratis]

Oracle,

that Ergenekon story is nothing but the outcome of the settling of accounts between secular-nationalists and islamic fundamentalists in Turkey, the latter backed up by the EU and the USA.
It looks, Greece and ROC seem to be closer to islamists than nationalists for obvious reasons.
And nothing could be more wrong..
It remains to be seen what would be the fate of average christian in turkey, let alone secularists, in an increasingly islamized society.
It will only a matter of time before US policy of supporting what is called "mild islamism" backfires..
In short, the antithesis of ultra-nationalism is not at all islam, but a true democratic regime, preferably a leftist but at the same time a multi-culturalist regime.
Ultra-nationalism and islamic fundamentalism always go hand-in-hand.
Particularly in Turkey......

Cem, with democracy you can't have such preferences. You can't say I accept democracy as long as I like the ones elected and their policies. That is not democracy at all.

Democracy means majority rule, along with human and minority rights. If the majority of people in a county want somehting which is not against the human or minority rights of other citizens, then they should be allowed to do it.

Take the case of headscarf for example. How could allowing a piece of cloth worn on ones head harm anybody? On the contrary this should have been part of personal freedom and freedom of religion (which is a human right), and people should have been allowed to wear it even if they were only a minority.

[CopperLine]

it is easy to mourn the loss of something once you have eliminated it and it no longer competes with you or puts you to shame.

Indeed, but this does not remove the sincerity with which apologies or sorrow are expressed.

If Oracle thinks this is just an easy excuse then she would also have to concede that apologise and expressions of regret - wherever they come from - are just easy words. So when GCs apologies for the harms done to TCs, when Germans express sorrow for genocide and mass killings, when Australians acknowledge the massacres of native Australians, and so on, by Oracle's account it's just easy mourning. Crocodile tears - if this is what they are - are not according to Oracle the exclusive reaction of Turks.

[Piratis]

Thats a great analysis because it backs up the belief of many TCs that 70 to 80% of GC people think just like Oracle but conceal their true emotions until a point where they have the upper hand and can enforce what they percieve as being right for GCs only and sod the rest if they dont agree with what we demand then they must be wrong mentlity is what drives TCs to demand safeguards that guarantee that GCs stick to the rules and know exactly the consequencies if they should decide to feel they can renege or manipulate any future agreements.

VP, what you demand is not based at all in what is just or right. It is based solely on gaining by brute force on our loss.

So you have to take it for granted that when your power to impose injustice is over, so it will be the injustices that you impose. There is no secret here, and no "safeguards" will make you able to eternally keep what does not belong to you.

[Tim Drayton]

Take the case of headscarf for example. How could allowing a piece of cloth worn on ones head harm anybody? On the contrary this should have been part of personal freedom and freedom of religion (which is a human right), and people should have been allowed to wear it even if they were only a minority.

France has a written constitution. This constitution stipulates that France is a secular state. In 2004, France banned the wearing of Islamic headscarves in schools on the grounds that the wearing of religious insignia in state educational institutions is inconsistent with secularism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/fe ... sworldwide

If you consider the introduction of a similar ban in Turkey on the same grounds to be an infringement of human rights, do you also condemn France for trampling on the human rights of its citizens with this ban? If not, are you not guilty of double standards?

By my logic, you are. Unless, of course, we are dealing with some weird system of logic usually applied to subatomic particles. Perhaps our esteemed scientist fellow forumer could inform us if that is so.

[Oracle]

Tim you claim to be a social scientist, so you must appreciate the needs for schools to "neutralise" the appearance of their pupils for all sorts of reasons which have nothing to do with removing Human Rights and everything to do with creating an atmosphere of equality from home-influences such as poverty, as well as religious indoctrination (in those countries which practice secularism).

Universities do not impose the wearing of uniforms (except gowns ) so to make a special Law, just for women, to wear or not to wear a headscarf in such a place is subversive. It discriminates immediately against women.

Basically it's the difference between appreciating the imposition of wearing an assigned uniform when partaking of the offerings of that institution, or finding alternative institutions which meet with your preferred lifestyle.

[Piratis]

Take the case of headscarf for example. How could allowing a piece of cloth worn on ones head harm anybody? On the contrary this should have been part of personal freedom and freedom of religion (which is a human right), and people should have been allowed to wear it even if they were only a minority.

France has a written constitution. This constitution stipulates that France is a secular state. In 2004, France banned the wearing of Islamic headscarves in schools on the grounds that the wearing of religious insignia in state educational institutions is inconsistent with secularism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/fe ... sworldwide

If you consider the introduction of a similar ban in Turkey on the same grounds to be an infringement of human rights, do you also condemn France for trampling on the human rights of its citizens with this ban? If not, are you not guilty of double standards?

By my logic, you are. Unless, of course, we are dealing with some weird system of logic usually applied to subatomic particles. Perhaps our esteemed scientist fellow forumer could inform us if that is so.

I have no reason to defend France. If there was a law regarding all religious insignia and this was not created recently just for the headscarf then there is no discrimination against a particular group of people. If this was not the case, then yes I would say that France also violates the human rights of those people.

But beyond human rights there is also the issue of democracy. In Turkey the majority of people wanted to allow the headscarf. As long as all other religious insignia would be allowed as well, then I don't see why a (supposedly) democratically elected goverment should not be allowed to do somehting that doesn't violate the rights of anybody.

[Cem]

Oracle,

that Ergenekon story is nothing but the outcome of the settling of accounts between secular-nationalists and islamic fundamentalists in Turkey, the latter backed up by the EU and the USA.
It looks, Greece and ROC seem to be closer to islamists than nationalists for obvious reasons.
And nothing could be more wrong..
It remains to be seen what would be the fate of average christian in turkey, let alone secularists, in an increasingly islamized society.
It will only a matter of time before US policy of supporting what is called "mild islamism" backfires..
In short, the antithesis of ultra-nationalism is not at all islam, but a true democratic regime, preferably a leftist but at the same time a multi-culturalist regime.
Ultra-nationalism and islamic fundamentalism always go hand-in-hand.
Particularly in Turkey......

Cem, with democracy you can't have such preferences. You can't say I accept democracy as long as I like the ones elected and their policies. That is not democracy at all.

Democracy means majority rule, along with human and minority rights. If the majority of people in a county want somehting which is not against the human or minority rights of other citizens, then they should be allowed to do it.

Take the case of headscarf for example. How could allowing a piece of cloth worn on ones head harm anybody? On the contrary this should have been part of personal freedom and freedom of religion (which is a human right), and people should have been allowed to wear it even if they were only a minority.

If I remember well, Hitler came to office by majority votes in 1933.
Then using the fire in Reichstag as an excuse, he made the democracy "kaputt".

The issue is not merely a piece of cloth worn over the head. Do you know how many people are being bullied at the moment just because they do not abstain from either drinking and eating during Ramadan in Turkey?

BTW, I would like you the GCs come over to Anatolia particularly during ramadan and stroll the streets with either a bottle or a sandwich in your hand. Then you will see what happens to you.

Piratis, name me just one islamic country which tolerates other religions.

Name one islamic country in which women who don't want to wear headscarves are allowed to do so..

Could you also name muslim states in which greek patriarchs are allowed to practice (if they ever exist ).

A priest shot dead by a youth in a black sea town.

Three converts to Christianity have been murdered under torture in a east Anatolian town.
A noted journalist of Armenian origin was murdered.
So, just like the mainstream media in turkey, do you believe it is the handiwork of Ergenekon ?
then how come and why the culprits have not been sentenced to a maximum penalty ?

There is way difference between a majority rule and a majority oppression.
The 3rd Reich was built on majority rule.....
and minority extinction...
Show me a case whereby women in headscarves and burqas go hand in hand with chicks in mini-skirts and high-heeled shoes.
Show me case where you can freely sip your drink while muslims around you observe the practice of feast without any interference from their part.
Show me case a woman is allowed to choose her future partner even have pre-marital sex with him...
Then I would say why not ?