Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz]

The bolded part in Othellos post was NOT what you bolded but the "many against their will". part. Are you trying to tell me that all this avalanche in your posts was referring to something else i.e to your false assertion as to who made ALL of them refugees?

It is a lie to say that TC forced (used direct violence or the threat of direct violence if they did not leave their homes) TC from their homes. They did not.

Both you and othellos have made this claim in this thread and it is a LIE. In fact Othellos made that claim and then denied he made the claim, even though it is there in black and white.

It is also a lie to say that I have ever asserted that the only reason that TC fled their homes was GC violence are that ALL refugess fled their homes for the same reason (GC violence)

Are you trying to tell me Othellos did not provide an independent written source of evidence?

Yes this exactly what I am telling you. Neither you or othellos have provided a sinlge examlple of independent evidence that supports the LIE that TC drove TC from thier homes.
ALL the evidence that has been presented so far is that TC stopped TC from RETURNING to their homes. Something I have never denied.

If yes then obviously we are on different wavelengths here. And I don't think I should change mine....

You don't think you should stop trying to propagate LIES and wish I was on this same wavelength?

Here we go again.... I said in numerous occasions that THERE ARE such reports, but TCs who lived through the events are not willing to confirm them.You understood exactly the opposite.

If there are such reports then why have you and othellos falied to show a SINGLE example of them so far? Opposed to the hundreds of independent reports of foreign journalists present here during these times that report TC fleeing their homes as a result of GC violence and fear of such violence.
I understood that you are apparently trying to use the evidence that TC stopped TC from returning to their homes as evidence that TC forced TC from thier homes in the first place. I understand that you are trying to use the fact that their is no admission of this thing that did not happen by TC (as well as no independent reports either) as some kind of proof of a TC 'code of silence'.

OK. May I add once again that you cannot find a single TC today who either lived through this or was told by his parents with enough willingness to open his mouth and confirm them?

Not a single TC confirmed that they were stopped from returning to their homes by TC. Is this your 'thesis'? If it is then it is patently rubbish. If there was such a 'code of silence' by both the TC stopping TC from returning to their homes and those stopped - then where did the independent reports come from? The very fact that their independent reports of this is proof of the opposite. Some TC that were stopped frokm returning to their homes by TC DID talk about it - to indpendent reporters.

My question was, and still is, why?

Why did TC that were stopped from returning to their homes by TC and did talk about this - not talk about this? What a question. On;ly your own brand of logic could ever attempt tio answer such a question

I assumed it is some sort of "code of silence".

No you said it was a code of silence and that GC did not do this (a code of silence). So how many GC that saw with their own eyes GC extremists shoot and murder and terrorise TC and loot and burn their homes, simply because they were TC - how many of these GC come here today and admit what they saw or teach it to their children? Is that a 'code of silence'

I hope finally you will understand what I say, the way I say it, so we move on.

I inderstand that you say TC drove TC from their homes and that you have shown not a single indpendent report that supports this and that this claimis a LIE. I understand that you claim a ridiculous notion that there is some kind of TC 'code of silence' that is different that anything the GC do and that basic logic refutes you claim. I understand all this. Do you? Shall we move on?

[Othellos]

Yes this exactly what I am telling you. Neither you or othellos have provided a sinlge examlple of independent evidence that supports the LIE that TC drove TC from thier homes.

Quoting from "the Cyprus Conspiracy" by O'Maley and Craig, p.102:

"The most menacing place the patrol visited was Louroujina, where Turkish leaders were concentrating large numbers of refugees, many against their will, from smaller villages".

Translating from "H Proti Dihotomisi" ("the first partition" - just published) by Makarios Drousiotis, p.152:

"In total there were 25,000 people relocated who constituted 20% of the Turkish Cypriot population. The Turkish Cypriots were relocated either because of the fear of terrorist actions against them, either after pressure was exerted on them by the TMT".

The bold letters are mine.

O.

[gabaston]

Othellos

Thats a new one on me. Louroucina is my dads village, but if Makarios D says so, then i stand to be corrected

Anyway if were talking about multiple partitions i think most tcs (and many honest Gcs) see it this way, The first partition started when Gc wanted enosis, a subsequent partition happened when Markarios wanted to change the constitution. Another then followed as a result of coup. Another partition then occured as a result of the oxi vote. Are tcs or gcs responsible for theses events?

You bring it on yourselves, and when you fail, and make a complete mess of your intentions for Cyprus, you need to blame us.

[erolz]

Quoting from "the Cyprus Conspiracy" by O'Maley and Craig, p.102:

"The most menacing place the patrol visited was Louroujina, where Turkish leaders were concentrating large numbers of refugees, many against their will, from smaller villages".

Again you use a quote showing something to try and proove something entirely different. Your quote shows that TC leadership exerted control over the TC REFUGEES it does NOT show that TC leadership MADE thenm refugees by forcing them from their homes.

Translating from "H Proti Dihotomisi" ("the first partition" - just published) by Makarios Drousiotis, p.152:

"In total there were 25,000 people relocated who constituted 20% of the Turkish Cypriot population. The Turkish Cypriots were relocated either because of the fear of terrorist actions against them, either after pressure was exerted on them by the TMT".

The bold letters are mine.

O.

Finally a single quote that supports your claim. That this quote is from a book by a GC is to me relevant. Is the author of this book quoting someone else? If so who? If he is not then on what sources is he basing this claim? Can you show a single quote by an independent journalist of the times that supports the lie that TC drove TC from thier homes (and not that TC stopped TC from returning to their homes)?

Again I will quote to you from an independent source that made a detailed study of this issue and is quoted in the Cyprus Conflict forum as

This research, published as Political Geography and the Cyprus Conflict, 1963-1971, is considered among the most authoritative accounts of the period.

The author's investigations reveal that the overwhelming majority of Turk-Cypriot refugees moved only after Turk-Cypriots had been killed, abducted or harrassed by Greek-Cypriots within their village, quarter, or in the local vicinity.

It was only in a few instances, after January 1964, that the Turkish-Cypriot Leadership took the initiative in recommending that certain villages should be evacuated. However, it is known that such advice was not always followed.

Although it appears unlikely that there was any centralized co-ordination of the Turk-Cypriot refugee exodus, there is ample proof that Turk-Cypriot political and military leaders controlled the return of refugees to their former homes. It is known that in late 1964 some local Fighter commanders resorted to armed threats and even murder to prevent some refugees from moving into government controlled areas,[69] but it is not known to what extent such actions were directed or condoned by leaders in Nicosia. However, such coercion should be put in perspective. The government was prepared to encourage the return of Turk-Cypriot refugees provided that they accepted government authority and that they did not return to 'sensitive' areas. Such areas included locations adjacent to Turkish-Cypriot enclaves or National Guard positions, and also mixed villages in which returned Turk-Cypriots would outnumber Greek-Cypriots. In addition, known Fighter leaders were specifically prohibited from returning. The acceptance of such pre-conditions would have won for the government the victory that it had failed to achieve by its armed offensive. In addition, the hostility of many local Greek-Cypriots was such that Turk-Cypriots did not believe that the government could fulfill its guarantees that returning refugees would not be molested. In any case, by August 1964, the abandoned homes were looted and often burned-out ruins. Neither community had the resources to rebuild the houses, to purchase new farming equipment or to provide resettlement grants. The side that undertook such indemnities would also be tacitly admitting to a degree of responsibility in the creation of the refugee problem, and that neither community was prepared to do.

[/quote]

[MicAtCyp]

Thank Goodness finally Erol almost understood what we are talking about. Of course like he said about 10 times in his post both MIcAtCyp and Othellos are just spreading LIES !!
I hope the following documentation will add some more LIES to his whole understanding. It's a copy & paste job, and I apologise for the torture I am oblidged to put any reader through, in reading a 3 page long post however I have no other option to do it as ALL of it is from data stored in my PC. I however highlighted the important parts for the "lazy" ones like me.

From the Library of congress


Severe intercommunal fighting occurred in March and April 1964. When the worst of the fighting was over, Turkish Cypriots--sometimes of their own volition and at other times forced by the TMT--began moving from isolated rural areas and mixed villages into enclaves

From Cyprus Conflict web site


On 7 June 1958, following a bomb explosion outside the Turkish press office in Nicosia, there was an immediate invasion by Turkish rioters of the Greek sector, and Greek Cypriot residents were expelled from a mixed district. Communal clashes followed in the rural areas between neighbouring Greek and Turkish villagers armed with knives, sticks and stones, in the worst of which a group of Greeks just released from arrest by the British were murdered at Geunyeli. Grivas was known to be organizing Greek villagers against expected Turkish attacks and making plans for reprisals. The new Turkish militancy was also apparent in Istanbul where demonstrations in the summer of 1958 were held against the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Movements northward from Turkish Cypriot villages in the south, most of them spontaneous, some organized by TMT, were taken as clearing the ground for partition.
In July Grivas ordered raids on police stations with Turkish policemen as chief targets, and waived all restrictions on killing Turks. Many Turkish villages were burned. But in August an intercommunal cease-fire was proclaimed and held.

Cyprus Conflict web site

From inside their armed enclaves the Turkish Cypriots developed a theory - the joint product of official policy and popular belief - that they could no longer entrust their safety to Greeks and it was therefore even more important that it had seemed earlier that they should live in separate areas, governed and policed by themselves.
As if to prove their point the Turkish leadership exerted pressure on many Turks living in Greek areas to leave their homes and properties and come to the Turkish enclaves to live as refugees.


Other offline documentation:


A STUDY OF CLASHES IN DILLIRGA AND HOW THEY WERE REFLECTED IN OFFICIAL ANNALS

ULUS IRKAD

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Recent researches are now shedding light on the importance of the region to both opposing powers.In the Periodical published by the Cyprus Turkish Cultural Association (January 1997 volume 10 NO:1 ) in an interview with Dr. Ertan Tatlicioglu, a student who took part in the fightings, mentioned that although he was a young student he was a member of TMT.
He was ordered to go to Limassol to join in the fightings there, but he was not allowed to go beyond Nicosia by the Greeks and after staying for three days in Bozdag Region he returned to Turkey, but by a cyphered order he was trained in the Zir village with the other university students.
" From what I heard, Turkey in order to manifest the partion of the of the island planned to gather all Cyprus Turks within a region.

By placing militia at various points and enforcing these with new conscripts a permanent base of deployment was planned.Paphos was one the the regions planned for such a scope.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not relevant but interesting

Turks caught smoking Greek cigarettes or using Greek shops were beaten up by gangs of Turkish youths. Turks known to have deviated from the national line that coexistence between the communities was impossible were liable to be denounced as traitors. The TMT warned all Turkish members of Greek trade unions that they must resign, and shot dead two Turkish Communists ostensibly for ideological reasons, but the true motive is likely to have been their membership of PEO, which essentially involved cooperation with Greeks. On 18 May the TMT, in anticipation of the British policy statement, declared that the hour of total action had come: 'The island would be drowned in blood and fire the very day self-government is announced.' The same leaflet instructed the Turkish Cypriots to complete their preparations and hold themselves in readiness for action within the next fifteen days.

The Turkish Cypriots, despite their belligerency, were clearly at a serious disadvantage in that the TMT as yet had only very limited access to firearms. But Turkish orators set out to bolster morale by comparing the campaign with the struggle for Islam and by urging the Turks not to be discouraged by the lack of arms: 'Anatolia's war was fought with sticks and axes. '" The local leaders advised householders to accumulate in their homes knives, axes, sledges, pointed tools, large stones, boiling water and petrol. Convinced that Turkey would send troops to their aid, the Turkish Cypriots were in no way daunted by the fact that Greeks outnumbered them by four to one. Turkish houses displayed posters showing the island partitioned beneath the figure of a helmeted Turkish soldier. The fanaticism which was associated with EOKA now permeated the TMT, which called for 'PARTITION OR DEATH!':

Oh Turkish Youth!

The day is near when you will be called upon to sacrifice your life and blood in the 'PARTITION' struggle -- to the struggle for freedom. . . .

You are a brave Turk. You are faithful to your country and nation and are entrusted with the task of demonstrating Turkish might. Be ready to break the chains of slavery with your determination and willpower and with your love of freedom. All Turkdom, right and justice and God are with you. PARTITION OR DEATH!

[erolz]

From the Library of congress
Severe intercommunal fighting occurred in March and April 1964. When the worst of the fighting was over, Turkish Cypriots--sometimes of their own volition and at other times forced by the TMT--began moving from isolated rural areas and mixed villages into enclaves

I have tried and so far failed to locate any online reference to this text. Can you tell me who wrote this and what your source for the quote is ? The library of congress is a library and contains many books. For all I know they have a copy of the genocide files. If they did however I would hesitate posting quotes from it as being from the 'library of congress'

Movements northward from Turkish Cypriot villages in the south, most of them spontaneous, some organized by TMT, were taken as clearing the ground for partition.

Are you aware of the difference in meaning between 'organising' and 'forcing' ?

Cyprus Conflict web site

As if to prove their point the Turkish leadership exerted pressure on many Turks living in Greek areas to leave their homes and properties and come to the Turkish enclaves to live as refugees.

Written by the 'idependent' journalist - Zenon Stravrinides. Now do not get me wrong I have the greates respect for Mr Stravrinides. I think his book 'The Cyprus Conflict - national identity and statehood' is vital readin gin understanding the Cyprus problem. I think in general he is a model of objectivity. However as the Cyprus conflict website points out in the introduction to your previous quote "Every historical document, even scholarship, will suffer from some bias or incompleteness." I believe is this just such an example of bias (almost certainly un intended' in a very scholary work. In any event I remind you of what I ask you to try and provide - which was a single report from an indepndent journalist that suooprts the claim that TC used force against TC to make them leave their homes.

Other offline documentation:

" From what I heard, Turkey in order to manifest the partion of the of the island planned to gather all Cyprus Turks within a region. "

How many times have I and other TC been lectured here on the difference between a (alledged in this case) plan and the implementation fo the plan in regard to the Arkitas plan? I am sorry but this fails as far of eveidence that TC used force (viloence) against TC to make them leave their homes.

Not relevant but interesting

Not relevant to the discussion at hand but more good propaganda perhaps? Shall I respond in kind? I think I will forgo that this time.

Again I ask can you find a single report from an independent journalist (preferably one that was in Cyprus during this period) that supports your claim? A single one like the vast number (compared to 1) of such reports from indepndent international journalists that document the GC attacks on TC and the driving of TC from their homes by GC and GC violence?

[Yiannis]

Erolz,

Excuse me if i missed something but why would 'Libary of Congress' be a bad source?? I would believe that the Library of Congress should have mostly scholarly sources giving no doubt that they provide true facts and not misleading.

[Yiannis]

So if i understood well we should only account as non biased, sources that have to do with confessions being made by non gc or tc who at the time where in cyprus.Is that right Erolz?

I would then like to quote this abstract from the book 'The Cyprus Revolt.
' by Nancy Crawshaw.
http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/communal_strife%20-%20%2758.htm

It might be out of topic here but please excuse me for that.I just didnt want to open a new history topic in the cyprus problem section since i believe that just digging through the past is not any useful to the cyprus problem since both parties have equal share of blame.

So back to my subject i would like to get some comments from TC on the following:

The violence between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots had been sporadic and to some extent unsystematical until 1958. EOKA was targeting a few village leaders, and some leftists and policemen who were Turkish Cypriots were also murdered. But inter-communal violence as an intentional ploy did not really begin until June 1958

On the night of 7 June (shortly after 10 p.m. a bomb explosion outside the Turkish Press Office in Nicosia set off the worst outbreak of racial strife which the island had seen since British rule. The explosion served as a time signal and an excuse for Turkish rioters to invade the Greek sector of the old town. The Greeks sounded the alarm by pealing the church bells; in the violent clashes which took place, two Greeks were killed and much Greek property was ransacked or destroyed by fire. Shortly before midnight the troops were called out to assist the police to restore order and to man the 'Mason-Dixon' Line, the rough boundary separating the Greek and Turkish sectors. The Old City was placed under curfew but the fighting went on until 3 a.m. The original explosion did little material damage. And circumstantial evidence strongly pointed to the fact that the bomb was of Turkish origin. This, however, did not deter Turkey from making a formal protest to Britain the next day alleging that the Cyprus administration had failed to give the Turkish minority adequate protection.

As it is stated this incident took place in June of 1958 and it was Turkish Cypriots that started it. Does anyone have previous accounts of incidents happening before this one and who were the ones who started it?By the way my purpose is not too accuse any side, i just want to have some more information about the first accounts for intercommunal violence and who were behind it.

Partiality where it existed was dictated by political expediency and operational necessity. At policy level it could be traced to the importance which Britain and the US attached to Turkey as the last reliable bastion of Western defence in the Middle East.

What do the TCs have to say about the role that Britain and US played at the time in order to use Cyprus for their own interests in the region. Again im not saying that we should just blame Britain and US for the whole Cyprus problem but isnt it fair to give them also some share for the situation that still exists today?

Peace,
--Yiannis

[erolz]

Erolz,

Excuse me if i missed something but why would 'Libary of Congress' be a bad source?? I would believe that the Library of Congress should have mostly scholarly sources giving no doubt that they provide true facts and not misleading.

The library of congress is not a source - it is a library.

"It is also the largest library in the world, with more than 130 million items on approximately 530 miles of bookshelves. The collections include more than 29 million books and other printed materials, 2.7 million recordings, 12 million photographs, 4.8 million maps, and 58 million manuscripts."

You may be in no doubt that each and evrey one of these 29 million books and 58 million manuscripts is "mostly scholarly sources giving no doubt that they provide true facts and not misleading". Personaly I would simply like to know who wrote the quote given and where they wrote it. Is that really such a strange request? I have asked for further infpormation from him so that I can make a judgement about the quote.

[Yiannis]

I have asked for further infpormation from him so that I can make a judgement about the quote.

That answers my question Erolz.Sorry if my post was frustrating for u but i was just not clear on whether u meant that or that the libary of congress doesnt provide good sources.

Peace...